Archives for category: Accountability
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Curriculum Company Sues Parent for Criticizing Its Program

By dianeravitch
September 12, 2019 //
33

Sarah Sparks writes in Edweek about a curriculum company that is suing a parent in Wake County, North Carolina, for criticizing its math program. The company says the parent is defaming its product. The parent’s lawyer says the company is attacking the parent’s First Amendment rights.

As the story notes, this is a SLAPP suit, a suit meant to silence public criticism. The last time I encountered this sort of thing was when a charter company filed a suit against a school board member in California for negative criticism. The ACLU came to her defense. It should defend this parent too, who is using his Constitutional right to disagree with a program adopted by his district.

A group of families in Wake County, N.C., have pushed for months to get the district to stop using a controversial new curriculum. Now the company behind the curriculum is suing one of the most vocal parents for defamation.

It’s a surprising move that some say could have broad implications for parent advocacy around curriculum and instruction. A win by the company “would certainly cast a shadow on the idea that parents have a right to participate in their own children’s education, to criticize schools for buying particular textbooks, to voice their concerns about instruction and curriculum,” said Tom Loveless, an education researcher formerly at the Brookings Institution, who is not involved in the case.

The Mathematics Vision Project, a nonprofit provider of open source math curricula, filed a complaint this summer against Blain Dillard, a parent in the Wake County public school system. MVP has accused Dillard, an outspoken opponent of the math program, of libel, slander, and “tortious interference with business relations.”

The company alleges that Dillard has launched “a crusade against MVP” through his online criticism of the curriculum and advocacy with school officials and employees.

In a written statement to Education Week, Jeffrey Hunt, Dillard’s lawyer, wrote that the lawsuit “has no legal merit.”

“It is alarming that a parent would be sued for defamation for expressing opinions and making truthful statements about his son’s high school math curriculum,” Hunt said. “The lawsuit appears to be an attempt to silence Mr. Dillard and other critics of MVP, and to chill their First Amendment rights to speak about MVP’s services.”

The district is entering its third year using the MVP curriculum, which received a favorable evaluation from the curriculum reviewer EdReports. The open source curriculum emphasizes problem-solving and collaboration—students learn by working through problems, and teachers are expected to act as facilitators.

For months now, parents have spoken out against lessons that they say are confusing and poorly structured, lodging complaints with the district and making statements at school board meetings. Parents said their children weren’t getting enough direct instruction and were encouraged to rely on their classmates for help. As a result, they said, students who used to get As and Bs were now getting Cs and Ds, which would have long-lasting effects on their grade point averages and college prospects.

Barbara Kuehl, an author and consultant at MVP, said that the organization’s materials encourage a variety of methods. “Our curriculum not only supports well-timed direct instruction, we advocate for it,” she said. Kuehl declined to comment on the lawsuit, citing pending litigation.

Pushback from parents over a new curriculum, and particularly a discovery-based program, is nothing new, said Loveless.

“There have been all kinds of programs that have been oriented around that philosophy, and they have been quite controversial,” Loveless said.

What is new? A curriculum provider suing parents over such complaints.

 

 

Categories Accountability, Civil Rights, Curriculum, Freedom of Speech, North Carolina

Kentucky PTA Lawyer: The Other Side of the Story

By dianeravitch
September 12, 2019 //
5

I posted Gay Adelmann’s account of her efforts to see the financial records of the Kentucky PTA. Both sides ended up in court.

Kentucky: What is the State PTA Hiding?

I heard from S. Coy Travis, whose law firm represents the Kentucky PTA. He wanted readers to know both sides. I invited him to write a commentary, and he did.

He wrote:

Isn’t Kentucky PTA subject to the Open Records Act? Why does Kentucky PTA think that it doesn’t need to follow a lawful Open Records Act request.

Kentucky PTA is a private nonprofit corporation. While PTAs do work closely with schools, they are not simply an extension of the public school or generally under the control of the school district. As best said by Betsy Landers, past National PTA President, “PTA doesn’t work for the school – it works on behalf of children and families.”

The Kentucky Open Records Act, KRS 61.880 et seq., only applies to public agencies. School districts are clearly public agencies subject to the Open Records Act.

Under the Kentucky Open Records Act, public records of public agencies are subject to inspection unless they fall within a particular exclusion. One of the exclusions are records (a) that are required by a public agency to be disclosed to it by a private entity, (b) that are generally recognized as confidential or proprietary, and (c) that would permit an unfair competitive advantage against the private entity disclosing the records.

Breaking down that analysis:

(a) Kentucky PTA is required by the Accounting Procedures for School Activity Funds a/k/a Redbook to provide the requested records to the school. The school is a public agency under the Kentucky Open Records Act. There is little dispute that this portion of the analysis is satisfied.

(b) Financial records of private entities are generally considered to be confidential or proprietary. There is case law in Kentucky that acknowledges that a private entity’s financial records – including budgets and annual financial reports – are typically considered confidential and proprietary. While there may be great interest in these records, that does not change the fact that they are, generally speaking, considered to be confidential or proprietary. This point is explored more below.

(c) Entities that might be competitors or adverse to Kentucky PTA could use these records to gain an advantage on Kentucky PTA. As one example illustrating this point:

Suppose that a group wishes to reduce the influence of Kentucky PTA by forming unaffiliated parent teacher organizations (PTOs), which focus on the local school only and do not have the advocacy aims of PTA. The PTO organizers, if given access to Kentucky PTA financial records, could use those records to identify PTA chapters with fewer members and/or financial resources. The PTO organizers could then target those schools for development of a PTO instead of a PTA. As another example: Suppose that a charter school advocate wishes to build support for charter schools by pointing out schools with “weak” PTAs in an effort to show that public schools have not fostered parental involvement. This would clearly be detrimental to PTA.

So, while Kentucky PTA respects the goals of the Open Records Act, Kentucky PTA does not agree that the Open Records Act legally applies to Kentucky PTA or that the records that Kentucky PTA (through its local units) is required to disclose by law should be subject to an Open Records Request. Kentucky PTA believes that the current request is not supported by a correct interpretation of the law. For Kentucky PTA, this case is entirely about the “how” and not the “what” that is at issue.

How can Kentucky PTA claim its financial records are confidential when it discloses that information to members at local meetings?

First, it’s important to again remember that Kentucky PTA is a private entity, not a government agency or program. Second, Kentucky PTA has roughly 105,000 members, and we encourage our members to engage with local units. And yes, our local units regularly share financial information with members during PTA meetings. But, to put the Kentucky PTA membership number in context, there are approximately 4,468,000 people in Kentucky. This means that, out of Kentucky’s entire population, only 2.3% of the people in our state are Kentucky PTA members. While we gladly share information with our members, Kentucky PTA does not regularly share detailed financial information with the general public except as otherwise required by law. The essence of privacy rights is that private entities get to control how their information gets disseminated to the general public. In other words, the private entity gets to decide what to share, what not to share, how to share it, etc. Kentucky PTA takes its role in the public education sphere seriously and carefully balances its privacy interests against the goal of being transparent and ensuring public confidence in PTA.

Put into a different context: Just because a person might choose to share information with the person’s friends and family does not mean that the person does not still consider the information confidential to anyone outside those groups.

Why did Kentucky PTA sue an activist?

Technically, the named defendant in the lawsuit is the public agency – the school district. This is because the public agency currently possesses the records, and as such, is the defendant in an Open Records Act lawsuit. Ms. Adelmann was named not as a defendant but as a “real party in interest.” This means that Kentucky PTA acknowledged, from the outset, that Ms. Adelmann has a legal interest in the legal question at issue in the case and deserves a full and fair opportunity to be heard on the issue. Contrary to the narrative that Kentucky PTA has tried to keep Ms. Adelmann in the dark or hide anything, Kentucky PTA wanted to ensure that she had the chance to say whatever she wanted to say and be a part of this process.

Why doesn’t Kentucky PTA want to see the activist get these records? Why didn’t Kentucky PTA just give the records to the activist?

Actually, Kentucky PTA has already agreed to provide the requested records to Ms. Adelmann. Kentucky PTA is currently in the process of gathering those records and digitizing them so that they can be produced to Ms. Adelmann. However, Kentucky PTA is almost exclusively made up of volunteers, so it will take time to get these records. Additionally, many of the requested records, though produced to the schools, are not produced to the state PTA office, so we will have to collect those from our local units.

