Schools As Public Institutions Is Just So Old School

The move to privatize public education is in full swing and there are many out there stepping on the gas. We have  covered the issue of making money off the public sector through the charter system many times in this blog. It unfortunately does enjoy bi-partisan support so we get little attention from our legislators when we balk at things like charter schools and parent triggers. Such tools appear to embrace free market solutions which satisfies those who believe the free market can fix anything. It ignores the fact that the education market will never be free because the government has a vested interest in controlling how future voters are educated. Such tools appeal to the conservative right because they appear to put the parent back in the equation for raising children and that is a position parents have not held for a couple decades now. But these tools offer false choices and bring people, who do not have education in the forefront of their thinking, into the system that provides education.

An interview on CNBC's Street Signs demonstrates, with painful clarity, that the focus of charter schools has little to do with children and education, and everything to do with making a profit.


It is eerie to hear the interviewee brush off the failure of some charters as a mere nuisance that fortunately doesn't really impact their bottom line because of the way they have structured their investment. The word to investors is, "Come on in. The water's fine."

To make sure that these investments function as good "businesses" the Eli Broad Foundation is working to put entrepreneurs into top administrative positions within the school districts and government to make sure that the business education reform measures are carried out well. Like a TFA for administrators, Broad's new Leadership Academy draws participants from outside the field of education and reduces “the experience level required for entering [the] training program.” According to the Washington Post, the Academy’s revised program of study "will aim to prepare leaders for positions beyond the superintendency of districts to include leaders of charter management organizations and state education departments."  Got that?  They are actively working to put people who have little education background or even interest into state education departments that will deliver your child's education.

But hey, as long as these business whiz kids do a great job, who cares that they aren't totally focused on education? Well, ask the parents of Prince George's County Maryland Public Schools who have enjoyed Broad leadership for the last several years.

The Broad Academy acolytes that have honored us with their presence barely stay in their positions for three years, getting out when they realize their Broad ways aren't going to work. PGCPS is a mixture of urban and suburban areas. When "Dr" John Deasy's illegitimate doctorate came to light, he left. Now Dr. Hite is leaving for Philly where he won't have to listen to parents. He told parents in PGCPS that he didn't have the time to visit every school. He ran into a concrete wall when he tried to close suburban schools in Bowie and bus all the kids to a massive, 900 student elementary factory school (Fairwood , which is not going to be built). Their deputy Bonita Potter Coleman is leaving for Mississippi to be close to home. 
 
And we see the failure of Broads in Philly (Ackerman) Rochester (Brizzarre) and Seattle (Monica Goodman?). 15 years of failure from Eli.

          --------------------------------------

Prince George's County Public Schools has had several Broad disciples, all who have used PGCPS as resume padding. "Dr" John Deasy left for the Gates Foundation when his questionable doctorate came to light and spends his time running LAUSD and telling lies to Rick Hess. Dr. Hite, who claimed he wanted to turn gray while at PGCPS yet told parents he didn't have time to step from his chauffeured driven Denali to visit all the schools (though he did visit a classroom at Duval HighSchool twice), has left for Philly where he doesn't have to answer to the parents. 

For more background on the Broad Foundation, check out Parents Across America's Guide to the Broad Foundation's Training Programs and Education Policy.

The future of education will no longer be the Three R's, it will be ROI.

Is Charter School Expansion REALLY the Answer to Public Education's Woes?

Missourians are not the only ones concerned about the educational reforms set forth by Arne Duncan and state legislators. A citizen group in Seattle has been following these reforms very closely and this is a blog you should read to understand the charter school push by some state legislatures.

Seattle Education 2010 is a wealth of information and should be followed if you are interested in the evolution of public education being provided by private investors. If this is the course the Missouri legislature is going to pursue, it is imperative citizens understand how charters are funded and who is in charge of each charter organization. If the information from Seattle Education 2010 is correct, Missourians should be asking these questions of Missouri legislators as the plan "Educated Citizenry 2020" calls for the growth of charter schools in the state:

• Who is funding the charter schools?
• Are any of the charters receiving money from the Broad or Gates Foundation?
• Does the Legislature support monetary reward for parent signatures to provoke a "Trigger" option?
• Does this move to charters create more local control?
• Does this move to charters create more parental involvement?
• Will the charters be under the same common core standards as traditional public schools?
• Will the charters be staffed with inexperienced teachers?
• Do current Board of Education members have ties to charter school companies?
• Do any legislators have vested interests or contributions from charter school interests?

We believe these questions need to be asked and answered before public support can be given to the reforms mentioned in the current educational plan. When charters were first instituted, they were truly innovative. This is a partial description of charter schools from the Encyclopedia of Children and Childhood in History and Society:

Charter schools were founded to provide an alternative vision for schooling, to serve a special target population of students, or to gain flexibility and autonomy from local school districts. Charter developers maintained that charter schools could accomplish educational goals more effectively than traditional schools, if they were given the opportunity to operate free from restrictive regulations and had stable financing that could be tied directly to the attainment of educational goals. Waivers were requested for state and local testing mechanisms, personnel regulations, or state and local curriculum mandates; however, regulations for discrimination, health, or safety of children could not be waived.

Note the highlighted sentence in the charter school description. These waivers were what created the innovation in charter schools and set them apart from traditional public schools. However, with the common core standards implemented in traditional public AND charter schools, the only reasons to pursue the charter school route would be to diminish the teacher unions and put the decision making in the hands of private investors. Real reform of educational goals will not be accomplished by moving students from one building to another. The standards and testing and curriculum will stay the same if a student stays in a public traditional school or attends a charter.

I hope our legislators look closer at the plan they are expecting the citizens to accept. The expansion of charters does not address the underlying problems in public education today. If the curriculum is flawed and out of the hands of the state to develop and institute, it doesn't matter where a child is placed. If the mandates are flawed and not locally controlled, the placement of students is irrelevant.

We share the same concerns as the group in Seattle. Who is funding the charters and why is there such a move toward the privatization of schools that operate under the same mandates as the traditional public schools? Is this really a choice for better education or just moving the money around from one entity to another?