Another super-mugging? NY State Education Department to award $27 no-bid contract to Joel Klein and Rupert Murdoch

From Rachel Monahan of the Daily News comes the startling announcement that the NY State Education Department is about to award a $27 million no-bid contract to Wireless Generation to develop a statewide student data system, and has apparently been granted a waiver by the NY state Comptroller to do so.  

Wireless, which received several no-bid contracts from DOE, is now run by ex-Chancellor Joel Klein and owned by Rupert Murdoch’s NewsCorp. 

Why did the state argue for this contract?  On the basis of Wireless’ record in developing ARIS, NYC’s much criticized $80 million data system.

Recently, Lindsey Christ of NY1 in an award-winning three-part series pointed out the glaring deficiencies of ARIS and the far superior data system developed by NYC teachers for relative pennies.  

Last  fall, Gotham Schools did a similar expose;  we featured critical observations from a teacher about the inadequacies of the system back in 2008.

The hi-tech community recognized  it a huge boondoggle and a “super mugging” when the no-bid contract was first announced in 2007.

Already, the state’s intention to grant this contract to Klein et. al. has been criticized by Susan Lerner of Common Cause: "It just smacks of an old-boys club, where large amounts of public money are spent based not on 'is this the best product?'  E.D. Kain  of Forbes writes that the decision “reeks of cronyism.”

In support of their request, SED claims that Wireless has received “national recognition from Arne Duncan.”  Of course, Duncan has also called Joel Klein, who stands to benefit financially from the deal, “a good, good friend of mine.”

The letter also reveals that the Gates Foundation, which pushed data systems and testing as part of "Race to the Top", has also selected Wireless to “build its national Shared Learning Infrastructure,”  in what is likely to prove a generous windfall for Joel Klein and Rupert Murdoch.

The SED letter requesting the waiver claims that Wireless has invested “significant time and resources in end-user research with NYC DOE educators to determine the ideal ways to display information for educators to engage in data-driven instruction…[including] focus groups of educators and administrators.” 

If so, they obviously learned nothing from any of these focus groups, as most teachers report the system is nearly worthless.  The SED letter also claims that parent find ARIS useful, while  I’ve heard mostly complaints that the system contains little more than their children’s test scores and attendance.

SED adds: “Wireless has “developed the vocabulary used throughout NY for student classification and demographic information” and, for example, “understands what ‘ELL’ (English Language Learner) means..” Wow! That should be worth a cool million there.

Finally, “New York is well aware of the risks of large-scale technology projects that to [sic] tend to run over budget, behind schedule and be under-whelming when delivered.”  Which is a perfect description of ARIS.

It is surprising that NY State Comptroller Di Napoli would provide this waiver after his 2009 audit, exposing DOE’s abuse of the no-bid contract process.  These are precious funds that should be used to benefit children, rather than line the pockets of Joel Klein and Rupert Murdoch.

Who's striking out and who's sliding home?

Check out the presentation of the "Media Bullpen", the new project of the pro-charter school organization, Center for Education Reform, funded by Gates, along with the right-wing Bradley and Walton Family Foundations, which will grade reporters and news articles as to whether they accept their pro-privatization, pro-testing spin.





"The media bullpen is setting out to change the way the media covers education reform...Holding the media accountable; Changing covering of education reform; Driving smart legislation."

Apparently Gates is not satisfied with buying up most of the DC think tanks, funding fake "parent groups" like Stand for Children, and the new Michelle Rhee organization, Students First, to push for even more damaging policies on the state and national level.


He managed to control several days of coverage by NBC and MSNBC, by co-sponsoring the propaganda extravaganza, Education Nation, and supporting and promoting the film "Waiting for Superman."

But that's not enough. Now he also apparently wants to control all the media's coverage of these issues.

I think this is kind of scary. What do you think?

Gates-funded project leaves parents off the list of key stakeholders, once again

The research organization AIR was funded by the Gates Foundation to commission a series of papers on the Bloomberg/Klein education reforms, and to “convene a working conference….to inform future educational improvement efforts in the city.”

Reportedly, the papers will be published in a collection by Harvard University Press.

On November 10, they are holding an “invitation-only” forum at the downtown Hyatt hotel to discuss the results of their findings in what has been described as “an opportunity for dialogue and conversation among NYC stakeholders, DOE staff, and researchers…” (see invitation below.)

Yet the only NYC public school parents who have been invited to participate in this “dialogue and conversation” of stakeholders are the five borough-appointed members of the Panel for Educational Policy.

This exclusion of parents is reminiscent of the definition of stakeholders put forward by Secretary Arne Duncan and Joanne Weiss, when she ran the federal “Race to the Top” program (both of them former Gates grantees as well).

In their list of “key stakeholders”, they included education administrators, the teachers union, the business community and charter school operators, but not public school parents, as those groups that states were supposed to elicit support for their proposals. (They put in parents in afterwards, and only pro forma, after receiving negative feedback.)

Here is what Patrick Sullivan wrote in his comments to the US Education Department at the time:

One factor considered in awarding the grants to each state is the extent to which support and commitment of key stakeholders is enlisted (Overall Selection Criteria E3). While the administration has a long list of stakeholders, parents are not on it. Charter schools, teachers unions and foundations are deemed to be important stakeholders but not parents.

For this conference, once again, the concept of stakeholders appears to exclude public school parents and their children, who have been most affected and disenfranchised by the policies of this administration.

Parents aren’t even at the bottom of the list. In fact, they don’t exist at all.

On Oct 26, 2010, at 4:00 PM, nycretrospective <nycretrospective@air.org> wrote:

Dear all,

I just wanted to remind you of the conference invitation attached. The meeting will take place in two weeks (November 10th) and will be an opportunity for dialogue and conversation among NYC stakeholders, DOE staff, and researchers from inside and outside NYC about the findings of the NYC Education Reform Retrospective project. This is an invitation only conference and has been designed to offer an intimate venue for sharing ideas and considering implications for reform efforts in NYC and elsewhere. You have been invited based on your involvement in the NYC education reforms or your relevant research or practical experience. We hope that you will be able to join us and contribute to this discussion.

We have extended the RSVP and registration date to November 1st.

If you plan to attend, please fill out the attached registration form and e-mail it back to nycretrospective@air.org by November 1st.

If you are unable to join us, please reply to nycretrospective@air.org by November 1st to say you will not be attending.

We look forward to seeing you in NYC on the 10th!

Jennifer O'Day, Project Director for the New York City Education Reform Retrospective

Bob Hughes, announced as member of NY's "Race to the Top" team and criticized by the EEOC the same day

According to Gotham Schools, Bob Hughes of New Visions will be part of the NY State team to appear before the panel of judges to determine the federal “Race to the Top” awards.

As EdWeek puts it, "How a state’s delegation performs in a 30-minute presentation and a 60-minute question-and-answer session with a panel of judges could make or break its chances in round one of the competition.”

This dog and pony show, which might be likened to “American Idol”, is a function of the politicization of these grants, which should be honestly won or lost on the basis of substance alone.

Unmentioned in the Gotham Schools are Hughes’ close ties to the Gates Foundation, which financed many of the small schools in NYC through his organization as an intermediary.

Some have said that the Gates Foundation is really the power behind the throne in determining who wins these awards – as well as many of the pro-privatization policies being pushed by the US Dept. of Education; the foundation also helped states write their RTTT applications.

The woman who head’s the RTTT program at the US Dept of Ed, Joanne Weiss, is former COO of New Schools Venture fund, which finances charter school expansion with large infusions of Gates money; accordingly, states can win “points” on their applications depending on how charter-friendly they are.

Other members of the NY State RTTT team are Laura Smith, formerly chief of staff under former deputy Chancellor Chris Cerf, and before that, an employee of the NYC Charter School Center, and deputy Commissioner John King, formerly head of the Uncommon Schools charter chain.

According to Gotham Schools, New Visions has a financial interest in NY State’s winning the funds:

Hughes has also said that New Visions would be a likely applicant for a program, proposed by the Regents, to allow alternative organizations to bypass education schools to certify teachers. [Merryl] Tisch also cited Hughes as an expert on how schools can effectively use data to guide their work with students and on launching high schools, an area that will become key as the state attempts to replace its lowest-performing schools. “Bob has a track record on this, and he is respected in every corner on this subject,” Tisch said. “I trust him, I trust his judgment.”

Hughes was also cited in the just-issued decision of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission about the discriminatory dismissal of Debbie Almontaser as the principal of Khalil Gibran school: New Visions "concurred in DOE's judgment that she should resign and acted as agent in advising her to do so . . . . In the course of its advisory services to the Community Superintendent in the selection process, it concurred in DOE's conclusion that the circumstances of her resignation were such that continuing her candidacy was not desirable." (The EEOC decision is here.)

Hughes tried to get Almontaser to resign, but she refused until she could meet with the Chancellor, who was conveniently"unavailable." Instead, Deputy mayor Walcott acted as the designated hit-man, and threatened her that the school might be cancelled if she did not resign.

As David Bloomfield, expert on education law, pointed out, “Thus, while New Visions was found not liable since it was not in an employment relationship with Almontaser, it served as willing handmaiden to her illegal discriminatory dismissal 'on account of her race, religion, and national origin.'”

Gates Foundation Now Says Small Schools "Disappointing"

Over at Gotham Schools, Elizabeth tells us how all the bigwigs in education policy went out to Seattle to hear the latest thoughts of Bill Gates on education. The news is that the Gates Foundation has soured on small schools. And in a remarkable blast of friendly fire at his old allies, Joel Klein and Mike Bloomberg, he says small schools here don't do any better in preparing kids for college.

Gates spent years of telling school systems to reorganize high schools into small schools. As a result, billions in NYC capital spending that would be better used to build schools and reduce class sizes were sucked up into reconfiguring space for his policy. Now he tells us, in essence, 'oops, that small school stuff doesn't work so well'. He's on to the new new thing -- national standards and, of course, more testing.

I have had enough of the Gates Foundation telling me how my kids should be educated. I wish the people behind the Broad Foundation, Dell Foundation, Gates Foundation and all the rest of the special interests would find more productive ways to fritter away their billions. Of course none of these billionaires would send their own kids to the public schools.

Unholy alliance: Al Sharpton and Joel Klein

June 13: See update and correction on funders here.

Lots of publicity for the Klein/Sharpton alliance, inaugurated at the National Press Club yesterday, where no doubt they faced a less skeptical press corps than they would have in NYC -- though the Washington Post pointed out that “It was the kind of odd coupling that seemed more like the premise for a reality show than a news conference on education policy.”

As predicted, this "new" coalition will focus on charter schools, union-busting and teacher scapegoating – with not a single word about the need for any of the reforms that have actually been proven to work to narrow the achievement gap -- like class size reduction.

This strategic alliance, or "beautiful friendship" as Klein likes to put it, appears to be based upon the ideological biases of its funders -- the Gates and Broad foundations.

Accordingly, at the news conference, their statements were full of ignorant and self-serving nonsense:

NY Sun: “Mr. Klein said the achievement gap had "barely narrowed" in the more than five decades since the Supreme Court ordered the desegregation of the schools in the landmark 1954 decision, Brown v. Board of Education.”

This is right-wing tripe that has been repeatedly disproved. The achievement gap, though still significant, substantially narrowed in the 1970’s and 1980’s. (See the analysis in this classic work, for example.)

USA Today: “Sharpton, a Baptist pastor and political gadfly, says that for years, civil rights leaders have been silent on education equity issues.”

Who is he kidding? While he has been missing in action on these issues, the NAACP and other mainstream civil rights organizations have led the charge on educational equity – including, most recently, helping sponsor the Florida constitutional amendment requiring smaller classes in all grades.

Baltimore Sun: “They [Klein and Sharpton] support … more accountability for everyone, including central office staff.”

Sure. Tell me a single educrat at Tweed who has been held accountable for their multiple fiascos, from the bus route disaster last year, to this year’s mix-ups with admissions to G and T programs, preK and middle schools. Not to mention the serial blunders of the Accountability office, from the ridiculous school grading system to failure of ARIS, the $80 Million plus super-computer system.

Meanwhile, according to the Daily News, “The entire English staff at closing Lafayette High School was handed walking papers this week, a move that would leave no licensed English teachers for next year's students, the Daily News has learned.”

Talk about educational equity! I guess those kids don’t need English teachers – another backwards version of equity, no doubt, in the twisted land of Tweed.

An article in the News reports on the continuing harassment of Sikh students, which unfortunately omits the fact that the DOE has refused to comply with a law passed by the City Council four years ago, requiring the reporting and disciplining of anti-bias crimes in schools.

Also see the article in the News about Marie Pollicino, Queens CEC member, who filed a complaint against the attempt by DOE to eliminate all authority of parents on School Leadership Teams to develop school budgets and Comprehensive Education Plans. See our blog in early January about this outrageous and illegal move by Klein et.al., just after the complaint was originally filed.

Meanwhile, this new coalition blathers on about the need for “increased parental involvement.”

As Sharpton said at the news conference, “Who is standing up for the children?"

Not either of these hucksters, that’s for sure. Nor the Gates or Broad foundations, which are bankrolling this unholy alliance.

Does Bill Gates need a lesson?

Instead of yet another fawning profile of Bill Gates and his education iniatives, most of which have turned out to be absolute busts, take a look at the critique online at the Nation, one of the best that I've seen.

The author, Sarah Seltzer, who spent a year teaching in the Bronx, examines Gates' new Political Action Committee, Ed in '08, and its agenda: longer school days and years, merit pay for teachers, and a uniform national curriculum --- at least for the schools that other people's kids attend.

Instead, she recommends what's offered in elite private schools, including smaller classes:

In smaller classes, where conversation can flow more freely, the qualities that help students achieve are analysis, leadership and questioning. One set of skills puts students in managed mode; the other promotes students into manager mode. I can't emphasize that difference enough.

Since kids from poor and middle-class homes are less likely to have other mentors around--nannies, tutors, counselors and the like--the chance to talk with adults and air their opinions is more important for them. But they don't get that chance. When I taught during the NYC subway strike and attendance shrunk, all my formerly rowdy students turned docile. In the more intimate environment, their attitudes towards school and authority were different.

This kind of individual attention can do more than an extra half hour of classroom time will ever do. Kids are kids, after all--they tend to lose focus. An hour and a half and two hours of math are virtually equal in terms of what a child can absorb, and everyone who teaches knows that nothing gets done in June.

You don't see private schools clamoring for longer years; they have the shortest school calendars around! But those calendars are packed with vital activities--newspapers, sports teams, theater productions, field days. These are a bonus that encourages kids to come to school and help to build self-esteem and passion, not to mention a nice resume for colleges.

New Visions Caves

NYC Public School Parents orginally told the story of how New Visions, an organization seeking to become one of the DoE's Partnership Support Organizations (PSO), was using its control of Gates Foundation grants to force schools to select it as a PSO. Today, Erin Einhorn of the Daily News reports they have backed down on this controversial practice:

Late yesterday, New Visions director Robert Hughes issued a statement saying all schools that qualify for grants will be entitled to them regardless of whether they hire New Visions. He declined to elaborate on why he had changed his mind.

While this decision is a positive development, the episode shines a harsh spotlight on the rushed preparations to eliminate the DoE regional support structures.

"Visions of Cash"

Today, intrepid reporter Erin Einhorn of the Daily News followed the trail of the story that we first broke on our blog last Wednesday, "A Free Choice for Principals?" In the article entitled "Visions of Cash", she describes how the organization New Visions is distributing Gates Foundation grants to new schools but has "decided to attach strings to the cash: It wants a payoff of sorts."

Officials at New Visions have told principals at the start-up schools that they will not get any funding unless they also sign New Visions up as their PSO, or Partnership Support Organization, for the next five years, which means paying them substantial funds out of their limited school budgets.

A principal was quoted that she feels "blackmailed":

"I thought, 'Oh, my God, what a huge conflict of interest,'" the principal said. "We have to join their PSO and pay them for support in order to get this grant that we qualified for?"

The Gates foundation refused to comment; a DOE spokesperson said that "it's too early to comment on what rules PSOs will be required to follow or whether New Visions had broken them."

Just like the Children's First game, or the new Survivor version, this reflects the administration's way of making up the rules up as they go along, to make sure that no one will know what they are until it's too late! Luckily, in this case, the DOE may not be the final arbiter -- there are laws about this sort of thing.

In related news, the LISs (or Learning instructional supervisors, whose positions were established just a few years ago and are now being eliminated) are running scared. They have been reportedly warned by DOE officials in charge of the internal Learning Support Organizations that they will get jobs only if they persuade enough principals that they still supervise to sign up -- and promise to pay cold hard cash -- to the LSO.

A message from an insider at Tweed:

"LISs and others seeking to stay employed have allegedly been told that their invitation to join an LSO will be dependent upon how many schools they bring in with them. Principals are reaching out to colleagues and friends across district and borough lines to put together networks. Parents seem to be out of the loop. The Chancellor made it clear that the choice of support organization is the PRINCIPALS alone."

Is this the sort of school system we want for our kids?

A free choice for principals?

Under the proposed reorganization, the Department of Education is asking principals to choose a support organization – either an external Partnership Support Organization, (PSO), an internal DoE-led Learning Support Organization (LSO), or if their school becomes an empowerment school, they can draw on that network for support.

This initiative is being described as freeing up principals to choose the best services and deals possible from a range of possible sources – which of course, will have to be paid for out of their limited school budgets.

Here is an excerpt from a letter to principals by Joel Klein explaining the rationale:

As you know, an important priority of our Children First school reforms is making sure that all of our principals and school communities are held accountable for meeting rigorous goals for our students and are empowered to make the critical decisions about how best to succeed. You and your school community, not someone who works outside of your school, should determine what you need to be successful and you should have the resources and authority to make it happen. …. When you choose a School Support Organization, you and your school community have the chance to select the team that is best suited to help you, your staff, and your students succeed.

Not until mid-April are principals supposed to receive ”detailed information” about the services being offered by each organization, and in April and May, there are supposed to be a “series of citywide and borough forums to “meet representatives of the School Support Organizations, learn more about the packages of services each is offering, and make informed decisions.”

In the letter, Klein adds that is “too early for you to come to a conclusion about the most appropriate support organization for your school. The School Support Organizations are still in development and will be described to you in detail in the coming months. Any 'decision' to affiliate before these options are fully developed and made known to you would be premature and would very likely short-change your school and your students.”

In fact, the DOE has not yet officially chosen among the organizations that have applied to become PSOs, though New Visions confidently announces on its website that it will be one of them.

Yet in many cases, this choice appears to be more illusory than real.

A recent email from a top staffer at New Visions says they will delay giving out grants to the small schools with the Gates Foundation funds, until and unless these schools choose them as their PSO.

Here is an excerpt: “Remember, by signing this grant agreement you also agree to become a member of the New Visions Partner Support Organization. This is a clear stipulation for receiving funding support.”

And, in case that wasn’t clear enough:. “Only after each of you signs on to our NV PSO will we be able to issue a grant implementation letter.”

Is this an inventive kickback scheme on the part of New Visions, to ensure that funds keep flowing to their organization, in this case in the form of taxpayer dollars? Clearly this will restrict the ability of principals at the small schools to freely choose which PSO might be best for their needs, given the fact that they rely on Gates-funded grants to keep these schools going.

Comments anyone? Do you think the practice of forcing schools to choose New Visions as their Partnership support organization is unethical, illegal, or just business as usual, in the ruthless world that Tweed is intent on establishing in our public school system?