The state board of education in Massachettts approved a new charter for Worcester that plans to siphon state funds to subsidize a museum, Old Sturbridge Village.
Local officials, including the mayor, opposed the new charter. It was supported by officials from other charter schools and from Old Sturbridge Village.
Concerns included nearly $7 million that would be taken from the Worcester Public School district’s budget; that the school would act as a revenue stream for Old Sturbridge Village; and that it would not provide anything new that the Worcester Public School district does not already offer to its students.
Ties to Diocese of Worcester
Mailman [a school committee member] raised concerns over the school’s ties to the Diocese of Worcester, with which it has a lease agreement at 81 Plantation St., where the school would be located upon opening, and how that could impact things like sex education curriculum and treatment of LGBTQ+ students.
Concerns had been raised previously about the lease agreement and that it would not allow the school to teach material that is “inconsistent with the doctrines or teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, ” in the building.
Louise Burrell, a parent from Worcester who said she was speaking on behalf of other parents, said she was concerned that the organization behind the proposed school has not had any contact with families in the district.
She also had concerns about how the budget drain would exacerbate increased class sizes and staffing shortages, and have a negative impact on vulnerable students, particularly those who are Black, Indigenous or other persons of color.
Who benefits? Not the vast majority of children in Worcester. They will have larger classes so that a charter can choose the 350 students it wants.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Linda, how about a deep dive on this charter and its authorization?
If I am the “Linda” you are referring to, I assume that those who are interested can review the bio’s of the members of the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.
Positions in decision making about public schools should be made by graduates of public universities. Minimizing the influence of the richest 0.1% and the religious who want to further their agendas is critical at this time when democracy is under threat.
IMO, far too many of the bio’s reflect experiences at the Harvard Schools of the plutocracy and associations with Catholic schools and organizations.
Martin West, in a 2009 paper, presented his view that Catholic schools provided competition that improved school systems. His curriculum vitae posted at the Harvard site is worth reviewing, particularly, the grants section.
Linda, You were doing good until you got to smearing people because they went to a Catholic (or related) universities. I’m reminded again of WWII where Nazis burned books and searched for Jews in German attics.
I attended two Catholic universities (and received a degree from one) and have another degree from a secular university. I’ve been to and taught at several others and know many who attended . . . and the Catholic curricula was more rigorous and had smaller classes than the secular public university; and was not “religious” unless you wanted to take a degree in theology or some aspect of religious studies, which I did not.
Until you’ve experienced such institutions, you shouldn’t make judgments about the quality of their curricula, though I am sure some are better than others, as is the case with public schools.
If you had a reputation for unbiased reporting, such smearing wouldn’t do it any good, especially with such regularity as is the case on this blog.
And you didn’t answer my earlier questions (asked at least three times) about Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, both of whom are Catholic, and both of whom (and many many others) clearly understand the difference between secular democracy and religious totalitarianism. I guess they didn’t catch the “Catholic Zombie Disease” that, assuming your inuendo here most of the time, everyone MUST get from attending Harvard, Georgetown, or other Catholic schools, and that you are so obsessed with on this blog. CBK
Nothing can be gained from responding to the personal attacks from Catherine. However, she escalates when the person she targets remains silent.
I direct attention to my comment at 5:45 below for elucidation of my argument.
In comments to other posts, I have described the danger that tribalists present when they expect politicking from the right wing Catholic bishops to be ignored. We are experiencing the success of the tribalists’ tactics in state legislatures and in courts like SCOTUS. Particularly alarming is the narrative of media and influencers that ignores the power house of the Catholic Church in achieving right wing wins. The narrative places entire blame on evangelicals who the public understands to be conservative protestants.
If the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education had a majority of members with association to private schools like Liberty University and Oral Roberts University, I am convinced a concern would reach awareness.
Defenders of public education should have raised awareness about the work product of teachers at Catholic college’s like the book about unshackling and freeing American k-12 education.
