Archives for category: Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Peter Greene: The Branded Classroom of Tomorrow

By dianeravitch
September 11, 2017 //
6

Peter Greene read the story in the New York Times about the new trend of paging teachers to promote your brand, inside and outside the classroom, and he imagined the classroom of the future, where commercialism reigns.


“Good morning,children, and welcome to today’s classes in the Mr. Edbrand Fifth Grade Room, brought to you by Exxon here at Apple Elementary School. I’ll remind you that all Samsung devices and Microsoft Surface tablets must be placed in the big box just outside the door. As usual we’ll be recording and webcasting today, and only properly sponsored materials can be shown on camera.

Oh, Chris– you brought in your signed clearances from home? Excellent– you can finally move your desk out of the cupboard and join your classmates on camera.

Today we’re going to continue working on this week’s essay, “Why Pepsi Is the Most Refreshing Drink.” Remember, we’re going to be writing them with the new Edutech Markotron 5000s that came in yesterday. No, Ronny– you’re trying to hold your Markotron like a pen or pencil– just flip your wrist so your hand is upside down and backwards– the Markotrons work fine if you just change the way you write. At recess we’ll be trying out the new game from EduGo– did everyone sign their decline-of-liability forms? And while at your work stations, remember not to slouch so that the new DataGrabber Mining Module can track every part of your facial expressions.

I’ll also remind you that part of your class requirement is to post a picture from class on Instagram or Twitter; remember, you only get credit if you use the hashtag #MrEdbrandTeaches, because every day what…? That’s right– “Every day I’m increasing my digital footprint.”

After lunch we’ll be filming the spots for the demo of EduGadget’s Gramminator– the ones we rehearsed for the last few days– so make sure you get your face and hair all straightened out before then. Remember– we’re doing two versions, one with all the white kids in the front and another with all the white kids in the back. It’s so EduGadget can use them in different markets, dear. We’ll do that right after the Faberware Super Writing Center.

Categories For-Profit, Privatization, Propaganda

Samuel Abrams Responds to Barron’s Takedown of His Book and the Editor Makes a Snarky Comment

By dianeravitch
September 11, 2017 //
18

Samuel Abrams, veteran high school teacher and now Director of the National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education, at Teachers College, Columbia University, wrote an excellent book about the perils of for-profit schooling. Most of the book tells the story of the rise and calamitous fall of the Edison Project. The business magazine Barron’s published a scathing review of the book by anti-public school ideologue Bob Bowdon, whose film “The Cartel” compared the New Jersey teachers’ union to the mafia.

Samuel Abrams wrote a response to the review. Here is the original letter, followed by the heavily edited published version:

The original letter to the editor:

To the Editor:

In faulting me in his review of Education and the Commercial Mindset for focusing on the failure of Edison Schools rather than the success of National Heritage Academies (NHA), Bob Bowdon misses a central point of my book (“Balancing the Books: Slurring Charter Schools,” Sept. 4).

Edison was the standard-bearer of a movement hailed by Wall Street analysts in the 1990s to outsource the operation of public schools to for-profit educational management organizations (EMOs). Analysts forecasted that Edison and similar EMOs surfacing in its wake would run 10 to 20 percent of the country’s public schools by 2010 and reward investors handsomely. By 2010, the portion of public schools run by EMOs was 0.7 percent and has not changed since. Moreover, investors in Edison saw the stock plummet 90 percent from when it was taken public with much fanfare by Merrill Lynch in 1999 to the time it was taken over in 2003 by the private equity firm Liberty Partners, which, in turn, sold the company in 2013 for 80 percent less than it had paid.

While NHA has indeed tripled in size since 2001 to 84 schools today, as Bowdon writes, this growth along with that of other for-profit EMOs such as the Leona Group and Mosaica constitutes a blip relative to what analysts had predicted.

Furthermore, in contending that I ignored the consistent proliferation of charter schools, Bowdon misses another central point of my book. As I wrote in my prologue, “With the number of charter schools as a whole—from solo operations to network members—growing from 2 in Minnesota in 1992 to 6,440 across 42 states and the District of Columbia by 2013, the appeal and force of educational outsourcing cannot be questioned.”

Finally, in dismissing my argument that the complexity of primary and secondary schooling does not afford parents the transparency essential to conventional contract enforcement, Bowdon cites the complexity of Android and Apple smartphones as proof that complexity itself presents no barrier to the commercial model. Bowdon thus misses yet a third central point of my book.

While smartphones as well as their networks are clearly complex, they are discrete goods and services, respectively, and consequently comport with the commercial model because their effectiveness may be easily judged. In the case of primary and secondary schooling, however, the immediate consumer is a child or adolescent while the parent is at a necessary distance. School districts are accordingly well justified in outsourcing discrete services like busing or food preparation to commercial operators but not a complex service like school management. The implicit information asymmetry in the latter case generates significant potential for moral hazard.

Samuel E. Abrams

New York, N.Y.

Here is the heavily edited and sharply reduced version that Barron’s published, along with a defensive comment by the book editor:

Missing the Point

To the Editor:

In faulting me in his review of Education and the Commercial Mindset for focusing on the failure of Edison Schools rather than the success of National Heritage Academies, or NHA, Bob Bowdon misses a central point of my book (“Slurring Charter Schools,” Balancing the Books, Sept. 2).

Edison was the standard-bearer of a movement hailed by Wall Street analysts in the 1990s to outsource the operation of public schools to for-profit educational management organizations. Analysts forecasted that Edison and similar EMOs surfacing in its wake would run 10% to 20% of the country’s public schools by 2010 and reward investors handsomely. By 2010, the portion of public schools run by EMOs was 0.7% and hasn’t changed since. Moreover, investors in Edison saw the stock plummet 90% from when it was taken public with much fanfare by Merrill Lynch in 1999, to the time it was taken over in 2003 by the private-equity firm Liberty Partners, which, in turn, sold Edison in 2013 for 80% less than it had paid.

Samuel E. Abrams
New York City

Editor Gene Epstein replies: Bowdon wrote that Edison was a case of “switching a government-run monopoly for a privately run monopoly.” That was the reason he dismissed Edison for not being an example of competitive alternatives to government-run schools. Abrams misses this central point, apparently expecting Bowdon to be impressed by the fact that Edison was “hailed by Wall Street analysts.”

Categories Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, For-Profit, Privatization

Bad News for Bridge International Academies

By dianeravitch
September 10, 2017 //
26

The Liberian government received a report on the various for-profit corporations providing schooling. The bottom line: scores went up, but the cost of services varied dramatically. The most expensive of all the providers was Bridge International Academies, the for-profit corporation that is funded by Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and other luminaries of the tech sector. Their costs were so much higher than that of any other service that it is doubtful that they are sustainable.

The so-called Partnership schools received double the funding of the public schools: $100 instead of only $50. And the Ministry of Education made sure that the Partnership schools were well-supplied with teachers, including the best-trained.

Four of the networks managed to produce results for less than $100 per pupil. Bridge, however, cost more than $1,000 per pupil, a figure dramatically higher than any other network, and their results were not markedly better.

Will Nicholas Kristof reconsider his fulsome praise for Bridge International Academies? The skeptics were right to be concerned about sustainability and scalability. Why did the billionaires think it was a good idea to try to turn a profit off the backs of the poorest people in the world? These Silicon Valley geniuses may be good at selling product, but they are not very good at creating or providing an education system.

Download the brief here.  Download the report here.

 

Categories Education Industry, Education Reform, For-Profit, International, Privatization

Arthur Goldstein: The Myth of NYC’s “Bad Teachers” CORRECTED!

By dianeravitch
September 9, 2017 //
47

Arthur Goldstein is a veteran New York City high school teacher and blogger.

He went slightly ballistic when he read an op-ed article in The New York Times by Marc Steinberg, who became an instant principal during the Bloomberg-Klein regime and left to join the rightwing billionaire Walton Family Foundation, as director of its K-12 program. The Waltons despise public education and spend hundreds of millions backing charters, vouchers, and other modes of privatization. The WFF claims credit for funding one of every four charter schools in the nation. The Waltons individually spend millions on political campaigns to support privatization and undermine the teaching profession. They are avowed enemies of public education, the teaching profession, and collective bargaining.

Sternberg was a golden boy in the Bloomberg-Klein era. He graduated Princeton in 1995, joined Teach for America, picked up an MBA and MA in education at Harvard. Only nine years after finishing college, he was a principal in New York City. He quickly became a Klein favorite and moved up to become Deputy Chancellor in a few short years.

Now, at the pinnacle of rightwing power, with hundreds of millions to dispense every year, what really annoys him is that Mayor de Blasio plans to place hundreds of displaced teachers into classrooms. These are the teachers known as the “Absent Teacher Reserve,” where teachers are assigned when they have been accused of misconduct but are still awaiting a hearing or where they have been placed because their school was closed and they haven’t found a new job. Why haven’t they found a new job? If they are experienced, their salaries are at the high end of the salary scale, and principals don’t want to hire a permanent teacher whose salary is $90,000 instead of two young teachers for $45,000 each.

[ADDITION: Arthur Goldstein wrote at the end of the day to tell me I had confused “the rubber room” and the “Absent Teacher Reserve.” He explained:

[ATR teachers are not rubber room teachers. Rubber room teachers are those who are awaiting hearings. They don’t have rubber rooms anymore, so those teachers are placed in offices or schools. We had one in our school last year. He was given a job running our tutoring room.

[Teachers facing charges are generally not allowed to teach….ATR teachers are often displaced from schools. Some of them have been through hearings. They may have been found guilty on minor charges and fined. None of them have been found unfit. Had they been found unfit they would have been fired.]

As it happens, a friend of mine lost his job when the large school where he taught was closed and replaced by five or six small schools. He has a Ph.D. in history, but that didn’t help him find a new job. This highly educated, highly experienced teacher involuntarily became a permanent substitute, assigned to the Absent Teacher Reserve (ATR), bounced from school to school in a humiliating fashion. Marc Sternberg considers him a “bad teacher,” although he was never given a bad rating as a teacher. Mayor de Blasio wants him to get a permanent job. Sternberg thinks he should be fired.

Arthur Goldstein responds here to Marc Sternberg:

“I’ve never been in the Absent Teacher Reserve (ATR), so I can’t speak from experience here. My experience is limited to being an occasional substitute teacher, not one of my favorite things. I was in my school a few times this summer, and one day a secretary asked me to cover a class. I thought I’d maybe help out, so I asked, “Which class?”

“She told me she needed a teacher for a day, and that there were three classes, two hours each. I told her thanks but no thanks. Six hours is a long time to work as a substitute teacher. It’s far different teaching students you don’t know. A classroom culture takes time to build, but goes a long way.

“Now imagine that you’re an ATR teacher, and your stock in trade has been showing up and teaching whatever to whomever. Physics today, Chinese tomorrow. And then there are the principals, quoted in the press, who say how awful ATR teachers are. I’d only hire 5% of them, maybe, they say. And there are two issues with that.

“Issue number one, of course, is if I were teaching Chinese or physics, I’d be totally incompetent. I know virtually nothing about either. Even if a teacher were to leave me lessons all I could do would be follow instructions, watch the kids, and hope for the best. On this astral plane, I get lessons for subbing well less than half the time I do it. Sometimes I hear that ATRs should simply give lessons in their own subject areas. Mine is ESL, so it would be ludicrous to give such a lesson to native speakers. But even if I were to give one in ELA, imagine the reaction of a group of teenagers when a sub they will likely never see again gives a lesson on a different subject. And even if it’s the same subject, it’s ridiculous to compare the class culture of a regular teacher to one of a sub.

“Issue number two is that administrators, already overworked, now have to do at three to six observations for most teachers. If I were a principal, it would not be a high priority to observe teachers who were just passing through. I’m chapter leader of the most overcrowded and largest school in Queens. My job is nuts (and believe it or not, I’m not complaining). The principal’s job is crazier than mine. There is no time to fairly assess teachers who aren’t around very long. Frankly, I question where principals who cavalierly toss out percentages even find the time to look.

“I wonder if any writers who attack ATRs ever had or saw a substitute teacher. To compare a classroom with a culture, developed over time, with one led by a total stranger the students expect to never see again is preposterous. Watching hedge funded “Families for Excellent Schools” organize a dozen parents to protest the ATR is beyond the pale.

“This year things will be different for a lot of ATR teachers. The new plan is to place a whole lot of them, provisionally at least, in schools. You’d think that the people who bemoaned the cost of the ATR would be jumping for joy. By making teachers, you know, teach, they’re no longer throwing away all that city money they claimed to be so concerned about.

“To the contrary, they’re complaining. What if they’re no good? A parent wrote an op-ed in the Daily News saying she didn’t want her kid taught by them. Some guy on the Walmart payroll wrote virtually the same nonsense in the NY Times. You read in Chalkbeat about principals threatening to observe newly place ATRs to death. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty, or incompetent, or at least something that merited a conversation?

“Let’s be frank here—it seems that ATR detractors simply want all of them fired without due process. That’s a slippery slope. We are all ATR teachers. It’s just a matter of being in the wrong place at the right time.

“Here’s something you won’t read in the papers—with the help of UFT and my administration, we’ve placed at least four ATR teachers permanently at Francis Lewis High School. Three are in my department, and one is an English teacher working mostly with ELLs. 100% of them are doing fine.

“ATRs need a chance, and Lord knows NYC kids need teachers. Yesterday, I counted 248 oversized classes in my school alone. It’s time for ATR critics to shut up until and unless they discover something worth talking about.”

Wouldn’t it be amazing if the Walton Family Foundation stopped acting as an echo chamber for Donald Trump and Betsy DeVos and began to use its billions to address the real problems of students and schools?

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, New York City, Privatization, Teachers, Walton Foundation

John Merrow Reviews Laurene P. Jobs’ Timid TV Bash of Our High Schools

By dianeravitch
September 9, 2017 //
7

John Merrow watched the show funded by billionaire Laurene Powell Jobs and presented, monopoly-style, on four major channels simultaneously (NBC, ABC, CBS, and FOX). Why no CNN? Why no MSNBC? Why no QVC? Why no cooking channels? Just asking.

Merrow concluded that the show was lacking any reference to history, e perience, or knowledge (other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, what did you think of the play?)

An excerpt of what might have been:

“As I see it, the program wanted to look bold without criticizing the ‘school reform’ crowd that still controls most of what happens in schools. It could have been bold. It could–and should–have said “Most high schools treat kids like numbers, their scores on standardized tests. That has to change…and here’s how it can happen, how it is happening.” But in order to do that, the narrative would have had to renounce and reject not just Republican education policies of “No Child Left Behind” but also those of the Obama Administration’s “Race to the Top,” widely supported by Democrats for Education Reform and other traditional ‘school reformers.’ Given that Obama’s Education Secretary Arne Duncan now works for Powell Jobs’ Emerson Collective, that wasn’t going to happen.

“Last night’s program was high energy and cute without being daring. For example, it had a clever ‘red carpet’ segment but with teachers as the stars. Lots of cheering, but that was it. That’s sadly timid. Imagine if Melissa Rivers, the host on the red carpet, had asked teachers the question she always asks the Hollywood stars: “You look marvelous. What are you wearing tonight?’

“And picture a male teacher responding: “These old things? I bought these khakis 12 or 13 years ago. I was going to buy a new pair for tonight, but I just spent $380 on basic supplies for my classroom. Oh, and would it be rude of me to ask how much your outfit cost?”

