On a "Start a new post," Anonymous wrote:
"In 2009, the foundation spent $3.5 million creating an advocacy group to buttress its $290 million investment in programs to increase teacher effectiveness in four areas of the country: Tampa-St. Petersburg, Fla., Pittsburgh, Memphis and Los Angeles.
A document describing plans for the group, posted on a Washington Post blog in March, said it would mobilize local advocates, "establish strong ties to local journalists" and should "go toe to toe" with union officials in explaining contracts and state laws to the public."
Remember how NO ONE in the media would report on the incident at UPrep? Notice how NO ONE writes critically about Gates/Broad initiatives? Let's all take a moment and acknowledge how compromised Eleanor Chute clearly is.
Long but good article:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11142/1148445-298-0.stm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I'm curious --- has A+ Schools ever received any Gates money?
I'm curious too, about what motivates those deep-pocketed foundations. I'd hate to think it is at times all about relationships. Truly altuism or something else?
It is about privatizing, controlling and making a profit from public schools. Note the major increase in consulting companies since NCLB was enacted.
http://thebroadreport.blogspot.com/
Motivations are hard to pin-point. Power, control, profits are part of the thinking. Plain old thinking is part of the motivations too.
Even in these parts consider Andrew Carnegie. Whew...
But, to talk and worry about 'motivations' is to bat at the leaves on the tree of suffering. The foundations are here.
Even if their motivations were fully figured out and made universal to all to understand, they'd change their motivations. Then we'd only be watching the motivations and the real work of fixing our educational system, school districts, schools, classrooms and student experiences would still go without positive changes.
Motivations for students -- not that's something to worry about.
Motivations of deep pocket billionaires, not my worry.
What if the motivation is to have a place to experiment? Or to override the preferences of parents, students, alums and community members based on the idea that foundations know best?
Regardless of their motivations_____what are you (collective) going to do about it?
May I suggest several people write letters to the PG calling them out about this? Quote this part of the article and asked why the UPrep incident and Broad connection have never been explored by the PG? Email the letters and CC both Eleanor Chute and Tony Norman, both of whom were contacted (at least about UPrep) and did nothing with it.
We are more likely to witness the "Rapture" than any hard hitting journalism by the Pittsburgh Post Gazette on the Pittsburgh Public Schools.
The PPG's real estate is woefully underassessed and they are easily kept in line PPS not taking them to appeal.
Follow the money or in this case, the lack of tax dollars.
Could that really explain the instances where the PPG seems to forget that it is supposed to provide investigative reporting?
The city could also take the PPG to appeal, right? Would the city have the same or as much of an incentive to hold off?
Training academies for Pittsburgh teachers won't open.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_739974.html
I wonder if GATES is happy about this>>>>
Post a Comment