Archives for category: Corporate Reformers

This is a really good article by Rick Hess of the DeVos-funded American Enterprise Institute about reformers’ credulous embrace of every claim made by D.C. and using it as their model for the success of “reform.” Having elevated D.C. as their paradigm, they were unprepared for and blindsided by the recent graduation-rate scandal.

He faults the Washington Post, for its infatuation with Michelle Rhee and Kaya Henderson. And he faults President Obama for saluting a fake graduation rate increase.

Kudos to Rick for his fearless chastising of his compatriots.

He writes:

“Lots of self-styled “reformers” had good reason to observe DCPS through rose-tinted glasses. A wealth of advocates, funders, consultants, researchers, and friends had a rooting interest in DCPS’s success — and had every incentive to focus on the good news. This includes the senior author of this piece, who counted many DCPS leaders as friends of long standing — and who wrote admiringly about some of their efforts.

“After all, Washington, D.C., as much as any city over the past decade, served as a laboratory where philanthropists, policy analysts, and high profile media outlets converge. Philanthropists have poured more than $120 million into the school system since 2007. By 2010, the nation’s largest 15 philanthropies were spending more on K-12 education in D.C. than in any other school district in America.”

Curiously, he places some of the blame on critics of these fraudulent reforms, because their criticism made the reformers circle their wagons.

Maybe the reformers should have listened to critics like Guy Brandenburg and others who blew the whistle early on, instead of closing their ears and circling the wagons. Maybe they should have taken seriously the testing scandal that USA Today reported in 2011, instead of sweeping it under the rug.

Categories Accountability, Corporate Reformers, District of Columbia, Education Industry, Education Reform, Fraud, Privatization, Testing

Why Cynthia Nixon Has a Chance to Beat Andrew Cuomo

By dianeravitch

March 21, 2018 //

This is a good article in the New York Daily News by Alyssa Katz, of the Daily News about Cynthia Nixon’s challenge to Andrew Cuomo in the Democratic primary in New York.

She says that Cynthia Nixon should not be written off.

Cuomo has raised $30 million, almost all of it from fat cats and Wall Street.

Nixon, unlike Cuomo, is a genuine progressive.

Cuomo has helped Republicans retain control of the State Senate, even though Democrats have a numerical majority. Cuomo has allied himself with a breakaway group of rightwing Democrats (the Independent Democratic Caucus), who side with the Republicans and keep the Republicans in power. At Cuomo’s last election, he persuaded the Working Families Party to endorse him by promising to help Democrats win back the Senate. The day after he won the WFP endorsement, he broke his promise. That is why the leader of the State Senate is a rightwing Republican, John Flanagan, who defeats every progressive measure.

Nixon promises to change Albany’s culture of corruption. One of Cuomo’s closest aides was recently convicted of taking bribes.

She is way ahead of Cuomo on education issues. She went to public school, and she sends her own children to public schools. She understands that the state has failed to fund the public schools in response to court orders. She knows that Cuomo does the bidding of the charter industry, who have given generously to Cuomo. She knows that Cuomo supports vouchers, in a blatant appeal to religious groups. She remembers that Cuomo promised to “break up the public education monopoly” by funding billionaire-backed charters.

Cynthia is intelligent, quick on her feet, and unafraid of Cuomo, who likes to bully people.

At Cuomo’s last Democratic primary four years ago, Zephyr Teachout won 34% of the vote, with no money or media exposure or name recognition. She swept upstate New York. Now she is treasurer of Cynthia Nixon’s campaign.

If Nixon can win Teachout’s 34% by building on her New York City appeal, and add to it with the free media and name recognition that Teachout never had, Cuomo should worry.

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Cuomo, Andrew, Education Industry, New York, Privatization, Vouchers

Nancy Flanagan: Do Not Trust “Education Trust”

By dianeravitch

March 20, 2018 //

Earlier today, I posted an article criticizing Michigan’s floundering and unaccountable charter schools, based on a report by Education Trust Midwest. I have long known EdTrust as a DC-based organization heavily funded by the Gates Foundation as a cheerleader for high-stakes Testing as the remedy for low test scores of black and brown children. Last night, I saw a tweet that referenced the PIE Network, a collection of 70 corporate education reform groups spread across the nation, all committed to the testing and privatization network. There in Michigan was Education Trust Midwest. Check it and seee which groups in your state are part of this insidious network.

In a comment posted earlier on the blog, Nancy Flanagan, a veteran teacher and blogger, offers reasons not to trust EdTrust on the topic of charter schools.

She writes:

“I once was on the dias with Amber Arellano for a panel discussion on improving MI schools. The setting was an event for Oakland County school boards. Oakland County is Michigan’s richest county, and most of its public school districts are well-regarded, among the top-scoring districts in the state. The audience was elected school board members for these PUBLIC school districts, people who were presumably focused on improving the educational offerings and succcesses in the districts they represented.

“And what did Amber Arellano, Education Trust Midwest’s glamorous and charismatic CEO want to talk about? Charter schools and increasing choice. She framed her remarks by noting the number of failed charters in nearby Detroit. Left unsaid, but hanging in the air: Charters in Oakland County wouldn’t fail, because, well… let’s just say that the student populations would be different. Oakland County kids would benefit from an array of boutique charters for students’ individual passions and interests. Oakland County charters would be managed by innovative educators.

“That was her message. I was stunned. Wasn’t this audience dedicated to preserving public education?? Evidently not, as she was surrounded, after the program, by would-be innovators and entrepreneurs, wanting her advice on how to capitalize on MI’s charter laws.

“Her chief talking point is reflected in the report: You, too, can start a charter, but to sustain it, you must generate “good data.”

“This is the next logical step in Michigan’s utterly failed charter movement (driven by terrible legislation): First, we attract families to charters in areas (like Detroit) where public schools are in intense poverty and have been mismanaged by the state. The low-hanging fruit. Then, we go after the school districts that aren’t in trouble, while pointing fingers at the charters (and charter operators) who are taking on the most troubled kids. We can do better, we tell them.

“The purpose of this report is to spread the charter movement into solidly performing public districts who have thus far resisted the lure of the boutique charter, by once again contrasting (mostly white) children of privilege with children in struggling, underfunded schools in our poorest cities and rural areas.”

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Privatization, Testing

Julian Vasquez Heilig: KIPP and #NotUs in California

By dianeravitch

March 12, 2018 //

Julian Vasquez Heilig calls BS on KIPP in California, where they are pushing a KIPP charter into a community that doesn’t want them.

The local district, already financially drained by charters, rejected them. The county district rejected them. As in, go away. Now they are applying to the state board, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the California Charter School lobby.

”KIPP is now trying to insert more schools into the San Francisco Bay Area. But they are having a problem. They ran into some snags in the local authorizing process. First, the local district said that there are now more charters than neighborhood public schools and they are teetering on financial disaster. Their march towards bankruptcy is occurring even with increased funding from the state the past few years because the loss of students to charters has resulted in massive budget shortfalls. After their 3-2 denial by the district, KIPP then went to the county for their second and final attempt at local authorizing. However, that didn’t go well for KIPP because the county wanted assurances that that KIPP would abide by AB 1090, which is a California financial conflict of interest law. KIPP refused to abide by California financial conflict of interest laws. What!?

“Charters talk on and on about how interested they are in transparency and accountability #NotUs. They tell legislators that they are abiding by the law #NotUs. Then they tell other people that the law doesn’t apply to them (See video below) #NotUs. This sort of malfeasance goes on and on because we allow charters to talk out of two sides of their mouth. We also allow the “good” charters to say, “We are good” and of course there is some “bad.” #NotUs Which ultimately provides cover for the entire sector at the expense of transparency and accountability for children, families and taxpayers.”

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

Oakland Mom Has a Question

By dianeravitch

March 8, 2018 //

I can’t vouch for any of the details in this comment but it is posted and now in the blogosphere. So I invite readers who are familiar with the details to write comments and, if needed, corrections. I offer the same invitation to any of those mentioned her, to set the record straight.

She writes:

”Was hoping someone on this thread could advise on a similar contract issue here in Oakland. During the 2016-2017 school year, our board, under the approval of Antwan Wilson, sole-sourced a contract with Blueprint Schools Network. Blueprint would provide Math Fellows, via Americorps, for tutoring in 5 middle schools here. How much? How does a cool $1M sound? (with the add-ons). You’d think for that kind of money, our high-needs students would get actual educators with master’s degrees. Nope, Americorps volunteers only had to have a high school diploma. Half of the original contract for $835,000 (!) went to administrators in Blueprint Schools. The actual Math Fellows, were paid a pittance of around $25,000 with health benefits for one year, plus a $5K bonus upon completion.

“BSN is headed up by Matthew Spengler. Who is he? Harvard ed-reformer who was principal of a small district high school here, Met West. He then went on to work as a Director at Harvard’s EduLabs figuring out all kinds of neat experiments he could use on our students. Then, he found some superintendents who were willing to farm out their students for Mr. Spengler’s ed experiments, including, you guessed it, Antwan Wilson and Denver Public Schools. Next, Antwan Wilson shows up in Oakland, with Mr. Spengler close behind, ready to peddle his “tutoring” Math Fellows to our highest-needs students. And, bingo, the Board approves a sole-source $1M contract, just like that.

“Blueprint Schools end game is really data-mining. OUSD pays a fortune for an unproven program from an organization whose mission is to apply charter reforms to public schools. BSN gets all the data they want; I’m sure the participants/parents have no idea.

”This sole source agreement for essentially low-paid, unskilled “teaching” labor for $1M just doesn’t pass the sniff test. I’m going out a limb and saying it’s both illegal and immoral, but here we are. Any advice?”

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

Tom Ultican: California School Administrators Endorse Favorite of Billionaire Boys Club

By dianeravitch

March 6, 2018 //

As retired high school teacher Tom Ultican writes: This makes no sense.

The California Association of School Administrators endorsed Marshall Tuck, the candidate of the privatization movement, in the race for State Superintendent of Instruction, and snubbed Tony Thurmond, a steadfast friend of public education.

The Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) Back-Stabs Public Education

Read his post to see where Tuck’s money comes from. It’s the Destroy Public Education Movement.

The old familiar faces. Walton, Broad, Jobs,Hastings, Fischer. And more that you will recognize.

I urge my friends in California to vote for Tony Thurmond. He supports public schools, and we should support him.

Categories Billionaires, California, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization, Supporting public schools

The Horace Mann League Honors Carol Burris as Outstanding Friend of Public Education: This is What She Said

By dianeravitch

March 6, 2018 //

The Horace Mann League honored Carol Burris as the Outstanding Friend of Public Education of the year. The award was presented by the distinguished research scientist David Berliner.

Burris, who has has a long career as a teacher and much-honored principal in Rockville Center, Long Island, New York, released her notes.

She said:

“Thank you, David, for your kind remarks. And to all, thank you so much for this wonderful honor. To receive an award in Horace Mann’s name—well no award could be more treasured. I am thrilled. I also deeply appreciate the opportunity to speak to all of you today.

“I am often asked if I am afraid for the future of public education. No, I am not afraid. Fear is an inadequate descriptor. I am terrified. Here is why.

“Earlier this month, at the American Enterprise Institute this is how Jeb Bush defined public school districts.:

“12 or 13,000 government-run, unionized, politicized, monopolies. “We call them school districts,” he said.

“When I hear someone define a system of community schools, governed by unpaid volunteers elected by their neighbors as a “government-run, unionized, politicized, monopolies”– there is one thing I know for sure about the speaker—he does not want to improve that system, he does not want to compete with that system, he wants to destroy it.

“This is a summary of the state of school privatization in the United States today:

*15 states have voucher programs, some have several that cater to different student groups.
*6 states have Education Savings Accounts. New Hampshire will likely approve an ESA program within months, bringing the total to seven.
*18 states have tax tuition credit/scholarship programs. Many of these programs give a 100% credit to businesses for donations to scholarships for private schools which makes them a pass-through of public funds to private schools. Some allow the donations to become profitable when they are also deducted on federal returns.
*9 states have individual tax credits and deductions for private school tuition.
*44 states allow charter schools. Of those 44, only 4 vest full authority to the district.
*4 states allow for-profit charters, and 36 states all for-profit management to run the nonprofit charter schools.
*36 states allow virtual online charter schools, nearly all of which are for-profit.

“Of all of the various school privatization schemes, Educational Savings Accounts are in my opinion, the worst. They have become the preferred program of the Koch Brothers, the Goldwater Institute, the Friedman Foundation, Jeb Bush and others. ESAs are at their essence a cynical ploy that reduces society’s obligation to educate our nation’s youth to the dropping of tax dollars onto a debit card

“6 states have ESAs: Arizona, Florida, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Nevada. Nevada’s program is non-operational and unfunded. Last year, more than 20 state legislatures introduced ESA bills, with the proposed programs nearly always going by a different name. For example, ESAs are called Gardiner Scholarships in Florida, Individualized Education Accounts in Tennessee and Empowerment Scholarships in Arizona. Despite the different names, intended to hide, the joint effort by ALEC to promote the same basic bill, they operate in similar ways.

“Parents pledge to not enroll their son or daughter in a public school or a charter school. In exchange, they get nearly all of what the public school would have spent (usually 90%) placed on a debit card or in an account. This unaccountable and unregulated system is one in which families could easily be victimized by misinformation, false claims, profiteering and fraud. This is not lost on the proponents of ESAs. That is why they have developed all kinds of language to make ESAs seem hip and cutting edge. For example, parents are called “customizers” who choose “a la carte services” that they can select from online marketplaces. What they are really advocating, however, is a return to a time prior to the 1830s when schooling was a haphazard event for all but the wealthy.

“We are in this moment at a critical junction. There are states that are reaching a privatization tipping point from which they will not be able to recover. School districts in Indiana are shutting down—Muncie is about to be taken over by Ball State University which will turn all of its schools to charter schools. There are places where the only options that kids have are charter schools and voucher schools—schools that open and close. In Indiana, charters are shut after years of dismal performance only to be resurrected as voucher schools.

“We need to have the moral courage to say this is not OK.

“I am horrified every time I hear a superintendent say—I am not afraid of competition. Just give me a level playing field. If you want competition on a level playing field, join a hockey team.

“Your professional and ethical obligation is to provide the best and most equitable opportunities your community can afford to give kids. Competition for students will inevitably result in decisions not in the best interest of all kids. I have seen that happen time and again.

“You must assume your authority based on your expertise and your experience.

“No, parents do not always know best when it comes to designing a sound education for their children. Your expertise is critical when it comes determining a child’s educational needs. Doctors do not hand over their prescription pads to parents to prescribe what they want. The police do not allow parents to serve alcohol and drugs to their minor children and their friends in their basements. Children are not chattel. It takes a village to raise a child, not an online shopping cart.

“We commonly fund our schools because we all have a stake in doing the best we can to make sure we have physically and emotionally healthy, well-educated citizens. The era of reform is NOW the status quo. The results are in…. Students do no better in charter schools than public schools, they do worse in voucher schools and online schools are a dismal failure by any measure except profit.

“As superintendents, you have a bully pulpit. Speak truth to your community. Speak truth to your legislators. Don’t let Horace down on your watch. Thank you.”

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Network for Public Education, Privatization, Supporting public schools

Los Angeles: Should a Board Member Stay on the Board When He Been Charged with Commiting Felonies?

By dianeravitch

March 5, 2018 //

Sara Roos, blogger in Los Angeles, poses this question. Why should Ref Rodriguez keep his seat on the LAUSD school board when he has been charged with commiting involving financial fraud during his election campaign? But that’s not all. Ref founded a charter school chain, which complained to authorities about Ref’s misuse of its funding.

The Los Angeles Times reported:

Rodriguez, 46, faces three felony charges for conspiracy, perjury and procuring and offering a false or forged instrument, as well as 25 misdemeanor counts related to the alleged campaign money laundering.

At a preliminary hearing, prosecutors lay out their case before a judge, who must decide whether there is enough evidence for the defendant to stand trial. In court Wednesday, Judge Deborah S. Brazile, drawing on prosecutors’ estimates, said that the hearing in this case could last up to six days,

Unless there is a postponement, Brazile on May 9 will assign the case to a trial judge, who would have two days to begin the hearing.

Prosecutors say Rodriguez carried out a scheme in which friends and relativesdonated more than $24,000 to his campaign, with the understanding that Rodriguez would reimburse them fully. He could have donated the money legally to his own campaign, but Rodriguez allegedly broke the law by concealing the true source of the contributions — denying voters accurate information about support for his campaign, according to the L.A. County district attorney’s office and the Los Angeles Ethics Commission.

His cousin, Elizabeth Tinajero Melendrez, faces related misdemeanor charges. Prosecutors contend that she helped Rodriguez solicit and illegally reimburse the donors. She also has pleaded not guilty.

The case is complicated by separate conflict-of-interest allegations, first reported in the Los Angeles Times, that have to do with Rodriguez’s former role as a senior executive at a local charter school group.

Officials at the charter group, Partnerships to Uplift Communities, recently alleged that in 2014, Rodriguez signed or co-signed $265,000 in checks drawn on PUC accounts that were payable to a separate nonprofit under his control. That same year, they allege, Rodriguez authorized payments of $20,400 to a private company called Better 4 You Fundraising, in which he may have owned a stake at the time.

At a previous court appearance, Deputy Dist. Atty. Susan Ser said her team was examining whether to charge Rodriguez in the alleged conflicts of interest.

If he were a teacher, he would be fired.

If he were a principal, he would be fired.

If he were a superintendent, he would be fired.

But he stays on as a member because the charter school lobby spent millions to buy control of the board, and they can’t risk losing his seat in a new election. His vote may be decisive in choosing a new superintendent for the district.

Does California have ethics laws for public officials? Can they retain their position after indictment? If he is not guilty, he can run again. But it sets a terrible example for students to pretend that an indictment on felony offenses is a trivial matter.

Sara has a petition on her post. Please consider signing it.

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Los Angeles, Privatization

Gary Rubinstein: Where Have the Reform Stars of Yesteryear Gone?

By dianeravitch

March 5, 2018 //

Gary Rubinstein admits that he misses the big names of reform whose stars have flickered out: Michelle Rhee, Joel Klein, Arne Duncan, Cami Anderson, and those others whose words could be picked apart and ridiculed.

Gary says the successors to the golden oldies are not nearly as much fun. He explains by quoting at length from the current leader of Teach for America, whose prose is flat, bland, and blah. She even quotes George W. Bush on the “soft bigotry of low expectations.” How low can you go? Well, maybe some day she will quote Donald J. Trump to inspire the troops.

He writes:

“The disappearance of the reform rock stars and replacement by this new breed of bland understudies was a first step in the collapse of the reform movement. Trump and DeVos surely have not helped Democrats continue to embrace ‘school choice’ as a viable solution. Then, you knew it had to happen eventually, Bill Gates recently came out and admitted that teacher evaluation reform didn’t work as well as he had predicted so he is going to instead work on curriculum development. Whether or not the reform movement is merely ‘playing possum’ right now and playing dead while really planning their next wave of attack (some are giddy about the upcoming Janus Supreme Court case), I suppose we will find out in the years to come.”