Archives for category: Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Jan Resseger: School Choice Fails to Provide Equity for the Neediest Children

By dianeravitch
November 9, 2018 //
17

Jan Resseger reviews the evidence about the “portfolio” model of school choice and weighs in on the Burris-Ravitch critique of the recent paper from the Learning Policy Institute that supported that model.

She writes:

“The Learning Policy Institute’s report, The Tapestry of American Public Education, promotes a lovely metaphor, a tapestry of school options woven together—open enrollment, magnet schools, charter schools, and specialty schools based on distinct educational models. The Learning Policy Institute declares: “The goal and challenge of school choice is to create a system in which all children choose and are chosen by a good school that serves them well and is easily accessible. The central lesson from decades of experience and research is that choice alone does not accomplish this goal. Simply creating new options does not lead automatically to greater access, quality or equity.” Here is how the Learning Policy Institute proposes that such fair and equal choice might be accomplished: “Focus on educational opportunities for children, not governance structures. Too often, questions related to the number of charters a district should have address school governance preferences, rather than the needs of children… Work to ensure equity and access for all. Expanding choice can increase opportunities, or it can complicate or restrict access to convenient and appropriate opportunities, most often for the neediest students… Create transparency at every stage about outcomes, opportunities, and resources to inform decision making for families, communities, and policymakers… Build a system of schools that meets all students’ needs.”

“The Learning Policy Institute’s recommendations sound familiar. They are the same arguments made by the Center on Reinventing Public Education as it describes its theory of “portfolio school reform.” Portfolio school reform imagines an amicable, collaborative mix of many different schools: “A great school for every child in every neighborhood. The portfolio strategy is a problem-solving framework through which education and civic leaders develop a citywide system of high-quality, diverse, autonomous public schools. It moves past the one-size-fits-all approach to education. Portfolio systems place educators directly in charge of their schools, empower parents to choose the right schools for their children, and focus school system leaders—such as school authorizers or those in a district central office—on overseeing school success.”

“Under portfolio school reform, a school district manages traditional neighborhood schools and charter schools like a stock portfolio—opening new schools all the time and closing so-called “failing” schools. CRPE says that portfolio school reform operates as a cycle: “give families choice; give schools autonomy; assess school performance; schools improve or get intervention; and expand or replace schools.”

“This rhetoric is all very nice. But the realities on the ground in the portfolio school districts I know fail to embody equity and justice. I believe it is a pipe dream to promise a great school choice for every child in every neighborhood. For one thing, there are the political and economic realities, beginning with the operation of power politics which is always part of the mayoral governance that is at the heart of this theory. There is also the unequal access parents have to information, and the unequal political, economic, and social position of parents. And finally there is the devastating impact of the ongoing expansion of school choice on the traditional public schools in the school districts where charters are proliferating. CRPE calls its governance theory “portfolio school reform.” Many critics instead describe parasitic school reform.”

Resseger cites studies by Gordon Lafer and Bruce Baker that show the harm the portfolio model inflicts on public schools.

And she concludes:

“The public schools are our mutual responsibility through public governance—paid for and operated by government on behalf of he public. We have a lot of work to do to realize this promise for all children. Bruce Baker describes our responsibility: ‘More than anything else, our system of public schooling requires renewed emphasis on equitable, adequate, and economically sustainable public financing at a level that will provide all children equal opportunity to achieve the outcomes we, as a society, desire for them.’”

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, Equity, Justice, Privatization, School Choice

Sue Legg: Twenty Years of School Choice in Florida, Part 2

By dianeravitch
November 9, 2018 //
4

Sue Legg, the former director of education for Florida’s League of Women Voters, wrote this series at my request. She was assessment and evaluation contractor for the Fl. DOE for twenty years while on the faculty at the University of Florida. This is part 2.

Twenty Years Later: Impact of Charter and Private Sector Schools

With support from the state, charter and private schools enroll 22% of Florida’s three million children. Charters receive the same per student funding as regular public schools. Private schools receive tax credit scholarships to avoid Florida’s constitutional ban on vouchers funded directly by the legislature.

Nearly half of Florida’s 655 charters are run by for-profit management firms dominated by two firms: Academica and Charter Schools USA (CSUSA).

In 2016, In the Public Interest reported that Academica’s real estate arm controls more than $155 million in south Florida real estate. They essentially own the property for half of their schools and lease it to themselves through the non-profit charter boards they establish. Some of its charters pay exorbitant leases to the Catholic church or other religious entities. Using church facilities is not illegal if there is no religious instruction or other artifacts in classrooms.

CSUSA operates in a similar manner. CSUSA has its own real estate company. We tracked the history of one such school and found that CSUSA had purchased a former ATT call center for about $1.2 million. They flipped the building several times to have the property reappraised, and invested $1.5 million in air conditioning etc. The final appraisal was for $9 million, and the CSUSA board signed an escalating lease for over a million dollars per year which would in time surpass the school budget. Teachers are paid from the remaining budget which seldom allows for retirement or health benefits. Thus, teacher turnover tends to be more than double the rate for traditional public schools.

In 2016, the U.S. Office of the Inspector General delineated the similarities between charter financing and the subprime loan crisis that wreaked havoc with the housing industry. Real estate loans have minimal annual payments with large balloon payments when the loan becomes due.

Independently run charters survive at first on start up funds from the state and federal government. Even though charters are exempt from the regulations governing the quality of school facilities, many complain they are underfunded. Some are housed in abandoned strip malls or former business locations that need remodeling.

The lack of regulation was supposed to spur innovation. Charters must meet local fire and safety codes, employ teachers who are certified within 18 months, and administer state assessments. Otherwise, they are exempt from operational district oversight and state school facilities codes. District school boards can only intervene if charters cannot pay their bills or they receive failing grades two years in a row on the state assessment tests. There is no limit on charter expansion, and the State Board of Education may overrule, and does, proposals that are not approved locally.

Where does this lack of regulation lead? The simple answer is profiteering, corruption and closures. The management of Newpoint charters is the current scandal. The company has been charged with racketeering involving 57 million dollars in the operation of its 15 schools. Investigative reporting by the Miami Herald, Orlando Sentinel, and Tampa Bay Times have documented many other scandals in which charters close without warning, funds are collected for unenrolled students,

Charters close at an alarming rate. At least 373 Florida charters closed in the last twenty years. They take the money with them. Even some proponents of charters are having doubts.

Parents are finding out the hard way that they have no voice in charter school management. Erika Donalds, a former school board member whose husband is a legislator, sponsored the doomed constitutional amendment 8 to create a separate charter system. She also co-founded one of the Classical Academies where she was a board member. The charter was based on ‘Christian values’, but had a principal who created an environment “where fraud can occur without detection”. Donalds withdrew her children. She has, however, formed an alliance with the wife of the 2017 Florida Senate president to open another Classical Academy.

Past attempts by some legislators to limit the ‘self-dealing’ and profiteering failed. In September 2018, Integrity-Florida released its latest report on needed reforms. Millions of tax payer dollars have been lost to both excessive profits and criminal misuse of funds. Legislation is needed to require a justification for opening a charter and improved regulation to prevent profiteering. At least now, the public is growing aware of the financial threats to our public schools. No longer is the problem ‘over there’. It is affecting everyone.

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

Tennessee: Aspire Charter Chain In Trouble, Financially and Academically

By dianeravitch
November 8, 2018 //
7

The Aspire charter chain in Memphis is in trouble and debating its future. This is one of billionaire Reed Hastings’ investments, and it is not faring well.

Facing a roughly $2 million operating deficit and lagging academic progress, a California-based charter organization that runs four schools in Memphis is reconsidering its future in the city — even floating the possibility of pulling out of the area altogether.

At a public meeting on Friday, Aspire’s national board discussed with its Memphis staff four possible scenarios for moving forward. Board chair Jonathan Garfinkel said that changes are anticipated, given the budget deficit and the fact that academic “results have not been what we’ve hoped.”

As a result, Aspire could cease to oversee its four Memphis schools, which serve some 1,600 students in total. This wouldn’t mean the schools would close, but that the governance of the school would change. A task force — composed of board members, Aspire staff in Memphis and consultants — came up with the following four possible paths forward, though Garfinkel said more possibilities could be considered.

Memphis remains an Aspire region with additional supports and a plan to close the financial gap.

Memphis becomes an Aspire “franchise,” keeping the name and core approach and receiving some supports, like curriculum and coaching, but operates as a separate nonprofit with significantly more autonomy.

The four Memphis schools become a standalone charter network with their own central office and fundraising function.

The four schools team up with one or more existing local school district or charter network.

If any changes are made, they wouldn’t go into place until after this school year. Garfinkel emphasized that no decisions have been made, and the task force would use Friday’s conversation to steer its board recommendations, slated for January.

Guess they are not “saving poor kids in failing schools.”

Wonder if Reed Hastings will rethink his grand plan to privatize every public school? I’m guessing not. Being a billionaire means never saying you made a mistake.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, Memphis, Privatization, Tennessee

Reed Hastings: Destroyer of Public Schools

By dianeravitch
November 8, 2018 //
21

Reed Hastings, billionaire founder of Netflix, hates public schools. He wants to eliminate school boards and replace them with corporate management. He has spent more than $100 million promoting charter schools.

Reed Hastings: Netflix CEO Goes Nuclear on Public Schools

“Hastings’ lavish spending has raised concerns among critics who worry that the sort of technologies and efficiencies he used to build his Silicon Valley empire and is now applying to education might not work for the nation’s schoolchildren.

These concerns were raised in 2014, when Hastings, at a California Charter Schools Association meeting, asserted that public schools are hobbled by having elected schoolboards.

“Let’s think large-scale,” says Brett Bymaster, a Silicon Valley electrical engineer who broke the story about Hastings’ school board comments on his blog about Rocketship, a charter school chain supported by Hastings. “You have someone who is contributing millions and millions of dollars to local and statewide political races and who was the former president of the state school board — whose stated goal is to end democracy in education. That is deeply disturbing.”

When Hastings served as chair of the California State Board of Education, he opposed bilingual education, leading Democratic legislators to block his reappointment. While on The State Board, he led the charge to remove any limits on the number of charters in the state and to limit regulation or accountability.

“The fact that California Charter Academy, one of the country’s largest charter school operators, collapsed and left 6,000 California students without a school during his board tenure, did little to sway Hastings’ enthusiasm for publicly financed yet privately run schools. Along with helping to fund the Rocketship and Aspire charter programs, he’s served on the boards of the California Charter Schools Association and the KIPP Foundation, the largest network of charter schools in the country. And much of Hastings’ school reform efforts have focused on technological solutions. He helped launch NewSchools Venture Fund, which has invested $250 million in education entrepreneurs and “ed tech” products. He’s also been a major backer of DreamBox Learning, which develops the math software used in Rocketship schools, and the Khan Academy, an online teaching video clearinghouse.

“But so far, the outcomes of many of these ed tech ventures have been mixed. Khan Academy has been criticized for including fundamental math errors in some of its instructional videos. And while DreamBox once championed a Harvard University study that found that use of its math software was associated with test achievement gains in grades three through five, the study itself noted it could not be ruled out that the gains were “due to student motivation or teacher effectiveness, rather than to the availability of the software.” What’s more, the user data collected by programs developed at Khan Academy, DreamBox and other companies are fueling concerns over student privacy.

“More broadly, education experts are worried about the impact of minimally staffed, call center-like computer learning labs on the nation’s students and teachers, especially as this approach becomes more commonplace in the name of cost savings and innovation. (In a 2012 Washington Post article, former Rocketship CEO John Danner noted that “Rocketeers” could eventually spend 50 percent of their school day in front of computers.)”…

“When Netflix became the first major U.S. company to offer unlimited paid family leave for both male and female employees, it was criticized for extending the policy only to its white-collar employees, not blue-collar workers in charge of customer service and DVDs. And while Microsoft has required that many of its contractors and vendors provide their workers with sick days and vacation time and Google has demanded that its shuttle bus contractors pay better wages, so far Netflix has ignored calls for improved working conditions for its contract workers, says Derecka Mehrens, co-founder of Silicon Valley Rising, a campaign to raise pay and create affordable housing for low-wage workers in the tech industry.

“Mehrens sees a similar class bias in Hastings’ approach to public education. “We see profound consequences, both political and economic, when technology industry leaders take action from a position of privilege and isolation from the very communities they desire to help,” she says. “When tech industry leaders like Reed Hastings call for an elimination of school boards or for more privatization of public schools, they block low-income people from using the one instrument that the powerful can’t ignore – their vote.”

“Hastings’ end goal for California appears to be the near-total replacement of traditional public schools with charter schools. In his 2014 speech where he discussed abolishing elected school boards, Hastings pointed to New Orleans – whose school system was largely taken over by the State of Louisiana after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina and converted to the country’s first predominantly charter public school system – as a model:

“So what we have to do is to work with school districts to grow steadily, and the work ahead is really hard because we’re at eight percent of students [in charters] in California, whereas in New Orleans they’re at 90 percent, so we have a lot of catchup to do… So what we have to do is continue to grow and grow… It’s going to take 20-30 years to get to 90 percent of charter kids.”

For his contempt for public schools and his determination to remove democratic governance of education, I hereby place Reed Hastings on this blog’s Wall of Shame.

Categories Billionaires, California, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Democracy, Disruption, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization, Technology, Wall of Shame

California: State Superintendent of Public Instruction Race “Too Close to Call”

By dianeravitch
November 7, 2018 //
13

I have been watching the returns in California to see what happened in the race between Tony Thurmond and Marshall Tuck. As of early this morning, Tuck had a small lead. But a notice sent from the Thurmond campaign says it is “too close to call.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Madeline Franklin
209-210-8950

HISTORIC STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION RACE TOO CLOSE TO CALL

With nearly 4 million ballots left to be counted, Assemblymember Tony Thurmond thanked his supporters and the voters of California.

California – Wednesday, November 7, 2018 – Assemblymember Tony Thurmond is thanking his supporters and the voters of California as the State Superintendent of Public Instruction election remains too close to call with an estimated 4 million ballots left to be counted. The race was the most expensive education election in American history, with total spending topping $60 million. Thurmond was outspent two-to-one.

“With millions of ballots left to come in, we are digging in and waiting for every vote to be counted,” said Thurmond. “The kids of California are in it for the long haul and we are too. I’m so proud of the broad coalition we built, and I thank the thousands of educators, students, and public education advocates who communicated directly with voters until the polls closed yesterday.”

Thurmond was supported by Senator Kamala Harris, the California Democratic Party, and California’s teachers.

“I ran for Superintendent of Public Instruction because I want to deliver to all Californians the promise that public education delivered to me – that all students, no matter their background and no matter their obstacles, can succeed with a great public education,” Thurmond vowed.

“We talked to voters across the state, and told them what this election means for each of us: It means giving every kid the opportunity to succeed in the 21st century, not just the ones that show the most potential. It means funding our public schools at the levels they deserve, not pouring money into our jails and prisons. It means providing mental health treatment for kids, not arming them with guns. It means supporting our teachers, not demonizing them. And it means stopping Donald Trump and Betsy DeVos’s anti-education agenda from coming anywhere near California’s public schools.”

Categories Administrators, superintendents, California, Charter Schools, Privatization

Los Angeles: UTLA Blasts Beutner Plan to Accelerate Privatization

By dianeravitch
November 7, 2018 //
7

The United Teachers of Los Angeles blasted Superintendent Austin Beutner’s “secret plan” to break up the district into “networks,” which may be part of his long-range plan to downsize and privatize the district. Beutner, a non-educator, comes from the financial sector, where large corporations are routinely broken up and sold off. The point of this strategy becomes clear when you see the “corporate reformers” that Beutner has hired.

The LA Times leaked the plan and revealed the names of the consultants that Beutner is relying on. The two major consulting firms are Kitamba and Ernst & Young. The LA Times describes them:

Kitamba partner and chief executive Rajeev Bajaj, while heading different companies, became a major consultant in 2010 and 2011 for the school-reform effort in Newark, N.J. The companies in which he was involved attracted media attention because of potential conflicts involving business ties to state and local officials.

His partner at Kitamba, Erin McGoldrick Brewster, served as chief of data and accountability for the District of Columbia Public Schools, under hard-charging former Supt. Michelle Rhee. In 2009, McGoldrick Brewster, along with Rhee, came under scrutiny for not pushing harder to investigate credible allegations of cheating at schools that showed huge gains on standardized tests.

The work of Ernst & Young and Kitamba is being paid for by the recently established Fund for Equity and Excellence, which pools philanthropic resources for local education. Donors include the Ballmer Group, the California Community Foundation, the California Endowment, the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation and the Weingart Foundation.

http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-edu-lausd-school-networks-20181105-story.html

The UTLA said in a press release:


Austin Beutner’s secret plan to break LAUSD into ‘32 networks’, as leaked to the LA Times, is a reflection of Beutner’s short tenure as superintendent. Just as he continues to hide from public scrutiny, this plan was developed with no transparency and without the authentic involvement of parents and educators.

‘Decentralization’ is a common refrain in so-called portfolio districts — like New Orleans, Newark and Detroit —cities that are riddled with a patchwork of privatization schemes that do not improve student outcomes. They do, however, degrade the teaching profession and create chaos for parents and students trying to navigate the system. In New Orleans, there are no public schools left. In Detroit, a sea of charters has decimated democratically-run public schools.

In a competition-based portfolio model, clusters of schools compete against each other for resources and support, creating a system of haves and have nots and exacerbating segregation and equity issues. Rating systems are installed to justify closing “low-performing” neighborhood schools.

Beutner is working closely with the charter lobby–backed School Board members (the same ones who pushed through Beutner’s secretive hiring) while he is shutting out the voice of other elected board members who represent tens of thousands of voters.

“Austin Beutner should be figuring out how he spends the record-breaking $1.86 billion in reserves on urgent student needs, instead of spending time with high-priced, unaccountable consultants plotting the downsizing of a district that serves all students,” said UTLA President Alex Caputo-Pearl.

The people working on this secretive plan for a portfolio district are being paid off the books through a more than $3 million discretionary fund financed by known privatizer Eli Broad and others. They are exercising power at the highest levels in LAUSD, without any accountability or scrutiny by the public. Beutner is surrounding himself with the same architects of the privatization schemes in Detroit, New Orleans and Newark:

ThirdWay Solutions founder Cami Anderson was superintendent in Newark, New Jersey, from 2011 to 2015. Her billionaire-bankrolled “One Newark” universal enrollment scheme led to numerous neighborhood school closures, mass firings, and multiple complaints of civil rights violations. Parent outrage led to her resignation.
Erin McGoldrick Brewster is a partner at “portfolio district” specialists Kitamba. She helped then-Washington, DC, schools chancellor Michelle Rhee stonewall an investigation into higher-than-typical erasure rates on multiple-choice standardized tests during Rhee’s controversial test score-linked merit pay program.

Last week, Rebecca Kockler stepped down as Beutner’s Chief of Staff. She previously oversaw the massive charterization of New Orleans public schools.
Getting rid of central oversight and accountability would allow the unchecked spread of the worst of the charter sector abuses: not serving all students, financial scandals, misuse of public funds, and conflict-of-interest charges.

“There is no evidence that Beutner’s network approach would save any money—in fact, it likely would cost millions of dollars more as each network builds its own bureaucracy with redundant jobs and duplicative services,” Caputo-Pearl said. “Once this plan is enacted and the protections for our students are compromised, it will be open season for the privatization industry.”

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, District of Columbia, Education Industry, Education Reform, Los Angeles, Newark, Privatization

Fred Klonsky: Charter Teachers in Chicago Are Organizing, So Are Charter Students

By dianeravitch
November 5, 2018 //
20

Fred Klonsky has reported on the vote to organize a union by teachers in one of Chicago’s big corporate charter chains.

He reports here that charter students too are asserting their right to be treated with dignity. The students in the Noble Network, Chicago’s most politically connected corporate charter chain, are pushing back against abusive “no e causes” policies. The schools in this chain are named for the billionaires who fund charters, including billionaire Governor Bruce Rainer and Hyatt Hotels billionaire Penny Pritzker, who was Obama’s Secretary of Commerce. High school students can’t be bullied the way young children can. Even if they have been taught for years to be compliant, they can’t help but ask questions. My partner, who was a high school principal, always says she loves adolescents because they have an innate sense of justice.

The students expressed their demands:


We, the students, parents, families, staff, and community members of the Noble Network of charter schools demand that CEO and Superintendent Michael Milkie and the Noble Board of Directors meet the following three demands all across the Noble Network of Charter Schools.

1) Petition to Abolish the Bathroom Escort Rule

We, the undersigned, hereby demand the abolishment of the bathroom escort rule.

The student body agrees that the bathroom escort rule is unnecessary and comes with many pushbacks. We believe that:
Bathroom escorts fail to show up when requested, leaving students waiting for extended periods of time, from five minutes to not showing up at all. This can lead to infections and other health problems. It is dehumanizing to require students aged 15-18 to have an escort to the bathroom.

Female students are left to bleed through their pants. In numerous instances, female students have been left to soil themselves due to the escort rule. In addition, Noble Schools restrictive policy requires teachers to adhere to a rule instead of listening and responding to students needs. The bathroom escort rule is extremely embarrassing and unnecessary.

2) Petition to reduce homework and reform the conditions under which a lasalle can be received

Lasalles are often issued for small mistakes and it is unfair to make students stay after school and take away from their personal time for minor mistakes.

It is unreasonable to issue Lasalles simply because a student forgot to write their name or have turned in an assignment written in pen rather than in pencil. Thus, Lasalle should only be given if the work itself has not been turned in rather than for other unreasonable circumstances.

The amount of homework given on certain days leaves students with no choice but to stay up all night in order to avoid receiving a lasalle.

Teens need about 8 to 10 hours of sleep each night to function best, and students are barely receiving half of that. Without enough sleep, students are more likely to fall asleep in class and lose focus.

Some students have after-school activities such as jobs, clubs, tutoring, etc. Thus, students are forced to stay up even later due to the burden of homework. Students then have no choice but to turn in work of low quality and end up doing the homework to get it done rather than to actually learn from it, rendering it useless.

After going several nights without receiving enough sleep, many students are showing early symptoms of sleep deprivation. This results in demerits being issued for falling asleep in class, and it is something students simply cannot control.

A Stanford study showed that 56% of students report homework as their number one stressor. This seems like unnecessary stress and does nothing to create an enviroment for knowledge seeking. The purpose of schooling is to foster a lifelong pursuit of learning and knowledge.

3) Petition to have more Freedom of Expression with less restrictions

Noble students lose their self-identity at the doors of Noble charter schools. Freedom of expression is heavily restricted and there is no opportunity for students to express themselves and distinguish themselves from the crowd.
Since “there is no funding for more art classes during school time,” we demand more funding for afterschool programs such as art, music, photography, poetry/writing.

Allow tattoos to be visible

Allow ribbons and pins to be worn

Allow hair to be dyed any color

Give student council/government more power to influence the school and its culture

Congratulations to the high school students who want freedom of expression. Break those chains that bind you!

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Chicago, Discipline, Education Industry, Privatization

California: Is Marshall Tuck a Republican?

By dianeravitch
November 5, 2018 //
8

The race for State Superintendent of Instruction in California is the most expensive in history for a top state education
job. California-based Capital & Main predicts the spending will top $50 million, with Marshall Tuck outspending Tony Thurmond by 2-1.

All the usual billionaires have clustered behind Tuck—the Waltons, Eli Broad, Michael Bloomberg, Reed Hastings, etc.

The Republican Party has embraced Tuck. Its gubernatorial candidate John H. Cox endorsed Tuck on Saturday on Twitter.

But that’s not all.

Wealthy Charter Backers Flood California Schools Chief Race With Cash

The billionaires want this job, and they want it bad. Tuck is their man. He is also the Republican party’s man.

Capitol & Main writes:

One problem with having the Walmart Waltons foot a candidate’s bills is the presumptive link to the far-right agenda of Trump education secretary Betsy DeVos. Carrie Walton Penner’s support for DeVos included a board seat on her pet pro-voucher organization, Alliance for School Choice. Tuck’s moneyed backers are also betting big on neoliberal neophyte Buffy Wicks (and against progressive firebrand Jovanka Beckles) to fill Thurmond’s Assembly District 15 seat. If successful, Wicks could help dilute any legislative fixes of charters before they reach the desk of Gavin Newsom, the gubernatorial bête noir of the California Charter School Association.

One advantage to having Walmart-sized buying power is traction. In mid-October, EdVoice’s $8.55 million “thermonuclear” media response to a $3 million pro-Thurmond ad buy had Tuck squeaking ahead in the polls by October 24.

That lead widened in last Wednesday’s University of California, Berkeley IGS Poll, with Tuck polling 48 percent to Thurmond’s 36 (although a self-survey on iSideWith.com has Thurmond at 46 and Tuck at 34). The poll noted that 64 percent of Republicans favored Tuck, compared to 14 percent for Thurmond.

Tuck’s appeal to the right is no accident. Last week, members of California’s congressional delegation called on Tuck to disavow the $233,000 EdVoice has spent to plaster his face on Republican slate mailers around the state. During the primary, Tuck appeared on reelection mailers for key Trump allies Devin Nunes (R-CA 22) and Kevin McCarthy (R-CA 23). This time out, Representative Barbara Lee (D-CA 13) complained, he’s effectively helping Republicans in districts key to Democratic hopes to flip Congress in Tuesday’s hoped-for blue wave. They include the 25th District, where 31-year-old Katie Hill appears poised to knock out Republican Steve Knight, and the 45th District, where UC Irvine law professor Katie Porter hopes to retire Orange County Trump loyalist Mimi Walters. And on Saturday, Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox tweeted his endorsement of Tuck, alongside that of Republican EdVoice cofounder Steve Poizner for state insurance commissioner.

Tuck is also taking heat for EdVoice attack ads tarring Thurmond with racially tinged falsehoods. On Thursday, the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California objected to its name being used on a Tuck slate mailer that doubled down on debunked claims in an EdVoice TV spot that the Obama White House “reprimanded” Thurmond over mishandling of Title IX claims when he was a school board member. That ad earned Tuck an angry censure by state Democratic Party Women’s Caucus Chair Christine Pelosi and Southern Chair Carolyn Fowler, along with NAACP Hawaii president Alice Huffman, over the ad’s alleged use of racist “dog whistles” and for “being willing to weaponize children’s trauma.”

The record-shattering spending on Tuck ultimately mirrors the threat level that a Sacramento without Jerry Brown represents to EdVoice executive director Bill Lucia. With Gavin Newsom ahead of his Republican opponent, John Cox, by 18 points in Wednesday’s poll, Newsom’s pledges for greater accountability and a moratorium on further expansion in charter-heavy districts are the stuff that keeps California school privatizers turning in their sleep. Of the supe candidates, Tuck alone has flatly rejected a “pause” in favor of limited financial help to those districts for orderly downsizing through school closures and mass teacher layoffs. For the laissez-faire ed-reform faithful, “disruption” is proof that deregulated markets and robust competition are working.

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization

Burris and Ravitch: Yes, It Matters Who Governs Our Public Schools

By dianeravitch
November 4, 2018 //
16

During this past two decades of “reform,” there has been a concerted effort to minimize or eliminate democratic control of public schools. Egged on by No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top, states and districts initiated state takeovers of entire school districts, which typically failed, and mayoral control, which substituted the singular judgment of the mayor for elected school boards. John Chubb and Terry Moe wrote a book in 1990, “Politics, Markets, and America’s Schools,” in which they argued that school choice was a panacea, and that democracy was the most essential obstacle to achieving that nirvana.

In this article, posted at Valerie Strauss’s “Answer Sheet,” Carol Burris and I argue that governance matters, and that democratic governance is a fundamental tenet of public education.

We have learned from the repeated errors of state takeovers and mayoral control, as well as charter school failures and voucher scams, that democratic accountability is essential to public education. The schools belong to the public, and they must not be handed off to grifters, celebrities, religious groups, or corporate charter chains.

Governance matters.

This is our article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2018/11/04/why-it-matters-who-governs-americas-public-schools/

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

NYC: No Charter Waiting Lists! Charters Hire Firm to Market Their Brands

By dianeravitch
November 4, 2018 //
13

Susan Edelman of the New York Post reports that the NYC DOE is under investigation by federal and state officials for giving personal information about students to a marketing firm hired by charter schools.

https://nypost.com/2018/11/04/department-of-education-probed-for-pitching-charters-to-public-school-kids/

Wait! What about the long waiting lists?!

She writes:

“The city Department of Education reduces its enrollment by giving student names and addresses to a private vendor that produces mass mailings to help charter schools woo families.

“The longtime marketing practice has now come under investigation by state and federal officials after a Manhattan mom complained it violates student privacy rights.

“Each year my family receives a large number of pamphlets and flyers from charter schools, promoting and marketing their schools and urging me to apply, ” Johanna Garcia wrote to state and US officials.

“While Garcia has three kids in public schools, flyers have targeted her daughter who qualified for a gifted and talented program, she wrote, but not two other children with special needs.

“The DOE says it gives only student names, grade levels and addresses to Vanguard Direct, a bulk-mailing company, and forbids the company to share the data with anyone else.

“Charter schools — which are privately run but get taxpayer funds based on enrollment — hire Vanguard to send out hundreds of thousands of marketing materials aimed at recruiting kids.

“Major customers include charter chains Success Academy, Uncommon, KIPP, and Achievement First, said DOE spokesman Douglas Cohen. The DOE receives no payment from Vanguard, he said.

“In response to Garcia’s complaint, the New York state and US education departments said they are probing whether the marketing deal violates FERPA — a federal law which requires schools to get parent permission before releasing student information, except in limited cases.

“But Leonie Haimson, co-chair of the national Parent Coalition for Student Privacy, said the reasoning makes no sense: “School districts lose funding and space when students enroll in charters. Why would the DOE use its own employees for that purpose?”

“Garcia agreed. “Vanguard makes money. Charter schools make money. All on the backs of regular public-school students.”

“The practice began more than a decade ago under ex-Mayor Mike Bloomberg, when Success Academy CEO Eva Moskowitz said she needed the DOE data to market her charter schools. It has continued despite Mayor de Blasio’s less-friendly relationship with charters.

“Chancellor Richard Carranza told a town hall meeting in Harlem last week that DOE schools should better market themselves to stem the rise of charter schools, Patch.com reported.

“But charter schools say they rely on the mailings to fill seats.”

Categories Accountability, Bloomberg, Michael, Charter Schools, Data, Education Industry, Education Reform, New York City, Privacy and Privacy Rights, Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »