Archives for the month of: September, 2017

More than any other state, Michigan placed its bets on charter schools. This article shows what happened. Republican Governor John Engler sold his party on the miracle of school choice. Betsy DeVos jumped on the Choice bandwagon and financed its grip on the legislature. Although the article doesn’t mention it, Betsy and her husband funded a voucher referendum in 2000 that was overwhelmingly defeated.

The author Mark Binelli describes the mess that choice and charters have made of the state’s education system. The state is overrun by unaccountable charters, most of which operate for profit.

The damage has fallen most heavily on black children, especially in Detroit and in the districts where the state installed emergency managers and gave the public schools to for-profit charter operators.

Rich districts still have public schools.

Binelli writes:

“Michigan’s aggressively free-market approach to schools has resulted in one of the most deregulated educational environments in the country, a laboratory in which consumer choice and a shifting landscape of supply and demand (and profit motive, in the case of many charters) were pitched as ways to improve life in the classroom for the state’s 1.5 million public-school students. But a Brookings Institution analysis done this year of national test scores ranked Michigan last among all states when it came to improvements in student proficiency. And a 2016 analysis by the Education Trust-Midwest, a nonpartisan education policy and research organization, found that 70 percent of Michigan charters were in the bottom half of the state’s rankings. Michigan has the most for-profit charter schools in the country and some of the least state oversight. Even staunch charter advocates have blanched at the Michigan model.

“The story of Carver is the story of Michigan’s grand educational experiment writ small. It spans more than two decades, three governors and, now, the United States Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, whose relentless advocacy for unchecked “school choice” in her home state might soon, her critics fear, be going national. But it’s important to understand that what happened to Michigan’s schools isn’t solely, or even primarily, an education story: It’s a business story. Today in Michigan, hundreds of nonprofit public charters have become potential financial assets to outside entities, inevitably complicating their broader social missions. In the case of Carver, interested parties have included a for-profit educational management organization, or E.M.O., in Georgia; an Indian tribe in a remote section of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula; and a financial firm in Minnesota. “That’s all it is now — it’s moneymaking,” Darrel Redrick, a charter-school proponent and an administrator at Carver at the time I visited, told me.”

Leonie Haimson reports here on the parent revolt against the Summit platform, pushed now by the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

One of their biggest concerns is data privacy and the lack thereof.

Haimson writes:

Over the course of the 2016-2017 school year, parents throughout the country rebelled against the platform, both because of its lack of privacy but also because they experienced its negative impact on their children’s learning and attitudes to school. In addition, Summit and the schools using the platform are no longer asking for parental consent, probably because so many parents refused or resisted signing the consent forms.

After the Washington Post article appeared, I expanded on the privacy concerns cited in that piece, and pointed out additional issues in my blog. I included a list of questions parents should ask Summit to clarify their data-sharing plans. Parents who sent them to Summit informed me that Summit failed to answer these questions. (I later expanded on these questions, and Rachael Stickland, the co-chair of the Parent Coalition for Student Privacy, submitted them to Summit representatives after personally meeting them at SXSW EDU conference in March. She also received no response.)

Meanwhile, the list of Summit schools, both public and charter, that had allegedly adopted the platform last year was taken down from the Summit website sometime between February 15 and February 18, according to the Wayback Machine – making it even more difficult to ascertain which schools and students are were actually using it. The archived list is here.

On March 3, the Cincinnati Enquirer reported on the experience of parents in Boone County, Kentucky whose schools had adopted the platform– many of whom did not want to consent to their children’s data being shared with so little specificity and so few restrictions:

At the beginning of the school year, parents had to sign a permission slip allowing Summit to access their child’s profile information. Summit uses the info to “conduct surveys and studies, develop new features, products and services and otherwise as requested,” the form states. The agreement also allows Summit to disclose information to third-party service providers and partners “as directed” by schools. That, perhaps, is the biggest source of contention surrounding Summit. … “It’s optional. Nobody has to do Summit, [Deputy Superintendent Karen] Cheser said… Summit spokeswoman declined to speak on the record with The Enquirer.”

Yet within weeks of the publication of this article, at about the same time that the Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative took over, someone involved in the Summit initiative decided that parents would no longer be granted the right of consent – either for their children to be subjected to the Summit instructional program or for their data to be shared according to Summit’s open-ended policies. In fact, Summit claimed the right to access, data-mine and redisclose their children’s data in the same way as before – yet now, without asking if parents agreed to these terms.

As she notes, Summit no longer considers it necessary to get parental consent before they collect and use student data.

Since William Buckley wrote his once-famous screed, “God and Man at Yale,” the nation’s colleges and universities have been under attack for liberal bias. During the 1960s and 1970s, the Right complained that political correctness was stigling the voices of conservative students and professors and that affirmative action was causing white students to lose out in the admissions process. Somehow, despite the alleged (and real) leftward tilt of the professoriate, American politics is dominated by rightwing politicians. All three branches are in the hands of conservatives, and rightwing media is enjoying a dramatic resurgence.

But be prepared, warns an intern at the National Review, American higher education is about to become the nation’s scapegoat, serving next year in the role that the media serves now: punching bag for Republican demagogues. It is elitist, it costs too much, it harbors leftist bias, it encourages a proliferation of bizarre majors and courses.

There is more than a grain of truth in all these charges, but that grain is tiny compared to the anti-intellectualism and bile that lies behind these charges. Elected officials have spent decades shifting the cost of higher education from the state’s to students, and the costs are out of reach for many students; for those who do attend, the cost of paying back student loans can take years. Meanwhile, many universities have responded to competition by building lavish student facilities and reducing the number of faculty eligible for tenure. Some 70% of the nation’s professors are adjuncts, or “contingent” faculty, barely able to cobble together a decent living as a “reward” for their years of preparation and study.

The “political correctness” claims have been blown out of all proportion because they are easiest for the uneducated to understand. They play into the well of white resentment that elected Trump, r
The sense that nonegites are getting an unfair advantage over whites.

Since World War II, our nation’s universities have been generally viewed as engines of economic progress and a path to social mobility. They are also considered by many to be the best in the world.

Make no mistake. If the right targets them next as the target of the nihilist steamroller, the future growth of our nation–economy and social–will be at risk.

It is past time for the leaders of higher education to strategize about the future, about cost and accessibility, about how they are perceived, about their role in American society, and about how to respond to the attacks by rightwing politicians that will blame higher education for the erosion of equality and opportunity in our society.

Clayton Christensen, the leading advocate of DISRUPTION, will address the “National Summit on Education Reform,” sponsored by Jeb Bush’s Foundation for Educational Excellence. He will speak on Thursday November 30 in Nashville, as Jeb’s group celebrates a solid decade of efforts to privatize public education. Don’t expect to see or hear about charter school frauds or the failure of vouchers to improve student test scores or the looting of public funds by virtual charter schools.

If you are going, be sure to read the debunking of disruption by Harvard professor Jill Lepore. She demonstrates that disruption is a fraud, a hoax. Even the business disruptions that Christensen boasts about were actually failures. “Disruption is a theory of change founded on panic, anxiety, and shaky evidence….”

Read Judith Shulevitz’s takedown of disruption in The New Republic, and how it has emboldened those who want to destroy public education and diminish democracy. Eli Broad’s love of disruption produced the failed leadership of Michelle Rhee and Joel Klein.

Shulevitz wrote (in 2013):

“But when Broad’s “change agents” move into the institutions they’ve been taught to shake up, as dozens have now done, we can see how disruption, well, disrupts—not just “the status quo,” but peoples’ lives. Teachers quit en masse or are fired. Nearby schools close, forcing students to travel to distant ones. School boards divide and bicker. Parents picket. Broad-affiliated superintendents all over the country—Atlanta; Philadelphia; Rochester, New York; Sumter, South Carolina—have resigned or been forced out after no-confidence votes, corruption or cheating scandals, or, in one case, the discovery of alleged irregularities with a doctorate degree.”

Bringing a disruptor into your school district is like inviting an arsonist into your home. You will have change aplenty, but you will lose your home and possibly your family.

School has already started in some districts. In others, it begins the day after Labor Day. Most people, long after they have finished school, get that “back to school” feeling about now. good feelings. Worried feelings. Anxiety. Who will be my teachers? Will I have friends? Am I ready?

Steven Singer teaches in Pennsylvania. At first, he had an inadequacy dream. Will I fail? Am I a good teacher? Why do I teach?

But school started, and his bad dream turned into a beautiful reality: I love to teach!

He writes:

“Before they come in, I’m full of doubt: Can I still do this for another year? Will I be able to keep up with the work load? Will I be able to accommodate all the extra services for every special education student in my mainstreamed classroom? Do I have enough desks, pencils, paper? Have I planned enough for the first week? Will I be able to keep students interested, entertained, disciplined, engaged, working, inspired?

“But the second the kids enter the classroom – literally the exact second – all my doubts disappear.

“There’s no time.

“I have more than two dozen children to see to at any given moment – and their needs outweigh any of mine.

“It wasn’t until about halfway through the day that I even had an instant to myself to stop, breathe and reflect.

“After my first bathroom break in more than 3 hours, then grabbing my lunch and collapsing into a seat- the first time I’m off my feet with no anxious little faces looking up to me – I think back on my day and realize – I absolutely love this!

“No, really.

“My feet hurt, my temples throb from making a hundred tiny decisions every 40 minutes, my body feels like it’s already been through a war… But there is no place in the world I would rather be.”

Many people make more money. Many people hate their work. Steven looks at those eager faces, and he thinks he’s got the best job in the world.

“How can I not come to school every day and give my very best?

“A public school is more than a building to me. It’s a temple to humanity. It’s where we go to offer ourselves to other people.

“Every action, every thought spent on these children is holy. The tiniest gesture is magnified through infinite time and space. When I help a child gain confidence in her reading, I help not just her. I help everyone she will ever come into contact with –her co-workers, her friends, family, even her own children if she someday has some.

“It’s humbling. Amazing. Staggering.

“Where else can you see the accumulated hurt of the world and actually make a dent in it? Where else can you reach out not just to a cause or an idea but to a living person?

“I’m lucky. I am so lucky. My circumstances allowed me to do whatever I wanted with my life.

“I could have become a doctor or a lawyer. I could have gone into business and made a whole mess of money. But I never wanted any of that. I wanted to make a difference. I wanted to help people.

“I remember the pitying looks peers would give me in my 20s. What a waste, they seemed to say. But I’ve never regretted it.

“This is what I was meant to do. It’s the only thing I ever could and still respect myself.”

The One Wisconsin Institute compiled a list of the organizations that have been funded by the far-right Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee. It is a remarkable documentation of the largesse that is showered on advocates for privatization of public schools.

You will notice the relationship with Betsy DeVos’ American Federation for Children, adding more shekels to the school choice honey pot. DeVos’ AFC has pumped millions of dollars into Wisconsin legislative races to assure that its privatization agenda is protected by the legislature. We are reminded again that our Secretary of Education is an extremist who opposes public schools.

Bradley-funded activities work to prevent any accountability or audits for private schools that receive public funds. And they seek every opportunity to siphon money away from public schools to benefit voucher schools.

Among the notable recipients of Bradley funding:

*American Enterprise Institute (where EdWeek blogger Rick Hess is education director) received $4.3 million from their Bradley paymasters.

*Black Alliance for Educational Options (founded by Howard Fuller) got $1,475,000. BAEO sends speakers to black communities to try to persuade them that charters and vouchers are best for black children. You can be sure that BAEO does not tell its audiences that its activities are funded by a rightwing foundation run by reactionary white men.

*Center for Education Reform, run by former Heritage Foundation aide Jeanne Allen, which exists to smear public schools and promote privatization. 620,000.

*Center for Union Facts, led by PR man Rick Berman, whose goal is to defame teachers’ unions: $1,550,000. About 10 years ago, I attended a meeting of the rightwing Philanthropy Roundtable, where Berman gave a pitch for funding, based on his campaign to demonized the New Jersey Educational Association. When I asked him to explain why the top-performing states are unionized, and the lowest are not, he answered: I am a PR man, not an educator.

*Charter Growth Fund: $28 million. Not familiar with this one, but it serves to remind us that charter schools are high priority for the extremists of the right.

*Donors Trust, $3.1 million. An organization assembled by the Koch brothers and Dezvos family to funnel money to pet causes while hiding the donors’ identity. Dark money.

*Foundation for Excellence in Education, $435,000. Jeb Bush’s pastime.

*Heartland Institute, $647,500. Rightwing think tank.

*Heritage Foundation, $623,500. The senior citizen of far-right think tanks.

*Hoover Institution, $1.6 million. Sponsor of Education Next and other school choice initiatives.

*Marquette University, $1.7 million. This may be another subsidy for Howard Fuller and the Black Alliance for Educational Options, since Fuller is based at Marquette.

*National Council on Teacher Quality, $445,000. This organization was founded by the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute with the explicit purpose of harassing traditional teacher education programs. Started as a maverick, this rightwing group now grades teacher education institutions for US News & World Report and is quoted by the mainstream media as if it were a credible source.

*Partnership for Educational Justice, $200,000. This is Campbell Brown’s organization, whose goal is to eliminate teachers’ rights and unions.

*Rocketship Education, $375,000. The charter chain that piputs poor kids on computers.

*Thomas B. Fordham Institute, $522,000. One rightwing foundation funding another.

*University of Washington, $500,000. This would be a subsidy for Paul Hill’s Center on Reinventing Public Education, which promotes portfolio districts. You know, like stock portfolios.

That’s a sampling.

Think about this list of handouts the next time some rightwingers complains about unions subsidizing civil rights groups. No equivalency.

The report can be found here.

Herbert J. Gans is an eminent sociologist who taught at Columbia University for many years. He was born in Germany in 1927 and left for the United States in 1938, becoming a citizen in 1945. He shared this article about the importance of political education because he thought it would be of interest to the blog’s readers.

See the pdf here.

The annual conference of the Network for Public Education will take place October 14-15 in Oakland, California. There is space for only 500 people. It is nearly sold out.

Don’t miss your chance to meet your friends and allies from across the country, standing together to support public schools.

Please join us.

Kipp Dawson is a veteran teacher in Pittsburgh. She writes here about the new school year and the ongoing struggle to teach her students without idiotic programs foisted on her and her students. Kipp was a coal miner, and she knows the meaning of struggle.

She writes:

“Teachers and other front-line workers in our public schools are also on the front lines of some of the biggest battles in this country right now, as we are fighting alongside our children for their future. As school opens this fall, we can feel this, as we are torn between what we can already see and feel in their eyes and words of their potential and real lives and beauties and challenges, on the one hand, and what is required of us to do with and to them, on the other.

“As I begin what may become my last year in this particular relationship to these struggles, I feel a particular obligation both to do all I can with and for each of the marvelous souls and brains with whom I am blessed to spend our teaching/learning brains, and the communities they build together in our classroom, on the one hand, and simultaneously, with my amazing collesgues, to work to make our schools shrug off the ridiculousnesses politicians and their conduits who run many things put in the way.

“This is a Report from One of the Front Lines, #1 for 2017.

“Yesterday, three of my 12-year-old boy students presented personal narratives to their classmates. Two of them had been called out to do so by their peer reviewers who were stunned and impressed by their stories. These boys came from different neighborhoods with different skin hues, and each presented well-constructed, dialogue-filled, literary-devices-well-used (mainly similes and colloquialisms), narrative structure in place and well used. Each of their stories was about overcoming a personal challenge (one, learning to ride a bike; the other, overcoming a fear of rollarcoasters). Each stunned me with the skill both of the writing, and the presentation (hats off Ms. Greco, their 6th-grade teacher!). It was marvelous to see their classmates enjoy, and celebrate, their writing.

“Among their classmates was a third boy who had shared his story only (so far) with his peer reviewer, and with me. This child has the same skin hue as one of the above-mentioned presenters. (To put it right out there: to armed police, both would look like Tamir Rice or Trayvon Martin). This boy’s story was much more bare — no literary devices, sentence structure lacking a bit. He wrote of having been with his uncle when the uncle was shot, three times, in the back, as they left a store. His uncle died, he wrote, was revived, and then died again, forever. The end. Unlike the other two stories, there were no adjectives or adverbs or literary devices. But he felt he had a story to tell, and a safe place in which to tell it.

“These three boys were among their 100 or so 7th-grade peers who noisily left school for a three-day weekend when our last bell rang yesterday. These three boys were going into three different worlds. These three boys will be back in this classroom community, together, on Tuesday. They will spend a school year together in our classrooms. They (hopefully) will grow up and keep going out into different and same parts of this world. For this next few months, we have them, and we have so so much we/they/all of us can do to grow together.

“But.

“When that last bell rang, we who teach these boys, and all of their classmates, gathered our thoughts and papers, did some debriefing with colleagues or rushed out to be with families or simply collapsed at home with fatigue, beginning a weekend of downtime and the first weekend of organizing our time to meet the needs.

“Needs imposed on us by a “data-driven district” (aren’t they all, now?)

“Data.

“I am not alone in having in my home now, the stories and letters to me and daily check-ins of my approximately 85 new 7th graders, on the one hand, and the demands of a frenzied, trying-to-stay-afloat public school district which is translating that frenzy into increasingly onerous distracting, time-consuming, mis-focused (in my humble, professional/human opinion) demands on the workers, especially teachers. I will spend as much time as I can reading every word these new-to-me students wrote (or did not follow directions and left blank — equally important!) this first week of school. I will spend as much time as I can communicating with each/all of the new-to-me (with, of course, some returning via siblings) parents of these children, as these relationships are essential. I will be pulled from doing that by meeting the demands of administrations, some of which are understandable and helpful, and some of which drive me (almost) to despair.

“Test scores are our source of data. We are data driven. Therefore, our children, and their teachers, are judged, grouped, approached, by data, and test scores. Therefore these personal narratives become important mainly in how they will be rated on the rubrics which will turn into data when these children take their end-of-the-year tests. And now we are to take precious time out of our classrooms each day to put them in front of computers so the machines can judge their skills and give them individual, screen-and-keyboard-responses-only, assignments and evaluations. Every day. I am not ok with this. At all.

“If you have read this far, most likely you, also, are a school worker and/or parent. Most likely you, also, are pondering how to respond to the wonderfulnesses and alarm signals of your back-to-school days. Most likely, you are looking for ways to make things better for our children. Let’s do this together.”

Save Our Schools Arkansas and Grassroots Arkansas are sponsoring a showing of “Backpack Full of Cash” on Thursday September 7 from 6:30-8:30 pm at Philander Smith College (M.L. Smith Auditorium) in Little Rock. The event is sponsored by the Schott Foundation for Public Education and SOS Arkansas and Grassroots Arkansas.

All who are concerned about the future of public education as a basic human right are encouraged to attend. Join the Fight to stop privatization of what belongs to all of us!

Parents, educators, students, and other concerned citizens are urged to attend.

In response to the lobbying of representatives of the Walton family, the Legislature stripped Little Rock of local control. The pretext was that 6 of its 48 schools were low-performing.

Learn about the struggle to restore our democratic rights and save our public schools.