Archives for category: For-Profit

 

The Michigan House decided to let charters share in the bounty of votes on millage, where citizens vote to fund their public schools. 80% of charters in Michigan operate for profit, so this will boost their bottom line and steal taxpayer dollars intended for the 90% of children in public schools. The decision now goes to the State Senate.

LANSING, Mich. (AP) — Charter schools could receive the same designation as public schools in a district’s millage ballot under a bill narrowly approved by the Michigan House.

Legislators on Thursday voted 56-53 to pass an amendment to the General Property Tax Act allowing districts to describe charter schools as “public schools” on ballots. The initiative now heads to the Senate and follows a January law signed by Gov. Rick Snyder to let charter schools receive revenue from certain voter-approved property tax hikes….

Democrats counter that voters would be unaware of their tax dollars being funneled to for-profit education corporations.

 

 

 

The Network for Public Education has released an important report on online learning, directed at parents who need more information about the value of the time spent on computers and other devices in and out of the classroom.

The report urges parents to be wary of hype intended to sell a product of inferior quality and to protect their children’s instructional time from hucksters.

The report aims to answer such questions as:

With so much attention focused on online learning, it is important that parents be armed with the facts. What does the research tell us about online learning, and what are the different types? How well do students do when they take courses online vs. courses with face-to-face classmates and teachers? What is online learning’s promise, and what are its pitfalls? What role does profit play in online learning? When virtual schools get dismal results, why are they still supported? And what are the privacy implications of outsourcing more and more student data into private hands, as occurs when more learning goes online?

It reviews the research literature, which is thin, and warns parents against programs whose sponsors whose primary motive is profit. It looks at blended learning, “personalized learning,” and such programs as Rocketship Charter Schools, School of One (now known as Teach to One), and Mark Zuckerberg’s Summit Learning Platform. It also casts a wary eye towards virtual charter schools, behavioral management apps, and online credit recovery. Additionally, close attention is paid to student privacy issues, which few of the vendors have protected.

 

 

 

Renegade Teacher hast taught in both public schools and charter schools in Detroit. He writes here about the highly profitable fraud of online charter schools. Among their most prominent supporters are Betsy DeVos (who invested in them, and now advocates for them) and Jeb Bush, who relentlessly promotes online learning.

From his own experience as a teacher, he saw what online learning lacks: human relationships between students and teachers and between peers. It is soul-deadening.

“Online education in the K-12 sphere is a growing trend- as of 2015, there were some 275,000 students enrolled in online charter schools. In my home state of Michigan, from 2010 to 2014, the number of students in Online Charter Schools increased from 718 students to 7,934 students (over 1000% increase).

“Private, for-profit companies (using public funds) are cashing in- the two largest online charter companies, K12 and Connections Academy, are raking in an estimated $1 billion per year (as of 2014). The motive is profit over substance: less operating costs, less teachers, and less building maintenance.

“The results have been damning: according a study from the Center on Reinventing Public Education (CREDO), students in online charters lost an average of about 72 days of learning in reading and 180 days of learning in math IN THE COURSE OF AN 180-DAY SCHOOL YEAR. They could have had equal math progress if they had spent the entire year asleep.

“In Philadelphia, a system composed of mainly poverty-stricken Black and Latinx students, online schools educated more than one-third of students as of 2014 [1]. The kicker is that, between 2011 and 2014, 100% of those students failed their state achievement tests. 100%!!! [2].”

The biggest online charter school in Ohio recently collapsed, both an academic and financial disaster.

Renegade Teacher thinks they should be banned. They are educational frauds.

 

Jennifer Mangrum is one courageous woman. She is challenging Phil Berger, the far-right leader of the North Carolina State Senate. Berger has harassed teachers and passed laws to authorize charters, for-profit charters, online charters and vouchers. It is not an overstatement to say that Senator Phil Berger hates public schools and their teachers.

The Network for Public Education Action Fund has endorsed Mangrum. Mangrum has 12 years of experience as a classroom teacher. She is currently a professor of education at the University of North Carolina in Greensboro.

If every public school parent and every graduate of a public school voted for Mangrum, she would oust the worst legislator in the state.

VOTE!!!

VOTE FOR JENNIFER MANGRUM!

 

Parents Across America (an independent group of parent activists that is critical of the commercialization and corporate takeover of education) has created a valuable resource about the effects of screen time on children. 

It is titled “Our Children @ Risk.”

The paper is 26 pages long. It contains extensive documentation.

It is a valuable resource in light of the profit-driven effort to promote EdTech in the schools without regard to is effects on children.

Here is the introduction:

“Children have a basic right to live in environments that promote their social, emotional and intellectual well-being. They have the right to grow up, and parents have the right to raise them, without being undermined by greed.” Susan Linn

“Parents Across America has developed a position paper and associated informational materials which detail a number of concerns about the invasion of EdTech* into our schools, and which we have collected under the title, “Our Children @ Risk.”

“This document is an annotated bibliography of resources we used to inform our position paper and materials. References to the outline letters and numbering below are used parenthetically throughout the informational materials to indicate the corresponding supportive research, documentation, expert opinion, and anecdotal and other background information.

“There is some overlap in the categories, and, of course, many of the sources quoted address more than one area of concern.

“A. Effect on children’s mental/emotional health

“B. Impact on student learning

“C. Physical effects – screen time

“D. Physical effects – vision E. Physical effects – sitting

“F. Effects on schooling

“G. Questionable effectiveness of EdTech

“H. Constant testing/lack of informed consent

“I. Privacy issues

“J. Who benefits?”

 

 

Kevin Ohlandt writes about the team that has assembled to sell social impact bonds, perhaps to take advantage of the Trump administration’s desire to promote public-private partnerships.

“Who is involved? The name Ridge-Lane comes from former Pennsylvania Governor and former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge and financier Brad Lane. Others involved include: Jack Markell (DE), Christie Whitman (NJ), Jennifer Granholm (MI), Beverly Perdue (NC), John Deasy (former Superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School District), James Douglas (VT), Gary Locke (WI), Jay Nixon (MO), Ted Mitchell (former U.S. Under Secretary of Education), Bill Ritter (CO) and a whole bunch of ex-federal figures. The goal of Ridge-Lane? According to ex-Pennsylvania Governor and former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge, in a press release issued today:

“I am excited to have such distinguished leaders join us” said Governor Ridge, “as we expand the company in support of our mission to drive positive outcomes in society, at the intersection of private innovation, investment capital, and government. We are proud to announce our new team members.”

“Yes, because we need more corporate education reform leaning folks dumping AND hedging more corporate dollars into education. Because that has resulted in so much better education for kids. Some of these people are the same ones who pledged their souls to the almighty standardized test and sacrificed millions of public education children for flawed state assessments. But now, to fix those problems in education created by some of these very same people, corporations will profit off student outcomes by betting on the outcomes. I am utterly disgusted it has come to this.”

When it comes to profit, not many people say no.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Andrew Brenner is chairman of the House Education Committee in the Ohio Legislature. He hates public schools. He once referred to them as an example of “socialism.” He loves charter schools. Free enterprise! He was ECOT’s champion, the online charter that fraudulently inflated its enrollment and owes many millions to the state.

Brenner is now running for State Senate in District 19 in Delaware County. Take note if you are a parent or teacher.

The failed ECOT loved Brenner. It gave him lots of campaign $$$$.

Denis Smith details the love affair between Brenner and ECOT here. 

 

A new organization called the Global Fund for Emerging Scholars has formed a partnership with Bridge International Academies, a for-profit Group funded by Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Pearson, the World Bank, etc. BIA has opened schools in several African nations and is highly controversial because it operates for-profit and takes on the role of the government. They get higher scores than public schools but they only want fee-paying students, and the cost is very much higher. The Global Fund will raise money to fund the for profit BIA.

One wonders why BIA operates for profit when it is backed by billionaires. Why don’t they just open free schools on poor countries?

One also wonders if it is legal for a non-profit to raise money for a for-profit?

The Global Fund for Emerging Scholars is seeking an official nonprofit status from the IRS.

But nowhere on its website does it say who is behind it. Who is on the Board? Who are the Founders? Is it BIA?

The Global Fund says they’ve filed for 501c3 status but if they get it, it might be in direction violation of the law.

The IRS could not be more clear about this: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-organizations/inurement-private-benefit-charitable-organizations

 

 

In the case of the money-hungry DeVos family, you find what they care about by what they invest in. Or invested in.

PR watch reviewed the list a year ago.

She had big investments in student debt collection. That’s a money maker.

https://www.prwatch.org/news/2017/01/13207/betsy-devos-ethics-report-reveals-ties-student-debt-collection-firm

Why does a billionaire need more? That’s above my pay grade. What do you think?

The writer of this story Colin Woodard won the George Polk Award for exposing the for-profit scheme that Governor Paul LePage tried to impose on the children of Maine. Jeb Bush pulled the strings.