I hope you are not tiring of these stories about the intrusion of big money from corporate giants and billionaires into local school board races. Their goal is always the same: privatization and charter schools.
Here is the latest, from San Diego:
Who’s Behind the Big Money Takeover of San Diego County Schools?
It is the same story everywhere: The subversion of democracy as titans pour hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars into local contests. In the past, a citizen who wanted to serve on the local board could spend $10,000, $15,000, and run a respectable campaign.
But when billionaires like the Waltons, Bloomberg, Hastings, Arnold, Gates, etc, make your election their priority, they steal our democracy.
We need campaign finance laws that limit how much can be spent to foil the billionaires and DFER.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“I hope you are not tiring of these stories about the intrusion of big money. . .
Yes, Diane, I am tiring of the stories.
But just as one tires of daily exercise, of watching what one eats, always putting on seat belts, the need to have those those things and the stories you illuminate told far outweigh my discomfort of reading and hearing about them. Keep em coming, and I’ll keep reading. The more sunlight these stories are exposed to the better chance we have of eventually ameliorating the harm caused by so few who think they are so much better than the rest of us pee-ons.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is tiresome but also important that you and other scholars/activists not let the takeover of public education, city by city, state by state, be treated as if these takeover attempts are OK.
The billionaires who are getting huge tax benefits from these “investments” are not benign do-gooders trying to rescue kids from “failing schools.”
The focus on local and state takeovers should not distract our collective attention from ESSA, and the re-writing of that via “regulations” from John King.
Some of these regulations have been open for “comment, ” but without any final regulations since August.
One of the more important proposed regulations (not actually in the law) would require reports on per-pupil spending per school, while specifically exempting charters from disclosing the money they receive from private foundations
Here is an excerpt from a letter of “comment” to Secretary of Education John King from the National Education Association, dated August 21,2016
begin quote from August 1, 2016 letter regarding reports on Per-Pupil Expenditures
Per-Pupil Expenditures [§ 200.35] Section 200.35(a)(i)(B)(2) and § 200.35(b)(i)(B)(2) impose requirements that go beyond the statute for state report cards [ESSA 1111(h)(1)(C)(x)] and LEA report cards [ESSA 1111(h)(2)(C)] in specifically prohibiting state and LEA reporting of “funds received from private sources.”
This is contrary to the purposes and spirit of transparency and thoroughness in data reporting reflected in the statute, aimed at making publicly available information that needs to be factored into assessments of performance and effectiveness in bringing about positive student outcomes and resource allocation decisions.
Some charter school chain operators have been reported to spend 25-30 percent more per pupil, due to private philanthropic contributions, than nearby neighborhood traditional schools. Some traditional schools receive substantial private cash or in-kind services which, likewise, provide them with resources that are not available to others.
We believe it would be consistent with the intent and spirit of the statute to require state and LEA report card inclusion of private sources of funding as a separate item.
At minimum, the language precluding the reporting of funds received from private sources should be stricken, so as to leave such decisions to states and LEAs. http://getessaright.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/nea_comments_essa_080116.pdf
The new wrinkle in ESSA is that states and districts must figure out a system for pro-rating expenses for individual schools and per-pupil. The clear intent is to make certain that no school gets more from ESSA funding than other schools receiving ESSA funds.
In addition to pro-rating district office expenses, the reporting system must include, school by school, salaries and benefits for school administrators, teachers and supporting staff, some proportion of the cost of personnel not assigned to individual schools and not currently subjected to state-wide measures of student achievement (school counselors, social workers, visiting or nurses).
The unwritten aim is to bring a cost-benefit analyses to public education, for each school and student, with the “benefit” still tied to scores on state-wide tests, graduation rates, and the like.
This level of accountability means that a lot of quants will be hired, databases revised, and no doubt, some asinine letter grade or summary rating on the return on investment for raising test scores (or not), increasing graduation rates or not, and so on. The calculations will look entirely “objective,” “fair” and also be misleading, unless you think that all students in schools that receive ESSA fund should receive the same funds.
As far as I can tell, this proposed regulation has been stalled since August 1, 2016. What nobody seems to be talking about is the use of the per-pupil data.
Congress was clear about that in ESSA.
‘‘SEC. 5302. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION ON EQUALIZED SPENDING. ‘‘Nothing in this title shall be construed to mandate equalized spending per pupil for a State, local educational agency, or school.’’
If you are a state, district, or school administrator, or supplier of information for this econometric exercise, do not let anyone ignore SEC. 5302.
There are many good reasons why per pupil costs are not identical. Pro-rating at this level of detail will create the illusion of precision, please budget hawks, and be a disservice to students, parents, teachers, schools officials and citizens.
LikeLike
Diane says: “I hope you are not tiring of these stories about the intrusion of big money . . . ”
Yes–we are all tired of it–that’s their plan. So DON’T STOP.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The U.S. will not get campaign finance reform with a Trump presidency, a conservative Supreme Court, and Congress controlled by the GOP, the party that is owned by the billionaire oligarchs. The oligarchs also only own about half of the Democratic Party.
LikeLike
Amanda Terkel, in an 11/2/16 post at Huffpo, shows us that Georgia’s Governor would have fit better, in a prior time, a time that should be far distant, in America’s rear-view mirror.
LikeLike
“We need campaign finance laws that limit how much can be spent to foil the billionaires and DFER.”
BINGO!
And, well waddya know…!? The people who write the laws are among the relative few who are profiting off of the lack of just such restrictions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for posting this! Diane, can you shine a little light over here in Indianapolis?
S.O.S.
It’s EDUCATION INC in Washington Township Schools (adjacent to IPS): http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/in/2016/11/01/teach-for-americas-pac-spends-big-on-a-local-indiana-election-but-no-one-quite-knows-why/#.WBnRrWQrKRt
Our parent group’s page has been sounding the alarm since we saw campaign finance documents – Walton, Bloomberg are connected to what’s going on: https://www.facebook.com/wtparentcouncil/
LikeLike
The Mind Trust is trying to take over Indianapolis Public Schools. It launders money from Teach For America. Look for the 990 IRS form. There is a one year lag but it will give you clues on the intake and output of money. Also be aware that Bellwether Education Partners. org also launders money and recruits “talent” for The Mind Trust with Walton and many other foundations on their client list.
LikeLike
Thanks, Laura. We are trying to expose it as best we can.
LikeLike
Based on a linked post at this blog, Indianapolis public schools gave $150,000 to $200,000 to TFA in 2015. Indianapolis was the only public school system, in the nation, that joined the ranks of wealthy TFA, venture “philanthropy”, donors.
LikeLike