The FBI raided a charter school for at-risk youth in Florida, carrying away several boxes of whatever they were seeking.
The FBI has raided many charter schools in the Midwest but their investigations have remained secret.
Archives for the month of: July, 2016
The U.S. Department of Education wants schools to offer a well-rounded curriculum. But it is not letting up on the pressure to raise test scores in math and English. John King has long believed in closing schools with low test scores and firing teachers who don’t raise test scores. So why should anyone take him seriously when he says he wants students to have a well-rounded curriculum? Next thing you know, he will suggest testing all those subjects too.
From Politico:
HELP WITH THE HUMANITIES: The Education Department today is releasing a Dear Colleague letter as part of the Obama administration’s push [http://bit.ly/29A4ne7 ] to help schools, districts and states deliver a more “well-rounded” education to students. That means teaching not only math and English, but also including art, music, civics, world languages and more. The letter is meant to help states and districts when it comes to using federal funds to improve teaching of the humanities, such as the study of history, philosophy, literature and languages. The department says in the letter that states and districts can use federal funds to purchase humanities-focused materials or devices, provide teachers with professional development in the subjects or better serve students with disabilities or English language learners through humanities courses. The letter: http://politico.pro/29LTFVX.
Pass the bread, here comes the baloney (or bologna, if you please).
Robert Borosage has a long history in service of progressive causes. He has been an ardent supporter of Bernie Sanders.
In this post, he explains why Bernie endorsed Hillary and how the movement that Bernie started will make a difference and rebuild the Democratic party.
He writes:
The political revolution that fueled the Sanders campaign must continue to build. It must use the battles during Clinton’s first term to deepen popular understanding, to consolidate a multi-racial movement, to reach out to disaffected working and poor people to show there is an alternative – and it is not on the right. It has to mobilize to demonstrate that business as usual cannot continue. The massive, non-violent demonstrations in support of Black Lives Matter illustrates what can be done. The entrenched interests must be challenged frontally, uncomfortably, so they too understand that something must be done. The political revolution can then capture the energy for change to challenge those in both parties who are standing in the way.
Sanders has it right: The next step is to work to ensure that Donald Trump is routed in 2016, and to use the Democratic platform as the minimum standard that all Democratic candidates must endorse. Sanders isn’t selling out; he is staying in, loyal to the political revolution that he has helped to build.
Two dedicated pro-public education advocates, Chuck Pascal and Troy LaRaviere, wrote important amendments that were adopted and incorporated into the Democratic platform.
Because of them, with important support by Randi Weingarten, the platform now takes a stand against the high-stakes testing regime, opposes school closing shift based on test scores, opposes evaluating teachers by test scores, and emphasizes the importance of democratically-controlled public schools. The platform continues to support “high quality charter schools,” without defining what that means: high test scores? Or something else?
Ironically, the transcripts cited here were made by Education Reform Now, an affiliate of Democrats for Education Now, the organization created by hedge fund managers to promote charter schools.
The updated text can be found here.
An unofficial transcript of the session can be found here.
Politico reports that Democrats for Education Reform, the hedge funders’ charter advocacy group, is not happy with the amendments to the platform proposed by supporters of public schools Troy LaRaviere of Chicago and Chuck Pascal of Pennsylvania:
NO CANDIDATE LEFT BEHIND: While Democrats have yet to publish their most recent platform language, education-focused groups are already sniping about it. American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten said the new language “represents a refreshing sea change in its approach to public education” and “makes it clear that Democrats are committed to ending the failed era of test-and-sanction.” AFT is pointing to amendments to the draft language it says were adopted in Orlando during the weekend platform meeting – amendments that voice support for parents who want to opt their children out of standardized tests, demand more accountability for charter schools, and oppose using student test scores in teacher evaluations. All of those stances are favored by teachers unions.
– But Shavar Jeffries, the president of Democrats for Education Reform, called the amendments an “unfortunate departure from President Obama’s historic education legacy” and said that these changes came about because the platform drafting committee “inexplicably” allowed the process to be “hijacked.” Your dutiful Morning Education scribes will post the final platform draft as soon as it’s available.
Wendy Lecker warns the people of Connecticut that the New Haven public schools have made a deal with the Relay “Graduate School of Education,” which trains robot teachers who value compliance and arrive with scripted lessons. Why contract with Relay, she asks, when there are highly reputable teacher education programs in the neighborhood?
When you consider that Connecticut is one of the highest achieving states in the nation on NAEP, you have to wonder how the charter industry captured the state’s political leadership.
Joanne Yatvin is a retired teacher, principal, superintendent, and literacy expert in Oregon.
