Archives for category: Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

New Rochester Mayor Pledges More Charter Schools

By dianeravitch
January 13, 2014 //
25

Upstate New York has had its share of failed charter schools.

Some years back, Edison Schools had a charter school in Rochester, which was a disaster and later shuttered by its state authorizer.  Not far away another charter (acquired by Imagine Schools)  in Syracuse was shut down due to poor academic performance, and county bond holders were left holding the bag for the closed school.  In Buffalo, Stepping Stone Academy, another Edison school, across the street from one of the most toxic lead dumps in  the state, was shut down due to poor academic performance as was a former KIPP school, Sankofa.  (KIPP bailed out before closure to protect their “brand.”)

But here we go again.

The newly elected mayor of Rochester pledged to open more charter schools.

Hope springs eternal.

Does she know that the charters are likely to screen out students with disabilities (other than the mildest ones), students who are English learners, and those with low scores? Is she okay about dragging down the public schools of Rochester so that the charters can skim off the easiest to educate? How does she feel about running a dual school system?

We never learn.

Categories Charter Schools, Education Reform, New York, Privatization

Private Firms=No Accountability

By dianeravitch
January 12, 2014 //
22

Morgan Smith of the Texas Tribune (published in thr New York Times) wrote about the secrecy that surrounds the finances of private corporations that manage schools and claim to be “public.”

They are “public” when it is time to get the money but their finances are private when asked to account for taxpayer money.

Basis, an Arizona charter chain, submitted an application to open a charter in San Antonio and this is what happened:

“On a recently approved Texas charter school application, blacked-out paragraphs appear on almost 100 of its 393 pages.

“Redactions on the publicly available online version of the application often extend for pages at a time. They include sections on the school’s plan to support students’ academic success, its extracurricular activities and the “extent to which any private entity, including any management company” will be involved in the school’s operation. The “shaded material,” according to footnotes, is confidential proprietary or financial information.”

Smith writes:

“In Texas, commercial entities cannot run public schools. But when a school’s management — including accounting, marketing and hiring decisions — is contracted out to a private company, the distinction can become artificial. Such an arrangement raises questions about how to ensure financial accountability when the boundary between public and private is blurred, and the rules of public disclosure governing expenditures of taxpayer money do not apply.”

Some of the most secretive companies run virtual schools, paid for with public money:

“When The Texas Tribune made an open-records request for employee salary records and marketing expenses at the state’s full-time virtual schools, it received responses from all but one of those connected with for-profit entities indicating either that the records were not available or were not subject to public information laws.

“The Huntsville Independent School District, which went into partnership with K12 Inc. to open a virtual academy this year, said the district did not have documents responding to the request at the virtual campus as “it contracts with a private company to handle all employment of personnel and staffing-related data.”

“In other instances, The Tribune was directed to make a request to the private company. A lawyer for Responsive Ed Solutions, a charter school that also contracts with K12 Inc., wrote that most employees of its virtual school were hired by the company and provided the email address of a K12 lawyer. A K12 Inc. spokesman then told The Tribune that “confidential information about K12’s employees” could not be disclosed.”

Categories Charter Schools, Education Industry, For-Profit, K12 Inc., Privatization, Texas

Why I Defend Randi

By dianeravitch
January 12, 2014 //
135

A reader who calls himself or herself “Democracy” left comments criticizing me for defending Randi Weingarten–or perhaps for not attacking her.

Here is my response to Democracy:

Democracy, you ask a good question, and I will answer as best I can..

As you know, I have criticized the Common Core in many posts. I have criticized the lack of transparency and the lack of educator participation in its development. I have criticized the fact that the Gates Foundation paid out nearly $200 million to develop and promote the CCSS, which really means they are the Gates Standards. I have said that rigorous standards will not solve–let alone address–the economic dysfunction at the root of educational inequality–and is likely to exacerbate it.

Randi Weingarten is certainly more positive about Common Core than I am. She is the president of the AFT and has been willing to engage on the issues, while the NEA has remained supportive of Common Core and silent.

I have long believed that Randi would ultimately change course, and she has done so recently. First, she called for a moratorium on testing. only days ago, she came out in opposition to VAM, saying that VAM is a sham. She has followed her reasoning to its logical conclusion, which is that Common Core should be decoupled from testing. If Common Core is in fact decoupled from testing, it loses its power as a means of rating and ranking students and teachers and principals. It becomes a set of standards that may or may not prove useful but has no power to ruin lives and careers

The next, inevitable step is to recognize that Common Core must be amended by teachers and scholars. As it currently exists, it is an infallible edict encased in concrete. No standards are so perfect that they need never be updated.

I will not attack Randi, not only because she is a personal friend, not only because she is showing the capacity to evolve and change her mind, but because we who object to the current demolition derby can’t prevail without the support of at least one of the major unions. In short, we need her leadership. To turn against her is to wound our cause irreparably, our cause being the survival of public education and the teaching profession. To attack one of our few national leaders in the middle of a crucial war will aid those who are attacking public education and teachers. If we who are allies fight one another, we lose. I prefer success to defeat. Too much is riding on the outcome of these questions to indulge in ideological purity and cast out those who are not in complete agreement.

Categories Common Core, Privatization, Teacher Evaluations, Testing, Unions

Idaho Cancels Prison Privatization

By dianeravitch
January 12, 2014 //
23

Advocates of privatization of public schools, please take note:

Governor Butch Otter of Idaho announced that the state was taking control of “the largest privately-run prison in the state after more than a decade of mismanagement and other problems at the facility.”

“Nashville, Tenn.-based Corrections Corporation of America has contracted with the state to run the prison since it was built in 1997. Taxpayers currently pay CCA $29 million per year to operate the 2080-bed prison south of Boise.

Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter has long been “a champion of privatizing certain sectors of government, including prisons.”

“In 2008, he floated legislation to change state laws to allow private companies to build and operate prisons in Idaho and import out-of-state inmates. In 2008, he suggested privatizing the 500-bed state-run Idaho Correctional Institution-Orofino.

“The CCA prison has been the subject of multiple lawsuits alleging rampant violence, understaffing, gang activity and contract fraud by CCA.

“CCA acknowledged last year that falsified staffing reports were given to the state showing thousands of hours were staffed by CCA workers when the positions were actually vacant. And the Idaho State Police is investigating the operation of the facility for possible criminal activity.”

Categories Idaho, Privatization

Max Brantley: Charters and the Erosion of Brown v. Board

By dianeravitch
January 10, 2014 //
7

Max Brantley is a fearless columnist in Arkansas who dares to disagree with the Waltons in their home state. Yes, there are such reporters who are unafraid to speak truth to the monied power that owns their state.

In this column, Brantley describes the latest ploy by the charter industry: They are opening charters that implicitly will serve as havens for white families that do not want their children to attend majority-black schools in Arkansas.

Brantley writes:

Then there’s Quest, to be run by a Texas private organization faulted in a national study by a charter school-friendly research outfit at Stanford for its poor performance with lower-end students. Not that those kind of students are really anticipated in western Little Rock. There’ll be a lottery for admission if demand exceeds seats, but with a pittance budget for transportation it will be a miracle if it doesn’t reflect the higher incomes and lower black percentages of the neighborhood elementaries potential Quest parents now attend. They don’t want to go to majority black/poor nearby middle schools with lagging test scores. Some are improving, Forest Heights, particularly, and there are plans to make it an academic magnet, but it’s a risk the parents are reluctant to take. Too bad, because it’s project-oriented model sounds truly innovative.

Innovation? Look at Quest’s application. It’s full of meaningless education-speak gobbledygook. It promises to “feel like a private school,” but be free. I think you and I both know what “feels like a private school” means. The application also says bluntly that, since the Little Rock deseg case is over, neither they nor the state needworry one bit about whether the kids they draw from the Little Rock school district  will add to segregation there or create a segregated publicly financed school surrounded by the dregs of truly public education.

Sixty years after the controversial Brown v. Board of Education, the charter industry has found a way to render it moot. Remember, it’s all for the children. That is, for some children.

Categories Charter Schools, Education Reform, Privatization, Segregation , Racial Isolation and Integration

NC Approves 26 New Charters, $$$$$ Boon for Founders

By dianeravitch
January 9, 2014 //
22

Lindsay Wagner of NC Policy Watch reports that the State Board of Education in North Carolina approved 26 new charter schools today, with little discussion.

The most controversial decision was this one:

Among those approved today is South Brunswick Charter School, a fourth charter school to be run by Baker A. Mitchell, Jr.

Over the past several months, Brunswick County school district officials have called out Mitchell for profiting heavily off of taxpayer-funded charter schools that offer no new or innovative educational experiences outside of what traditional public schools already offer. Mitchell also serves on the Charter School Advisory Board, which is tasked with reviewing and recommending charter school applications.

In an impact statement, which the State Board ignored, the local superintendent of schools Dr. Edward Pruden said the charter would offer nothing that is not already available in the public schools.

When South Brunswick Charter School opens this fall, the local public school district could lose more than $2.5 million to start, and double that as the school expands, according to Pruden’s impact statement.

Pruden also explained that the funds redirected to South Brunswick Charter School will not result in the provision of the same level of services to those students as his public school system currently provides. Some examples of those services include transportation and disability support services.

“Brunswick County Schools provide services to all who enter, regardless of social and emotional need or cognitive ability. Reduction of funding impacts programs and services to support additional programs such as school nursing, social workers, counseling, and psychological support,” explained the impact statement.

The founder of the new charter school is profiting handsomely from his existing charters:

South Brunswick Charter School will be operated by the Roger Bacon Academy and will rent property from Coastal Conservancy, LLC. Baker A. Mitchell Jr.—who happens to sit on the Charter School Advisory Board—owns both of those entities.

Mitchell, who currently operates three other public charter schools in the state, paid himself nearly $1.8 million in 2012 for what he characterized as “management fees” to the IRS for running Charter Day School. He has reportedly collected in the neighborhood of $16 million over a five-year period in management fees alone, according to Pruden’s impact statement [boldface added by me].

All of that money, of course, is taxpayer funds. But Mitchell doesn’t have to explain how, for example, he used $630,696 of taxpayer dollars for staff development, as reported on his 2012 Form 990.

The chair of the State Board rejected Pruden’s concern about conflict of interest and told him that the problems should be resolved locally, which of course is a big fat joke.

At least the State Treasurer found it in her heart to worry about what these new charters would do to the local public schools, but she voted for the charters anyway:

North Carolina State Treasurer Janet Cowell expressed concern for local school districts as she voted to approve the 26 new charter schools.

“There is a tipping point for LEAs,” cautioned Cowell, explaining that in school districts where there are high concentrations of charter schools, students’ educational experiences in traditional public schools could be compromised as funds are siphoned away from those budgets and into the coffers of charters.

No problem. North Carolina is monetizing its taxpayer dollars and finding ways for clever entrepreneurs to get rich.

 

Categories Charter Schools, Education Industry, North Carolina, Privatization

Stop Reckless Charter Expansion in This Small Town in California

By dianeravitch
January 7, 2014 //
18

On January 15, there will be a crucial vote to allow the expansion of charter schools in Morgan Hill, California. As the post below points out, Morgan Hill is a small town of 40,000 with only 8 elementary schools. Rocketship wants to open 2 new charters in this small community, which will effectively destroy public education. Please read this post and send an email to the Santa Clara Office of Education. I will. I hope you will too.

 

Rocketship Education is the poster child of corporate reform charter schools. Founded in a poor Silicon Valley Latino community, they hope to expand to nearly 40,000 students nationwide in the next 5 years. That’s despite the fact that they have registered falling test scores each year for the past 5 years; this year only half of their students met English language standards. They came to my community with big promises of accountability and local control. But when they failed to meet their performance goals they broke their promise to relinquish future charters. Only two years after promising local school autonomy, they quietly slipped in a new governance provision, moving all the power to their distant national offices. They use a 41:1 student to teacher ratio, with inexperienced TFA teachers, but tell the public their student to teacher ratio is 27:1, lest it would hurt their recruitment machine. Their aggressive recruitment, with information inconsistent with the facts, is destroying what was once the cohesive fabric of our Latino communities. Rocketship does have some clever ideas, like requiring teachers to visit every student’s home, but a lack of community and district collaboration outweigh those benefits.

Rocketship has greased the wheels with hundreds of thousands in campaign contributions to our County Board of Education, who have approved a state record setting 38 charters in a row. Now Rocketship Education, and their cousins Navigator Schools, are asking for 2 additional charters in Morgan Hill, CA. Morgan Hill is a small town of 40,000, the first farmland south of the San Francisco Bay Area urban sprawl. They have only 8 elementary schools. If these charters moved forward they would crush Morgan Hill Unified, an innovative and successful school district. It’s a plan that makes no sense; Rocketship has falling test scores, while Morgan Hill has successful and thriving math, arts, and STEAM focus academies. Sadly, the district is considering closing those academies if the charters move forward. How ironic that these focus academies that provide thriving students with broad opportunities in the sciences and arts would be replaced with a drill & kill charter that offers little more than intense test prep on computers in rooms packed with students.
You can learn more at: http://www.stoprocketship.com/?p=1151
We’d like to reach out to your readers and ask for help by sending a quick email to the Santa Clara County Office of Education against this plan,http://www.stoprocketship.com/take-action-now/

You can follow us on Twitter at @norocketship
Categories California, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Privatization

Red Queen in L.A.: Where Is the Outrage?

By dianeravitch
January 6, 2014 //
17

Blogger redqueeninla takes a hard look at what is happening to the schools and the children and asks the inevitable question: “Where’s the outrage?”

Why do parents tolerate classes with 50 students? Teachers can’t teach such large classes. Does anyone care?

Why does the media report calmly about self-enriching deals for corporate interests without treating it as a scandal?

Why do we ignore segregation of our most vulnerable children when we know it’s wrong?

She writes:

“And yet therein lies the irony. Reported anger does not register; only blandishments do. The means to move change are so hampered by our unwillingness to hear unpleasantness. We wrap up the old year and hope for betterment in the next, but we school ourselves to ignore what ought to be infuriating. Bad things – injustice, poverty, denied opportunities — are being meted out upon our very own children. As a parent, I see the structure of our society as intended to support this next generation. Why do we do any of what we do if not to provide opportunity for them? Opting for disengagement equates to sanctioning inequity. The most important accounting this new year could bring is an acknowledgement of the harm our complacency catalyzes. Let these lists infuriate you. Hear the anger and do not just shut it off. Demand an accounting with accountability.”

What should we do this new year?

Get angry. Demand an accounting.

Get active. Reject complacency.

Find allies. Make noise.

Defend the children. Defend their teachers. Defend their schools.

United, we have the power to make a difference.

Categories Accountability, Corporate Reformers, For-Profit, Poverty, Privatization, Segregation , Racial Isolation and Integration, Students

Charter $$ Scandal Widens in D.C.

By dianeravitch
January 4, 2014 //
41

New court documents surfaced in the investigation of financial fraud at a D.C. Charter school, suggesting widespread corruption.

Emma Brown of the Washington Post writes:

“A senior official at the D.C. Public Charter School Board allegedly received $150,000 to help the former managers of Options Public Charter School evade oversight and take millions of taxpayer dollars for themselves, according to a new court document.“Jeremy L. Williams was the chief financial officer at the D.C. Public Charter School Board, responsible for monitoring the business practices of the city’s fast-growing charter schools. But at the same time he was entrusted with rooting out financial wrongdoing, he also allegedly joined in, according to the document.

“The document, an amended complaint that D.C. government lawyers filed as part of a lawsuit that began in October, expands onallegations that Options leaders diverted more than $3 million from the Northeast Washington school for at-risk teens to companies they founded. In the court papers, D.C. authorities describe a contracting scheme more elaborate than previously believed, including the alleged payments to Williams, extensive markups of services to generate personal profit, and bringing additional taxpayer dollars to Options to enrich themselves, money meant to help the city’s neediest students.The court papers also levy new allegations against WUSA (Channel 9) news personalityJ.C. Hayward, who authorities allege had an ownership stake in one of the companies and was paid $8,500 to attend company board meetings.

The attorney for those accused of wrongdoing said there was nothing unusual in the arrangements, that they were found in other charters as well:

An attorney for the third manager, former clinical director David Cranford, said that nothing about the business arrangements between Options and the two companies was illegal or inappropriate — or even all that unusual.

“These related-party transactions between for-profit management companies and the nonprofit public charter schools are not only appropriate and lawful, but the same arrangements exist with several other public charter schools,” A. Scott Bolden said. “It seems to me that the government has quite a burden on its hands in proving these claims against my client.”

The defendants are accused of setting up a shell for-profit company called Exceptional Educational Services, (EES) through which they contracted for services:

After the Options managers gained ownership of EES, the company began providing the school’s bus transportation for the 2012-13 school year. But instead of running buses itself, EES hired a subcontractor — Deadwyler Transportation, the same company that had bused Options students the year before.

Deadwyler charged about $31,000 per month. But EES charged Options a 77 percent markup, court papers allege — $45,000 per month plus a $100,000 “ridership bonus” in the middle of the year.

Options and EES also signed a supplemental agreement that raised the payments to EES because of the school’s arrangement for increased Medicaid reimbursements for bus transportation. Those reimbursements are now the subject of a federal investigation, according to people familiar with the investigation.

In all, EES received $974,850 from Options for bus transportation, according to court documents. The company paid Deadwyler $309,200 to run the buses, and it paid Montgomery, Dalton and Cranford hundreds of thousands of dollars on top of the full-time salaries and bonuses they were already receiving for working at the charter school.

Montgomery allegedly received $235,000 from EES in addition to the $425,000 from Options during the 2012-13 school year; Cranford allegedly received $82,893 from EES; and Dalton allegedly received $162,522.

And the sums of money involved are substantial:

In the middle of the 2012-13 school year, Options projected that its revenue would increase by $2.8 million because of an increase in the number of special education students with the most intensive needs, who also bring with them far more city money.

Soon after that projection, the school signed a management contract with EEMC estimated at the time to be worth $2.8 million. The “true purpose” of the contract was to funnel Options money to the managers through EEMC, the amended complaint alleges.

Options made a $500,000 prepayment under that contract in February 2013 and a second prepayment in August worth $954,000. It’s not clear what Options received in exchange for the money; the payments were allegedly made before the school received any documentation of services provided.

The large payments allegedly allowed EEMC to pay Montgomery $212,000 (on top of the $660,000 she received from EES and Options), while Cranford received an additional $131,706 and Dalton $94,884.

Some of the EES and EEMC money allegedly went to Williams, a longtime charter board official. Williams allegedly joined the finance committee of the Options board in February 2013 and in March began serving as a business adviser to EEMC.

The Washington D.C. schools are approaching a 50-50 split between charter schools and public schools. The charters have had no bigger booster than the Washington Post editorial page. Let’s see how the editorialists react to this massive scandal, in which the chief financial officer of the D.C. charter school board is accused of helping to loot funds intended for the city’s neediest students. Oh, yes, and the new owner of the Washington Post, Jeff Bezos of amazon.com, is a huge supporter of charter schools. What will they say?

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization

2013: A Very Bad Year for Teachers and Public Education in North Carolina

By dianeravitch
January 1, 2014 //
37

2013 was a horrible year for teachers and public schools in North Carolina.

The legislature and the governor passed bill after bill intended to demoralize teachers, defund public schools, and expand the transfer of public funds to privately managed schools, private schools, and religious schools.

Here, Lindsay Wagner of NC Policy Watch describes the nine actions that were intended to crush public school teachers and privatize public education.

The movement to snuff out public education begins by funneling public dollars to private schools, home schools, and charter schools, none of which are accountable for their spending or actions.

Then it starts the dismantling of the teaching profession by turning teachers into temps, removing any due process rights.

Into the mix, increase the amount and importance of standardized testing.

And meanwhile, cut the budgets of public schools and higher education.

It’s time to quote Garrison Keillor again. I may have to quote him once a week.

“When you wage war on the public schools, you’re attacking the mortar that holds the community together. You’re not a conservative, you’re a vandal.”

― Garrison Keillor, “Homegrown Democrat: A Few Plain Thoughts from the Heart of America”

Conservatives don’t destroy their community’s public schools. Conservatives don’t blow up traditional and beloved institutions.

Conservatives don’t place the free market above human values.

In North Carolina, the cultural vandals control the state.

Categories Charter Schools, North Carolina, Privatization, Teachers and Teaching, Vouchers
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »