He'll be offering the Webb School of Knoxville, Class of '77 perspective.

Priceless.

Each of the co-chairs got to pick their home-state guv, giving a little boost to two possible future presidential contenders.

And do you really need to wonder why Haslam has "juice" with Alexander?

possible future presidential contenders.

That's the scariest thing I've read all day. We already had one GWB. How'd that work out?

Nov. 2010...

Corker: Haslam's 'insight' will aid state education | timesfreepress.com:

"Mayors have a unique insight into education," said Corker, R-Tenn. "Mayors have a unique insight into some of the challenges that, especially, students who don't come from families that don't really nurture them into education, have."

Why would the feds want a governor who just recently stumbled into being in charge of one of the worst state education systems in the country and who otherwise doesn't really have much background in education?

Oh...and the answer to this quesion is that Tennessee ate the carrot on the stick that caused us to win the Race to the Top competition.

In eating that carrot, my understanding is that we agreed to:

1)Close the facility, fire the staff, and/or turn over to the state any school that fails to meet AYP.

2)Allow the state to then cede operational control to a private company (Teach for America's charter school arm, the Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) is one of two entities specified in the contract).

3) Double the number of charter schools operating statewide.

So...we're not 50th anymore, we're 1st! And it appears that the whole country will be taking their cues from us!

I believe I explained previously that the Broad, Gates, and Walton Family foundations are the primary financial supporters of Teach for America and the Knowledge is Power Program?

This seems like a pretty good spot, then, to post this link again (for the third time this week):

Don't miss Joanne Barkan's (12 page) article in the Winter 2011 issue of Dissent magazine, "Got Dough? How Billionaires Rule our Schools."

Biz, darlin', it's starting to look like a distinction without a difference.

I didn't mention it this past week, but Lamar Alexander's name also pops up here and there on the Broad Foundation's website.

Apparently, he's served as a jurist on multiple committees making awards of various sorts.

Of course, Jim McIntyre, a grad of Broad's superintendent academy, was also delivered to us by Broad's chief headhunter Ray and Associates.

Broad's website boasts that they now place 2 out of every 5 school superintendents nationally.

Could be that the "educational reform" team here in Tennessee is better assembled than we realized.

The Gates Foundation essentially wrote DoE's Race to the Top framework and states that won paid Gates Foundation consultants for their expertise (ha). Myths flooding the media for corporate reforms are being written and underwritten by the man behind the curtain- Bill Gates. Currently, Gates has been on a muti-state tour touting the benefit of increasing class sizes, merit pay for teachers, eliminating extra pay for experience and advanced degrees, and a data-based student and teacher evaluation method (norm-referenced test scores and Value-Added Teacher Evals).

He has a multi-pronged strategy for propagandizing the public discourse.

According to Valerie Strauss in WaPO, "The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is spending at least $3.5 million to create a new organization whose aim is to win over the public and the media to its market-driven approach to school reform, according to the closely held grant proposal."

At the same time, the Gates foundation has developed a grading system for media coverage of education issues with its obnoxious “Media Bullpen”. A clear intimidation tactic to marginalize dissenting or investigative journalists. Bill guarantees he'll be out in front of Jane Mayer-types with a clear counter argument to muddy the issue.
(link...) Check out the batting averages and home runs for school choice, teacher’s unions, and funding.

All while the Gates foundation is investing $400-million into program-related investments such as providing guarantees for bonds for charter schools.
(link...)

Does anyone see a major conflict of interest designed to guarantee a steady flow of public funds to Gate's private interests?

Gates isn't alone in promoting education privatization. Wall Street investors have had their eyes on the 600 billion dollar prize since 1999. Schools Matter has an apt title for this article by Michael Martin's 'Waiting for Super Fraud'. To Starve the Beast we Must Drown the Children.

(link...)

jcgrim said:

The Gates Foundation essentially wrote DoE's Race to the Top framework and states that won paid Gates Foundation consultants for their expertise (ha).

Actually, jc, that "Got Dough?" article I've linked again and again says it was the other way around (page 8), that Gates paid the states for their "successful" applications, here:

States were desperate for funds (in the end, thirty-four applied in the two rounds of the contest). When necessary, some rewrote their laws to qualify: they loosened or repealed limits on the number of charter schools allowed; they permitted teacher and principal evaluations based on test scores. But they still faced the immense tasks of designing a proposal that touched on all aspects of K–12 education and then writing an application, which the DOE requested (but did not require) be limited to 350 pages. What state has resources to gamble on such a venture? Enter the Gates Foundation. It reviewed the prospects for reform in every state, picked fifteen favorites, and, in July 2009, offered each up to $250,000 to hire consultants to write the application. Gates even prepared a list of recommended consulting firms. Understandably, the other states cried foul; so did the National Conference of State Legislatures: Gates was giving some states an unfair advantage; it was, in effect, picking winners and losers for a government program.

Colorado knows how to fund charters and Tennessee has license to spend.

This appears to have been the manner in which the Colorado team was assembled:

Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper knows Colorado Senator Michael Bennett from the time Hickenlooper was Denver mayor and Bennett was his Chief of Staff.

Bennett was subsequently appointed as Superintendent of Schools to the Denver system, where he implemented that merit pay system for teachers in 2005.

Denver's current Superintendent of Schools, Tom Boasberg, is the TFA grad I mentioned earlier, who is apparently poised to take "education reform" to the next level in Denver.

We are aware, of course, of new Tennessee Education Commissioner Kevin Huffman's connection to TFA as one of their grads, too.

It isn't readily apparent whether Huffman and Bennett are already acquainted, but possibly?

Back to Bennett, though: It's worth noting that he was previously a contender for Arne Duncan's job, which I personally didn't even recall.

As to other likely associations between Colorado's team members and Duncan's staff already in place within the federal Department of Education, I think I may have previously copied this lengthy list of Gates/Broad staffers already on the payroll in Duncan's office (also detailed in that "Got Dough?" article, page 7):

Within weeks, Duncan had integrated the DOE into the network of revolving-door job placement that includes the staffs of Gates, Broad, and all the thinks tanks, advocacy groups, school management organizations, training programs, and school districts that they fund. Here’s a quick look at top executives in the DOE: Duncan’s first chief of staff, Margot Rogers, came from Gates; her replacement as of June 2010, Joanne Weiss, came from a major Gates grantee, the New Schools Venture Fund; Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Russlynn Ali has worked at Broad, LA Unified School District and the Gates-funded Education Trust; general counsel Charles P. Rose was a founding board member of another major Gates grantee, Advance Illinois; and Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement James Shelton has worked at both Gates and the New Schools Venture Fund. Duncan himself served on the board of directors of Broad’s education division until February 2009 (as did former treasury secretary Larry Summers).

In any event, this Colorado team appears to have been in the making long before we were aware of it.

The federal "task force," too, appears to have been assembled long before it was announced--and their "findings" I think we can predict with great certainty.

In Nashville, Mayor Karl Dean welcomed 110 TFA recruits into its metro school system this year.

In Memphis, TFA has 150 troops on the ground, bought and paid for by the J. R. Hyde III Foundation.

As to the Hyde Family Foundations, it was the late J. R. Hyde II, founder of Malone & Hyde, now the nation's third largest wholesale food distributorship, who created the first foundation in 1961. It still exists as The J. R. Hyde Sr. Family Foundation and his son J. R. Hyde III now serves as its president.

The son, J. R. Hyde III, went on to found the 3200-store AutoZone chain. In 1992, he created a second foundation, the J. R. Hyde III Family Foundation.

According to their website, the focus of both foundations is "education and faith-based initiatives." Among their grantees are Teach for America, KIPP Memphis, KIPP Diamond Academy, the Tennessee Charter Schools Associaion, numerous charter schools directly, and the (former) Memphis City Schools system.

...two more Broad-ies in the KCS Central Office, that is, brought to us via a $3.6 million grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Per the Broad Foundation's September 8, 2010 press release announcing Residents placed this school year, the Broad Residents program takes two years, during which time its Residents work within both our publc school systems and any of nine charter school management organizations (including KIPP) scattered throughout the U. S.

Broad is paying 50% of each Resident’s salary the first year, and 25% the second year, with the partner organization paying the balance, "except where a Resident is already employed by that organization."

All Broad Residents "come from leading business and law schools" and bring "an average of 10 years of experience, typically from a Fortune 500 or other major company," the press release indicates.

Accordingly:

Ginnae Harley, our new Deputy Director of Federal Programs, brings to her task an MBA from Washington University and her work experience as a brand manager with Taco Bell and product manager with Pfizer.

T. Nakia Towns, our new Director of Human Capital Strategy, brings to her task an MBA from Duke University and her experience as a VP with Wachovia Bank and "associate in debt capital markets" for Bank of America.

I learned of our infiltration just this morning, in my search of the KCS site, as I had apparently missed the following three-paragraph mention (which doesn't mention charter schools) the News-Sentinel placed in its Text Me section for teens on September 28, 2010, as follows:

Knox County Schools receive Residents

The Broad Center for the Management of School Systems announced that two career executives have been accepted into The Broad Residency in Urban Education to lend their management expertise for the next two years to improving public education in Knoxville.

Ginnae Harley and T. Nakia Towns are the first "Broad Residents" to work in Knox County Schools, where they will improve operations so that critical resources can be effectively used to support teachers and students.

The Broad Residency is a management development program that places executives with private and civic sector experience and advanced degrees from top business, public policy and law schools into two-year positions at the top levels of urban school districts, state and federal departments of education and leading charter management organizations. Broad Residents work to improve central office management practices so that more money reaches the classroom, teachers receive effective support and students receive a quality education.

For more information, visit (link...).

Alrighty, then.

From KCS's "Local System Scope of Work" relating to its RttT monies, this clause is positioned over the form's signature line allocated for our superintendent:

I understand that recurring costs that can be paid
from current level LEA funding do not require a funding agency sign off.

Similarly, this clause is positioned over the form's signature line allocated for the chair of our "local funding agency," presumably our county commission chair:

On behalf of the funding agency for the Board of Education, I affirm that the funding agency is aware that "Scope of Work" for use of funds generated by the "Race to the Top" grant creates recurring costs beyond the four-year scope of the grant and that they acknowledge that these costs will become the responsibility of the local funding body.

As to the clause over the superintendent's signature line, am I to understand that it means commision need not approve any contracts resulting from KCS's implementation of RttT monies?

As to the clause over the "local funding agency's" signature line, I see that it addresses the manner in which commission may consider future budget requests from KCS, but should I also interpret that the "local funding agency" implicitly agrees, too, to forfeit its usual right to approve any KCS contracts relating to the grant's implementation?

I ask because it was my understanding that--under state law--commission must approve contracts exceeding a certain dollar amount, around $100K, I vaugely remembered?

Anybody?

Damn, y'all are scaring me. I had no idea of the depth and breadth of this massive campaign to end public education.

I see that I refered to KIPP in an earlier post as a "private entity," by which I meant only to distinguish them from any department acting as part of any public school system.

However, isn't it the case (jcgrim or Stick) that KIPP is a non-profit, not a for-profit corporation? And these big foundations, in fact, appear to be doing a lot more spending than receiving?

Threfore, I'm not necessarily aware just yet of how either these big foundations or their non-profit grantees may be padding their pockets.

Until we can confirm, I'll confine my objection soley to the stealth manner in which these multiple foundations have been working to supplement and supplant our public school system administrators with their corporate trolls, all with an eye toward affecting major public policy changes sans the public's involvement or even our knowledge--and that's plenty enough for now to tick me off.

Yes, using the on-line Guidestar service to investigate non-profits, I was able to key in the list of charter school management organizations with whom the Broad Residency Program works to determine that all of those, including KIPP, are non-profits, as follows:

Acheivement First, New York:
577 locations nationally
(incl 11 in TN)

Alliance for College-Ready Public Schools, Los Angeles:
5 locations nationally

Aspire Public Schools, Oakland:
69 locations nationally
(incl 2 in TN)

Green Dot Public Schools, Los Angeles:
4 locations nationally

KIPP, Houston:
180 locations nationally
(incl 1 in TN)

LEARN Charter School, Chicago:
140 locations nationally
(incl 1 in TN)

New Schools for New Orleans, New Orleans:
225 locations nationally
(incl 3 in TN)

The College-Ready Promise, Los Anglees:
1 location nationally

Uncommon Schools, New York:
25 locations nationally

I suppose it's a given that a foundation would work only with non-profits? I confess I haven't a clue how this stuff works...

What, then, are we to do with this information? What assurance, if any, are we afforded by learning that these organizations are non-profits rather than for-profits?

(Disclaimer: I didn't open a one of the IRS Form 990s for these non-profits at Guidestar's site, much less pore over any of them...)

I didn't mean to sound condescending--I'm just a bit grumpy today and I didn't want to sound grumpy toward you

:-(

In this question of whether a "sponsor" (aka "charter management organization") in Tennessee can or can not be a private corporation, here's what the Tennessee Public Charter Schools Act of 2002 says in defining a "sponsor":

At TCA 49-13-104--

(7) “Sponsor” means any individual, group, or other organization filing an application in support of the establishment of a public charter school; provided, however, that a sponsor cannot be a for-profit entity, a private elementary or secondary school, a post-secondary institution not accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, a religious or church school or promote the agenda of any religious denomination or religiously affiliated entity.

However, the very next statute outlines the manner in which any of that instruction may be waived, and by whom:

At TCA 49-13-105--

(b) Except where waivers are otherwise prohibited in this chapter, the sponsor of a proposed public charter school may apply to either the LEA or to the commissioner of education for a waiver of any state board rule or statute that inhibits or hinders the proposed charter school's ability to meets its goals or comply with its mission statement. Neither the LEA nor the commissioner shall waive regulatory or statutory requirements related to:

(1) Federal and state civil rights;

(2) Federal, state, and local health and safety;

(3) Federal and state public records;

(4) Immunizations;

(5) Possession of weapons on school grounds;

(6) Background checks and fingerprinting of personnel;

(7) Federal and state special education services;

(8) Student due process;

(9) Parental rights;

(10) Federal and state student assessment and accountability;

(11) Open meetings; and

(12) At least the same equivalent time of instruction as required in regular public schools.

I read that a sponsor must be a non-profit entity, but certain waivers are allowable by the Education Commissioner?

And a waiver of the statuatory requirement that a sponsor be a non-profit is not a requirement on the list of requirements the Education Commissioner is specifically forbidden to waive?

So a sponsor could potentially be a for-profit entity, if waived?

And Teach for America's Kevin Huffman is the state's new gatekeeper?

Is this your understanding? Anybody?

Edit: Forgot your link to Michies Legal Resources at
(link...))

A friend sends the IRS Form 990 for Teach for America for 2008 (fiscal year ending 9/30/09), here.

On page 1 of the 53-page pdf file, I note TFA has 4167 employees and 4075 volunteers.

On page 9, TFA's Statement of Revenue indicates total revenue of $251,515,886 including $33,632,832 in government grants (which makes for about 13 1/2% of total revenue coming from government grants).

On page 11, I note TFA's total assets are $305,981,521, its total liabilities are $44,524,599, making for its fund balance of $261,456,922. Fat and happy, huh?

Here's what caught my eye, though...

On page 42, TFA attaches its supporting Schedule O to document the Form 990's Part III, Line 4D, on which it outlines "Other Program Service Accomplishments." Text on that supporting schedule reads as follows:

Teach for America has an alumni base of former corps members all over the country. These individuals present a powerful opportunity to continue to impact the education community through management and government positions. In recognition of the importance of its alumni base, TFA has increased its alumni budget.

Then on page 51, I note TFA's Alumni Affairs Expense for the reporting year at $10,009,941.

How, exactly, does TFA "recognize" its alumni base, especially its alumni base in "government positions?"

For this reporting year, should we conclude that its alumni were "recognized" using this ten million expensed to "Alumni Affairs?"

What are these "affairs?"

Again, anybody?

Looks like Colorado is still filling some holes in their "education reform" team at the state level.

They're presently recruiting for a new Colorado Commissioner of Education who must demonstrate "support for school choice," as well as a "willingness to engage in finding alternative models for funding public education," per criteria reported by the "headhunter."

That same "headhunter," Bill Attea with Hazard, Young, Attea and Associates, is also working now to find district-level superintendents in three other Colorado school districts in Boulder, Frisco, and Telluride.

Attea's Colorado clients represent four of his 25 clients now seeking to fill cheif executive vacancies.

Also, Bill Attea previously placed Dr. Jim Scales as superintendent in Chattanooga's Hamilton County school system (in 2006) and Dr. Jesse Register in Nashville's Metro school system (in 2010).

(That may or may not mean anything, since I understand only a few firms specializing in school superintendent searches exist nationwide.)

More significant, though, is Register's recent placement in Metro Nashville, as he worked just prior to that as Senior Advisor for District Leadership with the Annenberg Institute for School Reform, another big Gates grantee.

Last August, Annenberg announced a $3 million grant from the Gates Foundation to "help school districts keep more students on track for high school graduation."

By December, Register announced that Metro Nashville would partner with Annenberg in a system-wide reform effort known as "MNPS Achieves."

Whatever you say, Bill.

William Cronon has put together an excellent resource for those interested in how a wave of similar legislation is sweeping across state houses at the same time. It's well worth your time...

One more thing. Does anyone know if parent trigger laws are being introduced in the TN leg? Parent trigger laws allow parents to submit petitions against their children's public school. If a certain percentage of parents sign, the petition triggers actions to dismantle the school- fire administrators and teachers, turn it over to a charter company or shut it down.

Who supports parent trigger laws you ask? Charter school companies. Green Dot Charter in California appears to be affiliated with Parent Revolution, an astro-turf organization that has been involved in underhanded, deceitful petition signing campaigns. According to Caroline Grannan of the SF Examiner (a reporter who practices actual journalism)Parent Revolution employees tricked parents into signing petitions that turned over two public schools to Green Dot charters. Green Dot had previously identified the targeted schools as "failing". Currently, PR is targeting 5 more schools in CA. Here's the source:

(link...)

Randy shared Corker's (unintelligible) quote (Thursday at 8:25 pm):

"Mayors have a unique insight into education," said Corker, R-Tenn. "Mayors have a unique insight into some of the challenges that, especially, students who don't come from families that don't really nurture them into education, have."

jcgrim said (Saturday at 12:36 pm):

"Murdock just hired former chancellor of NYC Joe Klien to run Wireless Gen. Klien worked in tandem with Bloomberg when he took over mayoral control of NYCity Schools."

Yes, this is a subject that hasn't yet been vetted on this thread, namely Gates' disdain for school boards and penchant for mayoral control of schools (so Randy, I suspect that Corker wasn't necessarily singing Haslam's praises in that quote, so much as he was just laying groundwork for changes he, too, hopes to see up the pike).

On the subject of mayoral control, Gates has said:

"You want to allow for experimentation. The cities where our foundation has put the most money is where there is a single person responsible. In New York, Chicago and Washington, DC, the mayor has the responsibility for the school system," Gates said during a CNN appearance.

In their effort to place NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg at the helm of that district, both Gates and Eli Broad pumped millions in Learn-NY, the organization that succeded in changing NY's law.

Gates, in fact, gave $4 million out of his own pocket, rather than through his foundation.

(There's lots more on that battle in the archives at The New York Post, although, ironically, The Post was a strong ally to Gates/Broad/Learn-NY throughout the campaign.)

Funny (in a droll kinda way) Murdock/Klein/Cerf/RttT/Broad Foundation/"Very-Important-People-Who-Care-About-Kids" diagram there, jc!

If you haven't seen it already, you really should read Tennessee's RttT application.

Meanwhile, some highlights as to our "reform agenda" are itemized below:

--From page 16 of the pdf file, Governor Bredesen assures (Bill Gates' and Eli Broad's) DOE interviewers he's aware that "value-added data indicate recruits from (Bill Gates' and Eli Broad's) Teach For America, which exists in Tennessee and plans to expand, are outperforming other teachers."

--In pages 17 and 18 of the pdf file, Bredesen previews that Tennessee's app will "describe how the atmosphere in the state...opens the education market to (Bill Gates' and Eli Broad's) charter schools and alternative licensure providers." and also "enables partnerships with (Bill Gates' and Eli Broad's) respected local and national non-profit organizations."

Well, you get the idea. Trudge through the whole 264 pages if you care to.

You may also want to look over (Bill Gate's and Eli Broad's) DOE interviewers' comments on Tennessee's RttT app, at page 4 of 47 in the pdf file. There, you'll learn that (Bill Gates' and Eli Broad's) DOE interviewers were glad to learn Memphis has some "interesting ideas" for alternative salary schedules, which they'll implement using a $90 million (yes, $90 million) grant from the Bill Gates Foundation.

Oh...and here's our (and Bill Gates' and Eli Broad's) representative from Knox County, Dr. Jim McIntyre, on the far left making Tennessee's RttT pitch to (other of Bill Gates' and Eli Broad's) representatives in the DOE.

You really should review the application's Memoranda of Understanding from affected parties like unions, as well as a couple of Letters of Support from our (and Bill Gates' and Eli Broad's) friends at TFA and KIPP, but I haven't yet dug those back up. If you've the time, maybe you'd care to?

American Federation of Children, empowering parents with choice, freedom and rainbows.

Schools need better security, also. Betsy Devos' brother founded Blackwater.

I posted earlier in this thread that Colorado was motivated to adopt "education reform" after losing out in the first round of the RttT competition?

Well, they lost out in the second round, too, it appears--after the state's teachers' union failed to sign on at all.

The union had done so grudgingly in the first round, but balked in the second round due to the Colorado legislature having tried to bolster their standing with the DOE by passing "some of the toughest teacher tenure reform legislation in the nation and adopting national academic standards."

On that point, I found Senator King's comments insightful, here:

Sen. Keith King, R-Colorado Springs, called Colorado’s participation in the Race to the Top competition a “foolish gamble that has left Colorado wedded to unknown national education standards without any financial benefits whatsoever.”

King is referring to the Colorado Board of Education’s controversial adoption of national education standards in language arts and math earlier this month. Critics say the board’s 4-3 decision to adopt the Common Core Standards will erode local control over education, setting the stage for a national curriculum.

“Colorado education standards should never have been compromised in the pursuit of one-time federal funding,” said King. “Education standards should be based on the needs of our students and local school districts, not the desires of bureaucrats in Washington.”

Federal education officials offered 20 points out of a 500-point scoring system for the Race to the Top competition if states adopted the national standards.

I'd imagined that Repubs nationwide were solidly behind the DOE's "reform" agenda, but maybe not? Maybe, particularly among the 35 states losing out in the RttT competition, we'll see some pushback, some objections to the erosion of local control inherent in the DOE's agenda?

Last month, Education Week reported on a follow-up study conducted by the Washington-based Center on Education Policy to the effect that among the 35 RttT "losers," 16 states will fulfill their "reform" promises sans this federal money, but 12 other states don't know whether they'll follow through with "reform" at all (the article doesn't comment on the inclinations of those other 7 states, whose inclusion would make for the remaining 35 "losers").

Meanwhile, the Ed Week story also reports that since the RttT competition ended, Gates and TFA both have extended more grant money to "losers" still intent on enacting "reform."

Ultimately, the success or failure of the DOE's agenda may come down to just how deep Gates' and Broads' pockets prove to be?

I suggested:

Ultimately, the success or failure of the DOE's agenda may come down to just how deep Gates' and Broads' pockets prove to be?

OK, that thought was painfully naive.

On the heels of that very private dinner party the Gates' hosted for most of the nation's billionaires about a year back:

Eli Broad and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg backed an initiative started by fellow billionaires Warren Buffett and Bill and Melinda Gates for rich Americans to give at least half of their wealth to charity.

Broad, former chairman of insurer SunAmerica Inc. and founder of homebuilder KB Home, joined his wife, Edythe, yesterday in pledging to give 75 percent of their wealth to philanthropic causes.

And Gates' own pockets also grow deeper following this development:

Buffett has promised to donate more than 99 percent of his wealth. The greatest part of his fortune, estimated in March at $47 billion by Forbes Magazine, is being provided in annual installments to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Bill Gates, 54, the co-founder of Microsoft Corp., is the world’s second-richest person. The Gates Foundation’s goals include the reduction of poverty and disease and the improvement of U.S. education.

Game-set-match, The Billionaires Club.

Oh--and I came across Teach First (in the UK) and Teach for All (worldwide), too.

At Teach for All, the CEO for Visa and the Chairman of Asset Management for Goldman-Sachs sit on the board.

There's something called Synergies in Canada that's connected somehow, but the link to the site didn't work for me.

Last August, the president of the Hyde Family Foundations expressed her relief that Teach for America's "perception" of Memphis had recently changed:

(Barbara) Hyde says when the foundation first approached Teach for America about coming to Memphis, it had to sell MCS as a viable option. Since MCS has received $90 million from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation that will be used to study teacher retention and effectiveness and $70 million from the federal Race to the Top program in the last year, perception has changed dramatically.

“When we first spoke to (Teach for America founder) Wendy Kopp, she said they only came to cities where they felt the conditions for success existed and at the time they weren’t convinced those conditions existed in Memphis,” Hyde says. “Since then, Tennessee has emerged as a state on the forefront of education reform. Having them come to Memphis was a sign we were ready to move in a more progressive direction.”

The kids served by the (former) Memphis City Schools system are essentially the same kids AFTER that $90 million foundation grant from Gates and that $70 million RttT grant through Gates as they were BEFORE the grants were extended.

So this sounds to me like Kopp's admission that TFA wouldn't touch Memphis with a ten foot pole unless her organization got $160 million more to do the job than Memphis City Schools customarily gets.

I guess that would change her "perception."

I reported previously:

(Colorado is) presently recruiting for a new Colorado Commissioner of Education who must demonstrate "support for school choice," as well as a "willingness to engage in finding alternative models for funding public education," per criteria reported by the headhunter.

That same headhunter, Bill Attea with Hazard, Young, Attea and Associates, is also working now to find district-level superintendents in three other Colorado school districts in Boulder, Frisco, and Telluride.

And I reported:

Also, Bill Attea previously placed Dr. Jim Scales as superintendent in Chattanooga's Hamilton County school system (in 2006) and Dr. Jesse Register in Nashville's Metro school system (in 2010).

Confirmed: Hazard, Young, Attea and Associates is the other headhunter--along with Ray and Associates, who delivered Dr. Jim McIntyre to Knox County--working with the Broad Foundation.

See Attea employees Jerry Chapman and Marvin Edwards listed as guest lecturers for Broad's Superintendent Academy, here.

Stick said (Fri., 3/18 at 4:43 pm):

KIPP is a non-profit organization. Right now, the big game in charter school land is real estate. The next one will be virtual learning and software...

I notice the for-profit Edison Learning (formerly The Edison Project charter schools) is recruiting for a Software Support Specialist to work in Knoxville, Tennessee.

Any idea what that's about?

...to the poor education our public schools achieved. So let me enjoy participating.

KCS did approve a charter school. But golly-gee, it is 100% owned by a foundation that is owned by the Islamic Gulen movement from Turkey. It took less than 5 minutes to Google to see what a great decision this was.

I think that the basis of any decision needs to focus on the fact that our public education system slipped to 32nd to 48th place internationally, and that is where the competition. If we do not reverse this poor level of performance, our children will be arguing the merits of Gates, billionairs, charter schools on the street corners in front of a fire, because they are likely to be jobless. This is the first priority to fix.

Charter schools have had mixed results for almost 20 years but improved. I would certainly prefer Kipp to the Gulen movement, whose approval reflects surprising lack of comprehension.

McIntyre was hired by the majority of elected brains to the school board, and did not even manage a school before, let alone a large school district. he managed support services for the Boston school district. It is a heck of a lot different to manage an 8000 staff/$380 million dollar organization, that is to produce results.

You think that education experience is the most important thing at management level of that size? It is not. Do employers of especially large employers know how good or bad the output of our schools are? Better than anyone else. They are the customer for what the school creates.

This scheme of elected Boards selecting superintendents for a huge management job has not worked to date. I can tell you that it is extremely difficult and expensive to turn around and badly performing organization with a large, entrenched central management team. The best solution is to introduce competition who are likely to do better. Not Gulen. That is what the charter school movement is all about. Charter schools or any other non-public schools, or public schools for that matter, should not be kept around forever if they do a poor job. We do not have that luxury. We do not have the money or time for that.

I can also tell you that if you were put into a position to turn around a poorly performing large organization, there must be change in leadership, goals, and especially operating plans with focus on quality and qualifications in every management job.

They are not doing one thing that I would do first. When you are not doing so well, you better look at your top three competitors, and find out how they are so successful, before you do anything else. For primary and secondary education, Finland, Hong Kong and Canada would be great choices. I tried it and all are very open to provide what anyone needs. Our district or state was not interested in that, and it took me only a few hours to find some key differences that any district could adopt.

So don't just complain. People are not perfect. Instead, suggest solutions, and let your politicians, governors and feds know. I can tell you that people in DC are very concerned about turning this bad situation around. I hope that Haslam realizes it too as he says, and believe he does until I see otherwise.

...for my typos.

You and your husband obviously have done a wonderful job to motivate your kids. What school did they attend?

I agree that poverty and its effects uncountered, is one of the contributors to worse school performance.

I agree with you about teachers and I support them.

We have a different view of our district's education of our children, with the exception of a handful of schools, and our district's central management. We can agree to disagree without any sarcastic remarks.

Could you tell us please, what solution you see to resolve the poverty difference, and how it should be financed?

How much improvement do you think your solution would bring about?

Why do you think our national debt is growing so fast, and why do we see so many imports dominating virtually any industry in the US, but our exports have progressively declined? Is this question unimportant for our country and state?

What are you proposing exactly to "compensate the poverty impact" on low performing children?

Short answer: End the conditions that create poverty. Predatory businesses need to take some responsibility for the poverty in communities. They lobby against tax increase, leverage their influence to eliminate workers protections, refuse to pay pensions or health insurance to part time and low wage earners. Their practices created the impoverished conditions in communities that contribute to student school failure. Poor people don't lobby their elected officials to keep their shareholders happy.

Developmental effects of poverty take hold long before children start preschool. Children's intellectual development is substantially compromised by the effects of poverty from birth and continues to decline during the first 5 years of life in the absence of early intervention.(Guralnick, 2005). Schools alone cannot make up for the substantial impact on development in those early years.

Read that again: the declines in intellectual development begins at birth and declines for poor children before they reach school age. The amount of developmental growth between birth and 5 years is proportional to the developmental growth from age 5 to 50 yrs. Positing that the first 5 years of life as critical for future development is an understatement. Research on developmental effects on infants from poverty is substantial:

From:Guralnick,M. (2005). Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 18, 313–324.

As noted earlier, these factors are often so problematic that they are quite capable of producing substantial declines in children’s intellectual development. Poverty, particularly if it occurs during a child’s early years and is chronic and pervasive, can clearly produce adverse child developmental outcomes of considerable magnitude (McLoyd 1990; Duncan et al. 1994; Yeung et al. 2002).

...the greater the number of these family environmental risk factors, the larger the negative impact on children’s intellectual development (Sameroff etal. 1987; Liaw & Brooks-Gunn 1994;2005;Burchinal et al. 2000; Belsky & Fearon 2002).

Extending my argument that business practices contribute to poverty note this example of mandated cruelty. TN in a public/private partnership, has essentially decimated a previously robust early intervention (EI) system for at-risk infants and toddlers. The new contractors fired all 40 interventionists and rehired 15 to handle the same caseload of infants previously managed by 40 IE teachers. The private managers cut their hourly wages and forced them all to work only part-time.

Schools will soon be serving these children who have been unnecessarily compromised by economic Darwinsim. It's time we held corporations accountable for their decisions. We should tie CEO compensation and bonuses to yearly declines in the poverty rates. That is a solution to the "poverty impact."

icgrim, well done. Actually maternal behavior impacts brain and other neurological development starting 3-4 months prior to conception. Drug, alcohol use and malnutrition will do it along with maternal exposure to lead, mercury and other heavy metals. Some of these are more poverty issues than not. A normal newborn has about 99% of the braincells for life. It is the interconnections among these spells that start forming rapidly, also influenced by the previous factors, plus the people's behavior around the young child. The great majority of these interconnections define personality, ability and so on and as you said most of it is set by age 5-6, but these interconnections change and develop at a much lower rate thereafter. They can change if not reinforced, with a lesser impact after age 6. That is what is behind your references, and as I said before if the above influencing factors are there as a result of poverty, they will contribute to mental and neurological disorders that present in some form learning issues, as well as genetics.

We can blame companies all we want, but we cannot change them. Some may be like you said, but they certainly cannot exist without being able to make money, because that is followed by unemployment. If you have a fix for that, you let me know.

In my opinion, there is something we could do. Providing both breakfast and lunch to ALL kids, and addional tutoring or class time for low performers, as well as Saturday classes for them. There is approximately $20 million or a little more and central admin that could be used by the schools, and I am sure we could close any gaps with volunteers and fundraising.

When the economy gets better, our income will improve, but I feel strongly about two things:

Get rid of overhead.

Produce much better educational achievement by having such a measurable goal on every school, and an operating plan to achieve it.

These could be changed. But dreaming about things that are not likely to change, and just complaining about it will not resolve the problem.

In my opinion, increasing a welfare type of program will change little if any. But ensuring sound meals, and more time in the learning environment would do better.

Just my opinion man.

Sorry for typos AGAIN!