Archives for category: Corporate Reform
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Virginia Parent: Perriello Gets $25,000 from Emerson Collective (I.E. Arne Duncan & Co.)

By dianeravitch
June 11, 2017 //
94

Michele Boyd, a parent in Virginia, sent this message. Both Tom Perriello and Ralph Northam describe themselves as progressives. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren endorsed Periello. However, Boyd writes, Perriello –who was DFER’s “Reformer of the Month in 2010–continues to receive money from corporate reformers. She reports that he received $25,000 from Palo Alto-based The Emerson Collective, which was created by corporate reform billionaire Laurene Powell Jobs (supporter of charters and on the national board of TFA). The Emerson Collective employs Arne Duncan.

VOTE FOR Dr. RALPH NORTHAM. DEMONSTRATE TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY THAT THEY CANT SELL OUT PUBLIC EDUCATION..

She writes:

Why Has a Corporate Education Reform Group Affiliated with Former U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, Donated $25,000 to Tom Perriello’s Campaign?

by Michele Boyd, a parent to two children and a public education activist

​For those of us who care deeply about K-12 public education – whether we are students, parents, educators, or concerned citizens – the stakes are high in Tuesday’s Democratic primary. In the current anti-Trump environment, the odds are in our favor that who we nominate on June 13th will become the next Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia. It is therefore paramount that we choose wisely. The 1,253,482 children who are currently enrolled in Virginia’s K-12 public schools and slightly over 100,000 teachers who teach them are depending on us to get it right.

​The media narrative that has emerged in this race is Ralph Northam and Tom Perriello are both progressives and the policy differences between them are insignificant, including K-12 education. On the surface, this appears to be true. (Read here for Northam’s education platform and here for Perriello’s.)

There’s more to this story, however. The candidates differ significantly in one aspect that, in my opinion, overrides everything else: Tom Perriello has deep ties to the corporate education reform movement and Ralph Northam does not.

​As a busy mom who works full-time, I was hoping that The Washington Post or other media outlets would scoop this story. It’s telling that Mr. Perriello chose not to disclose these ties at an education roundtable that myself and 15-20 others attended on January 31st in Manassas. With two children in public schools who have endured a learning environment of high-stakes testing that creates stress and anxiety, I cannot remain silent. Democratic primary voters deserve to know the facts before casting ballots on Tuesday.

There are many unanswered questions about Mr. Perriello’s past and current affiliations to the corporate education reformers – a select group largely financed by millionaires and billionaires – but the most pressing one is this: Why has an education reform group, the Emerson Collective, located in Palo Alto, California, donated $25,000 to Mr. Perriello’s campaign? What interests could this Silicon Valley Limited Liability Company (LLC) have in Virginia’s public schools?

I’ll start by saying this much, when Mr. Perriello boasts that he has the support of Obama Administration officials, we should believe him. As it turns out, former U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) Secretary, Arne Duncan, is Managing Partner at the Emerson Collective.

Former Secretary Duncan’s seven years of service from 2008-2015 can best be described as contentious. He once apologized for saying that Hurricane Katrina was “the best thing that happened to the education system in New Orleans,” viewing the disaster as an opportunity to usher in a market-based approach, which led to the firings of 7,500 unionized teachers (who sued for wrongful termination) and the establishment of America’s first all-charter district. Oddly, when he left USDOE and returned to Chicago, a public school system where he was once superintendent, he enrolled his children in private school. He later joined the Emerson Collective in March 2016, to work on issues regarding unemployed youth and education.

What is the Emerson Collective? Founded by billionaire Laurene Powell Jobs (wife of Apple’s co-founder Steve Jobs), the Emerson Collective makes investments and grants in education and other areas. The New York Times described it as one of several “top tier technology investors” in AltSchool, a network of small private schools that “use a proprietary learning management system that tracks students’ activities and helps teachers personalize their learning.” Ms. Powell Jobs is also a board member of several education reform organizations, including Teach for America and the NewSchools Venture Fund. You can learn more about the Emerson Collective, its $100 million high school redesign contest, and Ms. Powell Jobs in this October 2016 New York Magazine article.

In choosing the Emerson Collective, Mr. Duncan joined one of his former top aides at USDOE, Ms. Russlyn Ali. Mr. Duncan worked together with Ms. Ali at USDOE on the $4.35 billion Race to the Top (RTTT), which offered stimulus money to states as an incentive to adopt the Common Core standards and assessments, expand charter schools, and use test scores to evaluate teachers – all ideas promoted by the corporate education reformers. Here is a video of Mr. Perriello sharing his thoughts on RTTT in March 2012 as President and CEO of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

Thankfully, in 2011 Virginia withdrew its RTTT application and became one of only five states to not adopt the Common Core, avoiding the acrimony and backlash experienced in many other states. We were also fortunate to preserve the integrity of our system of traditional public schools and limit the growth of charters. Given that at least two studies from 2009 and 2010 found that charter schools performed no better and often worse than traditional public schools, this was a wise decision. By maintaining our independence, our state sent a bipartisan message to Mr. Duncan and the privitizers that Virginia’s public schools were not for sale.

There is reason to believe that Mr. Perriello and Mr. Duncan are personal friends and political allies. Mr. Perriello once described Mr. Duncan as a “visionary”, urging President Obama to “find the Arne Duncan of economic development” for Treasury Secretary. Press accounts show that Mr. Perriello hosted Mr. Duncan in Charlottesville for his “A Call to Teach” speech at the Curry School of Education at UVa on October 14, 2009. Mr. Perriello also paid a visit to former Secretary Duncan’s office with constituents to discuss education issues, including merit pay incentive programs. In 2010, Mr. Perriello secured a grant from USDOE’s Public Charter Schools Program to establish a rural charter school in the Fifth District. A few years later, the project was cancelled and the school never opened. Press reports also describe them as campaigning together in Mr. Perriello’s bid for reelection in 2010.

How did Mr. Perriello and Mr. Duncan become allies? Most likely it was through the political arm of a PAC formed by Wall Street hedge fund managers in 2005 called Democrats for Education Reform (DFER). DFER seeks to change federal, state, and local education policy to fit its agenda of choice, competition, and accountability through “supporting reform-minded candidates for public office.” DFER co-founder Whitney Tilson is quoted as saying that “hedge funds are always looking for ways to turn a small amount of capital into a large amount of capital.”

DFER lobbied President Obama upon his election in 2008 to select its top choice for Secretary of Education, Mr. Duncan. DFER also donated to Mr. Perriello’s 2008 and 2010 campaigns, in addition to holding fundraisers for him both online (see page 7) and in private residences. Mr. Perriello co-sponsored charter school legislation with another DFER-affiliated politician, Congressman Jared Polis (D-CO). In June 2010, Mr. Perriello was recognized by Whitney Tilson as DFER’s “Ed Reformer of the Month,” and featured in an online fundraiser for those who couldn’t attend a “reception in his honor” later that month.

DFER’s embrace of “accountability” and “choice” often aligned with that of conservatives, including many rightwing ideologues. Mercedes Schneider, an educator, author, and blogger has documented DFER’s receipt of $80,000 in donations in 2010 and 2014 from a group founded by Betsy DeVos, the American Federation for Children, and $65,000 in those same years from a nonprofit that Mrs. DeVos chaired, the Alliance for School Choice. The education historian, Diane Ravitch, argued recently in The New Republic that Democratic politicians who supported the corporate education agenda “paved the way for DeVos and her plans to privatize the school system.”

On April 14th, myself and a friend attended a town hall meeting in Montclair to clarify Mr. Perriello’s current position on charter schools, standardized testing, and DFER. Mr. Perriello recognized that some reformers wanted to destroy public education. Mr. Perriello’s interest, however, was that he was willing to try anything to improve public schools. He explained that since the evidence has led him to conclude that charter schools don’t work, he no longer supports them. He also expressed support for Governor Terri McAuliffe’s veto of legislation which would have shifted charter school decision-making authority from local school boards to Richmond. This is good news. If Mr. Perriello should win the Governorship, we will hold him to his word.

Mr. Perriello’s vigorous support for “data-driven education” was more troubling, as well as his explanation of his past DFER ties. He distanced himself from the group, claiming that he wasn’t a “member.” He also stated that he hasn’t received any campaign donations from DFER in his current race, but that he “couldn’t know if anybody who is affiliated with them” has donated. (See here for the video starting at 32:46.)

This is interesting. At the time of the town hall, Mr. Perriello’s first quarter campaign disclosure report had been filed. My friend and I were unaware at the time, and in all fairness maybe he was, too, but Mr. Perriello’s former Congressional colleague and DFER, Mr. Jared Polis, with whom he worked on charter school legislation, donated $3,500 to his campaign. A quick check of DFER’s website indicates that Mr. Polis remains a “featured” DFER. I find it doubtful that Mr. Perriello wouldn’t remember his former colleague and friend.

Although at town halls and in debates, Mr. Perriello has disavowed certain aspects of his past record on public education, in particular his support for charter schools, there remains cause for concern. In addition to the worrisome donations from the Emerson Collective and Mr. Polis, his campaign disclosure reports reveal that he has also received donations from other individuals associated with corporate education reform. One example is venture capitalist Nicolas Hanauer, who donated $1 million to a 2012 Washington State referendum to allow charter schools and $15,000 to Mr. Perriello. It’s reported that Mr. Hanauer is well-known in Washington State political circles as having a combative personality, especially when confronting the teachers union. I recognize that Mr. Perriello and Mr. Hanauer may be aligned on other issues besides education, but until I hear otherwise, I’m worried.

I believe that Mr. Perriello owes an explanation to the public about the donations he has received from entities or individuals who have ties to corporate education reform. Students, parents, educators, and concerned citizens deserve no less. Virginia is one of the few states remaining whose public education system hasn’t been corrupted by the privatization movement and it’s important that we keep it this way. This issue will be on the ballot in November with Betsy DeVos’s surrogate, Ed Gillespie, and as Democrats it’s imperative that we make sure our candidate has clean hands.

Ralph Northam has a public education record that demonstrates his allegiance lies with children, parents, and educators – not with corporate education reformers whether they are from Silicon Valley, Colorado, or Washington State. Dr. Northam has promised to follow in the footsteps of Governor McAuliffe who has vetoed all charter school legislation, made important strides in SOL reform by reducing the number of tests from 34 to 29, and recently signed into law a bipartisan bill which sets policy to raise Virginia’s teacher salaries at or above the national level. Much more remains to be done and I believe that Dr. Northam is up to the job.

I’ve had the opportunity to meet Dr. Northam three times, including once at an education town hall, and I was impressed with his knowledge of the issues, compassion, and unique understanding as a pediatric neurologist of children and how they learn best. Having a wife who is a K-5 science teacher only enhances his credentials.

Dr. Northam has also received the endorsement of the Virginia Education Association, representing more than 50,000 teachers. I feel it’s important as Democrats that we return to our roots and stand up for our educators, giving them the respect and support they deserve. Dr. Northam has pledged to give them a seat at the table.

The questions we need to ask ourselves before Tuesday’s primary is who do we trust more with the awesome responsibility of leading our public schools and looking out for the best interests of our children? Which candidate will appoint individuals who represent Virginian values as Secretary of Education and the nine members of the Board of Education? Who can we count on to ensure that K-12 education spending – which is more than one-third of the general fund – supports priorities that will have the most impact? I have my answer and he is Dr. Ralph Northam.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​
​
​

​

​

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reform

Los Angeles: Nick Melvoin Has Lots of Big Ideas, Now That the Billionaires Put Him on the zschool Board

By dianeravitch
June 10, 2017 //
18

Nick Melvoin beat Steve Zimmer for the LAUSD school board in the most expensive school board race in history.

The LA Times says he has fresh ideas.

Here they are.

Most of what he says is intended to enable the normalization of charter schools. Or is trite.

But get this:

“About 40% of a teacher’s evaluation should be based on measurable academic growth, such as standardized test scores, Melvoin said.”

Melvoin obviously is in the dark about the total failure of VAM.

But what would you expect from a puppet of Eli Broad?

Categories Accountability, Broad Foundation, Corporate Reform, Ignorance, Los Angeles, VAM (value-added modeling)

Exposed: Wall Street Money Pays Democratic Clique to Help GOP Control State Senate

By dianeravitch
June 10, 2017 //
25

New York is a blue state but has a divided legislature. Democrats control the Assembly, and Republicans control the State Senate. Republicans are not the majority of the State Senate. They are in power because of a small group of renegade Democrats who vote with the Republicans. They are called the Independent Democratic Caucus, and they hold the balance of power. Governor Andrew Cuomo likes the divided legislature, as it enhances his power.

The Alliance for Quality Education (AQE) investigated the IDC and discovered the source of their ample funding: Hedge fund managers and equity investors who favor charter schools and privatization.

Its report, called “Pay to Play: Charter Schools and the IDC,” lays out the political contributions that fuel the IDC campaigns:

“The IDC received $676,850 from charter school political donors.

“Over the past six years, the Independent Democratic Conference, a group of breakaway Democrats who support Republican control of the New York State Senate, have received $676,850 from charter school political donors. These political donors, including hedge fund managers and their political action committees, have been rewarded by the IDC as seen in the 2017 state budget where privately-
run charter schools got much larger funding increases per pupil than public schools. The IDC-Republican advocacy for privately-run charter schools at the expense of public schools runs counter to the IDC’s public pronouncements that they are championing public school funding and the Campaign for Fiscal Equity. The IDC is empowering pro-privatization, pro-Trump Republicans to run the State Senate even though it hurts the more than one million public school students they represent.

“The table below is lists the charter school-af liated individual and political action donations made to IDC members and to committees speci cally bene ting the IDC.

“Senators Hamilton and Peralta are not included in the list of IDC members shown below. Senator Jesse Hamilton joined the IDC on November 7, 2016. Senator Jose Peralta joined in January 2017. The two senators however, have a long history of receiving donations from the charter industry. Over the years, the donations they received come to a total of $ 11,500 for and $26,500 for Peralta. This money is in addition to the total shown in this report.”

Open the link to see the list of donors.

Why does this connection matter?

A Republican Senate can be relied on to prevent tax increases on the wealthy. This matters to them even more than charter schools. Bottom line: the 1% prefer charters instead of tax increases to pay for smaller classes, early childhood education, and the services that would help children and public schools.

Categories Billionaires, Charter Schools, Corporate Reform, New York

Jan Resseger: Meet the National Lobbyists Who Have Pushed a Far-Right Wing Agenda into the States

By dianeravitch
June 6, 2017 //
30

Jan Resseger read Gordon Lafer’s new book, “The One Percent Solution: How Corporations Are Remaking America One State at a Time,” and she understood the pattern on the rug.

“Gordon Lafer explains that in the November 2010 election, “Eleven state governments switched from Democratic or divided control to unified Republican control of the governorship and both houses of the legislature. Since these lawmakers took office in early 2011, the United States has seen an unprecedented wave of legislation aimed at lowering labor standards and slashing public services.” (p. 2) “In January 2011, legislatures across the country took office under a unique set of circumstances. In many states, new majorities rode to power on the energy of the Tea Party ‘wave’ election and the corporate-backed RedMap campaign… (T)his was the first class of legislators elected under post-Citizens United campaign finance rules, and the sudden influence of unlimited money in politics was felt across the country. Finally, the 2011 legislative sessions opened in the midst of record budget deficits (from the Great Recession), creating an atmosphere of fiscal crisis that made it politically feasible to undertake more dramatic legislation than might otherwise have been possible… For the corporate lobbies and their legislative allies, the 2010 elections created a strategic opportunity to restructure labor relations, political power, and the size of government.” (p 44)…

“Lafer continues: “Political science traditionally views policy initiatives as emerging from either reasoned evaluation of what has worked to address a given social problem, or a strategic response to public opinion. But the corporate agenda for education reform is neither. Its initiatives are not the product of education scholars and often have little or no evidentiary basis to support them. They are also broadly unpopular… In this sense, education policy… provides an instructive window into the ability of corporate lobbies to move an extremely broad and ambitious agenda that is supported neither by social scientific evidence nor by the popular will.” (p. 130)

