Oppression of public schools

[Peter Farruggio <pfarr@cal.berkeley.edu>]

The crony capitalist side of NCLB.  To paraphrase 
George Carlin, American business is based on the 
packaging and selling of bullcrap



> From: "taunarogers" <taunar@plateautel.net>



> Yesterday, I paid my first visit to the website of the EIA
> (Education Industry Association), the "premier organization of
> education entrepreneurs". Their Memorandum of Agreement for 2006-
> 2007 for the "Campaign to Support Quality Tutoring for America's
> Students" caught my attention. They are of course presenting
> themselves in appealing language as "voices for our nation's
> economically disadvantaged students" and referring to SES services
> as the "civil rights" of parents and their children to federally
> funded tutoring under NCLB. And it is oh so much more about money
> and greed than helping these kids. Among their campaign activities
> for 2006-2007 are to:
>
> 1). Brand the Campaign for Quality Tutoring for America's Students
> as the collective national voice for unfettered access by students
> to SES services and for fair-play between providers and school
> districts?
>
> 2). Monitor state and local implementation of SES, identifying areas
> of non-compliance and engaging appropriate local, state and federal
> officials to correct policies inconsistent with NCLB?
>
> 3). Continue a three-pronged media outreach campaign: (1) to expose
> objectionable district or state actions (or inactions); (2) to
> spotlight SES success stories in districts that are managing the
> programs well, and (3) to monitor news media coverage of SES
> nationwide and to follow-up and/or respond to stories accordingly.
> Conduct proactive media strategies to support advocacy and
> government relations goals of the campaign, and continue to position
> EIA as the national spokesperson for the Campaign.
>
> Now, don't school districts themselves have to pay for this
> tutoring? It seems to me that under the heavy-handed policies of
> NCLB, public schools are in essence being asked to pay for and
> facilitate their own destruction. And in so doing, open up to these
> vultures what is in their own words "rapidly becoming a $1 trillion
> industry, representing 10% of America's GNP". Our policymakers have
> prostituted themselves to corporate influence peddling and are
> allowing our country to be taken over by corporations. The DOE
> should exist to support public schools, not to facilitate their
> destruction. Reprehensible is not too strong a term to describe the
> oppressive actions of this administration in dangling the scent of
> badly needed education funds under the noses of cash-strapped states
> and school districts, yet denying them that money unless they agree
> to implement unproven high-stakes testing policies which harm
> children and lead to the destruction of their schools. And don't
> these oppressive tactics bear resemblance to extortion and bribery
> with their improper pressure? I know they won't meet the strict
> legal definitions of such but the actions are no less despicable.
> And Jerry, you were so right to advise states to "Just Say No" to
> NCLB. But like it or not, states DIDN'T say no and we are now in the
> vise grip of NCLB's jaws. In the long run, until NCLB can be
> changed or repealed, it's better for states to just forego this
> tainted money.
>
> I'll close with a question for consideration. When we who are
> dissenters appeal to our state representatives, legislators and
> governors, is it better to advocate for a massive overhaul of NCLB
> or outright repeal of it? Realistically, I'm assuming we'll have to
> go with advocating for changes in the law? But from a moral
> standpoint repeal is, in my view, entirely justified. Anyway, the
> privatizers have access to and great influence with the Congress.
> Somehow, we who disagree have got to get our collective voices to
> Congress also.
>
> Tauna