Archives for category: Democrats for Education Reform

Who is the miracle reformer of Colorado? Who wrote its law to evaluate teachers by their test scores? Who claimed that his high school graduated 100% of its seniors and sent them to college? Who so lauded by President Obama and DFER? Whose legislation became a model for ALEC? Why, Michael Johnston, of course.

Mercedes Schneider continues her portrait of the board of NCTQ by looking into Johnston’s history. NCTQ is the organization that tells the nation how to get high-quality teachers.

Previous posts by Schneider have included Wendy Kopp, Michelle Rhee, and Joel Klein, who have a cumulative teaching experience of three years among them (Rhee’s).

Just when you thought politics could not get weirder, we learn that a public relations guy is running a campaign against President Obama’s pick for Defense Secretary, Chuck Hagel.

Turns out the campaign is run by Bradley Tusk, who has the following connections: Former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Michelle Rhee’s StudentsFirst, and Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy. He also ran the NY campaign to lift the cap on charters, paid for by the Wall Street crowd and Mayor Bloomberg.

This is one of the strangest set of links in politics today.

Remember when decisions about schools were made by the superintendent and the principals? And when teachers closed their door and their classroom was their domain? That was long, long ago.

An organization called Students for Education Reform is popping up on various campuses to advocate for corporate reforms.

This article by George Joseph in The Nation explores who they are and who funds them.

It is hard to understand why students would demand more standardized testing and why they would support a movement that attacks teachers and wants teachers to be held accountable for what students do. Shouldn’t students be held accountable for what students do?

All around the nation, brave students are saying “no” to the corporate reform movement that wants to turn them into standardized data points.

But not SFER, which is an offshoot of the Wall Street hedge fund managers’ group called DFER. They want to be standardized. They want to be data points. They want more tests. Please, won’t someone test them and publish their scores?

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.

In this video, a father tells a scary story to his little girl as he tucks her in at night.

It is about the greedy Fatcats who are trying to close Chicago’s public schools and take them private.

This is a creative use of social media to educate the public.

Many people have asked the question.

Some are idealistic.

Some think they know how to reform schools.

Some think that all schools should be like KIPP.

Some think that the free market cures everything.

But others see profits.

Julian Vasquez Heilig explains it here.

Juan Gonzalez came to the same answer over two years ago.

In 2000, Congress passed the New Markets Tax Credit as part of the Community Renewal Tax Relief Act.

This act gives tax credits for investing in certain kinds of projects.

Investors can make large profits.

That explains a lot.

That explains why so many hedge fund managers poured money into state and local school board races in 2012, but only for candidates who support more charter schools.

John Podesta, who heads the Center for American Progress and headed the 2008 Obama transition team, was a keynote speaker at Jeb Bush’s DC gala.

He called on his fellow “reformers” to work in harmony with unions, even though nearly 90% of charter schools are non-union schools.

“Reform” (I.e. privatization) “is not a foregone conclusion.”

It is important to win the acquiescence of unions, especially now that the public is pushing back and trying to ward off the attack of the billionaires and hedge fund managers.

It seems the public is not yet completely sold on the idea of handing the public schools over to entrepreneurs.

Funny, that.

Joanne Barkan has written an excellent summary of how public education fared in the recent elections.

Barkan knows how to follow the money. Her article “Got Dough?” showed the influence of the billionaires on education policy.

She begins her analysis of the 2012 elections with this overview of Barack Obama’s embrace of GOP education dogma:

“Barack Obama’s K-12 “reform” policies have brought misery to public schools across the country: more standardized testing, faulty evaluations for teachers based on student test scores, more public schools shut down rather than improved, more privately managed and for-profit charter schools soaking up tax dollars but providing little improvement, more money wasted on unproven computer-based instruction, and more opportunities for private foundations to steer public policy. Obama’s agenda has also fortified a crazy-quilt political coalition on education that stretches from centrist ed-reform functionaries to conservatives aiming to undermine unions and privatize public schools to right-wingers seeking tax dollars for religious charters. Mitt Romney’s education program was worse in only one significant way: Romney also supported vouchers that allow parents to take their per-child public-education funding to private schools, including religious schools.”

Barkan’s analysis shows significant wins for supporters of public education–the upset of uber-reformer Tony Bennett in Indiana, the repeal of the Luna laws in Idaho, and the passage of a tax increase in California–and some significant losses–the passage of charter initiatives in Georgia and Washington State.

The interesting common thread in many of the key elections was the deluge of big money to advance the anti-public education agenda.

Even more interesting is how few people put up the big money. If Barkan were to collate a list of those who contributed $10,000 or more to these campaigns, the number of people on the list would be very small, maybe a few hundred. If the list were restricted to $20,000 or more, it would very likely be fewer than 50 people, maybe less.

This tiny number of moguls is buying education policy in state after state. How many have their own children in the schools they seek to control? Probably none.

The good news is that they don’t win every time. The bad news is that their money is sometimes sufficient to overwhelm democratic control of public education.

Katie Osgood reviews Chris Hayes’ new book “Twilight of the Elites” and ponders how the elites–the so-called best and the brightest–are now running education policy. Their ideas fail and fail but they boldly push ahead, utterly unfixed by the damage they inflict on others. They enjoy money, power, prestige, unlike those poor teachers and children whose lives they mess up with their hapless schemes.

Students for Education Reform at New York University and Columbia University plan a march to demand that the New York City United Federation of Teachers and the Bloomberg administration reach an agreement on test-based teacher evaluation. These groups are off-shoots of Democrats for Education Reform, the group founded by Wall Street hedge fund managers, the guys with annual incomes in the multiple millions, most of whom went to elite private schools.

The members of SFER pay more in tuition each year than a typical teacher’s annual income. They are students at elite universities. They obviously do not know that testing experts have found the evaluation system called “value-added assessment” to be inaccurate and unstable.

Why are they pushing teachers to accept an invalid measure? Why are these students, many of whom went to private schools that never use standardized tests, so eager to impose standardized tests on public school children and their teachers? Why do they want to see teachers rated and fired based on the results of standardized tests?

They should act like students, read the studies conducted by Jesse Rothstein of Berkeley, Linda Darling-Hammond at Stanford, and the joint statement of the National Academy of Education and the American Educational Research Association.

They should not disgrace themselves in public by promoting ideas they do not understand.