Archives for category: For-Profit

Where are our leaders? Where are the political leaders with the courage and independence to support the commons against the power of Big Money?

This reader read Gary Rubinstein’s brilliant Letters to “Reformers” and wrote this comment:

“Thanks for making this series more widely known– it is so well done and important for people to see. And as noted in the notes on the Tillson piece, their collective silence is deafening. Rarely is that crowd quiet about anything . . .

“What we need is a politician to spend more than five minutes studying and understanding the real issues of real education reform. Too many fall into the Obama/Duncan trap of nostrums that sound good but don’t work. Most people are busy, don’t have kids in public schools, don’t talk to principals or teachers and don’t even realize they are lining up with the ALEC privateers. Isn’t anyone in DC listening at all? Seems not, and meanwhile the damage being done in the states and in the local schools is tangible and real.

“Where is our champion inside the beltway? A senator, a rep, someone running for President next time . . ? Someone to make this, true and meaningful and effective education reform, a major part of their political identity. They’d start with an enviable base.”

I earlier reported the story on Huffington Post that said a number of top staffers had resigned, including Democrats. Hari Sevugan was a key figure in the article. He here explains his continued loyalty to Michelle Rhee’s mission.

I hope he will write again to explain why he thinks that Rhee’s support for for-profit charters, for vouchers, and for the agenda of rightwing governors helps our society’s most vulnerable children.

Diane – I’ve never posted a comment on your blog, but as one of the subjects mentioned in the article you have extrapolated from to make your point in this entry, I felt that I needed to on this occasion. I’m also writing this on my iphone, so please forgive me any wayward autocorrects.

You have often suggested, as you have here, that folks at StudentsFirst and more broadly the education reform community are working to privatize education and diminish teaching and teachers.

You afforded a story regarding my time at StudentsFirst enough validity to use it to criticize the organization. So, I hope you will afford my opinion based on that time the same credibility when I tell you this:

To suggest that folks working at StudentsFirst or in education reform are doing anything but working for the benefit of kids is plain wrong.

Everyone I worked with at StudentsFirst and in the education reform community was and is exclusively interested in improving the lives of children. They are not out to diminish teachers, but rather they recognize the importance of teachers in ensuring children have the best education possible. They are not out to destroy public education, but rather their fealty belongs to the public school students served by that system.

The thing is – I believe the same is true of teachers unions and many advocates, including you, who are opposed to education reform.

While I no longer work at StudentsFirst on a day-to-day basis, I will continue to work with them in other ways, as well as with other reformers, toward their goal of ensuring every child has access to high quality education.

In this post you ask, “What part of [Rhee’s] agenda is bipartisan?” There are many Democrats, including this one, who work toward reform because public schools are not currently serving every child – too often children of color and from poverty – as they should. These children are being denied a fundamental civil right. It is a core Democratic value to ensure that their civil rights are enforced. It is a core Democratic value to ensure poverty or socio-economic status is not a barrier to opportunity. It is a core Democratic value to ensure teachers are respected for the work they do.

There will be disagreements on how to enact those values at a policy level, on both sides and at times within the same side (see Newark teachers deal) but I hope we can abstain from characterizing motivations or values of those we disagree with. (Or in this case mischaracterizing them). I hope we can raise the level of the dialogue in this debate to reflect the importance of the subject matter both sides are trying to serve – our kids.

Hope this finds you otherwise well and doing better things on a Friday night that reading this.

– Hari

Joy Resmovits at Huffington Post has a revealing story about how top staff at Michelle Rhee’s StudentsFirst have abandoned the ship.

No one went on the record to explain the exodus but it is hard to see how any Democrat could be part of a campaign to curtail collective bargaining rights and to diminish the rights and status of teachers. Unions and teachers are the base of the Democratic Party.

Think about how frequently Rhee has allied herself with rightwing governors like Mitch Daniels, John Kasich, Rick Scott, and Chris Christie. She has advocated for for-profit charter schools and for-profit universities. She supports vouchers. She was honored along with Governor Scott Walker by the far-right American Federation for Children, which is passionate for vouchers and privatization of public schools.

What part of her agenda is bipartisan?

I disagree with this post by a faithful reader. But I think it deserves discussion.

There are many reasons to object to privatization.

One is that there is no evidence that privately managed firms that operate public services provide more efficient or less costly service. Another is that privately managed firms, when operating for profit, extract public dollars for investors that taxpayers intended for children, for educational programs that directly benefit children, for reduced class sizes, —and not to enrich shareholders. Privately managed nonprofits often pay salaries that would be unacceptable in the public sector. Privately managed firms tend to exclude the costliest clients to minimize their own costs, thus leaving the hardest cases for the less well funded public sector agency. And last, to destroy public education, which is so inextricably linked to our notions of democracy and citizenship would be an assault on the commonweal. Let us not forget that public education has been the instrument of the great social movements for more than the past half century–desegregation, gender equality, disability rights, and the assimilation of immigrants. Once it is gone, it is gone, and that would be a crime against ourselves.

The reader writes:

“Ladd and Fiske correctly identify the four risks to the public education system of the privatization movement, but they assume that the public education system is an unqualified “good.” What if privatization produces different and better goods? Public education implements mainly a “progressive” philosophy of government. By the word “democracy” it means government control of education and almost everything else it can get its hands on. “Social justice” is the well-worn substitute term for ‘redistribute the wealth.’ I mean no name calling to point out that has been the communist agenda from the beginning and remains the communist agenda.

“The whole point of privatization, then, is to free American education from the statist agenda (which implies ‘community’ responsiblity for every individual and submission of every individual to the tyranny of the community). Most here see public education as an unmixed good. It’s opponents think otherwise, and their motives are clear.

“What is most surprising, however, is to find the Obama Education Department so staunchly behind the measures that we ALL agree are destroying the public school systems. NCLB? RTTT? CCSS? What true educator can support that testing to extinction? It baffles me why Obama/Duncan want to eliminate the public school systems when their objectives in every other area of life, especially health care, is anti individual freedom.

“Ladd and Fiske, then, are totally correct in saying that the privatization movement sees public goods as merely the sum of the individual goods arising from education. I say that is the way it should be in America. What are claimed as social goods lost by privatization are, in my view, really social “bads.” They are mainly accustoming citizens to acquiesce in state control of their lives. There’s been enough of that already.”

EduShyster, that merry prankster of edu-reform offers her predictions for the New Year.

She says 2013 will be the year of the edupreneur.
This is a new genus americanus, the ultimate result of turning the public education system into an emerging market.

The New York Times had a front-page story yesterday about a non-profit corporation that runs halfway houses in New Jersey.

It may be non-profit, but the owner and his family are making millions.

Does this remind you of anything else you have read lately?

Robert Rendo, a National Board Certified Teacher, has offered his talents as an illustrator to help all those fighting misguided reform. He writes:

Dear Diane,

I am a veteran teacher of 19 years, Nationally Board Certified, and teach a low income immigrant population. I am also an editorial illustrator with works in the New York Times, the Chicago Tribune, the Sacramento Bee, the Society of Illustrators, and the American photography/American illustration show. My work is a tool for advocacy, and I believe firmly in the power of the image to speak more than a thousand words against this horrendous reform movement in public educaiton.

I recently put out a blog, and anyone and everyone who is like minded is invited to use the images in a free license with my express permission to incorporate into their advocacy material, in any medium they wish. The blog is about the education reform and all the reasons why it’s a catastrophe.

This is a very different sort of blog; it’s almost all imagery and no words.

Illustrations from my blog have been featured on Stephen Krashen’s “Schools Matter”, “Susan Ohanian”, “Change the Stakes”, “Education Notes”, to name a few.

the blog is at:

http://thetruthoneducationreform.blogspot.com/?view=snapshot

It is my sincere hope that everyone who is pushing back against this nefarious coporate reform in educaiton use my free images as much as they’d like. This is no promotion or sales pitch. In trying to be pro-active, I want to empower my fellow colleagues in what promises to be a difficult and complicated fight to preserve education as a public trust.

This is not just a fight for the equitable educaiton of all children; it’s a fight for democracy.

Thank you for all the work you do, Diane. I hope you know how valued you and your work are by parents and educators alike throughout the country.

Sincerely,
Robert Rendo

PS from Diane: I added capital letters, since Robert expressed his wish for them.

A reader writes in response to a post last night about Diana Senechal’s article on Big Ideas in education. I added that many of the Big Ideas today are driven by the profit motive, and Diana wrote to say that she did not make that point. I did. This reader shares his or her experience with the way profit changes education:

“Yes, your article did not emphasize how the profit motive has skewed what is valued in education today. I value Liberal Arts, but I’m glad Diane mentioned this, because it really needs to be stated and underscored, over and over again, since it’s not just Liberal Arts that are under-valued by today’s profit-driven “reformers”; teachers are not valued either.

“Teachers have no idea how bad it can get for them when profit drives education. Look to higher ed to see what’s been happening to teachers there:

“After teaching for decades (5 years at my current school), this week, I was given a contract indicating that, starting next month, I will be paid $200 per 16 week course. Yes, I am to be paid $12.50 per week. My contract also indicated that I will not be receiving this insulting, unlivable pay until the semester ends, after 4 months. This is a school that just went from being a non-profit to being a for-profit. No faculty members qualify for minimum wage or unemployment compensation either, because 100% of us were hired on a semester basis, so we’re not even really considered employees and we have no benefits or protections whatsoever.

“Profiteers have all kinds of “big ideas” up their sleeves which are intended to serve only their own benefit, and as long as the government allows it, they will continue to exploit whomever they can. So don’t think that being asked to teach for 16 weeks at the pay rate of $12.50 per week could never happen to you, because it just happened to hundreds of teachers at my school.”

Dennis Sparks has written a powerful post about the narrative of failure and decline that is now being cynically employed to privatize public education. Many of those now telling this story stand to benefit by taking over schools, firing teachers, and replacing them with computers, or selling the computers and software that replace the teachers. Or selling the tests that prove that no one knows anything and then sells the test prep materials to do better next time, and then sells the test security to make sure no one is cheating on the tests.

This article, published in The Times Educational Supplement (London), is an in-depth explanation of how the Global Educational Reform Movement (GERM) took shape and became powerful. Here you will meet Sir Michael Barber, who coined the idea of “deliverology,” and learn about his rapid ascent from trade union activist to Tony Blair advisor to McKinsey guru to Pearson strategist.

You will learn about the fierce struggle among advanced nations to have the highest test scores and be #1 on PISA and TIMSS.

You will watch as an ideology of struggle and compete takes over the minds of educators responsible for the care and nurturing of children.

It is an instructive and scary article.