Archives for category: Billionaires

John Thompson knows that reformers point to the District of Columbia as one of their examples of success. After all, the district has been controlled by Teach for America alumnae Michelle Rhee and Kaya Henderson since 2007. They own whatever successes and not-successes that occurred over the past eight years. The centerpiece of their claims of success is NAEP scores, which are up.

 

In this post, Thompson identifies the flaws in the narrative of success. Thompson lauds John Merrow for critiquing the narrative of a district he once held up as an exemplar of successful reform. Merrow asked, in his post, why anyone was celebrating Kaya Henderson’s five-year anniversary in the wake of the disastrous scores on the Common Core PARCC tests, which showed a district where academic performance was dismal.

 

Thompson reviews the NAEP scores, using Rick Hess’s data.

 

Hess cites overall gains in NAEP growth under Rhee and Henderson, but those same NAEP studies actually support the common sense conclusion that the numbers reflect gentrification. Hess’s charts show that from 2005 to 2013, the percentage of D.C. students who are low-income dropped from 66% to 61.6%. (In my world, a 61.6% low-income urban school seems danged-near rich.) Per student spending increased by 40% during that time. (The new spending, alone, comes close to the total per student spending in my 90% low-income system.)

 

According to Hess’s chart, the percentage of the D.C. students who are black dropped by 1/8th from 2005 to 2013, and the percentage of students with disabilities dropped by 1/7th. And, the 2015 NAEP excluded as many as 44% of D.C.’s English Language Learners. The conservative reformer RiShawn Biddle calls that exclusion “massive and unacceptable test-cheating.”

 

Even so, as Merrow reminds us, the performance gap between low-income and more affluent students has grown even wider; for instance, from 2002 to 2015, the 8th grade reading performance gap grew from 17 to 48 points.

 

Before Rhee/Henderson, the growth in D.C. test scores was spread much more widely. Because I believe that 8th grade reading is the most important NAEP metric in terms of evaluating school performance, I will cite some of those metrics in support of Merrow. From 1998 to 2002, black 8th grade reading scores increased from an average of 233 to 238. By 2015, they were down to 236. From 1998 to 2002, average 8th grade reading scores for low-income students increased from 229 to 233. In 2015, they remained at 233.

 

Thompson says it is sad that the elites now re-engineering public education are utterly disconnected from the lives and realities of the children who attend those schools or the people who teach in them. They need a reality check, or maybe a course in sociocultural sensitivity training so that they stop stepping on the faces of children and adults whose lives they know nothing about.

 

 

Leonie Haimson, parent activist who fights for smaller class size and student privacy, has strong reservations about Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan’s decision to devote a considerable share of their vast fortune to “personalized learning.” She wonders whether he is making a mistake that has even larger consequences than the $100 million he squandered in Newark, led along by Mayor (now Senator) Cory Booker and Governor Chris Christie.

 

Haimson points out that some leading corporations in the technology industry have been data mining students and invading their privacy. That’s bad enough. But a recent OECD study concluded that the students who use computers the most in the classroom have the lowest scores, even when demography is taken into account. Zuckerberg has already funded a chain of for-profit private schools that rely heavily on computer instruction. But the history of such schools is unimpressive.

 

This is not a research-based approach to improving education, she writes. Some studies show that computer-based instruction actually widens achievement gaps.

 

The truth is there are NO good studies that show that online or blended instruction helps kids learn, and the whole notion of “personalized” learning is a misnomer, as what it usually signifies is depersonalized machine-based learning. All software can do is ask a series of multiple choice questions and then wait for the right or the wrong answer. It cannot read an essay or give feedback on how to improve an argument, or help extricate a child from a knotty math problem. It cannot encourage students to confront all the various angles in a controversy, as happens through debate and discussion with teachers and classmates. In fact, learning through computers reduces contextualization and conceptualization to stale pre-determined ideas, the opposite of the creative and critical thinking that we are supposed to be aiming for in the 21st century.

 

One thing is sure: Zuckerberg’s initiative will be good for the industry. Not so clear that it will be good for students.

 

 

 

 

In a post about Campbell Brown’s quest to find someone to take her seriously, I said that the article appears in The Weekly Standard, and  I erroneously said that the magazine is owned by Rupert Murdoch. I was wrong. In 2009, Murdoch sold the magazine to fellow billionaire Philip Anschutz.

 

Anschutz made his billions in many industries, including railroads, sports teams, oil and gas, and movie theaters. He is a big player in fracking. So far, just your run-of-the-mill billionaire.

 

His political views are far, far right. He supports the Discovery Institute, which favors “intelligent design,” not evolution. He underwrote anti-gay initiatives in Colorado and California. He was a producer of the anti/union, anti-public education “Waiting for Superman.” He funds anti-environment causes. He funded “Won’t Back Down,” a paean to charters and the Parent Trigger, a box-office flop.

 

When I make mistakes, I own up to them. For me, that’s the best policy.

 

 

Reader “”Rratto” asked if I could  post the tapes of the Dean Skelos conversation with his son Adam, wherein he mentions that he has plans to see Campbell Brown and some billionaires. Blogger Perdido Street School posted the tape in question. Many others have also posted it. Google works.

 

Dean Skelos was the powerful leader of the New York State Senate. He is a Republican from Long Island. He resigned after he and his son were indicted for financial misdeeds.

Howard Blume of the Los Angeles Times reports that a secret PAC assembled $2.3 million and funneled it to the political arm of the California Charter Schools Association, which used it to finance the campaigns of three pro-charter school candidates in the recent school board election. Two of the three won their seats, including Ref Rodriguez, who founded and runs a chain of charter schools. The names of the donors were not revealed until the election was over.

 

Those contributions — from philanthropist Eli Broad, heirs to the Wal-Mart fortune, former New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and others — were made prior to the May 19 election to California Charter Schools Assn. Advocates, a political action committee in Sacramento. That group then forwarded campaign funds to a local affiliated committee.

 

The Los Angeles-based PAC was required by campaign laws only to identify the state charter group as the source of the funding, not the individual donors.

 

As a result, the donors remained anonymous in Los Angeles campaign filings. In September, the state charter group filed a required state report listing all its contributors.

 

While the practice appears to be within the law, state campaign regulators said they are concerned about how the contributions remained unreported for so long.

 

A spokesman for the Charter Association said it turns to outside backers because it would otherwise be outspent by the teachers union. In fact, the CCSA spent $2.7 million, compared to the union’s $1.6 million. So, follow the logic: funding provided from the salaries of teachers is comparable to funding from billionaires like the Waltons, Broad, and Bloomberg.

It’s sad that billionaires have no way to make their voices heard. So they feel compelled to try to buy the school board because they know more than the teachers who work there.

 

 

Among the charter donors not disclosed in L.A. filings was Bloomberg, who gave $350,000 in 2015. Bloomberg already had contributed $250,000 in 2014, an amount that was disclosed prior to the election because the funds arrived before the end of 2014.

 

Other donors from 2015 who were disclosed after the election included:

 

• Gap clothing co-founder Doris Fisher ($750,000). The longtime charter supporter also gave $550,000 in 2014.

 

• Wal-Mart Corp. heirs Carrie W. Penner ($150,000) and Jim Walton ($225,000). The two also gave a combined $620,000 in 2014.

 

• Grower Barbara Grimm ($500,000), owner of one of California’s largest farming operations, who started a charter school near Bakersfield. Grimm also gave $586,400 in 2014.

 

• Emerson Collective ($150,000), a corporation under the control of Laurene Powell Jobs, the widow of Apple founder Steve Jobs, which supports charitable and political causes.

 

• Investor John H. Scully ($100,000). He and his wife also gave $400,000 in 2014.

 

• Philanthropist Eli Broad ($50,000). He also gave $305,000 to the state charter PAC in 2014.

 

 

The issue of so-called “dark money” has touched Broad and the Fisher family before. In the 2012 election, the Fishers gave $9 million and Broad, $1 million, to groups that concealed the sources of these donations. The money was used to oppose a tax increase to fund education and in support of a ballot measure to limit union participation in political campaigns. The tax increase passed, the anti-union measure failed and the dark money maneuvering led to fines for some of the participants, although not the donors.

 

As in this year’s elections, the mega-donors have not always carried the day. In the 2013 elections, candidates backed by wealthy donors lost two of three contests, including one in which incumbent Steve Zimmer prevailed. He used the identity of the donors as an effective counterpunch to their resources.

 

“They’re truly funded by and accountable to the 1%,” Zimmer said of the charter advocacy group.