Archives for category: Disruption

 

This story was published in 2016. It remains the best single description of the chaos that free-market advocates have inflicted on the children of Detroit.

Please read it. Don’t skim it. Read it.

Detroit is a city with many choices and very few good choices. It is a city overrun with charter schools. Many of them operate for profit. The companies profit, the children lose.

“Michigan leapt at the promise of charter schools 23 years ago, betting big that choice and competition would improve public schools. It got competition, and chaos.

”Detroit schools have long been in decline academically and financially. But over the past five years, divisive politics and educational ideology and a scramble for money have combined to produced a public education fiasco that is perhaps unparalleled in the United States.

“While the idea was to foster academic competition, the unchecked growth of charters has created a glut of schools competing for some of the nation’s poorest students, enticing them to enroll with cash bonuses, laptops, raffle tickets for iPads and bicycles. Leaders of charter and traditional schools alike say they are being cannibalized, fighting so hard over students and the limited public dollars that follow them that no one thrives.

“Detroit now has a bigger share of students in charters than any American city except New Orleans, which turned almost all its schools into charters after Hurricane Katrina. But half the charters perform only as well, or worse than, Detroit’s traditional public schools.

“The point was to raise all schools,” said Scott Romney, a lawyer and board member of New Detroit, a civic group formed after the 1967 race riots here. “Instead, we’ve had a total and complete collapse of education in this city…”

“The 1993 state law permitting charter schools was not brought on by academic or financial crisis in Detroit — those would come later — but by a free-market-inclined governor, John Engler. An early warrior against public employee unions, he embraced the idea of creating schools that were publicly financed but independently run to force public schools to innovate.

“To throw the competition wide open, Michigan allowed an unusually large number of institutions, more than any other state, to create charters: public school districts, community colleges and universities. It gave those institutions a financial incentive: a 3 percent share of the dollars that go to the charter schools. And only they — not the governor, not the state commissioner or board of education — could shut down failing schools.

“For-profit companies seized on the opportunity; they now operate about 80 percent of charters in Michigan, far more than in any other state. The companies and those who grant the charters became major lobbying forces for unfettered growth of the schools, as did some of the state’s biggest Republican donors.

“Sometimes, they were one and the same, as with J. C. Huizenga, a Grand Rapids entrepreneur who founded Michigan’s largest charter school operator, the for-profit National Heritage Academies. Two of the biggest players in Michigan politics, Betsy and Dick DeVos — she the former head of the state Republican Party, he the heir to the Amway fortune and a 2006 candidate for governor — established the Great Lakes Education Project, which became the state’s most pugnacious protector of the charter school prerogative…

”Operators were lining up to get into the city, and in 2011, after a conservative wave returned the governor’s office and the Legislature to Republican control for the first time in eight years, the Legislature abolished a cap that had limited the number of charter schools that universities could create to 150.

“Some charter school backers pushed for a so-called smart cap that would allow only successful charters to expand. But they could not agree on what success should look like, and ultimately settled for assurances from lawmakers that they could add quality controls after the cap was lifted.

“In fact, the law repealed a longstanding requirement that the State Department of Education issue yearly reports monitoring charter school performance.

“At the same time, the law included a provision that seemed to benefit Mr. Huizenga, whose company profits from buying buildings and renting them back to the charters it operates. Earlier that year he had lost a tax appeal in which he argued that a for-profit company should not have to pay taxes on properties leased to schools. The new law granted for-profit charter companies the exemption he had sought.

“Just as universities were allowed to charter more schools, Gov. Rick Snyder created a state-run district, with new charters, to try to turn around the city’s worst schools. Detroit was soon awash in choice, but not quality.

“Twenty-four charter schools have opened in the city since the cap was lifted in 2011. Eighteen charters whose existing schools were at or below the district’s dismal performance expanded or opened new schools…

”With about $1.1 billion in state tax dollars going to charter schools, those that grant the charters get about $33 million. Those institutions are often far from the schools; one, Bay Mills Community College, is in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, nearly 350 miles away — as far from Detroit as Portland, Me., is from New York City…

”“People here had so much confidence in choice and choice alone to close the achievement gap,” said Amber Arellano, the executive director of the Education Trust Midwest, which advocates higher academic standards. “Instead, we’re replicating failure.”

Some children have attended three, four, five different charters. They compete for the kids and the money.

When there was a bipartisan effort in the legislature to establish accountability, the DeVos family fought it and won.

 

 

 

It is hard to understand why anyone thinks that charter schools have. O fiscal impact on public schools. There is only one pot of money for education, and not many (or any) states are expanding that pot. The Trump administration wants to cut the federal education budget and divert more money to charters and vouchers.

This is a post about a new study by Duke University economist Helen Ladd and John Singleton that nails down the fiscal Harm that charter schools do to public schools.

Here is the summary.

Here is the study.

Here is the abstract:

”A significant criticism of the charter school movement is that funding for charter schools diverts money away from traditional public schools. As shown in prior work by Bifulco and Reback (2014) for two urban districts in New York, the magnitude of such adverse fiscal externalities depends in part on the nature of state and local funding policies. In this paper, we build on their approach to examine the fiscal effects of charter schools on both urban and non-urban school districts in North Carolina. We base our analysis on detailed balance sheet information for a sample of school districts that experienced significant charter entry since the statewide cap on charters was raised in 2011. This detailed budgetary information permits us to estimate a range of fiscal impacts using a variety of different assumptions. We find a large and negative fiscal impact from $500-$700 per pupil in our one urban school district and somewhat smaller, but still significant, fiscal externalities on the non-urban districts in our sample.”

Public schools that are underfunded must cut their budgets so that a small minority of students can attend charter schools. It makes no sense.

 

Peter Goodman describes a “debate” of sorts in New York City, whose mayor is searching for a new chancellor to replace Carmen Farina.

Does New York City need a disruptor, like Joel Klein and Michelle Rhee, or a collaborator, following Farina’s tradition?

From what I read, the only voice in favor of a disruptor is a former official in the Bloomberg-Klein regime and the editorial writer of the New York Times.

Turmoil and instability and upheaval are not good for students, teachers, or learning.

I hope the next leader will be an experienced educator who has had experience in the classroom and as a principal and superintendent.

I hope it will be someone who knows the New York City public schools well and who is prepared to reach out to teachers and parents and students to build trust.

Please, no more disruption.

 

 

Tom Ultican, retired high school teacher of advanced math and physics, has embarked on a project to review the Destroy Public Education (DPE) Movement.

His latest topic is Denver. Privatizers point to Denver as a success story, but Ultican says the schools are a “dystopian nightmare.”

Denver is a classic example of impeccably liberal Democrats collaborating to undermine and privatize public schools.

They began, as they always do, by displaying dire statistics about the “failure”of the schools. Radical action is necessary. Denver leaders began by hiring non-educator Michael Bennett as Superintendent of Schools. Bennett had worked as managing director for the investment fund of billionaire Philip Anschutz, oil and gas magnate, fracking advocate, film producer (e.g., “Waiting for Superman,” “Won’t Back Down,” “The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe”), and an Evangelical Christian and a funder of anti-gay activism.

“A key DPE playbook move is to leverage out of town money with local money and political muscle to purloin control of public schools. DPS schools were not dysfunctional nor were they failing. In several Denver neighborhoods, the schools were the only functional government entity.”

“Colorado launched annual state testing, which helped Bennett in his need to cry failure. He was a great believer in the “bad teacher” theory. He turned to Michelle Rhee New Teacher Project and Wendy Kopp’s TFA to import new teachers.

“Bennett enthusiastically embraced the portfolio model, treating schools like stocks: keep the winners, close the losers. No surprise: Almost all the loser schools were in poor and minority communities.

“The year that Bennet became superintendent, the heirs of the Walmart fortune opened the Charter School Growth Fund just 20 miles up highway-25 from downtown Denver. Carrie Walton Penner, sits on the board of the fund and Carrie’s husband, Greg Penner, is a director. Annie Walton Proietti, niece of Carrie, works for a KIPP school in Denver. There are other Walton family members living in and frequenting the Denver area.

“Joining the Walmart school privatizers is Bennet’s business mentor Philip Anschutz. He has a billion-dollar foundation located in Denver and owns Walden Publishing. “Walden Publishing company was “behind the anti-teachers’ union movies ‘Won’t Back Down’ and ‘Waiting for ‘Superman.’”

“These wealth powered people along with several peers promote school privatization and portfolio district management ideology.

“There is a widely held fundamental misconception that standardized testing proves something about the quality of a school. There is a belief among people than have never studied the issue that testing can be used to objectively evaluate teacher quality. It cannot! A roulette wheel would be an equally accurate instrument for measuring school and teacher quality.

“Another Non-Educator with No Training

“In 2007, Bennet asked Tom Boasberg, a childhood friend, to join DPS as his chief operating officer. Trained as a lawyer, Boasberg had worked closely as chief of staff to the chairman of Hong Kong’s first political party in the early 1990s, when the colony held its first elections in its 150 years of British rule. Before DPS, Boasberg worked for eight years at Level 3 Communications, where he was Group Vice President for Corporate Development.

“In the spring of 2008, Bennet and Boasberg were ready to tackle the pension crisis seen as sucking money out of classrooms. One month after the collapse of Lehman Brothers, Boasberg and Bennet convinced the DPS board to buy a $750,000,000 complicated instrument with variable interest rates. During the melt-down of 2008 Denver’s interest rates zoomed up making this a very bad deal for DPS. (Banking was supposed to be Bennet and Boasberg’s strength.)”

So these two financial geniuses cost the school district some $25 Million on a bad bet with district funds, but no one hel them accountable. They got rid of “bad teachers,” but no one got rid of them.

Instead, Bennett was appointed to fill an empty U.S. Senate seat, and he was succeeded by his friend Tom  Boasberg. Boasberg is a “graduate”of the unaccredited Broad Superintendents Academy, which teaches the virtues of top-down management, closing schools, charter schools, and high-stakes testing.

Despite the usual reformer hype and boasting, test scores rose higher before Bennett started than after, yesterday reformers drooled over its “success,” which was in the eye of the beholder.

Ultican goes on to assert, with evidence, that Denver’s strategy has been ineffective and bad for kids. He shows that changing schools destabilizes neighborhoods and hurts kids; that the portfolio model is nonsense; and that inexperienced TFA teachers are not good teachers; and that running multiple school systems is more costly than running a unified system.

No miracle in Denver. Just disruption.

 

Julie Vassilatos writes about the latest School closing by Chicago Public Schools. It is a heart-breaking story.

The school closing is a real estate deal, she believes. It’s about gentrification, not education.

“Presto change-o, remove the public housing and the mostly-black grade school from the neighborhood, bring in a not-mostly-black high school, and watch the property values go up, up, up.

“These kinds of moves are the reason behind the twitter hashtags #RahmHatesUs and #RahmDoesntCareAboutBlackPeople. Outrageous claims, I bet you’re thinking. But the folks tweeting these hashtags know that actions speak louder than words. And Rahm’s actions via CPS in this new round of school closures tell of a man who will push his agenda no matter how many people it harms, no matter how obviously racist it looks.

“CEO Janice Jackson was not in attendance at last week’s NTA closure hearing. Neither was anyone at all from the board. The mayor wasn’t there. There was a man with a presentation, however, one man, Chip Johnson from the FACE office. He chided the crowd to be respectful this evening, and not carry on in a rowdy fashion like last time. He listened impassively to the 50+ speakers given two minutes each, never taking a note, never answering a question, positioning himself as a neutral party but very much committed to the CPS plan. This entire proceeding transported me back instantaneously to the fall and winter of 2012/13’s terrible school closing hearings, and I was glad I went up to the balcony to watch because I knew that I would probably get emotional or inappropriate or both.

“Because these events are an exercise in awfulness. Listening to one little child after another beg–someone (which public official listens to these things, again?)–to keep open the school they love, occasionally through tears, is something only a masochist can willingly do over and over. Which is maybe why no one from CPS leadership ever shows up.

“Seven children spoke, some as young as first grade. I can’t even imagine the poise of a six-year-old who takes the mic in a cavernous church sanctuary in front of a few hundred people, but I think it has much to do with the bravery that comes from despair. These little ones all love their school and wanted to tell Chip Johnson so. They spoke of their love for teachers and school family, the building, the staff, their classes. One child knew that the reason they were taking his school was that it was a good building with good things. One child knew that the reason they were taking her school was that they could. And one middle-school aged fellow who spoke of NTA’s caring staff had to pause 3 times in order not to cry. That was my cue to start weeping openly up in the balcony.”

It is no longer novel. No one listens to the parents or the children. They are the ones being removed.

 

Edward Johnson is an advocate for high quality public schools for all children. He lives in Atlanta. He has studied the works of G. Edwards Deming, who understood that you don’t blame frontline workers for problems with the system. If things go wrong, fix the system.

He wrote the following letter to Rev. Diane Daugherty about the absurdity of “choice” as a fix for the system (see her letter after his). In fact, “choice” is an abdication of responsibility by those who have the power to fix the system. They turn problems over to the market and hope for the best, ignoring the well-documented fact that the market deepens pre-existing inequities.

Of course, anyone who thinks that the Walton family, the DeVos family, Trump, ALEC, and other plutocrats are committed to civil rights and equity is either hopelessly naive or on their payroll.

He writes:

 

Rev. Diane Daugherty,

Thank you for lending your voice to the matter. Interestingly, one may take your understanding as a key aspect of the law research paper Opt-Out Education: School Choice as Racial Subordination, by Osamudia R. James, currently Vice Dean, University of Miami School of Law.

Atlanta superintendent Meria Carstarphen, Atlanta school board members, and BOOK, including especially its supporters UNCF and Andrew Young Foundation, would do well to learn from Vice Dean James’ paper.

But it may be unreasonable to expect any of them would. For example, this AJC article makes clear the superintendent, arguably Atlanta school choice proponents’ leader, holds an unshakable mindset fixated on commercializing public education in Atlanta by transforming it from a systemic public good into disparate private consumer goods, à la KIPP and others. So transformed, and unlikely to have resulted in improved schools, parents as consumers may then choose a school for their child just as they would choose a McDonald’s Happy Meal for the child. So goes the superintendent’s reasoning.

The pushback that arose in response to the superintendent’s profane conflation of consumerism and public education prompted school choice advocate Robert Holland to rise in her defense, with an attempt to say what the superintendent really meant to say. Holland, at the conservative and libertarian public policy think tank The Heartland Institute, blogged “The School Choice Generation Wants a Full Educational Menu.”

The Atlanta superintendent, school board, and BOOK would also do well to take from their partner and supporter, Walton Family Foundation, a lesson about how consumerism’s choice really works. Last week, the AJC and other media reported that, “based on a number of factors, including financial performance,” the Waltons made the decision to close their Lithonia Sam’s Club at Stonecrest. Was the store’s consumer community consulted or otherwise involved beforehand? Nope. Did the store’s consumer community have a choice? Nope. Now that once consumer community fears the Waltons have put upon it more problematic, if not new, food desert they did not “choose.”

The lesson, then, is who, in consumerism’s commercialized world, truly has choice and who truly does not.

Diane Ravitch offers an excerpt from Vice Dean James’ paper that amplifies the lesson (my emphases):

“James advocates for limitations on school choice ‘to prevent the disastrous social consequences–the abandonment of the public school system, to particularly deleterious consequence for poor and minority schoolchildren and their families–that occur as the collective result of individual, albeit rational, decisions. I also advocate for limitations on school choice in an attempt to encourage individuals to consider their obligations to children not their own, but part of their community all the same….The actual impact of school choice cannot be ignored. Given the radicalized realities of the current education system, choice is not ultimately used to broaden options or agency for minority parents. Rather, school choice is used to sanitize inequality in the school system; given sufficient choices, the state and its residents are exempted from addressing the sources of unequal educational opportunities for poor and minority students. States promote agency even as the subjects supposedly exercising that agency are disabled. Experience makes clear that school choice simply should not form an integral or foundational aspect of education reform policy. Rather, the focus should be on improving public schooling for all students such that all members of society can exercise genuine agency, initially facilitated by quality primary and secondary education. Ultimately, improving public education begins with preventing its abandonment.’”

 

This is Dr. Daugherty’s letter to the Atlanta Board of Education:

 

From: Diane Dougherty [mailto:doughertyadd@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 8:01 PM
To: EdJohnsonAfQPE <edwjohnson@aol.com>
Cc: AfQPE@aol.com; bamos@atlantapublicschools.us; cbriscoe_brown@atlanta.k12.ga.us; epcollins@atlantapublicschools.us; jesteves@atlantapublicschools.us; lgrant@atlantapublicschools.us; nmeister@atlantapublicschools.us; pierre.gaither@atlanta.k12.ga.us; mjcarstarphen@atlanta.k12.ga.us; annwcramer@gmail.com; Erika Y. Mitchell <eymitchell@gmail.com>; Kandis Wood <kandiswood@gmail.com>; Michelle Olympiadis <michelle.olympiadis@gmail.com>; education@naacpatlanta.org; president@naacpatlanta.org; info@bookatl.org; david.mitchell@bookatl.org; Naomi.Shelton@uncf.org; sekou.biddle@uncf.org; cmeadows@morehouse.edu; mbinderman@geears.org
Subject: Re: BOOK and newly installed Atlanta Board of Education Members

BOOK seems to promote better outcomes outside any effort to make existing public education better. Their methodology seems to create parallel academic structures diminishing schools that need an infusion of structures and funds. To me their short term efforts will not evolve into a sustainable plan 30 years from now. Without any data that supports their perceived “Better Outcomes, BOOK’S emphasis on School Choice has proven a poor strategy in decimated African American schools in Tennessee, Michigan and Louisiana….in spite of billions spent…why would there be improved outcomes here if it has not worked there? Rev. Diane Dougherty

Diane Dougherty, ARCWP

Avondale Estates, GA 30002

678-918-1945

doughertyadd@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

The General Assembly in North Carolina has devoted its efforts since 2010 to destroying the public education system and undermining the teaching profession. The Tea Party took control of the legislature in 2010 and proceeded to enact as many unjust laws as fast as they could while gerrymandering election districts to retain control. A Democrat won the governorship by a narrow margin in 2026, but the Far-right legislature has frustrated him repeatedly and stripped him of power and appointments to the greatest extent possible.

High school teacher Stuart Egan has chronicled the war against public schools and teachers on his Blog, Caffeinated Rage.  In this post, Egan describes the current state of that war. 

In this post, he writes about the new state superintendent, whose only previous experience was two years of TFA, and who now acts as a lackey for the Tea Party. (Curious how many TFA alums end up aiding governors who want to destroy public schools.) The legislators passed a class size reduction mandate without funding it. Reducing class size is a very good thing, but without funding, it means cuts in every area and elimination of courses and electives. It means chaos by design.

State superintendent Mark Johnson is avid for “personalized learning” (aka depersonalized learning).

Egan explains the hoax of personalized learning, and he calls out Johnson for his failure to provide leadership:

“Time, resources, classroom space, and opportunities to give each student personalized instruction are not items being afforded to North Carolina’s public school teachers. In fact, as state superintendent, Mark Johnson has never really advocated for those things in schools. Actually, he has passively allowed for the class size mandate to proceed without a fight, has never fought against the massive cuts to the Department of Public Instruction, and devotes more time hiring only loyalists and spending taxpayer money to fight against the state board.”

There will be a rally in Raleigh on January 6 in opposition to #ClassSizeChaos. If you are in the state, be there.

 

The Walton-funded Center for Research on Education Outcomes published a study containing a finding that almost everyone knew:

The strategy of closing schools because of their test scores disproportionately affects children of color.

A little less than half of displaced closure students landed in better schools.

• Closures of low-performing schools were prevalent but not evenly distributed.

• In both the charter and traditional public school sectors, low-performing schools with a larger share
of black and Hispanic students were more likely to be closed than similarly performing schools with a
smaller share of disadvantaged minority students.

• Low-performing schools that were eventually closed exhibited clear signs of weakness in the years
leading to closure compared to other low-performing schools.

•The quality of the receiving school made a significant difference in post-closure student outcomes. Closure
students who attended better schools post-closure tended to make greater academic gains than did their
peers from not-closed low-performing schools in the same sector, while those ending up in worse or
equivalent schools had weaker academic growth than their peers in comparable low-performing settings.

• The number of charter closures was smaller than that of traditional public school closures, however, the percentage of low-performing schools getting closed was higher in the charter sector than in the traditional public school sector.

Peter Greene wrote about this study here. Peter asks: The staggering bottom line here remains– we are closing schools that serve black, brown and poor students because they serve black, brown and poor students. How is that even remotely okay?

Steven Singer wrote about it here.

This was Steven’s takeaway:

If Sally moves to School B after School A is closed, her success is significantly affected by the quality of her new educational institution. Students who moved to schools that suffered from the same structural deficiencies and chronic underfunding as did their original alma mater, did not improve. But students who moved to schools that were overflowing with resources, smaller class sizes, etc. did better. However, the latter rarely happened. Displaced students almost always ended up at schools that were just about as neglected as their original institution.

Even in the fleeting instances where students traded up, researchers noted that the difference between School A and B had to be massive for students to experience positive results.

Does that mean school closures can be a constructive reform strategy?

No. It only supports the obvious fact that increasing resources and providing equitable funding can help improve student achievement. It doesn’t justify killing struggling schools. It justifies saving them.

This study leaves the observer to wonder why so much money was spent by Arne Duncan, Michael Bloomberg, and Rahm Emanuel to disrupt schools instead of investing in improving them with proven strategies like class-size reduction?

From Politico.

“JEB BUSH TO DISCUSS THE STATE OF EDUCATION: Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush tonight will discuss the “State of Education” at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. During a big education policy speech in December, he called for an “earthquake” when it comes to education policy and federal education funding. Bush, a close ally of DeVos, said, “This new administration and Congress have the real opportunity to bring wholesale disruption.” He called for an expansion of school choice and for Congress to “cut strings that come with federal education funding and let states innovate with those dollars.” The speech starts at 6:30 p.m. ET. Watch the livestream.”

https://constitutioncenter.org/experience/programs-initiatives/live/

Diane Pearl Gallagher left the following comment. I have advice for her. Do not give up. It is always darkest just before the dawn. We will win. We are many. They are few. We put children first. They put money and power first. We fight for the next generation, not to control them but to free them to be their best selves.

Gallagher writes:

“There is no end in sight. No light. Tunnel is long and winding. Will the snakes (plethora of them, which is growing insanely and rapidly) consume themselves? I am a survivor of the NYCDOE, where I witnessed educators carried out on stretchers, nervous breakdowns, heart attacks, trauma, etc. It became such a hostile environment that it was like entering another country. It continues….Students who bring mammoth issues into the schools, especially our urban schools (poverty in this century is a new breed of poverty) witness their teachers’ stress (test scores, oppressive management by incompetent leaders etc) and there is little for them to “survive” on or be nourished and educated in a way that allows social mobility. I am a public school advocate but at this point, there only remains a skeleton of what once existed as a place of learning and safety in our urban areas. For profit schools are demonstrating that they too are failing our children. Soon it will be blatant in the public’s eye and too many sacrificial lambs will have already been placed on the pyre. Our “little” voices still need to be heard. Resistance still needs to occur.”