“Imagine a female teacher responding, “What am I wearing? Actually, I’d rather talk about tomorrow’s field trip….I’m taking my kids to the Getty Museum, where they will….. see provocative art and meet contemporary artists. And the next day my students will be on Skype, talking with students in a high school in Paris about climate change. We’ve been measuring the air quality here and sharing the data with them for purposes of comparison and analysis. But I have to charge the kids for the bus to the Museum and I had to ask some wealthy parents to pay for the scientific equipment because the school district has been cutting our instructional budget.”

“And another teacher could have said, “To be honest, I’m happy for this attention, but I can’t help but thinking about the fact that you make 17 or 18 times more money per year than I do.”

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Disruption, Duncan, Arne, Education Industry, Education Reform, Funding, Media, Privatization, Propaganda, Testing

Viola Davis: Don’t Forget the Teachers and Public School That Changed Your Life

By dianeravitch
September 9, 2017 //
13

Viola Davis is one of the most gifted actors of our time. She has won the Tony Award, the Academy Award, and many other awards. She has never forgotten her humble origins and those who helped her rise to the top.

When she received the Tony award in 2010, she gave a powerful speech. She thanked God, her parents, and her teachers at Central Falls High School in Central Falls, Rhode Island. In that order.

I recall leaping to my feet when I heard her speak in 2010, because that was the very time when the city of Central Falls and the state of Rhode Island threatened to fire the entire staff of the High School that Viola Davis attended. To fire them en masse, from the principal to the lunch room staff. Arne Duncan congratulated the state officials for having the “courage” to fire everyone, and President Obama echoed Arne’s insult.

It was also the year of “Waiting for Superman,” and the corporate assault on the public schools went into high gear.

But then there was Viola Davis, thanking her teachers. I learned later that her own sister was a teacher at Central Falls HS.

But…but…but…then, Viola Davis took a leading role in the film “Won’t Back Down,” funded and produced by arch-evangelical billionaire Philip Anschutz (one of the “Superman” funders). “Won’t Back Down” celebrates the parent trigger, telling the fictional story of a parent and a teacher who were so disgusted with their public school that they gathered signatures and flipped the school over to a charter operator. I didn’t get to see the movie because it opened in 2,500 theatres (Anschutz owns the Regal theatre chain) and its receipts were so bad that it closed within a month and disappeared.

Last night, Viol Davis moderated Laurene Powell Jobs’ XQ extravaganza, which asserted that high schools are obsolete and need to be reinvented.

Viola Davis, please watch the speech you gave at the Oscars at 2010.

We need a real champion for public schools.

Trump and DeVos want to eliminate the schools that made you who you are today. Our public schools need your help. They are far from perfect. They need real reform, not a wrecking ball and disruption.

Viola Davis, help us. Join the millions of parents and educators who want better public schools.

The billionaires don’t need your help. We do. They are using you.

Join the Network for Public Education. Help the children and teachers whom the billionaires despise.

Categories Betsy DeVos, Billionaires, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Network for Public Education, Parent trigger, Parents, Privatization, Propaganda, Rhode Island, Students

Stephen Singer Reviews Mrs. Jobs’ Extravaganza on Fixing Schools

By dianeravitch
September 9, 2017 //
16

If you are not yet totally bored by reading about a billionaire’s vision for redesigning the high schools of America, you will enjoy reading veteran teacher Stephen Singer’s take on the vacuous production. Mrs. Jobs must have spent millions to buy an hour on four networks. What could your school have done with that money? Arts classes? Instruments for the school band? A school nurse? Free meals? Reopened the library and hired a librarian?

Instead she produced a vanity show.

Singer decided it was an exercise in desperation. The Reform brand is now owned by Trump and DeVos. Jobs had to find a way to claim that HER reform is different from THEIR reform, although it is not.

“So now that it’s over, what have we learned?

“1) Corporate education reformers are THAT desperate to distance themselves from Donald Trump.

“His wholehearted endorsement of their agenda has done them serious life threatening damage. He has exposed their racist, privileged, corporatist policies for exactly what they are. No amount of celebrities will replace that in the public consciousness.

“2) Rich people cannot set education policy.

“Steve Jobs widow may be a very nice lady. But she has no freaking clue about public education. Nor is she honest enough to engage actual classroom teachers in the discussion to find out.

“Instead of relying on the billionaires of the world, we should tax them. Then we can afford to fully fund our schools and let the people actually in the classroom decide what’s best for the students in their care. Let parents decide. Let school boards decide. Not a privileged tech philanthrocapitalist.

“3) Celebrities will do anything for money.

“The things these Hollywood elite prostitutes did last night to sell snake oil would make porn stars blush. I will never look at any of these people the same. Some of them I knew were true believers because of other projects. Heck! As much as I love Common’s new album, he does rap about Corey Booker – so warning there. Viola Davis is an amazing actress but she was in the parent trigger propaganda film “Won’t Back Down.”

“Being famous doesn’t mean you know a damn thing. We recognize their faces. We associate them with past roles and characters we loved. We think their political stands are authentic when they are often just a pose. We’ve got to stop respecting these people just because they’re celebrities.

“What will the long-term effect of last night’s propaganda be?

“I don’t know.

“I seriously doubt anyone really bought that. But you know what they say – no one ever went broke betting on the stupidity of the public.

“And that’s what this was – a high stakes wager on American gullibility.”

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization

How Can Charters Be Losing Public Support When They Are Allegedly Successful?

By dianeravitch
September 9, 2017 //
51

Jonathan Chait is a long-time charter supporter. He is unhappy that charters are “losing the narrative,” because he is certain that they are a great success.

By “losing the narrative,” I assume he means that the NAACP called for accountability for all charters, and that the pro-choice EdNext poll showed that public support for charters has slipped sharply in only one year, from 51% to 39%.

How could this be if they are a great success? He doesn’t explain.

He is especially upset that the New York Times featured a story about Michigan claiming that Michigan’s charters have been a big disappointment. This followed upon a front-page story in the New York Times describing the chaos of charters in Michigan, where students have many choices but education results (test scores) are down. He calls the Michigan story an example of “anecdotes” lacking factual data.

Michigan seems to be a good place to look at charters because it is Betsy DeVos’s state, the one that has gone overboard for charters and choice, one that has had a quarter-century of charters. She is Secretary of Education and it seems reasonable to assume that she would like to do to the nation what she has done to Michigan, where her money directs education policy.

Well, the most recent Times story points out that charters began in 1994 in Michigan. Michigan was hell-bent on competition and choice as the remedy for inequality. But Michigan schools today are underfunded, and the results have been dismal. In fact, as a report in 2016 by the charter-friendly Education Trust-West showed, the state’s scores on national tests have plummeted:

Michigan’s K-12 system is among the weakest in the country and getting worse. In little more than a decade, Michigan has gone from being a fairly average state in elementary reading and math achievement to the bottom 10 states. It’s a devastating fall. Indeed, new national assessment data suggest Michigan is witnessing systemic decline across the K-12 spectrum. White, black, brown, higher-income, low-income — it doesn’t matter who they are or where they live. …

That seems factual enough.

An article about charters in Arizona would show massive conflicts of interest, nepotism, and self-dealing. An article about Ohio would show pay-for-play charters where the owners give big contributions to Republican officials and get lucrative charter contracts. An article about Florida would show that charter operators are members of the legislature and pad their pockets by passing legislation that takes money from public schools and gives it to their charters. An article about Nevada would show that charters dominate the list of the state’s lowest performing schools. An article about California charters would have to include the state’s long history of scandals and frauds.

There are charter schools that get good test scores. But most of them are known for high attrition rates and excluding students with disabilities, students who don’t speak English, and students who don’t conform.

The issue that Chait never considers is whether it makes sense long term to fund two separate school systems: one that is free to accept the students it wants and free to exclude the ones it doesn’t want, and the other required to accept all students.

We went through a long history of having two separate-and-unequal school systems.

That is what DeVos and Trump want. That is what ALEC wants. That is what every red-state governor wants. That is what many blue-state governors, reliant on campaign contributions from charter-loving financiers, want. That is what the Koch brothers want.

Suppose that the data show that test scores are higher in a racially segregated system. Suppose the data show that test scores are higher when you exclude kids with disabilities, kids who don’t speak English, and students who are slow learners. Suppose the data show that test scores go up when you kick out the kids with low scores or never admit them.

Is that a model for public education. I say it is not. Where will the excluded children go?

It would be wrong for our society no matter what the test scores are. It would be wrong for our nation and for our children.

Sometimes principles matter more than data. And the public is catching on.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization

Missouri: New Push to Expand Charters Despite Lack of Success

By dianeravitch
September 8, 2017 //
10

Missouri legislators are gearing up for a renewed battle to expand charters, despite a lackluster record of existing charters.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/missouri-lawmakers-prepare-to-spar-again-over-charter-school-expansion/article_6ae01784-c517-5a65-b5ed-8736671d31c9.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share

When there was a Democratic governor, charter expansion went nowhere.

Now with a Republican governor, the pro-charter forces are ready to push for more.

One of the major out-of-state lobbying groups is Betsy DeVos’s American Federatiob for Children, which has hired a herd of lobbyists to replace public schools with charters and tax credits for vouchers.

Categories Betsy DeVos, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Failure, Missouri, Privatization

Nancy Bailey: Beware of Laurene Powell Jobs’s Bad Advice About “Reinventing” High Schools

By dianeravitch
September 7, 2017 //
41

Nancy Bailey, experienced teachers, knows what make high schools successful. She posts a to-do list here.

She also knows that Steve Jobs’ billionaire widow Laurene Powell Jobs is peddling snake oil. Her goal is to eliminate the American high school and replace it with online learning, despite the lack of evidence for it–and the plethora of evidence that says it is a dramatic flop.

She writes:

“It’s especially ironic that Powell-Jobs uses a school bus to hype her venture philanthropic program. You won’t need school buses for what she’s proposing. That is unless they take students to places other than brick-and-mortar schools–like museums.

“Her “remake the American high school” mantra is really about replacing high schools with technology—learning anytime, anyplace. Here are titles and phrases from the website that hint of that.

Going to School in a Museum: Does Learning Have to Happen in a School?

Imagine a Super School

America Needs a New Way of Learning

High School Will Never Be the Same Again

The Next Generation Must Learn to Adapt to a Changing World

When Your School is a Museum

“Laurene Powell Jobs and the quest to change high schools are not new. If you want to blame someone for difficulties in public schools, blame politicians and corporate CEOs who have irresponsibly been attempting this feat on their own for years.

“Remember Bill Gates and the small school initiative? They tried to break up Manuel High School in Denver using more than $2 million. It was a failure.

“The Gates Foundation also failed at the first Philadelphia School of the Future—an all-tech high school.

“Go back even further.

“In 1995, the RJR Nabisco Foundation launched Reinventing Education: Entrepreneurship in America’s Public School, by the Chairman and CEO of IBM Lou V. Gerstner, Jr.

“Gerstner talked of New Century Schools—“clearing away restrictions” at the same time pushing for the standards that would eventually hamstring teachers into a standardization box when it came to teaching….

“Schools highlighted on the XQ website advertised as innovative are all driven by technology. Teachers might be mentioned, but it’s not clear if their use of the word teacher means a qualified teacher with an actual degree in teaching.

“It isn’t clear whether students have access to a well-rounded curriculum. Some of their innovative schools seem to specialize in a narrow area.

“One question to ask, did Powell-Jobs attend a public high school herself? Do her children attend public schools?”

Please, Laurene, stop reinventing the schools. You know nothing about it, and you are surrounded by people who know even less.

Turn your considerable wealth and energies to helping solve the problem of poverty.

Categories Accountability, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »