What the divorcing Bill and Melinda Gates did to public education - The Washington Post

What the divorcing Bill and Melinda Gates did to public education - The Washington Post

Let’s review how Bill and Melinda Gates spent billions of dollars to change public education

Now that the philanthropic Bill and Melinda Gates have announced they are divorcing after 27 years of marriage, let’s look at the controversial investments they made together to reform K-12 public education — and how well those worked out.

Together, the two have been among the most generous philanthropists on the planet, spending more over the past few decades on global health than many countries do and more on U.S. education reform than any of the other wealthy Americans who have tried to impact K-12 education with their personal fortunes.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has spent billions of dollars on numerous education projections — such as creating small high schools, writing and implementing the Common Core State Standards, evaluating teachers by standardized test scores — and the couple has had enormous influence on what happened in classrooms across the country.

Their philanthropy, especially in the school reform area, has been at the center of a national debate about whether it serves democracy when wealthy people can use their own money to drive public policy and fund their pet education projects. The foundation’s financial backing of some controversial priorities of the Obama administration’s Education Department put the couple at the center of this national conversation.

Critics have said that many of the foundation’s key education projects have harmed public schools because they were unworkable from the start and consumed resources that could have been better spent.

But you don’t have to go any further than the Gateses themselves to learn that some of the billions of dollars they put into public education reform efforts did not go as well as they liked.

In 2013, Bill Gates said, “It would be great if our education stuff worked. But that we won’t know for probably a decade.”

It didn’t take 10 years for them and their foundation to acknowledge that key education investments didn’t turn out as well as they hoped.

In the foundation’s 2020 annual letter, Melinda Gates said: “The fact that progress has been harder to achieve than we hoped is no reason to give up, though. Just the opposite.”

That same annual letter had a rather remarkable statement from Melinda Gates about the role of the wealthy in education policy, given her and husband’s role in it:

We certainly understand why many people are skeptical about the idea of billionaire philanthropists designing classroom innovations or setting education policy. Frankly, we are, too. Bill and I have always been clear that our role isn’t to generate ideas ourselves; it’s to support innovation driven by people who have spent their careers working in education: teachers, administrators, researchers, and community leaders.

Bill and Melinda Gates have spent billions to shape education policy. Now, they say, they’re ‘skeptical’ of ‘billionaires’ trying to do just that.

The Gates Foundation began its first big effort in education reform about two decades ago with what it said was a $650 million investment to break large, failing high schools into smaller schools. CONTINUE READING: What the divorcing Bill and Melinda Gates did to public education - The Washington Post

NANCY BAILEY: Endgame! Using Covid-19 to Permanently Transform Schooling!

Endgame! Using Covid-19 to Permanently Transform Schooling!

Endgame! Using Covid-19 to Permanently Transform Schooling!

Funding technology seems unchecked in some places as teachers are driven out of their classrooms due to the virus. The more teachers prematurely retire, the more easily school districts can justify replacing them with technology.

And think long term. Teachers have been so mistreated in this country that no one wants their child to become a public school teacher, so getting a qualified teacher who has actually studied how to teach will be difficult in the future.

Technology is on the road to becoming the endgame for schooling, whether Americans like it or not. There’s no research to indicate all or mostly online instruction is better than face-to-face, in-person classes. Yet there’s a giddiness on the part of some that after Covid-19 takes its leave, online will be a wonderful way to do schooling.

But an all-tech curriculum wasn’t proven before Covid; it wasn’t great during Covid, so why would it be a panacea after Covid? At best, tech is useful for teachers to supplement CONTINUE READING: Endgame! Using Covid-19 to Permanently Transform Schooling!

“Coal Miner’s Daughter” Hawks Digital Learning | tultican

“Coal Miner’s Daughter” Hawks Digital Learning | tultican

“Coal Miner’s Daughter” Hawks Digital Learning

By Thomas Ultican 12/8/2020

The last Democrat and first woman to serve as Governor of North Carolina, Bev Perdue, has become one of the nation’s leading advocates for digital learning. She presents herself as a simple country girl from a poor family, but doesn’t mention that her coalminer father became a rich mine owner by the time she was in college. She is known as a powerful political and financial operative with connections that go all the way to the incoming Biden administration.

Creating a New Career

Governor Perdue does have a background in education. After obtaining a bachelor’s degree in History, she taught kindergarten in 1970-71, ninth grade 1971-73 and high school 1973-74. She then returned to school where in 1976 she earned a Doctorate in Education Administration. Her thesis was focused on education gerontology.

After earning the education doctorate, she worked in long term care and geriatric services. In 1986, she ran for the North Carolina House of Representatives and won. Four years later she won a state senate seat which she held for a decade before making successful runs for Lieutenant Governor in 2000 and again in 2004. This all positioned her to become North Carolina’s first female governor in 2008.

For Perdue, the wheels flew off the campaign bus in 2012. She was facing tanking polling numbers when members of her 2008 campaign pleaded guilty to finance violations. Greensboro businessman Peter Reichard, the finance director, pleaded to a felony and lawyer Julia Leigh “Juleigh” Sitton, a fundraiser for the campaign, pleaded to a misdemeanor in order to avoid a felony charge. Perdue soon announced she would not be a candidate for Governor in 2013.

The June following her exit from the Governor’s mansion, the Newsobserver.com reported, “Former Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue has recently CONTINUE READING: “Coal Miner’s Daughter” Hawks Digital Learning | tultican

Selling Edtech when Disguised as Philanthropy | tultican

Selling Edtech when Disguised as Philanthropy | tultican

Selling Edtech when Disguised as Philanthropy

By Thomas Ultican 11/27/2020

“Personalized learning” is being driven by foundations derived from companies that stand to profit by its implementation. Last year, George Mason’s Priscilla Regan and the University of Ottawa’s Valerie Steeves wrote the peer review paper “Education, privacy, and big data algorithms: Taking the persons out of personalized learning” in which they state, “Other than the Carnegie Corporation, the private foundations who have been most supportive of personalized learning are those supported by the technology companies, including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, and the Google Foundation.”

In the case of the Carnegie Corporation, the authors note that the philanthropy has been supporting education causes since its founding in 1911. Recently, Carnegie has given monetary support to “personalized learning” but “typically in partnership with one of the tech foundations.”

Based on a listing of the fifteen largest education spending philanthropies in the first decade of the millennium,  the paper’s authors selected the technology linked Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (the largest donor); Michael and Susan Dell (fourth largest donor); and William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (#8 in 2010) for analysis. They added two newer giving organizations, the Google Foundation and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, to complete their list of five tech associated education grant making companies to analyze.

In their review of scholarly papers and the popular press, they identified five CONTINUE READING: Selling Edtech when Disguised as Philanthropy | tultican

Jack Schneider: Is Homeschooling The Next Big Thing? | Diane Ravitch's blog

Jack Schneider: Is Homeschooling The Next Big Thing? | Diane Ravitch's blog

Jack Schneider: Is Homeschooling The Next Big Thing?

Jack Schneider is a historian of education. In this post, which he wrote at my request, he analyzes the new push for homeschooling. In the midst of the global pandemic, with millions of children quarantined at home, its not surprising that parents are compelled to be teachers. But how many parents will want to homeschool when real schools are one day available again?

Schneider writes:

Never let a good crisis go to waste. As any policy advocate knows, the destabilizing nature of an emergency creates a rare opportunity: sweeping change can happen quickly.

Both parties have a history of exploiting difficulties and disasters. During the Great Recession, for instance, the Obama administration pushed through a series of heavy-handed federal education reforms that might otherwise have met with stiff resistance. But during the COVID-19 pandemic, the most ambitious education proposals have come from Republicans, because the shuttering of schools has played to their advantage.

With state revenues shrinking before our eyes and CONTINUE READING: Jack Schneider: Is Homeschooling The Next Big Thing? | Diane Ravitch's blog

Let’s End this Debate and Talk about Best Practices for Remote Teaching | JD2718

Let’s End this Debate and Talk about Best Practices for Remote Teaching | JD2718

Let’s End this Debate and Talk about Best Practices for Remote Teaching

One way or other, the debate will end.Last week the Chancellor announced that NYC schools would engage in some sort of blended learning – a hybrid model – for September. Sometimes kids would be in school, sometimes kids would be out getting remote instruction, but they would have five days, and some would be in school. Teachers would come to school each day. Some kids and some teachers would opt out or be medically excused (completely different processes).

I’ve written a bit about issues with scheduling and safety that are so serious that I believe this plan is dangerous and will lead to chaos if not stopped. And a lot of other people are talking about it. It should be stopped. It can be stopped. It will be stopped.

The Chancellor is unlikely to just back down because of scattered resistance from teachers or schools. But the resistance may start to come from many schools. Or the union may feel the unease of members, and back away from its support for the idea. Or Cuomo may not permit NYC schools to reopen. Or the pandemic may surge again in the northeast, and make much of this moot. But one way or another, I think we will be remote in September.

And that’s a problem. We just finished the better part of a term remote. And I don’t know if you noticed, it didn’t go well. Not for most of us. Not for most kids. We learned about problems. Some of us found CONTINUE READING: Let’s End this Debate and Talk about Best Practices for Remote Teaching | JD2718

New Sacramento Bee Reporter Accepts and Uses Deceptive Claims of Data on"Personalized Learning " in Response to Covid School Closings

New Sacramento Bee Reporter Accepts and Uses Deceptive Claims of Data on"Personalized Learning " in Response to Covid School Closings

Sac Bee Reporter accepts and uses deceptive data on “  Personalized  Learning” schools response to Covid.  Welcome to Sacramento. 

In the Bee Article  “ Lawmakers, advocates say budget hurts top schools, “   published in the Bee on July 5,  new  Bee reporter Mackenzie Hawkins makes a series of claims   based upon a fundamental, and highly partisan claims.  Hawkins has been at the Bee for 2 months. Prior to this position she wrote for the Yale News, which may have been a student intern position.   Note, recognize that reporters often do not write the titles of pieces. 

Hawkins  says, 

“But under this year’s education budget, lawmakers and education advocates warn, the state will abandon its traditional allocation formula in favor of a system that harms the very schools — disproportionately, charter schools and personalized education programs — that have performed best under pandemic pressures.” [ no evidence  provided of the last phrase… that have performed best under pandemic pressures]

“California’s public schools usually receive money based on a combination of the prior year’s funding and the current year’s average daily attendance — a metric that reflects not the number of students enrolled, but rather how many students show up each day. 

Historically, this has meant that if a student switches schools from one year to the next, the money to fund their education moves with them. That will change under budget trailer bills AB 77 and SB 98, which allocate next year’s funding based on attendance through February 29 of this year.”
here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article243822982.html#storylink=cpy

This statement is inaccurate.  State funding of schools in California is based upon the Local Control Funding system, LCFF.    

The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) was enacted in 2013. The LCFF was designed to be a more equitable system of funding, with the goal of providing additional funding for the highest needs students. These subgroups of students include English learners, low-income students, and foster children. If the student groups targeted for assistance make larger than a majority of enrollment, districts receive additional concentration money.

          Schools do not receive money sole  based upon Average Daily Attendance, as the reporter asserts.  They receive money based upon ADA and  the state also gives additional state funds to districts based on the number of low-income students, English learners, foster children and homeless youth they serve.

There is a significant difference between these two

Reporter Hawkins goes  on to say, 

“Proponents say the legislation preserves educational equity and ensures adequate funding in the most disadvantaged areas. But according to charter school advocates and a bipartisan group of lawmakers, turning an emergency measure into a permanent policy undermines school choice and forces top-performing schools to turn away students — often, those served poorly in traditional schools — looking for another option. “[There is no evidence for the  claim that the funding would force top performing schools to turn away students because we do not know which are the top performing schools.]

“What the state is essentially proposing is we’re going to protect and essentially reward failing schools, and we’re going to punish schools that have proven that they’re performing well and successful in this COVID crisis,” Association of Personalized Learning Schools & Services (APLUS+) Director Jeff Rice, who represents 75 personalized education programs in California, told The Sacramento Bee. “While so many other public schools had to completely shut down their educational CONTINUE READING: New Sacramento Bee Reporter Accepts and Uses Deceptive Claims of Data on"Personalized Learning " in Response to Covid School Closings - 

A Hybrid (Remote + Live Instruction) Model that Works | JD2718

A Hybrid (Remote + Live Instruction) Model that Works | JD2718

A Hybrid (Remote + Live Instruction) Model that Works

A teacher described her niece and nephew’s school. A and B weeks. (not high school). Everyone knew the schedule, followed it. Worked. Everyone wore masks. And kids had the option of staying remote, but they did not, and they will go back live in September.

BS fantasy?

No.

NYC?

No. NYC probably cannot successfully do blended learning. Oh, we are still working on it. But most schools are waiting and seeing. The only progress I’ve heard of so far involves keeping over 50% of classes fully remote, or keeping over 50% of students fully remote (and everything’s worse in high schools).  We will find something, and it will be too expensive. Or too limited. And despite demands from politicians, A/B weeks for everyone? I don’t think so.

Not NYC. Read more:

I have family in Germany. today is their last day…they feel comfortable with everything that has been put in place.. One week in building and the next virtual. No parents allowed inside. Teachers and students wear mask, they have been very good at social distancing and washing hands. There is 10 children in the room plus the CONTINUE READING: A Hybrid (Remote + Live Instruction) Model that Works | JD2718

Personalized Learning May Appear to Solve Pandemic Education Challenges but New Research Raises Big Concerns | janresseger

Personalized Learning May Appear to Solve Pandemic Education Challenges but New Research Raises Big Concerns | janresseger

Personalized Learning May Appear to Solve Pandemic Education Challenges but New Research Raises Big Concerns

Here we are at the beginning of July, and the COVID-19 numbers are soaring across many states. The recessionary collapse of state budgets makes public school funding look shaky, and nobody can quite say how to make school safe. With the 2020-21 school year expected to start in six weeks, school leaders face overwhelming uncertainty. It is easy to imagine that a well-known, free, online learning platform and curriculum, funded entirely by tech philanthropists, might be extremely tempting.

But there are reasons for caution. Last week, the Washington Post‘s Valerie Strauss published a guest column from researchers at the National Education Policy Center (NEPC), a guest column describing the Summit Learning Platform, and warning about some of the reasons for school district leaders to be cautious. These researchers, Alex Molnar and Faith Boninger, have documented serious concerns about protecting the privacy of student data collected by Summit Learning and its sponsors. To underscore the seriousness of their concerns, they describe the powerful people behind Summit Learning:

“Summit Public Schools, founded in 2003, currently operates 11 schools enrolling approximately 4,675 students in California and Washington State. In 2013-2014, there was no Summit Learning Program or ‘partner’ schools. Things changed quickly after a 2014-2015 agreement between Summit and Facebook established the goals of enhancing Summit’s self-created software platform and collaborating on a marketing strategy for its nationwide adoption. Since then, Summit Public Schools has received extensive technical support from Facebook and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative and almost $200 million in funding from the Chan Zuckerberg Iniative, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and others.”

Molnar and Boninger review Summit’s marketing claims: “Summit Public Schools claims that its educational program does an exceptional job of preparing students for college and that its graduates succeed in college. Its specific claims are that its students are ‘100 percent Eligible CONTINUE READING: Personalized Learning May Appear to Solve Pandemic Education Challenges but New Research Raises Big Concerns | janresseger

CURMUDGUCATION: Never Mind The Personalized Learning. Let's Do Personalized Learning Instead.

CURMUDGUCATION: Never Mind The Personalized Learning. Let's Do Personalized Learning Instead.

Never Mind The Personalized Learning. Let's Do Personalized Learning Instead

As the education world scrambles to figure out what next fall will look like, many, many voices are speaking up for reimagined schooling. One particular model has surfaced repeatedly, and it’s not at all new—but it could be.

Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos has set aside some of the stimulus fund for a competitive grant that would reward state-wide virtual schools, much like the model she admires in Florida. Many commentors are arguing that now is the perfect time to “innovate” and shift to personalized learning, or its twin sibling, competency-based education. One clue to what these folks are really talking about is the market research, which focuses on education tech companies. But Governor Andrew Cuomo gave a clear signal when he was announcing that Bill Gates would be helping reimagine New York schools:

The old model of everybody goes and sits in the classroom, and the teacher is in front of that classroom and teaches that class, and you do that all across the city, all across the state, all these buildings, all these physical classrooms — why, with all the technology you have.

What most advocates have been selling for years is not actually personalized at all, but is a system in which content delivery and assessment are handled by software. An algorithm, often touted as Artificial Intelligence, decides which assignments to deliver to the student. There may be a human “mentor” available to the students, but the computer manages most of the “educating.” The CONTINUE READING: CURMUDGUCATION: Never Mind The Personalized Learning. Let's Do Personalized Learning Instead.