Archives for category: California
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Tony Thurmond: “Without Public Schools, I Might Not Be State Superintendent Today”

By dianeravitch
March 24, 2019 //
44

 

TonyThurmond, elected as California’s State Superintendent of Public Instruction last fall, spoke out strongly on behalf of public schools at a recent public event. He also insisted that the state must fund its pension promises and invest more in education. Competition doesn’t work in education, he said.

The goal of education must be to help every student must develop his talents, not to spur competition that creates winners and losers.

”In a conversation with CALmatters’ education reporter Ricardo Cano at San Francisco’s Commonwealth Club, Thurmond talked about how his mother, an immigrant from Panama, died when he was 6, leaving him to be raised by a cousin he never met. He says his family benefited from many government programs to get by, but that “a great public education” was the most vital.

“If it were not for the education, my cousin who took me in, countless mentors, I would easily have ended up in California state prison instead of serving as California’s superintendent of public instruction,” he said. “We owe this to all the students in our state.”

“That philosophy, he said, informs his fairly dim view of charter schools, which he characterized as benefiting certain students as the possible expense of others.

“I think there’s a role for all schools,” Thurmond said, including charters—publicly funded but privately managed schools that supporters say offer valuable educational alternatives to children, but which critics say undermine traditional public education. “But I do not believe that the state should ever open new schools without providing resources for those schools. I do not believe that education is an environment for competition.

“Here’s my concern: you cannot open charter schools and new schools to serve every single student in our state,” he continued. “If you take the competition approach, that means some students, a lot of students, will be left behind. And again, I don’t believe that that’s what our mission is. I believe that the promise that we make to each other in society is to provide opportunity to get an education, to live a better life, to be able to acquire what you want through your hard work for yourself and your family. So for me that means that competition is OK in some environments, but when it comes to education we’ve got a responsibility to make sure that every single student gets an education.”

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Competition, Education Industry, Privatization

California: Parent Opposes Berkeley’s Choice of Wendy Kopp as Commencement Speaker

By dianeravitch
March 21, 2019 //
13

 

Jane Nylund is a Parent Activist in Oakland who has fought the privatization machine. She wrote an open public letter opposing Berkeley’s selection of Wendy Kopp as its commencement speaker.

 

 

UC Berkeley should not support and condone school privatization: Rescind your offer to TFA Wendy Kopp as commencement speaker

As a public school advocate, and a product of California public schools (father and grandmother both attended UC Berkeley), I was outraged and saddened to find that UC Berkeley had extended an invitation to Wendy Kopp, founder of Teach For America, to be featured as the commencement speaker at UC Berkeley this year.

Oakland and other urban school districts have, for years, suffered under the constant threat of privatization. Teach for America is just one of many cogs in the privatization machine; there are many others, but TFA’s influence is not just felt at the school site level, but has also infiltrated higher levels of administration (such as the Oakland mayor’s office), as well as TFA acting as lobbyists for legislation favoring privately managed charter schools and ed reform groups.

TFA has a potent mixture of idealism and practicality; the concept of having the opportunity to “teach” in a high needs district such as Oakland is tantalizing for many young people eager to give something back to the community. According to TFArecruiting manager Jessica Rossoni, whose credentials included a stint at the Daily Californian, “UC Berkeley is one of the largest contributors to the organization in its number of students who join TFA, according to Rossoni. She said UC Berkeley students apply in high rates because of UC Berkeley’s values of equity and students’ desires to tie those values to a career.” Notice that she doesn’t mention the type of career. Could be anything but teaching, and usually is. But, here’s what TFA is really about:
1) Installing low-paid, unqualified, uncertified, non-union teaching labor into the most challenging schools. Leafy suburban schools would never accept a core group of teachers that enter their schools in significant numbers with only 5 weeks of experience. Charter schools actively employ non-union TFA teaching labor; charters’ teacher retention record is abysmal, typically 2 years. Not surprising, since this corresponds with the 2-year TFA teaching commitment.
2) Creating  a “teacher pipeline” to fill teaching positions is secondary to TFA’s true mission mentioned above. Despite TFA’s assertions, there isn’t a teacher shortage; that narrative is trotted out by TFA and is accepted as gospel by the ed reform echo chamber; teachers as a whole are woefully underpaid and unsupported, particularly in high needs districts (was everyone at UC Berkeley asleep during the Oakland strike?). TFA solves none of this; its existence exacerbates the problem by undermining the professionalism, credentials, and experience of authentic teachers committed to the job as a profession, and not just a career stepping stone or resume padding on the part of corps members.
3) TFA charges school districts a fee for hiring TFA members. This fee causes a significant burden for cash-strapped districts already grappling with expenses associated with supporting high needs students. There is no guarantee that these teachers will remain with the district, and in fact, collectively, TFA has a poor track record of teacher retention within the host district in which they serve. This disruptive model of teacher churn caused in part by hiring TFA is damaging to our students, who deserve highly-trained, certified teachers with a long-term commitment to the profession.
4) TFA is a privatization group that is actively supported by the Walton Family Foundation.  Why UC Berkeley would ever align itself with the worst of corporate school privatization supporters completely escapes rational thought. UC Berkeley is one of the most important assets and symbols of public education in California. Support for groups like TFA flies in the face of the core values that UC Berkeley represents. Its mission to serve public students and to serve in the public interest will forever be tainted by this ill-advised invitation to a group that undermines all we value as democratically represented public institutions.
Read here for the unflinching reality of what TFA truly represents, and ask yourself if this narrative aligns with the values of UC Berkeley. I was disheartened to note that UCBerkeley has been a part of what has become the education misery in Oakland and elsewhere by supplying a large pool of students as corps members. Again, while the Berkeley students may find this kind of service admirable, this model is actively undermining the teaching profession. Not surprising that it is our mostly black and brown students that are suffering the consequences because of it. There is nothing admirable or equitable about that.
While I understand that this decision was based in part by student input, it is sometimes advisable for other adults in the room to step up and explain the symbolism behind this TFA invitation. This generation of college students hasn’t been around long enough to understand what has happened regarding school privatization in this country, but someone (besides TFAer Ms. Rossoni) needs to explain it to them. The students’ wish to give back to their community has been hijacked by the very people like the Waltons that want publicly supported institutions like UC Berkeley to go away. The irony is not lost on those of us who have witnessed this calamity for far too long. Please do the right thing and rescind your decision to Ms. Kopp, offer her your sincerest apologies, and find someone like Diane Ravitch or Jitu Brown, both true champions of authentic public education in this country. Thank you for your consideration. .
Regards,
Jane Nylund
Categories California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, Oakland, Privatization, Teach for America

Campbell Brown’s Attack on Teacher Tenure and Unions Fails in Minnesota

By dianeravitch
March 19, 2019 //
20

 

Remember the Vergara case in California?

A stray Silicon Valley billionaire (or multimillionaire) named David Welch on behalf of a newly minted group called “Students Matter” filed a lawsuit against teacher tenure and seniority, claiming that these practices caused low-income children of color to fail, thus depriving them of their civil rights. At the lowest trial Level, a judge named Rolf Treu agreed with them, setting off a frenzy among Deformers and their admirers in the media.

The Vergara decision was hailed as the new “Brown” decision and even netted a cover in Time magazine (“Rotten Apples,” referring to teachers). Teachers endured a plethora of discussions about the great moment coming when all teachers would have no job protections, no due process rights, and all teachers would be great and no child would have low test scores. But higher courts in California overturned the decision, then dismissed the case. Cooler heads pointed out that the poorest kids had fewer tenured teachers than the districts with high scores, and the whole Vergara episode was illogical.

Ex-CNN commentator Campbell Brown, the then-new face of deform, glommed on to the legal strategy and her organization, the Partnership for Educational Justice (in partnership with hedge fund managers and billionaires) filed Vergara-style lawsuits in several state courts.  So far, PEJ has a perfect record of failing everywhere. Its lawsuit was tossed out in New Jersey and was just dismissed in Minnesota. It’s lingering in the New York court system but no one expects it to go anywhere.

Meanwhile as its legal strategy waswithering on the vine, PEJ expired. It was absorbed by 50CAN, the organization founded by Opioid King Jonathan Sackler. Brown decided to join Facebook to handle media relations. Vergara is no longer even a footnote.

Who will be the next face of Deform, now that Michelle Rhee and Campbell Brown have moved on? When last heard from, Rhee had joined the board of fertilizer company Scott’s, which makes Miracle-Gro.

Categories California, Education Reform, Teacher Tenure, Teachers and Teaching

California: Charter Advocates Rally to Fight Accountability and Regulation

By dianeravitch
March 14, 2019 //
34

 

While the State Board of Education was deliberating the fate of the low-performing Thrive Charter Schools, which they voted to close down,  the charter lobby rallied thousands of allies in front of the State Capitol in Sacramento to fight any new laws. 

One of the speakers was Margaret Fortune, who is president of the powerful California Charter Schools Association and also a member of the state’s task force that is supposed to decide whether to reform the state’s weak charter law and whether charter schools have a negative fiscal impact on public schools.

The charter industry sees any effort to restrict its actions or regulate its policies as a mortal threat to its existence.

“Dubbed the “Stand for All Students Rally,” it was hosted by the California Charter Schools Association and was a highlight of the organization’s annual four-day conference that ends in Sacramento on Thursday. Speakers included Arne Duncan, the U.S. secretary of education during the Obama administration.

“At the rally were charter school administrators, teachers, parents and students, many of whom came by bus from schools across the state. They held signs that said “#kidsnotpolitics” and “Defend Great Schools” and were led in chants by adults on a stage flanked by giant screens projecting their images across the park.”

Since charters enroll about 10% of the students in the state, they should have had a slogan “Stand for 10% of Students,” since they have no concern for non-charter students, who are the vast majority of students in the state.

In addition to Arne Duncan, the CCSA had Steve Perry as a keynote speaker. Perry, who has one or two charter schools, is noted for his vehement hatred of teachers’ unions, whom he has likened to cockroaches.

The rally was a response to four proposed bills that would establish regulations for charters.

“The introduction last week of four new pieces of charter school legislation has aroused passions among charter school advocates. It has raised fears among advocates that California’s charter school sector will face the greatest restrictions on its growth since the state’s first charter law was enacted a quarter century ago.

“If approved, the bills would eliminate the right to appeal to the county or the state if a district denies a charter application; place an unspecified cap on charter schools; allow charter applications to be rejected based on their financial impact on a district; and prevent charter schools approved in one district from setting up in another.”

Charter advocates claim that these reasonable restrictions would “eliminate” charter schools.

Why should a district in the mountains have the power to open a charter in another district hundreds of miles away?

Why shouldn’t the fiscal impact on public schools limit where charters are allowed to open?

Last week, they said that a law banning nepotism and conflicts of interest was a “scorched earth” policy.

How many public school districts are they allowed to destroy before they are reined in?

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Duncan, Arne, Education Industry, Privatization

California: State Board of Education Rejects Thrive Charter Schools Appeal for Renewal

By dianeravitch
March 14, 2019 //
3

 

Is it a new day in California?

Too soon to know but there was one good sign today.

The State Board of Education, which in the past had approved charters that had been rejected by districts and then by counties, rejected the appeal by Thrive charter schools of San Diego for renewal. Superintendent Cindy Marten came with staff and data to show that Thrive was not doing well by children. In the past, the facts were not enough. Today, they were.

Today was Linda Darling-Hammond’s first meeting as chair of the state education board. She cares about facts, data, and students. Thrive lost.

This is what Tom Ultican wrote about Thrive last fall. 

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization, San Diego

California: Who Chose the Members of the Charter Task Force?

By dianeravitch
March 14, 2019 //
40

The task force appointed to reform California’s weak charter school law has 11 members; six of them have ties to the charter industry. Two of the 11 are part of the California Charter School Association, the official lobbying group, which spends $20 million a year to prevent any accountability for charters. How likely is this task force to propose meaningful reforms to stop charter schools from draining resources from the public schools that enroll most of the state’s children? How likely is it to propose meaningful reforms that take away endless appeals by failing charters? How likely is it to prevent small school districts from opening charter schools in districts that do not want them or need them? How likely is it to propose reforms that prevent entrepreneurs and grifters from opening their own charter schools? How likely is it to oust charter chains (the Walmarts of education), storefront charters where teachers meet students only once every three weeks, or charters operated by foreign entities?

Well, we won’t know until we see the final report, will we?

I promised Tony Thurmond that I would suspend judgment until I see the final report, and I will.

Nonetheless it is worrisome to see that somehow the charter industry managed to gain six of the 11 seats on a task force that will make recommendations to reform the industry.

I assumed that Thurmond was responsible for the composition of the task force

I may have been wrong, but honestly I don’t know who made those decisions.

I received an email from a reader in California whose credentials are impeccable, who has a direct tie inside the Governor’s office. This person told me that the committee was selected by Governor Gavin Newsom, not by Tony Thurmond. This made sense because Thurmond was smeared by the charter lobby during the campaign in 2016, which spent nearly $40 million trying to beat him. He has no reason to stack the panel in their favor. But the bottom line is that I don’t know for sure. All I know is what I see. And the optics are not good.

Who wants to stay on the good side of Reed Hastings, Eli Broad, Bill Bloomfield, Arthur Rock, the Fisher Family, and the many other charter-loving billionaires in California?

I wish him well in producing a report that actually reforms the charter industry in California and limits the damage it is now doing to the public schools that enroll nearly 90% of the children in the state. Given the composition of the task force, it won’t be easy.

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization

California: Tony Thurmond Called Me

By dianeravitch
March 12, 2019 //
167

Many of the readers of this blog were disappointed, as was I, to see that the new Superintendent of Public Instruction in California, Tony Thurmond, appointed a task force to review charter law in which six of the 11 members are or were connected to the charter industry. We know how hard that industry has opposed any regulation or accountability. We know how many billionaires have used their influence to support the charter industry, both financially and politically. We know that they spent millions to defeat Tony Thurmond, and they lost. Many of us were disappointed in the task force’s composition, because we had supported his candidacy, believing that he would fight charter abuses.

The task force is expected to analyze the fiscal impact of charters on public schools. I wrote several critical posts, because I didn’t like the optics of having this review conducted by a committee in which a majority of the members were associated with the charter sector.

If I had had Tony Thurmond’s phone number, I would have spoken to him first to understand how this happened. I didn’t have his number.

This morning, Tony called me. He had my number.

He assured me that the task force will present recommendations for reform of the charter law. He assured me that he is personally in charge of the task force and its work product. He asked that I (we) (all of us) judge the task force and him by results.

I told him that I thought that was a reasonable request and that I would suspend judgment until I see what the task force produces.

I reminded him, though he needed no reminder, that California has one of the worst charter laws in the nation. It is a law that the charter industry has fought to keep weak and to allow bad actors to proliferate. I pointed out that it is wrong to allow a district to authorize a charter in someone else’s district, without its consent, especially when the authorizing district is hundreds of miles away.

California has more charter schools (more than 1300) than any other state, in part because it has such a large population. It has also seen more charter closures (more than 300) than any other state, including charters that opened and closed on the same day or within a few months. Under current law, a charter begins by applying to a district. If the district says no, the charter operator appeals to the county board of education. If the county says no, the charter operator appeals to the State Board of Education. Under Governor Schwarzenegger and then Governor Brown, the State Board of Education has rubber-stamped charters, no matter how awful their record or their application.

California charter law is in desperate need of reform. Tony knows that.

The charter sector is not going away; but it should play by the same academic, ethical, professional, and financial rules as public schools, and it should not drain resources away from the public schools. Charters should be audited and monitored to the same extent as public schools. Certification requirements for charter teachers and principals and superintendents should be no less than for public schools. Only educators, not entrepreneurs, should be allowed to operate charters. Charters should open only in districts that approve them and need them, and when they close, their students and property should revert to the public schools. Charters should enroll the same demographic as the district in which they are located. If I had my druthers, charter chains would be banned, as would charters managed by foreign entities. That’s my view.

I pledged to Tony that I would withhold judgment and see what his task force produces.

I think that is fair.

He promised that there would be charter reform.

I normally do not report on private communications, but Tony encouraged me to report our conversation.

Let’s watch and wait and hope that the task force produces the reforms that are needed.

 

 

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization

California: Will the State Board Renew a Failing Charter School?

By dianeravitch
March 12, 2019 //
7

On Thursday the California State Board will decide about the fate of Thrive Charter School in San Diego. The district refused to renew the charter, saying that it is a failing school. The County Office of Education rejected Thrive’s appeal. Thrive now goes to the State Board with a final appeal. Thursday’s meeting will be the first in which Linda Darling-Hammond will chair the State Board.

So we will learn whether the State Board Will side with the district or with a failing charter.

Tom Ultican has written about Thrive in the past. He recently received an unsolicited letter from someone who worked as a sub at Thrive.

Thrive Public Schools Renewal Petition Hearing on Friday

Tom says that the big charter school lobby—the California Charter Schools Association—is going all in to “save” Thrive, despite its poor performance.

 

 

 

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization

California: More Information About the Foxes Who Guard the Henhouse

By dianeravitch
March 11, 2019 //
14

 

Basketball Star Kevin Johnson was Mayor of Sacramento. He married Michele Rhee, ex-face of the privatization movement. Before their marriage, Johnson founded St. Hope Academy charter schools in Sacramento.

What has St.Hope got to do with Tony Thurmond’s Task Force on the fiscal impact of charters?

One member of the task force, Margaret Fortune, was the superintendent of St. Hope Academy. A graduate of Berkeley, she has stellar academic credentials. Nothing on her resume, however, refers to experience as a teacher or a principal. She is now board chair of the California Charter Schools Association, the powerful lobby for charter schools.

Another member of the task force is Ed Manansala, who is Superintendent of the El Dorado County Office, which runs a SELPA, providing special education services for students in charter schools. El Dorado County’s SELPA offers low prices and competes for students with disabilities in districts hundreds of miles away. How they are able to provide services to students in distant and far-flung districts is not clear.

A reader sent this additional information.

“Ed Manansala used to work at Sac Charter HS as a Principal of one of the small schools (School of Business), when Margaret Fortune was Superintendent of St. HOPE public schools.  When she resigned to take over The Fortune School (her Dad’s teacher prep program), Ed became Superintendent of St. HOPE before moving back into the public sector as El Dorado County Superintendent. “

I googled and indeed Ed Manansala was principal and superintendent of Kevin Johnson’s St. Hope Academy Charter High School in Sacramento before he became County Superintendent in El Dorado.

This past fall of 2018, the principal of St. Hope resigned to support student protests. She blasted the school leadership for “a history of neglect.” 

So, yes, indeed, a majority of the members of the task force that is supposed to scrutinize the fiscal impact of charters on public schools have direct connections to the charter industry.

The membership of the task force does not inspire confidence in its judgment or independence.

The question remains: Why did Tony Thurmond and Gavin Newsom give a majority of the seats on this task force to people directly connected to the charter industry, which enrolls only 10% of the students in the state? This is especially curious since the same charter industry spent many millions trying to defeat both Thurmond and Newsom.

Another Question: Did they think no one would notice?

 

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization

California: Thurmond and Newsom Put the Fox in Charge of the Henhouse

By dianeravitch
March 11, 2019 //
13

 

The story of the task force charged with reviewing the charter law and the fiscal impact of charters on public schools continues to evolve, and not in a good way.

Of the 11 members of the task force appointed by Tony Thurmond, in consultation with Governor Gavin Newsom, at least six are directly connected to the charter industry.

How can this be possible when the charter industry supported former Los Angeles Mayor Villaraigosa against Gavin Newsom, and when the charter industry spent millions to defeat Tony Thurmond, outspending his supporters by a margin of 2-1?

Here is the task force with new information about one member, the superintendent of El Dorado County:

 

The task force members are:

 

  • Cristina de Jesus, president and chief executive officer, Green Dot Public Schools California (charter chain);
  • Dolores Duran, California School Employees Association;
  • Margaret Fortune, California Charter Schools Association board chair; Fortune School of Education, president & CEO;
  • Lester Garcia, political director, SEIU Local 99 (Local 99 took $100,000 from Eli Broad to oppose Jackie Goldberg, a critic of charters);
  • Alia Griffing, political director, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Council 57;
  • Beth Hunkapiller, educator and administrator, Aspire Public Schools (charter chain);
  • Erika Jones, board of directors, California Teachers Association;
  • Ed Manansala, superintendent, El Dorado County; board president, California County Superintendents Educational Services Association; the El Dorado County Office set up a Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) specifically to service students with disabilities in charter schools and wooed charter students away from their local districts; El Dorado supposedly offers services to disabled students enrolled in charter schools who live hundreds of miles away;  
  • Cindy Marten,  superintendent, San Diego Unified School District;
  • Gina Plate, vice president of special education, California Charter Schools Association (charter lobby);
  • Edgar Zazueta, senior director, policy & governmental relations, Association of California School Administrators (ACSA endorsed Marshall Tuck against Tony Thurmond). 

 

By my count, six members of the 11-member panel are directly connected to the charter industry, including two from the lobbying organization CCSA. That’s a majority.

As a supporter of public schools, I supported Tony Thurmond as best I could on this blog. I personally contributed to his campaign. I thought that his election and the election of Gavin Newsom meant that charter schools in California would be held to the same standards of academic, financial, and ethical accountability as public schools; I hoped that the state would stop stacking the deck in favor of charters. I hoped that necessary reforms would eliminate shady operators and grifters and put a halt to the unchecked  proliferation of unstable, unsound charter schools.

Now, I am not so sure.

The fox is in charge of the henhouse.

If you are as outraged as I am, if you feel you have been had, please contact Superintendent Tony Thurmond.

Only 10% of the students in the state of California attend charter schools.

Why do their representatives get to police themselves?

Why do their representatives get to decide whether they are hurting the public schools that most students attend?

Why does the charter industry get to decide whether it is okay for them to drain funds and impose budget cuts on public schools?

 

Categories Accountability, Budget Cuts, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »