Archives for category: For-Profit
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

How Is a School Like Milk?

By dianeravitch
September 1, 2012 //
29

Jeb Bush spoke to the Republican National Convention on his favorite subject: how to save American education by privatizing it.

Bush said that choosing a school should be like buying milk.

This came from a newspaper report:

    “Everywhere in our lives, we get the chance to choose,” he said in aprepared version of his remarks sent to reporters. “Go down any supermarket aisle – you’ll find an incredible selection of milk. You can get whole milk, 2% milk, low-fat milk or skim milk. Organic milk, and milk with extra Vitamin D. There’s flavored milk- chocolate, strawberry or vanilla – and it doesn’t even taste like milk. They even make milk for people who can’t drink milk.”
    “Shouldn’t parents have that kind of choice in schools?” Bush said.

He agrees with Condoleeza Rice that education is “the civil rights issue of our time.”

But how can this be?

Is shopping for milk a civil right? How are these comparable?

This is not a good analogy.

Isn’t public education a public responsibility? Isn’t it a public good? How can it be compared to something as trivial as shopping for milk?

You can see where he is going with this analogy. An end to public education, a welcome mat for the privatizers, the for-profit schools, the for-profit online corporations.

Anyone is welcome to produce their own brand of milk, funded by taxpayers.

They can buy the high-priced milk, if they can afford it. They can buy the plain milk, or if they are poor, they can buy the rancid milk. It’s their choice.

Needless to say, Bush said nothing about the research showing that charter schools and voucher schools get similar results to public schools; and that the online for-profit schools get decidedly worse results.

But this is not about the kids. It is about letting the free market have its way with the kids.

 

Categories Accountability, Bush, Jeb, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Florida, For-Profit, Privatization, Vouchers

Cleveland Plan: Criticism and Response

By dianeravitch
August 31, 2012 //
10

A couple of weeks ago, I invited Stephen Dyer of Innovation Ohio to write a post explaining the Cleveland Plan.

He did that here.

I thought the post was fair, balanced, and informative.

Terry Ryan of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute, based jointly in Dayton and Washington, D.C., responded to Dyer and criticized me for printing the post.

When I visited Cleveland earlier this year to address the Cleveland City Club, what stuck me was that it is a sad, sad city. Except for sports stadiums, it feels abandoned. The downtown is small and has many empty commercial buildings. Neighborhoods have boarded up buildings and empty lots where buildings used to be. I was struck by how impoverished the city is, how disheartened the teachers are, and how inadequate is the response of state and city leaders to the collapse of this once-proud city.

According to NAEP, the district consists of 100% poor children.

About the time I was in Cleveland, the Cleveland Plan was announced, and all I heard about was merit pay and charters. I haven’t seen any evidence that this is a winning strategy for a deeply impoverished city. Charters in Ohio don’t get better results than regular public schools; many are in academic emergency or academic watch. I wanted to understand more, which is why I asked Dyer to explain the Cleveland Plan. The plan has been warmly embraced by Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson (D) and Governor John Kasich (R).

Just a bit of background. I was a founding director of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. I left the board in 2009. One of the reasons that I became disillusioned with charter schools was that I saw several of the charters in Ohio sponsored by TBF flounder and fail. My experience at TBF pushed me away from the nostrums that are now so popular on the right and with some Democrats, such as Arne Duncan. I came to see charters as part of a wider effort to privatize public education.

Two things I want to add:

First, I know Terry Ryan and always found him to be fair-minded, so I was disappointed that he took issue with my invitation to Stephen Dyer to write on an issue about which he is deeply knowledgeable. I previously asked Terry’s colleague Mike Petrilli to write a blog to explain why some conservatives support the Common Core standards (he was too busy). I don’t clear my decisions with anyone. I was also surprised that Terry thinks I am less committed to local democracy when I question charters, which transfer public funds to private corporations and replace public control of public education. It is because I believe in democracy that I am disturbed by the rapid growth of charters, which erode the democratically-controlled public sector. The growth of charters is the leading edge of a free market in education, and Terry knows it.

Second, unlike Dyer, I am unalterably opposed to for-profit schools. I think they are an abomination, and moreso in Ohio than in most places, where the for-profit sector is unusually rapacious and greedy and uses its profits to expand and generate more profits, not good schools.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Reform, For-Profit, Merit pay, Ohio, Privatization

Jersey Jazzman Reviews Joel Klein

By dianeravitch
August 29, 2012 //
4

Jersey Jazzman parses the latest article by Joel Klein, who frankly admits that the real goal of reform is to open up the education system to entrepreneurs and investors. As more start-ups produce new products and innovations, schools are sure to benefit, he predicts.

Klein also thinks that the R&D cycle for schools is much too slow. Randomized trials in education take years, but Apps for cellphones can be improved in a matter of months without all that slow processing of information.

This appalls Jersey Jazzman. He writes:

It’s really amazing that Klein is comparing the education of a child with a smartphone app. If you buy an app, it costs you maybe 99 cents; if it doesn’t work, you trash it. When you’re a school district, however, you spend hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of public dollars on curricula that affect every student in your district. If you buy a piece of junk that doesn’t work, you’ve abused the trust of both the taxpayers and the children.

Don’t you think maybe it’s worth taking some time to get these things right?

Categories For-Profit, Privatization

An Angry Teacher in Louisiana Replies

By dianeravitch
August 28, 2012 //
11

A reader said he was shocked, shocked by a post that linked to an article that spoke disparagingly of Governor Bobby Jindal and State Commissioner of Education John White. He thought it was “uncivil” to refer to them in disrespectful language.

This teacher from Louisiana disagrees. Since there aren’t many places in Louisiana where his or her views may be expressed in print, I am happy to print them here.

But they are thieves, vandals, liars and profiteers here in Louisiana!

They are also people I disagree with. I disagree with them because I disagree with rating teachers on student test scores. I disagree with them on ACT 54 and value added.

I disagree with them when our Governor and education secretary intentionally ignore the facts and twist the data to spread lies about Louisiana teachers, students and schools.

I disagree with ignoring the real issues of poverty, school quality, teacher qualifications and standardized testing. I

disagree with elected public officials lying, cheating and profiting from the destruction of the lives of the children of our state.

I come here for the discussions, I come to hear people express the truth and if what is happening here is not civil discourse, (I think it is quite civil for the most part and the occasional attacks are quickly rebutted or patiently ignored) then I guess we will have to agree to disagree on what civil discourse is and should discuss if the time for statesmanship has passed in this battle and it is time to change strategy?

I sometimes feel as if teachers are prisoners of this war and need the allies to arrive; I just do not know who the allies are. I thought they would be parents, education program professors, student teachers still in school, the Wongs, NIH scientists, associations like ACSD, NSTA, NTMA, Kaplans and others who write all the books, journals, seminars we attend and buy and programs we use.

If they run an organization for professional teachers and there are no more professional teachers who do they think their membership will be? The graduate schools of education, doctoral programs and certification providers. Why are they silent? All the experts we go to listen to at conferences and national meetings, the employees in the state departments of education(surely they believe what they do is important?) school board members, PTAs, PTOs and governmental organizations like NASA, NOAA, US Geological Survey, and hundreds of other agencies whose resources and outreach we use.

What about the United States Military branches who are constantly short of qualified, educated, diploma holding troops? Does the Department of Defense intend to recruit graduates of virtual schools, students from charters taught by people who are not certified and maybe have college degrees?

Do they want to depend on the for profit companies who are even now submitting their applications for Louisiana’s Course Choice program intended to remove even more students from Louisiana public high schools. Will these programs free of accountability and totally opaque to the parents and community produce men and women with the skills and commitment for national defense?

Do they not see that the destruction of public schools will eventually make them obsolete? Do they not all have a stake in collaboratively helping teachers make our schools the best and able to meet the needs of the children we serve?

Categories For-Profit, Jindal, Bobby, Privatization, Teacher Evaluations, Teacher Tenure, Teachers and Teaching

Did He Miss Class That Day?

By dianeravitch
August 28, 2012 //
2

I posted earlier about Mayor Michael Nutter of Philadelphia, who said he could not see the difference between public, private and religious schools.

A teacher asks:

I wonder where these politicians are getting their education from. Did they miss class on the days when the Constitution and First Amendment were discussed?

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Reform, For-Profit, Philadelphia, Privatization, Vouchers

Who Might Be Romney’s Education Secretary?

By dianeravitch
August 27, 2012 //
33

Education Week has an article by the always well-informed Alyson Klein that speculates about Romney’s possible choice for Secretary of Education.

The possibilities include:

Jeb Bush, former Florida governor, who shaped the Romney agenda for privatization of the nation’s schools;

Tom Luna, the state superintendent in Idaho who is known for his allegiance to online corporations and his efforts to increase class size;

Joel Klein, the former chancellor of NYC, now selling technology for Rupert Murdoch, another supporter of privatization and opponent of unions, seniority and tenure;

Michelle Rhee, leader of a national campaign to remove all tenure, seniority and collective bargaining fromt teachers;

Chris Cerf, acting commission in New Jersey, who is leading Chris Christie’s push to privatize public schools in that state;

Here is the big surprise:

Arne Duncan, who is seen by Republicans as compatible with Romney’s agenda and, as the article, says, eager to stay on.

There are other names, but it is interesting to realize that at least four of the six listed here are allegedly, nominally Democrats.

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Duncan, Arne, Education Industry, For-Profit, Klein, Joel, Luna, Tom, On-Line Education, Privatization, Rhee, Michelle, Romney, Mitt, Technology, Computers, U.S. Department of Education, Unions

Charters Hope to Open in Florida’s Top County

By dianeravitch
August 27, 2012 //
7

Three charter schools want to open in St. John’s County in Florida, which is the state’s highest ranking county.

Some of the state legislators, including one of the state senate’s most avid supporters of charters, are surprised. They thought that charters were supposed to rescue students in failing schools, but St. John’s County is known for its excellent public schools.

If approved, the charters will siphon almost $13 million out of the public school budget, requiring at least 200 teacher layoffs. School officials are alarmed. The excellent public schools of St. John’s County won’t be quite so excellent in the future. This is the kind of competition that Jeb Bush put into place, which he wants to replicate across the nation.

Two of the charters would be run by a for-profit charter chain that is already collecting $158 million in revenues from South Florida charters, which includes an annual profit to the firm of $9 million. It’s a very good business indeed.

A reader who runs a charter school wrote a week or so ago and insisted that charters are not deregulated; he asked for examples of state laws and regulations that charters are not required to meet. Here are some that apply in Florida, according to this article:

PUBLIC SCHOOL VS. CHARTER SCHOOL
A 2012 law passed by the Legislature makes charter schools part of the state’s public education program and thus makes charter schools public schools. Tax money can now go to the charters.
The law also gives charter schools what some see as preferential treatment, including now receiving all the state’s building money, which once went to public schools.
Charter schools do have to administer the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test. They may or may not get a school grade.
Charter schools are not bound to the Sunshine State Standards or the upcoming Common Core standards.
Charter schools do not have to meet the Classroom Size Amendment, which sets the number of students in certain classes.
Charter schools don’t have to meet the same building standards required of traditional public schools, which face tougher standards than regular building codes.
Charter schools have parent contracts including requiring parents to fulfill certain contractual items. If the parents fail to keep their side of the bargain, their children can be removed from the schools.
Categories Bush, Jeb, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Reform, Florida, For-Profit, Privatization

A Modest Proposal for School Reform

By dianeravitch
August 23, 2012 //
44

Joanne Yatvin is an experienced teacher, principal, superintendent, literacy expert, author, and former president of the National Council of Teachers of English. She wrote the following post for this blog:

Since we are deep into the era of school reform, I’d like to offer my own plan for reforming America’s schools.  Although I am not an official expert in the eyes of the federal Department of Education or the National Governors Association, I have better credentials* than most of the people so recognized, plus a lot of experience running successful public schools. 

If I had to propose a simple solution, I’d say let’s follow Finland all the way.  All their schools are free and public; school lunches are also free; there are no national tests; free pre-schools; regular schooling beginning at age seven; and teaching is a highly respected profession.  Unfortunately, however, not all those things would work in America because Finland has a much lower poverty rate than we do, a homogeneous population, and a language that is much easier to read than English.

So, I will get more complicated, but never so much as the various reform ideas being proposed or implemented now.

  1. Limit the Federal role in education to the administration of congressionally authorized grant programs that help schools provide needed services to poor, disadvantaged, and disabled students.
  1. Limit the state role to distributing tax funds to public schools, licensing teachers, providing student bussing where necessary, offering grants to schools with innovative programs, and providing special services, such as a school psychologist, where needed. 
  1.  Re-design formulas for state funding to include additional amounts for schools with large numbers of students living in poverty and students identified as disabled. 
  1. Reconstitute all public schools as charter schools, free to design and implement their own curricula, hire and evaluate teachers, select teaching materials, and determine their own class sizes, daily schedules, and number of annual school days.

        5.  No for-profit school may call itself a charter school or receive public funds.

         6.  Authorize at least thirty-three per cent of charter schools as magnet schools focusing on specialization in a particular field, such as science, the arts, or vocational training.

  1. Students shall attend the schools in their own community unless they wish to apply to attend a magnet school

        8. Allow each school faculty to select its own principal and administrative support team.  In addition, each school would allow parent observations in classrooms and encourage parent involvement in special projects.

  1.  Require each school to have its own citizen governing board elected from the local community. Each board would hold open meetings and respond to citizen input, and each board member would be required to spend at least ten days a year observing or assisting in classrooms
  1. Each school would be accountable to its board for the use of public funds, the effectiveness of its curriculum and methods, the quality of its teachers, and the success of its students.  The means of demonstrating such accountability would be determined jointly by the school and its board.
  2.  Each school bargains with its board on matters of salary and benefits or it may join with other schools to form a union chapter for this purpose. 

As I wrote my specifications for education reform, many exceptions, fine points, and dangers occurred to me, but adding them in would have made the structure too complicated and too susceptible to other problems.  In the end, I decided that I would have to have faith in the good intentions and good sense of all the parties involved and leave the whole system open to change.  Of one thing I am certain: the system I am proposing would be more flexible, democratic, and sensible than the top-down one we have now with all its misinterpretation of student needs and capabilities, scapegoating of teachers, and preferences for profiteering in materials publishing, consulting, and charter school operation.

——Joanne Yatvin

 

 

 

  • For those who are interested, below are listed my qualifications to be a school reformer.
  • B.A. in English and Drama from Douglass College, N.J.
  • M.A. in English from Rutgers University, N.J.
  • Ph.D. in Curriculum Development and Applied Linguistics from the University of Wisconsin, Madison
  • Eighteen years as a teacher in eight schools, in two states and the territory of Puerto Rico, at almost all grade levels, K-12
  • Twenty-five years as public school principal; twelve of those as a superintendent/principal
  • Wisconsin Elementary Principal of the Year, 1985
  • Recipient of the University of Wisconsin School of Education Distinguished Alumni Award, 1988
  • Member of the National Reading Panel
  • Recipient of the Kenneth S. Goodman In Defense of Good Teaching Award, 2002
  • President of the National Council of Teachers of English, 2006-2007
  • Member of the College Board Commission to Write Standards for AP English Courses, 2008-2010
  • Adjunct Professor and supervisor of student teachers at Portland State University, OR, 2000—present
  • Author of three books for teachers, numerous book chapters, and more than 100 articles and letters published in journals and newspapers
Categories Charter Schools, Education Reform, For-Profit

Can You Imagine This Scenario?

By dianeravitch
August 23, 2012 //
4

Imagine a governor rushing to the aid of a financially distressed public school district by naming a voucher advocate to run it.

Imagine that this new manager–with unprecedented power to determine the future of the district–has worked as a consultant to the big charter school in the district.

Imagine that the district pays one-third of its budget to that same charter school.

Imagine that the very wealthy owner of the charter school collects $16 million a year in “management fees” from the charter school budget.

Imagine that this same businessman who owns the charter and collects $16 million a year is also the single biggest contributor to the governor.

What, you can’t imagine such a thing could happen?

Neither could I.

It’s too improbable, too outrageous.

Why the national press would be all over this story, wouldn’t they?

Imagine that.

Categories For-Profit, Pennsylvania, Privatization, Vouchers

The Big Business of Charter Schools

By dianeravitch
August 20, 2012 //
25

You may have been naive enough to think that charter schools are multiplying because some people want better education for American children.

You may have thought they were expanding to give more choices to children trapped in bad public schools.

You may have wondered why they continue to proliferate when so many studies agree that they don’t get better results than the public schools.

But if you thought those things, you were on the wrong track.

There are other reasons that charters are growing by leaps and bounds.

They make money for investors!

They are a great investment opportunity!

Both links refer to the same interview on CNBC with the head of a real estate investment trust who explains why charters are a sure thing.

Follow the money.

 

Categories Boston Consulting Group, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Reform, For-Profit, Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »