John Thompson, teacher and historian, has been investigating the track record of Superintendents “trained” by the unaccredited Broad Foundation.
He writes:
Across the nation, educators have seen the harm done to public education by Broad Academy superintendents. But what do we see when we take a step back and think through their patterns of behavior? And what do we see when looking at Oakland, for instance, where four Broad graduates have run the district? When Broad focuses so intently on one school system, what does the record of its leaders say about education “reform?”
Perhaps the most powerful indictment of an Oakland-connected Broadie, Antwan Wilson, was written by conservative reformer Max Eden, who is one of the many new critics of the data-driven micromanaging which Broad exemplifies. This is crucial because more and more reformers are acknowledging that their accountability-driven theories have failed; apparently, these corporate reformers are now gambling everything on choice, and placing their bets on charters that don’t face the oversight that once was contemplated by many neoliberal reformers.
And that is the first obvious pattern which emerged from Oakland. Before the first Broad manager (Randy Ward) was appointed, Oakland had 15 charters. Six years later, after Oakland experienced three Broad superintendents, it had 34. By the time Antwan Wilson left, the district had 44. As was explained in 2016 by the New York Times Motoko Rich, Wilson faced “a rebellion by teachers and some parents against his plan to allow families to use a single form to apply to any of the city’s 86 district-run schools or 44 charter campuses, all of which are competing for a shrinking number of students.” The likely scenario was that the common application form would result in a New Orleans-style charter portfolio model.
Second, the Oakland Broad experience provides another example about the way that their corporate reformers are untroubled by behaviors that most people see as scandalous. Its four Broad leaders all came with a history of dubious behaviors, or when they left they were caught up in questionable activities.
Vincent Matthews (Broad Class of 2006) had been the principal of a Edison Charter Academy in Noe Valley which had been in danger of losing its charter because it had been criticized for pushing out black students with low test scores. Kimberly Statham (2003) had resigned as chief academic officer of the Howard County Schools following allegations of a grade changing scandal involving her daughter.
http://www.sfexaminer.com/incoming-sf-schools-superintendent-takes-measured-stance-charters/
http://www.baltimoresun.com/bs-mtblog-2007-10-where_are_they_now_kimberly_a-story.html
Randy Ward (2003) left Oakland for San Diego where he resigned, after being placed on administrative leave. The San Diego County Office of Education had been thrown into turmoil as a forensic audit examined “concerns related to certain expenditures and compensation” for top education officials.
I’d add an observation about one controversy involving Michelle Fort-Merrill, “a close confidant to former superintendent Ward,” who earned a salary of $161,000. A whistle-blower won a civil lawsuit after accusing Fort-Merrill and others of “playing favorites with public education money by awarding lucrative legal contracts to friends.” He successfully claimed that his due process rights were violated.
When Fort-Merrill was terminated, she sued saying her due process rights were violated. Isn’t it hypocritical for corporate reformers to use charter expansions and data-driven evaluations for an all-out assault on educators’ due process rights while using those rights to protect their huge salaries?
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/education/sdut-tensions-rise-at-county-office-of-education-2016jul14-story.html
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/watchdog/sd-me-county-schools-audit-20170714-story.html
https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2017/mar/02/ticker-lawsuit-top-lawsuit-office-education/#
Only after Antwan Wilson left Oakland and became Washington D.C.’s chancellor, did his full record become apparent. As Valerie Strauss noteds “It was no secret that when Wilson departed the Oakland Unified School District 2½ years after arriving, he left a budget deficit of about $30 million behind.” But subsequent analyses showed:
While Wilson was superintendent in Oakland, the district overspent its budget in some areas, but spent substantially below budgeted amounts in other categories, according to data from the Board of Education. During the 2016-2017 school year, $10.4 million was budgeted for “classified supervisors and administrators” while $22.2 million was spent, according to the Board of Education. In the same year, $21.4 million was budgeted for professional and consulting services, but $28.2 million was spent.
Wilson spent huge amounts of money, creating new, unbudgeted positions and he paid more than what was customary. Strauss noted, “In 2013, before Wilson arrived in Oakland, only four administrators earned more than $200,000; two years later, at least 26 did.”
But Wilson spent less on books and supplies for classrooms than was budgeted. In 2015-2016, Strauss recalls, “$18.6 million was budgeted, but only $12.3 million was spent, according to board data. In 2016-2017, $20.1 million was budgeted for books and other school supplies, but only $6.8 million was spent.”
Wilson was forced to resign in D.C. after violating rules when transferring his daughter to one of the city’s most desirable high schools. This followed a Washington Post report that “an internal investigation has uncovered signs of widespread enrollment fraud” at a desirable school.
And these violations were revealed about the time that it was learned that Wilson had been warned of the Ballou High School graduation scandal. Moreover, these revelations followed Washington Post discovery that “the dramatic decrease in school suspension rates was also fake.”
In other words, Wilson, the fourth Broad superintendent of Oakland, found himself in a very similar situation in D.C., being the third in the line of corporate reformers that began with Michelle Rhee. My sense is that the mess he helped create in Oakland illustrates a pattern which is similar to the one that was started by Michelle Rhee. Even if Broad superintendents were not so cavalier about violating the norms of honest behsvior, their data-driven mentality would still create inevitable scandals. Plus, the more that Broad and other corporate reformers double-down on a single district, the more damage will become too serious to be covered up any longer.
For instance, D.C.’s data-driven, competition-driven reforms created “a Culture of Passing and Graduating Students.” A review of FY16-17 DCPS graduates found that 34.% of students graduated with the assistance of policy violations.
The unraveling of D.C.’s claims of transformational success is crucial because it was once the heart of the Billionaires Boys Club’s vision for American schools. Nobody dared to claim that Oakland was a great success, but as the Motoko Rich’s article articulates, it became the “Heart of Drive to Transform Urban Schools.”
Not only did Broad train four of Oakland’s superintendents, but:
It has granted about $6 million for staff development and other programs over the last decade. The Broad Center, which runs the superintendents’ academy, has subsidized the salaries of at least 10 ex-business managers who moved into administrative jobs at the district office.
Broadies may have had “modest success in raising student achievement” but in the environment they created there is no reason to believe that those “achievement” gains are real. It failed to solve the district’s financial problems, and it dramatically expanded charters.
So, what is next?
Broad has been helping to fund the campaigns to elect its corporate reformers in elections throughout California. Its failure to improve Los Angeles, Oakland, and other districts is interpreted as more evidence against public education norms. Rather than admit that their social engineering has failed, Broad et. al are doubling down on the edu-politics of destruction.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Broad Superintendents have a pattern of disruption and deliberate financial mismanagement to discredit public schools. In Philadelphia, former superintendent Arlene Ackerman, who was on the board of the Broad Foundation, laid the groundwork for the current assault on public schools. “More on Broad in Philadelphia” http://www.defendpubliceducation.net/more-on-broad-in-philadelphia/ Her successor, Broad Superintendent William Hite, is continuing the privatization of public schools. “Why does Philadelphia’s Strawberry Mansion High School only enroll 235 out of 2,267 eligible students?” https://appsphilly.net/2018/05/09/why-does-philadelphias-strawberry-mansion-high-school-only-enroll-235-out-of-2267-eligible-students/
LikeLike
I think the most offensive part is how they REFUSE to admit they are setting the two sectors in competition. Of course they are! It’s key to the whole ideological approach and it’s DIRECTLY reflected in the specific plans.
It’s key to the people they hire, their hiring decisions. The requirement is they be pro-charter. There is NO requirement they be pro-public schools. In fact, they admit this too- they proudly declare they are pro-charter and when they’re questioned on whether they are also “pro public” they demur and dial back to the weak and useless “agnostic” pose.
As a practical matter, what results is this: we have a huge group of cheerleaders for charter schools and a bunch of weak and useless “agnostics” on the public side of the ledger. That’s inequitable. It’s not a level playing field at all.
They are great advocates for CHARTER schools. They are LOUSY advocates for public schools.
I actually prefer the straight-up privatizers. They’re more transparent. This “sector agnostic” stuff is pure baloney. Broad and the rest of them lobby for charters. Nothing “agnostic” about it.
LikeLike
When I watched Vice’s coverage of education in Michigan last night, I saw DeVos’ husband being interviewed. He claimed that competition will make public schools stronger because they will be forced to adopt new methods in order to compete with private academies. Of course, he would not address the loss of funding that public schools face. DeVos has his own aeronautic academy in which almost all the students are white. He mentioned that a black students was recently accepted into the program. Overall, Vice did a good job showing the devastation of the Michigan public schools under the influence of DeVos family.
LikeLike
I guess it’s just a mystery that in every single one of these cities where the “portfolio” approach is used the public school “sector” gets weaker and the charter school “sector” gets stronger.
They’re picking schools. They;re not investing anything in the public schools in Indianapolis. They’re winding them down and replacing them as fast as they can. They couldn’t jam anymore new charters in so they created a special new category of charters with a different name.
The goal is to eradicate public schools. They stopped investing in our schools and shifted investment to the sector they prefer, and they did it with little or no public input or democratic input of any kind.
They like data so let’s see some numbers. Show me a portfolio city and show me where the public investment is going. There are real numbers somewhere. Let;s see those. How much have they put into Indianapolis public schools versus the schools they prefer, which are charters? Is it “agnostic” or are they picking winners and losers?
LikeLike
Portfolio investing is a robber baron, carpetbagger, for profit approach to education. It provides maximum investment opportunity to exploit what should be a community asset. The profit generated leaves the community and becomes the added value to the carpetbaggers. Good public education enhances the value of a community, and the value of the public asset remains in the community. The fact that this is happening more in minority neighborhoods confirms the exploitative nature of the arrangement.
LikeLiked by 1 person
EXPLOIT. Nothing less.
LikeLike
Is it too much to demand that we have some representatives in government who are actual advocates for public schools?
We have loads of charter advocates- the DC contingent can’t cheerlead charters often enough or loud enough. The Trump Administration spends 90% of their time promoting private schools, so private schools are covered.
Who works on behalf of public schools? Shouldn’t 90% of families have an advocate in government? Not the useless and weak “agnostics”- a real advocate. Someone who values our kids and our schools.
LikeLike
“Eli Broad made a phone call, and that was it. Eli Broad can pick up the phone, give the word, and one of his people packs up, breaks professional and personal relationships without a word of explanation, and leaves town.
“This is the reformster approach at its most naked and ugly. Our Betters, the men with money and power, want to be free to operate our education system like their own personal fiefdom, managed by people who answer to one authority and one authority only. This is a school system run by a shadow government, and a shadow government that is run by a godfather, an emperor, an autocrat. This is the opposite of democracy, the opposite of transparency, the opposite of a system that worries for one nano-second about the concerns of the little people, the Lessers.
“This is the guy who wants to take over LA schools. This is the guy who is funding dozens of charter policy initiatives. And this is how he operates. Pick up a phone. Make a call, and his will is done.”
http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2016/04/how-eli-broad-operates.html
LikeLike
If you want to see what happens when an “agnostic” school board in Oakland funded by GO Public Schools (all the usual charter dark money folks) comes up with a piece of legislation, look no further. BP6006 is basically a blueprint for school closure. The “city-wide plan” verbiage probably came about as a result of a recently attempted charter grab by the Aspire charter chain to take over a piece of city-owned property that was originally zoned for affordable housing. Somehow, someone on the Oakland City Council thought this was a splendid idea, since Oakland certainly doesn’t need more affordable housing, but definitely needs more charter school expansion, SMH.
https://ousd.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3460644&GUID=F3D0508D-4FFF-45B5-B5DF-F4FD3B8E4706&Options=&Search
LikeLike