Issue link: http://educator.cta.org/i/15938
and students, Ravitch asserts. While there are some outstanding charter schools, they are no magic bul- let for success. The majority of the 5,000 or so charters nationwide appear to be no better, and in many cases worse, than local public schools when measured by achievement on stan- dardized tests, according to experts citing years of research. Notes the New York Times, “Last year, one of the most comprehensive studies by researchers from Stanford University found fewer than one-fifth of charter schools na- tional ly of fered a better education than comparable local schools, almost half offered an equivalent education and more than a third, 37 percent, were significantly worse.” Ravitch warns that the real agenda for corporate foundations and the “bil- lionaire boys” behind them is the de- regulation of schools, much like the deregulation of energy companies and health care. “Deregulation contributed to the near collapse of our national economy in 2008, and there is no reason to anticipate that it will make education better for most children,” she says. “Removing public oversight will leave the education of our children to the whim of entrepreneurs and financiers.” Sacramento under Foundations gaining momentum Corporate foundations have gone from playing a supportive role in education to dictating unproven school “reforms.” The power they wield is growing. Richard Rothstein, author of Grading Education: Getting Accountability Right, noted in a New York Times article that corporate donations may be acts of gen- erosity, but also benefit the wealthy. Using a formula developed by Michael E. Porter, a professor at Harvard Business School, Rothstein estimates the govern- ment loses about $4 in taxes for every $10 a philanthropist donates. If a corporation can afford to give money to a school district, it can afford to be taxed, asserts Joel Spring, author of American School: From the Puritans to No Child Left Be- hind. “However, most of the time foundation money is presented with a public relations spin, so people see it in a positive light.” Foundations demand that public schools and teachers be held accountable for performance, but they are accountable to no one. They do not have to disclose the details of their spending, although the government does. “It’s anti-democratic to relinquish control of public education to private foundations in ways that would never survive the scrutiny of voters,” says Sanchez. Operating schools as businesses may sound good on paper — but students are not widgets and schools aren’t expected to turn a profit. “The corporate model of reform pays little heed to other expectations of pub- lic schools — building just and tolerant communities, reducing distrust of one another and our shared institutions, safeguarding democratic ethics and in- troducing children to the world,” warns Dorothy Shipps in an article titled “Cor- porate Influence.” “Neither markets nor business ethics routinely put equality or fairness above profits.” Gates, Broad and the Walton family are not “experts” in education. They may be acting in the name of “school reform,” but they are pushing their own agendas and programs based on ideology rather than research. “The judgment of donors is sometimes wiser than that of school officials and sometimes not,” says Rothstein. “But it is hard to separate good ideas from founda- tion proposals that, while seemingly attractive, may be passing fads or only a way to advertise a donor’s virtue.” Instead of being scrutinized, corpo- rate foundations are given deferential, “gentle” treatment by the media, who fear taking them on. They operate, says Rav- itch, in a “conspiracy of silence.” “I don’t think the public is aware of their influence on federal public policy corporate control schools In 2003, Sacramento High School became St. Hope Charter High School. At that time Kevin Johnson, a former basketball star with the Phoenix Suns, raised millions of dollars from several corporate foundations to make the conversion happen at his alma mater, including $3 million from the Gates Foundation and more than $1 million from the Walton Family Foundation. Today, enrollment is dwindling and the school is in its third year of Program Improvement. It received a bronze medal from U.S. News for raising test scores, going from 719 to 731 on the API from 2008 to 2009, but has re- ceived criticism for “counseling out” students who are not successful. Some say the college-prep school is intent on only serving motivated students. Those who cause trouble are “shipped out” to other schools, say critics. Johnson is now mayor of Sacramento, and St. Hope operates several charters in Sacramento. During the past year there was a scandal over allegations that the nonprofit associa- tion Johnson founded used federal money to pay volunteers for jobs including political activities, running personal errands and washing 12 California Educator | SEPTEMBER 2010 Johnson’s car. The terms of the settle- ment stated that St. Hope Academy must repay nearly $424,000 in return for the government’s lifting its suspen- sion on future federal grants. But cor- ruption allegations are only part of the problem. Linda Tuttle Sacramento City Teachers Association “The community is still angry about the closure of Sacramento High School because it was a comprehensive high school that offered students a broad selection of electives, sports and ex- tracurricular activities,” says Linda Tuttle, president of the Sacramento City Teachers Association (SCTA). “The charter school is not a comprehensive high school. And it’s a bad state of affairs when a school can pick and choose its own students.” Johnson recently started a new nonprofit,