Archives for category: Education Industry
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Arizona: Is This the Worst Charter Scandal Ever?

By dianeravitch
October 30, 2017 //
34

Jim Hall of Arizonans for Charter School Accountability has a mission. He insists that charter schools should be accountable to taxpayers for the public money they receive. In Arizona, the charter laws are written to ensure that charter schools seldom are accountable.

He produced this example as the poster charter for total non-transparency and non-accountability.

A member of the legislature, Representative Eddie Farnsworth, owns a chain of charter schools. It has a budget of $18 Million. He is the only member of the board. State law says that “all legal actions of a public body must be made in a meeting open to the public.” State law says that such meetings must be open to the public. “All meetings of any public body shall be public meetings and all persons so desiring shall be permitted to attend and listen to the deliberations and proceedings. All legal action of public bodies shall occur during a public meeting.”

Every school district, charter school, public agency, and commission must abide by these laws.

But not Rep. Farnsworth’s Benjamin Franklin Charter Schools.

The state Attorney General confirms that charter schools owned by Representative Eddie Farnsworth are exempt from all Arizona Open Meeting Laws.

Hall writes:

“The four Benjamin Franklin Charter Schools in the East Valley are owned solely by Republican Representative Eddie Farnsworth as a for-profit company. Rep. Farnsworth has appointed himself the only board member of the school’s governing board and, as the result of a technicality in Arizona law, does not have to follow Arizona’s Open Meeting Laws. Rep. Farnsworth has free rein to conduct all matters pertaining to the expenditure of over $18 million in public money every year in complete secrecy – there are no public meetings at Benjamin Franklin and there can be no Open Meeting Law requests for information.”

Jim Hall’s ACSA filed a complaint in March 2017 against the four Benjamin Franklin Charter Schools for failing to provide information about the location and notice of board meetings on their website as required by law. As of October 25, 2017, the school websites are still out of compliance with Open Meeting Laws.

Rep. Farnsworth says that he is exempt from the laws because he is the sole member of the governing board. He alone controls $18 Million and is not obliged to hold public meetings.

Jim Hall, founder of Arizonans for Charter School Accountability, noted: “As a member of the Arizona Legislature, you would hope Rep. Farnsworth would set an example for assuring charter schools are spending tax dollars in a transparent manner. Instead, Rep. Farnsworth participates in the worst of practices of deception and secrecy that undermine the credibility of “public” charter schools. There is nothing “public” about Rep. Farnsworth’s charter schools.”

Contact Jim Hall

Arizonans for Charter School Accountability

arizcsa1000@gmail.com

azcsa.org

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

Lily Eskelsen Garcia: DeVos Knows Nothing About Public Schools

By dianeravitch
October 30, 2017 //
50

Lily Eskelsen Garcia forced herself to sit down and listen to Betsy DeVos’ speech at Harvard, where she thought she would be in a choice-friendly environment, surrounded by allies at the Program on Educational Policy and Governance, led by choice advocate Paul Peterson. As we now know, students in the audience rejected her message and unfurled banners expressing their opposition to her policies.

Lily has refused to meet with DeVos because of her well-known contempt for public schools and the teaching profession.

This is her reaction to DeVos’ remarks.

“At times, I felt like I was getting a root canal without novocaine from the dentist in “The Little Shop of Horrors.” When the pain subsided, I was more convinced than ever that DeVos knows little about public schools and even less about their mission.

“Here’s a summary:

“1. DeVos talked about her Rethink School tour, applauding the schools she visited for openly stating: “’We’re not for everybody and we don’t expect everybody to want to come here.’ I think all schools should have that attitude.”

“She doesn’t understand the concept of “public” schools—schools that are open to all students, no matter what language is spoken at home, what the family income is, what their religion or race is, what abilities or disabilities they have, whether they are gay, straight, or transgender. The mission of public schools is to provide opportunities for each and every student who walks through the door, not to roll up the welcome mat, bar the door, and declare: “Sorry, but we’re not for everybody.”

“I think we already went through that time in history. There was even a name for it: Segregation.

“2. When she mentioned the places she visited during her tour, there was one noticeable omission: Michigan, her home state. Who can blame her? She funded efforts in Michigan to siphon funds from students in public schools, allowing for-profit companies to operate schools with taxpayer money and no accountability. The result? Schools with shoddy academic records continued operating for years; no state standards focus on who operates or oversees charters; and schools routinely close without giving families or educators adequate notice.

“This, apparently, is her goal from coast to coast.”

Read on to understand Lily’s reaction.

Categories Betsy DeVos, Charter Schools, Education Industry, For-Profit, Privatization, School Choice, Segregation, Virtual Charter Schools, Vouchers

BOMBSHELL: Dark Money Targets School Board Races for Takeovers

By dianeravitch
October 29, 2017 //
16

Carol Burris and Darcie Cimarusti of the Network for Public Education spent months assembling a portrait of the Dark Money that is now pouring in to local school board races, not to save schools or improve them, but to privatize them.

Valerie astrauss posted their shocking expose here.

Strauss begins:

“The Denver Post’s editorial board recently published a piece endorsing four candidates running for the Denver school board, all of them in support of reforms that employ some basic principles of for-profit businesses to the running of nonprofit public education. The editorial calls their opponents “anti-reformers” (as if they oppose making things better for students) and says they “enjoy plenty of money and energy.” (That, apparently, includes a 19-year-old “anti-reformer” candidate who just graduated from high school.)

“Here’s what it doesn’t mention: the big out-of-state money behind the editorial board’s chosen candidates. This is a phenomenon that we’ve seen for years now, one in which some of America’s wealthiest citizens back school board candidates — even in states in which they don’t reside — to push their view of how public schools should operate. It has happened in Louisiana, California, Minnesota, Arkansas, Washington, etc.

“This is a detailed post explaining the flow of dark money — funds donated to nonprofit organizations that spend the money to influence elections but do not have to disclose where they got it — by looking at the Denver school board race. There are four open seats on the seven-seat board and a total of 10 candidates.”

Who are these billionaires and millionaires who are spending huge sums to buy acquiescence to privatization, whether in Denver or Massachusetts or elsewhere?

Read on.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Dark Money, Denver, Education Industry, Network for Public Education, Privatization

Black Alliance for Educational Options Is Closing

By dianeravitch
October 29, 2017 //
10

The rightwing-funded Black Alliance for Educational Options is closing its doors. It was launched by Howard Fuller, who was superintendent of Milwaukee public schools in 2000. Fuller was radicalized by his inability to change the system and formed an alliance with the far-right Bradley Foundation, which funded vouchers and wanted to privatize public education. Over the years, BAEO has been funded by white conservative foundations including the Walton Foundation.

BAEO Sought to persuade African Americans that school choice, charters, and vouchers, and privatization were in their interest.

Southern legislatures, controlled by conservative white men, liked BAEO’s ideas.

Education Week credits BAEO with getting Alabama and Mississippi to pass charter laws, and Louisiana and D.C. to pass voucher legislation.

White segregationists embrace school choice readily, as they have wanted it since 1954. Fuller pushed on an open door. Now southern states can fund segregated schools and do it with a clear conscience. Sort of.

Fuller no doubt was following his conscience, but it would be better if he had done it without all that rightwing money.

In the era of Trump and DeVos, it is difficult to play the role of a progressive when their agenda and yours are the same. Especially when the NAACP is speaking out against charters and privatization.

In a related story, the former chairman of the BAEO board Kevin Chavous has been named president of K12 Inc.s Academics, Policy, and Schools. K12 Inc. was founded by junk bond king Michael Milken and his brother Lowell and is the nation’s largest virtual online charter corporation. It is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Its schools have been notable for high attrition rates, low test scores, and low graduation rates. The NCAA withdrew accreditation from two dozen K12 schools a few years ago because of their poor quality. This is a choice strongly supported by DeVos. K12 Inc. is also known for paying lavish compensation, desite its poor academic results.

Categories Alabama, Black Alliance for Educational Options, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, For-Profit, K12 Inc., Louisiana, Mississippi, Privatization, Segregation, Virtual Charter Schools, Vouchers

No Degree of Separation Between DeVos, Cunningham, Duncan, and Jeb

By dianeravitch
October 27, 2017 //
27

Education Post announced a competition for videos celebrating the glories of school choice. There will be prizes of $15,000 each to the lucky winners.

Education Post is funded by Eli Broad, the Walton Family, Michael Bloomberg, and sundry other billionaires.

It is led by Peter Cunningham, who served in the first term of the Obama administration as Arne Duncan’s Assistant Secretary for Communication, P.R., etc.

On the presumption that it was part of the Democratic center, it supposedly supports charters (partial privatization), not vouchers. That was then. This is now.

Read Peter Greene about the contest.

But a closer look makes this contest even more interesting. First of all, instead of focusing only on charter schools, this contest is to promote a broader agenda:

There is no “one size fits all” school or educational model that works for everyone. That is why it is important for students and families to have the freedom to choose the pathway that best meets their needs, whether that is a different public school, charter, magnet, private school, virtual/blended, or homeschool.

That moves us away from the strictly-charter advocacy and into something more closely aligned with, well, the agenda of Betsy DeVos. Plenty of charter advocates have cast a leery eye on voucher systems– but this contest loves it all. And EdPost is promoting it.

Whose contest is this, exactly?

Well, the main address on the site is that of the Foundation for Excellence in Education, the Florida-based group that, a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, was going to provide a platform to help launch Jeb Bush to the White House. FEE has actually changed its name, at least in some places, to ExcelInEd, a group that includes all the same players and still calls itself the Foundation for Excellence in Education in the fine print on its site. I bring ExcelInEd up only because they are nominally the launchers of this contest. Mostly I am just dying for them to open an Ohio branch so that we can call them EiEiO. FEE/EiE is one of the older, more well-entrenched reformy groups with a Who’s Who of deep-pocketed donaters including Gates, Walton, Broad, Kellogg, Bloomberg, Schwab, News Corporation and Dick and Besy DeVos.

Also sponsoring the contest? American Federation for Children, Betsy DeVos’s advocacy group. AFC is a dark money group that has been working hard to push privatization of education in this country (for the children).

Also? EdChoice, the advocacy group previously known as the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice, the group launched by Milton Friedman.

Categories Betsy DeVos, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization

Newark Charter Announced Last Week It Would Close But Has Now Decided to Stay Open…for Now

By dianeravitch
October 26, 2017 //
5

The M.E.T.S. Charter school in Newark opened in late August, with Governor zchrus Christie present to cut the ceremonial ribbon and slam Newark’s public school (which have been controlled by the state for 22 years and are only now regaining local control). Two months later, the school abboinced it would get rid of two grades (9 and 10) and close down completely at the end of the school year.

Forget about it.

The school announced it has decided to remain open after all. At least for now.

Hey, that’s business. Shoe stores open and close. Restaurants open and close. Charter schools open and close, then change course and don’t close.

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, New Jersey, Newark, Privatization

Panel of Scholars at NPE Conference: Betsy DeVos is Wrong About Choice!

By dianeravitch
October 26, 2017 //
4

Julian Vasquez Heilig writes one of the best education blogs in the blogosphere.

In this post, he has video of the scholars’ panel at the NPE17 conference in Oakland, California, where the top was “school choice and privatization.”

Julian is a member of the panel, along with Frank Adamson of Stanford, who has studied choice from an international perspective; Janelle Scott of Berkeley; Roxana Marachi of San Jose State University.

The discussion is lively, and I think you will enjoy watching it.

Categories Accountability, Betsy DeVos, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization, School Choice, Vouchers

John King: High-Stakes Testing Is Necessary for Equity and Civil Rights

By dianeravitch
October 26, 2017 //
167

John King, who served as Secretary of Education after Arne Duncan departed, went to the Cleveland City Club to praise high-stakes testing as the route to equity and civil rights. He spoke highly of No Child Left Behind and its successor, the federal Every Student Succeeds Act.

He is so wrong. Not just wrong, but misinformed, misguided, and ignorant of facts and evidence about the injurious effects of high-stakes testing on children, teachers, schools, and education. When you read things like this, you remember how the Obama administration sold public education out and paved the way for Betsy DeVos.

All that testing, he said, raises test scores.

Clearly, he never read the report of the National Academy of Sciences (2011) “Incentives and Test-Based Accountability in Education.”

I recommend that King read Daniel Koretz’ new book: “The Testing Charade: Pretending to Make Schools Better.” Koretz shows that high-stakes testing produces score inflation, teaching to the test, cheating, and loss of instructional time for non-tested subjects.

Someone should explain Campbell’s Law to John King. Whenever high stakes are attached to a measure, it corrupts the measure as well as the social process that is being measured. That means that when you attach high stakes to tests, you can no longer trust the test results and you mess up what is being measured.

Tests are normed on a bell curve. Every bell curve has a top half and a bottom half. The most advantaged kids cluster in the top half. The most disadvantaged kids cluster in the bottom half. Could someone explain to John King that standardized tests never produce equity? That they measure gaps without reducing them? That they discourage children who are told year after year that they didn’t meet the standard? How does it promote equity to rely on a tool that is designed to measure and reproduce inequity?

Categories Accountability, Campbell's Law, Civil Rights, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Equity, Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Testing

Memphis: Thousands of Parents Opt Out of Sharing Their Names with Charter Schools

By dianeravitch
October 26, 2017 //
8

Most of the charter schools in the failing “Achievement School District” are in Memphis. The bloom is definitely off the rose for charters in Memphis.

The State is compelling districts to turn student data over to charter schools. The Metro Nashville School Board said no. So did the school board in Memphis.

Memphis parents were asked if they would share their data with charters, and thousands of parents said no.

The state is suing the Metro Nashville School Board because it refuses to give its student data to charter recruiters. It will probably sue Memphis too. The state is more concerned about the tiny proportion of students enrolled in charters than about the 90+% enrolled in public schools. This is madness.

The charters say they need the data for their marketing.

What happened to those mythical waiting lists for charters?

If the charters want to compete and take students and resources from the public schools, why should the public schools help them?

PS: Sorry for the typo in the original title; I wrote it on my cell phone last night as I was walking the dog and could not see full title.

Categories Charter Schools, Competition, Corporate Reformers, Data, Education Industry, Memphis, Nashville, Privatization

New Study: New SAT is Biased Against Females

By dianeravitch
October 25, 2017 //
33

Testing companies typically invest in an in-depth review of test questions to assure that the questions are not biased against any group or subgroup. The testers are very concerned about bias, even hidden ones.

A new study asserts that the “new SAT” is gender biased.

Here is Mercedes Schneider’s take on the SAT’s disadvantaging of girls.
The “new SAT” is David Coleman’s latest project, following the Common Core fiasco.

I wrote a book about the process by which test publishers use “bias and sensitivity reviews” to identify and screen out questions and test items that disadvantage groups. I was critical of the way that the reviewers went overboard, eliminating any word or phrase, or image that anyone might consider insensitive. Feminists wanted to delete any word that identified anyone by gender, religious fundamentalists wanted to remove any reference to witches, pumpkins, Halloween, disobedient children. The book is called “The Language Police,” and it looked at censorship from left and right.

So, knowing that the SAT is subject to analysis for every sort of bias and disadvantage, what gives?

Any advice for David C?

Categories Accountability, Bias, Education Industry, Testing
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »