Archives for category: Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Douglas County: Is This the Future of Public Education?

By dianeravitch
November 5, 2013 //
8

Today, voters in Douglas County, Colorado, will decide the future of public education for the children of their county. In response to an earlier post about the election battle for control of the schools in Douglas County, where the school board is eager to privatize the schools, this reader made the following comment:

We should be courageous and move in the opposite direction from the so-called corporate reformers, the for-profit charter schoolmasters, and the naysayers of American public education. Administrators, teachers, staff, parents, students and concerned citizens should follow what is happening to American education. It is a violent, destructive force against public education.

The landscape is changing; on the horizon, we do not see public schools or parish schools. We see a disproportionate number of for-profit charter schools and schools serving segregated populations. The closure of neighborhood public and parochial schools widen the gaps, decreasing opportunities to grow and prosper. The demise of neighborhood schools adversely impacts the community life and spirit.

We see the end of public school funding and with that, the end of the significant role public schools play in democratizing our young citizens. In this model, the for-profit schools control the market place and the market values.

Categories Colorado, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Privatization

Cody: Are Newspapers Independent or Lapdogs of Their Owners?

By dianeravitch
November 4, 2013 //
12

Anthony Cody wrote a post in which he reviews how the newspapers have reacted to important issues.

First, there was the great editorial in a Vermont newspaper, patiently explaining that public schools belong to the public, “not hedge fund managers and entrepreneurs,” and they serve public purposes.

Then he points to the Lap Dog editorial in the Los Angeles Times, which defended embattled superintendent John Deasy, whose decisions may be costly and harmful, but who must ultimately prevail over those who were elected by the public to be Deasy’s employer. The L.A. Times, in other words, voices the anti-democratic views of its owner, who obviously cares very little for democratic niceties like elections. John Deasy is the darling of Eli Broad and Bill Gates, so his wrong-headed decisions must be defended, free from any judgment by no matter the elected board. In the eyes of this newspaper, Deasy is the boss and the elected board works for him.

And then there is the kid-glove treatment of New Jersey’s bully governor, whose sneering response to a teacher was not worthy of a mention. Luckily, his remarks as well as his sneer were recorded by others, and they are going viral even now.

I have always been a supporter of a free press, but at times like these, one misses the freedom of the press. The press should comfort the afflicted, and afflict the comfortable. But that’s hard to do when the comfortable own the press.

 

Categories Corporate Reformers, Education Reform, Privatization

Moody’s: Charters Pose Serious Risk to Struggling Cities

By dianeravitch
November 4, 2013 //
13

Back in the olden times, advocates claimed that charters would provide healthy competition and beneficial innovation. This would benefit the public schools and urban districts as well.

But it turned out to be a false promise.

By skimming off the best students in poor neighborhoods, charter schools leave the public schools in worse condition, overburdened with the neediest students that the charters don’t want and lacking the resources to educate them appropriately. Where the public school system is struggling to improve, charter schools may actually hasten their collapse.

Now Moody’s Investors’ Service has issued a bulletin warning that the proliferation of charters in economically weak cities damages those cities’ economic viability.

The report summary says:

The dramatic rise in charter school enrollments over the past decade is likely to create negative credit pressure on school districts in economically weak urban areas, says Moody’s Investors Service in a new report. Charter schools tend to proliferate in areas where school districts already show a degree of underlying economic and demographic stress, says Moody’s in the report “Charter Schools Pose Growing Risks for Urban Public Schools.”

“While the vast majority of traditional public districts are managing through the rise of charter schools without a negative credit impact, a small but growing number face financial stress due to the movement of students to charters,” says Michael D’Arcy, one of two authors of the report.
Charter schools can pull students and revenues away from districts faster than the districts can reduce their costs, says Moody’s. As some of these districts trim costs to balance out declining revenues, cuts in programs and services will further drive students to seek alternative institutions including charter schools.
Many older, urban areas that have experienced population and tax base losses, creating stress for their local school districts, have also been areas where charter schools have proliferated, says Moody’s. Among the cities where over a fifth of the students are enrolled in charter schools are Cleveland, Detroit, Kansas City, St. Louis, and Washington, D.C. Nationwide about one in 20 students is in a charter school.
One of the four risk factors Moody’s identifies as making a school district vulnerable to charter school growth is that the school district is already financially pressured and grappling with weak demographics.
A second factor is having a limited ability to adjust operations in response to a loss of enrolment to charter schools.
“Shifts in student enrollment from district schools to charters, while resulting in a transfer of a portion of district revenues to charter schools, do not typically result in a full shift of operating costs away from district public schools,” says Moody’s Tiphany Lee-Allen, the Moody’s Associate Analyst who co-authored the report. “Districts may face institutional barriers to cutting staff levels, capital footprints and benefit costs over the short term given the intricacies of collective bargaining contracts – leaving them with underutilized buildings and ongoing growth in personnel costs.”
A third risk factor for a school district is being in a state with a statutory framework promoting a high degree of educational choice and has a relatively liberal approval process for new charters and few limits on their growth, as well as generous funding.
For example in Michigan, the statutory framework emphasizes educational choice, and there are multiple charter authorizers to help promote charter school growth. In Michigan, Detroit Public Schools (B2 negative), Clintondale Community Schools (Ba3 negative), Mount Clemens Community School District (Ba3 negative) and Ypsilanti School District (Ba3) have all experienced significant fiscal strain related to charter enrollment growth, which has also been a contributing factor to their speculative grade status.
Categories Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization

Melissa Tomlinson: What Do Teachers Want?

By dianeravitch
November 3, 2013 //
24

Thanks to Kipp Dawson of Pittsburgh for drawing my attention to this letter written by Melissa Tomlinson, the teacher who confronted Governor Chris Christie, who shouted her down and said contemptuously, “What do you people want?”

This is her answer, which appeared on Mark Naison’s blog:
Dear Governor Christie,

Yesterday I took the opportunity to come hear you speak on your campaign trail. I have never really heard you speak before except for sound bytes that I get on my computer. I don’t have cable, I don’t read newspapers. I don’t have enough time. I am a public school teacher that works an average of 60 hours a week in my building. Yes, you can check with my principal. I run the after-school program along with my my classroom position. I do even more work when I am at home.

For verification of this, just ask my children.

I asked you one simple question yesterday. I wanted to know why you portray NJ Public Schools as failure factories.

Apparently that question struck a nerve. When you swung around at me and raised your voice, asking me what I wanted, my first response “I want more money for my students.”

Notice, I did not ask for more money for me. I did not ask for my health benefits, my pension, a raise, my tenure, or even my contract that I have not had for nearly three years. We got into a small debate about how much money has been spent on education. To me, there is never enough money that is spent on education. To invest in education is to invest in our future. We cannot keep short-changing our children and taking away opportunities for them to explore and learn.

As more money is required for state-mandated curriculum changes and high-stakes standardized testing, it is our children that are losing. Programs are being cut all over the state as budget changes are forcing districts to cut music, art, after-school transportation, and youth-centered clubs.

But let’s put money aside for a moment. What do I want? What do ‘we people’ want? We want to be allowed to teach.

Do you know that the past two months has been spent of our time preparing and completing paperwork for the Student Growth Objectives? Assessments were created and administered to our students on material that we have not even taught yet. Can you imagine how that made us feel? The students felt like they were worthless for not having any clue how to complete the assessments. The teachers felt like horrible monsters for having to make the students endure this. How is that helping the development of a child? How will that help them see the value in their own self-worth?

This futile exercise took time away from planning and preparing meaningful lessons as well as the time spent in class actually completing the assessments. The evaluations have no statistical worth and has even been recognized as such by the NJ Department of Education. I am all for evaluation of a teacher.

I recognize that I should be held accountable for my job. This does not worry me, as long as I am evaluated on my methods of teaching. I can not be held wholly accountable for the learning growth of a student when I am not accountable for all of the factors that influence this growth. Are you aware that poverty is the biggest determination of a child’s educational success. If not, I suggest you read Diane Ravitch’s new book Reign of Error. Take a moment and become enlightened.

Getting back to the issue of money. I am fully aware of our educational budget. Where is all of this money? To me it seems like it is being siphoned right off into the hands of private companies as they reap the benefits of the charter schools and voucher programs that you have put into place. It certainly hasn’t gone to improve school conditions in urban areas such as Jersey City. The conditions that these students and teachers are forced to be in are horrifying. Yet you are not allowing the funds needed to improve these conditions. Are you hoping that these schools get closed down and more students are forced to go to private charter schools while the districts are being forced to pay their tuition? I know for a fact that this is what has happened in Camden and Newark.

Yet these charter schools are not held to the same accountability as our public schools. Why is that? Because deep down you know that you are not really dealing with the issues that influence a child’s education. You are simply putting a temporary band-aid into place.

Unfortunately [for you] that temporary fix is already starting to be exposed as Charter Schools are showing that they actually are not able to do better than public schools. You are setting up teachers to take the blame for all of this. You have portrayed us as greedy, lazy money-draining public servants that do nothing. I invite you to come do my job for one week Governor Christie. I invite you to come see my students, see how little they really have during the school day as they are being forced to keep learning for a single snapshot of their educational worth.

For that one end-all, be-all test, the NJASK. The one that the future of my job and my life is now based upon. Why do you portray schools as failure factories? What benefit do you reap from this? Have you acquired financial promises for your future campaigns as you eye the presidential nomination? Has there been back-room meetings as you agree to divert public funds to private companies that are seeking to take over our public educational system? This is my theory. To accomplish all of this, you are setting up the teachers to take the blame. Unfortunately, you are not the only governor in our country that has this agenda.

What do “we people’ want, Governor Christie? We want our schools back. We want to teach. We want to be allowed to help these children to grow, educationally, socially, and emotionally. We want to be respected as we do this, not bullied.
BadAss Teacher, Melissa Tomlinson
http://withabrooklynaccent.blogspot.com/2013/11/letter-to-governor-christie-from-new.html

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, New Jersey, Privatization, Teacher Evaluations, Teachers and Teaching, Testing

Governor Christie Berates a Teacher, Again

By dianeravitch
November 3, 2013 //
80

Governor Chris Christie has made clear that he doesn’t like the public schools in his state. He calls them “failure factories,” as he campaigns for vouchers. (He is a graduate of Livingston High School.) He seems to despise public school teachers. He enjoys berating teachers, especially if they are female. He is one big, tough, strong guy who knows how to put down women.

Melissa Tomlinson is a public school teacher in New Jersey. She went to a Rally for Governor Chris Christie and she held up a sign.

Read this wonderful description on Jersey Jazzman’s blog of Melissa’s courage in confronting a bully.

Her sign said:

“I am a public school teacher.

“We are NOT failing our students.

“N.J. is ranked 3rd in the US.

“Christie’s refusal to finance public education is failing our students.”

She asked him: “Why do you portray our schools as failure factories?” His reply: “Because they are!” He said: “I am tired of you people. What do you want?”

So, the most powerful executive in the state of New Jersey treated this dedicated public school teacher with arrogance, rudeness, and disrespect. She didn’t back down. She had him cornered. She is right. He is wrong. Probably, he knows he is wrong, so he felt compelled to shout her down instead of engaging in civil dialogue.

Melissa Tomlinson was right that Governor Christie has underfunded the schools. He froze the spending that was supposed to be used to repair schools with leaky pipes and mold and crumbling facilities.

But Tomlinson was wrong about one thing: on the 2011 NAEP, New Jersey was second in the nation in reading, behind Massachusetts and tied with Connecticut. In math, New Jersey was second in the nation. Not third, but second.

The districts in New Jersey that are failing are the ones that are controlled by the state, some for decades. The state has no idea what to do other than to hand students and public funds over to private corporations.

As Julia Sass Rubin pointed out in an earlier blog today, the Christie administration has systematically underfunded districts that enroll children of color. It has stripped them of democratic governance. It has overloaded them with charters that skim the best students and increase segregation. Governor Christie praises charter schools that exclude children who have serious disabilities and children who don’t speak English. The state has embarked on a policy of separate and unequal for the districts that are powerless.

Governor Chris Christie should be ashamed of himself for his systematic neglect of the education of New Jersey’s most vulnerable children as well as his rude and disgraceful behavior towards public school teachers. He should stop his war against public education. It will not help him become president. It will be a huge liability.

Here is a blog in California. Governor Christie, your reputation as a bully is going national.

Categories NAEP, New Jersey, Poverty, Privatization, Segregation , Racial Isolation and Integration, Teachers, Vouchers

Kitty Boitnott Reviews “Reign of Error”

By dianeravitch
November 3, 2013 //
2

Kitty Boitnott is a National Board Certified Teacher in Virginia who now coaches teachers and teacher leaders.

She here reviews Reign of Error.

Boitnott summarizes the main arguments of the book and then says:

This is a must-read for any public school educator, for any parent who still cares about public schools and their role in the community, for the administrators who haven’t been so brainwashed that they have forgotten why they went into education in the first place, and many, many more. I cannot recommend this book more highly. If I were writing a review for Amazon (which I may do come to think of it) it would definitely get a five-star rating. For teacher leaders and parents who are concerned about what is happening to their communities because of the demise of the neighborhood school, I urge you to read it as soon as possible and start using the information inside its covers. More importantly, I urge you to get involved in the grassroots movement that has already started in some parts of the country. There are a number of groups around the nation where the push back has begun. Some of these groups have been founded by parents, some by students, and of course, teachers have started some. It isn’t too late, but time is ticking away. We need to start speaking out and organizing now.

She is right. As more parents and teachers become informed about the coordinated campaign to privatize our schools and to destroy the teaching profession, it becomes urgent that we organize and resist. Those who are funding and leading this campaign have wealth and power, but their numbers are few. Leaving aside their paid employees (some of whom send me their personal disgust with their organizations), the number of those pushing the privatization movement are quite small. I have often speculated that they could probably fill a hotel ballroom. But perhaps not.

Those of us who oppose their efforts to destroy our community public schools are in the millions. We can stop them if we organize. They have money, but we have numbers. This is still a democracy.

 

 

Categories Corporate Reformers, Privatization, Reign of Error

Governor Christie’s Disastrous “School Reforms”

By dianeravitch
November 3, 2013 //
15

Julia Sass Rubin, an associate professor at the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers University and a founder of Save Our Schools NJ, here explains the ugly face of what is deceptively called “school reform” in New Jersey during the administration of Governor Chris Christie.

It would be more accurate, she writes, to say that Governor Christie has promoted a policy of “separate and unequal,” targeting children of color.

First, he imposed massive budget cuts that disproportionately harm children of color. She writes:

For example, the Paterson, Elizabeth, and Newark school districts combined lost over $300 million since 2010. If the New Jersey Supreme Court had not intervened in 2012 to restore some of the funding, the damage would have been even greater. Gov. Chris Christie also tried repeatedly to permanently alter the State’s school funding formula, to reduce funding for the almost 40 percent of New Jersey public school students who are low-income and/or Limited English Proficient.

Second, allowing schools that serve the neediest children to become unsafe and unsanitary. Rubin writes: Trenton High’s 1,800 students, and thousands of others, attend schools plagued by rats, roaches, asbestos, and black mold because the Christie Administration has all but frozen the work of the Schools Development Authority. The authority is charged by law with building and renovating public schools in the 31 former Abbott districts, while those school districts are precluded from repairing or rebuilding their dilapidated public schools.

Third: Suspending local control in districts where most students are children of color and subjecting these districts to years of state control, which facilitates privatization. The assumption behind this policy is that democracy is the problem; but the state’s lack of success demonstrates that poverty and segregation are the problems that the state refuses to address.

Fourth, the state is determined to get rid of public schools wherever possible, and replace them with privately-managed charter schools. The suburbs have staunchly resisted charters, which would weaken their public schools and divide their communities, so the state controlled districts have become the petri dishes for charters. Rubin points out that the charters have intensified segregation: The Christie administration “has ignored the fact that many of the charter schools are contributing to the segregation of students by income, language proficiency and race…New Jersey Department of Education 2012 – 2013 data shows that Hoboken’s three charter schools educate 31 percent of the City’s total public school students, but a significantly larger proportion of its white students (51 percent), and a significantly smaller proportion of its impoverished students (6 percent of the free lunch and 13 percent of the reduced lunch). The charter schools also educate none of the city’s Limited English Proficient students. Thanks to the charters, the remaining public schools are weakened by the concentrated enrollment of students with the greatest needs.

What is in store for New Jersey in another Christie administration?

A sustained assault on public education, especially in communities of color. More charter schools that skim off the highest-performing students and kick out those that don’t meet their standards. More segregation. The destruction of community participation and democratic governance in communities of color. The suburbs may think they are safe from these policies, but with a renewed mandate, they should expect to see budget cuts, and a redoubled effort to divide their communities by introducing charter schools.

Rubin concludes:

We know what is effective: addressing concentrated poverty; involving parents and communities in decision-making; providing adequate funding and healthy and safe facilities; ensuring access to high-quality pre-kindergarten and wraparound social services. The research is clear and consistent. We only need the political will to follow.

It is ironic that Governor Christie is so hostile to public education, inasmuch as he was educated in the state’s public schools. Even more ironic is that New Jersey has one of the top public school systems in the nation. On the National Assessment of Educational Progress, New Jersey ranks second or third in the nation, along with Massachusetts and Connecticut, on tests of math and reading. If New Jersey took realistic and research-based steps to improve its poorest districts–like Camden, Paterson, and Newark–New Jersey would very likely rank first in the nation. Yet Governor Christie continues to badmouth the state’s good public schools and tear down urban public education with failed privatization policies.

The Christie administration will renew its attack on public schools across New Jersey. Join other parents to save public education in New Jersey.

Categories Charter Schools, Education Reform, New Jersey, Poverty, Privatization

Will Public Education Die in Douglas County, Colorado?

By dianeravitch
November 2, 2013 //
51

Investigative reporter Stephanie Simon of Politico reports on the most bizarre school board race in the nation: Douglas County, Colorado.

There, a powerful coalition of rightwing extremists has gained control of the school board and is determined to turn education into a free market, where competition and choice replace public education. They want vouchers, charter schools, and differentiated pay for teachers.

Simon writes: “The conservatives who control the board have neutered the teachers union, prodded neighborhood elementary schools to compete with one another for market share, directed tax money to pay for religious education and imposed a novel pay scale that values teachers by their subjects, so a young man teaching algebra to eighth graders can make $20,000 a year more than a colleague teaching world history down the hall.”

The future of this free-market policy will determined in the school board election, where powerful rightwing ideologues have funded the pro-market members of the board, and teachers’ unions and parents are funding those opposed to the elimination of public education.

The Koch brothers have contributed $350,000 to the free-market campaigners. They would, if they could, privatize all of what we now know as public education. The current board, fighting to maintain control, hired conservative icon Bill Bennett for $50,000 to be a consultant. It also hired Rick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute to write a paper praising the district’s initiatives, for $35,000.

Among the changes that conservatives admire:

Pushing the free market farther still, the board has urged district elementary schools to compete with one another for enrollment, rather than simply serving all students in the neighborhood. Principals are encouraged to budget creatively so they can develop a marketable niche, a practice that has left some schools without art or music teachers as they build up science programs or bring in foreign-language classes. Then there’s the market-pay system, in which a first grade teacher is valued, and paid, more than a second grade teacher and teaching physics far outweighs teaching art.

Some parents are upset, like one who told Simon that what bothered her most was “the splintering of her community.

“Five years ago, Scott said, all the kids on the block walked together to the local elementary school. Now, each family goes their own way — some to charters, some to private schools and some to public schools across town that have successfully marketed themselves as worth the drive. She has stuck with her neighborhood school, but often thinks of pulling up stakes.

“It’s truly broken up the community,” Scott said, “and it’s sad.” 

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/koch-group-unions-battle-over-colorado-schools-race-99252_Page2.html#ixzz2jWcawZLp

Categories Charter Schools, Colorado, Corporate Reformers, Privatization

Charters in Buffalo: The Return of Segregation

By dianeravitch
November 2, 2013 //
13

Charter schools were created twenty years ago to address problems that public schools could not solve and to collaborate with public schools, sharing their best ideas. They were not intended to compete with public schools, but to support them. Today, however, many charter schools (especially the chains)  see themselves as antagonists to public schools. eager to take their funding and their space. A reader from Buffalo sent in this comment:

 

Many of the charter schools in Buffalo are a throw back to segregation. These all black schools are actually favored by the parents, but they aren’t getting different results.

Anyone can start a charter school, you don’t need to be an educator (and it shows). Some of the charter schools are run by for profit corporations funded by public money.

Besides being a way to weaken the unions, charter schools are funded on the back of public education.

I am not against the idea of charter schools, I am against the reality. Charter schools could provide unique services, such as schools specializing in autism or all male schools for wayward boys. How about a charter school for pregnant teens or teen mothers? Maybe a hands on school for the child that learns by doing instead of seeing and listening. However, these schools should not take away funds from the public schools, they need their own funding line. The teachers should be given some rights and guarantees, even if not unionized – i.e. They are not slave labor to be made to teach almost year round, Monday to Saturday, 9:00 to 5:00 or later, then cast aside when rightfully complaining or when due for a salary raise.

Buffalo has lots of problems, charter schools should not be one of them.

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Privatization

Albany Releases Charter School Audit

By dianeravitch
November 1, 2013 //
9

Thanks to Leonie Haimson for posting this information about the New York State Comptroller’s audit of charter schools in Albany. The links are a must-read. When you read the links, you will understand why the New York Charter Association fought all efforts to permit the State Comptroller to audit the charters; the charters won in court, but the legislature revised the law, allowing the audits to proceed.

Leonie Haimson writes:

Albany Community Charter School – Financial Operations (Albany County)
The board failed to fully evaluate the choice of its school building for the site selection of the elementary school or middle school. Auditors found the school could have saved from $200,000 to $2.3 million if it purchased the elementary school by issuing debt instead of continuing to lease the building.

The building was being leased from the Brighter Choice Foundation,

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/schools/2013/albanycharter.pdf

The Brighter Choice Foundation, founded by Tom Carroll, who is one of Albany’s top lobbyists for privatization. More on him and the Foundation here:

http://nepc.colorado.edu/blog/charters-get-even-more-brazen

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/albany-charter-cash-big-banks-making-bundle-new-construction-schools-bear-cost-article-1.448008

http://www.edwize.org/thomas-carroll-wal-mart-and-the-effort-to-defeat-the-albany-school-budget

http://www.albanycharterschoolnetwork.org/community/brighter-choice-foundation/history/

In response to the crises faced by the Albany public schools, a group of concerned civic and business leaders founded the Brighter Choice Foundation (BCF) in 2000. At the time, the mission of BCF was to undertake a variety of educational initiatives aimed at addressing the dire educational situation in Albany. These educational initiatives included:

  • Providing technical assistance and other support to public charter schools, public schools, and private schools pursuing innovative educational practices, with a focus on schools serving urban and economically disadvantaged children.
  • Supporting innovative educational approaches, including longer school day and longer school year models; single-sex instruction; subject-based elementary-level instruction; looping and integration of social and educational programs.
  • Conducting and commissioning research on the effectiveness of different educational approaches.
  • Supporting educational scholarships, with a focus on programs that serve economically disadvantaged students.
  • Serving as a clearinghouse for information on educational best practices.

Thirteen years after the start of its mission and with nine charter schools up and running in Albany, BCF has become an organization dedicated to the support and success of those schools. Today, those nine charter schools supported by BCF collectively represent the Albany Charter School Network (ACSN).

Categories Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »