Archives for category: Corporate Reformers

Paul Horton is a history teacher at the University of
Chicago Lab School, one of the nation’s finest private schools.
Because he has a keen understanding of history, he is outraged by
the assault on our nation’s public schools. He wrote the following
open letter to a large number of education writers. It should be
widely circulated:

Dear Country’s
Best Journalists,

I am a thirty year
educator and I am trying to send up a red flag to the press that
says: we are in need of good investigative reporting in education.
Too many editorial boards are parroting propaganda from
foundations, Daren Briscoe [Arne Duncan’s press secretary], and
Michelle Rhee.
Why didn’t John Merrow (PBS) connect the dots
on Rachel Maddow when he was given the opportunity? Valerie and Jay
at the Post are fair despite their differences, Ms. Rich at the
Times is beginning to see the big picture, Noreen does excellent
work at the Trib., Kate Grossman is open to listen at the
Sun-Times. Jimmy Kilpatrick at Education News is all over this
stuff as is Anthony Cody at Education Week. So is Jamie Gass in
Boston. Alan Singer at Hofstra is all over Pearson Education
(address copied) especially, and Joel Spring at NYU has the big
picture that everybody needs (go to Amazon). He also has some good
graphics that explain how education reform works even though it
doesn’t (contact him, he is copied, and put in a plug for his new
novel). MIke Shaughnessy at Education News (copied) has done some
great interviews with all of these folks. Christel in Utah (copied)
is a fiercely honest blogger who is a better investigative reporter
than anybody at this point. She might send you all of her research
if you ask nicely. Ben Javorsky at the Chicago Reader is a
fantastic reporter and writer (copied: joravben). For Chicago
Teacher’s Union (CTU) contact Stephanie Gadlin (copied). If you
would like to know why the Common Core Standards are not what they
are cracked up to be, contact a curriculum expert, Sandra Stotsky
(copied) I wish I could send you the e-mail address of my former
student who is the mayor’s chief of staff, but he only twitters, so
it is impossible to communicate………..
Brother (literal) Scott at Harper’s, you guys
need to do a feature story on this! The Atlantic’s publisher’s are
neo-liberals, so we don’t even go there (by the way, I write this
across from the Laboratory Schools in the cockpit of neoliberalism,
the Booth School of Business cafeteria, where all of the world’s
problems get solved, or messed up, depending on how much money you
make, of course).

Brothers (soul) Tavis
and Cornell, please step up on this issue!
On the left and center, we need Kat, Clarence,
and EJ to step up to the plate where Mr. Will is already batting
from the center-Burkean-right (he had a two home-run game last
week, but the Nats can not catch up to my Braves). Kat, I am going
by 53rd Street Coffee to talk Rick Perlrstein(sic) into talking to
you about talking to Krugman and Keller about taking in the right
wing extremist canard hook, line, and sinker. Somebody please send
this to the fearless Bill Moyers!
Ed Ayers, magnificent historian, President of
The University of Richmond, and brilliant and charming commentator
on “The History Guys,” please do a segment on the History of
Education that asks our brilliant scholar of Education and student
of the Lawrence Cremin, Diane Ravitch, to riff with the guys. And,
while I am at it, congratulations to one of my heroes who I am
proud to call my teacher (if only for a week), Ed, on receiving a
well-derserved National Humanities Medal! Ed, please tell these
guys that I am a teacher and very minor scholar with some
credibility and not some right-wing crank.
Diane Ravitch is my hero, she is brave,
fearless, a fellow Texan, and completely dedicated to righting the
ship of education in a very scary tempest. Please read her new book
(go to Amazon) and her blog!
All of us are up against about $50 billion
dollars (combined foundation money), money that can hire full time
Madison Street firms and money that talks to editors
until-they-are-blue-in-the-face-and-say-yes-just-so-they-can-hang-up-or-get-out-of-the-meeting-with-frigging-boring-
people: does this seem familiar, Mr. Weingarten at the
Trib.?

I work for people who
are are the core of the Obama Administration, one of the
President’s best friends is the head of my school board. I am going
to have to be quiet for a while and trust you guys to stand up. I
have to read, write lesson plans, go to meetings, talk to parents,
talk my senior advisees, write a newsletter for the state history
teacher’s association, and, most importantly, try to motivate my
son to pass math. As Ed likes to say about the coming school year:
“the train is roaring down the track and we have to be ready for
it!”

Please listen to the
rail for the hundreds of thousands of teachers out there who can’t
talk. Please share with anybody who might listen if you feel this
is worth worth sharing.
All best,

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/18133-when-schools-become-dead-zones-of-the-imagination-a-critical-pedagogy-manifesto

Paul
Horton
State
Liaison
Illinois Council for History
Education
History Instructor
University High School
The
University of Chicago Laboratory Schools

We remember Molly Ball as the writer for The Atlantic who tried to persuade us in 2012 that Michelle Rhee really truly is a liberal and was taking over the Democratic Party. Of course, since then, we have seen StudentsFirst make campaign contributions to rightwing Republicans and to a handful of Democrats who support vouchers. We even saw her select a Tennessee legislator who sponsored notorious anti-gay legislation (“Don’t Say Gay”) as “reformer of the year.”

Now the same Molly Ball has another article, also in The Atlantic, plaintively wondering why liberals “hate” Cory Booker. I don’t hate Cory Booker.

I don’t agree with his views on education, but I don’t hate him.

But education is the issue that is missing from Molly Ball’s article, except at the very end, when she acknowledges the reasons that liberals have a Cory Booker problem:

“Nonetheless, it seems clear Booker will not be riding to Washington on a wave of esteem from national progressives. Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and a former communications director for the New Jersey Democratic Party, said there’s still time for Booker to earn liberals’ esteem. “There’s a healthy skepticism, given his record of cozying up to Wall Street donors, defending corporations like Bain Capital, and supporting Michelle Rhee’s extreme school-privatization agenda,” Green said. “That said, there’s a real willingness to take a second look, given his airtight commitment to oppose any Grand Bargain that cuts Social Security benefits and his openness to actually increasing those benefits.” Booker, he said, would “earn a lot of goodwill” if he committed to the PCCC-backed proposal to expand those programs. For now, though, the skepticism remains.”

At least, Molly Ball is now willing to concede that Michelle Rhee has an “extreme school-privatization agenda,” which is not exactly representative of the Democratic party.

But she never acknowledges that Booker has views that are closely aligned with Rhee. He supports privatization via charters and vouchers. He was chair of the board of the Wall Street hedge-fund managers’ Democrats for Education Reform (DFER), which pushes for privatization and high-stakes testing. He brought Mark Zuckerberg to Newark and welcomed Teach for America, the Goldman Sachs’ construction of a special housing village for TFA, etc. etc.

Critics of Cory Booker don’t “hate” him. But they wonder why he hates public education and the people who teach in public schools.

California State Superintendent of Schools Tom Torlakson is
one of the best education leaders. As an experienced classroom
teacher, he knows what teachers and students need. As a veteran of
the Merchant Marine, he has a steady hand on the tiller. As a
former legislator, he knows how to work with the legislature. He
had the wisdom and foresight to avoid Race to the Top, knowing that
a “win” would cost the state $3 billion to comply with federal
mandates. Naturally, the billionaires can’t stand Torlakson because
they don’t control him. Worse, he does not share their ideology of
blowing up public education and calling it “innovative.” So they
are running a candidate against Tom Torlakson. He is Marshall Tuck, who ran Mayor
Villaraigosa’s 15 schools and compiled a mediocre and unimpressive
record. He has also been president of the Green Dot charter chain.

One of Tuck’s big issues: he wants teachers to be evaluated by student test scores.
This is a bad policy that has led to teaching to the test,
narrowing the curriculum, and firing good teachers who teach the
neediest children. With the support of the corporate reformers,
eager to privatize as many public schools as possible, Tuck can
count on big money from the big-money guys who tried to unseat
Steve Zimmer (and lost) and then got beaten by a teacher with no
outside funding, Monica Ratliff.

Tom Torlakson deserves to be
re-elected. He is a fighter for kids, teachers, and public
education. He understands the importance of public education in a
democracy.

I saw Bill Moyers interview Mark Leibovich last night, and I was riveted to the screen.

I began to understand that the privatization of public education is part of a much larger corruption in our politics.

The power of greed is a mighty force. Once let loose on our schools, it will monetize the children.

Please watch this when you have a free hour.

You will be appalled and informed.

And you will be angry.

I just ordered Mark’s book.

Anthony Cody explains
here the sustained assault on the commons
, the effort to
privatize institutions that were long considered public.

He considers what happens when prisons
are privatized, creating profits by reducing the quality of service
and care. He shows why the post office is being privatized and who stands to gain.

And he summarizes the ongoing effort to privatize public schools and turn them over to corporate control.

He writes:

“It has
been decided in the halls of power, governmental and corporate,
that the way to improve schools is to unleash the power of the
marketplace. We are undergoing a transformation of huge proportions
in order to allow this to occur. Through the Common Core State
(sic) Standards, we are creating a single national marketplace for
tests, technology and curriculum – all three of which are
increasingly intertwined and removed from the control of teachers
and local communities….

“Meanwhile, our leaders
have unleashed “austerity” on the public sector, schools included.
In Chicago, the bulldozers destroyed a community reading center
treasured by local parents, capping off the closing of more than 50
public schools by Mayor Rahm Emanuel. In Philadelphia, the mayor
has been working to abandon public schools in favor of charters,
and the underfunding of the city’s schools has clergy there calling
for a student boycott.”

He concludes:

“Our schools are part of a public
heritage passed down to us. They were built in our communities with
a vision of bringing all children under the same roof to learn
together. Privatization replaces this model of the commons with one
ruled by marketplace “choices.” As we know, some people always wind
up with many more choices than others. Interviews with parents
reveal that their first choice is almost always a high quality
local public school for their children. If we shifted our public
policies away from attempting to discredit and replace these
schools, and towards supporting and strengthening them, we would be
far better off.”

The National Education Policy Center urges caution when reading the CREDO study of charter schools in New Orleans. Governor Bobby Jindal has already taken CREDO as evidence for the success of privatization.

NEPC says not so fast. In addition to technical issues in the study, the critics make the following observations:

“Even setting aside these concerns, the effect sizes reported for New Orleans—let alone for the state as a whole—are not impressive in terms of absolute magnitude. Differences of 0.12 standard deviations in reading and 0.14 in mathematics indicate that less than one half of one percent of the variation in test scores is explainable by membership in a charter school.

“The study’s methods raise concerns that the findings could easily be misinterpreted to inflate pro-charter conclusions. In context, there’s little to crow about: the results from Louisiana and New Orleans are not much different from the uninspiring national results; the results for the state’s suburban charter schools showed negative gain scores (somewhat less growth in charters than in the comparison schools); and the small positive results reported for New Orleans are confounded by the devastating aftermath of a unique disaster.”

An even more serious challenge to the study was posed by New Orleans-based “Research on Reforms,” which complained that the Louisiana Department of Education will not release student data to independent research organizations.

It wrote: “As long as the Louisiana Department of Education can determine to whom to release student records for research purposes, the reports produced thereof, such as the CREDO report, are nothing more than biased evaluations.”

“The Department of Education (DOE) maintains that it has the discretion to release de-identified student-level records to selected researchers, and that it has the discretion to deny the same student records to other researchers. And, for the past few years, that is what the DOE has done. CREDO received the student records, and, Research on Reforms, Inc., who submitted a public records request for the same student records, was denied. As long as the DOE gets to select its evaluators, i.e., its researchers, the impact of the state-takeover and the charter school movement will never be objectively evaluated.

“Specifically, the Department of Education (DOE) released de-identified student-level records to CREDO for the school years 2008-09, 2009-10, and 2010-11 and denied the student level records for the same school years to Research on Reforms, Inc. (ROR). Thus, ROR sued the DOE in October 2012 for violation of Louisiana’s Public Records Act. The matter is now in Civil District Court.”

Charles Blow is one of the columnists in the New York Times that I usually count on to challenge the conventional wisdom and to speak up for the powerless.

Sadly, in this column, he parrots the conventional wisdom and voices the opinions of the elites.

Imagine, he calls the Broad Foundation a “reform” organization. The readers of this blog know the Broad Foundation as the source of malicious policies that are privatizing public schools and destroying communities. Some of the worst, most arrogant leaders in US education have been “trained” by the unaccredited Broad Academy. The foundation issued a guide on how to close schools that is a Bible for the corporate reform movement.

As for the international test scores, Blow should not have relied on Time magazine’s Amanda Ripley. He should have looked at the Rothstein-Carnoy study, which demonstrates that the PISA results were misleading, or the recent article in the UK Times Educational Supplement, where test experts maintained that the scores on PISA are “meaningless,” or considered the more recent TIMSS test, where American students did very well. Or read the chapter in my new book on the myths and facts about international testing.

Why in the world would he enthuse about the Common Core tests, which widened the gaps in New York between affluent and poor, between black and white, between English language learners and native speakers, between children with disabilities and those without? Common Core has no evidence to support its claims. As we see it in action in New York, we see that it is deepening the stratification of society and falsely labeling two-thirds of the state’s children as failures.

This piece about “disruption” was cross-posted on Huffington Post, meaning that I wrote it this morning, got an invitation from HuffPost to write something, and offered to put this post in both places.

I may do this with future blogs, to help spread the message of hope and good cheer about the growing movement to free our schools from the heavy hands of the corporate reformers.

Feel free to go to Huffington Post and leave a comment on the article there.

This is part of our message, those of us who are trying to change the narrative.

Let’s work together to inform the public that the train has not left the station.

There is nothing inevitable about current misguided policies.

The train has not left the station.

The train is headed right for a cliff.

It is time to change direction.

And it is happening.

Americans like their neighborhood public schools.

They don’t want to see them closed and replaced by a school to which they must apply for admission.

They don’t like standardized testing.

They love their teachers.

They don’t want their teachers rated by the test scores of their students.

Common sense will win.

I promise.

Earlier today, I published Judith Shulevitz’s brilliant essay on “disruption” as a business strategy.

As we know, mega-corporations believe they must continually reinvent themselves in order to have the latest, best thing and beat their competitors, who are about to overtake them in the market.

They believe in disruption as a fundamental rule of the marketplace.

By some sloppy logic or sleight-of-hand, the financial types and corporate leaders who think they should reform the nation’s schools have concluded that the schools should also be subject to “creative disruption” or just plain “disruption.”

And so we have the unaccredited Broad Superintendents Academy, underwritten by billionaire Eli Broad, sending out superintendents who are determined to “disrupt” schools by closing them and handing them over to private management.

Unfortunately, Secretary Arne Duncan agrees that disruption is wonderful, so he applauds the idea of closing schools, opening new schools, inviting the for-profit sector to compete for scarce funds, and any other scheme that might disrupt schools as we know them.

He does this believing that U.S. education is a failed enterprise and needs a mighty shaking-up.

First, he is wrong to believe that U.S. public education is failing. I document that he is wrong in my new book, Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and The Danger to America’s Public Schools, using graphs from the U.S. Department of Education website.

Second, “disruption” is a disaster for children, families, schools, and communities.

Think of little children. They need continuity and stability, not disruption. They need adults who are a reliable presence in their lives. But, following the logic of the corporate reformers, their teachers are fired, their school is closed, everything must be brand new or the kids won’t learn.  No matter how many parents and children turn out at school board meetings to plead for the life of their neighborhood schools, the hammer falls and it is closed. This is absurd.

Think of adolescents. When they misbehave, we say they are “disruptive.” Now we are supposed that their disruptive behavior represents higher order thinking.

But no one can learn when one student in a class of thirty is disruptive.

Disruptive policies harm families because after the closing of the neighborhood school, they are expected to shop for a school. They are told they have “choice,” but the one choice denied to them is their neighborhood school. Maybe one of their children is accepted as the School of High Aspirations, but the other didn’t get accepted and is enrolled in the School for Future Leaders on the other side of town. That is not good for families.

Disruption is not good for communities. In most communities, the public school is the anchor of community life. It is where parents meet, talk about common problems, work together, and learn the fundamental processes of democratic action.

Disruption destroys local democracy. It atomizes families and communities, destroying their ability to plan and act together on behalf of their community.

By closing their neighborhood school, disruption severs people from the roots of their community. It fragments community.

It kneecaps democracy.

City after city is now suffering a “disruptive” assault on public education. Mayor Rahm Emanuel closed dozens of schools in Chicago; Mayor Michael Bloomberg closed dozens of schools in New York City; public education in Detroit is dying; Philadelphia public schools are on life support, squeezed by harsh budget cuts and corporate faith in disruption and privatization.

But the disruptive strategy won’t be confined to urban districts. As the tests for the new national Common Core standards are introduced in state after state, disruption and havoc will produce what corporate reformers are hoping for: a loss of faith in public education; a conviction that it is broken beyond repair; and a willingness to try anything, even to allow for-profit vendors to take over the responsibilities of the public sector. That is already happening in many states, where hundreds of milllions of dollars are siphoned away from public schools and handed over to disruptive commercial enterprises. It doesn’t produce better education, but it produces profits.

Maybe that is the point of disruption.

One of our loyal readers in Boston informs us that one candidate in the Boston mayoral race–Rob Consalvo– has appealed to his fellow candidates to refuse funding from out-of-state groups.

Fat chance.

Not only is Stand on Children (allegedly based in Oregon) throwing in between $500,000-750,000, but other groups including New York-based Democrats for Education Reform (the Wall Street hedge fund managers) have taken a keen interest in the race.

It would not be surprising to see Michelle Rhee’s StudentsFirst sending money to John Connolly–the choice of Stand on Children–and also to see the arrival of hundreds of thousands of dollars–maybe millions– from New York City Michael Bloomberg, Los Angeles billionaire Eli Broad, Netflix owner Reed Hastings, publishing magnate Rupert Murdoch, and the billionaire Walton family. These individuals have added big dough to school board races in Louisiana, Idaho, Georgia, and California.

Local school boards should be chosen by the people of the school district, not purchased by billionaires with a hunger for power and control, which they use to privatize public education.