We all should be very clear about right wing religion’s view related to unfettered capitalism and unions, with which wealthy, political Republicans they plot and, how much political power they exert. And, we should be fighting their attacks on the rights of women and LGBTQ.
Linda,
I can’t fight Catholicism as a religion. I have too many dear friends who are Catholic.
And you should deal with the fact that Biden and Pelosi are good Catholics and share your views.
Gee, Diane, do you feel like a member of the voracious plutocracy who should never be allowed to be involved with decisions about public schools? Wellesley is pretty plutocratic… I guess I probably should not have been allowed to teach public school after attending another elite eastern women’s college. A little over the top there, Linda. Your brush gets a little broad on certain occasions. You are right to call attention to power grabs by the powerful, but sometimes you sound a bit like a modern day Madame DeFarge.
For what it’s worth, I never tell anyone how to teach because I don’t know how.
I have learned a good bit about education policy by studying the history and politics of education for more than 50 years. I’ve learned that teachers need professional autonomy; I’ve learned that principals should be head teachers; I’ve learned that politicians should butt out. I’ve learned that privatization of public services generates profits but not for the public, which gets worse services. And a few other things.
Massachusetts had a Republican Governor, Charlie Baker. He appointed conservatives to the state board, but not Christian fascists/white supremacists. The board is pro-charter.
(1) Is the evidence clear that Harvard’s School of Education politicks for privatization? A review of the source of grants to faculty provides insight.
(2) The line that separates Republican voters between fascist, white supremacists and those who aren’t, is difficult to draw when the religious right’s two top contenders for President in 2024 appear to be Trump and DeSantis.
(3) The issue of representation when SCOTUS judges are exclusively from the Ivy Leagues, is a discussion that has merit. Yes, individuals from Ivy Leagues when they are in groups where they are not the overwhelming majority, likely don’t present any substantive issue of representation.
(4) The decisions made by the conservative Catholic majority on SCOTUS related to cases involving religion make clear a significant problem.
(5)) When a person carries the banner for a demographic group that chooses to politic, he or she should look at the members of that group and ask him or herself the question, “do my politics make me an outlier in this group?” If the answer is, “yes,” the follow up question is, what damage is done by me carrying the standard for the group?
(6) IMO, separating conservatives into two camps, those who advance the interests of the richest 0.1% and those who don’t, serves no purpose.
Side note, AOC and Sotomayer share my political views. Right wing Catholic power brokers who cite religion as their motivator, work to defeat Biden and other pro-choice Democrats who are in the same religious sect that they are. The Columbia Journalism Review’s 2021 article that I referenced in a prior post describes which voting initiative enabled Josh Hawley’s win over Claire McCaskill and what drove the voter mobilization. The current practice of ignoring Catholic Church political actions, many through the state Catholic Conferences, because “not all members” of the sect are GOP voters, is a strategy that has failed. The threats to our freedom from the law firms associated with the religious right and the wins of those firms make the situation dire at this juncture.
So should I blame all Jews for the death of Jesus because some within tthe hierarchy were threatened by him? I think we already went down that dangerous road. Do I blame all Hindus for marginalizing their Muslim neighbors in India? Do I hold all Russians responsible for the human rights atrocities of Putin in Ukraine?
Linda I appreciate Linda’s distinguishing “right wing,” in this case, as distinct from “broad brushing” all things “Catholic” or even religious.
If we distinguish religious from political intentions, the Catholic Church (and probably any church) can be divided from within into two groups: (1) Those who, daily, struggle to understand and lead their political and moral lives according to the life and teachings of its founder, in this case, Jesus and the New Testament, and (2) those who don’t, who give lip service to it while ignoring or twisting those teachings to their own wants and who, regardless of what they say, use the name of the Church as a shield to hide their anti-Christian, e.g., right wing, neo-liberal politics. Even the anti-abortion issue is a ploy for those who, in their stunning arrogance, have adopted the neo-liberal capitalist disease and made a personal double-speak code out of it.
Religious meaning and questions are human at their core. As transposed into the political arena, that meaning becomes extremely powerful. Though it needs to be continually transformed, that meaning and those questions are not going away.
It follows that in a secular democratic culture, there will always be a tension between the religious and the political. On the other hand, capitalism, for all its potential power for the good of all, continues also to be a moral and political hazard . . . for its inherent ability to capture our lesser desires and fears.
But the power of religion is WHY so many like Leo, Koch, and even Trump, hide behind it (remember Trump playing the “saved” sinner?. . . gag). They also know “religion” is a freedom and so will always be treated like a sacred cow. Some of course seriously try to live the truly religious life. But greed is a much bigger master for others. That’s why they hide behind it and “justify” their actions in the twisted way that they do. Most are not elected, but have learned how to manipulate the electorate, who are not exactly innocent in the present scheme of things.
When we get into the “weeds” of any institution as large and as long-lived as any of the world’s major religions, including Catholicism, however, we can find every sort of person, politics, and morality in the book. So there is no “all” here. But in our time, a focus on religious institutions . . . any of them . . . just helps keep the neo-liberal greed and its religious smokescreen in place. CBK
I am grateful for Paul’s comment about the danger of any religion that grows tyrannical when it has too much power.
Diane This is just an FYI aside: I live in California near the Saddleback mountains, which is also near the Saddleback Church, which recently was “disassociated” from its Southern Baptist affiliation because it supports the installment of women clergy. CBK
https://apnews.com/article/southern-baptists-saddleback-church-women-pastors-7b2bf53ddb413809b9ca18d87b630fd7
Evidently, little thought occurred when commenter sped was likening me to a fictional character. To dispel the falsehood, a capitalistic economic system is best. Capitalism needs to be regulated through democratic process. The U.S. as the nation with the most incarcerated population in the world, uses punishment too eagerly. The principles behind most of the legal system, particularly its protections, are solid. A caveat- the legislative, executive and judicial branches are too often corrupted by wealth and by right wing religion, largely courtesy of Leonard Leo’s Federalist Society.
I was commenting on DeFarge’s targeting those she saw as enemies (of the common man) as a class/group. I’m not sure what DeFarge had to do with capitalism. I certainly did not draw that comparison intentionally.
sped-
I have consistently and uniformly qualified my comments. I write about RIGHT WING POLITICKING by the Catholic Church and about RIGHT WING AGENDAS by identified Catholics who cite religion as their motivation, for example, Attorney General Barr who said religion should be introduced at every opportunity, Gen. Flynn who said the U.S. should have one religion, etc.
You may believe that religion does not influence the decisions of the SCOTUS majority, you may buy their claims. However, many like me, deduce from the Roe decision and from statements by Barrett prior to her term on the bench, that the conservative religious on SCOTUS are driven by their religion.
Your trotting out of the worn out analogy of “do all…” doesn’t fit my comments and you owe me an apology.
You could add to your list the rightwing Christians, the rightwing Jews, and the Muslims in power.
All the same, just dressed up in different robes or special underwear.
Diane Some here (Linda) just cannot get off the horse they rode in on.
What is so difficult in understanding those who hide behind and use powerful religious organizations for their own twisted benefit, not to mention for political control, which is nothing less than fascist.
If fascism comes wrapped in a flag and holding a cross, then it’s fascism and not flags and crosses that are the problem. The twisted human interior life will remain regardless if you got rid of every religious reference in the entire world and over all of history.
Also, Linda, if exploring contexts and comparisons, and pointing to intimately related issues is to filter or wash away the focus on some of your or others’ religious/Catholic hate-filled bias, I’m all for it.
I find NO REASONABILITY in your comments here. I see no difference whatsoever between (a) your endless schmering about Catholics and (b) my right-wing family members who scream “FAKE NEWS!” regardless of what anyone says or the presentation of evidence that, for instance, the election was not stolen. NOTHING GETS THROUGH. The next time you hear about Trump’s “base,” think of yourself and how closed-up-tight your thinking is.
Personally, I think some of the references in Linda’s last couple of notes, (I won’t repeat them), besides making me laugh out loud, remind me of a class I once observed where the students were all so dogmatic they couldn’t take an ounce of criticism nor could they think an inch beyond their present view of things . . . in fact, it was a class for a group of disabled students. CBK
Linda I think you are right about Barrett . . . she seems to me to be completely ideologically driven and I even think her heart’s in it (which is no excuse when you are on the Supreme Court).
But you are broadbrushing again. And I think you share the ideologically-driven thing with Barrett, only you represent the other entirely closed extreme.
For so many of the rest, I suggest it’s “follow the money.” I remain a “modified capitalist when I say that something happens to even the most sincere and genuine people when big money is involved. CBK
Linda An addendum: I thought your use of “right wing” was a good sign. But I see now that it’s just lip service to cover the same old same old. CBK
Actually, I am far from a fan of the far right or religious extremists of any ilk, especially when they wield broad economic power as well. I have to remember that neither of us are unbiased observers, but I get a little tired of attacks on elite private institutions like Harvard and religious institutions like the Catholic church. Extremists and fanatics of any brand make me extremely uncomfortable. However, I don’t see Harvard or the Catholic church as part of the evil empire. Obviously, a little hyperbole is embedded in the last statement. I don’t think I could say the same about the Republican party right now.
I was brought up in a Republican household back when that actually meant something but can’t imagine what any sane person sees in the party today or for that matter for the last several decades. There was a period where I could feel comfortable as an independent, but while there are a few Republican types that I can respect, I can’t imagine ever voting for someone who identifies with the current Republican party again.
I think this discussion started back when I solicited your extensive knowledge that might have illuminated my understanding of the Worcester charter business. You have done a lot of research that has helped me be more aware of the prominent forces of religious extremism in particular. Perhaps I am too easily triggered by your choice of wording on occasion. I am sorry if you were offended, but I won’t apologize for my opinion.
Ryan T Anderson (see Wikipedia for info.) is president of EPPC (Washington D.C). One of the EPPC programs, since 1999, is Faith Angle Forum. David Brooks of the NYT wrote, “If there’s one institution I’ve seen that has had a huge leverage point in American culture, it’s the Faith Angle Forum.” (A description of the Forum follows in my 3rd paragraph.)
Sourcewatch identifies EPPC as a recipient of 3 grants from Pew Charitable Trust. Some readers may remember the Pew/JohnArnold dog and pony show in state capitols about pension reform.
“Bringing together secular journalists and Christian thought leaders,” that’s an excerpt from an obituary for a former VP of EPPC. At the EPPC page for the Faith Angle Forum, we learn the following, The program “aims to strengthen reporting and commentary on how…religiously grounded moral arguments affect American politics…Twice a year, in Miami Florida, the Forum holds a conference…miles removed from Wash. D.C.’s ideological battlefields.” The
program “brings together a select group of nationally respected journalists.”
When positive media coverage about pension reform became part of a plan, a program (not related to EPPC) was funded to bring journalists together (all expenses paid).
If David Brooks has quotes that single out the success of programs originating from organizations like EPPC, that are instead viewed as associated with Muslims and Jews, I agree that blog readers would benefit from knowing the information.
Diane You all know that I am Catholic . . . somewhat lapsed, but still Catholic. Keep that in mind while I say this about the “diocese.”
Just like the Catholic Church over the entire world is and will continue to pay (in so many ways) by their long-term pretended ignorance of priests’ sexual abuse of children, . . .
. . . so they will pay (in so many ways) for their continued right-wing “back door,” work-around, but obvious-to-all incursions into the public/political/ policies of the secular democracies they reside in, namely, in the United States, but not only here. (Ahem the greater context . . . Catholics are not the only guilty persons or groups, religious or otherwise).
I do believe in the freedom of religion in a secular democracy. However, implied in that political freedom is the need to harbor a kind of wisdom on the part of religious people that defies the crux of today’s right-wing politics, at least in the U.S., but I think also over the world today.
To the Catholic Diocese of Worchester I would say: If the above note is correctly drawn: Go back to your founder . . . you won’t find any of that totalitarian cxxp there, financial and/or ideological . . . as a matter of fact, just the opposite. CBK
I know, CBK. I have many Catholic friends and am married to one. None of them condone this behavior.
Diane I know . . . and I should have mentioned “neo-liberal.” I am not perfect, but that mentality makes me sick to my stomach. And my guess is that R. W. Emerson is rolling over in his grave as we speak . . . as I hope Ronald Reagan is doing also. And neo-liberals probably still think they are “capitalists” in the old-school and more pure sense of that term; aka: NOT predatory and certainly NOT a mindless “competition” of numbers in your bank accounts.
It’s changed, guys. For instance, it’s not JFK’s: “ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.”
Switch “Country” to “The World” and you might begin to understand your place in it as well as the genuine end-run of capitalism. CBK
“I am Catholic . . . somewhat lapsed, but still Catholic.”
And I am totally lapsed, like 200%. . .
. . . and I agree with what you say.
The United States is, and probably always will be (as long as it’s a country), a ruthless, cutthroat capitalist Constitutional Republic/Democracy where successful pirates, thugs, thieves, and liars are admired and worshiped by too many ot its poor and middle class citizens.
This is a mind boggling effort to siphon public funds for uses that are not public. How did a long-established historic restoration (Old Sturbridge Village) get suckered into this?
I’m curious what the finances are at the Village. My kids all took their fifth grade class trip there. Admission was pretty expensive and while the place is lovely, it’s a little too boring for the price. A few teachers have told me they are dropping Sturbridge as the class trip. I’m wondering if the village is getting desperate thus clinging to this charter school “life line”.
Yup, Allison. I agree. I grew up in that neck of the woods and a one day field trip to OSV was more than enough.
What confuses me is that Old Sturbridge Village isn’t in Worcester. In fact, the internet puts it at 21 miles away. I remember the long school bus ride there.
Also of note: Worcester had a really cool museum called the Higgins Armory Museum. It was full of historic suits of armor including one made for a dog. (Us kids loved that.) This fun museum closed “due to a lack of funding” at the end of 2013. The collection was shunted over to the art museum in Worcester, which is a quality place but not the crazy looking armory museum.
What’s up, Worcester? You can’t support your own museums and now you’re funneling public money, shortchanging local students.
P.S. Apparently, Norman Rockwell drew an imagined scene based on the now defunct Higgins Museum. http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/9621103_snack.jpg
Just have to add a picture of the dog in armor. The exact opposite of a boring, colonial-era church at OSV. https://img.atlasobscura.com/Py_Rjk9XxgnJJnDABj_4pVqVEf3apNfz0MCLV1fuCUg/rt:fit/h:390/q:81/sm:1/scp:1/ar:1/aHR0cHM6Ly9hdGxh/cy1kZXYuczMuYW1h/em9uYXdzLmNvbS91/cGxvYWRzL3BsYWNl/X2ltYWdlcy8yNjIy/OTM0NjYzXzJkMGVm/MTBiMmFfYi5qcGc.jpg
Wonderful dog!
What a great dog in armor.
The University of Southern California, at its Center for Religion and Civic Culture site, has an excellent post. An excerpt follows, “Despite preaching small government, these Christians (includes right wing Catholics) are currently using state power to impose their will on others…(They are) fearful of the prospect of individual liberty and democratic governance if the movement toward theocracy is averted.”
In addition to Catholic Church politicking for school privatization, the U.S. is not safe from the attempt to prevent access to birth control. For those who naively believe that Catholic universities do not have powerful people within and allies outside spearheading right wing wins, I recommend reading at the Catholic University of America site, the “Affirmation of the Church’s Teaching on the Gift of Sexuality,” (School of Theology and Religious Studies).
Note the affiliations of the signers to the document.
The board of Catholic University (Wash. D.C. ) has close ties to Charles Koch.
Linda
I am so removed from religion that I would say Marx had it all wrong. Religion is not “the opiate of the masses”. It is the arsenic for the masses . Even opiates have some value in pain relief for all the harm they cause.
Whatever value can be found by the charitable works of all Religion “the universal spirit of religious intolerance, inherent in every sect, disclaimed by all while feeble, and practised(blame TJ) by all when in power” has caused harm that far outweighs all the goods.
So the Catholic Church may be guilty of everything you say and many if not most Catholics may be complicit as are Protestants, Jews and …. But they are no more culpable than any other “Sect” .
Your credibility would not be harmed to spread it around. The Catholic Cult is only notable because of its size . For over a 150 years it has been attacked by other “sects “for its power grabs in this country as dominated by” Roamanist’s” especially for its views on funding Parochial vs Public Education. The Protestant Cults are larger still and in the regions of the Country that they are dominant, equally as dangerous. There was no need to have Protestant religious schools till Brown in 54 and Engel in 62 . One does not have to look too far to see the damage done by ultra orthodox Jews in the counties of NY they are dominant in nor in Israel . Islam in this country too small to influence much. But please find me a tolerant country that Islam is the Dominant religion in.
So you preform a service by exposing the conspiracies that are in plain sight. But you fall short by focusing only on one Cult .
Charles Koch is not religious his donations to Catholic University are are the same as his donations to other schools aimed at insuring his Libertarian clap trap is the dominant Political/Economic theory taught . That he has a receptive audience in the Conservative Bishops who would love to turn the clock back is a problem. But no worse than any other .
Exactly right, Joel. I could not have said it better. Although my punctuation would be better.
dianeravitch
Your punctuation is much better ,especially without an edit button .
Again I’m confronted with the inexplicable spaces before periods. I admit it, I’m slightly obsessed with this.
One of the people who co-wrote the, “Affirmation of the Church’s Teaching on the Gift of Sexuality,” holds a top position at the Washington D.C.- located EPPC and the same person has provided testimony in state capitols regarding legislation. EPPC describes itself as the “premier institute applying the Judeo-Christian moral traditions to critical issues of public….”
Sourcewatch describes EPPC’s origins in terms of its support for capitalism, its funders including Koch and, its political influence.
The prior-referenced document at Catholic University, the Sourcewatch description of EPPC and theocracy’s recent, profound political wins at the expense of democracy can be made less visible by expansion of the topic. The watering down could be achieved by identifying innumerable sects and also, by omitting the relative power rankings, for example the ratio of states with sect conferences dedicated to politicking, the amount of their collective activity and, the number of their political wins.
Joel, I recall that you acknowledged in a prior thread that msm focuses on Christian evangelical political power but, not so much in identifying right wing Catholic political power. Do you assess that situation to provide balance for the American public? If not, what is your recommendation for redress?
Readers may be interested in your and other commenters’ speculation about the motive of the Worcester diocese and the Massachusetts BESE. You should certainly post about the Dutch Reformed synod, etc., (if and) when, they do something similar to the Worcester diocese or, if they take a legal case like Biel v. St. James Catholic school to SCOTUS. Readers will want to know when the Dutch Reformed majority on SCOTUS decide in favor of the Dutch Reformed school, exempting its entire school system from civil rights employment law.
You may not think less of people who belong to and support organizations that overtly discriminate against Black people (or women), I, however, do.
June 29, 2021 at the EPPC site, “Why States Should Bar CRT,” submitted to the Ohio Legislature by a senior fellow of EPPC.
Linda writes about **”EPPC describes itself as the ‘premier institute applying the Judeo-Christian moral traditions to critical issues of public….’”
Hmmm . . . . again, Linda overlooks the many moral principles that are ALREADY shared between secular and religious institutions. NOT ideologies, but shared principles . . . are already embedded in secular constitutions, laws, communities, and ongoing discourses.
Tacit in Linda’s complaints is (1) the acceptance of the absurd idea that moral traditions are “owned” and come down exclusively from this or that religion (and so the inuendo flows: we must reject all out of hand if we are to keep a secular democracy), and that high level moral traditions are not already a part of the development of human beings throughout all of history, regardless of religious affiliation, or no affiliation at all.
Adherence to principle means, as a set of principles, because it’s named “Christian” (or whatever) doesn’t mean it is necessarily bad or that it’s necessarily opposed to a secular democratic political situation.
(2) That tacit idea is already “gated” and leaves NO room, on principle, for reasonable mediation between secular and religious institutions. It also confuses the great difference between the question of how we relate to God or even to the bigger questions of life and the universe, and our other religious questions, and how we relate to others . . . on the moral-political ground.
Jefferson read history in the old languages. He didn’t want to get rid of religion, but wanted to allow it to flourish freely. With Linda, however, I don’t think he (nor I) wanted a theocracy nor a fascist state. There are plenty of “religious people” in the world who understand the difference between a tribal and a civil religion. History “told” him, however, that theocracies don’t work (commonly but not necessarily tribal) where in a secular civil culture, all you have to do to belong is to be a person/citizen. From there, we can pursue our own religious questions.
The tension between church and state, however, is just that . . . a tension that requires of us adherence, perhaps ironically, to many of those same shared moral and political (religious, secular, and civil) principles.
But Linda is not the first one in either “camp” to overlook the difference between “hard” ideological imposition of “religion,” and moral and political principles that can be and are already shared. My view is, and has been for as long as I have been on Diane’s blog, that Linda is correct in many of her criticisms of the present Catholic and oligarchical extremes who have obviously lost their ground in Christianity, if they ever had it, and who indeed have abused the tension that still needs to exist between church and state–like the backdoor acceptance of public funding or even the political intent of getting rid of all-things-public . . . nothing less Christian than that.
I also still think Linda is involved in her own special anti-Catholic/religious bias and uses the same kinds of half-truths, innuendo, projections, over-generalizations, and “gotcha” language that Trump used in his most recent speech shown here on another thread . . . just like any fascist-leaning person who cannot question or think beyond their own special version of “hard” ideological interior gates. CBK
This is basically throat-jamming … as in jamming a charter down a community’s throat whether they want it or not.
Jack, exactly right.
The state board is still Charlie Baker’s assortment of Walton adjacent members and business people who believe the schools’ job is to turn out, using Peter Greene’s phrase, “meat widgets”. The commish, Jeffrey Riley, was a principal in a Boston turnaround school who caught the eye of the late Mitchell Chester (head of PARCC while also holding the position of commish). Chester appointed Riley as receiver of the Lawrence Public schools (an abject failure as have been all other state takeovers). Upon Chester’s unanticipated death, Riley next took over Chester’s spot.
Riley has run roughshod over policy issues favored by educators and communities, arrogating to himself control over Covid related policies, which belong to local districts. Naturally, he leaves our affluent communities in peace, seeking to exercise control over those “failing” districts – we all know, the poor ones with lots of kids learning English, whose test scores make them privatization targets.
After elections, but before Baker left office, several board members had their terms mysteriously extended. The board elects the commish. There is a cabinet position controlled by Governor Healey, Secretary of Education, which has been filled by Patrick Tutwiler, an honest to god lifetime educator, so fingers crossed looking forward. The excerable privatizer and hedge funder Jim Peyser held that position under Baker.
The Walton influence is bad enough, but given it’s Massachusetts, the Catholic influence on public education cannot be over looked. The Pioneer Institute is a champion of privatization and has been pushing for the overthrow of the Blaine amendment for decades. Parochial schools lost many, many paying customers as a result of the child sexual abuse scandal. Some parents went to charters as a result. Now that the notoriety has worn off a bit, Catholic schools are recruiting among our Haitian and Latinx students. The Worcester diocese hasn’t been forthcoming about the scandal.
https://www.wgbh.org/news/local-news/2023/02/06/victim-advocates-blast-worcester-diocese-report-on-clergy-sex-abuse
Old Sturbridge Village already has a charter school. This new one would be an extension.
Thank you for your comment, Christine. At some point in the future, a reporter will draw the connections between Koch influence and right wing Catholic influence.
One of democracy’s unprotected fronts was exposed in the appointment of a Koch network guy to a top position in Georgetown’s Law School.
An old friend, a Boston College grad, pretty much wrote the IDEA Act and had a corner office at DOE in DC. We lost touch, but I heard from him when he was nearly at the end of his life due to cancer. A nice, normal guy, he’d ruined his second marriage and become estranged from his children due to his reverent loyalty to the Opus Dei cult.
It must have been a puzzling story for you to hear?
Made no sense to me at all. It came before his cancer crisis, too, so it wasn’t that.
Out of curiosity I googled the location of the old, Catholic school building where the proposed charter would be located…..81 Plantation St. in Worcester.
It’s an odd choice. Why there? It’s got to be about money -not kids.
The brick building looks like a 19th century factory. Forget Old Sturbridge Village with its colonial fakery…. this place is a relic of education circa 1893, an era when children were treated like assembly line workers. And, a time when the church could afford this school because nuns did most the teaching. (For a bit of history about the building and a picture:: https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2022/12/09/NTEG/352abeab-fe6c-4f53-9f0f-a3b128acb4b4-LOC_CharterSchoolHearing2_1206.jpg?width=660&height=398&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
On Google street view at least, a crucifix is still centered over the front door. In all my years living near Worcester, we drove past that building…never.
But here’s the funny thing…just a mile away, there is a museum built with kids in mind, called the EcoTarium. Been there many times.
Designed in 1971 by Edward Durell Stone, it’s clearly a product of a more forward-thinking era in U.S. history. Funky and fun, it encourages children to touch the exhibits, jump on stuff and run around. To quote a recent review on TripAdvisor, “I have a child who is a tactile learner and he couldn’t get enough of this place! So many different activities from live animals to various indoor exhibits. The kids LOVED this!”
The contrast between the two locations could not be more stark. Two different visions of education.
And, the Ecotarium apparently doesn’t want much to do with this wacky charter scheme being foisted on the city. To quote…
“But leaders of major local institutions like the EcoTarium and the Hanover Theater have stopped short of offering support for the charter school.
‘We do have significant agreements in place with schools around the region. Our organization, however, is not in a position to have a role in the founding of another organization,’ EcoTarium CEO Noreen Smith wrote after OSV asked the museum to be involved in the charter.”
https://patch.com/massachusetts/worcester/state-board-oks-worcester-old-sturbridge-village-tied-charter-school
The amazing thing is, the nearby Ecotarium has deep roots in Worcester, going way back to the lyceum movement of the 1820s. Originally called the Natural History Society, this is a local institution that has grown organically over time, branching out, developing new buildings and involving more people throughout the city.
From the EcoTarium’s website: In the 1860s, “Women begin to participate in the Natural History Society and play important roles in the creation of social and fund-raising activities.”
Thoreau even visited the Worcester museum.
https://ecotarium.org/about-us/history/
I don’t know…the more I read about this Worcester charter mess, it’s like, shame on Old Sturbridge Village. How dare you use history this way. Astroturfing it for money.
Of course, Massachusetts holds a prominent place in the long story of promoting public education. Horace Mann is probably rolling in his grave as you read this.
John, thanks for the research.
I hear that Olde Horace has so roiled his gravesite they’ve had to dig it up and rebury the guy, John.
Christine, it seems that Old Sturbridge Village figured out that charter schools are a way to fund their operations. Maybe they will create a chain.
I cannot figure out WordPress. I don’t see my comment posted,but you seem to be responding to it Diane. Is it in moderation, for your eyes only?