(Correction: An earlier version said that Students for Education Reform (SFER) got a a large infusion of cash from Education Reform Now, a wing of Democrats for Education Reform, in 2010. SFER says it did not receive an actual contribution from Education Reform Now but that the latter held $30,000 of SFER’s donations as a fiscal agent while SFER was receiving its classification as a 501(c)(3) but then returned it. This version reflects the correction.)
It can be bewildering to keep track of all the “grassroots” education reform groups that have popped up in recent years. Where, have you ever wondered, do they all come from? Daniel Katz, an assistant professor of educational studies at Seton Hall University, explains in the following post who is actually funding many of them — and how “grassroots” they actually aren’t. This appeared on his blog.
By Daniel Katz
One problem with today’s education reform environment is that a number of groups exist that call themselves “grassroots” organizations, but which have expanded rapidly because of large infusions of cash from corporations and foundations invested in pushing charter schools, mass high stakes testing, data mining students and the Common Core standards. These groups do not exist to represent the organically derived priorities and shared interests of students, teachers and parents; they exist to put a more credible face on the priorities and shared interests of a very narrow but astonishingly influential set of repeating characters.
Take Educators 4 Excellence as an example. On their website, they tout that they began as “two teachers” and wanted to give teachers a voice in a system that imposed changes from the top down, and now they are growing into 10 of 1000s of teachers in multiple states. What don’t they mention? That they are funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which is not really a surprise because: a) Gates has been funding a lot of similar efforts, and, b) their “pledge” includes evaluating teachers by value-added testing models (something Gates really, really likes) and supporting “choice” which is reform jargon for charter schools (something hedge fund managers really, REALLY like). The group was central in the not-entirely-successful #supportthecore social media campaign, and former Connecticut legislator Jonathan Pelto writes here about more of their rather miraculous funding.
When I was in high school, soap actor Peter Bergman did television ads for Vicks cough syrup with the tag line “I’m not a doctor but I play one on TV.” At least he was upfront about it.
The Washington Post recently ran a story about the founding of “Education Post” which claims to be a new source of information about topics in education that will avoid the supposed rancor in current public conversations. To her credit, reporter Lyndsey Layton did report that it is funded by the Broad Foundation, Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Walton Family Foundation and is headed by the former communications director for Arne Duncan, so we have some heads up as to how that “reporting” on “what works” will tilt.
Genuine grassroots organizations cannot just pop up out of nowhere, grow by 1000s of members practically overnight, afford slick web designs, afford Manhattan rent and big staffs. But without knowing what to look for it can be difficult for the casual observer, or even a working teacher, to spot the signs of a group that is more AstroTurf than grassroots. I would like to offer the following guide as assistance, and I have chosen, not entirely randomly, Students for Education Reform. Sounds like a great thing, doesn’t it? Students? Education reform? Who wouldn’t want to support that?
From the Students for Education Reform webpage:
What started as two students working for educational justice in their own communities eventually grew from one college campus to twenty, and from twenty to over 140 undergraduate chapters at two- and four-year colleges in over 30 states. Our founders launched Students for Education Reform as college freshmen, each bringing a different perspective to the fight for educational equity: Alexis Morin is a lifelong public school student and was a local school board member in her Massachusetts district, and Catharine Bellinger is an aspiring teacher from Washington, DC. Together, Alexis and Catharine created a platform for college students to share their stories on one campus; by working with peers across the country, they grew SFER nationally during their sophomore and junior years. SFER’s members now represent the diversity of the American K-12 education system: the vast majority of us attended local district schools, while many others attended schools of choice – charter schools, parochial schools, and private schools. Together, we know what’s true, and what’s possible.
Ms. Morin and Ms. Bellinger started SFER in 2009 while freshmen at Princeton, and it has grown to 136 chapters in 33 states. According to this blurb in Forbes, both of them had to put off their studies for a year to assist with the astonishingly paced growth of the group. Which brings me to my first clue for spotting fake grassroots groups:
Growth at a pace that only a corporation’s monetary resources could manage. Perhaps SFER’s founders had sincere interests in growing a real movement that included a genuine array of student voices (although the prominent mention of KIPP charter schools and North Star charter in this interview makes me doubt they had any vision except current corporate backed reforms in mind), but their growth could not have happened this rapidly without a serious infusion of assistance from outside. That assistance, of course, came in the form of cash and the expectation that such cash would influence the values of the activism.
And Students for Education Reform definitely have been given cash. This is evident in their web design which is a slick and well-executed page oddly reminiscent of the “Educators 4 Excellence” site. SFER also has a national office in New York City, specifically on West 38th Street in the Garment District and near the Empire State Building and Pennsylvania Station. While not the priciest office district in Manhattan, rents for office space on this site range from $27 per square foot to over $100. That’s per month. I’ll go out on a limb and assume someone is putting up the money for that which brings me to the second clue:
Who is funding the group and for how much? We do know they have large donors though we don’t know exactly who they are.
We know they have big-money donors because their own 990 tax form filed in 2012 for tax years 2010 and 2011 show that they went from a total $30,000 on donations in 2010 to at least $1.8 million in 2011 with the vast majority of it coming from donors who gave at least $38,000 or more each.
The $30,000 was held by Education Reform Now, a wing of Democrats for Education Reform, in 2010, which served as a fiscal agent while SFER was receiving its classification as a 501(c)(3). ERN then transferred the money back and SFER says it hasn’t received donations from SFER.
With big money come influential advisers, and for SFER, that is a board of directors that is a made up of some heavy hitting finance and reform personalities. Which comes to the third clue:
Who is REALLY running the operation? SFER is upfront about their boards of directors, which boasts some very familiar names and organizations. Amy Chou is the chief growth officer of the KIPP charter school network. KIPP, it should be noted, is one of the “miracle” charter chains that claims they have “proven” that high poverty populations can close achievement gaps by doing things their way. What they don’t mention is how self-selection and high attrition without backfilling vacated seats influences their success rates. In fact, Bruce Baker of Rutgers University provides a simple chart showing how various “miracle” and some non-miracle charter networks compare in populations relative to fully public schools in NYC:
I don’t mind various ways of doing business, but I really mind being told miracles are happening when the data suggests something much more mundane. As an added bonus, one of KIPP’s founders, Mike Feinberg, was asked if his children were going to attend a KIPP school. His fumbling answer would have been amusing under other circumstances.
Also on the board? Christy Chin of the Draper Richards Kaplan Foundation, which is the philanthropy arm of the venture capital firm, Draper Richards. Adam Cioth, the founder of Rolling Hills Capital and former investment banker at Goldman Sachs. Justin Cohen, the president of Mass Insight Education which is the education wing of Mass Insight Global Partnerships, a financial industry alliance and lobbying group supporting “market-driven solutions”. Shavar Jeffries, former mayoral candidate in Newark whose campaign received a huge influx of Wall Street cash in the final weeks. Jon Sackler, who is listed as the President of the Bouncer Foundation, but who is also a player in finance and investment and is a trustee with a major charter school management firm. Chris Stewart is listed as the executive director of the African American Leadership Forum, but he will also be blogging for the recently announced Education Post, funded by the Waltons, Broads and Bloomberg. The board is rounded out by the Deputy General Council of Unilever and a graduate student at Harvard Divinity School, Rebecca Ledley, who is married to ERN and DFER board member Charles Ledley, and who is herself on the board of a charter school management company.
But, you know, what she’s studying in graduate school is MUCH more interesting.
This kind of slight of hand brings up my final clue about a fake grassroots organization and that is:
Do its supposed grassroots members have even a clue what the organization is about? I have done grassroots politics. As part of the steering committee that formed the Graduate Employees Union at Michigan State University, I know first hand that real grassroots work is painstaking and slow, requiring a lot of time to meet, debate and educate a population. Yes, we got help and networking connections from the Michigan Federation of Teachers, but the actual door to door conversations with the 1000s of teaching assistants at the university? We did that ourselves and aimed to help every potential member of our collective bargaining unit to understand the issues we believed could be solved by forming the union.
While the central office of Students For Education Reform is deeply entrenched in an exact kind of reform that emphasizes charter schools, testing and union busting, it is not clear that all chapter members, the ones called upon to be the public face of SFER at rallies and meetings, know this. In 2012, SFER mobilized students to take part in a rally demanding that the UFT and city reach an agreement to implement a teacher evaluation system that included controversial value-added measures of teachers using testing data because there was a $300 million dollar implementation grant at stake. They carried signs emphasizing the money that was at stake, and got people to talk about how important that money would be for city schools. But one would think that if SFER was really worried about school funding, they’d be far more concerned about what Bruce Baker demonstrates here: that the NYC school budget is shorted $3.4 BILLION ANNUALLY by Albany. SFER showed up to protest the UFT’s reticence to accept a deal that included teacher evaluations that do not stand up to ANY scientific scrutiny, but to date, they do not seem to have mobilized any placards to protest what Dr. Baker points out.
Do these “students for education reform” even have the slightest clue what they are protesting? I doubt it matters to their board of directors who are happy to have a ready to deploy force of good optics for the press, and who are not as honest as a 1986 cough syrup ad:
The good news? We learned something from the #supportthecore day on Twitter. Genuine grassroots work may not have a Manhattan office. It may not have a steady flow of cash from the Waltons. It may not have a slick website and be able to boast 100s of chapter offices in only 4 years. But it does have an energy that derives from authenticity. And that has staying power. The hedge fund managers are treating all of what they want to accomplish as simply an advertising matter, but it is a democracy matter and people will have a say, one way or another.