We have also heard that Ms. Adelmann feels that she did not get a sufficient response from Kentucky PTA when she requested these records from local units. Kentucky PTA is not aware of any request made at the state level or the specifics of who in local PTAs Ms. Adelmann asked for these records. To date, she has not provided Kentucky PTA with any corroboration of the efforts she made to get these records directly from PTA at any level before resorting to her request under the Open Records Act, and she has repeatedly acknowledged that she did so more for her own convenience. Regardless, Kentucky PTA is currently working on developing written protocols to ensure that there are more clearly-established and understood procedures for member document requests in the future.

Is this a good use of Kentucky PTA’s resources?

We’ve all heard the phrase, “If something is worth doing, it’s worth doing right.” Likely, those who have children or have worked with children have stressed this lesson many times. Kentucky PTA fully agrees with this assessment, and that is the driving belief behind this legal action. Again, Kentucky PTA is not trying to hide anything – it fully intends to produce the requested records to Ms. Adelmann. However, we do believe that the question of “how” those records are produced has been completely overlooked. Using an analogy that education activists in Kentucky can appreciate, Kentucky PTA believes that trying to get the records of a private entity through an Open Records Act request is a lot like trying to pass a pension reform bill by calling it a wastewater bill – no matter what anyone may believe about the merits, the process is flawed.

Additionally, much of the legal work performed for Kentucky PTA, including most of the time spent on this litigation, has been done on a pro bono basis. As a supporter of public education and its allies, Kentucky PTA’s general counsel has done his absolute best to keep the costs on this case as low as possible, including substantially reducing the hourly rate when work has been billed.

Why didn’t Kentucky PTA take action in the past in response to other Open Records Act requests?

There was a previous Open Records Act request made by a local newspaper a couple of years ago for PTA records. However, there is no evidence that Kentucky PTA knew about the request prior to the school district releasing the records. In an Open Records Act case, once the records have been released, there is really no remedy. In the current instance, Kentucky PTA was made aware of the request through local PTAs contacting the state office before the records were produced, giving Kentucky PTA the opportunity to intervene for the above-stated reasons.

If Kentucky PTA is giving the activist the records, why is it planning to appeal the trial court decision?

The decision by the trial court in this case has no precedential value for any future requests. Until there is a published appellate opinion, there is no controlling law on this question. Kentucky PTA believes that it and other entities required to produce records to the government by law would benefit from an analysis of this portion of the Open Records Act.

Categories Accountability, Kentucky

Steven Singer: Time to Close Every Single Charter School, Every One

By dianeravitch
September 12, 2019 //
41

Steven Singer, a teacher in Pennsylvania, has concluded that there are no good charter schools. The problem, he says, is not implementation but the concept, which, he insists, is wrong.

He writes:

The problem with charter schools isn’t that they have been implemented badly.

Nor is it that some are for-profit and others are not.

The problem is the concept, itself.

Put simply: charter schools are a bad idea. They always were a bad idea. And it is high time we put an end to them.

I am overjoyed that lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are starting to hear the criticisms leveled against the charter school industry in the face of the naked greed and bias of the Trump administration and its high priestess of privatization, Betsy DeVos. However, I am also disappointed in the lack of courage displayed by many of these same lawmakers when proposing solutions.

Charter schools enroll only 6 percent of students nationwide yet they gobble up billions of dollars in funding. In my home state of Pennsylvania, they cost Commonwealth taxpayers more than $1.8 billion a year and take more than 25 percent of the state’s basic education funding. That’s for merely 180 schools with 135,000 students!

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization

North Carolina: Republican Legislators Trash Democracy

By dianeravitch
September 11, 2019 //
13

 

Republican legislators in North Carolina pulled a fast one on the Democrats. After assuring them that no votes were scheduled, the Republicans took advantage of the Democrats’ absence to override Governor Roy Cooper’s veto of the Republican budget.

https://apple.news/ARwmvDp7KQ1O0PQfx-alHAA

NBC reported:

“North Carolina House Democrats are calling foul on their Republican colleagues for voting to override the governor’s budget veto on Wednesday while most Democrats were not present.

“The uproar began after GOP Rep. Jason Saine made a motion early Wednesday morning to reconsider the budget that was vetoed by Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper earlier this year, according to The Raleigh News & Observer.

“Democrats excoriated Republicans on social media and the few who were present in the House at the time of the vote furiously protested the decision. Only 12 Democrats were in the House, but they did not all have an opportunity to vote and their microphones were cut off, the paper reported. The vote passed 55-9. The issue now moves to the state’s GOP-controlled Senate.

“How dare you do this, Mr. Speaker!” said Democratic Rep. Deb Butler, who was surrounded by fellow Democrats on the House floor as she shouted in protest at the decision, according to a video posted online by a Democratic colleague. “If this is the way you think democracy works, shame on you. This is not appropriate and you know it. The people of North Carolina, you will answer to the people of North Carolina.”

“House Democratic leader Darren Jackson told the paper that he informed Democrats that they did not need to be present because Republican Rep. David Lewis said there would be no recorded votes. The North Carolina House is a 120-member body and Republicans hold a 65–55 majority. However, last year Democrats won enough seats in the House to end the GOP’s supermajority, which had allowed them to override a veto.”

Governor Cooper was attending a 9/11 memorial service when the Republicans trucked him and their Democratic colleagues.

 

Note from an activist in N.C.:

“The NC House voted this morning to override Governor Cooper’s veto of the republican budget. Cooper wanted to expand medicaid and also increase school funding, teacher salaries. The ‘News and Observer’ noted in an editorial today that NC ranked 37th in the nation when Republicans won control of the General Assembly in 2011. Today, the same editorial noted that our state now ranks 48th overall in per pupil spending.

“The Senate still also needs to vote but it’s probably going to happen (Cooper’s veto will be overridden). Republicans only need one vote in the NC Senate and they’ll bribe somebody. They tried all summer to get 5 votes in the house but failed so they used 9/11, of all days, to ramrod through their agenda.”

Links below
N&) Editiorial 9/11/19
BUDGET
VIDEO
Categories Accountability, Democracy, Fraud, Funding, North Carolina

Purdue Pharma and the Sackler Family Reach a Deal That Leaves the Family Billionaires

By dianeravitch
September 11, 2019 //
24

Purdue Pharma and the Sackler Family have reached a settlement that will leave the family with many billions of dollars.

The company is expected to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy imminently. The settlement, which was described by two people involved in the negotiations, involves the dissolution of Purdue Pharma as it now exists, the formation of a new company that will continue to sell its signature opioid, OxyContin, with the proceeds going to a public beneficiary company that will pay the plaintiffs. Purdue Pharma also will donate “rescue” drugs, several of which are in development, for addiction treatment and overdose reversal.

The Sackler family will pay $3 billion in cash over seven years.

The settlement does not include a statement of wrongdoing.

The company declined to comment.

The settlement is a landmark moment in the long-running effort to compel Purdue Pharma, the company whose drug is seen as an early driver of the crisis, and its owners, the Sacklers, to have their day of reckoning for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people from overdoses and the calamitous systemic costs.

The settlement comes scarcely six weeks before the start of the first federal trial in the sprawling opioid litigation in front of a federal judge in Cleveland who has recently issued tough pretrial rulings against the defendants — drug manufacturers including Purdue, as well as drug distributors and chain retailers. Although other manufacturers have already settled in that case, as well as in an earlier state opioid trial in Oklahoma, the Purdue agreement is the first so-called “global” arrangement. Negotiated by a team of five lawyers representing nearly 2,300 lawsuits in federal court, as well as by lawyers for the states, the resolution would end almost all of the cases against Purdue…

But because the deal falls short of what some state attorneys general had insisted upon, they have said that they will continue to pursue the Sacklers themselves. In recent weeks, perhaps in anticipation of legal fortresses built by the Sacklers to guard their fortune, which Forbes estimated to be about $13 billion, more states, including Virginia, New Mexico and Delaware, have been filing cases against members of the family. The states have used anarray of legal tactics, hoping for an even bigger payout from the Sacklers and to force them out of the pharmaceutical business altogether.

A critical sticking point has been the timing of the family’s sale of its global pharmaceutical business, Mundipharma, and the contribution the family would make from the proceeds. Some attorneys general, including those from Massachusetts, New York, and Connecticut, who have not signed on to the settlement, had been pressing the family to sell the company immediately and to discontinue manufacturing drugs for international markets. And regardless of what price Mundipharma fetched, the attorneys general said, they wanted the Sacklers to commit an additional $1.5 billion up front.

The family refused to do so.

“Connecticut has not agreed to any settlement,” William Tong, the state’s attorney general, said in a statement. “Our position remains firm and unchanged and nothing for us has changed today.” He added: “I cannot predict whether Purdue will seek bankruptcy, but all I can say is we are ready to aggressively pursue this case wherever it goes — whether it is in the Connecticut courts or through bankruptcy.”

 

Categories Accountability

Providence: Acting Superintendent Wastes $187,000 on “Inspirational” Books

By dianeravitch
September 11, 2019 //
8

The public schools of Providence have been taken over by the state because of very low test scores. The interim superintendent Frances Gallo is the same person who threatened to fire the entire staff of Central Falls High School in 2010 because of its very low scores. Central Falls was taken over by the state. It still has the lowest scores in the state.

From the Boston Globe, which is behind a pay wall:

After a tough summer, the interim superintendent of Providence schools wanted to do something uplifting for students returning to class in a system labeled as one of the most troubled in the country.

She searched through Amazon and selected a motivational book, ordering thousands of copies at a cost of $187,000. The plan was to have all middle and high school students read it this month.

But after teachers and school board members complained that “Shoot Your Shot: A Sport-Inspired Guide To Living Your Best Life” was filled with religious overtones, Frances Gallo asked educators to pause their use of the book in class…

Gallo, who retired from running Central Falls schools in 2015, was named Providence’s interim superintendent shortly before Rhode Island Education Commissioner Angélica Infante-Green announced the state would take control of the struggling district.

The state’s intervention comes after a report from researchers at Johns Hopkins University found the school system is plagued by widespread dysfunction, poor test scores, and abysmal building conditions. One member of the research team cried after visiting a school. Others called Providence the worst district they had ever encountered…

Gallo said the purchase of the books is a relatively small expenditure inside of a school budget that is approaching $400 million, but the district has been forced to put off technology upgrades and cut partnerships with nonprofit partners in recent years due to a lack of funding.

Read the full story:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/rhode-island/2019/09/11/providence-schools-spent-inspirational-books-now-has-plans-use-them/cAarWBtBAv8DiqMI1sK3VJ/story.html?s_campaign=breakingnews:newsletter

Categories Accountability, Administrators, superintendents, Providence, Rhode Island

Peter Greene: Privatization and the Weather Service

By dianeravitch
September 10, 2019 //
57

Did you ever stop to wonder why you get weather forecasts for free? The National Weather Service is a federal agency that provides this information to the public, and we pay for it with our taxes.

Bad news, Peter Greene reports. A commercial weather service called Accuweather, which sells advertising, thinks it is unfair that the National Weather Service gives the weather forecasts for free. Donald Trump has nominated the brother of the owner of Accuweather to head NOAA, which supervises the NWS. His goal is to eliminate the free competition. Fortunately, he has not yet been confirmed.

Read Greene’s account. Will this theft of a valuable public service go forward?

http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2019/09/privatization-and-weather.html

Greene writes:

“Barry Myers was the top lawyer for Accuweather, the weather service founded by his brother Joel. This article from Bloomberg Businessweek chronicles the thirty or so years that Myers spent fighting with the National Weather Service. He had a variety of complaints, not the least of which was that while Accuweather was charging clients to get weather reports, NWS was giving away that stuff for free.

“It’s going to be a bad day for somebody.
There are two things wrong with that argument. One is that one of the people that the NWS gives it away free to is– Accuweather. NWS has 120 Doppler Radar positions around the country, plus the computer power to process all that information that comes in, and they do, in fact, give it away. Even if your local tv station has its own Super Eye On The Weather Sky Place weather product, chances are good that it depends on NWS data. At one point in his years of kvetching, Myers argued that it was like the US Postal Service vs. FedEx, only with the USPS delivering for free. While his analogy is a bit off, it’s self-defeating in one respect– when FedEx doesn’t want to deliver your package to some remote address, it hands the package off to the USPS. Their entire business model depends on using the federally funded service to fill in the less profitable holes, because their business is built on only serving the profitable customers. Not unlike the basic business model for a charter or voucher system.

“The other problem is that the NWS stuff is not free. Yes, they don’t charge the users of the information, but we taxpayers have already paid for the whole operation. That is our information– to collect it and then charge us for it again would be like, well, those times when taxpayers pay for a school building twice (once to build it and once to finance a charter buying it) and still don’t own it.

“If you clicked through to the article, you already know the other parallel here to education– Myers was the Trump nominee to head up NOAA (the agency under which NWS falls) in fall of 2017. That has not gone particularly well; in the meantime, the agency is just one more that is operating without a permanent chief. They come under the purview of Wilbur Ross, another swamp dweller.

“Oh, and fun trivia. Rick Santorum once tried to float a bill to force the NWS to charge for their stuff, thereby helping Accuweather compete.

“So the plan was (or still is– who knows) to have the government agency that provides an important service for all citizens headed by somebody whose allegiance is with private businesses that want to compete with the taxpayer-funded agency that provides essentially the identical service. Barry Myers, meet Betsy DeVos.“

Categories Accountability, Privatization

Arthur Camins: Fight for First Principles

By dianeravitch
September 10, 2019 //
19

Arthur Camins insists that voters should stand by their principles in the 2020 elections.

https://www.dailykos.com/story/2019/9/6/1883805/-Fight-for-First-Principles

In 2020, let’s elect people who don’t temper and undermine first principles like high-quality universal education and health care, with a soul- and hope-crushing, “But let’s be realistic about what’s achievable.” Don’t start with the workaround. Start with the energizing principles and fight for them.

Since this is an education blog, we will keep track of where candidates stand on “high-quality universal education.”

We will listen to what they say about charters and vouchers and what they don’t say. We will assume that some will attempt to deceive us by denouncing only “for-profit” charters. Only one state allows for-profit charters—Arizona—yet many states have nonprofit charters operated by for-profit EMOs.

What about corporate charter chains that take over what were once public schools? What about Gulen charters, part of a shadowy network that imports Turkish teachers and relies on corporate boards led by Turkish men?

We will also pay close attention to whether candidates express their views about the reign of high-stakes testing imposed by No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, and Every Student Succeeds Act. The billions expended on testing have enriched the corporations that sell them, but harm children and the quality of education.

We will be watching, and NPE Action is maintaining a score card on the candidates.

NPE Action 2020 Presidential Candidates Project

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, For-Profit, Privatization, Testing, Vouchers

Texas: Commissioner Threatens to Dismiss Elected Board Because One High School Has Low Scores

By dianeravitch
September 10, 2019 //
6

Texas Commissioner of Education Mike Morath has threatened to take over the state’s largest school district—Houston Independent School District—because one high school has persistently received low test scores. That school—Wheatley High School—enrolls high proportions of students who are low-income (88%) and in need of special education (19%), but Morath doesn’t care.

Morath sent similar letters to three other districts.

This is nuts. Using its test-score based rating system, the state has rated Houston a B+ district. Yet the state commissioner wants to oust the elected board because one school has low scores!

Remember when Republicans were the champions of local control. Those days are gone. Republicans are now the champions of privatization and autocracy.

Morath is not an educator. He earned his undergraduate degree in business administration, then became a software developer, then a businessman and an investor. He was elected to the Dallas ISD school board, where he advocated turning the entire district into a”home-rule charter system,” a dream of privatizers like billionaire John Arnold.

How do Texans feel about Governor Gregg Abbott and Commissioner Morath taking control of any district that they target?

How do Texans feel about giving up their independence to state politicians and bureaucrats who don’t have a clue about how to improve schools?

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Texas

Ed Johnson on the Non-Renewal of the Atlanta Superintendent’s Contract

By dianeravitch
September 10, 2019 //
4

The Atlanta Board of Education announced earlier today that it was not extending the contract of its superintendent.

Ed Johnson has been an outspoken critic in Atlanta of the drive for privatization and the behaviorist methods that have been in favor in Atlanta since the arrival of the late Superintendent Be early Hall, who literally drove teachers, principals, and students to produce higher test scores with promises of rewards and threats of punishment. Hall’s tenure ended badly.

Ed Johnson warned about the fruitless pursuit of miracles and quick fixes.

This was his response to today’s news. 

It is the sound of wisdom.

Categories Accountability, Administrators, superintendents, Atlanta, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Privatization, Testing
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »