Archives for category: Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Charter Advocates Outraged by Warren K-12 Plan

By dianeravitch
October 22, 2019 //
44

Politico Morning Education reports that charter advocates are furious in response to Warren’s K-12 education plan , especially her intention to cut off federal funding for charters. They are especially frustrated because she is not accepting corporate donations for her campaign, and they can’t buy her support.

CHARTER ADVOCATES BLAST WARREN’S PLAN: While drawing praise from teachers unions, Warren’s hard-line approach to charter schools in a new K-12 plan is under fire from a Democratic group that says her stance is “out of touch” with voters and will hinder opportunities for black and brown students.

— The plan, which would cost some $800 billion over 10 years, would ban for-profit charter schools, end the main source of federal funding for all types of charter schools, and end federal funding for their expansion.

— “While we agree with the Senator that for-profit charters should be banned and that public charter schools should be held to high standards, limiting high-quality options that have been proven to increase equity within the public school system is the wrong plan for Democrats,” said Shavar Jeffries, Democrats for Education Reform’s national president, in a statement

In case anyone from Politico reads this, the Network for Public Education isnot funded by unions and is not a union front. DFER is funded by Wall Street and should be identified as such.

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Charter Schools, Democrats for Education Reform, DFER, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization

New Hampshire: Democrats Block GOP Effort to Gut Local Control

By dianeravitch
October 22, 2019 //
0

 

New Hampshire’s Republican Governor, Chris Sununu (his father John Sununu was Chief of staff to President George H.W. Bush), appointed a man who homeschooled his children to be State Commissioner of Education. Commissioner Frank Edelblut has dedicated his time in office to undermining public schools. His big idea is called “Learn Everywhere,” which would allow the State Board of education to allow graduation credits for anything they wished, whether it was for-profit, or commercial, or lessons with Miss Sally, or anything else. Local school boards now have that authority, and they rightly complained that Learn Anywhere infringed on their realm.

Edelblut wants to put public schools out of business by allowing anything and everything to count for credit.

He is the Betsy DeVos of New Hampshire.

But Democrats in the legislature threw a big obstacle in front of Edelblut’s plan.

Lawmakers on New Hampshire’s legislative rules committee voted Thursday to reject the proposed “Learn Everywhere” program from the state’s Department of Education, in the latest blow to a months-long effort by Commissioner Frank Edelblut. 

In a 6-4 vote led by Democrats on party lines, members of the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules voted to issue a final objection to the proposed rule change. 

But the action doesn’t kill the program for good. Under state law, the Department of Education can proceed with the rules over the objections of lawmakers. Doing that, though, would be risky. The department would assume all liability in the case of legal action, according to lawyers for the state’s Office of Legislative Services on Thursday.

If the citizens of NewHampshire want to save their public schools and prevent massive fraud with their tax monies, they have to replace Governor Sununu when he runs again and insist that the new governor put an educator in charge of the State Education Department.

 

 

Categories Accountability, Betsy DeVos, Education Industry, Education Reform, New Hampshire, Privatization, School Choice

North Carolina: Leaders of Charter Chain Disappear into Thin Air

By dianeravitch
October 22, 2019 //
5

 

A few years ago, Oregon businessman John Bryan gave hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions to make sure that the state had a welcome mat for charter schools. He coincidentally opened 17 charter schools across the state, under the aegis of a management corporation called TeamCFA. He also pushed the legislature to create an “Opportunity School District,” modeled on Tennessee’s failed Achievement SchoolDistrict, which would gather the state’s lowest scoring districts and give them to a charter operator. By happenstance or design, Bryan’s TeamCFA received the contract to run the district. Districts fought hard to prevent the state from taking over their schools, and eventually only one school was sucked in. The first evaluation of the OSD showed that its one school did not improve, and the district had a revolving door of superintendents and principals.

TeamCFA runs 17 charters with 11,000 students in North Carolina and another four in Arizona.

When a reporter at the Raleigh News & Observer tried to find out who was in charge, no one answered the phones or returned his messages.

The reporter did reach a board member.

“I want to clear up one misconception,” C. Bradley Miller, a member of TeamCFA’s board of directors, said in an email Friday to The News & Observer. “TeamCFA Foundation is not closing. We remain committed to supporting schools and their students and helping them achieve academic excellence.”

Miller said staff members still work at TeamCFA, but he didn’t provide any details. No one answered the phone at TeamCFA’s headquarters on a recent weekday and a voice mail from The News & Observer wasn’t returned.

The staff directory, email and telephone contact information on TeamCFA’s website was gone Monday afternoon.

Staff members who left and were contacted by The N&O would not say why they left.

Amid the uncertainty, two new schools that opened in August — Bonnie Cone Classical Academy in Huntersville and Community Public Charter School in Stanley — no longer plan to have TeamCFA run their day-to-day operations.

They just picked up and left without so much as a “by your leave.” It’s an innovative way to supply high-quality seats and academic excellence.

Read more here: https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article235919992.html#storylink=cpy

 

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, Failure, North Carolina, Privatization

Kentucky: Don’t Be Fooled! Charters and Vouchers Harm Children.

By dianeravitch
October 22, 2019 //
3

 

Rev. Sharon Felton, coordinator of Pastors for Kentucky Children, warns parents and other members of the public not to be fooled by the rhetoric. Charters, vouchers, and tax credits are not good for children, and they drain resources from the public schools that educate most children.

She writes:

Educating our children is the most important thing we do in the commonwealth. Educating all of our children no matter their family’s economic status, their address, the color of their skin, is so critical to our society and our future that our constitution requires it!

Section 183 of the Kentucky Constitution states, “The General Assembly shall, by appropriate legislation, provide for an efficient system of common schools throughout the State.”

People are pouring money and rhetoric into our state to convince us all that privatization, school choice, scholarship tax credits (vouchers), and charter schools are the answer to all our public school issues. What they are NOT telling us is that these programs often tend to harm students, public schools, families and our communities…

It is time we tell the privatizers no, once and for all. Our children are not commodities, available for the wealthy and corporations to profit…

Every time some high-dollar lobby group creates some new scheme to take money out of public schools, scholarship tax credits being the latest example, we take money away from the 648,369 children in public schools and make the job that much harder. We do not need to fund more than one educational system.

We do not need to give wealthy people tax breaks for donating to the private school of their choice. Instead, imagine the return if we invested everything we could into the great school system we already have going. Imagine how all our students would flourish if we provided for their teachers.

Imagine the future of our commonwealth with a fully funded public school system where teachers were paid what they deserve and had the resources to do their jobs and our children were afforded the highest quality education in the country. We will make this a reality when we choose to invest in our children and their public schools.

Join Pastors for Kentucky Children as we advocate for all of Kentucky’s children and our public schools.

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, For-Profit, Kentucky, Privatization, School Choice, Vouchers

Class Size Matters: The Cost to New York City of Paying Rent for Charter School Facilities

By dianeravitch
October 21, 2019 //
5

 

Leonie Haimson and her colleagues Patrick Nevada and Emily Carrazana of Class Size Matters released a report on the cost that New York City pays for charter school facilities, even for richly endowed charters like Success Academy. The city is now spending more than $100 million a year to pay the rent for charters. This includes almost $15 million a year paying for rent where the charter or its management organization is the landlord!

In 2014, Governor Andrew Cuomo advanced legislation that required the City to pay the rent for charter schools in private buildings when the city was unable to provide suitable space in public school buildings. At the time, he declared himself the champion of charter schools, which helped him raise campaign funds on Wall Street. Charter students are 4% of the state’s students, and 10% in the City.

Here is the press release:

On Monday, October 21, Class Size Matters released a new report revealing how the NYC Department of Education has spent more than $377 million on charter school facility costs from FY 2014 to FY 2019.  This amount includes both matching funds for facility upgrades for public schools, co-located with charter schools that spent more than $5000 for this purpose, and on paying the rent for new and expanding charter schools in private space. Nearly $15 million of that total since FY 2015 was spent by DOE to help charter schools to help pay for their space, even though their buildings are owned by their Charter Management Organization, affiliated foundation or LLC.

In FY 2019, DOE spent about $25 million last year on matching funds to public schools co-located with charter schools.  Yet between FY 2014 and FY 2019, more than $22 million in charter school expenditures on facility upgrades were not matched in 175 public schools that shared their buildings, according to spreadsheets provided by DOE, in apparent contradiction to astate law passed in 2010. By FY 2019, only one third of co-located DOE schools received their full complement of matching funds.  

The two schools which experienced the largest shortfalls were both District 75 schools that serve students with serious disabilities: Mickey Mantle School (M811), located in two sites in Harlem, which lacked $1.5 million, and P.S 368 (K368), located  in two sites in Brooklyn, which lacked about $1.2 million. All four sites are co-located with different branches of the Success Academy Charter schools.

Mindy Rosier is the UFT chapter delegate from Mickey Mantle School, which enrolls students with multiple disabilities, including autism, emotional/behavioral difficulties and/or significant language and communication disorders.  As Mindy pointed out, “The $1.5 million in matching funds for facility upgrades would have been incredibly helpful to our school.  Our District 3 site needs new wiring, since the internet is very slow, and much of our curriculum is online. Our site in District 4 needs new bathrooms and water fountains, and nine classrooms out of ten badly need repainting.”

The DOE currently holds leases for 12 private buildings that house 15 charter schools, with a cost to the city of $17.1 million during FY 2019 alone. In addition, there are 88 charter schools that receive a per student “lease subsidy” to help pay for their own private space, which has increased by 72 percent since FY 2017. In 2019, DOE was projected to spend about $83.6 million in lease subsidies for charter schools, with an estimated $50 million of that total reimbursed by the state.

By analyzing property records, charter school financial reports, and sales records, the authors found that the payments made by DOE included $14.8 million for eight charter schools which are housed in buildings owned by related parties of these schools, that is, their own Charter Management Organization or an affiliated LLC or foundation.  

For example, DOE provided lease subsidies of $2.2 million in FY 2019 for two Success Academy charter schools even though the Success CMO owns their space in the Hudson Yards complex on the west side of Manhattan, reportedly the most expensive real estate development in US history. In another case, the city paid $461,965 in lease subsidies in FY 2019 towards the rental costs of Beginning with Children II charter school, despite the fact that the Beginning with Children Foundation bought this Brooklyn building for only ten dollars in 2017 from the Pfizer Corporation. More examples are provided in the report.

Carol Burris, Executive Director of the Network for Public Education said: “It is outrageous that the taxpayers of New York City and the state are required to pay $2.2 million a year to house two Success Academy charter schools located in a building in the Hudson Yards that the Success Academy Charter Management Organization owns. And Success is not alone. This report documents eight charter schools for which taxpayers are footing the facilities bill in buildings owned by the charters themselves or affiliated organizations. The Network for Public Education has studied all of the various charter laws and their loopholes.  I have never seen any other that requires the district to cover the costs of private facilities like this one does. One wonders whether this is about educating children or building a real estate empire at taxpayer expense.” 

“NYC has more than 500,000 students in overcrowded public-school buildings, as well as class sizes far higher on average than classes in the rest of the state.  Yet we are also the only district obligated to cover the cost of private space for charter schools, or offer them space in public school buildings,” said Leonie Haimson, one of the co-authors of the report. “The cost of providing space for charter schools in private buildings has risen sharply over the last five years.  If the current trend continues, the amount spent annually may soon exceed the cost of the payments that the city spends to finance the construction of new public schools.”  

Concluded Diane Ravitch, celebrated education historian, “The findings of this report, if validated, should shock the conscience of the Governor and Legislature.  They should amend the law as soon as possible so that the city is no longer forced to subsidizethe acquisition of private space by charter schools, even as our public schools continue to be badly underfunded and overcrowded. “

The powerpoint can be downloaded here.

The document can be downloaded here.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Funding, New York City, Privatization

Warren Releases K-12 Education Plan, Wallops Charters

By dianeravitch
October 21, 2019 //
96

Rachel M. Cohen has the scoop on the Elizabeth Warren K-12 education plan, just released. 

Warren would quadruple federal funding for Title 1 schools.

She would eliminate the federal Charter Schools Program, which has been a colossal failure and which Betsy DeVos has turned into a slush fund for corporate charter chains.

Cohen writes:

ELIZABETH WARREN RELEASED a wide-ranging education plan Monday, pledging to invest hundreds of billions of dollars into public schools if she wins the presidency, paid in part through her proposed two-cent tax on wealth over $50 million. Sen. Warren’s plan is infused with her broader campaign themes of reducing corruption and fraud; she backs measures like new taxes on education lobbying, limiting the profiteering of tech companies that sell digital products to schools, and curbing self-dealing within charter schools.

And it builds on some of her earlier campaign proposals, like pledging to appoint aformer public school teacher as Education Secretary, supporting schools in teaching Native American history and culture, and expanding early learning opportunities for infants and toddlers.

In May, fellow Democratic hopeful Sen. Bernie Sanders’s own education plan sent shockwaves when he endorsed the NAACP’s call for banning for-profit charter schools and holding nonprofit charters to the same transparency and accountability standards as traditional public schools. In her new plan, Warren joins Sanders in embracing these positions.

Warren goes further than Sanders in calling not only for a for-profit charter school ban, but also extending the ban to any non-profit charter that “actually serve[s] for-profit interests.” Warren said she would even direct the IRS to investigate non-profit charters for potential tax status abuse and recommends referring “cases to the Tax Fraud Division of the Department of Justice when appropriate.”

This is great news for all of us awaiting the K-12 plan of the candidate who has a plan for every other issue. This is a strong plan.

Supporting privatization lite (charter schools) is no longer a bipartisan issue. Republicans support charter schools.

I am especially pleased to see that her plan proposes elimination of federal support for charters, which now stands at $440 million a year and is used to grow KIPP, IDEA, Success Academy, and other big chains as they replace democratically controlled public schools.

NPE’s Report “Asleep at the Wheel” demonstrates that 1/3 of federally funded charters either never open or close soon after opening. Carol Burris has updated that report and is in Washington, D.C. today reporting to members of Congress on the waste of at least $1 billion on failed charters.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, For-Profit, Privatization

Denis Smith: The Questions You Should Ask When You Visit a Charter School

By dianeravitch
October 21, 2019 //
6

Bill Phillis reposts here an article by Denis Smith, who offers sound advice about the questions you should ask if you visit a charter school.
Denis Smith on Ron Rice of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools
In a recent column in the Columbus Dispatch, Ron Rice of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools opened his piece with this statement. “The early stage of the 2020 presidential campaign has featured a lot of rhetoric about charter schools. Too much of it has been divorced from the reality of what charter schools are. So I have a special request of all the candidates: Go visit a charter school.”
Denis Smith, who used to work in the Ohio Department of Education’s charter school office, thinks that Ohio citizens should take Rice up on his offer to visit and learn more about schools that call themselves public entities but hide their private dimension. He offers suggestions when visiting a charter.
__________
 The recent Op-Ed by Ron Rice Jr. of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools about the need for candidates to pay attention to charter schools contains an interesting – and inviting – sub-headline:
Cut through the rhetoric and go visit charter schools.
What a wonderful idea! I certainly hope that my fellow citizens will take Mr. Rice up on his request to see what they can find out about these peculiar institutions which are privately managed but publicly funded. If anyone should visit one of these schools, here are some questions visitors should ask to better understand the DNA of charters.
How is the school governed? How are the board members chosen? Since they are not democratically elected by registered voters, like public school board members, whom do they represent? Are the board members American citizens? Do the board members live in the school attendance area? How many other charter school boards might the board members be serving on at the same time?
What about the company that manages the school? Do they own the building in which the school is housed and use operating profits diverted from classroom costs to buy real estate? How much of the school budget is applied to rental costs? Does the management company also own the property where the school is housed? Has the company or school leader populated the board with individuals who may be conflicted with regard to whose interests, rather than the students, come first? 
While we’re at it, folks who might visit charters need to find out about the school leader. A lot of charters use imposing titles such as CEO and Superintendent in their listings. But does the school leader have a professional educator license and graduate training in teaching and school administration? A previous background in the classroom? What percentage of the total school budget goes to administration?
There aren’t as many questions to ask about the teachers inasmuch as state law requires the classroom-level staff to be licensed. However, how many of the teaching staff are completing their first year at the school? How many have worked at the school more than two years? 
These are but a few of a list of sample questions that should be posed to any charter school advocate. The reason for the choice of these particular questions is simple. Ohio law exempts charters from about 150 sections of the state code that apply to public schools. There is no requirement for a charter school board member to be a qualified voter, viz., citizen, nor is there any minimum educational requirement or professional license required to administer a charter school. In spite of Mr. Rice’s advocacy of charters, these are two of many fatal design flaws for these under-regulated schools that have been the subject of so many scandals over the years.
Ohio residents should visit some area charter schools and ask these and other questions. It’s time for voters to inform themselves about charter schools, critically examine their nature and purpose, and cut through the rhetoric offered by Mr. Rice and those who wish to privatize one of key elements of every community. Public education is about democracy and the investment citizens make in their schools, not about enabling private companies to convert public assets into profit and acquire private property that otherwise should belong to the taxpayers.
For these reasons, the term “public charter school” is in fact an oxymoron. The very use of that term is a fitting example of the kind of rhetoric Mr. Rice has encouraged us to avoid. Let us help him to cut through the rhetoric in this election season and take him up on the suggestion of visiting these privately operated schools which convert public funds for their own purposes. 
William L. Phillis | Ohio Coalition for Equity & Adequacy of School Funding | 614.228.6540 | ohioeanda@sbcglobal.net| www.ohiocoalition.org
Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Democracy, Education Industry, Education Reform, For-Profit, Ohio, Privatization

Philadelphia: School Choice Has Harmed, Not Helped, the City’s Public Schools

By dianeravitch
October 21, 2019 //
7

Back in the early days of school choice advocacy, it was often claimed that school choice would “force” the public schools to compete and they would get better because of the magic of the market.

Now we know that was a selling point, and it was not true.

Deborah Gordon Klehr, executive director of the civil rights group Education Law Center-PA, writes about the negative effects of “school choice” on the public schools of Philadelphia. 

The publics schools in that city have long been severely underfunded, and school choice has stripped them of both students and funding, leaving them even worse off.

Klehr writes:

A study of charter schools in Philadelphia published by the Education Law Center earlier this year is a stark reminder that many parents don’t get to choose and that ultimately it may be the school and not the parent doing the choosing. More charters and more slots haven’t cured an ailing school system.

This is not to discount the successes we know exist for students in many city charters. But Philadelphia’s 22-year history of rapid charter expansion coupled with inadequate oversight is entrenching new inequities in an already unequal landscape.

Sometimes the problem is blatant discrimination: For instance, a recurring pattern we see among families who contact us is charters telling students with disabilities, after they have been accepted, “We cannot serve you.” As public schools, charters are prohibited from discriminating against students with disabilities. And yet, we see this pattern persist.

Sometimes the obstacles to enrollment are more subtle; for example, enrollment documents may only be available in English. The results, however, are clear. The population of economically disadvantaged students is 14 percentage points lower in the traditional charter sector (56%) vs. the district sector (70%). And, the percentage of English learners in district schools (11%) is nearly three times higher than in traditional charters (4%), with nearly a third of traditional charters serving no English learners.

Few of the special education students in traditional charters are from the disability categories that typically are most expensive to serve. And, the vast majority of traditional charter schools serve student populations that are two-thirds or more of one racial group – a significantly higher degree of segregation than in district schools.

In short, the city’s traditional charter schools (excluding “Renaissance” charters charged with serving all students from a catchment area) disproportionately enroll a student population that is more advantaged than the students in district-run schools; as a sector, charters are shirking their responsibility of educating all students.

No independent observer could look at the Philadelphia schools—public, charters, and vouchers—and say that any problems have been solved by privatization.

 

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, Inequity, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Privatization, School Choice, Segregation, Vouchers

Arizona: Privatization of Records Storage Will Cost Millions

By dianeravitch
October 20, 2019 //
3

 

When a new Secretary of State (aDemocrat in a Koch-owned State) was elected in November 2018 in Arizona, she discovered that her predecessor had signed a long-term contract with a private company to store public records.

The state’s storage facility sat empty while the private company collects millions.

One former state official described the warehouses as something out of “Indiana Jones,” with stack after stack of boxes.

A few years ago, the hulking facility just down the street from the Arizona Capitol was filled with government records, from the files of prison inmates to old meeting minutes.

Today, its three warehouses sit mostly empty.

Instead of storing records here, the state agreed in 2017 to ship each box to the warehouses of a storage and information management company, Iron Mountain.

Then-Secretary of State Michele Reagan, a Republican, touted the deal in a news release as saving money.

But her Democratic successor, Katie Hobbs, says the financial implications of the decision have been staggering. And the state appears stuck with the deal for years under a contract awarded without competition.

Hobbs published a proposed budget Thursday that calls for an infusion of funds into her office for 2020, the coming election year. She pointed to the Iron Mountain contract as a major drain on the office’s finances, describing the deal as part of what she called “severe mismanagement and irresponsible oversight of public resources” under Reagan’s administration.

Under the contract with Boston-based Iron Mountain, the price for each box is only going up. The Secretary of State’s Office says the costs of storing government records has nearly doubled from the year before the contract took effect.

At the same time, the state is paying to maintain its mostly vacant complex of warehouses, which remain government property.

The contract runs for 10 years.

In all, the records management program will cost the Secretary of State’s Office about $1.6 million this fiscal year, even considering that the state slashed the number of staff positions in records management from 11 to three after initially implementing the contract.

Meanwhile, the fees from other government agencies are expected to total $900,000.

In addition, the state pays $400,000 a year for its own empty storage facilities.

Under the contract, the price for storing each carton of documents will increase annually starting next year.

Not only do the fee schedules in the contract call for higher prices year after year, Iron Mountain could add a surcharge on the cost of each trip it makes to pick up government records if fuel prices rise over a certain level. And if the state wants to transfer the records to another company or to its own warehouses for storage, the government will have to pay for the move, too.

Do the math. The state is paying about $3 million a year to store its records. That cost is expected to rise in each year of a ten-year contract. The state saves by cutting the jobs of eight employees, who were probably making less than $100,000 a year, probably $60,000 a year, filing records.

In Arizona, this is a public-private partnership.

Guess who benefits?

Categories Accountability, Arizona, Privatization

Valerie Strauss: The Koch Strategy to Eliminate Public Schools

By dianeravitch
October 20, 2019 //
49

 

Valerie Strauss writes here about an important new book about the Koch Empire and its desire to eliminate and privatize public schools. The book is “Kochland: The Secret History of Koch Industries and Corporate Power in America,” by Christopher Leonard.

Strauss writes:

Early this year, the Koch network committed to starting an effort to transform public education. What would that look like?

The author of a new book on the billionaire Charles Koch and his late brother, David, says it would amount to the destruction of public education as we know it.

The Koch network is the influential assemblage of groups funded by billionaire industrialist Charles Koch and more than 600 wealthy individuals who share his pro-business, anti-regulation view of economics and positions on social policy, such as climate change denial.

The focus on K-12 education follows long involvement by the Koch brothers in higher education. As leaders of a conservative movement that believes U.S. higher education is controlled by liberals who indoctrinate young people, they spent as much as an estimated $100 million on programs at hundreds of colleges and universities that support their views…

In June, two Koch-related education initiatives were announced. One is a group called “Yes Every Kid,” which, its creators say, will bring together partisans in the education labor and funding debates to try to find solutions. The other is a project called 4.0 that commits the Charles Koch Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation to pledge $5 million each — along with $5 million from other donors — to support, according to a statement, “600 education entrepreneurs in incubating, testing and launching innovative approaches to education.” (The Walton foundation has long supported charter schools and other parts of the school choice movement.)

one thing is certain: the efforts of the Koch Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation are not doing it “for the kids.” By now, it a fact that kids in charters do not outperform their peers in public schools, and kidsin voucher schools get worse scores than their peers in public schools.

What do the billionaires want? Lower taxes. No unions. Powerless teachers. A free market where government has no role, and families compete for resources. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer, just like the economy. What we know about the market is that it produces a few winners and many losers. It does not produce equal educational opportunity.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, Koch Brothers, Privatization, Vouchers
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »