5 Policies from Forbes Ed “All-Stars” to Make US Public Education “Tops” - NPQ - Nonprofit Quarterly

5 Policies from Forbes Ed “All-Stars” to Make US Public Education “Tops” - NPQ - Nonprofit Quarterly:

5 Policies from Forbes Ed “All-Stars” to Make US Public Education “Tops”

WRITTEN BY RICK COHEN  

CREATED ON MONDAY, 08 DECEMBER 2014 15:27

Share on emailShare on printShare on facebookShare on twitterShare on linkedinShare on pinterest_shareShare on google_plusone_shareMore Sharing Serv

December 1, 2014; Forbes

Forbes convened what it called the “top leaders from the four key constituent groups” in the arena of fixing or remaking U.S. public education to make it “again…tops in the world.” It might be a little presumptuous to name U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan as the spokesperson for the federal government, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo the articulator of state government concerns, and D.C. schools chancellor Kaya Henderson as the representative of local school boards. The notion of Henderson speaking for school boards—in the Forbes analytical structure, a stand-in for the interests of parents and student—is kind of dubious: Henderson isn’t a school board member, but an employee of the schools’ governing body and the successor to (and, some would say, acolyte of) Michelle Rhee. They all may work for parts of the education establishment, but they all have ideological biases that others among their “constituent groups” might not endorse.

The fourth top leader may be a dubious representative herself. Forbes recruited Randi Weingarten of the American Federation of Teachers to speak for the teachers unions. Without suggesting that AFT is better or worse, there is another teachers union of significance in the form of the National Education Association, whose membership of 3 million surpasses the AFT’s 1.6 million members (a total that includes 112,000 health professionals outside the teaching profession). And, though many of our friends in organized labor might not like this question, when it comes to speaking for teachers—as opposed to speaking for teachers unions—is the AFT, with or without the NEA, sufficient? Or do teachers have issues and concerns that may not be reflected in the AFT or NEA agendas? As an example, consider organizations like the Badass Teachers Association, which has 53,000 members, an endorsement by education reform critic Diane Ravitch, and a mission statement that rejects “assessments, tests and evaluations created and imposed by corporate driven entities that have contempt for authentic teaching and learning.”

In any case, these four top leaders—an “all-star lineup,” according to Forbes—participated in a roundtable conversation moderated by hedge fund mogul and Robin Hood Foundation founder Paul Tudor Jones to identify five education policies that merit serious public investment and, if “fully implemented,” could “vault” U.S. public education in each area into the world’s top five and “if undertaken together, would surely take us to number one.”

The five policies selected by the Forbes education all-stars were: “teacher efficacy, universal pre-K, Common Core standards, blended learning (incorporating technology into how students are taught) and school leadership (training and empowering principals).” As Duncan put it, the five policies are or should be “mutually enforcing” and should be tackled “full speed ahead and scale [sic] on all five.”

Even among the all-stars, there were different accent marks placed on the policies. The AFT’s Weingarten suggested that “you need to do them together with a real focus on equity,” a pleasantly obvious concept that seems to evade practical implementation more often than not. Cuomo put the issue of disparities in terms with which the Badass Teachers would agree : “We have two education systems, and it’s not public-private, it’s rich and poor.”

Perhaps it was the presence of a venture philanthropist like Jones moderating the conversation, but the all-stars quickly reached something of a consensus around the necessary role of philanthropy. Henderson, for example, credited $67 million from philanthropy as the “catalytic impact in pushing me to move blended learning across my district, with improving teacher quality,” without necessarily noting that the foundations’ money was keyed to helping D.C. negotiate a union contract, with a pay-for-performance requirement 5 Policies from Forbes Ed “All-Stars” to Make US Public Education “Tops” - NPQ - Nonprofit Quarterly:

The great charter school rip-off: Finally, the truth catches up to education “reform” phonies - Salon.com

The great charter school rip-off: Finally, the truth catches up to education “reform” phonies - Salon.com:

The great charter school rip-off: Finally, the truth catches up to education “reform” phonies

Fraud, financial mismanagement, lousy results: Reports highlight awful charter schools and people are catching on

JEFF BRYANT

Diane Ravitch, Michelle Rhee (Credit: MSNBC/AP/Jacquelyn Martin)

Last week when former President Bill Clinton meandered onto the topic of charter schools, he mentioned something about an “original bargain” that charters were, according to the reporter for The Huffington Post, “supposed to do a better job of educating students.”

A writer at Salon called the remark “stunning” because it brought to light the fact that the overwhelming majority of charter schools do no better than traditional public schools. Yet, as the Huffington reporter reminded us, charter schools are rarely shuttered for low academic performance.

But what’s most remarkable about what Clinton said is how little his statement resembles the truth about how charters have become a reality in so many American communities.

In a real “bargaining process,” those who bear the consequences of the deal have some say-so on the terms, the deal-makers have to represent themselves honestly (or the deal is off and the negotiating ends), and there are measures in place to ensure everyone involved is held accountable after the deal has been struck.

But that’s not what’s happening in the great charter industry rollout transpiring across the country. Rather than a negotiation over terms, charters are being imposed on communities – either by legislative fiat or well-engineered public policy campaigns. Many charter school operators keep their practices hidden or have been found to be blatantly corrupt. And no one seems to be doing anything to ensure real accountability for these rapidly expanding school operations.

Instead of the “bargain” political leaders may have thought they struck with seemingly well-intentioned charter entrepreneurs, what has transpired instead looks more like a raw deal for millions of students, their families, and their communities. And what political leaders ought to be doing – rather than spouting unfounded platitudes, as Clinton did, about “what works” – is putting the brakes on a deal gone bad, ensuring those most affected by charter school rollouts are brought to the bargaining table, and completely renegotiating the terms for governing these schools.

Charter Schools As Takeover Operations

---

---

The “100 percent charter schools” education system in New Orleans that Clinton praised was never presented to the citizens of New Orleans in a negotiation. It was surreptitiously engineered.

After Katrina, as NPR recently reported, “an ad hoc coalition of elected leaders and nationally known charter advocates formed,” and in “a series of quick decisions,” all school employees were fired and the vast majority of the city’s schools were handed over to a state entity called the “Recovery School District” which is governed by unelected officials. Only a “few elite schools were … allowed to maintain their selective admissions.”

In other words, any bargaining that was done was behind closed doors and at tables where most of the people who were being affected had no seat.

Further, any evidence of the improvement of the educational attainment of students in the New Orleans all-charter system is obtainable only by “jukin the stats” or, as the NPR The great charter school rip-off: Finally, the truth catches up to education “reform” phonies - Salon.com:

Investors Resist Idea of Society as Stakeholder in Public Education

Investors Resist Idea of Society as Stakeholder in Public Education:

INVESTORS RESIST IDEA OF SOCIETY AS STAKEHOLDER IN PUBLIC EDUCATION

Parents are key stakeholders in any child’s education. Does that mean that they are the only stakeholders? One upon a time in America most people would say “no”. They would say that it’s all of society. But not anymore. Investors are what has changed that equation.

Reformster propaganda is having its effect

Most of the people who I know would agree that the whole of society benefits from mandatory public education. However, reformsters and too many state school chiefs have been pushing for a different understanding. They speak, issue administrative directives, and lobby the legislatures as though parents are the ultimate stakeholder in a child’s education.

It’s given as the justification for massive, high-stakes testing, value-added measurement (VAM) of teachers, and A-F “report cards”.

Isn’t that concept of parents being the only stakeholder convenient for investors who want a nation-wide industry of literally selling education? Once the general public, big media, politicians, and school boards start accepting that notion, then it will be easier to sell education to those who can pay. The investors will come out way ahead.

But big-money reformsters have to convince more of us that education is a product to be sold to parents for this to happen. That’s why there has been millions spent for right-wing think tanks to promote the idea of the parent as the sole stakeholder in public education.

“Parent trigger” laws open the way for private interests

So how do they do that? “Parent trigger” laws have been passed in several states now by using the argument that parents are just stuck with awful public education and need a way out.

Notice the whole framework of this: Parents, if your school is not meeting up to your expectations, just vote for our parent trigger law as a way to pull your kid out of that school and shop for a better school product.

A part of class warfare against democracy

These big investors are a part of the very rich class, and do not want those parents to do things that might threaten minority rule of the rich like organizing, engaging in collective protest, exercising their democratic power to elect new school boards and demanding change in their publicly-owned schools.

For the very rich investors, they want to sell education to parents as shoppers at taxpayer expense while cutting out those very taxpayers from the decisions and input into just what kind of education the current generation of children are getting.

The bait-and-switch of pretending to rescue the children of the poor by these methods is a ruse to make us believe that there is something noble about the very rich trying to create new investment opportunities at taxpayer expense.

Some are realizing this for what it is as reports from those parent trigger states start coming to light such as in California where some charters have taken taxpayer money, shortchanged the students and teachers, and sent tax money up the line to administrators and investors. It is a money grab at the public’s expense.

We have allowed radical experimentation on the poor

In a series of three posts that I have written about New Orleans, Detroit, and Newark, I have shown that in fact, investor-owned Investors Resist Idea of Society as Stakeholder in Public Education:

Video: Bill Gates, Expert On All That Matters | deutsch29

Video: Bill Gates, Expert On All That Matters | deutsch29:

Video: Bill Gates, Expert On All That Matters

December 21, 2014

Billionaire Bill Gates has been buying the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for years now. He started doing so after being asked to by former Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) President Gene Wilhoit and edupreneur, CCSS “lead architect” David Coleman in the summer of 2008.

Gates has spent at least hundreds of millions on CCSS.

One Gates-funded entity is the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a “think tank” full of “scholars” who promote corporate-feeding “solutions” in American arenas, including education. As such, the “enterprise” in American Enterprise Institute is free enterprise.

Specifically, AEI has received over $5 million in Gates bucks. In August 2014, Gates gave AEI a fresh million for, among other promotions “in the K-12 and higher education space,” “impactful convenings.”

AEI is also connected to the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) as well as Koch-funding funnel, Donors Trust. Low bottom line. High profits. The ultimate in what matters.

When a billionaire gives millions to a nonprofit group of philanthropic-dependent “scholars” like those of AEI, well, those scholars just have to interview him extensively as though he is an expert on all of his purchased issues.

So it goes, apparently.

In the March 2014 AEI video interview below, Gates admits, “…There’s no proof that [public education] is going to be dramatically better 10 or 20 years from now” (9:20).

Yet Gates continues to pour millions into CCSS.

At the ten-minute point, Gates is expressing surprise that there is no clear connection between state per-pupil spending and “excellence” (a euphemism for stats, the corporate-reform centerpiece of which is the standardized test score). He states that Washington, DC, has “improved somewhat” via “personnel policies, shuttering schools” and “letting the charter schools take a somewhat higher share of the cohort.” Nevertheless, Gates states, DC is still “an abysmal system.”

No mention of former DC Chancellor Michelle Rhee, who (according to her 2008 Video: Bill Gates, Expert On All That Matters | deutsch29:

Our fight for justice | Randi Weingarten

Our fight for justice | Randi Weingarten:

Our fight for justice

Our country strives to be a more perfect union--one that believes in freedom, opportunity and justice for all. Every day, our union, the AFT, strives for fairness, democracy, economic opportunity and high-quality public education, healthcare and public services for our students, our families and our communities.

Yet, too many things still stand in the way of American dream: Economic and racial inequality and bias. Sexual discrimination. Wage stagnation. Retirement insecurity. Escalating student debt and child care costs. The greatest wealth gap since the 1920s, and poverty that impacts nearly one-quarter of our children (and half of all kids in public schools).

We must knock down these obstacles if we are going to reclaim the promise of America--the promise that when you work hard and play by the rules, your family can thrive. That you can send your kids to strong neighborhood public schools and give them the chance to be successful in college, career and life without being trapped by debt. That working people are provided with a voice, the freedom to join a union, high-quality healthcare, the ability to take time off to take care of a sick child, and, after a lifetime of hard work, a retirement with dignity. That's what we all want for ourselves and our families.

Fifty years ago, Martin Luther King, Jr. reminded us that the struggle for civil rights is a struggle for good jobs, with decent wages. That educational opportunity is the highway to economic opportunity. This message is just as important today as we fight to ensure everyone can climb the ladder of opportunity.

And that's why fighting racism, sexual assault, wage stagnation and retirement insecurity is as much the AFT's work as fighting for high-quality public education, healthcare and public services. We won't settle for a public education system or economic system that only works for the wealthy few. Or a criminal justice system that offers anything less than justice for all.

It's our collective responsibility to confront racism-- before it robs more people of opportunities. During a trip to Ferguson, Mo., this week, I heard hope and real fear in the voices of the students, teachers and community members with whom I met. Think about the fact that more black men are behind bars today than were enslaved in 1850. And many of us are haunted by this question: If Michael Brown, Eric Garner andTamir Rice were white, would they be alive today?

Over the past several weeks, thousands have protested and engaged in civil disobedience because of the fear that our criminal justice system is not colorblind. Ijoined them, and was arrested myself, because sometimes it's not enough to simply speak out against injustice.

Cops are not the enemy--they are our first responders--bias, racism and economic inequality are. Creating more good jobs can be a springboard for change. We must work together to create a more perfect nation where all people see justice.

Likewise, when scores of young women began coming forward to share how their colleges failed to deal with accusations of rampant sexual assault, our union helped to change policies on campus. And I shared my own story of sexual assault nearly 30 years ago, because if more survivors feel emboldened to speak out, and more understand that they aren't to blame, we'll begin to shatter the culture that has allowed this epidemic to take hold.

It's not enough to say that everyone should be able to go to college; we must pave the way for all students to achieve their dreams--not to be devastated by assault or Our fight for justice | Randi Weingarten: