At the Brookings celebration of school choice, Secretary DeVos said that people should choose a school like choosing Uber or some other alternative to the traditional public school. She is clueless about the role of public education in a community and in a democracy.
Picking your mode transportation is a consumer good that you pay for; public education is both a public good and a right.
From the transcript of the video (please post the link if you can find it):
“Separately, the report argues that ‘There is no question that alternatives to the traditional school district model are destructive of the traditional school district model.’
“Many would read this and conclude that such
alternatives (or choices) are destructive of traditional public schools and of the students they serve.
“But I would argue that these alternatives are constructive, not destructive, for students, parents and teachers.
“Let me offer this example from a different part of our daily lives.
“How many of you got here today in an Uber, or Lyft, or another
ridesharing service? Did you choose that because it was more convenient than hoping a taxi would drive by? Even if you didn’t use a ridesharing service, I’m sure most of you at least have the app on your phone.
“Just as the traditional taxi system revolted against ridesharing, so too does the education establishment feel threatened by the rise of school choice. In both cases, the entrenched status quo has resisted models that empower individuals.
“Nobody mandates that you take an Uber over a taxi, nor should they. But if you think ridesharing is the best option for you, the government shouldn’t get in your way.
“The truth is that in practice, people like having more options. They like being able to choose between Uber Pool, Uber X,
Lyft Line, Lyft Plus, and many others. Or when it comes to taking a family trip, many like options such as Airbnb.
“We celebrate the benefits of choices in transportation and lodging. But doesn’t that pale in comparison to the importance
of educating the future of our country? Why do we not allow parents to exercise that same right to choice in the education of
their child?”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Is this the transcript?
Click to access 20170104_education_trump_transcript.pdf
The most shocking thing DeVos said and ed reformers endorsed at that meeting is they believe we have “nothing to lose” by privatizing.
They don’t value public schools at all. They see NO possible downside risk to privatization, and that is just insane. “Revolutions” don’t work like that. They carry risk.
It’s so cavalier. “Let’s blow up this huge public system and just see what happens! Only good things will happen so we can do anything because public schools are all SO BAD that any scheme we hatch will be an improvement!”
What a great thing that must be. Call yourselves “revolutionaries” but refuse to contemplate any downside risk and insist no one at all will sacrifice or lose anything. Is there a “revolution” in the history of the world that worked like that?
People who want to “blow up the system” are not conservatives. They are anarchists.
No, Diane, they’re not anarchists. Reactionary would be the best term. Please research anarchism.
Dienne, I have heard reformers say that they would like to blow up the public school system. That’s a step beyond reactionary.
Maybe DeVos listened to Steve Bannon.
Bannon, according to;
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/22/steve-bannon-trump-s-top-guy-told-me-he-was-a-leninist.html,
and a few other sources, said at one time:
Lenin,” he answered, “wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.” Bannon was employing Lenin’s strategy for Tea Party populist goals. He included in that group the Republican and Democratic Parties, as well as the traditional conservative press.
Sounds like anarchy to me. Maybe that’s why Betsy got the nod from Doanld.
I have heard the “oops” response to endless test-score invasion failures for years. What teachers/parents/students could prevent had they been given voice simply becomes a minimal apology in a couple of news outlets a few years later. And then — on to the next destructive move. All very “Let’s blow up this system and just see what happens. Oops.”
Actually, the comparison with Uber is apt. Uber is all about cutting costs by shafting the drivers in order to make a bigger profit for the owners. It’s bad for safety for the drivers, the passengers and by-standers. It’s part of the “gig” economy so that workers have no benefits and are constantly scrambling for their next “gig”. Uber is exactly what the Republicrats want education to be. This is why we need to pay attention to what’s going on on a larger scale, not just education itself. Neoliberalism is a disease that infects everything.
Incidentally, anyone who uses Uber because it’s cheaper or more convenient or just otherwise better for you personally should think about why parents choose charter and voucher schools and maybe rethink your choices.
Dienne,
It is not as if taxi drivers are well paid and have benefits. It is not as if taxis have a government monopoly. Her analogy was dumb.
It’s not like teachers are terribly well paid either, but traditional teachers are generally much better paid than charter teachers, and they have better protections. Traditional taxi drivers may not be that well paid, but they’re much better paid than Uber drivers and they have much better protections. That is not arguable, so I don’t see why you need to argue with me. I’m not defending deVos, I’m saying her analogy was apt in ways she might not have intended.
Whatever teachers earn, it’s to much for De Vos and her ilk.
Regarding the Uber/school privatization analogy, the essence of it is that, like so-called reform, Uber’s business model is entirely dependent on destroying its competition, via destruction of government regulation.
Uber is losing two billion dollars a year, despite lowering payments to drivers, because it is subsidizing rides for passengers, until such time that they can gain monopoly power. When that happens, watch fares skyrocket. Coming back to our neck of the woods, if you think Eva Moskowitz, Deborah Kenny (chauffered to her charter school by limo every day) and other charter parasites/predators are overpaid now, just wait until they drown the public schools in the bathtub; the din of pigs feeding at the trough will become deafening.
Anyone interested in the bogus economics behind Uber’s business model should read the excellent series of articles by long-time transportation expert Hubert Horan on the Naked Capitalism blog.
Agreed. Another way in which the charter school business and Uber are the same is in the amount of direct to consumer advertising meant to influence politicians. We saw this in NYC when Uber went after de Blasio and the proposed limit on Uber taxis. Their tv and direct mail campaign was very reminiscent of a Families for Excellent Schools campaign. Like the charter business, Uber advertisements also stress how much they “benefit” poor people and people of color (quotes are mine).
I think what Dienne is saying is that Uber is doing the same thing to traditional taxi service as charters and other deforms (eg, computer instruction, abolition of tenure, etc) are doing to public schools. It sacrifices protections for riders and drivers just as charters do for students and teachers.
Uber would be more aptly called “Unter” because it UNDER cuts traditional taxi service at every step of the way.
It may be cheaper but at what cost?
If I’m interpreting “politician speak” correctly (and I think I’ve gotten good at that) it sounds like DeVos plans to punish states who don’t expand vouchers and charters by withholding “discretionary” funding. She’ll push as much funding as she possibly can away from public schools by setting conditions to make public schools ineligible.
So just like the Obama Administration with charters, except add vouchers.
They’re using our schools as a bargaining chip to fund the schools they prefer re:states. Put in vouchers and fund more charters or public schools get hurt. Our schools are now useful only as leverage to get states to go along with the main focus, which is charters and vouchers.
Yes. Her thinking is in line with the extortion in Race to the Top courtesy of Duncan/Obama. Unless your state law mandates choices as I describe them, you are ineligible for federal funds reserved for vouchers.
“Grizzly bears Uber alles.” — Betsy DeVos, 2017
Go tell that to the salmon. . .
. . . Salmon Swamp Monster that is.
It’s obvious that most if not all billionaires, especially those who were born to wealth like the Malignant Narcissist in the White House and DeVos, have no concept of why the Founding Fathers wrote the U.S. Constitution to protect the people against individuals like them.
And conmen and frauds like Trump often look down on the people they cheat, con and/or fool with their lies helping explain why the people who will be hurt the most by Trump’s budget will be many of his supporters.
Betsy DeVos is another malignant narcissist born into wealth.
Lloyd,
Do you think Trump ever read the Constitution?
Do you think he knows there are three branches of the government?
Do you think he knows that federal judges can cancel his orders?
Remember, this is a man whose only life experience was running a family business where the head of the family had sole control.
My answer to your three questions is NO. Trump lives in his own opaque bubble and is disconnected from the world and everyone in it. I’ve read that he listens to his children about one-third of the time and even then, after he agrees with them face-to-face, there is no way for his children to know if he will follow that advice a few hours or days later.
The search terms Betsy DeVos Uber will get you multiple sources, including the NY Times.
The local Catholic School system is on the verge of financial collapse, so the High School principal has thrown in with the DeVos crowd in a desperate effort to score some of that sweet sweet taxpayer funding and to save her own job. I find this sort of behavior to be dangerous public policy, as well as noxiously corrupt on the part of an official whose organization makes such a big deal over morality.
Which local Catholic school system? What city?
I don’t think that DeVos is clueless, but actively hostile to the concept of public education.
The problem of too much choice is well understood though often ignored by the business and marketing communities. Here’s a link. http://www.businessinsider.com/the-fundamentals-of-choice-2011-2 What Betsy fails to acknowledge, on purpose I believe, is that having choices is not the same as having the ability to decide on what to choose from what’s available. She also ignores the rather obvious fact that those who are offering the choices have a strong motivation to decieve their customers into choosing them over their competitors and do so by an assortment of lies. Read up on Gresham’s Dynamic for more info on that. It explains how the most unethical and amoral entities outcompete all others. Regulatory capture is but one part of this. William K. Black is excellent on the topic.
And the Malignant Narcissist in the White House wants to dismantle and/or cripple the regulatory agencies that are there to protect children, consumers, and patients. Most if not all of his cabinet picks want the same thing.
Too much choice is a component of the Complexity Problem and is a burden to business as well. It makes it all to easy to rocket past the point of diminishing returns by having to manage every larger inventories, product sub-options, etc. and by making everything function as a custom job rather than being off the shelf. Choice outpaces the growth needed to support it, restricts that growth and only increases the bureaucracy needed to maintain itself. As Lloyd pointed out, the solution for this from the current ideologically based regulatory side is to simply not regulate, to not fulfill one of the most basic obligations of government, to protect its citizens from the crime of fraud. Regulatory capture in a nutshell.
I’m very tired of hearing people like Ms. DeVos say, “money is not the solution”. Money is almost always the solution to problems! For example, it’s the solution for improving veterans’ health care, strengthening the military, and building a wall. It’s also the solution for fixing America’s crumbling infrastructure. And if that isn’t enough, it’s also the solution for bringing top talent to the government and private industry.
Why are schools always treated as immune to the forces of capitalism? Free enterprise seems to matter only when connected to some conservative ideological goal, like “choice”.
Want better teachers? Pay them more! The carrot works much better than the stick, as every decent business knows.
Want school buildings that aren’t decrepit? Pay for upgrades and new construction.
Want teaching of 21st century skills? Then skip the low-level “personalized learning systems” that only teach to the test. Pay—er invest—in laboratory equipment, media centers, robotics, field trips, etc.
Want character, grit, creativity and self-confidence? Get rid of the punitive and obedience-driven no excuses model. Instead, pay for well-trained, committed teachers, so students are always learning from the very best: teachers who are professionals, who know how to inspire, and who can serve as coaches, mentors, advisors, and at times even surrogate parents.
Money can buy all those things. The only question is why Americans prefer to spend it not on schools but on locking people up in prisons, which is the darker and much more expensive alternative.
Public schools are like the taxi companies in that they are both held to countless regulations. Meanwhile, companies like Uber and Lyft can provide essentially the same services without complying with some of those mandates, which is why they can do it for less cost to the consumer. That’s why the taxi companies are revolving. (On another note, it would be interesting to see if those taxi company CEOs support school choice. That would be what Sean Hannity likes to call “intellectual dishonesty.”) Would they be as successful as they are if they have to comply by the same rules?
I ask that question about charter schools and private schools all the time. I do not believe the typical successful charter or private school would succeed if they had the same requirements as public schools. I would go as far as to say even the most elite of private schools would lose their grounding if they had to accept every student, keep them, take the state exam instead of the exam of their choice, etc.
I am slightly hesitant to leave my response on this forum, however, i feel that it is a safe enough space to do so. I am in no way discrediting any doubts that anyone has against Betsy DeVos. I believe that everyone has their own understanding of the proposal and in turn has formed their own opinion. I have balanced both sides of the argument and see the negatives as much as the positives and have come to my own conclusion. From this transcript alone, it is my understanding that DeVos is not planning on privatizing every public school but is rather attempting to provide more options for parents to choose from. Of course, I guess this would mean that some public schools may be transformed into a private school… However, I think this broadening of education could potentially have positive effects. It is clear that the rates of graduation and college attendance are at a low. The current education system is not entirely working. This low rate could absolutely be the result of a different aspect of eduction but since SIG proved to be ineffective, it may be time to try something new. The examples DeVos gave were obviously geared to hit empathetic listeners but she did make a point that many students are just being passed through K-12 to get to graduation. Sadly, not every single teacher is as dedicated to the students as they should be and the students are the ones suffering from that. If changing the type of schooling students have the option to attend could potentially improve the amount of empowerment they feel as thinkers and philosophers, then why not take that chance? We are a world of development and risk taking and I think it is time for some sort of change. If this particular change is not the one we need, then we will figure it out and change once again. But for now, whether the change happens or not, it is ultimately up to teachers to make sure students feel they are getting the most out of their education.
Bryahna,
Please go to the local library and read my book “Reign of Error.” High school graduation rates are at a historic high point. So are test scores. Dropout rates are at a historic low point. All of this is official data. Charters and vouchers actually do not get better performance than public schools, and often get much worse performance because they don’t have experienced teachers.
It is very risky to destroy a nation’s public school system on a whim.