Parent activist Lynn Davenport posted this warning about a “public-private partnership” that leaves out the public. Corporate interests are plotting to privatize public schools while hiding behind the facade of the “portfolio model,” a term used to deceive the public of Grand Theft Public Schools.
Davenport writes:
The new oil in Midland is student data. The Midland Collective Impact initiative under Educate Texas was launched in October 2015. I’ve written extensively on what “collective impact” really means and how there’s no “public” in public-private partnerships. Although Educate Texas concluded its work with the initiative in April 2017, Educate Midland continues with the collective impact framework which is one giant data grab. Key Midland funders include the Abell-Hanger Foundation, Scharbauer Foundation and Henry Foundation. Scharbauer Foundation wrote a letter to the TEA endorsing the Transformation Zone grant and Abell-Hanger Foundation piloted an outcome measurement system.
What data did Educate Midland and MISD give to them? Do parents have to consent to the data being collected for use by foundations? As a charter operator governing partner does the Educate Midland board have access to academic and behavior data of children to be used for “educational research.”
The “portofolio model” allows appointed boards to govern public schools with taxpayer funds. Article VII of the Texas Constitution makes provision for public free education. If we replace elected trustees with appointed boards, that is taxation without representation. Once our voice is removed, we will likely never get it back.
To read more about the scandalous effort to privatize the public schools in Midland, read Lynn Davenport’s additional report here.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
AN ASIDE: . . . Bill Gates just keeps on keepin’ on with his version of “personalized learning.” See below notice of “Educational Summit,” sponsored by the man himself: CBK
https://www.edweek.org/ew/events/summits/personalized-learning-summit-2019-an-education.html?utm_source=email&utm_medium=headline&utm_campaign=plsummit19
CBK
and such a transparent truth: personalized learning means USE OF COMPUTERS and use of computers means PROFIT FOR GATES
ciedie Yes, and I suspect it’s an effort to lessen the student-teacher ratio? where computers are supposed to replace the number of teachers needed? They forget (conveniently) that children need a live-person to learn all of the other “hidden curriculum” things that go on where the math or the science is only the tip of the iceberg of what’s going on as a child is being educated as a whole person. CBK
Texas is in the crosshairs of privatizers that are trying to transfer a public institution to private investors. To do this they must suppress democratic input. People of Texas should not stand by passively and allow this theft of the common good to happen. It is time to organize, protest and rebel. It is time for Texans to take action against these corporate vandals.
The charter Gold Rush has started in Texas.
Protect your public schools!
The varmints have invaded.
“how there’s no “public” in public-private partnerships.”
Sure there is. The funding is public. Private management and ownership, public funding. It doesn’t get any better than that. All of the funding and risk on the public, all of the control to the private.
But it’s for your own good. You can’t be expected to properly govern yourselves. What’s the word ed reformers like? Oh, yeah- “relinquish”. To them.
“Experts suggest that Morath should go in with an exit strategy. State takeovers can be very effective, researchers at the Center on Reinventing Public Education pointed out recently as interventions in Houston and Rhode Island loomed. But they are politically unpopular and are not designed to go on forever. Leaders need to craft solutions that will garner enough buy-in — and possibly legal protection — to endure once the receiver withdraws.”
If they don’t get “buy-in”, not to worry. They’ll make sure to codify the agenda they impose so no citizens can possibly have a say at any future time, either.
So the receiver “withdraws” but only as window dressing. By that time they’ll have the laws in place to prevent any actual input by anyone who lives there.
The thing to understand about ed reform initiatives is they are permanent. If we lose public schools we will never get them back. They’ll allow some tweaking around the edges but the basic privatization scheme will never be undone, no matter the “results”
In fact, faced with a lack of results, 100% of the time their solution is more privatization! They will not rest (or have to show their work) until the last public school is converted. At that time it will also, conveniently, be impossible to undo. There is no “publicization” movement. This ratchet only turns one way.
Center for Reinventing Education pushes charters and portfolio model. Loves school closings as remedy.
It’s always circular. Ed reform initiatives are validated by a tight circle of ed reform orgs. Around and around. You’ve heard of a circular firing squad? This is a circular cheering squad.
And ALL the funding comes from the same 7 billionaires. Not the day to day operations- that’s all publicly funded, of course. The management. The “idea” people. Who are specifically NOT the local people. They’re excluded by design before the takeover even begins.
The same 7-12 billionaires (I have a long list in my new book SLAYING GOLIATH) fund dozens of reform organizations. If the money went away, the whole phony “movement” would collapse.
I love the ed reform assumption going in that ANY pushback to their plans is invalid, presumptively, and must be not listened to or considered but conquered.
They speak like military strategists, like an invading army. The level of arrogance is just off the charts. It is impossible that they could have a bad idea.
Speaking of the locals like they’re disobedient children who have to be “brought along” with phony “input” and soothing murmuring about how they have a “voice” is just another insult.
That’s exactly what it is, a hostile takeover with complicit members of the government aiding and abetting the theft.
Just found out that US News is NO LONGER accepting Letters to the Editor.
A public-private partnership is, as Chiara and Diane note, not a “partnership” but a scheme to get public funding for a private venture with private management. We are drowning in these schemes.
The goal is to socialize the risk and privatize the profit. The corporations benefit, not the people.
Poor fellows: They don’t even know to take advantage of public oversight. CBK