Frank Biden, who just so happens to be Vice-President Joe Biden’s brother (he told me twice when I met him briefly at Lynn University in Palm Beach County almost two years ago), is selling charter schools. He represents a for-profit chain called Mavericks. The chain makes some big claims. The results are not so impressive. That never stops snake-oil salesmen. No one ever cured lumbago or grew new hair by rubbing in snake oil. But that never changes the pitch of the salesmen.
Archives for category: Corporate Reformers
No sooner did I blog to question the reformers’ end game than NYC teacher Marc Epstein, who has a doctorate in history, wrote to remind me that he had already asked and answered that question a year ago on Huffington Post.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marc-epstein/the-education-reformers-e_b_840831.html
Marc has lived through the closure of Jamaica High School, the school where he taught social studies for many years. He has seen barely controlled chaos as small schools were opened to replace a comprehensive high school that was once one of the city’s best. but which was turned into a dumping ground by the Department of Education.
Is he right? Has anyone in the reform camp thought through what our schools will look like after teachers have lost tenure, are stripped of all job protections, have seen their pensions and health benefits cut? Have they thought about what kinds of teachers are eager to be evaluated based on the test scores of students? Or what public education will be after the widespread adoption of privately-managed charters and of vouchers for all? Can they point to a nation that is doing these things? Do they have any idea how their ideas will change the lives of real people?
Have they thought about the consequences for other people’s children? Or the consequences for our society?
Diane
Does anyone know what the reformers’ end game is?
What do they think will happen to students and schools and the quality of education if they achieve their goals?
How will education get better if teachers live in fear of termination without cause?
How will education get better if standardized tests are the sole measure of success?
Will the “best and brightest” flock to teach if they will be rated by the test scores of their students?
Will the “best and brightest” stay in education more than a year or two if teachers are treated with disrespect?
Will education improve if teaching is no longer a profession but an at-will job?
Can anyone name any nation in the world that rates teachers by the test scores of their students? I can’t.
The reformers puzzle me.
They seem to know so little about children or motivation or schools or education, yet they are so certain they are right.
Does anyone know what their end game is?
Diane
In a commencement speech, Richard Rothstein challenged the reform narrative. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/the-fantasies-driving-school-reform-a-primer-for-education-graduates/2012/05/13/gIQA5vwzLU_blog.html
First, he demonstrated that the central thesis of “reform” is wrong: American public education is not failing.
Second, he demonstrated the dramatic progress made in recent years especially by African American students.
Third, he challenged the “reform” claim that scores are influenced solely by teachers.
Fourth, he demonstrated that social and economic conditions have a strong influence on test scores.
As he shows, and as should be obvious to all but those with hardened hearts, children have more trouble learning if they are hungry and homeless.
For reformers to treat social and economic conditions as excuses, rather than as brutal facts that must be addressed, is just plain wrong.
Of course, we won’t vanquish poverty or close the glaring income gaps in our generation.
But, shame on us if we don’t even try.
Diane
I got an email last night from Leo Casey at the United Federation of Teachers, informing me that the UFT had just received a dump of emails from the New York City Department of Education, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. Leo noticed that Deborah Meier and I were mentioned several times in the emails and so he shared the trove with us.
Pretty ugly stuff. Read it here, in two parts, if you can open a google document:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B1Ghj5xYLG5Ka0c2RUJLWHhNSmM
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B1Ghj5xYLG5KcjZTem95WjZnUUU
The first thing I noticed was the chummy exchanges between the public officials in change of the New York City public school system and the top dogs of the charter leadership–the Wall Street hedge fund managers, the leader of Democrats for Education Reform (DFER), the leader of the New York City Charter Center, and various others. It comes clear that there is a strong and concerted effort to hand over as much public space as possible to the charters. The charter leaders are not the poor and oppressed of New York City; they are the powerful and monied, and the public officials who are paid to protect and support the PUBLIC schools of New York City are working hand-in-glove to advance the interests of the privately-managed charters, not the public schools. You will also notice, in one of the emails, that the charters are very concerned to make sure that there is no cap on their executive compensation. Heaven forbid! It’s important that their leaders continue to pull down $400,000 a year to oversee a few small schools.
The collusion between those who are sworn to protect the public schools and those who are incentivized to privatize them is surely the most important thing to be gleaned from this correspondence.
For me, the other interesting point is that they are so afraid of any criticism. They are especially afraid of Deborah Meier, me and Jonathan Kozol. They refer to columns by Deborah Meier and myself–she an educator with decades of experience, I a historian with a long view–as “moronic” and “idiotic.” They refer to Jonathan Kozol and me as “deranged crackpots.”
How can anyone take these mean-spirited, ignorant, arrogant people seriously?
The only thing frightening about them is that they are clamoring–with some success–to take control of the education of innocent children. Now, that is really scary! That is the scary thing that happened last night.
Diane
Someone sent me a link to an organization I had not previously heard of. It’s called the State Government Leadership Foundation, and it sounds a lot like ALEC. It takes positions and offers policy advice on many different issues, all from a conservative point of view. After much scouring of the site, I discovered that SGLI is a 501(c)(4) organization associated with the Republican State Leadership Committee.
When I went to the section of the website on education reform, I was not surprised to encounter the usual corporate reform ideas, like school choice, ending tenure, and evaluating teachers by student test scores.
What astonished me was the education reform sector opens with a little graph titled “America the Illiterate?” The graph is accompanied by this language: “Several decades ago, American students were at the top in every subject. In that time, public school union membership has increased 600%, and now we trail China in every category.” The graphic has three arrows purporting to show that American students dropped from #1 to #25 in math literacy, from #1 to #17 in scientific literacy, and from #1 to #14 in reading literacy.
None of this is true. The first international assessments were administered in the 1960s; twelve nations participated. We scored twelfth out of twelve. In the intervening half-century, our students typically ranked in the middle or even the bottom quartile on those tests. We were never #1. Maybe those tests rate test-taking skills but they surely are not a predictor of future economic success. Our nation continued to boom economically and to encourage entreprepreneurship, creative media endeavors, and new businesses despite the unimpressive scores on international tests.
If you recall, the famous report “A Nation at Risk” complained in 1983 that our international test scores were consistently mediocre. So the claim that achievement on those tests has fallen over the decades is factually untrue. It’s no worse, and actually somewhat better, than on previous international tests.
And we are certainly NOT behind China, because China has never participated in any of the international tests. The city of Shanghai did take part in the PISA exam of 2009 and came out #1, but Shanghai is one city, not the nation of China. That would be like characterizing U.S. performance by putting only Massachusetts–our highest scoring state–in the testing pool to represent the nation.
In short, this description of U.S. Education is a pack of lies that smears our nation. I wonder if the people who created this website went to fancy prep schools and looked down their noses at those of us who went to public school. They seem so eager to put down American schools, which educated 90% of us, and by implication, put down the United States. it makes one wonder who they are. Too bad they didn’t take responsibility and put their names on their work so we would know who they are.
Diane
I just read online that Eli Broad, the Los Angeles billionaire, might buy the Los Angeles Times. Broad’s book was published this week. My first thought, speaking just as an author, was: “Some people will do anything to get a good review in their hometown paper.” http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/02/local/la-me-broad-20120503
My second thought, after a slight period of reflection (five minutes), was that it would be unfortunate if this comes to pass. Eli Broad is not shy about using his billions to advance his political agenda. I don’t know where he stands on most issues, but in education, he has been a force for distorted priorities that are harming American education. He has used his fortune to train a generation of school leaders devoted to imposing the business model onto education. Business values belong in the business office of the schools, but they don’t belong on the instructional side. Broad once told me quite frankly that he knows nothing about education, but he knows the importance of good management. I am not so sure that the graduates of his Superintendents Academy are good managers. Many have been run out of town after alienating the public. Of course, he prefers mayoral control, where the public can be ignored.
His acolytes are known for the closing and demolition of public schools in district after district. He has had a large hand in Detroit, which is now on the verge of total collapse and/or privatization. In Louisiana, a Broad-trained superintendent is leading the charge for privatization via a vast expansion of vouchers and charters. It seems that wherever a Broad graduate goes, the district or state starts closing public schools and expanding opportunities for privatization and for-profit operators. Along with their emphasis on privatization comes a devotion to high-stakes testing. The combination is not only toxic to public education but results in an approach that betrays a naive faith in the value of standardized testing. These policies are ultimately anti-intellectual, anti-education, and anti-child.
I hope he decides not to buy the Los Angeles Times. It is one of the few remaining independent dailies. I hope it stays that way.
Diane
I blog weekly for Education Week. I think it is a wonderful publication and a great newspaper of record for education.
On my blog, I have been free to write whatever I want. No one has ever told me that I can’t say what I think. I respect Education Week for that editorial independence. I mention this because a friend wrote today to ask me if I started my own blog because of problems with Education Week. Absolutely not! I just have more to say and comment on than can be contained in a weekly piece or in tweets, and sometimes I want to write something on the spur of the moment, blow off steam, or just jot down whatever I want when I want. Like now.
At this moment, I am upset that Education Week has become intertwined with the online for-profit industry. I got an email today, one of those automated things, announcing a webinar on May 8, called Education’s “Constructive Turbulence”: How Innovation and Technology Can Help Improve Student Learning. The webinar is sponsored by Apex Learning, which is a for-profit online corporation.
That bothers me. It bothers me for several reasons. First of all, I don’t like for-profit corporations that seek to replace schools. I understand that they meet certain legitimate purposes, providing instruction for students who can’t get to a physical school for whatever reason. I understand that for-profit corporations sell textbooks and testing and pencils and software and hardware. I just have this really bad feeling about for-profit schools. I keep thinking that they give more thought to profits than to pupils. I worry that the bottom line will matter more than imagination or unfettered inquiry. I hate the idea of machine-scored essays, which seems like a living example of an oxymoron.
The email says that technology–that is, the opportunity to sit your child in front of a computer for a longer period of the day or maybe the whole school day–will supposedly address the triple threat of tight budgets, teacher shortages, and the need for higher achievement. I think we should all be fighting to protest the budget cuts, not supinely accepting them as inevitable. And with so many layoffs, I am not convinced there is a teacher shortage. I think what Apex really means is that school districts can replace teachers and save money by putting more kids in front of computers and having larger classes and fewer teachers. Curious that we hear so much about the importance of education but aren’t willing to pay for really great education, which requires teachers and resources.
The other thing that really bothers me is the very notion of “Constructive Turbulence.” Why do children need turbulence in their lives? What’s “constructive” about “turbulence”? Why would be we pay a corporation to produce chaos for our children? Aren’t children’s lives sufficiently turbulent these days? Don’t they need constructive stability, constructive relationships and caring? There are far too many adults who think that children need to be in an environment of disruption and risk. I don’t know any parents who want their children’s lives to be chaotic and turbulent. That may work for entrepreneurs, but as a mother and grandmother, I don’t believe it is right for children.
Almost every day, I get an email from some sponsor telling me how entrepreneurs will re-invent education and make money at the same time. I wish they would stick to soap and toothpaste and leave our children alone.
If you haven’t seen this article by Lee Fang in The Nation about the for-profit online industry, please read it now: http://www.thenation.com/article/164651/how-online-learning-companies-bought-americas-schools?page=full. That’s an important article.
Some people say that the movement towards privatization is a juggernaut that can’t be stopped. I don’t agree. As more parents wake up to what is happening, there will be more push-back against privatization.
The push-back is happening now against high-stakes testing. It will happen against privatization too, as the public catches on to what is happening to their public schools. I heard this afternoon that Kenneth Cole decided to take down his obnoxious anti-teacher billboard. What that says to me is that corporate interests are even more sensitive to public opinion and to controversy than public officials. But that’s a subject for another blog. This juggernaut can be stopped.
Diane