Topping the national news several months ago was a story about two dangerous criminals escaping from a high security prison. For several months they had devoted themselves to preparations: persuading a woman prison employee to get them the tools they needed and agree to drive them away when they got outside the prison walls, digging a route to the outside of the prison from their cell, and working late at night to avoid attracting notice. When their preparations were finally complete, they also went through several rehearsals before carrying out their plan. Unfortunately for them, they were captured only a few days after their escape. Their promised driver had broken her promise and left them without a plan or an opportunity to practice any new tactics to reach safety.
What interested me about this story was that men who had wasted so many years of their lives in crime rather than seeking education or legal jobs were able to plan so well, work hard, and show so much patience in carrying our their escape. They certainly showed “grit” when the goal was important to them and the stakes were high.
Another story of grit is told in one of my favorite movies, “Cool Hand Luke”, which is about a man arrested and imprisoned for a minor crime. Because he is smarter and more independent and resourceful than his fellow inmates, he is continually singled out for punishment and public humiliation. Yet, he endures everything and continues to defy prison rules and trying to escape. Finally, he steals a prison truck and drives a long distance before hiding out in a deserted building. Unfortunately, the prison officials manage to track him down and set fire to the building. In the end Luke chooses to take his own life rather than surrender. Yet, by losing his life he also wins: he will never go back to prison and no one can punish him ever again.
Although Luke is gone at the end of the movie, his lessons of “grit” inspire other prisoners to follow his example and stand up for themselves against prison cruelty. Although the movie shows so much harshness and sadness, its ultimate message is one of hope.
In both the real prison escape and the movie’s story, I found lessons about “grit” not understood by the experts now calling for teaching that skill to students in the classroom. Not tyrants, prison guards, nor teachers can teach grit. Human beings—and most animals– develop grit only when they are so dedicated to reaching a particular goal that they will push on through obstacles, rejections and repeated failures.
As a teacher and principal I often saw ordinary students develop grit on their own because the conditions in the classroom were right. Their teachers taught lessons that were interesting to young people and offered opportunities for self-chosen projects, collaboration with classmates, and innovation. And because the kids had already tasted success and satisfaction in previous classroom activities, they believed they could stretch themselves even further this time. Yes, the work was harder than before, but it was doable, and in their eyes the goal was worth the extra effort. They had already developed grit and could use it. And they believed in themselves.
Education should be a dynamic experience for all students. It’s not preparation for college or the workplace, but a laboratory for exploring who you are and what you want to do; for trying out your interests and talents in a safe place and for sifting out the gold buried in the sand of school subjects. It’s also a place to develop grit because you believe you can.
A comment by a reader responds to the question of whether charters schools are public schools:
The use of the terms “government schools” and “public charter schools” are equally egregious. On June 14th the LA Times informed the public: “Charters are independently operated, free public schools.” The term”public charter school is becoming common usage. There Is No Such Thing as a “Public Charter School.”
***
Charters are not public schools. The term “public charter school” was developed by a PR firm to reframe the way we understand schooling in relationship to “public” and to democracy. Any public institution—school, library, zoo—is, at least in theory, funded by taxes from all the people in its jurisdiction—local, state and national—and is accountable to those who pay the taxes.
Most public schools are accountable to an elected school board made up of community members. Residents of that community have the right to be present at Board meetings, weigh in on votes and debates, and access public financial documents.
Charter schools are run by executive boards, committees or corporations whose members often live outside the community in which they are located and are not accountable to parents or the taxpayers/community members who fund them.
If you don’t like what your traditional public school is doing, you can make your voice heard by addressing administrators, voting for new leadership or taking a leadership role yourself. If you don’t like what your child’s charter school is doing and you express yourself, you may be asked to leave. There is no democratic mechanism for spearheading policy change.
Public institutions are the motors of democracy. Their purpose is to promote and preserve the fundamental values of a democratic society: liberty, equality and the public welfare or common good.
Public schools recognize that the welfare of everyone’s children and grandchildren is intimately linked to the welfare of all. Through support and oversight by the communigy, public schooling is intended to serve the common good and preserve fundamental qualities that sustain democracy beyond getting students “college and career ready.” If public schools have not always lived up to their promise then it is necessary to redouble our efforts to have them do so, not to abandon them.
When students leave public schools for charter schools they take their per pupil expenditures –which in California averaged $9, 794 last year–with them, leaving public schools with less revenue but the same overhead. The federal government also spends millions on charters at the expense of public schools. Taxpayers paid one consulting firm nearly $10 million to the U.S. Department of Education Charter Schools. That’s $10 million fewer federal dollars for public schools. The law forbids local districts, which in California are the main authorizers for new charters, from taking into account the potentially crippling impact of new charters on district financing when considering approving new schools. So even if you find an excellent charter to send your own child to, you are reducing the chances of every student remaining in the public school having their own excellent education.
Charter schools’ claim they enhance democracy is disingenuous. The highly touted freedom of individual parents to choose their child’s school comes at the heavy price of reducing two other essential functions of democracy: providing for the general welfare of a society that requires well funded public schools and insuring equal opportunity for all children. Competing with traditional public schools for space and funding reduces the quality of the remaining public schools, and ignores patterns of clear advantage for the children of savvy parents, thus assuring that some children will be better schooled than others.
Being publicly funded, charters cannot be considered private. However, their private governance and their marginalization of fundamental democratic values disqualifies them as public.
The most accurate label for charters is “Publicly–funded private schools.” Don’t let them abscond with our language. There is no such thing as a public charter school.
As you surely know, Senator Bernie Sanders endorsed former Secretary Hillary Clinton at a joint appearance in New Hampshire today.
I listened on the radio to their respective speeches. Bernie was inspirational as he recapped his campaign themes and said that he believed Hillary Clinton would be faithful to his agenda. Hillary Clinton echoed much of what Bernie Sanders said. Both sought unity, facing what is likely to be a tough campaign against Donald Trump. Trump has turned his campaign into an almost stereotypical Republican tough-guy appeal to the Silent Majority. He continually tells people that America is weak but he is strong. He supports “America First,” a phrase that I thought was long associated with the discredited isolationist wing of the GOP. He says that the world laughs at us because we are losers; he will turn us into winners again. I listened to him speak in Indiana this evening, and he said–referring to the Dallas shootings–that he is the candidate who is “tough on crime.” He said again and again that he would build the wall shutting off our southern border, with a gate that opens only for those who have met legal requirements. He said to the crowd, “Who will pay for the wall?” And they thundered back, “Mexico!” I want to know why Trump thinks that the Mexican government is ready to pay billions of dollars to build a wall. I don’t get it.
He is hitting all the right notes in appealing to an angry, fearful public, one that is rightfully worried about their jobs and their economic well-being. Underlying their fear, however, is old-fashioned nativism, a sense that outsiders, aliens, immigrants are taking over the country and that white males are losing their commanding power.
I juxtapose these events with my day. I decided a few days ago that since I had endorsed Hillary and plan to vote for her, I would make a contribution to her campaign. I bought tickets to a special matinee of “Hamilton,” whose cast and crew put on a Tuesday matinee for a private performance dedicated to her campaign. I sat with my partner, Mary, my son and his spouse, and our 9-year-old grandson. For reasons I don’t understand, the show has an enormous following among teens and pre-teens. My grandson was mouthing the words as he watched.
The show was everything it is cracked up to be. I am not a huge fan of rap, yet this show won me over. It seemed to be a rap operetta. The energy of the dancing and staging is remarkable. It is dazzling, fast-moving, and conceptually brilliant. It is the story of the founding of America, with the founding fathers played by actors of color. The show was introduced by historian Ron Chernow, who wrote the Hamilton biography that served as source material for the play.
When it ended, Lin-Manuel Miranda, the man who wrote the book, music, and lyrics, spoke to the audience about the show. He literally reinvented the founding of our nation to include everyone. He said the show was about our founding ideals, and our struggle to reach them, which always fell short. Because humans are fallible, he said, we never reach them, yet we keep trying. And he posed the question: Who is likely to keep trying to meet those ideals–Clinton or Trump? The choice was easy.
Miranda then introduced Hillary Clinton, who had just flown in from New Hampshire and was glowing. The audience belonged to her, so there was a lot of love in the room.
Bernie Sanders promised to travel the nation to rally his followers to vote for Clinton. The threat of a Trump presidency is unthinkable. From his performance today, we can expect that he will use his travels to build the movement that he launched. And that will be good for all of us.
Politico published a fascinating analysis of Cory Booker’s slippery career as Mayor of Newark.
We previously learned in Dale Russakoff’s book “The Prize” about Booker’s rock-star status among the powerful New York City elites and his less than stellar performance as Mayor of Newark. Booker is a hero to Democrats for Education Reform, the group that always bets against public schools.
In this article, Amy S. Rosenberg digs into the myth of Cory Booker, his careful polishing of his image and his efforts to cement his ties to the rich and powerful, while keeping his eyes on the opportunity to move up and out of Newark. Rosenberg does not assess Booker’s big project of turning Newark into a national model of school reform, which was his single biggest failure.
What did he actually accomplish? Is Newark better off today because of Booker?
One thing we know for sure is that Cory Booker is tied at the hip to those who want to get rid of public education. He is close to Chris Christie and helped the governor run the public schools of Newark into to the ground, while persuading Mark Zuckerberg to fork over $100 million to turn Newark into a city of charters. We know how that worked out.
Booker became a darling of Manhattan neoconservatives because he supported both charters and vouchers.
It worked for Booker. It didn’t work for the children of Newark.
Now Booker is angling to become Hillary Clinton’s vice-presidential choice.
Let’s keep our fingers crossed that it never happens.
Diane Ravitch's blog 