The Other ALECs' K-12 Education Agenda Exposed

[Starry Messenger]

http://truth-out.org/news/item/10435-the-other-alecs-k-12-education-agenda-exposed

The Corporate Playbook for Public Education

In Part Two of this series we described a "corporate playbook" for influencing state-level legislation through nonprofit organizations like ALEC and CSG. As a reminder, the playbook works approximately like this (with variants depending on the group):

1. Donate to a "Group" (like CSG and/or ALEC), thus gaining access to the Groups' legislative membership.
2. Use corporate money to get lobbyists on boards and task forces associated with the Group.
3. Use lobbyists' positions on the task forces to set the education agenda for these Groups. Groups are where state-level legislators receive most of their job training.
4. Use free time at educational events to "schmooze" powerful legislative leaders.
5. Write, introduce and influence the passage of business-friendly model legislation through CSG and ALEC.
6. Lobby your model bills into enactments in as many states as possible.

This playbook process describes how state-level education policy is shaped by corporate America.

Most major Groups' education platforms reflect some aspect of the big-business model for education.

For instance, CSG seeks to build a "culture of entrepreneurship" and create a "skilled workforce" ready for 21st-century labor tasks. The NCSL Education Task Force promotes "flexibility," charter schools and "common academic standards" based on testing. ALEC's education task force promotes "efficiency" and "parental choice" in schools.

This whole article is a good read, it was tough to find a place to excerpt.

[Lifelong Protester]

1. bookmarked to read tomorrow!

gotta sign off here. But thanks!

[Starry Messenger]

2. Thanks for checking it out!

I think you'll enjoy it!

[LooseWilly]

3. k&r

[Lifelong Protester]

4. Wow. Just wow.

I cannot believe the interests out there that want to put the final nails in the coffin of public education. And the sheeple (the uninformed public) that's buying it.

Do you know, do charter schools have to submit to the same rigorous testing, or is that state by state?

[Starry Messenger]

5. I believe they all have to do the same testing.

We're talking about the high-stakes tests, right? Charters give them too. There seems to be a different standard of accountability with the results though:

http://www.educationjustice.org/newsletters/nlej_iss21_art5_detail_CharterSchoolAchievement.htm

[div class="excerpt"}

Charter Schools Nationwide Not Better, Maybe Worse, than Public Schools *

Research on charter schools paints a mixed picture. A number of recent national studies have reached the same conclusion: charter schools do not, on average, show greater levels of student achievement, typically measured by standardized test scores, than public schools, and may even perform worse.

The Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University found in a 2009 report that 17% of charter schools outperformed their public school equivalents, while 37% of charter schools performed worse than regular local schools, and the rest were about the same. A 2010 study by Mathematica Policy Research found that, on average, charter middle schools that held lotteries were neither more nor less successful than regular middle schools in improving student achievement, behavior, or school progress. Among the charter schools considered in the study, more had statistically significant negative effects on student achievement than statistically significant positive effects. These findings are echoed in a number of other studies.

Variations in Charter School Performance

While research tends to show that charters do not, on average, outperform public schools, these studies have found wide variation in charter quality.

Charter school performance may vary geographically. Studies by Caroline Hoxby and by the authors of the CREDO report both found that charter schools in the New York City tended to outperform public schools in the city, for example, while a 2009 study by the RAND Corporation found that charter middle schools appeared to be falling short of public middle schools in Chicago (in reading) and in Texas (in both reading and math).

Charter school research has also found variation based on student demographics and subject matter. A literature review of studies of charter schools concluded that they frequently produced higher test scores in elementary school reading and middle school math compared to public schools, although the effect sizes were small in the latter case, but that they often scored significantly lower in tests of high school reading and math. The Mathematica study found that charter schools serving the largest proportions of low income or low achieving students had positive effects on students' test scores, particularly in math; conversely, charter schools serving more advantaged or higher-achieving students had negative effects.



Despite all of this, the media is not calling for a crusade against charter schools or blaming unions for "failing" schools. The whole article is interesting, by the way. I actually don't like to use tests as a yardstick for "success", but since that is the metric we're using, it is compelling to ask why one system that is doing less well is allowed to go on like it is.

[Lifelong Protester]

6. I also wonder by which metric are we comparing

ourselves to Finland, seeing as how in Finland they do NO high-stakes testing.

[mopinko]

7. sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. tests

high stakes tests are no better a measure of charter schools than they are of any other schools. in fact, since most charters are built around a different model that most common schools, they are even less likely to be tested with an instrument that fits their curriculum. if a charter is based around language immersion and international studies, how do you think they are going to do on the standardized tests most kids take? how about a math and science charter?
either tests don't measure anything, or they do. but you can't have it both ways.

[Starry Messenger]

8. " I actually don't like to use tests as a yardstick for "success""

I believe we're in agreement.

[mopinko]

9. we agree about a lot, i am sure.

tests should be more than half the measure of anything. no decision should be based on test scores alone. none.