All aboard the charter schools gravy train

32 comments on “All aboard the charter schools gravy train ”

• Comments are now closed

1. madtom 1

   21 May 2016 at 7:54 am

   The charter schools profiteers do not give up easily, as this history of their fight with the voters in Washington State shows. I suspect there is behind-the-scenes synergy here, as the immediate working operators make bundles of cash, and the sit-back, big-wealth backers like Bill Gates (in this story) hope to extend their control of the public mind by adding k-12 education to their media and copyright ownership.

   [I taught high school & beyond in Washington for about 15 years, so I take this personally]

   http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/04/how-bill-gates-and-his-billionaire-allies-used-their-wealth-to-launch-charter-schools-in-washington-state.html
   • greywarshark 1.1

     21 May 2016 at 9:44 pm

     This is some of the above article mentioned by madtom. It sounds familiar to us doesn’t it.
     http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/04/how-bill-gates-and-his-billionaire-allies-used-their-wealth-to-launch-charter-schools-in-washington-state.html
     Posted on April 27, 2016 by Yves Smith
     By Joanne Barkan. Originally published at the Nonprofit Quarterly (Spring 2016; vol. 23, no. 1)

     Charter supporters tried another ballot initiative in 2000, and, for the first time, attracted the backing of a multibillionaire philanthropist. Paul Allen had cofounded Microsoft in 1975 and The Paul G. Allen Family Foundation in 1988.3 The state places no limits on individual campaign contributions for ballot measures, so Allen was able to give $3.275 million of the total $3.4 million raised by the pro-charter side. Opponents raised only about $11,000. Outspent 309 to 1, they still defeated the initiative, although the millions given in support of charters shrank the margin of victory. The vote was 51.8 percent against charters and 48.2 percent in favor.4

     In the next four years, the national context shifted. The debate around public education intensified as a controversial market-based education-reform movement grew stronger. “Ed-reformers” claimed that U.S. public schools were failing; that the culprits were bad teachers, teachers unions, and government bureaucracy; and that the private sector, using public resources, could run better schools. They promoted competition among schools to force out the weakest and measuring educational success via students’ standardized test scores.
     (My bolding.)
2. Keith 2

   21 May 2016 at 8:07 am

   Isn’t cute the way National make unhelpful stats just go away and even cuter bypass the collection of potentially bad stats by not collecting them at all.

   This poor value for money taxpayer funded largesse for friends of the government is clearly not working if statistic cover ups are in full swing, but i guess thats not what really matters, its divvying up the cash that does.
3. NZJester 3

   21 May 2016 at 8:53 am

   Even before they opened the fist charter schools in New Zealand the data from those places having tried them overseas have shown that charter schools simply are not value for public money and in a lot of cases are a total waste of money. Those already known results seam to be matching what has been happening with charter schools in New Zealand.
   If that money had gone into public schools instead it would have improved education in New Zealand instead of lowering our education standards.
   • Draco T Bastard 3.1

     22 May 2016 at 2:51 am

     Charter Schools the world over have nothing to do with improving educational outcomes but are simply another way to transfer public wealth into the hands of the rich. They have no other reason to exist.
4. One Anonymous Bloke 4

   21 May 2016 at 9:19 am

   Gone by lunchtime, with a full audit and clawing back of all funds provided under false pretences (which if you ask me is 100%). The only way to Tory proof education is to inflict massive damages upon anyone who collaborates with the National Party.

   Make them lose their shirts and they’ll think twice next time. Same applies to the likes of SERCO and other corrupt trash.
   • Chuck 4.1

     21 May 2016 at 9:59 am

     No doubt OAB you will be the leader of the “hit squad” to round up “anyone who collaborates with the National Party”

     And then “inflict massive damages upon” them.

     Maybe even shave their heads??…so everyone knows they collaborated with the enemy 🙂
     • Nic the NZer 4.1.1

       21 May 2016 at 10:12 am

       No need. Once the gravy train dries up these companies dont want to be in the business of education and are hopelessly inefficient at it. If they are sensible they just fold immediately when a different govt is elected.
     • One Anonymous Bloke 4.1.2

       21 May 2016 at 3:31 pm

       Since when does “shirts” mean anything other than “money invested”?

       cf: the failed privatisation of ACC.
     • Stuart Munro 4.1.3

       21 May 2016 at 11:53 pm

       Not their heads Chucky my lad, but their margins.

       Make them repay for non-performance – Brownlee would be in debt for a hundred lifetimes for the bollocks he’s made of Christchurch.

       Nick Smith – wouldn’t have a penny to his name, and Bill English? The whole family would have to be sold into slavery for a geological age – just to recoup the public money they’ve pissed away like the ketone laden residue of an after-match function.
5. Jenny Kirk 5

   21 May 2016 at 10:18 am

   A particularly lousy aspect of what is already a lousy policy is that these seven charter schools will be paid for by money originally allocated to the state school system. So – the charter schools will flourish, and the state schools will deteriorate even further.
   • Kelly-Ned 5.1

     21 May 2016 at 4:01 pm

     That has certainly been the pattern in USA.
6. tinfoilhat 6

   21 May 2016 at 10:22 am

   sigh…there is so much emotive disinformation on both sides of the charter school debate in NZ.
   • seeker 6.1

     21 May 2016 at 2:34 pm

     @ tinfoilhat@10.22am

     Have you looked into this ’emotive disinformation’ to see whether or not it is ‘disinformation’ and if it is why one might become a tad ’emotive’ about it.
     Or have you just ‘sighed’ and used this phrase to dismiss this issue to yourself with indifferent arrogance and swagger. (because the issue does not affect you personally).

     Really tinfoilhat.
     • tinfoilhat 6.1.1

       21 May 2016 at 3:39 pm

       @ seeker – I have posted substantively on this issue at this blog.

       disclosure: I am a long serving secondary teacher in the Auckland region.
       • seeker 6.1.1.1

         21 May 2016 at 6:09 pm

         Thankyou for your reply tinfoil.
         I too have served long and hard as a primary and secondary teacher, and particularly within special education in the UK
         Special Education in the UK means meeting the full spectrum from those children with severe learning difficulties and all it entails ,right through to the very able or’gifted children..
         I do not have a tinfoil lhat……only great sadness at what this government and the UK government have been doing to education. The USA never really had my respect for their approach to public education.
         Am now retired and am really concerned for the young people of today growing up in the world created but what are now known as ‘neolibs’. These people are so enamoured of ‘the market’ that I think of them as ‘black marketeers’, especially with our children’s lives. But perhaps this is a little too emotive.

         Happy teaching. Perhaps you are still young enough to be able to get a chance to teach in ‘charter’ school . Please let us know what you think.
         • seeker 6.1.1.1.1

           21 May 2016 at 6:32 pm

           Oops a few typos on my comment, main one should read:
           “by what are now known as neolibs”
         • maninthemiddle 6.1.1.1.2

           22 May 2016 at 2:28 pm

           Your argument about the ‘market’ intervention in education is fallacious. Partnership schools are not-for-profit, so the market is only partially utilised here. But, mores the point, the ‘market’ has delivered education for far longer than has government. The ‘market’ also successfully delivers a swathe of other services to government, including health care, public transport, IT support, printing, roading and other infrastructure work.

           I suggest to you that most opposition to partnership schools is ideological, not evidence based, and I suggest the same thing is true of much support. I suggest a reasonable approach is to wait and see. As other posters have said, if they improve educational outcomes for their pupils, leave them open. If not, shut them. I only wish we had the same ruler applied to public schools.
           • joe90 6.1.1.1.2.1

             22 May 2016 at 2:53 pm

             But, mores the point, the ‘market’ has delivered education for far longer than has government.

             Do you mean prior to governments providing public education when only the 1% could afford to educate their children?.
7. ianmac 7

   21 May 2016 at 10:25 am

   The State schools BOT were paid $50 per meeting for 10 meetings per year. About $2,500 per year.
   It seems that Advanced paid out $309,399 for the same thing but with fewer than 100 kids.
   Gravy?
8. Byd0nz 8

   21 May 2016 at 10:49 am

   Would a Marxist school of economics get a look in?
9. McGrath 9

   21 May 2016 at 10:53 am

   For me the debate is simple. If pass rates are higher in charter schools, they should stay. If not, they should go.
   • Incognito 9.1

     21 May 2016 at 11:06 am

     For me the debate is simple. If charter schools do anything to deal with The Long Tail of Underachievement as they said they would, they should stay. If not, they should go.
   • mpledger 9.2

     21 May 2016 at 11:14 am

     There will always be excuses and evasions about what their results are. Just like there is at the moment.

     Charter Schools get to chose their students and there is no come back if they push out students e.g. they still keep the money that pays for educating that student even when they go back to the state school system.

     It’s a way for private companies to get their hands on tax dollars to take as profit.
   • One Anonymous Bloke 9.3

     21 May 2016 at 3:36 pm

     For me the debate is simple: close them by lunchtime so that the next time the National Party tries to inflict its dogma upon children, potential investors are gunshy.
10. AsleepWhileWalking 10

    21 May 2016 at 11:10 am

    In shape contrast…if you choose to home school your kid (a smaller version of a charter school imho) the State gives you just over $700/year per child.
11. feijoa 11

    21 May 2016 at 11:41 am

    I also heard somewhere that an extra $7 million of STATE SCHOOL FUNDING is going to be REMOVED for these wretched schools. Think I heard it on TV in the last day or so.
    • Jenny Kirk 11.1

      21 May 2016 at 8:16 pm

      Yes – I heard that too, feijoa. State school money going straight into private Charter Schools. This stinks. Its not that the govt has found extra funds from somewhere (a foreign trust maybe) for the new charter schools. They’re taking it from us – middle NZ – to pay for the elite !
12. millsy 12

    21 May 2016 at 12:02 pm

    Charter schools serve the following purposes:

    – The privatisation of education
    – The lowering of the working conditions and wages of teachers
    – The indoctrination of children and young people with neo-liberal and Calvinist ideology. whereby fundamentalist Christian pentecostalism and free market capitalism are the order of the day, and kids are taught not to question authority. Look at what is happening in the US, whereby most charter school are either run by churches or millionaires.

    The charter schools here are a military academy, where kids are taught to say yes sir, no sir and not question anything, and a christian school, where kids are taught that the earth and mankind were created, women are baby vessels and LGBTI people are vermin that are fit only for extermination.
13. marsman 13

    22 May 2016 at 10:34 am

    Thank you Anthony for your clear description of yet another neo-liberal scam.

    I want to post this article on my Facebook page but somehow that is not working. Any suggestions?
14. Jack Ramaka 14

    23 May 2016 at 9:06 am

    Sounds like one big scam, surely the Education Department is sorting our problems and under achievement in schools in NZ, in 1907-1908 the Native schools in NZ were on par if not better than the European schools in NZ, so we have obviously gone backwards in the past 100 years. Why are we trying to re-invent the wheel?
15. M. Gray 15

    23 May 2016 at 12:09 pm

    You can’t and shouldn’t have different levels of accountability when you are using tax dollars the charter schools need to be accountable , transparent and subjected to the same scrutiny as public and other private schools otherwise get rid of them

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS