Archives for category: Education Industry

Politico reports on a panel discussion that takes place today. As you will see from the line-up, there are no high-level representatives of public schools. Only charter schools count, and public schools are supposed to learn from them.

NO CANDIDATE LEFT BEHIND: Last week, Hillary Clinton earned boos from some NEA delegates when she suggested that traditional schools and charter schools should share ideas to figure out what works. [http://politico.pro/29w3C8C ] Today, on Capitol Hill, a panel will be addressing this very issue during a discussion on “efforts to foster collaboration,” which was announced by the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. Panelists include Naomi Rubin DeVeaux, the deputy director of the D.C. Public Charter School Board, Chris Pencikowski, head of Lee Montessori, Cassandra Pinkney, founder of Eagle Academy, and Kaila Ramsey, a teacher at H.D. Cooke Elementary. The moderator is Nancy Waymack of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The event starts at 2 p.m. in Cannon House Office Building, room 121.

The New York Times published an article about how critics of public schools now call them “government schools.” This is supposed to conjure up an image of a faceless, unaccountable bureaucracy, like the IRS, not your neighborhood public school whose teachers you know well.

I first heard this term used at the Hoover Institution. At first I didn’t know what they were talking about, then I realized that the public schools were, in their minds, “government schools,” a heinous institution that should be replaced by private schools, vouchers, religious schools, charters, home schooling, anything but those hated “government schools.” I began to wonder if they referred to highways as “government highways” and found a way to avoid them; if they referred to public parks as “government parks,” to be avoided or privatized; if they referred to public beaches as “government beaches.”

Privatization always has a bottom line: profit. And as Peter Greene recently pointed out, the difference between for-profit charter schools and non-profit charter schools is an illusion. The nonprofits like to grow, increasing their revenues and salaries for top administrators. They too exclude the hardest-to-educate children (they cost too much, which affects the bottom line).

One area where privatization has been a major failure is privatized prisons, publicly funded but privately managed. They produce profit. They do not reduce recidivism because they want more prisoners, not fewer.

Our faithful reader John Ogozalek, who teaches high school in upstate New York, sent a letter this morning on the same subject. I decided to let him tell the story:

Diane,

You probably saw this New York Times article about the efforts to redefine public schools in Kansas. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/10/us/schools-kansas-conservatives.html

It’s another fascinating example of how linguistics is being used to twist the argument over school reform.

Once again, the public good is demonized and complicated challenges are reduced to a simplistic need to “rebrand”.

I’m also in the middle of reading a very lengthy piece in Mother Jones (August 2016) about the for-profit prison industry. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/06/cca-private-prisons-corrections-corporation-inmates-investigation-bauer

The parallels to the for-profit school industry are scary: lack of adequate training for staff, the obsession with profits over people and outright cheating to get around government safeguards…gag rules to keep employees from speaking out. And, of course, ALEC rears its ugly head once again.

I taught many years ago in the New York State prison system. It was for about as long as the reporter for Mother Jones worked at the for-profit prison in Louisiana. Of course, there are very significant differences between the New York State Department of Corrections and the Corrections Corporation of America -not the least of which is the low pay, non-union labor force that the CCA relies on to make money for its shareholders.

And, interestingly enough, the shareholders of for-profit prisons includes the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (Are their tentacles missing from any corner of the U.S.A.?) https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2016/jul/6/demonstrators-protest-gates-foundations-22-million-investment-geo-group/

My time teaching at the prison was invaluable -not only for helping me understand the huge role that this industry plays in our democracy but also for giving me a way to connect to former students who end up incarcerated. (I recently went to see one young man I taught years ago. The prison he’s in looks like a child’s drawing of a medieval fortress. Visitors walk up to the massive, rusticated castle and enter a thick, steel door that opens right out of the prison wall. If it wasn’t so frightening you might feel like you’re part of a cartoon. To see someone you knew as a child emerge from deep within that stone labyrinth is heartbreaking.

All Americans should visit a prison, I think -especially if you know someone who works as a corrections officer. It is a tough job and I respect the people I worked alongside. Shane Bauer makes it clear in his Mother Jones investigation that the COs at the for-profit prison are sort of prisoners in a manner, too. They’re treated as cogs in a brutal human assembly line.

I remember quitting my job at the correctional facility 30 years ago. It was a very happy moment as I walked up to the razor wire fence on my way out. The Superintendent (i.e. warden) had tried to convince me to stay. “It’s a growth industry,” he said, citing the career I was giving up. Hell no!

I could afford to leave. I didn’t have a mortgage, no kids going to college. I’m not the quitting sort but it was clear I had to go.

It’s very unsettling to now see public schools nationwide being turned upside down by some of the same forces that have made some prisons so incredibly inhumane now. Frightening is a better word. I sit at my desk some days and imagine how it will feel when I walk out of school for the very last time.

-John O.

Jack Hassard, emeritus professor of science education at Georgia State University, warns his fellow Georgians about a constitutional amendment on the November ballot that will allow the state to cancel local control.

This is Governor Nathan Deal’s so-called “Opportunity School District,” modeled on Tennessee’s failed “Achievement School District.”

Read the language of the proposed amendment:


Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended to allow the state to intervene in chronically failing public schools in order to improve student performance?

( ) Yes

( ) No

If we posit that the state of Georgia does not know how to improve student achievement in “chronically failing public schools,” then what is the amendment really proposing? Let the state take control of schools away from their local school district and give them to out-of-state corporate charter chains. Even though this was tried and failed in Tennessee, let’s do it in Georgia too.

Dan Mihalopoulos of the Chicago Sun-Times followed up on an important story: Two years ago, the FBI raided the offices of Concept Schools, which runs charter schools in Illinois. They also raided one of its charters.

Chicago Public Schools’ officials were aware of the raid, and they exchanged emails about what to do. They decided to do nothing.

More than two years since the FBI raids brought the still-ongoing federal investigation involving Concept to light, the charter operator has continued to do business with contractors identified in court documents as allegedly having been involved in defrauding a U.S. Department of Education grant program, records obtained by the Chicago Sun-Times show.

The charter-management organization — which runs four taxpayer-funded charter schools in Chicago and dozens more across the Midwest — has paid more than $519,000 since the raids to companies federal authorities said were involved in the corruption probe and their subsidiaries, according to documents the newspaper obtained from individual Concept schools.

There has been no correspondence between CPS and Concept Schools — which gets millions of taxpayer dollars a year to operate its Chicago schools — regarding the federal probe, according to CPS and the charter operator.

A CPS spokeswoman declined to comment Friday, citing the ongoing investigation.

Three years ago, Mihalopolous investigated the number of trips to Turkey that Illinois legislators have taken, paid for by the Gulen organization. Michael Madigan, Speaker of the House. is the Gulenists’ best friend in Illinois.

Anita Senkowski is a blogger in Michigan who has been closely following the unraveling of Grand Traverse Academy, a charter chain founded by optometrist Steven Ingersoll. Ingersoll developed a new pedagogy, he said, based on “visual learning,” and he gathered a governing board of other optometrists to lead the charter venture. Unfortunately, no one kept close watch on the financial affairs, and Dr. Ingersoll transferred millions of dollars from the schools’ account to his personal bank account. The members of the board were not troubled by this minor oversight, but federal prosecutors were not so understanding. Ingersoll was indicted and convicted. But the saga continues.

Anita Senkowski wrote to me:

File this one under “I thought I’d seen everything”: Steven Ingersoll’s optometry license may be yanked (revoked) by the Michigan Board of Optometry, and guess who sent letters of recommendation? [Board members] Mark Noss and Brad Habermehl:

http://glisteningquiveringunderbelly.blogspot.com/2016/06/mark-noss-brad-habermehl-write-letters.html

In addition, in late March, federal prosecutors revealed a former Noss accountant blew the whistle as he exited the place and revealed a years-long pattern of cash payments:

http://glisteningquiveringunderbelly.blogspot.com/2016/03/breaking-news-full-spectrum-managments.html

However, using the accountant’s information, federal prosecutors later substantiated two previously undiscovered Ingersoll bank accounts and ID a total of (wait for it!) $627,624.14 was paid to Ingersoll by Noss. Although it’s later claimed that one of the payments was a reimbursement for an early payroll payment made by Ingersoll during the transition from his Smart Schools Management to Noss and Full Spectrum, that’s still a hell of lot of money. And did Ingersoll report the money on his taxes? According to the government, nope!

http://glisteningquiveringunderbelly.blogspot.com/2016/04/full-diaperfilled-with-money-complete.html

At the start of each fiscal year (July 1), beginning in 2007 and continuing for six years until 2013, Grand Traverse Academy (GTA) manager Steven Ingersoll advanced his entire annual Smart Schools Management, Inc. fee from the Traverse City, Michigan charter school’s bank account before it had been earned — and before he was contractually entitled to receive it. Although based on a percentage of the GTA board’s approved preliminary budget figures, Ingersoll’s management fee was adjusted downward after actual budgets were calculated.

However, Ingersoll never really repaid the difference between the amount he’d advanced himself and the actual management fee he received.

How did the receivable grow from $538,864 on June 30, 2007 to $3,551,328 on June 30, 2012 if Ingersoll, as he claimed to the GTA board, booked each year’s fee overpayment as a receivable and paid it off at the beginning of the next fiscal year?

Simple: after Ingersoll had paid the previous year’s receivable balance using Michigan state aid money provided to the Grand Traverse Academy, he transferred that money back from the Academy’s bank account to one of his Smart Schools accounts, and created a new, and even larger, receivable balance. (Ingersoll finally admitted the scheme on December 9, 2015 while testifying during his ongoing sentencing hearing).

Representatives of the GTA board, including its then-president Mark Noss, met with attorneys from the Thrun Law Firm and Steven Ingersoll on May 20, 2013. During the meeting, Ingersoll admitted owing the charter school at least $3.5 million but asked to have the debt classified as a “loan”.

According to the May 30, 2013 Thrun Law Firm legal recommendation to Noss, the issue before the Board “relates to funds withdrawn from the Academy’s general fund by Steven Ingersoll and/or representatives of SSM, which exceed the amount appropriated or authorized by the Board to be paid to SSM for either management fees or the reimbursement of Academy expenses.”

The letter estimated Ingersoll’s debt to the Traverse City charter school at $3,548,319 (based on information provided by Ingersoll’s handpicked CPA, Tony Henning). As Henning had relied solely on “financial reports and representations of Steve Ingersoll” to determine the amount, Thrun repeatedly urged the GTA board to “independently verify the full sum due” instead of merely accepting Henning’s number.

Representing the interests of the GTA and its board, not Steven Ingersoll and Smart Schools Management, Thrun affirmed in its May 30, 2013 letter that “Steven Ingersoll openly admitted, when asked by us during the May 20th meeting, that a conflict exists between his personal interests and the interests of the Academy.”

However, the Academy Board ignored Thrun’s recommendation to verify Ingersoll’s numbers, instead using CPA Henning’s exact $3,548,319 amount in its June 13, 2013 “demand letter” to Steven Ingersoll.

On June 30, 2013, the GTA board and Ingersoll agreed on a “repayment plan”, revealing the details in the Academy’s 2013 financial statement. The agreement allowed Ingersoll to “work off” his balance by foregoing management fee payments over the remaining three fiscal years of his management contract.

GTA board president Mark Noss oversaw an early morning meeting on March 19, 2014 where the board voted unanimously to officially “withdraw from the management contract with Smart Schools Management, Inc.”

Minutes later, the board accepted the resignation of “Mark Noss as the President of the Board.” Although Noss tendered his resignation during this meeting, the resignation was not effective immediately.

GTA records reveal Noss continued to serve in a dual role as a board member until its May 2014 meeting, nearly two months after signing a multi-year, multi-million dollar management contract.

Steven Ingersoll was indicted on April 9, 2014.

Ingersoll was charged with three counts of wire fraud, two counts of tax evasion, one count of conspiracy to defraud the government, and one count of attempted conspiracy. (Four co-defendants, including Ingersoll’s wife Deborah, were also charged on various fraud and conspiracy counts).

An April 24, 2014 superseding indictment further charged Steven Ingersoll with tax evasion regarding his attempt to “disguise the money allegedly received from Grand Traverse Academy” —which was also named by the government as the motive for the bank fraud conspiracy and tax evasion conspiracy.

Steven Ingersoll was convicted of three counts of fraud and tax evasion on March 10, 2015.

Ingersoll’s sentencing hearing began on October 21, 2015 and is scheduled to resume July 11, 2016.

On March 15, 2016, an accountant formerly employed by Mark Noss at Full Spectrum Management reveals to the GTA board and the charter school’s authorizer, Lake Superior State University, Noss had been making $12,500 monthly payments to Ingersoll since April 2014, shortly after Noss assumed control of the GTA.

Using information provided by the whistleblowing accountant, (who resigned shortly after making his revelations public), federal prosecutors were able to substantiate that between April 8, 2014 and March 1, 2016, Steven Ingersoll received a total of $627, 624.14 from Full Spectrum Management, the educational services provider owned by Mark Noss and holder of the management contract for the Grand Traverse Academy or Grand Traverse Academy itself. All of that money went into accounts owned by Steven Ingersoll and his solely owned entities.

An excerpt from the April 29, 2016 document: “In assessing the credibility of Habermehl as a witness and Noss as an affiant in this matter, the court must consider the relationships they have with Ingersoll and how their financial and personal relationships with Ingersoll have influenced the representations that Habermehl and Noss have made to the court.

The evidence discussed above casts doubt on the credibility of Ingersoll, Noss and Habermehl.”

Stuff like this, which seldom are noticed by the mainsteam media, can drive bloggers crazy. Is anyone listening? Does anyone care?

California has more than 1,000 charter schools. When Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was in charge, he filled the state school board with charter advocates, even though students in charters were only 5% of the enrollment. Today, the California Charter School Association is one of the richest, most powerful lobbies in the state. They don’t lobby for all children. They lobby only for charter expansion and continued deregulation.

Because the State Education Department lacks the staff to supervise so many charters, each of which is akin to an independent district, the charters regularly produce stories of graft and corruption. The exposes roll out almost daily of theft of public dollars. The CCSA thinks that is just fine. They oppose any regulation or oversight of these unaccountable schools.

Here is your chance to join with others who are defending public education in California. Learn about the all-day seminar on July 30, 2016, at Richmond High School in Richmond, California.

See the flyer with information about the event here.

The new federal law titled “Every Student Succeeds Act” encourages states to welcome newcomers to the field of teacher education, such as the Relay Graduate School of Education and the Match Graduate School of Education. Relay and Match have much in common. They do not have scholars or researchers on their “faculty.” At last check, neither had anyone with a doctorate in any subject on their faculty. They do not appear to teach cognitive development, child study, the history or economics of education, the uses and misuses of testing, early childhood education, or any other subject normally found in a typical graduate school of education. These “graduate schools” consist of charter teachers teaching future charter teachers how to raise test scores and how to maintain strict discipline. They might appropriately be called a “program,” but they are not “graduate schools of education,” nor should they have the right to award master’s degrees. Going to Match or Relay is akin to taking classes in computer programming or cooking or going to a trade school.

I discovered that EduShyster explained the Match “Graduate School of Education” a few years back. Read this short piece to understand what Match is and why so many of its ill-prepared teachers don’t last.

And remember, the Congress of the United States wants to promote more of these sham teacher-preparation programs.

The San Francisco Mime Troupe performs free in parks across northern California all summer. Their current performance satirizes what is called “education reform.”

In “Schooled,” the San Francisco Mime Troupe argues that the purpose of education is to build citizens, to prepare young adults to make informed decisions in their civic life. The company’s free summer show of its 57th season also makes a compelling case that art is foundational to a healthy democracy.

As is tradition, the troupe will stage this show in parks throughout Northern California until Labor Day, so the context of each performance will vary greatly. But as performed in Dolores Park on the Fourth of July, “Schooled” juxtaposed stark extremes.
The Mime Troupe is run as a collective, with “The Communist Manifesto” required reading for all members. All its shows impart that work’s philosophy. “Schooled” is no different. It pillories the flaws in the U.S. education system, especially its dependency on digital technology as a Band-Aid for deeper structural problems — underfunding, the achievement gap — and, in tandem, its overreliance on the corporations that profit from that technology.

In “Schooled,” the evil corporation is Learning Academy of Virtual Achievement, or LAVA, which seeks to “spread” to Eleanor Roosevelt High School. LAVA’s emissary is Fredersen J. Babbit (Lisa Hori-Garcia), a dead ringer for Donald Trump, complete with the hair and mucus-ridden vocal cords. He peddles learning tablets, cleverly rendered by the props department with an iridescent surface, so that as an actor rotates one, its screen shimmers in the sun.

Public schooling is not a Communist idea; it is a democratic idea. It is the way the entire community takes responsibility for the learning of the children of the community.

The bad guys are not just the guys peddling technology and wanting to make a buck. The bad guys are the ones who insist on privatizing what belongs to the public and use their money to buy support.

Jonathan Pelto wrote an illuminating and informative post about the members of the “Billionaire Boys Club,” or should I say the “Billionaire Boys and Girls Club,” since Alice Walton, Laurene Powell Jobs, Penny Pritzker, and several other women belong.

Pelto writes:

The colossal and disastrous effort to privatize public education in the United States is alive and well thanks to a plethora of billionaires who, although they’d never send their own children to a public school, have decided that individually and collectively, they know what is best for the nation’s students, parents, teachers and public schools.

From New York City to Los Angeles and Washington State to Florida, the “billionaire boys club,” as Diane Ravitch, the country’s leading public education advocate, has dubbed them, are spending hundreds of millions of dollars via campaign contributions, Dark Money expenditures and their personal foundations to “fix” what they claim are the problems plaguing the country’s public schools.

These neo-gilded age philanthropists claim that the solution is for parents, teachers and education advocates to step aside so that the billionaires and their groupies can transform public education by creating privately owned and operated – but taxpayer funded – charter schools.

In addition, they pontificate that students learn best when schools are mandated to use the ill-conceived Common Core standards so classrooms become little more than Common Core testing factories and the teaching profession is opened up to those who haven’t been burdened by lengthy college based education programs designed to provide educators with the comprehensive skill sets necessary to work with and teach the broad range of children who attend the country’s public schools.

The billionaire’s proclaim that the solution to creating successful schools is really rather simple.

They say that public schools run best when they are run like a business…

Cut through their rhetoric and the billionaires want us to believe that by introducing competition and the concept of “profit” they can turnaround any school, no matter the challenges it or its students may face….

Privatization, they argue, will lead to greater efficiencies while opening up the public purse to those who have products that they seek to sell to our children and our public schools.

John Dewey famously wrote that what the best parent wants for his child is what we should want for all children, but the billionaires have flipped that sage advice on its head. They say, “My kids need small classes, experienced teachers, and beautiful schools, but your children don’t.”

Jon Pelto has an exhaustive list of the billionaires who are out to undermine public education.

He identifies them by name, by their net worth, and by their pet causes.

Dana Goldstein, veteran education journalist, reports that Hillary Clinton is striking a very different note with teachers and their unions than Obama did.

Obama’s education policies were shaped to cut the power of unions and to reduce teachers’ job protections. His administration was openly hostile to public schools and teachers. In response to the hedge fund managers at Democrats for Education Reform, whose favorite he was, and to the Gates Foundation and the Broad Foundation, the Obama administration invested heavily in privately managed charter schools and forced thousands of public schools to close, based on their test scores. The burden of school closings fell mainly on poor communities of color, which were destabilized by his punitive policies.

Goldstein says that Hillary is taking a very different tack:


Clinton’s speech to the NEA was notable both for what she said and, perhaps even more so, for what she didn’t say. She promised to expand access to child care and pre-K, pay teachers more, forgive their college debt, construct new school buildings, and bring computer science courses into K-12 education. While a brief mention of successful charter schools (most of which are not unionized) was met with scattered boos, for the most part the audience of activist teachers greeted Clinton ecstatically, chanting “Hillary, Hillary!”

Following eight years of federally driven closures and turnarounds of schools with low test scores, which have put union jobs at risk, it was music to the NEA’s ears when the presumptive Democratic nominee promised to end “the education wars” and “stop focusing only on quote, ‘failing schools.’ Let’s focus on all our great schools, too.” And in a big departure from the school-reform rhetoric of President Barack Obama, the only time Clinton referenced “accountability” was to refer not to getting rid of bad teachers, but to giving unions a bigger voice in education policy. “Advise me and hold me accountable,” she said. “Keep advocating for your students and your profession.”

This speech, the first big moment for K-12 education in this general election, signals a potentially meaningful shift in Democratic Party education politics. The Obama era has been, often, a painful one for teachers-union activists. Obama launched his presidential campaign in 2007 as an ally of Democrats for Education Reform, a group of philanthropists (most with ties to the financial sector) who support weakening teachers’ tenure protections, evaluating teachers according to their students’ test scores, and increasing the number of public charter schools.

Obama held many positions with which teachers’ unions agreed, like helping teachers improve through peer mentorship programs and pushing states to embrace the Common Core national curriculum standards. Still, he represented a wing of the Democratic Party that thought unions held too much sway over education policy, and in 2008, the NEA chose not to endorse in the Democratic primary, while the other national teachers’ union, the American Federation of Teachers, endorsed Obama’s primary challenger, Hillary Clinton.*
As president, Obama followed through on his promises to union critics. He created a $4 billion program, Race to the Top, that tied federal education dollars to policies like evaluating teachers according to student test scores and weakening tenure protections, so underperforming teachers could more easily be fired.

Goldstein’s conclusion is premature:

It’s safe to say it is a new day for the Democratic Party on education policy. But here’s hoping that Clinton’s turn toward the unions doesn’t mean she lets go of some of the Obama administration’s more promising recent ideas.

It is too soon to say whether it is a new day for the Democratic policy on education policy. DFER has not gone away, nor have the billionaires who want to crush teachers, unions, and public schools.

And I wonder what the Obama administration’s “more promising recent ideas” are. I haven’t heard them. John King was known in New York for his zealous embrace of Common Core, high-stakes testing, opposition to opt out, and commitment to evaluating teachers by test scores. His brief tenure as Education Secretary does not show any disposition on his part to abandon those policies.

So, as the saying goes, time will tell. We should all give Hillary Clinton a chance to change direction. Heaven knows we can’t continue with the federal government making war on public schools and their teachers. If that’s what she means by ending the education wars, I am all for it.