“Who are the corporate lobbies crafting and pushing the anti-tax, union-bashing, anti-public education agenda? “Almost all of these initiatives reflect ALEC (the American Legislative Exchange Council) model legislation, and have been championed by the Chamber of Commerce, Americans for Prosperity, and a wide range of allied corporate lobbies.” (p. 130) “Furthermore, the corporate agenda is carried out through an integrated network that operates on multiple channels at once: funding ALEC to write bills, craft legislative talking points, and provide a meeting place for legislators and lobbyists to build relationships; supporting local think tanks in the ALEC-affiliated State Policy Network to produce white papers, legislative testimony, opinion columns, and media experts; contributing to candidate campaigns and party committees; making independent expenditures on behalf of lawmakers or issues; and deploying field organizers to key legislative districts.” (p. 39)

“A primary strategy is tax cutting: “‘The best way to stimulate the economy,’ insisted a senior fellow at the Koch-funded Cato Institute, is ‘to shrink government… lower marginal tax rates, and streamline regulations.’ The corporate right’s exhortations for an unprecedented policy of cutting taxes and services in the midst of recession was not an evidence-based policy and indeed did not yield the economic growth its proponents forecast… There was no reason to believe that tax cuts were the key to economic recovery. However continuing tax cuts achieved something else; they dramatically—and perhaps permanently—shrank the size of government.” (p. 65)

“How has all this affected public education? “(B)udget cuts were particularly widespread—and particularly devastating—in the country’s school systems. In 2010-11, 70 percent of all U.S. school districts made cuts to essential services. Despite widespread evidence of the academic and economic value of preschool education, twelve states cut pre-K funding that year, including Arizona, which eliminated it completely. Ohio repealed full-day kindergarten and cut its preschool program to the point that it served 75 percent fewer four-year-olds than it had a decade earlier. Pennsylvania also cut back from full-day to half-day kindergarten in many districts—including Philadelphia, which also eliminated 40 percent of its teaching staff…. More than half the nation’s school districts changed their thermostat settings…. Research shows that the availability of trained librarians makes a significant improvement in student reading and writing skills, yet by 2014, one-third of public schools in the country lacked a full-time certified librarian.” (p. 69)

Conspiracy theory? No, a well-planned, carefully executed plan to cut taxes, kill unions, privatize education.

Categories ALEC, Budget Cuts, Corporate Reform, Privatization, School Choice, Unions

Tom Ultican’s Sharp Critique of What Went Wrong and How to Make Things Right

By dianeravitch
May 28, 2017 //
19

Tom Ultican became a teacher of math and physics in San Diego after a career in Silicon Valley. He is retiring. He loves teaching.

He describes with precision the people who imposed bad ideas on the schools and messed them up. Maybe they meant well but their lack of knowledge or experience in the classroom led to naive and foolish and failed interventions, like Common Core and “turnaround,” with mad firings.

He writes:

“Standards based education is bad education theory. In the 1960’s Benjamin Bloom proposed mastery education in which instruction would be individualized and students would master certain skills before they moved ahead. By the 1970’s this idea had been married with B.F. Skinner’s behaviorist philosophy and teachers were given lists of discrete items for their students to master. The “reform” became derisively known as “seats and sheets.””

Tom says he is leaving the classroom. I hope there is a way to keep his kbowledge, experience, and wisdom engaged in educating the next generation.

Categories Billionaires, Charter Schools, Competency Based Education, Corporate Reform, Education Industry, NCLB, NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Privatization, San Diego, Technology, Turnaround Schools

Gary Rubinstein: Rick Hess is the Reformer Who Thinks

By dianeravitch
May 12, 2017 //
28

Gary Rubinstein read Rick Hess’s latest book, “Letters to a Young Education Reformer” and found much to admire, even though Gary is one of the most perceptive critics of what is now called “reform.”

He writes:

“I was eager to receive Rick Hess’s latest book ‘letters to a young education reformer.’ Hess is the director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a conservative think tank. Hess is one of the few defenders of the reform movement whom I respect. His writings, like his column in Education Week, always have the nuance that most reform writers at places like The 74 and Education Post lack.

“This book explains what is behind some of the failures of the reform movement. With states opting out of the Common Core, parents opting out of state tests, and prominent reformers even opting out of ed reform, the reform movement is currently experiencing a slump.

“Though the book is written in an informal tone with plenty of very interesting anecdotes, it is a very scathing critique of the reform movement, the style of reform that really became big with people like Michelle Rhee, Joel Klein, and, of course, President Obama.

“Hess knows what missteps reformers committed along the way to lead to this. By writing about these mistakes in a series of letters to an unnamed ‘young education reformer,’ Hess hopes that the next generation of ed reformers will avoid those mistakes.”

Gary offers quotes from the book that he likes, such as:

““Washington-centric, dogmatic big R Reform has too often neglected this reality, with reformers exhausting themselves to win policy fights and then winding up too bloodied and battered to make those wins matter. It’s left me to wonder whether all the fuss and furor of recent years has done more harm than good.”

“In the fourth letter he writes:

“Calling something an implementation problem is how we reformers let ourselves off the hook. It’s a fancy way to avoid saying that we didn’t realize how a new policy would affect real people … and that it turned out worse than promised.”

Gary disagrees with two major arguments that Hess makes:

“One is that I think that Hess has overestimated the potential of the Reformers. I see his central argument as: it’s time for us to start playing fair, to stop misusing data and to stop ignoring, and otherwise showing contempt, for Reform critics. He seems to think that the Reform movement has made some progress, but to get to the next level, to win, they will need to be more open to discussion with critics and be more open about potential problems when things like the Common Core are implemented.

“I think the opposite is true. I think the Reformers have actually overachieved to get the victories they have. Getting more humble and honest and letting critics participate in the discussion will not get them to the next level at all. In a fair matchup, Reformers will get clobbered. I think they are going to lose the education reform war either way, but really the only chance they have is to ramp up the slick messaging and the lying. With the dishonest route, I think they have about a ten percent chance of ultimately winning. With the honest route, I think they have a zero percent chance of winning.”

Gary clearly enjoyed the book because it made him think.

Without having read this book, I want to add my thoughts about Rick Hess. I sponsored Rick’s first appearance in D.C. right after he received his doctorate from Harvard. For several years in the 1990s and early 2000s, I ran an annual education policy conference at the Brookings Institution, to which I invited researchers on different sides of contentious issues. I also invited a lunch speaker and a dinner speaker. In 1998, looking for a fresh face, I invited Rick as the lunch speaker after hearing good things about his first book, “Spinning Wheels: The Politics of Urban School Reform.” Rick subsequently found a home at AEI, and my confidence in him was affirmed.

From the very first day that I turned against the corporate reform movement, Rick has been gracious to me. When “The Death and Life of the Great American School System” was published in 2010, I called Grover (Russ) Whitehurst at the Brookings Institution, where I had been a Senior Fellow for 17 years, to ask if I could hold an event at Brookings to present my book, which was my refutation of No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top. He said I would have to rent the auditorium, pay for the sound system, and pay for any incidental costs, in addition to paying my own way. Having sat in his seat at Brookings in the mid-90s, I knew this was not customary for someone who was part of Brookings.

So I called Rick to ask if I could do the event at the free-market American Enterprise Institute. Rick immediately said yes and created an excellent event, where I spoke to an overflowing crowd, and a balanced panel responded with thoughtful questions. AEI paid all expenses. It was an excellent setting in which to present to the D.C. establishment my change of mind about the basic “reform” principles of testing and choice. Clearly, I appreciated Rick’s openness to dissent.

Categories Corporate Reform

Sen. Bernie Sanders Endorses Steve Zimmer and Imelda Padilla for L.A. School Board!!

By dianeravitch
May 7, 2017 //
17

Senator Bernie Sanders endorsed Steve Zimmer and Imelda Padilla for the Los Angeles school board. The election will be held May 16.

““Billionaires should not make a profit off of public school children. That’s why I’m supporting Steve Zimmer and Imelda Padilla for the Los Angeles School Board. They will fight against the Trump/DeVos agenda to destabilize and undermine public schools,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders in a statement.”

Zimmer’s opponent Nick Melvoin is supported by billionaires who hope to privatize public schools in Los Angeles.

Zimmer is committed to fighting the Trump-DeVos agenda of charters and vouchers. His opponent is not.

I recommend that citizens of Los Angeles vote for Zimmer and Padilla. They will fight for public schools and the common good.

The Network for Public Education has endorsed both Zimmer and Padilla.

Send a message to Donald Trump and Betsy DeVos! No privatization! No corporate control! No vouchers! The public schools belong to the people, not the billionaires!

Categories Betsy DeVos, Billionaires, California, Charter Schools, Corporate Reform, Education Industry, Los Angeles, Privatization

Jeannie Kaplan: Denver’s Corporate Reformers Try to Distance Themselves from DeVos

By dianeravitch
May 4, 2017 //
28

Jeannie Kaplan watches with amusement as the corporate reform-led Denver School Board tries to distance themselves from Betsy DeVos.

She says, “They can run, but they can’t hide.”

You see, Denver Board of Education and superintendent, once the drip of privatization as characterized particularly by choice and charters starts, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to stop. What starts as a drip quickly becomes a flood that is almost impossible to control. You may truly not believe in vouchers, but you have fostered an atmosphere in Denver where vouchers could be the logical outcome of Choice and Charters, intended or not. And while DFER, too, tried to separate itself from parts of the Trump/DeVos agenda, it simultaneously sent out a notice congratulating “Betsy DeVos on her appointment as Secretary of Education, and we applaud Mrs. DeVos’s commitment to growing the number of high-quality public charter schools.” Further, Betsy DeVos has given money to DFER which in turn has given lots of money to DPS campaigns including the Committee for Denver’s Kids cited below. You can’t always have it both ways, and even the best public relations departments cannot always convince you of their stories.

This is a problems for all the Democrats who have cheered on “school choice,” but thought they could draw the line at vouchers. Like Senator Michael Bennett of Colorado, who is a major supporter of charters. Like Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York, who wants to be President and has been a major supporter of charters. Like California Governor Jerry Brown, who never saw a charter he didn’t like. Like Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, who voted against DeVos, but advocates both charters and vouchers.

Once you jump on board the school choice train, it is hard to explain why you only meant charters, not vouchers.

Categories Betsy DeVos, Charter Schools, Corporate Reform, Democrats for Education Reform, Denver, Education Reform, School Choice, Vouchers

Christine Langhoff: The Corporate Reformers Are in Control of Massachusetts Public Schools

By dianeravitch
May 1, 2017 //
11

Christine Langhoff teaches in Massachusetts and is a member of the Network for Public Education.

She writes:


Massachusetts public education is being run by a cabal of reformsters, many of them affiliated with a local thinkster tank, The Pioneer Institute. Jim Peyser, state Secretary of Education, is a former director of The NewSchools Venture Fund, having run the Pioneer Institute from 1993-2000. Gov. Weld named him as undersecretary of education in 1995, shortly after the introduction of charters to the state, for which Peyser was – and is – an advocate. In charge of higher education is perennial gadfly Chris Gabrieli, failed gubernatorial candidate, who has developed no fewer than three reformy edu-businesses. (Time on Learning – extended day and year no extra pay; TransformEd – measuring grit and feelings; and Empower Schools, which seeks to destroy union contracts and impose a “third way” in urban districts – so far 3 and counting). So, to use the local dialect, all of them are wicked reformy.

Things have not been going so well for Chester. He signed on as chairman of PARCC, but that boat sank under the weight of the Common Core. This past November, when he thought the charter cap would be lifted and privatization could proceed apace, that too went down to an ignominious 2-1 defeat, in the process awakening parents and taxpayers to the charter scam. He has lately signed on to be a Chief for Change. Reformsters, unlike teachers, don’t need tenure because they have sinecures.

I think this latest peevish salvo stems from Chester’s frustration at being unable to simply sign executive orders and command the world as he would have it. Recently, after testimony from Lisa Guisbond of Citizens for Public Schools, he was forced to revise a punitive policy for students opting out:

“On the related issue of state testing, I thought you should know that some teachers are being given these instructions for handling students whose parents have chosen to opt them out:

‘When a student opts out they will remain in the classroom, listen as the test directions are being read and given the test. If after 15 minutes the student doesn’t write anything down, then, and only then, may the teacher remove the test.’

A 4th grade teacher shared her reaction:

‘This is public shaming, will cause emotional harm, and is a travesty to the precious relationship between teachers and students. Remember we cannot say anything except the scripted words on the test document or we are threatened with job termination, legal and or criminal action.’

So we have a fourth grader embarrassed and crying and a teacher who could lose his or her job for consoling the child. The teacher must ignore this child in need and say nothing.

I trust that these instructions are in error, and that your humane instructions from last year, Commissioner Chester, that students should not be pressured or punished for opting out, remain in place. I urge you to communicate this to the field.”

Delay and Revise MA ESSA Plan to Help, Not Harm, Struggling Schools

At the April 18 board meeting, one of the topics under discussion was the use of the scores from this year’s round of testing. Chester proposed to have 2017 scores included in the average for determining school levels. That was nearly unanimously rejected by the Board due to the use of several variants of tests in the past three years. Previously, it had been agreed that schools would be “held harmless” during the transition to a new test.

A recess was called, during which time Secretary Peyser expressed his belief that if the 2017 scores were not included, teachers would deliberately have students tank the exams so that they could increase scores in future years. In other words,he believes teachers across the state would INTENTIONALLY have thousands of children do poorly on tests in order to create a low baseline. NB: At the time of the discussion, we were already halfway through the testing period.

These people have no respect for the work teachers do. They do not believe we have any integrity. They do not treat us as professionals. It is indeed shameful.

Categories Accountability, Administrators, superintendents, Charter Schools, Corporate Reform, Corporate Reformers, Education Reform, Massachusetts, Students, Teachers and Teaching

North Carolina: Legislators Propose Special Perks for Corporate Charters

By dianeravitch
April 26, 2017 //
13

Under a bill proposed in the North Carolina legislature, corporations would gain the power to set aside half the seats in a new charter for their employees if they contributed funds, land, or equipment. For their generosity, the corporation would also have seats on the charter boards. The charter would become a perk for corporate leaders and valued employees, kind of like a company store.

The state House is considering a collection of bills that would change who can start a charter and how quickly the schools can grow. Corporations would be able to reserve spaces in schools for their employees’ children, and two towns would be able to set up charter schools for their residents. Under current law, charters are open to any student in the state, although schools can give preference to siblings and school employees’ children.

“This is loosening the restrictions on how charters operate and what they’re allowed to do,” Rep. Graig Meyer, an Orange County Democrat, said of the collection of bills the House Education Committee approved Monday in divided votes.

Under one bill, up to half a charter school’s seats could be reserved for children whose parents work for companies that donate land, buildings or equipment to the school. Employees of those companies would also be able to join the charter school’s board of directors.

Rep. John R. Bradford III, a Mecklenburg Republican, framed the bill as an economic development tool that could help attract companies to rural counties. Companies would be able to offer classroom seats as employee perks, Bradford said, equating charter enrollment to companies paying for employee meals.

“This creates a vehicle where a company can create an employee benefit,” he said.

Meyer objected, saying the provision would have taxpayer money going to company schools.

“This moves closer to privatization than North Carolina has ever allowed before,” he said.

Another bill would allow charter enrollment to grow 30 percent a year without approval from the State Board of Education. Charters are now limited to 20 percent annual growth without board approval. Some Democrats objected on the grounds that it could fuel growth in schools that aren’t good. Allowing charters with bad records to expand would not be fair to taxpayers, parents or students, said Rep. Bobbie Richardson, a Louisburg Democrat.

At the same time, the legislature imposed a mandate to reduce class size without any new funding, which will cause layoffs of thousands of teachers and overcrowding in grades not included in the mandate.

North Carolina blogger-teacher Stuart Egan calls the corporate-control bill “The Privatization of Public Schools Bill.”

Can there be any question that the NC legislature is systematically privatizing the schools of the state?

Categories Charter Schools, Class size, Corporate Reform, Education Reform, North Carolina, Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »