Rewind: In Case You didn't Know - The Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation

Business-Managed Education - Business Campaigns - The Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation:

Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation

The Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation calls itself "a national venture philanthropy established by entrepreneur and philanthropist Eli Broad (pictured with Edythe) to advance entrepreneurship for the public good in education, science and the arts". Eli Broad made his billions in business, including real estate and insurance.

Apart from its leadership programmes outlined below, the Broad Foundation provides funds to groups advocating charter schools such as Education Reform Now and also to groups training non-educators to be teachers and principals in schools (such as Teach for America and New Leaders for New Schools).

Broad and his foundation believe that public schools should be run like a business. One of the tenets of his philosophy is to produce system change by "investing in a disruptive force." Continual reorganizations, firings of staff, and experimentation to create chaos or "churn" is believed to be productive and beneficial, as it weakens the ability of communities to resist change...
A hallmark of the Broad-style leadership is closing existing schools rather than attempting to improve them, increasing class size, opening charter schools, imposing high-stakes test-based accountability systems on teachers and students, and implementing of pay for performance schemes.

The Broad Foundation and the Gates Foundation teamed up in 2007 for a $60 million “Strong American Schools” campaign to ensure that education was a strong election issue and to promote strong curriculum standards, standardised testing and merit-based pay for teachers.

After the election of the Obama administration in 2008 the Broad Foundation boasted:

With an agenda that echoes our decade of investments—charter schools, performance pay for teachers, accountability, expanded learning time, and national standards—the Obama administration is poised to cultivate and bring to fruition the seeds we and other reformers have planted.

Providing a Pipeline to Senior Positions

The Foundation funds the Broad Center which runs two "executive development" programmes aimed at getting its alumni into positions of power where they can promote and implement the Foundation's education agenda of choice, competition, deregulation, accountability, and data-based decision-making through charter schools, high-stakes standardized testing for students and merit pay for teachers.

As a result of these programmes, Broad-trained executives hold top leadership positions in many of the nation's education districts including the three largest; New York, Los Angeles and Chicago. Critics argue "Broad-trained superintendents use corporate-management techniques to consolidate power, weaken teachers' job protections, cut parents out of decisionmaking, and introduce unproven reform measures".

One programme is the Broad Superintendents Academy. Those attending the academy have their tuition and travel costs paid for the Foundation and, following the six-weekend course, find jobs as school district executives and superintendents. They come from business, the military, government as well as the education sector.

Academy graduates have filled 71 superintendent positions and 87 senior school district executive positions. Graduates of the program currently work as superintendents or school district executives in 53 cities across 28 states. In 2009, 43 percent of all large urban superintendent openings were filled by Broad Academy graduates.

Broad graduates are in this way able to gain 'an "alternative" certification process which has come to supplant or override the typical regulations in many states that require that individuals have years of experience as ateacher and principal before being installed as a school district superintendents'.

The other programme is the Broad Residency, has also successfully placed some 200 graduates into over 50 educational institutions. The residency involves working full-time in "paid positions at the top levels of urban school districts, state and federal departments of education and leading charter management organizations.. Participants have an average of 10 years of experience, typically from a Fortune 500 or other major company." The foundation provides them with "professional development" for the first 2 years and subsidizes their salaries (50 percent the first year, 25 percent the second year). This subsidy makes them attractive to poorer school districts.

Broad fellows currently hold leadership positions in districts such as Washington, D.C., New Orleans, Philadelphia, Detroit, Green Bay, Boston, Durham, Prince George's County (Maryland), Providence, Houston, Chicago, Dallas, and Oakland, to name but a few. The annual $2 million Broad Prize given to a chosen school district serves to sweeten the pot, which makes the selection of a Broad-connected CEO almost irresistable.

Perhaps one of the best known Broad fellow was Joel Klein, who became chancellor of New York City public schools. The schools were subsequently given over $100 million by the Broad and Gates Foundations.

The Broad Institute for School Boards provides three training programs for elected school board members and non-Broad-trained superintendents conducted in partnership with theCenter for Reform of School Systems (CRSS). The Institute trains new board members at a one-week summer residential setting. Its Alumni Institute is an advanced course for experienced school board members. The third program, Reform Governance in Action, is by invitation only and provides "a long-term, training/consulting partnership program to selected large, urban districts." The Broad Foundation underwrites 80 percent of all program costs through a grant to CRSS.

These programmes not only give the Broad Foundation influence through getting their own 'trainees' into key positions but this influence is increased because Broad graduates tend to hire other Broad graduates. For example, in Los Angeles, where the Foundation is based, the LA Unified School District (LA Unified), employed in 2010 the following Broad alumni:

• Matt Hill, who oversees the district's Public School Choice project that turns schools over to independent managers (Broad pays Hill's $160,000 salary);
• Parker Hudnut, executive director of the district's innovation and charter division
• Yumi Takahashi, the budget director;
• Marshall Tuck, chief executive of the nonprofit that manages schools for Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa;
• Mark Kieger-Heine, chief operating officer of the same nonprofit; and
• Angela Bass, its superintendent of instruction.
• John Deasy as deputy superintendent of LA Unified (he's a likely candidate for the superintendent's job).

In early 2011 "three prominent school district superintendents" trained by the Broad Superintendents Academy resigned "after allegations of mismanagement, autocratic leadership styles, and/or the pursuit of unpopular policies".

The Broad Residency also receives funding from the Gates Foundation($3.6 million in 2010).

Teachers' union opposes potential Broadie BUSD supt. hire - Burbank Leader

Teachers' union opposes potential BUSD supt. hire - Burbank Leader:

Teachers' union opposes potential BUSD supt. hire

The Burbank Teachers Assn. sent an email blast to its membership Monday evening urging public school employees and other community members to voice their opposition to Burbank Unified superintendent candidate Matthew Hill, who currently works in the Los Angeles public school system. 

The BUSD board of education scheduled a town hall-style meeting today from 3:30 to 6 p.m. at John Burroughs High School, with the stated purpose of giving people "an opportunity to ask questions of Matthew R. Hill, Superintendent of Schools candidate, and learn more about his background and qualifications."

The BTA release, however, asks people to show up during the regular board meeting on Thursday at 6 p.m. to urge the board to reject Hill and continue its search for a new leader. That meeting will be held at Burbank City Hall. 

Specifically, union officials expressed concern that Hill has never worked as a teacher or a principal, as well as his involvement in the much-maligned iPad roll-out at LAUSD.

The BTA also raised concerns about Hill’s involvement with the implementation of a $130-million student information system at LAUSD that became a technological debacle.

When the system went online last fall, it overloaded the district’s database servers, which required emergency re-engineering, according to the Los Angeles Times.

For days and weeks afterward, many teachers couldn’t enter grades or attendance or even figure out which students were enrolled in class, the Times reported.

In a letter written last October, then LAUSD Supt. John Deasy said the fixes required to repair the system may take up to a year.

Though the final open seat on the Burbank Unified school board will be determined following the general election tonight, none of the new members will be formally seated on the board for several weeks, meaning the selection of the new superintendent may occur without their input.  

Current Burbank Supt. Jan Britz is retiring at the end of the school year. Teachers' union opposes potential BUSD supt. hire - Burbank Leader:

Things have worked out so well at LAUSD Burbank should give it a whirl!

