Archives for category: Walton Foundation

Earlier today, Ben Austin wrote an open letter to me on Huffington Post. He expressed dismay about my characterization of him and his group Parent Revolution. Read his letter here. Here is my reply.

Dear Ben Austin,

Thank you for your invitation to engage in dialogue in your letter posted on Huffington Post.

You probably know that I have been writing a daily blog for the past fourteen months and during that time, I have written over 4,000 posts. I can’t remember any time when I have lost my temper other than when I wrote about your successful effort to oust an elementary school principal in Los Angeles named Irma Cobian.

I apologize for calling you “loathsome,” though I do think your campaign against a hardworking, dedicated principal working in an inner-city school was indeed loathsome. And it was wrong of me to say that there was a special place in hell reserved for anyone “who administers and funds this revolting organization that destroys schools and fine educators like Irma Cobian.”

As I said, I lost my temper, and I have to explain why.

I don’t like bullies. When I saw this woman targeted by your powerful organization, it looked like bullying. Your organization is funded by many millions of dollars from the Walton Family Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation. You have a politically powerful organization, and you used your power to single out this one woman and get her fired.

Your organization sent in paid staff to collect signatures from parents. The teachers in the school were not permitted to express their opinion to parents about your efforts to fire their principal. When you succeeded in getting her fired, 21 of the 22 teachers on staff requested a transfer. That suggests that Cobian has the loyalty of her staff and is a good leader.

Who is this woman that you ousted?

All I know about her is what I read in this article in the Los Angeles Times.

It said: “More than two decades ago, Cobian walked away from a high-powered law firm to teach. The daughter of Mexican immigrants, she said she was inspired by a newspaper article about the low high school graduation rates of Latinos and wanted to make a difference.

“Her passion for social justice led her to Watts in 2009.”

Irma Cobain is now in her fourth year as principal of the school, and you decided that her time was up.

What did her teachers say about her?

“Third-grade teacher Kate Lewis said Irma Cobian is the best principal she’s had in nine years at Weigand Avenue Elementary School in Watts.

“Joseph Shamel called Cobian a “godsend” who has used her mastery of special education to show him how to craft effective learning plans for his students.”

“Fourth-grade teacher Hector Hernandez said Cobian is the first principal he’s had who frequently pops into classrooms to model good teaching herself. Recently, he said, she demonstrated how to teach about different literary genres by engaging students in lively exercises using characters from the “Avengers” comic book and film.”

When Cobian arrived at the Weigand Avenue Elementary school four years ago, she found a school with low test scores, low parent involvement, and divisiveness over a dual-language program. “All the students come from low-income families, more than half are not fluent in English and a quarter turn over every year,” the Los Angeles Times story said.

Cobian decided to focus on improving literacy and raising morale. She certainly won over the faculty.

The day after Cobian learned about the vote removing her, she went to a second-grade classroom to give prizes to children who had read 25 books this year. She cheered those who met the goal and encouraged those who were trying. But she could not hide her sadness.

“I need happiness today,” Cobian told the bright-eyed students. “What do I do when I’m sad?”

“Come here!” the students sang out.

For a moment, her sadness gave way to smiles. But later, she said: “I am crushed.”

Ben, how did you feel when you read that? I felt sad. I felt this was a caring and dedicated person who had been singled out unfairly.

Ben, I hope you noticed in the article that Dr. John Deasy, the superintendent of schools in Los Angeles, praised the plan that Cobian and her staff developed for improving the school. He called it a “well-organized program for accelerated student achievement.” He thanked Cobian for her commitment and hard work.” But you decided she should be fired.

Ironically, the parent who worked with you to fire Cobian said she preferred Weigand to her own neighborhood school where she had concerns about bullying. Even stranger, the parents at Cobian’s school voted to endorse her plan. Your parent spokesperson said she did not like the plan because it focused on reading and writing, but she told the reporter from the Los Angeles Times that she actually never read the plan.

I understand from your letter, Ben, that you somehow feel you are a victim because of what I wrote about you. But, Ben, you are not a victim. Irma Cobian is the victim here. She lost her job because of your campaign to get rid of her. She is the one who was humiliated and suffered loss of income and loss of reputation. You didn’t. You still have your organization, your staff, and the millions that the big foundations have given you.

I am sorry you had a tough childhood. We all have our stories about growing up. I am one of eight children. My father was a high-school dropout. My mother immigrated from Bessarabia and was very proud of her high school diploma from the Houston public schools. She was proud that she learned to speak English “like a real American.” My parents were grateful for the free public schools of Houston, where I too graduated from high school. We had our share of problems and setbacks but I won’t go on about myself or my siblings because my story and yours are really beside the point. What troubles me is what you are doing with the millions you raise. You use it to sow dissension, to set parents against parents, parents against teachers, parents against principals. I don’t see this as productive or helpful. Schools function best when there is collaboration among teachers, parents, administrators, and students. Schools have a better chance of success for the children when they have a strong community and culture of respect.

Your “parent trigger” destroys school communities. True to its name, the “trigger” blasts them apart. It causes deep wounds. It decimates the spirit of respect and comity that is necessary to build a strong community. Frankly, after the school shootings of recent years, your use of the metaphor of a “parent trigger” is itself offensive. We need fewer triggers pointed at schools and educators. Please find a different metaphor, one that does not suggest violence and bloodshed.

It must be very frustrating to you and your funders that–three years after passage of the “parent trigger” law– you can’t point to a single success story. I am aware that you persuaded the parents at the Desert Trails Elementary School in Adelanto, California, to turn their public school over to a privately operated charter. I recall that when parents at the school tried to remove their signatures from your petition, your organization went to court and won a ruling that they were not allowed to rescind their signatures. Ultimately only 53 parents in a school of more than 600 children chose the charter operator. Since the charter has not yet opened, it is too soon to call that battle a success for Parent Revolution. Only the year before, the Adelanto Charter Academy lost its charter because the operators were accused of financial self-dealing.

But, Ben, let me assure you that I bear you no personal ill will. I just don’t approve of what you are doing. I think it is wrong to organize parents to seize control of their public school so they can fire the staff or privatize it. If the principal is doing a bad job, it is Dr. Deasy’s job to remove her or him. I assume that veteran principals and teachers get some kind of due process, where charges are filed and there is a hearing. If Cobain was as incompetent as you say, why didn’t Dr. Deasy bring her up on charges and replace her?

I also have a problem with the idea that parents can sign a petition and hand their public school off to a private charter corporation. The school doesn’t belong to the parents whose children are enrolled this year. It belongs to the public whose taxes built it and maintains it. As the L.A. Times story pointed out, one-quarter of the children at Weigand Avenue Elementary School are gone every year. The parents who sign a petition this year may not even be parents in the school next year. Why should they have the power to privatize the school? Should the patrons of a public library have the power to sign a petition and privatize the management? Should the people using a public park have the right to take a vote and turn the park over to private management?

We both care about children. I care passionately about improving education for all children. I assume you do as well. You think that your organized raids on public schools and professionals will lead to improvement. I disagree. Schools need adequate resources to succeed. They also need experienced professionals, a climate of caring, and stability. I don’t see anything in the “trigger” concept that creates the conditions necessary for improvement. Our teachers and principals are already working under too much stress, given that schools have become targets for federal mandates and endless reforms.

I suggest that educators need respect and thanks for their daily work on behalf of children. If they do a bad job, the leadership of the school system is responsible to take action. What educators don’t need is to have a super-rich, super-powerful organization threatening to pull the trigger on their career and their good name.

Ben, thanks for the open letter and the chance to engage in dialogue. If you don’t mind, I want to apologize to Irma Cobain on your behalf. She was doing her best. She built a strong staff that believes in her. She wrote a turnaround plan that Dr. Deasy liked and the parents approved. Ms. Cobain, if you read this, I hope you can forgive Ben. Maybe next time, he will think twice, get better information, and consider the consequences before he decides to take down another principal.

Diane Ravitch

Anthony Cody describes the campaign to put mayors in charge of school districts and the reasons behind it.

The biggest supporter of mayoral control is Arne Duncan. When mayoral control was up for renewal in Néw York City, he weighed in to support it. He lobbied against any effort to give the mayor’s appointees set terms; he insisted they should serve at the pleasure of the mayor to give his absolute authority over every decision.

That allowed the mayor to ignore protests against school closing and charters, both of which are priorities for Duncan.

Who else supports mayoral control? The Gates Foundation, the Broad Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation. The billionaires don’t like democracy.

Unfortunately, mayoral control hasn’t worked out so well for Néw York City, Chicago, and D.C., but why let evidence get in the way of a desire for total power?

Researchers Sarah Reckhow of Michigan State University and doctoral student Jeffrey Snyder reported at an AERA session that foundation giving is increasingly concentrated on a small number of recipients.

Foundation funding is moving away from giving to public schools–attended by 90% of American students–and is going instead to “challengers” to the system, especially charter schools–attended by about 5% of American students.

The story in Education Week says:

“At the start of the decade, less than a quarter of K-12 giving from top foundations—about $90 million in all—was given to the same few groups. Five years later, 35 percent of foundation giving, or $230 million, went to groups getting support from other foundations, and by 2010, $540 million, representing 64 percent of major foundation giving for K-12, was similarly aligned.”

The groups now getting the lion’s share of foundation funding are KIPP, Teach for America, the NewSchools Venture Fund, the Charter School Growth Fund, and the D.C. Public Education Fund.

None of the main recipients of foundation funding are models for American education. All are committed to privatization. The best known alumni of TFA are Michelle Rhee, John White of Louisiana, and Kevin Huffman of Tennessee, all of whom support vouchers and charters.

When will the foundations wise up and stop supporting failed policies?

Don’t they care about the 90% of American children who attend public schools? Or do they think that someday all schools will be run by private entrepreneurs?

This blogger follows the money. That is his hobby and his passion. In this post, he tracks Walton funding for “advocacy.”

I put advocacy in scare quotes because foundations are tax-exempt and supposedly non-political. Yet the tax laws apparently allow them to put some of their money to work advocating for what appear to be political goals, in the case of the Waltons, the privatization of public education.

When it comes to funding “advocacy,” the Gates Foundation is right up there with multi-millions.

Say this for the Waltons: they are consistent. They don’t attempt to hide their agenda. They like charters and vouchers. They don’t like anything involving regulation or government.

“Imagine that you are possessed of the surname “Walton” and happen to be sitting on mad coin—say a cool $90 billion. How do you celebrate the occasion that is Teacher Appreciation Day? Do you chip in to give the nation’s teachers a raise, knowing they’ve been hard hit by the recession? Do you send them gift cards to Walmart, the store that hath so enrichethed you? If you are a teacher in Massachusetts, the Waltons have an extra special treat in store for you: a fully-funded gala at the Statehouse urging the replacement of the state’s many non-excellent teachers with fresh new innovators who will share their excellence one renewable year at a time. Happy Teacher Appreciation Day, xoxo Walmart!”

EduShyster describes here the Walton family campaign to create new charter schools in Massachusetts.

The billionaire family is funding almost every part of the campaign in the state where Horace Mann created the nation’s first public schools.

I know this is supposed to be funny. It’s not. It makes me very sad.

There must be something that money can’t buy.

You won’t find the answer to that question in this exchange but you will see some sharply worded responses to David Greene, who has mentored many TFA recruits.

Greene has the somewhat antiquated (but true) belief that we need teachers who see teaching as a career. As he writes, “Teaching must be a lifelong career worthy of those we want to teach.”

It is odd that there are so many (including Arne Duncan and the far-right Walton Foundation) who see TFA as a systemic answer to the question. Duncan gave TFA $50 million. Walton gave them $49.5 million.

And yet in its 20+ year history, TFA has produced less than 30,000 alumi. Most of them are no longer in classrooms. Its most prominent graduates are demanding privatization of public education: Michelle Rhee, John White in Louisiana, Kevin Huffman in Tennessee.

Indifferent to John Merrow’s investigative reports on the cheating scandal during Michelle Rhee’s tenure as DC Chancellor, the Walton Family Foundation gave her organization $8 million to continue pushing its radical agenda of attacking teachers and promoting privatization of the nation’s public schools.

StudentsFirst advocates that test scores should count for 50% of teacher evaluation, although most researchers agree that these measures are inaccurate and unstable. It also advocates charters and vouchers, including for-profit charters.

The Boston Review has a special issue devoted to the question of what foundations are for.

The lead review describes the role that foundations are supposed to play: to encourage innovation, to prod government to change its priorities, to demonstrate the validity of a different path, etc.

Various commentators, including me, were invited to respond. I tried briefly to explain how the role of foundations in the K-12 sector have changed in significant ways. The three biggest foundations now act in concert with the U.S. Department of Education, not trying out new ideas, but imposing their shared ideological agenda. By he power of this combine, they actually exclude and repress any thinking other than their own.

Leo Casey, a long-time union activist, here reviews a recent report by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute decrying the immense power of teachers’ unions. Michael Petrilli of TBF described the unions as “Goliaths” battling the weak, underfunded “Davids” of the corporate reform movement.

Casey challenges the report and the characterization, pointing out that corporate reformers have deployed vast amounts of money–far greater than the teachers’ unions could ever muster–to destroy the last vestige of teacher unionism. This assures that teachers have no voice at the table when governors and legislatures decide to slash spending on education or to privatize it to the benefit of entrepreneurs and campaign contributors.

The Walton Family Foundation has an overriding interest in school pro privatization. They commit about $160 million each year for charters, vouchers, Teach for America, think tanks, and media. Everything they do has the singular goal of dismantling public education and opening the schools to untrained, uncertified teachers.

Here is news from the Chicago Teachers Union about the role of Walton in the proposed closing of 54 public schools.

NEWS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Stephanie Gadlin
April 17, 2013 312/329-6250
StephanieGadlin@ctulocal1.com

Walton family school “reform” initiatives in Chicago reveals true education agenda

CHICAGO – The Walton Family Foundation, led by heirs to the Walmart fortune, says it wants to improve education. But the public is increasingly asking whether the WFF’s corporate-style, privatization-oriented approach to reform, based on the mistaken premise that competitive market dynamics apply to K-12 education just like they apply to Walmart stores, is right for our schools. The family’s recent involvement in the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) school closing controversy is a prime example of the ways in which Walton family’s education agenda can actually harm schools, communities, and students, according to the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU).

Citing budget deficits and lower enrollments, CPS officials—led by the Broad Foundation’s Barbara Byrd-Bennett, who previously led mass school closures and teacher firings in Cleveland and Detroit—announced last month as Chicago’s new schools chief that the district would close 54 “underutilized” schools, mainly in majority black, low-income neighborhoods. (The mayor-appointed Board of Education is set to vote on approving the closures May 22.) Defenders of public schools say that CPS has sought to weaken and close public schools in order to open more charter schools, which are often under-regulated, lack adequate oversight, and cherry-pick top students while leaving behind others. In 2011, CPS’s Chief Operating Officer even admitted that the system was intentionally underinvesting in low-performing schools that it might close someday.

As CPS prepared its closure list, the Walton Family Foundation bankrolled a “community engagement process,” with meetings led by Walton-paid consultants, to provide the illusion that the school closure process was open and democratic. Meanwhile, the Waltons also paid $3.8 million in 2012 to open new charter schools in Chicago. Given the Waltons’ strong support of school vouchers and charter schools, public school supporters were deeply skeptical that public opinion was truly meant to be heard and fully considered at these meetings. Media were banned from attending, but Walton Family Foundation staff attended. Now the family is funding a series of ads and videos that the system is using to try to justify the closings.

“If the Waltons were serious about improving education or children’s’ lives, they would do anything possible to prevent disruptive, harmful school closures, rather than encourage them,” said CTU President Karen Lewis. “We continue to fight for a full moratorium on all school actions this year. It is imperative that we force the district to take time to study the impact of these closings and other failed experiments have had on our students.”

According to a University of Chicago study of recent Chicago school closures, only six percent of students whose neighborhood school closed moved to an academically sound school. In addition, the study found that school closures are a “substantial burden” on students, families, communities, and school staff: Students face difficult adjustments to new schools, neighborhoods lose a community anchor, and school staff becomes unemployed. Parents in Chicago are also acutely concerned about the safety of their children if they are sent to schools outside the neighborhood, possibly into gang territory.

The way the Walton family has interfered in Chicago, working to shutter public schools while simultaneously opening unproven, under-regulated alternatives, makes it clear that their primary interest is not better education for kids, but rather undermining public schools in order to promote an alternative, private-style school system, Lewis said. It’s even worse that they are interfering in a community they are not part of, where they can use their wealth to push their beliefs on other people’s children, avoid any of the impact or risks, and escape accountability. Corporate reformers insist that students and teachers have to be accountable, but apparently will give a pass to the nation’s wealthiest family.

Ironically, one of the things shown repeatedly to improve academic performance is improving the economic situation for children and their families. While the Walton family likes to talk about how they value all children, Walmart, which the family controls roughly half of, continues to keep many of its associates in poverty, with low wages, poor benefits and the kinds of unpredictable schedules that make parenting even more difficult. If the Waltons were truly concerned about lifting all boats, they could start with something directly under their control—living wages for 1.3 million Walmart workers in the United States alone.

In the ideal Walton world, schools would compete against each other for students, resources, and test scores. But there’s a problem: When there is a competition with winners and losers, there are inevitably losers. Chicago parents don’t want their children to be on the losing team in the Walton-engineered competition.

###