Archives for category: School Choice
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Florida: Government Watchdog Agency Reports on Charter Corruption, Cronyism, Lack of Accountability

By dianeravitch
January 5, 2019 //
16

Betsy DeVos often says that Florida is a national model of choice. You will understand why she says this when you read the report from a government watchdog agency called Integrity Florida. This group, which is not focused on education but on government ethics, reveals in detail what happens when government money is handed out freely to entrepreneurs without any oversight or accountability.

Corruption and malfeasance run rampant.

The biggest money to finance the privatization of Florida’s schools came from Betsy DeVos and the Walton Family and a gaggle of rightwing out-of-state elites.

Betsy and the Waltons and their rightwing allies bought the privatization of Florida’s schools.

Here is the executive summary:

Underfunding, coupled with the continual adoption of tax cuts that make adequate public-school spending harder and harder to attain, prompts a look into the future. How much further growth in the number of charter schools is likely? How will that growth affect traditional schools and the public education system?

The answer to the first question appears to be that growth will continue unabated as long as private charter companies consider public schools a profit-making opportunity and they find receptive audiences in the legislature. If current trends continue, a 2015 national report concluded, “Charter schools will educate 20-40 percent of all U.S. public-school students by 2035.”1 Reaching those percentages in Florida would require doubling to quadrupling charters’ current 10 percent share of all public school students.

Some charter and school choice advocates are clear about their goal. Charters already have “created an entire new sector of public education” and they ultimately may “become the predominant system of schools,” the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools has said.2 And the ultimate hope of many, as Milton Friedman wrote (see Page 8), is to bring about a transfer of government to private enterprise, in part by “enabling a private, for-profit industry to develop” in education.

Continued growth in the charter sector will exacerbate a problem that seemingly runs against the Florida Constitution’s decree that the state must provide “a uniform system” of high-quality education. As the number of charters has grown, with different rules than in traditional schools, some question whether a uniform system actually exists today. If Amendment 8 had remained on the November ballot and passed, a state charter authorizer could have approved new charter schools without the consent of the school district. In that case, the school district would not “operate, control and supervise all free public schools within the school district,” as another provision of the Constitution requires.

As the Miami Herald has said during a charter school investigation,
“Charter schools have become a parallel school system unto themselves, a system controlled largely by for-profit management companies and private landlords – one and the same, in many cases – and rife with insider deals and potential conflicts of interest.”

Key Findings

• Charter school enrollment continues to grow in Florida and nationwide, although at a slower rate than in previous years.

• The number of charter schools managed by for-profit companies in Florida continues to grow at a rapid pace and now makes up nearly half of all charter schools in the state.

• Although many charter schools in Florida are high performing, research has found no significant difference in academic performance between charter schools and traditional public schools.

• Numerous studies have found that charter schools strain traditional schools and school districts financially.

• Charter schools were originally proposed as teacher-run schools that would use innovative techniques to be shared with traditional schools. Over time, the concept changed to set up a competitive relationship between charters and traditional schools rather than a cooperative one.

• Charter schools have largely failed to deliver the education innovation that was originally promised and envisioned.

• Some charter advocates have explicitly said their goal is to privatize education by encouraging a for-profit K-12 industry. Today some charter proponents see charter schools, rather than traditional ones, as the “predominant system of schools.”

• Since 1998, at least 373 charter schools have closed their doors in Florida.

• Local school boards have seen reduced ability to manage charter schools in their
districts.

• The Florida Supreme Court removed Constitutional Amendment 8 from the November 2018 ballot that would have created a statewide charter school authorizer. However, future attempts by the legislature to establish a statewide charter authorizer may occur and should be opposed. A state charter authorizer would preempt voters’ rights to local control of education through their elected school boards, even though local tax dollars would pay for charter expansion.

• The charter school industry has spent more than $13 million since 1998 to influence state education policy through contributions to political campaigns.

• The charter school industry has spent more than $8 million in legislative lobbying expenditures since 2007 to influence education policy.

• The legislature has modified the original Florida charter school law significantly over the years to encourage creation of new charters, increase the number of students in charter schools and enhance funding of charters, sometimes at the expense of traditional schools.

• Some public officials who decide education policy and their families are profiting personally from ownership and employment with the charter school industry, creating the appearance of a conflict of interest.

• Lax regulation of charter schools has created opportunities for financial mismanagement and criminal corruption.

Policy Options to Consider

• Inasmuch as charter schools can be an inefficient and wasteful option for “school choice,” the legislature should evaluate the appropriate amount of funding the state can afford to offer in educational choices to parents and students.

• Require for-profit companies associated with charter schools to report their expenditures and profits for each school they operate.

• Require charter schools to post on their website their original application and charter contract along with their annual report, audit and school grade.

• Charter school websites should include lease agreements, including terms and conditions and who profits from the lease payments.

• Companies managing charter schools in more than one school district should have annual audits ensuring local tax revenue is being spent locally.

• Add additional criteria for school boards to consider when reviewing and deciding on a charter school application.

• Give local school boards more tools to manage the charter schools in their districts, including greater contractual oversight and the ability to negotiate charter contracts.

• Increase education funding to sufficiently fund all public schools to eliminate competition between traditional schools and charter schools for inadequate public education dollars.

• Prohibit charter schools from using public education funds for advertising to attract new students.

• Limit the amount of public funds that can be used for charter school facility leases to a certain percentage of the school’s operating budget.

• Require charter schools to report annually the number of dropouts, the number of withdrawals and the number of expulsions.

Go to pages 26-30 to see where the money came from to finance this plunder and privatization of Florida’s public schools. You will see familiar names.

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

When “School Choice” Means “Schools Choose”

By dianeravitch
December 28, 2018 //
11

Two scholars demonstrated what we already knew: many charter schools are skimming and choosing the students they want while excluding the ones they don’t want, the ones likely to cost too much or pull down their test scores.

Peter Bergman and Isaac McFarlin Jr. tested the hypothesis.

Here is the abstract of their paper.

School choice may allow schools to “cream skim” students perceived as easier to educate. To test this, we sent emails from fictitious parents to 6,452 schools in 29 states and Washington, D.C. The fictitious parent asked whether any student is eligible to apply to the school and how to apply. Each email signaled a randomly assigned attribute of the child. We find that schools are less likely to respond to inquiries from students with poor behavior, low achievement, or a special need. Lower response rates to students with a potentially significant special need are driven by charter schools. Otherwise, these results hold for traditional public schools in areas of school choice and high-value added schools.

An excerpt from the study:

We find that, overall, traditional public schools’ response rates are similar to the response rates from charter schools across treatment messages. However, there is a different response rate to messages that signal a child has a significant special need. Traditional public schools exhibit no differential response rate to these messages, but charter schools are 7 percentage points less likely to respond to them than to the baseline message. This result is important because students with disabilities are twice as expensive to educate than the typical student without a disability (Moore et al., 1988; Chambers, 1998; Collins and Zirkel, 1992), and students with the severe disabilities can cost 8-to-14
times to educate compared to the typical non-disabled student (Griffith, 2008).

Here are commentaries.

From the Atlantic:

Parents of students who are “harder to educate” may have a hard time getting schools to reply to their emails about how to apply.

From U.S. News:

Students with behavior problems, low achievement or special needs are sometimes not encouraged to apply to charter schools…

Charter schools and public schools of choice – those in school districts that allow students to choose from any number of schools instead of zoning them to just one – are less likely to encourage students with a history of poor behavior, low academic achievement or special needs to apply.

Charter schools, in particular, were less likely to encourage students with a potentially significant special need to apply.

That’s the latest research published Thursday by Peter Bergman, an assistant professor at Columbia University’s Teachers College, and Isaac McFarlin Jr., assistant professor at University of Florida’s College of Education.

The researchers sent emails from fictitious parents to nearly 6,500 schools in 29 states and the District of Columbia, asking whether any student is eligible to apply to the school and how to do so. Each email signaled either a disability status, poor behavior, high or low prior academic achievement, or no characteristic at all. The researchers also varied students’ implied race, household structure and gender.

“We find that schools respond less often to messages regarding students whom schools may perceive as more challenging to educate,” the researchers concluded.

The baseline response rate was 53 percent. But emails signaling a student with a potentially restrictive special need were 5 percentage points less likely to receive a response; emails signaling a behavior problem were 7 percentage points less likely to receive a response; and emails signaling prior low academic achievement were 2 percentage points less likely to receive a response.

Notably, emails indicating good grades and attendance were neither more nor less likely to receive a response.

In one sub-analysis, the researchers compared the responses of charter schools directly to the nearby traditional public schools. Overall, they found the response rates similar with one major exception: If an email signaled a child had a significant special need, charter schools were 7 percentage points less likely to respond while traditional public schools were not more or less likely to respond.

“This is one of the most striking findings of the study,” McFarlin said, “because it raises the question of whether high-performing charter schools are successful in part because they screen out the costliest-to-educate students from their applicant pools.”

Categories Accountability, Bias, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization, School Choice, Special Education

Florida: The DeSantis Team to Crush Public Schools Includes Religious Zealots and Profiteers

By dianeravitch
December 15, 2018 //
11

I have posted several times about the disaster that is happening in Florida, which elected a governor who is a mini-me of Betsy DeVos and Jeb Bush. His name is Ron DeSantis. He did not talk much about education during the campaign, but now that he is governor-elect, he has chosen the F-team to carry out the wishes of ALEC, the Waltons, the Koch brothers, DeVos and every other malefactor of public education.

Peter Greene describes the members of the DeSantis team, every one of them seeking to divert public money to charter schools, religious schools, or for-profit scams. If you are the kind of person who likes to see train wrecks up close, please read this post.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Florida, For-Profit, Fraud, Privatization, Religion, School Choice, Separation of church and state, Vouchers

Samuel Abrams: Why Did Sweden Adopt School Choice?

By dianeravitch
December 13, 2018 //
16

I posted this morning that Sweden is now engaged in serious reflection about the failure of school choice. Its ranking on international tests has declined significantly, while segregation of every sort has increased.

A reader asked why Sweden chose to adopt school choice, given the strength of unions in that country.

I asked Samuel Abrams, who wrote about Sweden in his excellent book “Education and the Commercial Mindset.”

He replied:

It’s an excellent question. And I addressed it in detail in my book. Below is the text (coming from pp. 267-269). In sum, Sweden, like other Nordic countries, benefits from a great deal of trust in government and corporate officials. Union leaders in Sweden went along with the privatization initiative in the early 1990s because they trusted independent school leaders to treat and pay teachers fairly. In fact, union leaders concluded that competition from these independent schools would drive up salaries for teachers. The union leaders were wrong, however, as independent schools didn’t have to hire certified teachers. So, the opposite occurred: competition drove down salaries. In 2006, the Swedish government said enough: independent schools could hire only certified teachers. But there was a grandfather clause: those already teaching without certification didn’t have to get certified.

– Sam

Beyond funding parity with municipal schools for independent school operators, administrative sovereignty for their leaders, and desire among many Swedes for school choice after decades of limited options, an interconnected, vigorous Nordic investment community played a substantial role in boosting educational privatization. The coordination of Swedish banks and businesses, in particular, has a long history. Called the “Wallenberg system” by Francis Sejersted, ownership groups with controlling interests in Swedish companies also hold major stakes in banks, which they, in turn, use to facilitate loans. Among the so-called “fifteen families” operating in this manner, the Wallenbergs have stood out, holding, for example, controlling interests through EQT and Investor in such companies as Alfa Laval, Atlas Copco, Electrolux, Scania-Vabis, and SKF as well as AcadeMedia while also maintaining a major stake in Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken (better known as SEB). In conformity with the concept of Jantelagen, in fact, the Wallenberg motto, chiseled into a black granite wall at SEB headquarters, captures this quiet ubiquity: Esse non videri [To be yet not seen].

But for EQT and Investor of the Wallenbergs, along with Bure Equity and Magnora, Kunskapsskolan and several of its competitors would never have evolved into sprawling enterprises. These school companies benefited, as well, from two additional advantages denied Edison and many other EMOs: first, much lower perceptions of corruption, or, as Transparency International puts it, “abuse of entrusted power for private gain”; and second, far less childhood poverty, meaning children come to school better prepared to learn as well as much less likely to cause trouble for classmates (or, in technical terms, generate negative peer group effects).

According to Transparency International, a think tank based in Berlin dedicated to measuring trust in government and corporate officials in countries around the world, Sweden, like its Nordic neighbors, has year after year been a model nation. Over the course of two decades of annual surveys, from 1995 to 2014, Sweden averaged a ranking of fourth most transparent (or least corrupt) country, ranging from most transparent to sixth most. By contrast, the United States has averaged a ranking of eighteenth, ranging from fifteenth to twenty-fourth.

In everyday circumstances, such trust can be seen in parents leaving infants in carriages outside cafés while meeting friends inside for coffee or in café proprietors leaving woolen blankets on outdoor chairs to keep customers warm. By extension, parents, union leaders, and journalists in the 1990s and early aughts accorded for-profit school operators ample trust that student interests would be paramount.

In fact, both teachers unions-Lärarförbundet (representing preschool and elementary teachers) and Lärarnas Riksförbund (representing secondary teachers)-welcomed the free school movement and continued to support it. According to Anna Jändel-Holst, a senior policy advisor at Lärarnas Riksförbund, teachers welcomed the opportunity to work at different schools and expected additional competition between schools to drive up salaries. Speaking in 2009 at her office in central Stockholm, Jändel-Holst, who was previously a lower-secondary social studies teacher for seven years, explained that many members of her union taught in commercially operated schools and that she had no objection herself to the concept. Her son, after all, was a ninth-grader at a Kunskapsskolan, she said, and was challenged and happy.

Jändel-Holst said the only problem with the voucher legislation was that it did not stipulate that teachers in friskolor had to be certified. Some schools consequently hired unqualified teachers, she said, and this exemption moreover put downward pressure on teacher salaries. Salaries for Swedish teachers did, in fact, sink from 2000 to 2009. In 2000, teacher pay equaled per capita GDP for primary and lower-secondary teachers and amounted to 1.07 as much for upper-secondary teachers. By 2009, primary teachers earned 0.93 as much as per capita GDP; lower-secondary teachers, 0.96; and upper-secondary teachers, 1.01. The trend in Norway was the same whereas the opposite was true in Denmark and Finland.

Along with her colleague Olof Lundberg, another senior policy advisor, Jändel-Holst agreed that both unions had erred in failing to anticipate the consequences of this exemption for friskolor. But both were quick to point out that legislation was passed in 2006 to mandate that teachers in all schools be certified, though uncertified teachers already unemployed at friskolor were grandfathered in.

Categories International, School Choice

What School Choice Did To Sweden: A Cautionary Example

By dianeravitch
December 13, 2018 //
8

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development convened a meeting last spring in Portugal to discuss the condition and future of the teaching profession. Each nation present discussed its perspective. The following is the official summary of the presentation by the Minister of Education from Sweden.

To download the full report click here.

SCHOOL CHOICE

Sweden:

In the early 1990s, Sweden moved to a school choice system in which the education system changed from one where the vast majority of students attended the public school in their catchment area to one where many students opt for a school other than their local school, and where schools that are privately run and publicly funded compete with traditional public schools.

Over the past twenty-five years of this unlimited choice system in Sweden, student performance on PISA has declined from near the OECD average to significantly below the OECD average in 2012, a steeper decline than in any other country. The variation in performance between schools also increased and there is now a larger impact of socioeconomic status on student performance than in the past.

Swedish participants described Sweden’s education system as an object lesson in how not to design a school choice system. Housing segregation leads to school segregation, and if you add to that market mechanisms and weak regulation, the result is markedly increased inequity.

The decline in achievement has fueled a national debate about how to improve the Swedish education system, from revising school choice arrangements to improve the access of disadvantaged families to information about school choices and the introduction of controlled choice schemes that supplement parental choice to ensure a more diverse distribution of students among schools. The Swedish government wants to modify its school choice system but this is politically difficult.

The Swedish government is increasing resources to poor schools but has not been able to solve its problem of teacher shortages, which affect the poorest schools the most. The poorest schools have the least experienced teachers, who are overwhelmed by the many problems they face. Teachers also lack time to work with students, and surveys of students report a lack of trustful relations with teachers.

Categories Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, Failure, For-Profit, International, Privatization, School Choice, Testing, Vouchers

Mercedes Schneider: The Racist Origins of School Vouchers

By dianeravitch
December 12, 2018 //
30

Mercedes Schneider wrote a history of vouchers and school choice called School Choice: The End of Public Education? She is aware that libertarians like to credit the origins of vouchers to Thomas Paine and John Stuart Mill. But, their ideas never took root in American soil.

School vouchers, and the larger concept of private schools paid for with public money, is rooted in racism.

Schneider writes:

The history of school vouchers in American K12 education is rooted in racism.

This fact is indisputable.

Libertarian economist Milton Friedman wrote his famous proposal for vouchers in 1955. Southern governors loved the idea of using public money to escape federal court orders.

She writes:

When it comes to racial integration, school vouchers have yet to “show promise.” Moreover, even though over 60 years has passed since vouchers were first used in K12 education to stymie the federal desegregation mandate, school voucher usage has yet to redeem its reputation as a catalyst for racial resegregation.

In the face of this reality, crediting Paine, or Mill, or Friedman with “the” idea for school vouchers matters little, for it is an idea that only fares well on paper.

Vouchers have also fared poorly in studies of academic achievement.

They seem to be best at reinforcing Inequity.

Categories Accountability, Racism, School Choice, Segregation, Vouchers

Editorial: R.I.P., Public Education in Florida

By dianeravitch
December 11, 2018 //
7

The St.Augustine Record knows that the choice of privatizer Richard Corcoran as Commissioner of Education is disastrous for public schools.

He is totally unqualified and he hates public schools.

To be blunt, as the editorial is, he is a hack.

Let’s not beat around the political bush: Putting former House Speaker Richard Corcoran in charge of Florida education is like hiring Genghis Kahn to head the state Department of Corrections.

The charter school fox is heading for the Department of Education hen house and, for public schooling, that’s finger-lickin’ bad.

Corcoran is a coercer, a brawler and politician who rewards fealty while marking opponents for payback. Those who know him would say he’d be flattered by the description.

He came into politics through the back door. He ran for the House in 1998 in a district outside his own. He was dubbed a “carpetbagger” by the hometown newspaper. He lost.

But he became a rising star in the party machinery, and eventually became what many describe as a political “hitman” for Marco Rubio’s bid to gain House leadership in 2006. He was rewarded by being hired as Rubio’s chief of staff at $175,000 yearly salary — considerably more than his boss, who made $29,697 a year. The governor that year was paid around $130,000.

If this gives you pause in terms of state political priorities, go to the head of the class.

In 2007, Corcoran again ran for special election, this time in the Senate. He was again portrayed as a carpetbagger — and lost.

The third time was a charm, when Corcoran won a House seat in 2010.

Governor-elect Ron DeSantis has made his pick known. But, on paper, the decision is up to the board of education — all GOP appointees, who probably like their current status.

DeSantis has made no bones about wanting to see public education dismantled, though you heard little of that during the governor campaign.

For his part, Corcoran spearheaded the state’s ongoing effort at funding charter schools with taxpayer money. And, where that was not possible, bankrolling public schools with various funding schemes, including paying for any child who deems himself “bullied” in public school to attend a private school tuition-free — and where, we must assume, bullies do not exist.

Corcoran was also the weight behind efforts this year to dismantle elected school boards and put the oversight of schools under direct legislative control.

In a twist of irony, Corcoran included this line is his speech after being named Speaker: “The enemy is us. … Left to our own devices, all too often, we’ll choose self-interest.”

His wife ran a charter school at the time and has since sought to expand to other areas. But his dark political history aside, might we not expect to have a person with some history in education — whether public or charter school — to lead an agency tasked with educating 3 million kids?

DeSantis has given Education Commissioner Pam Stewart her walking papers, though she has a year left on her contract. She takes with her 40-plus years of experience in education, including guidance counselor, teacher and principal at both elementary and high school levels. She was Deputy Chancellor for Educator Quality at the Department of Education and Deputy Superintendent for Academic Services here in St. Johns County, just prior to taking over as Education Commissioner — following a series of embarrassments by political appointees to that post.

She has been controversial. But juggling the hot potato tossed to her called Common Core was an unenviable trick to pull off.

Now a hack takes her place. And with one swift move, the Legislature accomplishes Job No. 1. That’s putting Florida’s $20.4 billion education budget out to bid in the private sector. That’s a frightening amount of political capital to be spread around to those who decide who gets charter school contracts and where those schools will be.

There ought to be a law…

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Florida, For-Profit, Fraud, Privatization, School Choice, Vouchers

Florida Editorial: Corcoran is the Right Choice for GOP, the Wrong Choice For Public Schools

By dianeravitch
December 11, 2018 //
5

The Sun-Sentinel of Florida explains why Richard Corcoran is a disastrous choice for Florida’s public schools as Commissioner of Education. He is unqualified. He has no education experience. He is hostile to public schools and their teachers. He has done everything he could think of to shift local tax monies from public schools to charter schools. During his campaign for governor, Ron DeSantis never visited a public school, although 90% of Florida’s children attend them.

Put succinctly: “Richard Corcoran for state education commissioner? Sure. Why not make Tallahassee’s hostility to public education even more apparent?…

In Corcoran, DeSantis has an education soulmate. Last year, Corcoran leveraged his power as speaker to push through legislation that for the first time gave charter schools — which use public money but may be privately operated — some of the property tax revenue that school districts use for construction and maintenance. When Florida allowed charter schools in the mid-1990s, operators said they never would need such money.

“House Bill 7069, which legislators hardly got to read, did much more. It gave charter companies $200 million to build “schools of hope” near low-performing public schools but with no guarantee that the charters would take all the students. The bill made it harder for school districts to use federal money designed to help those same struggling students.

“Former Palm Beach County Superintendent Robert Avossa called Corcoran’s creation “the single largest piece of legislation to dismantle public education that I’ve ever seen.” True, but HB 7069 simply extended the attack on public education by Republicans since they took control in Tallahassee two decades ago.”

Elections have consequences. Floridians who value their public schools will have to fight for them, or see more of their tax dollars diverted to for-profit charter entrepreneurs and religious schools that teach creationism and racism.

Categories Accountability, Administrators, superintendents, Bias, Charter Schools, Florida, For-Profit, School Choice, Separation of church and state

Pete Tucker Interviews Me About Segregation Academies and School Choice

By dianeravitch
December 9, 2018 //
33

Pete Tucker is a freelance journalist in Washington, D.C. He reports on corruption and ethics, a full-time job in the nation’s capital.

https://www.pete-tucker.com/blog/2018/12/3/from-segregation-academies-to-charter-schools-a-conversation-with-diane-ravitch

By the way, some Koch-funded libertarians got very angry to hear me link school choice and segregation. They harassed me on Twitter. They prefer to trace the roots of school choice to John Stuart Mill. That sounds better than George Wallace, for sure. However, they can’t seem to find a thread that shows publicly-funded school choice in these United States from colonial times to 1955.

I recommended they read Mercedes Schneider’s excellent history called School Choice, published by Teachers College Press. The introduction was written by Karen Lewis, then president of the Chicago Teachers Union. Being that they are libertarian ideologues, I don’t expect them to take my suggestion and open their minds.

Categories Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization, School Choice, Segregation

Sweden: Market-based Education Produces Poor Results, Segregation

By dianeravitch
December 7, 2018 //
5

Swedish scholar German Bender reports on the negative results of market-driven reforms in his country.

Choice has produced worse outcomes and encouraged segregation.

He demonstrates how choice has increased inequality and concludes:

It is clear that the Swedish school system, once known for its egalitarian ambition and high degree of equality in outcomes, now effectively sorts children by ethnic and socio-economic background. And, although the escalating violence in many Swedish suburbs cannot directly be connected to school segregation, it is very likely that segregation is a contributing factor. Our report summarizes a large body of research on the negative effects that segregation has on a wide range of social factors, such as educational and occupational choices, income and unemployment, health and criminality, and social attitudes towards other groups. Most of these outcomes have a considerable impact both on an individual and a societal level.

The results make it painfully clear that the Swedish school system effectively works against the very idea that schools should level the playing field for students from all backgrounds and give every child equal opportunity. Even after the rise of right-wing populism in Sweden, our established political parties have proven themselves unable, or unwilling, to rein in the highly unregulated Swedish school market.

Governments seeking inspiration for school reforms should look elsewhere – unless they are looking for a cautionary tale.

Categories Failure, For-Profit, Inequality, International, School Choice, Segregation
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »