Archives for category: Resistance

In a warning to the people of Massachusetts and Georgia, this parent in Red Bank, New Jersey, explains her community’s fight against a charter school that has drained resources from the town’s public school and increased segregation by luring mostly white students.

She writes:

Many years ago, a small group of Red Bank parents started talking about how upset they were that the Red Bank Borough schools were terribly underfunded and terribly segregated, mostly due to the charter school in our small town.

For years, a group of us did our best to ignore the negative effects the Red Bank Charter School was having on our schools and community. We hoped these effects would go away, and magically we would be properly funded and less segregated. We worked tirelessly on fundraising, asking for community support (for arts, music, etc.) and doing our own recruiting of parents to help even out the segregation issue.

But as time went on, evidence of the negative effects caused by the charter school continued to present themselves — whether it was in annual cuts to our school programs, broken friendships and neighborhoods, or simply being exposed to class pictures from the mostly white charter school.

I tried to turn the other cheek and focus on our schools and making them better. I became highly involved in the Parent Teacher Organization and worked with state politicians on our arts programs and underfunding.

Success was achieved. We restored our string instruments program with the help of our superintendent and many community partners. We also maintained our valuable elective classes such as Chinese, AVID (college-prep) and Project Lead the Way (engineering). We were making great strides through the leadership of our very smart administration, involved parents and community.

Then everything came to a head last year when the charter school asked to expand. We were faced with the already existing negative effects multiplying — less funding, deeper segregation. Our community was floored. But we pulled together to block the expansion. As we did, we had a chance to educate our larger community even more about the negative effects the charter school has on our district.

It was like unpeeling an onion, one layer at a time, and examining the funding model, segregation, student academic achievement, programming, budgeting, school communications, and more. And with each layer, we became more and more astounded and shocked. The data supported our deepest fears: We were indeed living in the most segregated neighborhood in New Jersey — yes, our “hip town,” our cool little town of Red Bank, the same Red Bank that Smithsonian magazine, The New York Times and many others have written about as one of the best small towns in America. The data and information we uncovered was the dirty little secret that creeped below the headlines.

Here is a list of the school boards that have passed a resolution opposing “Question 2,” that would allow the state to open a dozen charter schools every year, with no limits. The school boards recognize that this would take money away from public schools and destroy public education in Massachusetts. Since Massachusetts is already the top-performing state in the nation on federal tests (National Assessment of Educational Progress), there is no good reason to open an unlimited number of privately managed charters. As the November 8 election grows closer, you can expect this list to grow longer. Currently, 112 school boards have voted to oppose Question 2. Zero (0) support the proposal. (Not all 112 may be on this list.)

A growing list of communities oppose lifting the charter cap

These communities have all gone on record against lifting the cap on charter schools. (Each community’s school committee has passed a resolution or issued a statement against a cap lift. The list also indicates communities in which another town body has gone on record against lifting the charter cap.) If your city or town is missing from this list, see if you can get them on board!

Adams-Cheshire
Agawam
Amesbury
Amherst
Andover
Arlington
Ashland
Barnstable
Belchertown
Bellingham
Berkshire Hills
Beverly
Boston City Council
Bourne
Brockton
Burlington
Cambridge School Committee,
Cambridge City Council
Chelsea
Chicopee
Clarksburg
Conway
Deerfield, Deerfield Selectmen
Dennis Selectmen
Douglas
Dudley-Charlton
Easthampton City Council
East Bridgewater
Everett
Fall River
Falmouth
Fitchburg
Framingham
Frontier Regional
Greenfield
Hampshire Regional
Haverhill
Hawlemont Regional
Holyoke
Kingston
Lee
Lenox
Lexington
Longmeadow
Lowell School Committee, City Council
Ludlow
Lynn City Council, Lynn School Committee
Malden
Mansfield
Marshfield
Medford
Melrose
Milton
Monomoy
Mohawk Regional
Narragansett Regional
New Bedford
Newburyport
North Adams
Northampton
Northbridge
North Middlesex
North Reading
Norton
Norwood
Orange
Oxford
Peabody
Pelham
Pioneer Valley Regional
Pittsfield
Quincy
Revere
Rowe
Saugus
Savoy
Silver Lake Regional
Southern Berkshire Regional
Somerville
South Hadley
Springfield
Stoneham
Taunton School Committee, Taunton
City Council
Tyngsborough
Upper Cape Cod Regional Tech
Wachusett
Wareham
Waltham
Westhampton
West Springfield
Whately
Whitman-Hanson
Williamstown
Winchendon
Winthrop
Worcester School Committee, Worcester City Council

Jim Horn has a website called “Schools Matter.” He opposes corporate reform, as I do.
I have never met him. I hear he doesn’t like me. I don’t know why. I thought we were fighting for the same goals.

The first time I became aware of his hostility was when he posted a photograph of me with the caption, “Nice face job, Diane.” Very puzzling as I have never had a facelift. Sexist too. I ignored him.

When Anthony Cody and I decided to create the Network for Public Education, aiming to build alliances among the many individuals and groups fighting against corporate reform, we selected a board and announced our existence. Horn emailed to say that he was going to attack us because we included a much admired NBCT African American teacher from Mississippi. Horn discovered that she had written an article praising merit pay. Many emails went back and forth among him, Anthony, and me. He decided not to poison us at our birth.

But he has an intense and personal animus towards me. Again, I can’t explain it. I don’t know why.

I thought I would share with you his latest blast, which was (I assume) a response to my post about how progressive movements die when they turn on one another. In the post, I urged us all to work together towards our shared agenda. Apparently he is angry that I supported ESSA; I supported it because it eliminated NCLB (No Child Left Behind), AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress), and VAM (value-added modeling or test-based teacher evaluations). If ESSA had not passed, NCLB would still be federal law, and John King would have the authoritarian power that Arne Duncan had over the nation’s schools. If I were writing the law, I would have eliminated all federal mandates for accountability and testing, but I was not writing the law.

Despite what he writes, we are on the same side of the issues. Like him, I oppose standardized testing, other than for sampling purposes. I oppose evaluation of teachers by test scores. I oppose segregation. I support equitable and ample funding of schools. I support teacher professionalism and collective bargaining. I support public education and oppose privatization. Yet he says I am his enemy. He wants us to fail.

This is what Jim Horn wrote yesterday:

Today’s Communique to the Ravitch Forces

After what seems to me to have been a pretty effective skirmish, the Ravitch forces have climbed out of their tent at their permanent Basecamp, stomping the ground and waving their, um, whatevers. For those Ravitch acolytes who are not too drunk on revenge to read, here’s something to ponder, as I am working on a next book today and don’t have time to attend to your whining.

In everything I have seen from D. Ravitch and the band of intellectual eunuchs who comprise the NPE echo chamber, a theme stands out, which is that we cannot afford to fight among ourselves, that allies cannot be ripped asunder, that we must stick together in the same tent, blah blah. So let me speak to Diane directly here, and I hope that all of her disciples will read this carefully.

The problem is, Diane, our goals are not the same. My goals are ending testing accountability in all forms, ending segregated classrooms in all forms, and ending corporate education reform in all forms. I can’t work toward those goals with any effect while misleaders like you and the union suits are cutting deals on ESSA to guarantee another generation of testing accountability, segregated classrooms, and corporate control. Have you read the history of NCLB?

We are on different sides of these issues, regardless of how much braying and foot stomping you are able to stir up. We are not allies. I am your enemy. Get used to it.

What is competency-based education? Twenty or thirty years ago, it referred to skill-based education, and critics complained that CBE downgraded the importance of knowledge.

Today CBE has a different meaning. It refers to teaching and assessment that is conducted online, where students’ learning is continuously monitored, measured, and analyzed. CBE is invariably susceptible to data-mining of children, gathering Personally Identifiable Information (PII) that can be aggregated and used without the knowledge or permission of parents.

The first time that I heard of CBE (although it was not called that) was in a meeting in August 2015 with The State Commissioner of Education in New York, MaryEllen Elia, after her first month in office. I organized a discussion between Commissioner Elia and several board members of NYSAPE (New York State Allies for Public Education), the group that created New York State’s massive opt out that year (and again this year). It was a candid e change, and at one point, Commissioner Elia said that the annual tests would eventually be phased out and replaced by embedded assessment. When asked to explain, she said that students would do their school work online, and they would be continuously assessed. The computer could tell teachers what the students were able to do, minute by minute.

This kind of intensive surveillance and monitoring is very alarming. Once teaching and testing goes online, how can parents say no?

A group of bloggers wrote posts last week to express their concern and outrage about the stealth implementation of CBE. The lead post warns that opting out of annual tests is not enough to stop the digitized steamroller. It’s title is: “Stop! Don’t Opt Out. Read This First.” The author argues that parents are being deceived.

The blogger warns:

Schools in every state are buzzing this year with talk of “personalized” learning and 21st century assessments for kids as young as kindergarten. The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and its innovative pilot programs are already changing the ways schools instruct and assess, in ways that are clearly harmful to our kids. Ed-tech companies, chambers of commerce, ALEC, neoliberal foundations, telecommunications companies, and the government are working diligently to turn our public schools into lean, efficient laboratories of data-driven, digital learning.

He or she recounts the ways the technocracy responds to parents’ concerns and fears. The new way, they will say, is “personalized learning.” Don’t worry. We know what is best. When the parent objects that the test results come back too late to inform instruction, the technocrat says, “embedded instruction provides real-time feedback. No problem.” Parent asks, what about the stress? Technocrat: “Children won’t even know they are being tested.”

The blogger doesn’t actually say to parents, “Don’t opt out.”

Quite the contrary:

“Opt out families nationwide are encountering these same arguments, as though a pre-set trap is being sprung. Great. So opting out of end-of-year testing isn’t the silver bullet we hoped it would be. Now what?

Now that we know the whole story, go ahead and opt out of the end of the year tests. No child should suffer through them. But we have to expand our definition of opting out, to protect our children from data mining and stop the shift to embedded assessments and digital curriculum.

In addition to opting out of end-of-year testing, there are other important steps we need to take to safeguard our children’s access to human teachers and to protect their data, their vision, and their emotional health. There is no set playbook, but here are some ideas to get us started.

1. Opt your child out of Google Apps for Education (GAFE).

2. If your school offers a device for home use, decline to sign the waiver for it and/or pay the fee.

3. Does your child’s assigned email address include a unique identifier, like their student ID number? If yes, request a guest log in so that their data cannot be aggregated.

4. Refuse biometric monitoring devices (e.g. fit bits).

5. Refuse to allow your child’s behavioral, or social-emotional data to be entered into third-party applications. (e.g. Class Dojo)

6. Refuse in-class social networking programs (e.g. EdModo).

7. Set a screen time maximum per day/per week for your child.

8. Opt young children out of in school screen time altogether and request paper and pencil assignments and reading from print books (not ebooks).

9. Begin educating parents about the difference between “personalized” learning modules that rely on mining PII (personally-identifiable information) to function properly and technology that empowers children to create and share their own content.

10. Insist that school budgets prioritize human instruction and that hybrid/blended learning not be used as a back door way to increase class size or push online classes.

Parents, teachers, school administrators, and students must begin to look critically at the technology investments we are making in schools. We have to start advocating for responsible tools that empower our children to be creators (and I don’t mean of data), NOT consumers of pre-packaged, corporate content or online games. We must prioritize HUMAN instruction and learning in relationship to one another. We need more face time and less screen time.

Every time a parent acts to protect their child from these harmful policies, it throws a wrench into the gears of this machine. The steamroller of education reform doesn’t stand a chance against an empowered, educated army of parents, teachers and students. Use your power to refuse. Stand together, stand firm, be loud, and grab a friend. Cumulatively our actions will bring down this beast!”

My first job was as an editorial assistant at a small publication called “The New Leader,” which no longer exists. It was founded by a Menshevik who left Russia after the revolution. Its politics were democratic socialist and anti-Communist. I was right out of college, just married, and had no job experience or skills. I was paid $10 a week. It was a great job. I did everything, from selling advertising to writing book reviews. I was introduced to the world of intellectuals who argued about politics all over the world and which writer’s latest novel was his best or worst. In an essay that I wrote for its last issue, I said that I earned my M.A. at the New Leader. (I have a B.A. and a Ph.D., no M.A.).

One of my greatest, most important lessons was about the nature of left-wing politics. The Mensheviks hated the Bolsheviks. But then there were the Trotskyites, the Lovestoneites, the Cannonites, and the Schachtmanites. And more. At the time, I learned the distinctions among them, but if asked today, I couldn’t tell you. Jay Lovestone, who led his faction, stopped in the office at least once. I went to an evening event where I met the great Max Schactman, a towering figure with piercing eyes who was said to have engaged in a legendary four-hour debate about the future of the left. (His wife, Yetta, was Al Shanker’s personal secretary during his UFT years in New York City.)

I also learned about the famous lunch tables at the City College of New York, each associated with a left-wing faction.

I didn’t know much about Marxist philosophy but the one abiding lesson I learned was that factionalism and divisiveness kept the left impotent. They spent more time fighting one another than framing an agenda about their common strategies and goals.

This is why I have always believed that our own movement to stop the privatization of public education and the degradation of their schooling into scripted learning must be inclusive. At the first annual conference of the Network for Public Education in Austin, I spoke of the importance of having a big tent, welcoming all to our side who share our vision of better schools for all, free of high-stakes testing, amply and equitably resourced, where teachers are treated with respect as the professionals they are, and students are treated with respect and have the opportunity to learn.

Thus, I will not join in the demonizing of allies. For example, I do not criticize the unions, first because I believe in the right to collective bargaining, and second because I believe that unions are vital in building and sustaining the middle class and reducing income inequality. Those of us who oppose privatization of the public sector are in the same boat. If we waste our time fighting one another, we won’t get anywhere and the boat might capsize.

This is my introduction to a touchy subject. Anthony Cody writes here about some recent internecine battles. I appreciate his support. Anthony and I have spent hours discussing the issues that confront us all. I continually learn from him, as I do from Carol Burris and from all the board members at the Network for Public Education, each of whom has deep experience in their own field.

I am always taken aback when someone I consider on the same side, fighting the corporate assault on our schools, attacks me. Then I remember what I learned at the New Leader about how people can destroy their movement by internal squabbling. I won’t do it. Send me your slings and arrows. I won’t react. I don’t care. We are up against some of the most powerful people in the nation, who want to impose their discredited ideas on other people’s children. I am saving my energy for that struggle. I want to see us win during my lifetime. The clock is ticking.

Jesse Hagopian, a teacher and civil rights activist in Seattle, writes here about the growing Black resistance to corporate reform. The resolutions adopted by the NAACP and the Movement for Black Lives to stop the expansion of charter schools is only the beginning, he says, of opposition to the corporate agenda.

A moratorium would halt the granting of any more licenses to open new charter schools — that is, schools funded by the public but privately run and not accountable to democratically elected school boards. The NAACP announcement has corporate education reformers reeling. Rick Hess, director of education policy at the right-wing American Enterprise Institute, said that if local governments adopt the NAACP’s proposed moratorium, “It would give a permanent black eye to the sector.”

If the NAACP’s stance on charters would bruise the corporate agenda, then the declaration from the Movement for Black Lives — the newest civil rights coalition, comprised of dozens of grassroots organizations around the country — would flatline it altogether. The coalition released a policy platform at the beginning of August that called for, among other things, a moratorium on all out-of-school suspensions and the removal of police from schools, replacing them with positive alternatives to discipline and safety. It also called for a moratorium on charter schools and school closures, and full funding formulas that adequately weigh the needs of all districts in the state.

Hagopian knows that the high-stakes testing and privatization of public schools is not in the interest of Black students, although reformers claim they are.

Billionaire philanthrocapitalists have upended education over the past 15 years by backing a series of major policy changes — codified in the No Child Left Behind Act, the Race to the Top initiative and the Common Core State Standards. These policies have badly damaged education for all kids and have had particularly harmful effects on Black and Brown communities. Today, increasing numbers of people have discovered that these reforms are in reality efforts to turn the schoolhouse into an ATM for corporate America.

While their program for corporate reform is being eroded by research and rising grassroots movements, the corporate reformers are clinging to one last glossy brochure in the public relations portfolio — the one with photos of Black youth on the cover and promises that all of these reforms are really about civil rights and defending kids of color.

What they don’t want you to know is that their favorite schools have high suspension rates for Black students and are highly segregated. They are, he says, part of the School-to-Prison Pipeline.

What the testocracy doesn’t want you to know is that standardized testing is a multibillion dollar industry, with the average student in the American public school system taking an outlandish 112 standardized tests during their k-12 career. They don’t want you to know that many schools that serve Black and Brown students have become test-prep factories rather than incubators of creativity and critical thinking, with testing saturating education at even higher concentrations in schools serving low-income students and students of color. They don’t want you to understand the way high-stakes tests are being used around the country in service of the school-to-prison-pipeline. A review by the National Research Council concluded that high school graduation tests have done nothing to lift student achievement, but they have raised the dropout rate. When one test score can deny students graduation — even when they have met every other graduation requirement — it can have devastating consequences. Boston University economics professor Kevin Lang’s 2013 study, “The School to Prison Pipeline Exposed,” links increases in the use of high-stakes standardized high school exit exams to increased incarceration rates.

Education Week posted an article, like many others, on the growing African American opposition to the expansion of charter schools.

This was in response to resolutions passed by the NAACP annual convention (not yet ratified by the national board, which must be subject to heavy lobbying by Gates and other funders) and by the Movement for Black Lives (a consortium of 50 black organizations including Black Lives Matter).

The resolutions acknowledged that schooling in black communities is being taken over by outside entrepreneurs, and black parents have no voice when this happens. It is a bit like Walmart moving into your town and killing off all the mom-and-pop stores, then hiring mom and pop as greeters in a massive chain operation, which might abandon the community if sales are not sufficiently brisk.

All such stories about this development have two go-to sources to contradict the NAACP and the Movement for Black Lives: Howard Fuller of Black Alliance for Educational Options and Shaver Jeffries of Democrats for Education Reform.

Neither is a grassroots black organization.

Howard Fuller is black, but his organization has been bankrolled by white rightwing philanthropies since its inception in 2000. Its biggest funders are the Walton Foundation, the Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee (huge supporters of vouchers), the John M. Olin Foundation (now defunct), and the Gates Foundation.

Shavar Jeffries is black, but DFER is an organization that represents white hedge fund managers, including billionaires, who are contemptuous of public schools and eager to privatize them.

Nonetheless, it is heartening to see that truly grassroots groups like the NAACP and many of its chapters (including the New England chapter, which opposes Question 2 to expand charters in Massachusetts) are speaking up and opposing privatization of public schools.

In Chicago, hunger strikers sat in front of Dyett High School, demanding that Mayor Emanuel keep the school open.

They wanted an open enrollment neighborhood high school, and Dyett was the last one in the city.

Not only is the school open, the city spent $14 million to renovate it. It reopened as an arts-themed neighborhood high school.

Total victory for our friend Jitu Brown and his steadfast, courageous allies.

Jitu would be the first to say that he does not deserve credit or recognition. But he was there every day. He led. The hunger strikers won.

Jitu Brown hereby joins the honor roll of this blog. I am happy to say that he is a member of the board of the Network for Public Education.

Yesterday the blog passed the 28 million mark. That is the number of page views, the number of times that someone opened a post.

Something important is happening. It is happening step by step, but it is happening. The tide is turning.

The key to saving our schools is collaboration among allies. The Network for Public Education has developed an awesome national website called the Grassroots Education Network. Open it, and you will see your state. Click on it and you will see the name of organizations working together to support better public schools, schools open to everyone, no lottery. If you don’t see the name of your organization, contact Carol Burris, the executive director of NPE and give her the information.

The public is waking up to the fraud perpetrated by the privatizers, the corporate reformers, the privateers, whatever you call them. They dare not say what they really want.

They have no interest whatever in “reforming the public schools.” They want to disrupt them, blow them up, shut them down, and replace them with private management.

The public is wising up.

Sometimes it takes a comedian to tell the truth, as John Oliver did recently.

Day after day, the national media tell stories of charter scams, online charter scams, real estate frauds, self-enrichment schemes, charters run by religious organizations, charters run by foreign nationals, charters destroying local communities, charters cherrypicking the kids they want. How do they never see the pattern in the rug?

After 15 years of No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, and now ESSA, what reform victories are there? The Tennessee Achievement School District has failed to make a difference despite its bold promises. The Michigan Educational Achievement Authority has failed, utterly failed. Firing teachers and staff and closing schools is not reform: It’s disruption.

After 15 years of Reform-That-Dare-Not-Speak-Its-True-Name (Privatization), the pushback is happening, and it is real.

We will not simply preserve public education. We will stand together to make American public education better than it has ever been, for every child in every zip code.

A good post by Mike Klonsky.

Watching Democracy Now’s footage of hired company thugs from the Dakota Access pipeline company, sicking their dogs on peaceful Lakota pipeline protesters was a bit much for us to stomach. Brings back memories of Alabama, 1962.

So we’re packing up the car this morning with warm clothing and food and driving up to Cannonball, N.D. from Chicago, to see how we can help offer support and solidarity with the Standing Rock Sioux and thousands of activists who’ve been at the encampment for months.

This is not just about helping others. The $3.8 billion Dakota Access Pipeline, which poses a clear and present danger to the environment and especially to the drinking water of 90 million people, empties out its fracking oil here in Illinois. The N.D. protests have an immediate aim of stopping the company and the Army Corps of Engineers (the folks who helped bring deadly flooding to the Lower 9th Ward after Katrina) from putting the pipeline under the Missouri River on reservation land. After that comes the Mississippi. A leak into either river will produce another oil catastrophe.