Archives for category: Privatization

Educators and policymakers need unbiased analyses of the effects of privatization of education, and that is what the National Center on the Study of Privatizatuon in Education at Teachers College, Columbia University has provided since it was founded by noted economist Henry Levin in 2000. In 2015, Levin stepped down and was succeeded by Samuel Abrams, who wrote a superb study of The Edison Project called Education and the Commercial Mindset. For the best nine years, Abrams has run NCSPE with integrity. Privatization is rapidly spreading around the globe, and the public needs a reliable source to keep watch on it. I hope that TC can find someone as able and thoughtful to succeed him.

Samuel Abrams wrote this letter about his decision and the next chapter in his career:

After nine years as the director of NCPSE, I’m writing to share that I’m stepping down to become the director of the International Partnership for the Study of Educational Privatization (IPSEP).

IPSEP will be anchored at the National Education Policy Center (NEPC) at the University of Colorado, Boulder. Partner institutions will include, to start, the Department of Economics at Stockholm University in Sweden; and the Turku University of Applied Sciences as well as the School of Education at the University of Turku in Finland. To receive IPSEP publications, please sign up here to join the NEPC mailing list (in case you’re not already a subscriber).

The idea for IPSEP derived from my time last year as a Fulbright visiting professor at the University of Turku, where I studied the role of public-private partnerships central to apprenticeship programs at vocational secondary schools. Nearly 50 percent of secondary students in Finland attend vocational schools (in comparison to about 5 percent in the U.S.). Such public-private partnerships make such robust participation in vocational education possible and pave the way to impressive job training and placement.

The private sector has nevertheless failed to distinguish itself in other educational domains in Finland. For example, commercial firms are playing a growing role in managing preschools and running teacher professional development. In both cases, significant questions have been raised about quality. In addition, school districts have allowed tech companies to play a growing role in determining curricula, with iPads and tablets replacing books, which may explain to a significant degree the plunge in reading proficiency among Finnish youth. The mean score for reading for the Finns on PISA dropped from 520 in 2018 to 490 in 2022, which amounts to nearly a year of learning, generating alarmist headlines in newspapers across Finland. A country known since the publication of the first PISA results in 2001 as an education mecca for policymakers seeking pedagogical solutions had lost its shine.

The realm of preschools may be most telling. A company called Pilke is now running 227 preschools across Finland, up from 19 in 2013. Pilke, in turn, was acquired in 2020 by a Norwegian preschool operator called Læringsverkstedet. Both Pilke and Læringsverkstedet now operate as subsidiaries of a parent company called Dibber, which counts over 600 preschools in its portfolio across several countries, from Norway, Sweden, and Finland to Latvia, Poland, Germany, South Africa, the UAE, India, and Hong Kong. In the spring of 2023, workers at Pilke went on strike twice to protest low pay and poor working conditions.

Such outsourcing in Finland echoes what’s happening in its Nordic neighbors as well as countries around the world. Across the Gulf of Bothnia, after all, Sweden went much further in introducing vouchers in 1992, allowing parents to send their children to private schools with public funds and permitting commercial firms to run such schools. Three decades later, about 15 percent of students at the primary and lower-secondary level and 30 percent of students at the upper-secondary level employ vouchers to attend private schools, about 75 percent of which are managed by commercial firms. On top of substantial documentation of corner-cutting by such commercial firms in the name of profits, segregation, grade inflation, and poor academic outcomes overall have been attributed to this dramatic transformation of the Swedish system.

With educational privatization clearly now a multifaceted global phenomenon, there is a need for an international multi-institutional version of NCSPE involving scholars abroad to conduct comparative research and disseminate findings. The outsourcing of management of preschools as well as teacher professional development, the prominence of vouchers in countries like Sweden as well as Chile, and the encroachment of ed tech on classrooms represent merely a slice of this story. Educational privatization has taken many other forms around the world: low-fee private schooling has proliferated across Sub-Saharan Africa, India, and Pakistan; “free schools” and “academies” in England (functioning much like charter schools in the U.S.) now enroll more than 50 percent of the nation’s primary and secondary students; and “shadow education” in the mold of after-school tutoring to aid students prepping for exams for admission to secondary schools as well as universities dominates the lives and strains the budgets of many families in many countries.

With NCSPE, Henry Levin laid the foundation for how a research center can address such issues in a dispassionate, rigorous way. While a professor at Stanford serving on an advisory board to assess the implementation of school vouchers in Cleveland in the mid-90s, Levin concluded that a glaring absence of reliable information on educational privatization precluded informed debate. To fill that void, Levin set to work on creating a research center that would provide impartial documentation, publish working papers, conduct research, and hold conferences. Lured in 1999 to Teachers College by then-President Arthur Levine to assume an endowed professorship and establish this center on Morningside Heights, Levin launched NCSPE the following year and ran it until 2015, when he asked me to take over.

It has been an honor to serve as the director of NCSPE. Following 18 years as a high school history teacher, I joined NCSPE as a visiting scholar in 2008 to work on a book on educational privatization. That book became Education and the Commercial Mindset (Harvard University Press, 2016), an exploration of the impact of market forces on public education in the U.S. and abroad. The last two chapters concern educational reform in Sweden and Finland, respectively. In doing the research for those two chapters, which involved school visits and interviews in Denmark and Norway as well as Finland and Sweden, I quickly learned the immense value of comparative analysis. To know one’s home, one must leave it.

In running NCSPE, I have had the privilege of collaborating with a range of gifted scholars in editing their working papers and contextualizing them in my announcements to the listserv. I have also had the privilege of getting to know a parade of visiting scholars from numerous countries and of working with a group of talented research associates who wrote book reviews and news commentaries for the NCSPE site. To all, I express my profound gratitude for all they have taught me. Finally, to Henry Levin, I am indebted for his faith in me to run this center and for his example of erudition, diligence, and openness. Levin has indeed been a role model for scholars everywhere and in all fields.

Going forward, I would like to thank Faith Boninger, Alex Molnar, and Kevin Welner, professors of education at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and experts on privatization, for their warm welcome to NEPC. In addition, for making this partnership international, I would like to thank Jonas Vlachos, a professor of economics at Stockholm University and an expert on privatization; Vesa Taatila, the rector of the Turku University of Applied Sciences and an expert on public-private partnerships; and Mirjamaija Mikkilä-Erdmann and Anu Warinowski, professors of education at the University of Turku and experts on teacher education. A board of advisors for IPSEP will be posted on the NEPC site in due time.

NCSPE is slated to remain operating at Teachers College. An update about the center’s status should appear on this site before long.

As I have continued to serve as a visiting scholar at the University of Turku, you may reach me with any questions at samuel.abrams@utu.fi.

Samuel E. Abrams
NCSPE Director
May 6, 2024

Chris Tomlinson, a columnist for The Houston Chronicle, writes here about the audacious, mendacious plan of Lt. Governor Dan Patrick to destroy public schools. Patrick was a talk-show host like Rush Limbaugh before he entered politics. In Texas, the Lt. Governor has more power than the Governor, so his actions must be closely scrutinized.

Dan Patrick hates public schools. He wants to abolish them and replace them with vouchers.

Tomlinson explains Dan Patrick’s malevolent plan:

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s fantasy of abolishing property taxes would set the state up for financial failure and end public education as we know it by placing a greater burden on low- and medium-income Texans.

The most powerful man in Texas politics wants you to believe he’s looking out for homeowners, but there’s always an unacknowledged goal for significant initiatives like this one. You need only look at who deposited $3 million in Patrick’s campaign account and who gave the record $6 million donation to Gov. Greg Abbott to boost private religious schools.

As lieutenant governor, Patrick appoints the leaders of Senate committees, sets their agendas and decides whether a piece of legislation gets a vote. Patrick also rewards senators who appease him and punishes those who don’t with his fat campaign war chest.

Last week, the lite guv ordered the Senate Finance Committee to “determine the effect on other state programs if general revenue were used to fully replace school property taxes, particularly during economic downturns.”

Rising property taxes are directly correlated to the growing cost of housing in Texas. When home or apartment values go up, so do taxes, and the two combined create a crisis across the country.

Median property taxes in Texas rose 26% between 2019 and 2023, according to data from real estate research firm CoreLogic, and first reported by Axios, an online news agency. In four years, the median payment rose to $4,916 from $3,900 as property values nationwide grew 40%.

Texas has crazy property taxes due to a convoluted system that protects the wealthy and pushes the burden of paying for government services onto low- and middle-income families.

To understand how and why, Texans must remember that we pay for schools through property taxes levied by school districts. The state is forbidden from collecting a property tax, so the Legislature depends primarily on sales taxes and severance taxes levied on oil and gas production.

The Texas Constitution also forbids an income tax, perpetuating the myth Texas is a low-tax state. The wealthy, who spend less of their income on retail purchases and real estate, get off easier than in other states. But the half of Texans who struggle to make ends meet pay a higher proportion of their income in sales and property taxes.

Most states rely on the proverbial three-legged stool of income, property and sales taxes to fairly charge families and businesses based on their ability to pay. Texas relies on only two legs, and Patrick is talking about kicking away one of them.

Patrick’s command comes less than a year after the Legislature took $18 billion from sales taxes and oil and gas severance taxes to pay down school taxes. Most of that money came from high crude oil and natural gas prices and a roaring economy that generated huge sales tax returns. The move marked the first tax reduction paid by most property owners in decades.

Ending property taxes is part of the Republican Party of Texas platform, but it would require collecting $73.5 billion from the remaining leg of the stool, the sales tax.

The state sales rate is 6.25%, while local authorities can collect up to 2% more. The Texas Taxpayers and Research Association in 2018 calculated the sales taxes would need to reach 25% to replace property taxes.

Right-wing fantasists will point at Texas’ colossal budget surplus last year as proof that lawmakers will only need to raise sales taxes a tiny bit. However, anyone who’s lived in Texas for a decade or more knows the fossil fuel business goes through boom-and-bust cycles.

During a bust in 2011, Texas lawmakers slashed school funding by $4 billion. When the money runs out, the Republicans who control every lever of power in Texas do not hesitate to sacrifice public education to avoid raising taxes. Even with last year’s windfall, they refused to give teachers a raise.

This is where school vouchers and property taxes collide. The billionaires backing Abbott and Patrick believe public schools are Marxist, woke indoctrination factories. They want to give parents vouchers to choose Christian nationalist indoctrination factories exempted from state or federal oversight.

The vouchers, though, are insufficient to cover private school tuition, so families must pay the difference. The GOP hopes to create a system in which the state pays a defined amount and normalizes parents’ paying the rest.

Don’t be fooled by promises of lower taxes; this is about killing public schools by underfunding them and shifting more of the burden onto young families and off the wealthy.

This malicious proposal could be politically palatable. There are some five million public school students in Texas. There are more than six million privately owned homes. The population of Texas is majority-minority, like the public school students. The Republican-dominated legislature is overwhelmingly white. Do the math. The people with the power, the people who pay the most property taxes, are white. Do they want to pay property taxes for other people’s children?

Award-winning opinion writer Chris Tomlinson writes commentary about money, politics and life in Texas. Sign up for his “Tomlinson’s Take” newsletter at houstonhchronicle.com/tomlinsonnewsletter or expressnews.com/tomlinsonnewsletter.

The founding myth of the corporate reform movement is the rebirth and transformation of the public schools of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Most of the city’s public schools suffered physical damage because of the horrendous storm. Large numbers of the students and teachers were scattered after the storm. The state of Louisiana moved in aggressively: it lowered the bar at which a school was deemed to be failing. It took control of most of the public schools and turned them over to charter operators. It fired all of the teachers, most of whom were African-American, disbanding the teachers’ union. The charter operators hired large numbers of Teach for America recruits. The media hailed the experiment in privatization as a success story. Numerous states followed the lead of New Orleans, turning over their lowest-performing schools to charter operators. Michigan created the Education Achievement Authority. Tennessee created the Achievement School District. North Carolina and Nevada launched similar but smaller experimental districts. All of them failed.

Now comes a report that the nearly all-charter New Orleans district did not live up to its hype.

Dr. Barbara Ferguson 
Research on Reforms, Inc. 

April 2024

Following Hurricane Katrina, a newly enacted state law identified schools that scored below the state average as failing and subject to take-over. The state then took-over 107 of New Orleans’ 120 public schools and turned them into charter schools. Last year’s scores showed that 56 of New Orleans’ 68 public schools had scores below the state average.*

Thus, after nearly twenty years, over 80% of New Orleans schools are still below the state average. This charter school experiment has been a failure.

Of the five worst performing high schools taken-over, only one now scores above the state average. Two are still below the state average. Another was closed and then reopened as a campus to expand the Willow selective admission charter school. The status of the other, Walter Cohen, is unclear. Recall that the New Orleans College Prep Charter took-over Cohen High School, operating its selective charter school on one floor, while leaving the failing Cohen students on the other floors. Thus, we learned that the take-over of a failing school simply meant taking-over the building, not the failing students in the building.

Of the five highest performing high schools taken-over, they continue to be the highest performing except for one, McDonogh #35, which is now below the state average. These schools, except for McDonogh #35, collectively received over $5 million in Charter School Grant Funds. The five worst performing high schools received nothing in Charter School Grant Funds following the takeover.The Louisiana law, which termed charter schools “an experiment,” also stated that they were to “serve the best interests of at-risk” children and youth.

But the legislative auditor found in 2022 that for the past six years, more than 1 in 5 charter schools failed to meet requirements on enrollment of children from low-income families.

Louisiana’s “state takeover” law required schools below the state average to be taken-over. Thus, half of the schools should have been taken-over because half are below the state average and half are above. Yet, only the New Orleans’ schools below the state average were taken-over. Targeting New Orleans seems to again be popular with our new governor.

Research on Reforms, Inc. consistently reported on the status of the state-takeover through its website and a published book, “Outcomes of the State Takeover of the New Orleans Schools.” This will be the final of its outreach, which ends with hope that our legislature will one day enact laws that provide equity and excellence in education for our New Orleans children and youth.

Barbara Ferguson, Attorney and Co-founder 
Charles Hatfield, Co-founder 
Research on Reforms, Inc.

Comments to 

bferguson@researchonreforms.org

Research On Reforms Website

Indiana has plunged headlong into privatization of its-once-beloved public schools.

Fortunately, there is a knowledgeable candidate for Governor who has promised to stop the destruction of public education.

Jennifer McCormick is a career educator who began as a special education teacher, then became a language arts teacher, a principal and a district superintendent.

She was elected Indiana State Superintendent of Public Instruction in 2016; she ran as a Republican. She served out her four-year term and switched parties in 2021.

McCormick wrote on Twitter:

Indiana GOP’s school privatization efforts have diverted 1.6B of tax dollars away from public schools, and the majority of communities do not have families and/or private schools participating. As governor, I will champion for Indiana to pause funding school privatization.

At the NPE conference in D.C. in 2023, JenniferMcCormick and me.

Eva Moskowitz runs the most successful (when measured by test scores) and the most controversial charter chain in New York State. Controversial because her schools are highly regimented, “no excuses” schools where student behavior and dress are tightly monitored. Controversial because her schools have a high attrition rate and a high teacher turnover rate. Outspoken parents complain that their children were “counseled out” or pushed out due to their behavior, their test scores, or their special needs.

Eva expected to expand to 100 schools in New York City but she constantly must fight parents and community schools who oppose her methods. So long as Michael Bloomberg was mayor and Joel was chancellor of the schools, Eva got whatever she wanted. But when they left office a decade ago, Eva had to fight off her critics without the certainty that City Hall. Backed her.

Funding has never been a problem for Success Academy. The chain is a favorite of Wall Street billionaires. Eva is said to have a salary and bonuses that are nearly $1 million. She has purchased properties and leases space to her schools.

Now, Chalkbeat reports, it appears that Eva is pondering open Success Academy schools in Florida, where charter schools are booming.

Alex Zimmerman writes:

Success Academy, New York City’s largest charter operator, is considering an expansion to Florida, a major shift in strategy for the network.

Success founder and CEO Eva Moskowitz said Wednesday she is in search of friendlier terrain for expansion.

New York has been “a rather hostile political environment” for charter schools, Moskowitz testified at a Florida State Board of Education meeting Wednesday morning. She later added: “I want to be in a place that’s high-growth, that’s high-innovation, that is welcoming to parental choice.”

The network’s decision to contemplate expanding beyond New York is a notable shift, as Success has operated schools exclusively within the five boroughs since launching in 2006.

Moskowitz previously outlined aggressive plans to expand to 100 schools locally, roughly double the number that the network currently operates. But Moskowitz and other leaders have faced strong headwinds. Charter schools have fallen out of favor with many Democrats and the sector faces a strict cap on the number of schools that are allowed to operate in the state. The legislature recently allowed 14 new charters to open in New York City, but have not signaled any plans to allow dramatically more than that.

Plus, the city’s charter networks have struggled with declining enrollment in recent years, including Success, though preliminary state figures show the network now enrolls about 21,000 students, erasing pandemic-era enrollment losses. Success is currently looking to open six new schools, according to the SUNY Charter Schools Institute, which oversees Success.

Florida officials, meanwhile, are rolling out the red carpet. The State Board of Education voted Wednesday to designate Success as a “School of Hope” operator, a program designed to attract high-performing charters to the state, offering funding for construction and other startup costs.

Enrollment in Florida’s charter sector has steadily grown in recent years, educating nearly 14% of students, or roughly 400,000 children, state data show. Charters are publicly funded, but privately operated schools.

In her testimony, Moskowitz emphasized that the network’s students are overwhelmingly low-income children of color and their test scores far outpace the city’s district schools — and even affluent suburbs. She also highlighted the network’s track record of preparing students to attend competitive colleges.

“This is exactly what we were envisioning: To have a charter school network to be able to come in and really serve those populations that are in need of this kind of academic rigor, of this performance,” State Education Commissioner Manny Diaz, Jr. said at the Wednesday hearing.

But Success has also been dogged by persistent allegations that school officials push out children who are more difficult to serve, including suspending them or dialing 911when students are experiencing behavioral problems or emotional distress. In 2015, the New York Times reported that one of its Brooklyn campuses had created a “Got to Go” list of troublesome students. Success officials said the list was a mistake and have disputedthat they systematically push children out.

It’s not clear how quickly Success might move to open schools in Florida or even if they will ultimately move forward with plans to do so. A Success Academy spokesperson did not elaborate.

Open the link to continue reading.

Jim Hightower is an old-fashioned Texas liberal. He tries to understand what’s happened to his state in his blog. The GOP is just plain mean and crazy.

He writes:

If you think the GOP’s Congress of Clowns represents the fringiest, freakiest, pack of politicos that MAGA-world can hurl at us – you haven’t been to Texas.

It’s widely known, of course, that Ted Cruz, Greg Abbott, and most other top Republican officials here are obsequious Trump acolytes. Thus, Texas is infamously racing against Florida to be declared the stupidest, meanest, most-repressive state government in America, constantly making demonic attacks on women’s freedom, immigrants, voting rights, public schools, poor people, and so on. But I’m confident Texas will win this race to the bottom for one big reason: GOP crazy runs extraordinarily deep here.

We have a county-level layer of ultra-MAGA cultists constantly pressing the state’s far-right officials to march all the way to the farthest edge of extremism – then leap into absurdity. Therefore, the party officially supports abolishment of labor unions, elimination of the minimum wage, privatization of social security, legalization of machine guns, and… well, you get the drift. Now, though, local mad-dog Trumpistas are pushing their party straight into the abyss of autocracy by declaring war on H-E-B.

What’s that? H-E-B is a Texas chain of supermarkets beloved in communities throughout the state. “Beloved,” because the stores fully embrace the rich diversity of all people in our state, has affordable prices, values employees, and supports community needs.

Nonetheless, county Republican zealots screech that H-E-B violates their party ideology by accepting food stamps, opposing privatization of schools, and (horrors!) sponsoring some LBGTQ pride events. So, they’re demanding official condemnation of the grocery chain for – GET THIS – “advocating for policies contrary to the Republican Party of Texas platform.”

Yes, violating the party platform is to be criminalized. It’s the reincarnation of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four: Be MAGA… or else.

Governor Bill Lee of Tennessee made school vouchers his top priority but the issue died in the Legislature despite its Republican supermajority. He will bring the issue back next year. He’s hoping for universal vouchers, where every student in the state is eligible for a voucher but opponents call his plan a subsidy for the wealthy who already are attending private schools.

In eastern Tennessee, and very likely across the entire state, parents and educators heaved a huge sigh of relief.

Dustin Park is a parent of kids who go to school in Maryville. He’s opposed to the universal school voucher plan because he said it excludes students with disabilities.

“The only thing that protects kids with disabilities is that federal law,” Parks said. “A bedrock of our public schools is that they accept everybody.”

The school district he sends his children to supports his stance. 

“We continue to maintain our belief that public funds should not be diverted to private entities, and taxpayers should not be required to subsidize private schools that are not held to the same standards of accountability and inclusivity as public schools,” said Mike Winstead, Director of Maryville City Schools. “If the Education Freedom Scholarship Act passed, it would have been harmful to the very students and vulnerable populations it maintained to assist.”

Dave Gorman is a teacher at Knox County Schools and also said he’s not sure lawmakers will listen to their constituents.

“We also have seen enough dirty dealings,” Gorman said. “We’ll never forget when Jason Zachary was the deciding vote to bring vouchers to a couple of cities in the state a few years ago — when it looked like it was about to die and he changed his vote.”

Knox County Schools provided the following statement about the proposal failing.

“As we have stated before, our attention has and will continue to stay focused on our students and providing them with a high-quality education. We are confident that our families will continue to choose KCS regardless of what happens at the state level.” 

Several school districts across East Tennessee also said they also are pleased a school voucher plan would not pass this session…

Kelly Johnson, Director of Clinton City Schools

“Elected officials are responsible for listening to their constituents, not answering to outside special interest groups. We know Governor Lee plans to bring it back next year. It is my hope that the citizens of TN remain vigilant in celebrating the many successes of public schools.”

The billionaire funded outside special interest groups will be back next year. Parents and educators should vote to replace those who want to undermine public schools.

A group of scholars at Indiana University led by Christopher Lubienski developed a methodology for ranking organizations and individuals in the field of education.

It was disheartening to see that nine of the ten most influential organizations advocate for school privatization, for charter schools and vouchers. It was also disheartening to see that these nine organizations have revenues in the millions of dollars each year. They are heavily funded by rightwing organizations and billionaires.

It was exciting, however, to see that #3 on the list of the 10 most influential organizations was the Network for Public Education!

It also was the organization with the smallest budget!

Wow! Standing up for public schools without billionaire $$$!

Iowa was once respected for the quality of its public schools. Now the Republican elected officials are tearing down the state’s public schools. They launched a voucher program, and they are now expanding it, at the expense of public schools.

There are some things we know for sure about voucher programs after three decades of experience. First, the actual cost always outstrips the projected cost. Two, whatever the eligibility requirements are in the first year, they will be stripped away so that eventually all students will be eligible for vouchers. Third, vouchers may be initially targeted to needy groups, like students with disabilities, but there is no assurance that these children will be admitted to voucher schools. Fourth, most students who apply for and use vouchers are already enrolled in private and religious schools. Fifth, students who transfer from public schools to voucher schools will fall behind academically. Sixth, many voucher schools will discriminate on any grounds—keeping out children because of their religion or because they are LGBT or because they are simply “not what the school wants.”

In voucher schools, schools choose, not families or students.

Ty Harding of Iowa Starting Line reports on the growing program in Iowa.

Iowa has committed nearly $180 million in taxpayer funds to support private school tuition in the 2024-25 school year, which is almost $50 million more than the initial Iowa Legislative Service Agency (LSA) projections.

Initially, the LSA projected Iowa would spend $106.9 million in the first year of Gov. Kim Reynolds’ private school voucher program—called Students First Education Savings Accounts—and $132.3 million in the second year.

However, the first year of the program cost Iowa taxpayers nearly $128 million. The Iowa Legislature allocated $179.2 million to the program for the upcoming fiscal year, according to the state’s recently approved general fund.

These amounts are only expected to increase as restrictions on who can participate in the program are rolled back.

The first year restricted access to students with a household income at or below 300% of the federal poverty guideline, but that restriction will be raised to 400% ($124,800 for a family of four) in the 2024-25 school year, before being phased out entirely in the 2025-26 school year.

Each voucher recipient will receive $7,826 in taxpayer funds to help cover private school tuition in the 2024-25 school year (the amount changes each year based on the state’s per-pupil funding). Predicated on this year’s budgeted amount, the state expects at least 22,897 students to receive a voucher. 

Another big change for the upcoming 2024-25 year is that public school districts will directly lose money due to voucher program. 

State funding for public schools is primarily based on enrollment weighting and state cost per pupil. Before the voucher law, districts still received those funds from the state even for students who lived in the district but did not attend a public school. Going forward, districts will no longer receive those dollars.

Please open the link to finish reading.

This article in the Gazette shows the negative effects of vouchers on Iowa City, a school district with some 14,400 students. Property taxes are going up, the teaching staff will shrink by attrition, and an elementary school will be closed. The vast majority of students will be harmed by a program that subsidizes the few.

Tim Slekar is a fearless warrior for public schools, teachers, and students. I will be talking to him about Slaying Goliath and the struggle to protect public schools from the depredations of billionaires and zealots.

This Thursday on Civic Media: Dive Back into “Slaying Goliath” with Diane Ravitch

Grab your pencils—BustEDpencils is gearing up for a no-holds-barred revival of Diane Ravitch’s game-changing book, *Slaying Goliath*, live this Thursday on Civic Media. 

Launched into a world on the brink of a pandemic, *Slaying Goliath* hit the shelves with a mission: to arm the defenders of public education against the Goliaths of privatization. But then, COVID-19 overshadowed everything. Despite that, the battles Diane described haven’t paused—they’ve intensified. And this Thursday, we’re bringing these crucial discussions back to the forefront with Diane herself.

This Thursday at 7pm EST on BustEDpencils, we’re not just revisiting a book; we’re reigniting a movement. Diane will dissect the current threats to public education and highlight how *Slaying Goliath* still maps the path to victory for our schools. This isn’t just about reflection—it’s about action.

**It’s time to get real. It’s time to get loud. It’s time to tune in this Thursday at 7 PM EST on Civic Media.**

If you believe that without a robust public education system our democracy is in jeopardy, then join us. Listen in, call in (855-752-4842), and let’s get fired up. We’ve got a fight to win, and Diane Ravitch is leading the charge.

Mark your calendars and fire up Civic Media this Thursday at 7pm Central.