A reader spots a niche business:
“How about the idea of online early childhood? Learning to play with virtual toys with virtual friends?”
Archives for category: For-Profit
So Los Angeles spent $1 billion on iPads, promising grand outcomes, closing the digital divide between rich and poor, the “civil rights issue of our time,” yada, yada, yada.
But as this blogger points out, this move was made without the most elementary planning or forethought.
Should anyone have been consulted before spending 25-year school construction bond money on iPads? Will voters ever again approve such a bond knowing that it may be diverted to an administrator’s pet project?
She asks questions that apparently never occurred to the administrators who bought the iPads:
“If the ipads stay in the classroom, how is their distribution to be managed in any way efficiently?
If in the classroom, is the physical integrity of the building sufficient to ensure everyone’s and everything’s safety?
If staying in the classroom, does that forfeit the device’s biggest potential, as substitutes for heavy, expensive, resource-intensive textbooks?
If not to stay in the classroom, how will internet access be managed among “not-wired”, very poor or chaotic homes?
How are electronics to be harnessed for education alone and not hijacked by its social, interactive component?
If not in the classroom, how to reconcile bond construction monies targeted to long-term infrastructure support, with transient instruction delivery tied to non-durable goods?
If not in the classroom, how to manage the high turnover (purportedly up to one-third) among students of some high-poverty communities? What is the implication for device-specific instruction? For physical disappearance of the devices?
When was the imperative of Common Core testing agreed upon, as it underlies the drive behind implementing the
ipad program precipitously?
When were teachers presented an honest cost:benefit analysis toward soliciting professional input regarding utility and efficacy in educating their students???
And:
“When were parents presented an honest cost:benefit analysis toward soliciting parental input regarding utility and efficacy in educating their child???
“The bottom line is: the people such massive programs with gargantuan implications affect, need to be asked first. A program of such eclipsing size and existential implications needs at the least to be tested, to be piloted and then: to be evaluated before approving or denying subsequent phases.”
“It is an incredibly uncomfortable position to feel patronized and exploited by in-house imperialists. How do these detached, possibly ulteriorly-motivated administrators know what is best in the classroom, without going into the classroom? Ask the denizens there what they need, and for some sense of the fallout.”
From California to New York, the same questions arise: why don’t the people making decisions about children and education listen to parents and educators?
In a democracy, consultation is necessary and wise. Great leaders know how to listen and are wiling to learn from their errors.
Charter schools were supposed to be creative sources of innovation. They were supposed to show what could be accomplished when government got out of the way. The newcomers would give lessons to the professionals, who couldn’t be trusted.
But it hasn’t worked out that way. In Ohio, charter schools are some of the worst schools in the state. 83 of the lowest performing 84 schools in the state are charters.
Guido H. Stempel III, a distinguished professor emeritus in the E.W. Scripps School of Journalism at Ohio University, says that the people of Ohio have been cheated.
Stempl says the driving force behind charters is greed.
He writes:
“There are 27 organizations, and 25 of those are for-profit. One of those, with 17 schools, is run by an Islamic minister.
We have a double standard. There are 200 state laws that apply to public schools and not to charter schools Qualifications of teachers are not checked as they are for public school teachers. Auditing of finances does not occur as often.
The names of public school board members are public and listed in a state directory. There is no record of who the members of school boards for charter schools are or how they are chosen. Public school boards must have a regular meeting schedule, and if they schedule additional meetings they must notify local media. The public does not know when charter school boards meet.
There is, in short, a lack of oversight.”
When the state ordered the state’s largest charter operator, David Brennan, to close two of his low-performing schools, “One reopened in the same place with a new name and the same staff. The other was the same story except that they replaced 30 percent of the staff.
“The charter schools are getting almost a billion dollars from the state. This year charter schools got bigger increases in state funding that the public schools did. Money was taken from appropriations for districts. More that a million dollars was taken from the five districts in Athens County.
Why do the legislature and governor protect charters from accountability?
Simple.
Charter school owners contribute generously to political candidates.
Robert D. Shepherd, curriculum writer and author, left the following comment following Andrea Gabor’s post about the data collecting and data mining business called inBloom.
He writes:
“There were 55,235,000 K-12 public school students in the US in 2010. At $5.00 apiece for inBloom, that would amount to $276,175,000 a year. And if inBloom had a large existing database, it would become a monopoly provider. Switching from it would be next to impossible.
But that’s just the beginning. The whole point of gathering this real-time data on student responses is to link it to online adaptive curricula, with inBloom 2.0 as the gateway, the portal, for delivery of that curricula–
serving up the mind-blowingly inane online worksheet on the schwa sound to little Yolanda and the Powerpoint-like online worksheet on the foil method for factoring to little Kwame. The fans of this online adaptive curricula are the sort of people who think that all learning can be reduced to bullet points on a screen.
At any rate, when the inBloom database becomes the portal for curricula, that’s when the big bucks start rolling in, from inBloom’s “partners,” like Murdoch’ and Klein’s Amplify, for example. And inBloom has made it VERY clear from the start that that’s their plan. That’s the “promise” of having such a database.
Quite a promise.
In short, inBloom is a strategic powerplay for the education market.
I dearly hope that people will have the sense to stop this Orwellian operation before it sinks its data-gathering tentacles into our nation’s children.
Think of it, a nationwide portal for delivery of curricula, a gateway with inBloom as toll-taker.
As Arne Duncan’s office put it, “The new standards are about creating a national market for products that can be brought to scale.”
Bill Gates earned his billions by selling a small amount of stuff to practically EVERYONE.
It appears that inBloom has a very similar long-term business model.
It gets even worse. Read the Department of Education’s Report on “Promoting Grit, Tenacity, and Perseverance: Critical Factors for Success in the 21st Century.” This report envisions hooking kids up to real-time monitors of their affective states and feeding THOSE into the database as well so that grit, tenacity, and perseverance can be measured continually.
This kind of thing goes WAY BEYOND Orwell’s Telescreens in 1984. The whole concept is sickening.
And Arne Duncan’s Department of Education is serving as the facilitator for the creation of this Orwellian Common Core Curriculum Commissariat and Ministry of Truth (Minitrue).
You have to give it to these guys for cooking up such a diabolical strategic plan. And almost no one seems, yet, to be hip to what this national data-gathering is really about over the long term. Such plans could be carried out only if people weren’t really paying attention. So far, that’s worked well for the, ahem, “reformers.” We have new NATIONAL “standards” even though most U.S. citizens have never heard of them and haven’t a clue what they are, what’s in them, who paid for them, who created them, what consequences they will have for curricula and pedagogy, and so on. All that new standards and testing stuff was done with NO national debate and with no vetting.
I’m sure that the inBloom folks were hoping for the same here. And the truly frightening thing is that their hopes might well be fulfilled.
Totalitarianism can come about through violent revolution. It can also come about because no one is paying attention.”
Yesterday, I posted a story about a charter school in Miami founded by a rapper known as Pitbull. This fellow was lauded by NPR for his philanthropy in founding a charter school. The fact that he has no qualifications to run or create a school is of no matter. He is known for his vulgar language and his contempt for women. The school will be managed by a for-profit corporation that has become very rich in this new entrepreneurial venture called “charter schools.” Read the post, but more important, read the investigative reporting by Jersey Jazzman and Mother Crusader. Mr. Pitbull’s school is a real money-maker. So, hey, this is America! Anyone can open a school! Come and get the taxpayers’ dollar! No one is watching the store! This is called “reform.” Will the students study the works of the founding father, Mr. Pitbull?
This reader looked up some of Mr. Pitbull’s oratory and though that this printable selection should be posted as a plaque on the building:
| I hadn’t heard of Mr Pitbull before this, and so naturally I rushed to look up the lyrics of his songs. You are correct in saying that most of the lyrics are not worth repeating, but I thought this little excerpt from his 2004 song ‘We don’t care ’bout ya’ was relevant in this context:
We don’t care about yo clique Maybe this could be engraved on the new school’s signboard as a kind of motto. |
I never thought I would see the day when NPR ran a story complimenting a misogynist rapper for opening a charter school. This rapper, who calls himself Pitbull, writes lyrics that are too filthy to repeat on NPR or on this blog.
But there is Claudio Sanchez, reporting on the charming phenomenon that celebrities who are not educators and who apparently have no education themselves are opening charter schools! Isn’t that wonderful! Shouldn’t we all be impresssed!
Well, no, it is not that Mr. Pitbull has a heart overflowing with love of children or love of learning. He is making a lot of money. Fortunately for the readers of this blog, we have read Jersey Jazzman and Mother Crusader, both of whom did the sort of research that NPR did not do. Mr. Pitbull has another name: Armando Perez. In Jersey Jazzman’s article, you will see Mr. Pitbull-Perez has hired Academica, a for-profit charter chain with revenues of $158 million, to run his new charter school. Academica is owned by Mr. Fernando Zulueta, who controls some $115 million in real estate in Miami, all exempt from property taxes because his for-profit schools are “public.”
The story–and the money trail–gets way more complicated, but NPR did not see fit to discover any of the backers of Mr. Pitbull’s school.
The story gets entangled in Florida Republican politics, as Mother Crusader shows.
As always, it is a good thing to follow the money. Who is putting up the money, who is getting the money, who is making out like bandits?
But there is a lingering question: Why does anyone think it is a good idea for celebrities to open their own schools and to get public dollars for their profitable vanity project? How are we supposed to “outcompete” the globe by turning our children over to uneducated sports stars and rappers?
I never thought I would see the day when NPR ran a story complimenting a misogynist rapper for opening a charter school. This rapper, who calls himself Pitbull, writes lyrics that are too filthy to repeat on NPR or on this blog.
But there is Claudio Sanchez, reporting on the charming phenomenon that celebrities who are not educators and who apparently have no education themselves are opening charter schools! Isn’t that wonderful! Shouldn’t we all be impresssed!
Well, no, it is not that Mr. Pitbull has a heart overflowing with love of children or love of learning. He is making a lot of money. Fortunately for the readers of this blog, we have read Jersey Jazzman and Mother Crusader, both of whom did the sort of research that NPR did not do. Mr. Pitbull has another name: Armando Perez. In Jersey Jazzman’s article, you will see Mr. Pitbull-Perez has hired Academica, a for-profit charter chain with revenues of $158 million, to run his new charter school. Academica is owned by Mr. Fernando Zulueta, who controls some $115 million in real estate in Miami, all exempt from property taxes because his for-profit schools are “public.”
The story–and the money trail–gets way more complicated, but NPR did not see fit to discover any of the backers of Mr. Pitbull’s school.
The story gets entangled in Florida Republican politics, as Mother Crusader shows.
As always, it is a good thing to follow the money. Who is putting up the money, who is getting the money, who is making out like bandits?
But there is a lingering question: Why does anyone think it is a good idea for celebrities to open their own schools and to get public dollars for their profitable vanity project? How are we supposed to “outcompete” the globe by turning our children over to uneducated sports stars and rappers?
Secretary of Education Arne Duncan blasted critics of Race to the Top and his “reforms” as “armchair pundits.”
Anthony Cody writes about his remarks here and reproduces part of his remarks (not the part where he boasts of his many “accomplishments” as Secretary of Education). I expect he made no reference to the high levels of demoralization among teachers and principals documented by the annual MetLife survey. But, hey, disruption is part of the plan, right? Pushing out the veterans is not counted a bad thing in Arne’s play book. He likes the nimble kids who stay two years, then leave.
Does Duncan think that teachers and principals are armchair pundits?
Does he think that researchers who have demonstrated the futility of value-added assessments like Linda Darling-Hammond (candidate Obama’s education advisor in 2008) are armchair pundits?
Does he think that researchers like David Berliner, who has studied the effects of poverty on academic achievement for decades, is an armchair pundit?
I guess he means me. I have studied the history and politics of American education for more than forty years. It is true that I believe what Duncan calls “reform” is a disaster that is demoralizing teachers and principals, harming communities, and doing incalculable damage to American education. I explain why I believe this in my new book, “Reign of Error.” I document everything I write.
I would like Secretary Duncan to explain why he thinks that more testing and more standardization and more charter schools is better than placing his bets on the research-based recommendations in my book.
I would like him to explain why the Obama administration’s education policies are so closely aligned–nearly identical–to the failed NCLB policies.
Looking for common ground.
Emma Brown of The Washington Post reports on an outrageous scandal at the city’s oldest charter school:
“Former senior managers and the board chairwoman of the Options Public Charter School for at-risk youths diverted millions of taxpayer dollars that were meant to fund programs for students, according to a lawsuit District authorities filed Tuesday.
“The lawsuit filed in D.C. Superior Court claims that three former managers, the school’s board chairwoman — Channel 9 news personality J.C. Hayward — and a senior official at the D.C. Public Charter School Board concocted an elaborate contracting scam that led to improper payments of more than $3 million since 2012. It alleges that the group of school leaders engaged in a “pattern of self-dealing” that included large payments to for-profit companies that the managers founded while running the school.”
And more from the story:
“The city’s charter board launched an investigation of Options on Aug. 19, days after The Washington Post submitted a Freedom of Information Act request seeking contracts between the school and two for-profit companies founded and controlled by its senior managers: Exceptional Education Management Corp. (EEMC) and Exceptional Education Services (EES).
“Those contracts and other payments to the companies — including a $2.8 million contract for management services during the 2013-2014 school year — are at the heart of the District’s case against Options.
“The senior managers who allegedly co-founded the two companies are the former executive director, Donna Montgomery, who was paid an annual salary of $254,679, according to the school’s 2011 tax return; former clinical director David Cranford, who made $202,443; and former general counsel Paul S. Dalton, who was paid $146,372.”
The school enrolled 400 students in middle- or high school, most of whom have disabilities.
The apparent misuse of public funds was a pattern.
“Jeremy L. Williams, who was the chief financial officer of the D.C. Public Charter School Board until August, also allegedly aided the scheme. He “regularly forwarded confidential, internal PCSB e-mails” to the three managers, including e-mails alerting them to a planned inspection of Options that was meant to be a surprise.
“Williams, who also served on Options’s board of trustees, also allegedly maneuvered to ensure that EEMC’s largest contract, for $2.8 million, would not be reviewed by PCSB staff. He is now the company’s chief financial officer.”
This is a sickening story.
Yes, there are charter schools that serve all kids. Yes, there are good charter schools that are not trying to drive the public schools out of existence.
But then there are the profiteers, who have spotted the charter industry as a chance to make money.
Surprise of surprises, this critical review of the profiteers appears in Forbes magazine. Fat City, indeed!
Regular readers of this blog know some of these stories. They know about green cards for foreign nationals who invest in charter schools. They know about the New Market Tax Credits. They know that sports figures without any educational qualifications are opening charter schools instead of summer camps. They know that the online corporation K12 pays its CEO$5 million, but did you know his pay is tied to recruitment, not to academic performance?
A few more new items:
“Charter schools are frequently a way for politicians to reward their cronies. In Ohio, two firms operate 9% of the state’s charter schools and are collecting 38% of the state’s charter school funding increase this year. The operators of both firms donate generously to elected Republicans.”
And:
“The history of publicly traded charter school firms is limited and ugly. Edison Schools traded publicly from 1999-2003. During that period, it reported one profitable quarter. Shares reached nearly $40 in early 2001… only to crash to 14 cents.”
And this:
“For now, the big money in charter schools is confined to those on the inside. In late 2010, Goldman Sachs announced it would lend $25 million to develop 16 charter schools in New York and New Jersey. The news release said the loans would be “credit-enhanced by funds awarded by the U.S. Department of Education.” Of course.”
And this:
“In Florida, the for-profit school industry flooded legislative candidates with $1.8 million in donations last year. “Most of the money,” reports The Miami Herald, “went to Republicans, whose support of charter schools, vouchers, online education and private colleges has put public education dollars in private-sector pockets.”
But, as the article says, both Democrats and Republicans have joined the game.
Diane Ravitch's blog 