Jeff Bryant writes here about Little Rock, Arkansas. Little Rock was the scene of one of the crucial battles in the movement to integrate public education after the Brown decision of 1954. When city and state officials refused to integrate Central High School, President Dwight D. Eisenhower federalized the National Guard and sent in 1,000 members of the 101st Airborne to enforce the court order to admit black students.
Jeff interviews a large number of citizens of Little Rock, who tell the story of the district. For a time, it was successfully integrated, or at least parts of it were. But the resistance never went away.
At present, the Walton Family Foundation is behind a state takeover of the entire district, even though only six of its 48 schools have been declared to be “failing” schools.
State Senator Joyce Elliott said to Jeff:
“We are retreating to 1957,” Elliott believes. Only now, instead of using Jim Crow and white flight, or housing and highways, the new segregationists have other tools at their disposal. First, education funding cuts have made competition for resources more intense, with wider disparities along racial lines. Second, recent state takeover of the district has spread a sense throughout the community of having lost control of its education destiny. Parents, local officials, and community activists continuously describe change as something being done to them rather than with them. And third, an aggressive charter school sector that competes with local public schools for resources and students further divides the community.
And lurking in the background of anything having to do with Little Rock school politics is the Walton Family Foundation, the philanthropic organization connected to the family that owns the Walmart retail chain, whose headquarters is in Bentonville, Arkansas.
State Commissioner Johnny Key terminated Little Rock’s superintendent, Baker Kurrus:
The disenfranchisement of Little Rock citizens became especially apparent recently, when Commissioner Key suddenly, and without explanation, terminated the contract of Baker Kurrus, until then the superintendent of the Little Rock School District. (Key had originally appointed Kurrus himself.)
As veteran local journalist for the Arkansas Times Max Brantley explains, Kurrus was initially regarded with suspicion due to the takeover and the fact he was given the helm despite his lack of education background. But Kurrus had gradually earned the respect of locals due to his tireless outreach to the community and evenhanded treatment of oppositional points of view.
But many observers of school politics in Little Rock speculate Kurrus was terminated because he warned that charter school expansions would further strain resources in the district. In advising against expansions of these schools, Kurrus shared data showing charter school tend to under-enroll students with disabilities and low income kids.
He came to view charter schools as a “parallel school system” that would add to the district’s outlays for administration and facilities instead of putting more money directly into classroom instruction.
“It makes no sense” to expand charter schools, he is quoted as telling the local NPR outlet. “You’d never build two water systems and then see which one worked … That’s essentially what we’re doing” by expanding charters.
Kurrus also came to believe that increasing charter school enrollments would increase segregation in the city.
In a state where the Waltons have their headquarters, it is unthinkable that Little Rock have a superintendent who isn’t committed to the magic of charter schools. That contradicts the Walton philosophy. Kurrus had to go. Interestingly, one of the two charter chains (LISA) in Little Rock is identified by Sharon Higgins as Gulen charters.
A report on the academic performance of charters throughout the state of Arkansas in 2008-2009 found, “Arkansas’ charter schools do not outperform their traditional school peers,” when student demographics are taken into account. (As the report explains, “several demographic factors” – such as race, poverty, and ethnicity, – strongly correlate with lower scores on standardized tests and other measures of achievement.)
Specifically in Little Rock, the most recent comparison of charter school performance to public schools shows that a number of LRSD public schools, despite having similar or more challenging student demographics, out-perform LISA and eStem charters.
There’s also evidence charter schools add to the segregation of Little Rock. Soon after the decision to expand these schools, the LISA network blanketed the district with a direct mail marketing campaign that blatantly omitted the poor, heavily black and Latino parts of the city, according to an investigation by the Arkansas Times.xxx
In the state board’s vote to take over the district, as Brantley reports for the Times, members who voted yes had family ties to and business relationships with organizations either financed by the Walton Foundation or working in league with the Waltons to advocate for charter schools.
In another recent analysis in the Times, reporter Benjamin Hardy traces recent events back to a bill in the state legislature in 2015, HB 1733, that “originated with a Walton-affiliated education lobbyist.” That bill would have allowed an outside non-profit to operate any school district taken over by the state. The bill died in committee when unified opposition from the Little Rock delegation combined with public outcry to cause legislators to waver in their support.
So what the Waltons couldn’t accomplish with legislation like HB 1733 they are currently accomplishing by influencing official administration actions, including taking out Kurrus and expanding charters across the city.
The Waltons recently announced that they plan to spend $250 million annually to expand charter schools. They selected 17 urban districts that they would pour money into. One of them is Little Rock.

“Specifically in Little Rock, the most recent comparison of charter school performance to public schools shows that a number of LRSD public schools, despite having similar or more challenging student demographics, out-perform LISA and eStem charters.”
I’m telling you it doesn’t matter. They’ll simply do what they did in Ohio- they go to the second argument, which is “choice”.
Anyone who objects will be portrayed as self-interested, protecting a monopoly and denying “choice”.
There is no way it can fail. If “better” isn’t true, they go to “choice” and all they have to do is open the schools or produce the vouchers and they have succeeded on the second justification.
It’s hysterical. In Ohio, vouchers failed. They announced vouchers hadn’t failed, but had actually improved PUBLIC schools. They can’t even credit public schools for improving! That violates the dogma. They have to claim private school vouchers forced public schools to improve. It’s not that they don’t fail, it’s that they’ve set this up so there is literally no way it CAN fail. They just move the goalpost.
LikeLike
Hypocrisy, it is said, is the complement Vice pays to Virtue. Is there any better current example of this maxim than the “education reform movement”?
LikeLike
Politics??
LikeLike
The Walton heirs plan to spend one billion dollars establishing a new school system in the US.
One quarter of the amount the Obama Administration spent on RttT for the whole country. All schools of any kind- 4 billion. Charters and vouchers- 1 billion.
Wow. Are we a plutocracy yet? What would mean “yes”, I wonder? 4 billion? All they need are 3 more billionaire families and your school is on the privatize list.
LikeLike
We have, for all intents and purposes, been a de facto (if not de jure) plutocracy (or oligarchy, choose your favorite term) for quite awhile now.
The very wealthy and powerful have the ears of the politicians, and the politicians dance to their tunes.
It’s not just the Waltons, it’s the Gates, Eli Broad, and a whole bunch of other plutarchs who think that, because they have accumulated vast sums of money, they know best for the entire country.
And, while they’re at it, the charter school/privatization/testing/using canned books, tests, software, etc/removing all autonomy from classroom teachers/hiring untrained or minimally trained, cheap “teachers” etc., also have the advantage of making money for a lot of companies, while producing a bunch of unthinking future worker-bees who will do what they’re told and continue to vote against their own self-interests.
It’s a win-win for the plutarchs.
LikeLike
Here’s a fun game. Who said this, Donald Trump or Arne Duncan?
Republican Party presidential nominee Donald Trump gave a shout-out to a long-treasured GOP priority, school choice, in his nomination acceptance speech here Thursday, and in a section on education attacked a long-time party boogeyman, “bureaucrats.”
“We will rescue kids from failing schools by helping their parents send them to a safe school of their choice,” Trump told delegates on the final night of the Republican National Convention. “My opponent would rather protect bureaucrats than serve American children.”
Nice work, ed reformers! Every public school employee in the country is now in the hated “bureaucrat” column. Your friends, your neighbors, your children’s teachers, even your relatives. All self-interested and greedy and anti-child. Tens of millions of kids in public schools and they’re all apparently surrounded by terrible adults. How this is even pro-education, never mind pro-public school?
LikeLike
I would change that to “Who said it, Trump or Obama?
Duncan was just Obama’s flunky — and man was he good at it, flunking that is.
Flunky Dunky.
LikeLike
Thanks Diane!
LikeLike
It is a sad state of affairs when billionaires can insert themselves into public policy and deny citizens their democratic rights. Too many elected officials are serving the interests of billionaires and corporations rather than the people that elected them. Billionaires should not be able to impose their personal bias and agenda that allows them to destroy community schools and neighborhoods in order to create a segregated system. We see a similar hostile takeover in Los Angeles, not just Little Rock. This is not how a democratic system is supposed to operate.
LikeLike
There was a time when some very wealthy individuals actually did a lot of good.
The initial land for several of the National Parks (eg, Acadia, Tetons) was purchased by wealthy people like Rockefeller, who donated it to the federal government.
And Andrew Carnegie donated what today would be billions to build public libraries all over the country.
Today’s billionaires are a different breed.
LikeLike
It is worth noting, however, that the “land grab” for parks (eg, around the Tetons) was quite undemocratic. In fact, it was done so that none of the local people knew who was behind it. Some things never change.
LikeLike
@someDAMpoet What you’re talking about is actual philanthropy. I think we need to coin a new word for “philanthropy” that is actually vandalism. How about “malanthropy”?
LikeLike
yes, malanthropy works
so do
“vandalanthropy”
and “criminalanthropy”
LikeLike
And of course, the Bill Gates form — “billyanthropy” — includes the worst aspects of current malanthropy rolled up in one nice package.
LikeLike
“Billyanthropy”
Billyanthropy
It’s plain to see.
Is quite a different bird.
It’s not a gift.
But more like grift.
No matter what you’ve heard.
LikeLike
HYPOCRISY WITH HILLARY AND HER WALTON-ARKANSAS TIES
Alice Walton of Bentonville, Ark., is a big supporter of Hillary Clinton becoming the Democratic presidential nominee in 2016.
Walton gave $25,000, the maximum allowed under federal law, to the super PAC Ready for Hillary during the 2013-2014 cycle, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission. Walton is a long-time acquaintance of Clinton, going back to the former secretary of state’s days as Arkansas’ first lady.
Walton is also the daughter of Sam Walton, founder of the Walmart chain of big-box retail stores. That makes the donation a rather delicate matter for Clinton, the front-runner for her party’s nomination. For many on the Left, the Arkansas company is emblematic of all that is wrong with corporate America. It is particularly detested by organized labor — a key Democratic constituency — because the company has doggedly fought all efforts to organize its workers.
Clinton’s ties to Walmart go back to 1986, when she joined the company’s board of directors. She remained there until 1992, when husband Bill Clinton ran for the White House. For years afterwards they both maintained close ties to the retail giant.
LikeLike
The Oligarchs are ruining our country. We need money out of politics. It is so disheartening to feel like there is nothing that can be done to change this trajectory since the people with money seem to be able to do whatever they want to do.
LikeLike