Once Broad alumni are working inside the education system, they naturally favor hiring other Broadies, which ups the leverage. A clear picture of this comes from Los Angeles. The foundation is based there and exerts formidable influence over the LA Unified School District (LA Unified), the second largest in the nation. At the start of 2010, Broad Residency alums working at LA Unified included Matt Hill, who oversees the district’s Public School Choice project that turns schools over to independent managers (Broad pays Hill’s $160,000 salary); Parker Hudnut, executive director of the district’s innovation and charter division (Kathi Littmann, his predecessor, was also a Broad resident); Yumi Takahashi, the budget director; Marshall Tuck, chief executive of the nonprofit that manages schools for Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa; Mark Kieger-Heine, chief operating officer of the same nonprofit; and Angela Bass, its superintendent of instruction. In June 2010, the Board of Education hired Broad Academy alumnus John Deasy as deputy superintendent of LA Unified (he’s a likely candidate for the superintendent’s job). At the time of hiring, Deasy was deputy director of education at the Gates Foundation.

Broad casts a long shadow over LA Unified, but other foundations also invest. A $4.4 million grant from the LA-based Wasserman Foundation, $1.2 million from Walton, and smaller grants from Ford and Hewlett are paying the salaries of more than a dozen key senior staffers in the district. They work on projects favored by the foundations.

After-school programs could be cut at four Sacramento schools | The Sacramento Bee The Sacramento Bee

After-school programs could be cut at four Sacramento schools | The Sacramento Bee The Sacramento Bee:

After-school programs could be cut at four Sacramento schools 

 The city of Sacramento is considering closing 4th “R” after-school programs at four Sacramento City Unified School district campuses and severing its ties to another after-school program at 18 schools.

A City Council discussion on the proposal had been scheduled for this evening, but has been postponed until April 28. Eric Guerra, who last week won a City Council seat representing one of the affected 4th “R” campuses, is scheduled to be sworn in that evening. City Manager John Shirey and council members said they wanted to allow Guerra to take part in the debate.

Under what the city said is a cost-saving plan, the 4th “R” programs would get slashed at Golden Empire Elementary in Rosemont, Caroline Wenzel Elementary School in Greenhaven, Hubert H. Bancroft Elementary in College Greens and O.W. Erlewine Elementary in Larchmont Riviera. Golden Empire, Bancroft and Erlewine are within one mile of one another.

According to a city of Sacramento staff report, the 4th “R” program is facing a budget deficit of $458,000 for the fiscal year that begins July 1. That gap is the result of increasing employee costs; many employees at 4th “R” sites recently joined a labor union, and the city now must pay those workers increased benefits, according to Alan Tomiyama, the city’s recreation manager.

Enrollment in the 4th “R” programs has steadily declined at the four campuses slated to be closed as more parents enroll their children in free after-school programs. There are 187 children combined in 4th “R” at the four schools, Tomiyama said.

Golden Empire, Bancroft and Erlewine all have free START after-school programs operated by the city. Wenzel has a free program offered by an outside vendor.

The START program is also hurting the city’s bottom line. Employee salaries and benefits are rising, and the program will carry a $1 million deficit in the upcoming fiscal year “without significant cost saving measures,” according to the city report. As a result, the city plans to cut its ties with START at 18 schools.

The START program began in 1996, fostered by then-City Councilman Darrell Steinberg. Within three years it grew to 42 schools serving 7,000 students, offering homework help, recreation and literacy education.

Steinberg, who served as state Senate President Pro Tem until last fall, said Tuesday that the after-school brand remained in Sacramento but became an inspiration for other after-school programs across the state.

“When I started it, it got a lot of attention in the capital city, and the Legislature picked it up, and (U.S.) Senator (Barbara) Boxer picked it up,” Steinberg said. “It was a significant catalyst to the statewide programs.”

Steinberg said he knew about the START deficit and hopes that a replacement is found.

“I love the brand,” he said. “It has done a lot of good over the years. But that’s less important to me than making sure the same number or more children get comprehensive after-school experience.”

The Sacramento City Unified School District does have plans to look for other vendors to continue the after-school program at the 18 schools. District Superintendent Jose Banda told parents in a letter last week that funding is available for START through state and federal grants, and the after-school programs will not be eliminated.

“I’m talking with (Banda) about the need to keep these sites open based on the letters I’ve received and the need I know these communities have,” said Councilman Rick Jennings.

The fate of 4th “R” is less clear.

Banda wrote parents last week that the district is working with the city to find a solution to the proposed elimination of 4th R at the four schools. Jennings, who represents Greenhaven, said the city is exploring whether the district or an outside vendor can assume responsibility for the programs.

A parent, Felise Dooley, pulled her car to the front of Wenzel Elementary Tuesday morning and said she hoped to learn about after-school options for a child who attends a charter campus nearby. Her third-grade son used to attend Wenzel and its 4th “R” program, she said. But the cost was between $400 and $500 a month. Now she hopes to enroll him in the free California After School Education & Safety Program operated at the campus – one of the multiple vendors that also provide a free after-school program.

“It keeps him busy, keeps his brain stimulated for summer and even after

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article18519929.html#storylink=cpy

After-school programs could be cut at four Sacramento schools | The Sacramento Bee The Sacramento Bee:

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article18519929.html#storylink=cpy

Let’s hear it for failure, bullying, underage drinking–and, of course, PARCC testing | Bob Braun's Ledger

Let’s hear it for failure, bullying, underage drinking–and, of course, PARCC testing | Bob Braun's Ledger:

Let’s hear it for failure, bullying, underage drinking–and, of course, PARCC testing





 Some might believe the relentless testing regime plaguing public schools—but not the most prestigious private schools—will improve learning. Others have endorsed testing as a way of attacking veteran teachers who, of course, are frequently  blamed for failure but far less often credited with success.  Then there is a group—who knows the size?—who view testing as a kind of philosophical sorting out process, all but divinely mandated, that separates the saved from the doomed.  One of these, the superintendent of a major New Jersey school district, wrote these bizarre words in a note to his staff:

“I desperately hope my children are bullied at least once a year through their K-12 experience.”

The writer is Gerard Jellig, the superintendent of the South Brunswick schools.

This site afforded Jellig repeated opportunities to explain, not just his wish that his own children be bullied, but also the entirety of a note that, while clearly odd, probably goes a long way to explain the bureaucratic machismo behind a testing regime that, among other things, allows for children to be bullied by administrators and spied upon by foreign corporations using Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and other social media.

Jellig, however, refused to respond—despite his proclivity to engage students in Twitter dialogues, a habit he forbids teachers to embrace.

His wish that his own children—and he has children—are bullied is simply the outer fringe of a manic educator’s belief in the inherent rightness of anything done in the name of education “reform,” a word stolen from plain language and now used to justify the strangest of policies. Bullying fits the context that standardized testing—which always implies failure—is part of a cosmic judgment on the lives of children and their teachers.

He begins his note by conceding the PARCC tests are difficult—“not for the faint of heart” he says, not terribly originally.  But, so what?

“What’s wrong with hard? What’s wrong with some failure? Is adversity to be scrubbed from the adolescent experience altogether?”

Jellig, a former Army ranger and private school headmaster, is clearly on a roll now as he writes his note to staff. One can imagine his keystrokes becoming more Let’s hear it for failure, bullying, underage drinking–and, of course, PARCC testing | Bob Braun's Ledger:

Hillary Clinton Thinks Common Core “A Good Idea” | deutsch29

Hillary Clinton Thinks Common Core “A Good Idea” | deutsch29:

Hillary Clinton Thinks Common Core “A Good Idea”

 Hillary Clinton was in Iowa today, campaigning.

According to The Guardian’s live blog coverage by Tom McCarthy, Hillary Clinton is sympathetic towards “the plight of Common Core.” McCarthy reports::

Clinton bemoaned the plight of Common Core educational standards, a good idea she said had been taken hostage by the political debate.

Implicit in Clinton’s message is that Common Core would have been just fine except that it became entangled in politics.

Get a clue, Hillary: Common Core was birthed in politics.

But I think you know that.

The National Governors Association (NGA) is one of two organizations that holds theCommon Core copyright. That right there is a problem for a so-called “state led” education initiative.

Then there is US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan using federal money to pay for two Common-Core-associated testing consortia– and announcing as much in 2009, before there even was a Common Core.

Never mind that the other Common Core copyright owner, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), has a CEO, Gene Wilhoit, who thought it would be a good idea to ask billionaire Bill Gates in 2008 to bankroll Common Core.

Politically-connected edupreneur David Coleman– who did business with Arne Duncan during Duncan’s time as CEO in Chicago in 2002– was with Wilhoit when he asked Gates for his money.

Then, a few years later, Wilhoit moved on and was replaced by former Pearson associate, Chris Minnich.

Following his CCSSO retirement, Wilhoit conveniently joined Coleman’s Common-Core-centered for-profit-gone-nonprofit, Student Achievement Partners.

And Coleman moved on to become the president of an assessment company, College Board.

So, you see, Hillary, Common Core was never “not political.”

On June 12, 2015, my book on the history, development, and promotion of Common Core, Common Core Dilemma: Who Owns Our Schools?, will be released.

Clinton should read it.

But back to Iowa.

At least Hillary publicly admitted her sympathy for Common Core.

This puts her on the same side as another 2016 presidential hopeful:

Republican Jeb Bush.

However, according to McCarthy’s report of Clinton’s campaign kickoff in Iowa, Hillary Clinton Thinks Common Core “A Good Idea” | deutsch29:

AFT President Randi Weingarten was on Tavis Smiley yesterday! They discussed two dominant philosophies in education - American Federation of Teachers

AFT - American Federation of Teachers:
 AFT - American Federation of Teachers

AFT President Randi Weingarten was on Tavis Smiley yesterday! They discussed two dominant philosophies in education.
Posted by AFT - American Federation of Teachers on Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Confidential Report: EduProfiteers See a Big Market in Education | Diane Ravitch's blog

Confidential Report: EduProfiteers See a Big Market in Education | Diane Ravitch's blog:

Confidential Report: EduProfiteers See a Big Market in Education 

 This arrived in my email box today. The author, who owns a literacy company, asked to remain anonymous. He is describing an entrepreneurs’ conclave at Arizona State University, cosponsored byGSV Capital, whose leader, Michael Moe, has been bullish about the education sector as a profit opportunity for many years.

My correspondent writes:

 Dear Dr. Ravitch,

 I’m a longtime fan of your work and your blog (which I have recommended to many colleagues and in my company’s blog).
My name is ……

 I’m writing to you today to tell you about a conference I just returned from called the ASU GSV Summit. It should really be called the Taxpayer Funded Education Business Con-ference (with an emphasis on “con”), because it was filled with entrepreneurs and venture capitalists claiming to want to do “social capitalism” but who actually were participating in an event filled with corporate dominated “school reform” propaganda that placed its focus on charters, accountability (ie testing), and corporate solutions such as Teach For America. While a great deal of lip service was paid to the great work of teachers (including an appearance by the hip-hop star, Common, along with his mother, a Chicago school board member), far more attention was given to pro-corporate propaganda. For instance, one of the hosts, GSV’s Michael Moe (http://investors.gsvcap.com/management.cfm) gave a lengthy keynote in which he compared education reformers to former Notre Dame coach, Lou Holtz and then extolled the virtues of companies such as Dreambox Learning, an online math program, that owes its existence to the fact that its owners also own a chain of charter schools that purchase its software. Not coincidentally, Dreambox won their ROE (Return on Education) award for the 3rd year in a row.

 I think Dreambox is well worth a look because it exemplifies the kind of corporate reform darling that has success based completely on smoke and mirrors. If you read this report: https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.epi.org/files/2014/school-privatization-milwaukee.pdf, it outlines Dreambox’s relationship with the Rocketship Charter Schools. It also details how: “When the U.S. Department of Education reviewed DreamBox in December 2013, researchers found 11 studies claiming to assess the program’s impact, but immediately rejected 10 of them as statistically meaningless. While the 11th study used sound methods and reported “significant gains in overall mathematics scores,” DOE staff found that the authors—whose work was commissioned by Rocketship—had arbitrarily excluded students they deemed “outliers.” When DOE Confidential Report: EduProfiteers See a Big Market in Education | Diane Ravitch's blog:

Want to Make a Buck? Invest in Charter Schools by T.N. Box Chair of Teacher in the Box

1. Come up with a cool "Education" name:

2. Partner with your local Astro Turf Corporate Education Reform non profit (sic)

Beware of AstroTurf Ed Reformers 

Just Like Michelle Rhee's Students first only BETTER

Astroturf lobbying refers to political organizations or campaigns that appear to be made up of grassroots activists but are actually organized and run by corporate interests seeking to further their own agendas. Such groups are often typified by innocent-sounding names that have been chosen specifically to disguise the group's true backers

Just Like Michelle Rhee's

 Students first Astroturf lobbying (only Better) 

Other Astroturf lobbying groups

DON'T FORGET THE TAX BENEFITS

Just Like Michelle Rhee's

 Students first Astroturf lobbying (only Better) 

3. I don't know anything about running a school! I understand. I didn't know anything about Education either. YOU Don't Have TO!!! Hook up with a CMO - Charter Management Organization,  I Did and I am rolling in tax sheltered cash. And isn't that what it is all about!

The preceding Public Service announcement was brought to you by   

Check out our Next Generation Charter Schools

Pro PARCC post in Gist memo is propaganda piece:

Pro PARCC post in Gist memo is propaganda piece

 In her recent field memo of April 3, 2015Commissioner Gist took the unusual step of quoting an entire blog post.

“I’m a mom,” it begins. “And the happiness of my children, now and in the future as they go on to start careers and families of their own, is on my mind all the time.”

The post was written by a mother from Florida who is in support of the Common Core State Standards and the accompanying testing. She is also an attorney and president & CEO of the Multicultural Education Alliance.

The blog on which it appeared is put out by the Foundation for Excellence in Education, a Jeb Bush creation, which states on its website: “The 21st century economy is the most competitive in world history. It is an economy that requires a growing number of educated and skilled workers. Yet, on international assessments, American students rank 21st in science and 26th in math, behind their peers in countries like Singapore, Japan and Canada. We need to reverse this trend if America is to continue its dominant role.”

In other words, the goal of education is to provide a workforce with the skills to meet the needs of the global corporate economy and maintain America in a dominant world position. Does this goal resonate with most parents of preK-12 students?

The website for the EdFly blog has as its web address ExcelinEd.org. According to the 2014 donor page for ExcelinEd, those at the top of the donor list include (no surprises here):

Greater than $1,000,000:

• Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust
• Walton Family Foundation

Between $500,001 and $1,000,000:

• Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
• GE Foundation
• News Corporation
• Charles & Helen Schwab Foundation

Between $250,0001 and $500,000:

• Laura and John Arnold Foundation
• Bloomberg Philanthropies

Between $100,001 and $250,000:

• Eli & Edythe Broad Foundatio
• Jeb Bush & Associates

It is no coincidence that Commissioner Gist herself as a Chief for Change, a group also created by Jeb Bush, would choose this particular blog post to send to all RI superintendents. That she has used her position of authority to single out this one blog post, which can reasonably be assumed to be propaganda for the position she has espoused since assuming the role of commissioner, is very unfortunate and does a disservice to the hundreds of RI parents and other concerned citizens who have researched the Common Core and PARCC testing in depth and decided they are not in the best interests of our children.

While it is true that many prominent civil rights groups, including the National Council of La Raza, do support the allegedly “rigorous” Common Core Standards and testing for accountability of students, teachers, and schools, one can only wonder whether the members of these groups have confronted the reality of the harm this agenda is actually having on traditionally under-served children and youth. It is understandable that those concerned about children of color, children from diverse ethnic and linguistic backgrounds, children with special learning needs, and children living in poverty, should be alarmed by the very real lack of advancement of many of these children in the public schools.

This is a complex issue and needs to be addressed comprehensively. The starving of Pro PARCC post in Gist memo is propaganda piece:

THE STATE OF AMERICAN PUBLIC EDUCATION: DÉJÀ VU ALL OVER AGAIN - Badass Teachers Association

Badass Teachers Association:

THE STATE OF AMERICAN PUBLIC EDUCATION: DÉJÀ VU ALL OVER AGAIN

By Andrés Rodríguez Jr., father of BAT and DREAM admin Aixa Rodriguez



 How the current apostates of education reform distort the meaning of “public” in public education is breathtaking. More astonishing is the perversion of time-tested and proven elements of good public education with its concomitant, predictable and disturbing consequences: institutional segregation of students, under-resourced schools, overcrowded classrooms, no access to the arts, music or physical education, lack of diversity in the teaching corps, mediocre school leadership, bland and non-stimulating curricula emphasizing test-taking instead of critical thinking and analysis.

This is the legacy that education “reform” in New York City and other urban centers of America are leaving in their wake. Institutions of higher learning want a well-rounded and diverse student body. Much of what currently passes for “reform” in New York City is depriving students of experiences highly valued by college recruiters. The students that stand to lose the most are poor, of color, and immigrants.

Above: Protest held by College Bound students and fellow Franklin students demanding the same small classes and programs for all students. Below: Students from NYCLetEmPlay at the International Community High School protesting against racial inequities in sports funding.

The maxim “there is always room for improvement” encapsulates the essence of “continuous quality improvement”, a management philosophy applicable to virtually all human endeavors, including education. Who would question the wisdom of that philosophy? Many “reformers” self-identify as polemicists only interested in improving public education. But some of the loudest and well-connected reformers around now would be better described as propagandists with hidden agendas. One must wonder what exactly these “reformers” are peddling. The polemics about what constitutes an effective and productive system of public education were settled decades ago. The accomplishments of the high school I attended in East Harlem, El Barrio, in the late 1960’s exemplify that.

Benjamin Franklin High School in East Harlem (years ago renamed the Manhattan Center for Science and Mathematics) was never on my radar. I didn’t choose to attend the school. I was focused on Bronx Science, Brooklyn Technical or Stuyvesant high schools. But I was never alerted to the entrance examination dates for these specialized schools. Forced to choose between Morris High School in the Bronx and Benjamin Franklin High School in Manhattan, schools with less than stellar reputations at the time, I chose Franklin. It was not apparent to me and many of my classmates that an extraordinary set of circumstances would have life-changing implications for all of us.

My introduction to freshman year of high school was more about rude awakening than high expectations. The most vivid recollection I have of its start is an overcrowded English classroom so lacking in resources that each available copy of George Eliot’s novel, Silas Marner: The Weaver of Raveloe, had to be shared by two students! It was a dispiriting revelation. I had always been an enthusiastic student earning high marks for class participation. Despite the teacher’s best efforts to jump-start my enthusiasm and pique my interest, I quickly became withdrawn and uncharacteristically passive. Funding for books mattered then, it matters now.

Predictably, the first parent-teacher conference that my mother attended did not go well. The teacher explained that my classroom participation was poor: I didn’t raise my hand enough, didn’t want to read out loud and didn’t participate in class discussions. After a few minutes hearing the teacher’s litany of concerns and seeing my mother’s worried face, I lost my composure and blurted, “How can I participate in the classroom with so many students raising their hands competing for attention while my hand is rarely, if at all, noticed?” It was my way of saying that I had become a face in the crowd and had simply given up. Class size mattered then. It matters now.

Somehow I survived freshman year. The summer went fast and I expected to start my “sophomore slump” in September. It didn’t take long. Again I encountered crowded classrooms, a dearth of resources and the customary bland and sparse course offerings for a purportedly “academic” Badass Teachers Association: