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

Philadelphia’s Mayor Nutter Bets on Privatization

By dianeravitch
June 5, 2013 //
3

An earlier post today described the devastating budget cuts to public education by Pennsylvania’s Governor Tom Corbett. Districts across the state are laying off staff, cutting librarians, teachers of the arts, and school nurses and guidance counselors. No city has been harder hit than Philadelphia, which has been under state control for over a decade. The following commentary was written by Ken Derstine, a retired teacher in Philadelphia.

Ken writes:

Philadelphia’s Democratic Mayor Nutter’s role in these events should be noted. Nutter, currently the President of U.S. Conference of Mayors http://www.usmayors.org/about/orgleaders.asp,
is Mayor of a city whose public schools are in crisis. After ten years of starvation budgets to build up charter schools http://tinyurl.com/kphmwmm, last week the School Reform Commission passed a Doomsday budget which will devastate an already struggling School District cutting school staff to only a principal and classroom teachers.

It is in this situation that Nutter on Tuesday held a special press conference in Harrisburg with charter school operators to lobby for Corbett to fund schools….so that Philadelphia can expand charter seats! His only prescription for the struggling public schools has been that there must be “shared sacrifice” in the new contract of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers starting September 1st, with wage and benefit concessions of $133 million.

Nutter is hoping to capitalize on Corbett’s ALEC inspired agenda of privatization of public schools. The Philadelphia School District was taken over by the state in December, 2001. The School Reform Commission which runs the District has brought in the Philadelphia School Partnership and Boston Consulting Group to oversee the privatization of public schools. In FY09, charters were 15% of the District budget. In FY14 they will be 30% of the budget.

The charter management companies have come into conflict with the SRC over the last few months. The SRC in March called a moratorium of expanded charters at this time because of the budget crisis. A number of charters defied this moratorium and enrolled students even though it violated the contractual enrollment caps in their charter. When the SRC refused to pay for this over enrollment, the charter companies went to Corbett’s Secretary of Education and he took the money out of state funds that had been approved for the Philadelphia School District. It is in this situation that Mayor Nutter is in Harrisburg lobbying for more money for charter schools. 21 charters want 15,000 new seats which the District estimates would increase charter costs to about $110 million annually.

Categories Budget Cuts, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Philadelphia

Sirota: What “Reformers” Really Want

By dianeravitch
June 5, 2013 //
7

David Sirota sees the current disastrous era of school “reform” as a shell game that blames teachers and schools while diverting the gaze of the public from the root causes of poor academic performance.

Persist. This too shall pass.

Categories Accountability, Bloomberg, Michael, Education Industry, Emanuel, Rahm, For-Profit, Privatization

North Carolina: Public Schools First Rallies Against Cuts

By dianeravitch
June 5, 2013 //
11

ACTION ALERT!
publicschoolsfirstnc.org

Help Us Deliver 15,000+ Signatures
to Governor McCrory on Thursday!

It’s time to wake up the people of North Carolina and let them know that our public schools are in danger! Pending bills in the General Assembly could devastate our schools as we know them — lifting the cap on classroom sizes, eliminating classroom positions, slashing eligibility for Pre-K, authorizing vouchers that send public money to private/religious schools, and funneling public money into for-profit schools with no oversight.

Join us for a press conference and rally as we deliver our petition to Governor Pat McCrory! Children are especially welcome to join us — let’s show our lawmakers who will pay the price if they go through with these terrible ideas.

If we don’t let our friends and neighbors know what’s going on, no one will — and it will be too late!

Join Us

Thursday, June 6 at 4:30 PM

State Capitol Building
1 E Edenton Street
Raleigh, NC 27601
Public Schools First NC
(919) 576-0655
info@publicschoolsfirstnc.org

Categories Budget Cuts, Education Industry, For-Profit, North Carolina, Vouchers

This Letter About Corporate Involvement in Education Policy Should Go Viral

By dianeravitch
June 5, 2013 //
37

Paul Horton, a history teacher at the University of Chicago Lab School, wrote a letter to Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa, the top-ranking Democrat on the Senate committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), when the Senator announced his intention to retire.

Horton asked whether the senator was aware of the corporate influence on Race to the Top and the Common Core standards.

Horton told the senator that critics of these programs are not extremists:

“In fact…critics of the RTTT mandates and the CCS come from the progressive wing of the Democratic Party and the libertarian wing of the Republican Party. In the national education debate, the status quo agenda that is being pushed comes from the corporate middle of both parties that is backed by many of those who have been the biggest beneficiaries of the current economic “recovery” in Seattle, Silicon Valley, and Manhattan (and Westchester County) and large foundations.”

Horton urges Senator Harkin to call Secretary Duncan to a hearing to testify under oath and answer the following questions:

“How many of your staffers have worked for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation? Who are they, and why did you hire them?

“What role did these staffers and Bill Gates have on the formulation of the RTTT mandates?

“How much classroom teaching experience do the principal authors of the RTTT mandates have, individually, and as a group?

“Why are these individuals qualified to make decisions about education policy?

“Were you, or anyone who works within the Department of Education in contact with any representative or lobbyist representing Pearson Education, McGraw-Hill, or InBloom before or during the writing of the RTTT mandates?

“What is the Broad Foundation? What is your connection to the Broad Foundation? What education policies does the Broad Foundation support? How do these policies support public education? How do these policies support private education? What was the role of the Broad Foundation in the creation of the RTTT mandates?

“How many individuals associated with the Broad Foundation helped author the report, “Smart Options: Investing Recovery Funds for Student Success” that was published in April of 2009 and served as a blueprint for the RTTT mandates? How many representatives from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation assisted in writing this report? What was their role in authoring this report? How many representatives of McKinsey Consulting participated in authoring this report? What was David Coleman’s role in authoring this report?

“Do you know David Coleman? Have you ever had any conversations with David Coleman? Has anyone on your staff had any conversations with David Coleman? Did anyone within the Department of Education have any connection to any of the authors of the Common Core Standards? Did anyone in your Department have any conversations with any of the authors of the Common Core Standards as they were being written?

“Have you ever had any conversations with representatives or lobbyists who represent the Walton Family Foundation? Has anyone on your staff had any conversations with the Walton Family Foundation or lobbyists representing the Walton Family Foundation? If so, what was the substance of those conversations?

“Do you know Michelle Rhee? If so, could you describe your relationship with Michelle Rhee? Have you, or anyone working within the Department of Education, had any conversations with Students First, Rhee’s advocacy group, about the dispersal foundation funds for candidates in local and state school board elections?

“This is just a start. Public concerns about possible collusion between the Department of Education and education corporations could be addressed with a few straightforward answers to these and other questions.

“Every parent, student, and teacher in the country is concerned about the influence of corporate vendors on education policy. What is represented as an extreme movement by our Education Secretary can be more accurately described as a consumer revolt against shoddy products produced by an education vendor biopoly (Pearson and McGraw Hill). Because these two vendors have redefined the education marketplace to meet the requirements of RTTT, they both need to be required to write competitive impact statements for the Anti-Trust Division of the Department of Justice.”

This is an extraordinary letter. Please read it. Send it to your friends. Send it to everyone on your email list. tweet it. These are questions that should be answered by the Secretary, under oath, in public hearings.

American education is being radically reconstituted and centralized, with little or no democratic deliberation. The public hears bland assurances about “high standards for all,” “college and career readiness for all,” and other unproven claims and assertions about sweeping changes that have not been subject to trial or open debate or careful review.

Horton asks tough questions. The American public deserves real answers–not flowery rhetoric– about who made the decisions to reconstruct the nation’s education system, with what evidence, and for whose benefit.

Categories Common Core, Duncan, Arne, Education Industry, For-Profit, Gates Foundation, Bill Gates, Race to the Top

Fairtest: New ESEA Bill Continues Damage Done By Bush-Obama Administrations

By dianeravitch
June 4, 2013 //
10

Those hoping that a Senate rewrite of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (now known as No Child Left Behind) would recognize the damage of the past 12 years of federally-mandated high-stakes testing will be disappointed by the Senate Democrats’ proposal, says FAIRTEST. The new proposal completely ignores the grassroots rebellion by parents, geachers, students, and local school boards against the punitive misuse of testing.

Here is the FAIRTEST statement:

FairTest
National Center for Fair & Open Testing
for further information:
Dr. Monty Neill (617) 477-9792
or Bob Schaeffer (239) 395-6773

for immediate release, Tuesday, June 4, 2013

U.S. SENATE EDUCATION BILL FAILS TO REVERSE “NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND” DAMAGE;
IGNORES MESSAGE FROM CONSTITUENTS’ RESISTANCE TO HIGH-STAKES TESTING;
GRASSROOTS BOYCOTTS, OPT-OUTS AND RESOLUTIONS SAY, “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH”

Education legislation unveiled in the U.S. Senate today is “grossly inadequate to undo the damage of the ‘No Child Left Behind’ (NCLB) test-and-punish era,” according to the country’s leading assessment reform organization. “Rather than embracing policies that would improve learning and teaching, the bill drafted by Senate Education Committee Chair Tom Harkin (D – Iowa) follows the counterproductive path of the Obama-Duncan administration,” explained Dr. Monty Neill, Executive Director of the National Center for Fair & Open Testing (FairTest). “It also ignores the growing grassroots movement against high-stakes standardized exams.”

Among the weaknesses in the Senate proposal cited by FairTest:

– This bill maintains NCLB’s testing requirements, which have failed to fulfill the law’s fundamental promises of higher overall achievement and smaller gaps between racial groups.
– Even more testing will be required because states seeking Title II funds will have to include student test scores in teacher evaluation.
– Focusing sanctions on the lowest-scoring schools will lift the worst punishments from most suburban communities while leaving low-income, minority neighborhoods at continued risk.

“The bill House Republicans are developing is no better,” Neill continued. “They may turn sanctions over to the states. But they have no plan for the federal government to provide the support necessary to build stronger schools in low-income communities. They, too, seek to coerce states into judging teachers based on student test scores.”

Neill concluded, “Instead of pursuing ‘more of the same’ failed policies, policy-makers need to listen to their constituents. It is time to replace high-stakes testing schemes with assessment systems that help improve educational quality and equity.”

Categories Closing schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Teacher Evaluations, Texas

Is School Reform Really About Economic Development?

By dianeravitch
June 4, 2013 //
8

Leslie T. Fenwick, dean of education at Howard University, argues that what is called school “reform” is really about urban land development, not about improving the lives of disadvantaged minority children. She says, follow the money to understand the “reforms.”

Dean Fenwick doesn’t mince words. She writes:

“The truth can be used to tell a lie. The truth is that black parents’ frustration with the quality of public schools is at an all time righteous high. Though black and white parents’ commitment to their child’s schooling is comparable, more black parents report dissatisfaction with the school their child attends. Approximately 90 percent of black and white parents report attending parent teacher association meetings and nearly 80 percent of black and white parents report attending teacher conferences. Despite these similarities, fewer black parents (47 percent) than white parents (64 percent) report being very satisfied with the school their child attends. This dissatisfaction among black parents is so whether these parents are college-educated, high income, or poor.

“The lie is that schemes like Teach For America, charter schools backed by venture capitalists, education management organizations (EMOs), and Broad Foundation-prepared superintendents address black parents concerns about the quality of public schools for their children. These schemes are not designed to cure what ails under-performing schools. They are designed to shift tax dollars away from schools serving black and poor students; displace authentic black educational leadership; and erode national commitment to the ideal of public education.”

What is needed to change the stagnant status quo? Read the article.

Categories Budget Cuts, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Parents, Privatization, Teach for America TFA

The Patron Saints of Standardized Testing

By dianeravitch
June 4, 2013 //
15

Two political leaders—Arne Duncan and Dannell Malloy, governor of Connecticut–recently held a press conference where they both pretended to disdain high-stakes testing. Duncan went so far as to claim that he had decreased standardized testing when he led the Chicago public schools.

If only it were true! Jonathan Pelto and Sarah Darer Littman did some fact-checking, and the only question is why these guys don’t own up to their public record. They are both champions of standardized testing. Their unwillingness to own up to their own record shows how unpopular the testing-accountability movement has become. Now if they would only practice what they preach!

Categories Connecticut, Duncan, Arne, Education Industry, Race to the Top, Testing

Camins: What Would Real Reform Look Like?

By dianeravitch
June 4, 2013 //
15

Arthur Camins is director of the Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education at the Stevens Institute of Technology in Hoboken, New Jersey.

In this excellent article, he notes that the advocates of the status quo are those who are in power and who impose high-stakes testing and privatization on districts and states. Oddly enough, the leaders of the status quo dismiss critics by calling them “defenders of the status quo.”

Camins suggests that real reform would be very different from the current evidence-free status quo.

He argues that: “the pillars of current education reform are more likely to preserve rather than change the status quo. Further, there are alternative policies that are more likely to mediate educational inequity, creating real rather than illusory movement. None of the pillars of reform will address either of these conditions at scale. Instead, they merely give some students a competitive advantage. Even if reforms redistribute these benefits or slightly alter the size of the advantaged group, they are still essentially maintaining the status quo, creating the illusion of movement, without fundamental change.”

One of the pillars of the “status quo reformers” is a devout belief in charters. Camins says this is not real reform: “Current policies that fund increasing numbers of charter schools is not a game-changer because there is no evidence that high-quality charters are a scalable strategy. Some argue that they should be part of a solution. However, since they only serve the few based on comparative advantage, this is in the end a cynical idea- a solution for the lucky few. Others argue that they are the solution. These folks see results-driven competition as a means to weed out ineffective schools through closings. This implies continual disruption in the lives of the disadvantaged children they are meant to serve. Rather than forward movement, it is an exacerbation of current conditions. The publicity around the limited number of effective charter schools creates the illusion of improvement for a few, while everything else stands still. Finally, since the evidence is mounting that charter schools are increasing rather than deceasing class and racial segregation, they are supporting not disrupting the status quo.”

The other pillar of the “status quo reforms” is high-stakes testing. This too is not real reform. “In reality, these reforms preserve rather than challenge the status quo because they do not address the fundamental causes of educational inequity. They preserve the core idea that competition rather than collaboration is the lever for fundamental change. Competition for rewards is only effective for short-term superficial goals while undermining the collaboration necessary for long-term improvement. Since teacher isolation is too often a feature of current school culture, a competitive reward system will only makes this situation worse. Again, we have the illusion of movement while leaving things in place. As many have argued, fostering intrinsic motivation is the only sure strategy for deep sustainable change.”

What would real reform look like? To begin with, it would address the root causes of poor academic performance. Camins says that “A focus on improving the collective culture of schools, rather than individual teachers, has far greater potential for substantive progress.” He has ten specific approaches that would lead to real reform and would liberate students and teachers from the punitive status quo. Read the article.

.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Duncan, Arne, Education Industry, Education Reform, Support for public schools, Teachers and Teaching, Testing, Vouchers

A Brilliant Post By Anthony Cody: How to Win

By dianeravitch
June 4, 2013 //
23

Anthony Cody gets stronger and sharper with every column he writes.

In this post, he explains how the best defense is a good offense.

He shows how critics of NCLB were tricked in 2008, then tricked again by Race to the Top.

It’s time to stop collaborating with those who want to destroy public education, he says.

It’s time to recognize, he writes, that Common Core is old wine in new bottles. Instead of getting rid of the testing and accountability dragnet, we will be ensnared in it even more deeply.

He writes,

“The Common Core could be called a “High Tech Rehabilitation of High Stakes Tests.” The major goal of the project has been to overcome objections to data-driven school reform, by offering standards and tests that are so new and different that we will not mind having our schools driven by them. They are heavily supported by a coalition of corporate entities that stand to make billions from the privatization of education. If we cannot mount a coherent counterproposal, we will be stuck objecting piecemeal to the worst elements of this regime, just as we did with NCLB. This may give us some small victories, but the entire project will remain intact.”

What would a good offense look like? The first step, as he puts it, is to “discredit bogus claims and false solutions,” as we do here regularly, like the stories about the miracle schools where 100% of the students graduate and go to college (except for those that don’t), or the miracle claims for mayoral control (but forget about D.C. and Cleveland), or the phony claims about privatization and inexperienced teachers.

What else? Read his post.

Categories Charter Schools, Closing schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, For-Profit, Privatization, Race to the Top, Testing, U.S. education, Vouchers

Kids Are Never Too Young to Learn to Make Money

By dianeravitch
May 31, 2013 //
11

EduShyster reports here about a charter school in Utah where the goal of schooling is commerce.

Starting in kindergarten, the curriculum is all about buying and selling:

“HighMark administrators are quick to point out that the school is not a pint-sized business school. Instead, key business concepts and principles are integrated into every aspect of the K-8 charter. For example, “a student wanting to become a dentist will learn about the marketing aspect of dentistry, the pros and cons of opening their own office, entrepreneurship, and what leadership qualities are necessary to hire and supervise a staff.””

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Economy, Education Industry, For-Profit
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »