Archives for category: Corporate Reformers

Labor lawyer comments on the Rocketship post:

“Rocketship operates charters that enroll students via application. Therefore, it necessarily follows that the Rocketship will enroll a different mix of students than the low-SES-area neighborhood public schools. In low-SES areas, many parents are too unconcerned/dysfunctional to learn about the charter, to successfully complete the application process, and to provide daily transportation to the charter. The neighborhood public school will enroll all of the children of the unconcerned/dysfunctional parents as well as some of the children of he concerned/functional parents (who decide not to enroll in Rocketship). Rocketship, by contrast, will enroll only children of the concerned/functional parents.

“For this reason, it is comparing apples to oranges to compare Rocketship test scores with neighborhood public school test scores.

“If Rocketship thinks it has discovered the secret to effectively educating low-SES-area students, let Rocketship take over a low-SES-area neighborhood school — enrolling all the neighborhood school children and only the neighborhood school children — and let’s see how Rocketship’s model works when Rocketship has the same apples as the neighborhood public school.”

This is a puzzling story. At Crenshaw High School in Los Angeles, teachers, administrators, students, and the community leaders worked together to improve te school. It seemed to be working. The school made enormous gains.

But then Superintendent John Deasey stepped in and pulled the plug. He will reconstitute the school, break it up into four small schools, fire the staff, and start over. The staff can reapply for heir old jobs, but half or more are not likely to be invited back.

The school seemed to be turning itself around. White harsh measures?

Can anyone explain?

John Merrow raised this question in his PBS show about Rocketship charters.

I have not visited one of these schools so do not pass judgement on them. I can say without qualification that I would not want my grandchildren to attend a school where children spent two hours a day in front of a computer screen doing point and click. I have heard that these charters offer no art or music. I hope that’s not true. I will wait to hear from others.

But the key question here is: Is it possible to “mass produce” a high quality school.

My assumption here is that the goal is to cut costs by replacing teachers with computers and having a “system” that can be managed by inexperienced, low-cost teachers.

My answer is that the question is an oxymoron. Any school that is “mass produced” [i.e., teacher-proofed] cannot be high quality. Just as one cannot mass produce a string quartet, or mass produce great families, or great anything, one cannot mass produce a great school. A high quality school has a culture made up of its principal and teachers. They cannot be mass produced. Period.

John Merrow’s show last night was called: Profiling Rocketship Education

“Rocketship Education operates seven schools in San Jose, California that are among the top performing low income schools in the state. The dream was to eventually serve one million students. Although others have tried, nobody has successfully mass produced a high quality, cost effective school model. Will Rocketship be the first?”

Jersey Jazzman reports on a massive dump of emails about Mark Zuckerberg’s gift of $100 million to “save” Newark’s schools. The emails were released on Christmas Eve, with the expectation that no one would notice them. There never was any expectation that much of the money would reach the children of Newark. A big chunk has been used to pay consultants, but the largest portion is being applied to underwrite merit pay in the Newark teachers’ contract. This will make that contract a national model, but only if Mark Zuckerberg is willing to pony up billions of his personal wealth to fund merit pay everywhere else.

Read this post. It shows the reformers acting about as cynical and cravenly political as anything you are likely to read for a long time. And don’t forget, as you try to imagine where that $100 million is going, “it’s for the children”

Dennis Sparks has written a powerful post about the narrative of failure and decline that is now being cynically employed to privatize public education. Many of those now telling this story stand to benefit by taking over schools, firing teachers, and replacing them with computers, or selling the computers and software that replace the teachers. Or selling the tests that prove that no one knows anything and then sells the test prep materials to do better next time, and then sells the test security to make sure no one is cheating on the tests.

This is a message for corporate reformers from Katie Osgood.

I hope it will be read carefully by the folks at Democrats for Education Reform, Stand for Children, ALEC, Teach for America, Education Reform Now, StudentsFirst, the Gates Foundation, the Walton Foundation, the Broad Foundation, the Dell Foundation, Bellweather Partners, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, the Heartland Institute, the NewSchools Venture Fund, and, of course, the U.S. Department of Education.

Please forgive me if I inadvertently left your name off the list of the reform movement. If I did, read it anyway.

Katie Osgood teaches children in a psychiatric hospital in Chicago. She knows a lot about how children fail, how they suffer, and how our institutions and policies fail them.

Please read her short essay. Help it go viral if you can.

Arthur Goldstein, who teaches ESL and English in a Queens, New York, high school, writes a consistently excellent blog (nyceducator.com).

In this post, he raises an intriguing question: Why is that reformers can criticize teachers nonstop and say ridiculous things about them but get twisted into paroxysms of outrage if anyone dares to defend teachers or–heavens–their right to belong to a union?

Goldstein is one of our very best teacher bloggers. What makes a teacher blogger excellent? First, they write from their experience and know what they are talking about. Two, they write well, without jargon. Three, they have occasional (and sometimes more than occasional) flashes of humor. Four, they are unafraid.

Do you know other great teacher bloggers? Please call out their names. I want to follow them.

Drop whatever you are doing, and read this. EduShyster serves up a delightful portrait of an award-winning school in Minneapolis that embodies every new reform strategy. And here is the best part: It hasn’t opened yet! It won’t open until next September and it is already a great success!

 

 

Diana Senechal has written a thoughtful reflection on the tendency of policymakers to foist big ideas on education. Fads come and go. The ones we live with today, say I, seem especially pernicious because they are backed by the power of the state in alliance with the profit motive.

Yet I remain confident that truly bad ideas will fade away. This is not from a sense of resignation or historical inevitability, but because I believe that educators and parents and school boards will rise up and say “Enough!” It is beginning now, and the roar of protest will grow.

This article, published in The Times Educational Supplement (London), is an in-depth explanation of how the Global Educational Reform Movement (GERM) took shape and became powerful. Here you will meet Sir Michael Barber, who coined the idea of “deliverology,” and learn about his rapid ascent from trade union activist to Tony Blair advisor to McKinsey guru to Pearson strategist.

You will learn about the fierce struggle among advanced nations to have the highest test scores and be #1 on PISA and TIMSS.

You will watch as an ideology of struggle and compete takes over the minds of educators responsible for the care and nurturing of children.

It is an instructive and scary article.