LeBron James’ new public school in Akron, Ohio, but it’s already showing remarkable progress by the only metric the public understands: test scores.
Readers of this blog understand the deficiencies of standardized tests. But in this case, they are bringing attention to the most interesting and high-profile effort in the nation to reform education for the city’s neediest children.
Bill Gates has thrown billions into failed reforms, like Common Core and teacher evaluation by test scores. Perhaps he should invite LeBron James to advise him.
LeBron James is proving that money makes a difference, when it is used wisely, for example, on small class size.
He has created an innovative model within the public system. His school is not a charter. It is a public school. It purposely chooses the kids least likely to succeed.
Ohio presently spends $1 billion on charters, two-thirds of which are rated D or F by the state. Over the years, the state has wasted at least $10 billion on privatization.
Is Ohio capable of learning?
Erica Green writes in the New York Times:
AKRON, Ohio — The students paraded through hugs and high-fives from staff, who danced as Sister Sledge’s “We Are Family” blared through the hallways. They were showered with compliments as they walked through a buffet of breakfast foods.
The scene might be expected on a special occasion at any other public school. At LeBron James’s I Promise School, it was just Monday.
Every day, they are celebrated for walking through the door. This time last year, the students at the school — Mr. James’s biggest foray into educational philanthropy — were identified as the worst performers in the Akron public schools and branded with behavioral problems. Some as young as 8 were considered at risk of not graduating.

The academic results are early, and at 240, the sample size of students is small, but the inaugural classes of third and fourth graders at I Promise posted extraordinary results in their first set of district assessments. Ninety percent met or exceeded individual growth goals in reading and math, outpacing their peers across the district.
“These kids are doing an unbelievable job, better than we all expected,” Mr. James said in a telephone interview hours before a game in Los Angeles for the Lakers. “When we first started, people knew I was opening a school for kids. Now people are going to really understand the lack of education they had before they came to our school. People are going to finally understand what goes on behind our doors.”
Unlike other schools connected to celebrities, I Promise is not a charter school run by a private operator but a public school operated by the district. Its population is 60 percent black, 15 percent English-language learners and 29 percent special education students. Three-quarters of its families meet the low-income threshold to receive help from the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services.
The school’s $2 million budget is funded by the district, roughly the same amount per pupil that it spends in other schools. But Mr. James’s foundation has provided about $600,000 in financial support for additional teaching staff to help reduce class sizes, and an additional hour of after-school programming and tutors.
”The school is unusual in the resources and attention it devotes to parents, which educators consider a key to its success. Mr. James’s foundation covers the cost of all expenses in the school’s family resource center, which provides parents with G.E.D. preparation, work advice, health and legal services, and even a quarterly barbershop.
The school opened with some skepticism — not only for its high-profile founder, considered by some to be the best basketball player ever, but also for an academic model aimed at students who by many accounts were considered irredeemable.
“We are reigniting dreams that were extinguished — already in third and fourth grade,” said Brandi Davis, the school’s principal. “We want to change the face of urban education.”
The students’ scores reflect their performance on the Measures of Academic Progress assessment, a nationally recognized test administered by NWEA, an evaluation association. In reading, where both classes had scored in the lowest, or first, percentile, third graders moved to the ninth percentile, and fourth graders to the 16th. In math, third graders jumped from the lowest percentile to the 18th, while fourth graders moved from the second percentile to the 30th.
The 90 percent of I Promise students who met their goals exceeded the 70 percent of students districtwide, and scored in the 99th growth percentile of the evaluation association’s school norms, which the district said showed that students’ test scores increased at a higher rate than 99 out of 100 schools nationally.
The students have a long way to go to even join the middle of the pack. And time will tell whether the gains are sustainable and how they stack up against rigorous state standardized tests at the end of the year. To some extent, the excitement surrounding the students’ progress illustrates a somber reality in urban education, where big hopes hinge on small victories.
“It’s encouraging to see growth, but by no means are we out of the woods,” said Keith Liechty, a coordinator in the Akron public school system’s Office of School Improvement. The school district, where achievement and graduation rates have received failing marks on state report cards, has been trying to turn around its worst-performing schools for years. “The goal is for these students to be at grade level, and we’re not there yet. This just tells us we’re going in the right direction,” he added…
On a tour of the school on Monday, Michele Campbell, the executive director of the LeBron James Family Foundation, pointed out what she called I Promise’s “secret sauce.” In one room, staff members were busy organizing a room filled with bins of clothing and shelves of peanut butter, jelly and Cheerios. At any time, parents can grab a shopping bin and take what they need.
Down the hallway, parents honed their math skills for their coming G.E.D. exams as their students learned upstairs….
“MR. JAMES, BILL GATES IS ON LINE 2.”
This is a community school and community schools are a proven strategy for equitable school improvement. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Community_Schools_Evidence_Based_Strategy_BRIEF.pdf
What will the charter school vampires focus on if they ever admit this school exists?
The vampires like Bill Gates, Betsy the Brainless, the Walton family, Eli Broad, Jeb Bush, the Koch brothers and every member of ALEC will focus on one sentence. If they don’t, they will just ignore the fact that this school exists.
“The goal is for these students to be at grade level, and we’re not there yet.”
The corporate harter school and voucher vampires will twist this one sentence into one short easy to remember lie and repeated it until the lie is echoing across the country.
The vultures will say, “LeBron James’ new public school in Akron, Ohio has failed because the students are not reading at grade level.”
Hi,
We are in very deep trouble with Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Ed. LeBron James would be an improvement.
We are much better off with Betsy DeVoid (credit to whoever posted that the other day) than we were with King Duncan. Their agenda is the same, but Betsy (like her boss) is just so naked in her evil that people have no choice but to wake up and see what’s happening. King Duncan and their boss were “our guys” and the “good liberals” would have let them rob us blind.
Agree with Diane! LeBron James actually understands how to address the needs of the kids who struggle, while the rest of education reform believes that testing and punishing them will change things no matter how much evidence they have that it harms children.
Anyone who believes we are “better off with Betsy DeVoid” is probably middle class and can afford to send their kid to a non-public school. Duncan was terrible but I can’t imagine looking at the face of one of the myriad of children who her policies have directly negatively affected and telling their parents that they are much better off and good thing Trump won so we don’t have another Arne Duncan.
The way to fight bad policies by Democrats is not to elect horrible terrible people who are far, far worse than Democrats and do so much harm to children. The way to fight bad policies is not to tell the parents of the kids harmed that they should feel “better off” because the damage done to their children is such a small price to pay for “blowing up” the system because you know it will lead to a more progressive country at some point in the future.
Sure, having Hitler eventually made Germany more progressive than it was before Hitler, and as long as you were in your privileged position as a Christian Aryan German you could convince yourself that making sure that his challenger did not get a chance to defeat the fascist was really a good thing.
“…myriad of children who her policies have directly negatively affected….”
And, what, King Duncan’s policies didn’t directly negatively affect a myriad of children??? I want you to stop by just about any public school and say that, especially around testing time.
BTW, I ESPECIALLY want you to say that in a Chicago Public School. Maybe one of the fifty Duncan’s good buddy Rahmbo closed. Oh, wait, those don’t exist any more.
Your willingness to turn a blind eye to the harms under the Democrats is appalling, but, sadly, not surprising for a partisan like you.
Dienne,
What brings on this wild rant? I have been very critical of Duncan, Rahm, John King, Race to the Top. Have you not paid attention?
I do not think Dienne77 even saw LeBron’s name in the comment she copied and pasted, or read the post. I think she is guided by extreme confirmation bias and she scanned the comments looking for something to attack and her obvious “dyslexia” twisted the words she saw out of context and turned them into something that wasn’t there.
BTW, DeVos = Hitler is cute, if wildly offensive. I bet you had apoplexy when the rightwingers called Obama Hitler, didn’t you?
And, finally, BTW, my kids are in private progressive schools because of the anti-progressive policies of the Obama/Duncan regime. The Trump/DeVos regime certainly hasn’t made anything any better, but they haven’t made it any worse either.
It was the Obama/Duncan regime that implemented:
— Race to the Top [sic] which made schools compete for limited funding
— Tying teacher salaries to student standardized test scores, even for teachers who don’t teach tested subjects, thereby “evaluating” [sic] teachers based on students they never taught
— The drastic reduction or elimination of recess, PE and other electives
— The focus on “high quality” [sic] academic preschool because
— Kindergarten is the new first grade
— The introduction of “Social Impact Bonds” pay-for-success” [sic] programs enriching the likes of Goldman Sachs
— Forcing states/districts to increase charter caps thereby opening the way to privatization
— Forcing states/districts to have a plan to take over/turn around “failing” [sic] public schools
— Mass closure of public schools, as happened in Chicago, Philadelphia and elsewhere, not to mention the all-privatized New Orleans (remember, it was Duncan, not DeVos, that said that Katrina was the best thing that ever happened to New Orleans).
— The rise of tech-driven “personalized” [sic] “learning” [sic] enriching the likes of Bill Gates (with attendant data-mining)
— The introduction of the edTPA for anyone wanting to be a real teacher while supporting five-week TfA miracle workers
— Please help me out with the myriad of things i’m probably forgetting
Do you think for one second DeVos could get away with a tenth of this? Look at the barriers she’s run into. List any “successes” she has managed that Duncan didn’t manage ten times more of. I’m eagerly awaiting you showing me how much worse DeVos is than Duncan. I’ll wait.
Since I believe dienne77 was replying to me and not Diane, I will explain.
The way to accomplish change is to fight like heck to get change and be incredibly critical of the awful people in power, whether they are Democrats or Republicans.
The way to accomplish change is not to elect someone so fascist and horrible who appoints someone so terrible and horrible in the hope that eventually people will realize that things are so terrible and horrible that they will vote out the most terrible people. When the choice is between neo-Fascists who are doing everything to try to destroy our democracy, and people who have terrible policies, you don’t vote for neo-Fascists who are trying to destroy our democracy.
The reason Arne Duncan was allowed to enact his policies was because there was not the same groundswell of rejection of those policies 10 years ago. That’s why you never heard Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders taking up the fight against the privatization of public schools and the testing regime — instead they were repeating the same nonsense as Duncan about “good public charters” and lending progressive credibility to the privatization movement.
But by 2016, there WAS a backlash against those policies. That is why by the time of the 2017 Virginia Democratic Governor’s primary, support of public education became a big issue.
It would have been truly outrageous and despicable if the pro-charter DFER Democrat Tom Periello had defeated the pro-public education candidate Ralph Northam, and pro-public education voters said “we better vote for the far right Trump supporting Republican Ed Gillespie because even though he will be terrible for public education and everything else, at least having Virginia voters understand that the reformers are really bad for education will be good in the long run.”
If DFER Democrat Periello had won the Virginia primary, are you really suggesting that pro-public education voters might have been better served by voting against DFER Periello and letting the right winger Gillespie win?
It is one thing to criticize Arne Duncan who deserves every single word of criticism.
And it is quite another thing to try to spin Trump appointee Betsy DeVos’ tenure as something we should be happy about because in the long run it will turn people off of the reform movement that Democrats like Tom Perriello embrace.
By the way, is Tom Perriello one of those “good liberals” who would have let the ed reformers and privatizers “rob us blind”?
“But by 2016, there WAS a backlash against those policies. That is why by the time of the 2017 Virginia Democratic Governor’s primary, support of public education became a big issue.”
Does Besty the Brainless deserve some credit for causing this backlash because of her putrid policies and that arrogant expression she always has plastered on her face — and is that really her face or a word that starts with an “A”?
It’s quite clear who I was responding to and why. Please read the thread before calling my comment a “wild rant”. I’m really sick of you allowing NYCPSP to bait me like that. Her comment about me ranks right up there with Duncan’s comment about only white middle class soccer moms who think too highly of their kids could be opposed to his policies.
In fact, most of the people I know who are actually most threatened by Trump’s policies see very clearly the roll Democrats have played in getting us Trump in the first place and the similarities between Democratic and Trumpian positions. It’s only the insulated upper middle class white folks who seem to think that Trump is some kind of wild aberation who must have been elected by the Russians.
Dienne, Diane Ravitch has been consistently damning of Ed Deform in all its guises and from all its promoters. She excoriated the Obama/Duncan education policies for years and analyzed them on these pages in enormous and damning detail. And she has devoted a lot of time and effort to opposing Rahm’s policies in Chicago. I’m sure that these guys, Duncan and Rahm and Booker and all the members of DFER think of her as their Number 1 Nemesis. You must not be reading the same blog I’ve been reading.
That would be Ditzy DeVos, Secretary of the Department for the Privatization of American Education, formerly the US Department of Education
dienne77,
I responded to a remark that I found truly appalling — someone trying to convince us that there is something good about having Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education. “We are much better off with Betsy DeVoid..than we were with King Duncan” because “good liberals” would have “let them rob us blind.”
Does anyone know which “good liberals” are being smeared here? Is it progressive DFER favorite Tom Perriello? Elizabeth Warren?
There is nothing about any Trump appointee that makes this country “much better off” . Period.
Dienne is correct in stating “We are much better off with Betsy DeVoid (credit to whoever posted that the other day) than we were with King Duncan.”
To state so does not mean that one actually WANTS her in the position nor that one actually voted for the tRump and/or the Rethugs. Dienne is just saying that, to paraphrase an old aphorism, the Dimocraps shouldn’t be throwing stones while living in their glass houses.
As far as James being a better Sec of Ed than DeVos, well, anyone besides Duncan or J King probably would be but that doesn’t mean that James is qualified to be in said position. I’d have to see some serious delineations of his public education policies to think that he is qualified at all.
Being a monied celebrity does not equal being qualified.
Thanks for clarifying, Duane.
“Dienne is correct in stating “We are much better off with Betsy DeVoid (credit to whoever posted that the other day) than we were with King Duncan.”
“To state so does not mean that one actually WANTS her in the position nor that one actually voted for the tRump and/or the Rethugs. Dienne is just saying that, to paraphrase an old aphorism, the Dimocraps shouldn’t be throwing stones while living in their glass houses.”
Are you saying no Democrat, including Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, is allowed to criticize DeVos without mentioning that of course, DeVos is much better than if one of them had chosen a Secretary of Education who was a Democrat because “the ‘good liberals’ would have let them rob us blind”?
I don’t get you. Since when is it required that one may not criticize anything Trump or one of his awful, awful appointees does without including the disclaimer that had the Democrats won, of course the appointee would be far, far worse?
Plus your belief that Americans are “much better off” with DeVos is just an opinion and there are plenty off children who don’t happen to be white, Christian and heterosexual who would disagree that they are “much better off”.
What is interesting is that you and dienne77 could have made the comment that DeVos is just as bad as Arne Duncan. But that isn’t your point. Your point is that all criticism of DeVos should be accompanied with the clear acknowledgement that she is better than the Democrat. Because “the good liberals would have let them rob us blind”.
Imagine if anytime you or dienne77 had criticized Arne Duncan during his tenure, Diane Ravitch and many other people here kept insisting “but he is much better than Margaret Spellings.” You were not allowed to say one negative word about Duncan without us insisting that at least he wasn’t Margaret Spellings. Do you remember that happening? Because I don’t. We actually joined in your criticism of Arne Duncan and we didn’t insist that you always include the disclaimer “but he is much much better than Spellings”. Because that would not have been relevant anymore. And you would have wondered what agenda we had that we chimed in to any criticism of Arne Duncan by insisting at least he was much better than Spellings.
We didn’t do that. So why do you?
There was lots of criticism here of Arne Duncan. And I don’t recall anyone who kept posting “he’s much better than Spellings” whenever that criticism came up. Should we have done that in the name of “honesty” like you are dienne77 feel obligated to do?
I wish you guys were willing to just once acknowledge how terrible the Republicans are without always implying that at least they aren’t the evil Democrats.
Republicans are very bad. They are worse than Democrats. In every single way. Legitimizing and enabling them and NORMALIZING what is not normal behavior is a choice. It is possible to criticize a Republican without always insisting that the disclaimer be made that at least they are better than the Democrats.
NYCpsp,
I never implied that one side/political party can’t demean, deplore or denigrate the other. Not at all.
And we, I believe I can speak for Dienne in this, do not believe “that Americans are “much better off” with DeVos” in a broad sense. Not at all. What we are saying is that it is better to have the Wizard of Oz villain out in the open and not hiding behind the Democratic party curtain which hides what is actually going on-the deformation and privatization of American public education. The better off aspect being that at least we can see who and what we are fighting against instead of not knowing that the Democrat in charge is actually a Rethuglican lite in policy and policy enforcement of bribing states to do his bidding.
NYCpsp, you stated “Your point is that all criticism of DeVos should be accompanied with the clear acknowledgement that she is better than the Democrat. Because “the good liberals would have let them rob us blind”.”
No, that is not my point at all. Please do not put words in my mouth that I have not said nor implied. If that is the implication you interpreted, I apologize for not being 100% clear. Let it be clear now that that is not what I stated.
You also stated “I wish you guys were willing to just once acknowledge how terrible the Republicans are without always implying that at least they aren’t the evil Democrats.”
You must not have read all that I have written against the Rethugs. I condemn both parties for the actions that I consider abhorrent. Certainly I consider them far worse than the average Dimocrap. I despise both parties equally. Are there a few individuals in both parties who I can tolerate? Yes, but token toleration does not imply acceptance of either of the larger political parties’ overall avariciousness and self-centeredness of the majority in each party that I perceive. I’m an independent free thinking skeptical individual.
And finally in response: “It is possible to criticize a Republican without always insisting that the disclaimer be made that at least they are better than the Democrats.”
I’ve never seen that disclaimer made by Dienne and it certainly doesn’t apply to me. I’m from the Show Me State. Show me where I have written anything that even comes close to implying that falsehood.
“We are much better off with Betsy DeVoid (credit to whoever posted that the other day) than we were with King Duncan. ”
“the “good liberals” would have let them rob us blind”
” the Dimocraps shouldn’t be throwing stones while living in their glass houses.”
I explained why I felt the need to respond to those comments. I realize that you believe that is it perfectly reasonable to follow criticism of DeVos with a gratuitous reminder that she is BETTER than Arne Duncan. But as I pointed out, if someone was frequently posting that “Duncan was much better than Margaret Spellings” when there was a discussion of Arne Duncan’s terrible policies, you would probably wonder why someone would have the need to make that gratuitous comment all the time. Am I wrong about that?
Duane, you wrote: “Show me where I have written anything that even comes close to implying that falsehood.”
Here is my answer:
“Dienne is correct in stating “We are much better off with Betsy DeVoid (credit to whoever posted that the other day) than we were with King Duncan.”
To state so does not mean that one actually WANTS her in the position nor that one actually voted for the tRump and/or the Rethugs. Dienne is just saying that, to paraphrase an old aphorism, the Dimocraps shouldn’t be throwing stones while living in their glass houses.”
the Dimocraps shouldn’t be throwing stones while living in their glass houses.”
I have no idea how to interpret that remark. Are you really saying that Bernie Sander and Elizabeth Warren and Diane Ravitch are not allowed to criticize DeVos?
Who IS allowed to “throw stones” at Betsy DeVos? Or may we not criticize her because you believe she its better than whoever the Democrats would have appointed?
Diane Ravitch should be allowed to criticize (i.e. “throw stones” at) DeVos. So can other Democrats. Why do we need to be told by the very same people who said there is no difference between Trump and HRC that DeVos is better than Arne Duncan? She isn’t. Being out in the open isn’t “better”, especially when the rest of us are powerless to stop her. How is undermining legitimate criticism of DeVos by insisting she is “better” than Arne Duncan helpful?
So let’s agree to disagree. You aren’t going to convince me that putting the most awful people in power because their evil is out there to see is a good thing. We could have fought against the evils of Arne Duncan if people like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren were not part of the problem. They were wrong. That doesn’t make them evil. That doesn’t make them worse than Betsy DeVos. That doesn’t mean they are not allowed to criticize DeVos without being undermined by those who claim they are throwing stones from their glass house.
When all criticism of the truly terrible things that the Republicans are doing is met by people trying to undermine that criticism because “Democrats are just as bad”, then our country is in deep trouble.
I have said this before. Please listen to how AOC talks and how dienne77 talks. One is interested in making the party who opposes Trump better. The other is interested in undermining the party who opposes Trump. Look at the kind of language you use — “Dimocraps shouldn’t be throwing stones while living in their glass houses”. Maybe you think it is helpful but – in my opinion – the only people that kind of language helps are the right wing Republicans.
Dienne 4:32 post: Just have to quibble with your list. Obama/Duncan are to blame for continuing & even worsening NCLB policies– & may well be responsible, timing-wise, for your decision on your kids’ schooling. But a lot of this craap was already coming down the pike when Bush took office, & he cast it in concrete w/NCLB, thus getting the ball rolling on most of these bullet points. (I don’t even say “Bush – and Ted Kennedy” any more since I learned Ted turned against NCLB when Republicans reneged on the deal to improve/ add funds to ‘failing’ schools [vs just closing them]).
NCLB was a policy begging for national stds and aligned assessments– which immediately became necessary for “accountability” when many states lowered stds or dumbed down tests to avoid “failing” (& of course Gates’ Achieve was in the wings & ready since ’90’s) … The widespread narrowing of curriculum to match tested subjects (&/or add test-prep courses) was already being documented under Bush just 5 yrs into NCLB… Charter expansion was happening steadily even before NCLB… At least in NJ, state takeovers of “failing schools” began well before NCLB, & “school turnarounds” were a thing immediately upon its implementation… NOLA’s Recovery School District charter conversion started 2 yrs pre-Katrina, & was full-blown [102 of 126 schools] just 3 months after, 3+ yrs before Obama took office… And– again, in NJ– the focus on “hi-quality” i.e. academic PreK because “K is the new 1st grade” was well underway as my kids entered PreK/ K in the ’90’s.
I take what I think is your point– that progressives, or even just old-fashioned Dems could have turned a lot of this s*** around starting in Jan 2009. Instead we got neolibs who doubled down on lousy Republican policy.
I can see both sides of this argument, but I have to say that from a pragmatic point of view, Obama/ Duncan [/J King] did far more damage to US public schools than Trump/ BDeVos have managed so far.
DeVos, as Diane predicted, has done us the favor of being so “out there” in her plain-spoken disdain for public schools & her enthusiasm for public funding of unmonitored charters/ vouchers– thinly disguised as enthusiasm for public funding of crappy little Christian schools—that she has actually drawn negative attention to charters and vouchers in the mainstream media.
In addition to her bully-pulpit turnoff, she has gilded the lily by enacting Obama rollbacks that have garnered the negative attention of progressives everywhere—plus made ludicrous, unpassable budget proposals that have similarly wised up the mainstream on privatization. Trump has done his part by being unconcerned with ed in general, thus allowing Betsy to F up.
Compare this if you will to Obama’s dead-wrong double down on Rep-designed anti-pubsch accountability schemes +/ coordinated w/ incentivizing privatized alternatives, all dressed up as [or honestly mistaken for?] help for poor inner-city kids, put into play by basketball buddy Duncan.
I think you are right. Trump and his entire current administration including Betsy the Brainless are so far “out there,” they have energized Democrats and most Independent voters to get out and vote.
If everyone who is a Democrat and most independents vote, there is no way Trump and the GOP can win a presidential election and they will keep losing seats in Congress and losing states.
DeVos the DeVoid is the gift that keeps on giving. She strips away the mask of the Disrupters.
“there is no way Trump and the GOP can win a presidential election..”
Sure there is. The Democrats will lose if all criticism of Trump and his appointees is accompanied by the refrain “but the Democrats are no better” or “but the Democrats are worse”.
AOC is strongly critical of Democrats who offer policies that are bad. But she never stoops to saying “you are as bad as Trump” or “you are worse than Trump”. Perhaps because she is wise and understands that gratuitous smearing of the entire Democratic party does not help the progressive agenda.
Hey, Elmer. Haven’t seen you here before and doubt you will answer, but just exactly what do you mean with that comment? I think I know the answer, just curious if you have guts to explain.
GregB,
I agree that his statement could use some clarification. As it is now I completely agree.
Why?
Because relying on a monied celebrity and/or a business tycoon to be the “savior” is not a good strategy to repair all of the harms done through the various malpractices that have been instituted in this century, and before, is misguided at best. Just because James has done good work in funding with the school insisting that it accept struggling students doesn’t mean the model of “reform” is a good one–one only has to look, as Diane mentions the effects of that type of funding and donor demanded changes a la Gates can be and is problematic.
Duane, maybe this is what you are saying, but my caveat re: LeBron James is, great—this particular moneybags knows what he is doing with ed— keep it in the public schools! small classes et al research-proven methods! Good on ‘im. But the paradigm is all wrong, i.e., moneybags making things happen in public ed. We’ve been watching the results of that for 20 yrs w/Gates, Broad, Walton, Kochs, etc ad nauseum.
It reminds me a lot of that scene in the classic “Network” movie, where the powers that be sit Howard Beale down at a conference table to explain that it’s OK Saudi interests are buying up US properties: the money flows out… eventually it has to flow back in! (Never mind that the other guy is now calling the shots).
Hey, Duane. To me the statement above was a stealthy comment about race—and the intention was sinister. I don’t think he has the guts to admit it or respond. As for your observation about “celebrity” or “business tycoon”, I would generally tend to agree with you, but in this case, I live two miles from this school and I’ve observed LeBron from afar since I moved here when he was still in high school.
Based on what I’ve observed over the years, this is no stunt and not some ego gratification of a rich, powerful individual. His commitment to this community is a model for how people of privilege should act. He gives back to the community in immeasurable ways (just got that inside joke as I wrote this). With respect to the IPromise school, he asked the public school system what their dream was, he did not come in as the savior to create some gimmick to make money off of it (Andre Agassi in Las Vegas comes to mind at the antithesis of this approach). He shared his money, stature, and connections to let committed professionals have the autonomy to do what they, as committed professionals, felt might—might in the sense of what their engaged instincts and experience informed them—work. Something different, something innovative, something that would make a long-term difference in the lives of young children and their parents. I am not involved at all with the school, but it gives me a great deal of satisfaction bordering on pride to see this experiment show tangible dividends so soon.
I often think of refer to Al Shanker’s vision of what charter schools were supposed to be. As devastated as he surely would have been to see how profiteers have perverted his noble idea, I’m sure he would be grinning from ear to ear if he could visit this school. Let’s hope this is the spark that will lead to greater things, perhaps greater things for the neighborhood around Jefferson Ave. and Natural Bridge Road in St. Louis that I saw just a couple of weeks ago. Knowing what little I know about LeBron, I’m sure he’d take this success and be happy knowing he was a part of something great as he fades into the virtual woodwork. He has proven to be an incredible role model and resource for this community. If that can be spread around to benefit more children and families in need, more power to him!
I think besides Money and Kindness, it is also important for students to have positive successful role models from one’s own community to look up to. These positive role models also need to come from multiple walks of life that kids have some hope of attaining, not just the NBA. Educational dollars would be very well spent encouraging the development of more teachers of color and/or relieving their student debt loads.
Not to mention improving their working conditions as was discussed in connection with your post re Bob Shepherd’s comment today.
Unlike so many charters, LeBron’s school is serving those that would likely be rejected by privatized schools. He is addressing the needs of the whole child, not just test scores, and he is working to enhance the work of the public schools, not replace them with highly paid private management companies. Maybe if Ohio had not wasted millions on ECOT and other privatized fiascos, more schools in Ohio would be able to offer the same level of support to other struggling students in the state.
Exactly!!!
From what I read, it sounds like the teachers are in charge and those teachers probably all volunteered to teach at that school because its methods fit what they think should be done.
It is amazing what happens when teachers are put in charge of how to teach and what to teach. All we have to do is look at Finland to see how well that works.
WOW! Kudos to Mr. James for this effort!!!!!
Just think what would happen if the billions spent on Ed Deform were spent, instead, on projects like this to support public schools with small classes, more teacher time for planning and reflection and tutoring and collaborating, more wrap-around services!!!
This is just wonderful.
Bill Gates would never ask anyone for advice.
Like Dear Abby, he only gives out advice.
Dear Bill: I’m having trouble in school. What would you suggest?
Bill: Drop out and start a software company.
Is it a school that students need to apply for (opening up the criticism of only students with grater resources at home attend) or do all students in that neighborhood attend?
Students qualify only if they are ranked in the bottom 25%. They enter a random lottery. No one is excluded because of special ed status or ELL. They take the neediest.
I just want to make sure I have my refutations in order when people try to discredit this program.
So do parents have to sign their kids up or are all the kids in the lottery?
All the kids who apply are in the lottery. The school seeks only low performing kids. Their growth is from a very low starting point.
Thanks for the info. I also found this from money.com
The school selected area students from among those who trail their peers by a year or two in academic performance. “We did a random selection of all students who met that criteria, and got to make these awesome phone calls to parents and say, ‘How would you like to be part of something different, the I Promise School,’” Keith Liechty, the Akron Public Schools’ liaison to James’ foundation, told USA Today.
How awesome is it that the school went and found kids who needed extra help rather than rely only on families to find out and then apply!!!!
LeBron has had the wisdom to listen and learn and place his money in supports that: (a) matter to the parents/caregivers of the students and (b) are not routinely provided by public funds.
For a contrast, I turn to money sent to Ohio from the B&M Gates Foundation in 2018. The total was about four million dollars but little of that, only $90,000 was sent to a public school district.
That grant went for two years of college advising in the Columbus Public Schools (no details available).
Meanwhile the B&M Gates Foundation’s grants to Ohio in 2018 continued to support charter schools, community colleges, computer delivery of instruction, and a new initiative to fund a corporate lobby for education.
The lobby is named “Ohio Excels.” It has received $900,519 from the B&M Gates Foundation. That’s not all. The new President of “Ohio Excels” is Lisa Gray a free-lance consultant who has recently represented the Gates Foundation in Philanthropy Ohio. Gray claims that her other clients have included Achieve, Inc., Battelle for Kids, Ohio Business Roundtable, Teach for America, Jobs for the Future (and others).
“Ohio Excels” is a lobby for corporate-friendly policies as long as these do not require new financial investments from corporations (e.g., a dedicated corporate tax for career and technical training).
The policy priorities of Ohio Excels are a noteworthy array of contradictions. The lobbyists propose some flexibilities in high school graduation requirements but also a demand that the state adopt four corporate-preferred options. The lobbyists want these options to “Be consistently implemented within all schools and throughout the state to ensure equitable expectations for all students.”
Another proposal calls for state policies bearing on corporate/industry approved achievement measures. “Measurement: Use consistent, externally verified (i.e., not teacher scored) requirements that accommodate students’ chosen (career) pathways.
The context for this lobbying effort is found at the website and in Lisa Gray’s written presentation on the agenda to state officials. The corporatists were not happy with “capstone projects” as an option and they want higher cut scores for math and reading tests. https://ohioexcels.org/policy-priorities/
Read the “Ohio Excels” link… Who are these people? Are they corporations, or just Lisa Gray, Gates-funded consultant? Demanding this that & the other foggily-undefined student result which are nevertheless “consistent, externally verified (i.e., not teacher scored) requirements” of public schools – without providing uno centavo in exchange?
Gates knows who to target: Ohio, the state we know well from Chiara: Wild West of charters, whose reputation for charter fraud engendered such a nationwide laugh when Duncan sought to throw another $80million their way that he backpedaled & added strings– whose ed-decision-makers include many w/vested interest in charters– whose vision of public schools is to replace teachers w/personalized learning & put a charter across the street.
The post reminds us of Bill Gates’ inadequacies. Tech people who have imagination and big picture thinking, which Gates lacks, focus not on human replacement in jobs but, on innovations that accomplish what humans can’t.
Narrow thinkers like Gates have intellectual limits that yoke them to work replacement prototypes, teaching machines, schools-in-a-box, etc. An example of the well-worn design path is AI used to beat a human at chess. The change doesn’t enhance. It just leads to a soulless automated replacement. The path appeals to Gates because it personifies him.
“Impatient Optimists” is a misnomer. Derivative Opportunists is accurate.
I am so thrilled that this is getting positive reporting, because experiments of this kind are often the victim of haters of public education just waiting to jump on it for any failures.
Bill de Blasio chose not to listen to pro-charter naysayers who were screaming for him to shut down 94 “failing” public schools and instead he designated them as “Renewal Schools” and tried to give those schools some of what LeBron James is trying to give students in Akron. The idea behind Renewal Schools was similar to the idea behind the I Promise schools.
de Blasio’s Renewal program was based on the philosophy that failing schools didn’t need more “effective” teachers, but needed more resources. Over 4 years the budget was $773 million. If you do the math, that is $193 million/year for each year, which gives each of the 94 schools about $2 million — similar to what the Akron school got before the extras from James.
Like James’ school, the NYC experiment was an attempt to give students more than just teaching — they provided counseling, free physical and mental health services, etc.
The I Promise students in Akron “were among those identified by the district as performing in the 10th to 25th percentile on their second-grade assessments.”
But the students in the Renewal schools were among the absolutely most disadvantaged students. They included high schools that served newly arrived immigrant students with no English and schools serving huge numbers of high poverty students living in temporary housing or with serious learning disabilities.
It always astonished me how fast everyone jumped on the bandwagon to call this program a complete failure and throw out the $773 million number to create the false narrative that this was an extraordinarily amount of money just wasted on nothing.
Remember, that $773 million only sounded like a big number because no one wanted to break it down to “less than $2 million/year per school”, which is lower than the I Promise schools. As the LeBron story points out, $2 million per school per year isn’t all that much money. And Akron is a much less expensive city than NYC.
It is near impossible to start these kinds of programs and have them work perfectly at first shot. There will be money spent on ideas that don’t work. There will be students whose academic performance don’t improve. But the idea behind directing resources to the most impoverished public school students who struggle the most academically — the idea behind supporting their non-education needs like hunger, healthcare, etc. — is a terrific one.
And it was depressing to me how few people were defending the idea behind Renewal Schools as worthwhile. I thought people would acknowledge what wasn’t working and look for ways to deliver the program better but DEFEND the idea behind Renewal. Instead it just got mischaracterized as another failure proving that spending money on disadvantaged kids is a waste if that money isn’t given to the charters who know how to teach them.
I have no doubt that there will be some issues somewhere with the I Promise schools because there always are. The question is whether the focus is only on the failures or whether the successes — the things that made a huge difference in the most impoverished children’s lives — are considered. Will the press start jumping on the I Promise schools if the student’s test performance isn’t good enough and forget all the wonderful services provided to these children’ families? I hope not. But if they do, I hope progressives jump in to defend the idea — even if there are some flaws in the execution at the beginning — because these changes will not happen if we expect perfection from these schools.
The DeBlasio Renewal Program was not well run. The person in charge of it is now working for a charter chain. https://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/2019/03/aimee-horowitz-former-head-of-renewal.html
I agree! Aimee Horowitz seemed to do a terrible job and she certainly should have been fired. The Renewal program was not run the way it should have been.
Nonetheless, I think there were some principals who did a good job with the extra resources. And there were students who benefitted from the free health care or other wraparound services being offered. I think people reading the news story would believe it was entirely a complete and utter failure.
I would have preferred if the criticism was about the execution with a clear support of the IDEA behind Renewal. When a big new initiative begins, it often doesn’t go exactly as planned but I had hoped that the criticism was about how it could be better as – contrary to popular belief – I don’t believe de Blasio intended it to fail. He wanted to do something good that was really, really hard and was very likely to have problems.
Progressive ideas never seem to get the benefit of not showing immediate stellar success before being branded “failures” and “a waste of money”. And needing that kind of perfection makes it very hard. I’m just glad that the roll out of universal pre-k was executed almost to perfection because if any thing had gone wrong I suspect the entire program would have been attacked until it was scrapped as a big waste of money.
I just want LeBron’s schools to have the chance to get some things wrong because the idea behind them is one that is important and is going to help so many students.
“The person in charge of DeBlasio’s Renewal Program is now working for a charter chain!”
This sounds like deliberate sabotage similar to what is happening in California with that commission that Governor Newson allowed one of the charter school industry’s minions that had somehow ended up in his administration to end up with the responsibility of picking a majority of pro-charter people to judge corporate charters.
I’ll bet Newsom’s charter school agent volunteered for that job. He couldn’t do it himself so he was looking for someone and she stepped up just like her masters told her to.
This school should NOT be judged on test scores.
People REALLY need to get away from this completely flawed method of evaluating schools.
Of course, without test scores, how do you gauge all the things the school is doing in this case?
Maybe they could base it on the number of peanut butter jars distributed to parents, which probably means far more than the test scores.
Of course, Campbell’s law says if you base the evaluation on the number of peanut butter jars given out, teachers will start giving them out by the truckload.
And then we will just have a peanut butter scandal on our hands.
So never mind.
Peanutbutter VAM
When teacher valuation
Depends on peanut butter
The business of the nation
Is business of the nutter
Down the Test Hole
Backing out of rabbit hole
Is really never easy
And turning round will take a toll
And leave you kind of queasy
So best approach is “Don’t go down!”
And leave the hole to rabbits
Who use the holes to get around
And other daily habits
I’ve done some spelunking so have first hand experience.😀
The Black Test Hole
Beyond event horizon
The turning back is moot
So here’s what I’m advisin’
Reject the testing route*
*You say potayto, I say potawto
“This school should NOT be judged on test scores.
People REALLY need to get away from this completely flawed method of evaluating schools.”
BINGO! Give that man a Kewpie Doll.
Hey, Duane.
I was thinking of you when I wrote the Down the Test Hole poem because you have pointed out time and again how once you go down the testing hole, you get into a veritable maze of inconsistencies and falsehoods from which it is virtually impossible to extract yourself.
Don’t go down the hole!
I recently found a video interview of you on YouTube where you discuss your book.
Really excellent. Everyone should view this. IMHO, Diane should feature it as a post
Thanks for the kind words of praise, SDP. The interviewer is DJ Wright and she has also written a book on her travails as a teacher. She’s another teacher like many here, who continue to teach in spite of all of the inanities and insanities thrown her way (and there have been many).
One of these days I’m going to have to watch that interview. LOL!
By the way.
What you say at the end of that interview is right on the money.
Intentions do NOT matter.
What matters are the impacts that you have on other people.
If those impacts are negative, you should stop what you are doing regardless of how noble your intentions s might be. That’s where the medical oath “Do no harm” comes from.
People like Bill Gates should be judged based on the results of their actions (and I don’t mean test results, but instead total disruption of schools) NOT on whether he sincerely believes he is helping teachers and students. Who really cares what an ignoramus like Gates believes about education? It’s completely irrelevant. Just as irrelevant as what a non-engineer believes about bridge design. That people listen to a word the guy says about education is just absurd.
There’s a few places where the sound drops out, but other than that it’s very good.
Yes, I did listen to it today after you mentioned it here. We had a little problem with the audio, but DJ did a pretty good job of editing it.
By the way, your song lyric substitution for Age of Aquarious (one of my favorites from my early teen years) was excellent!
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education and commented:
I think it would be interesting to see Lebron team up with Ron Clark and open a school