Contact Notebook contributing editor Dale Mezzacappa at email@example.com.
Submitted by Ms.Cheng (not verified) on Sat, 06/01/2013 - 22:25.
This is a good article about what can be done when egos are put aside. Right now there are a multitude of organizations working alone. The ego is a hard thing to put aside. I am skeptical that Philly, as embroiled as it is in its own "specialness" and self interest will be able to overcome this obstacle. We trash our nonprofits because we want that villain (as in BCG) to remain a villain. G.. forbid anyone else can be a hero and steal our spotlight... forget the kids.
It is still unclear where the rest (2/3) of the $1 billion over 10 years in Cincinnati came from. One article promoting the community schools there said the taxpayer was willing to see their $$ spent there because of the promised return in services. Here it is suggested that Federal Medicaid $$ partially funded it: What were the other funds that were "already available"? Couldn't be "private" donations could it? Very curious.
Yes, and why now so "late in the day" do we point to the success of this model? The origin of the motivation is not "in the heart" at all; otherwise we would have been working towards making this happen, not busy "lecturing". So many lost opportunities for partnerships which show where the real priorites were.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/03/2013 - 17:58.
BCG is a non-profit?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/03/2013 - 18:45.
Boston Consulting Group has a Board members on Wendy Koop's latest education privatization endeavor - Teach for All. Teach for All is suppose to replicated Teach for American around the world. Considering all of the consumer items the U.S. has contributed to the world, this ranks up there with the junkiest. The U.S. should be examining what is being done in other countries - not trying to push more privatization of education on others.
Submitted by Ms.Cheng (not verified) on Mon, 06/03/2013 - 19:38.
BCG more like suggested, that nonprofits run a restructuring which they labeled "achievement networks". Rather than examining what the essential ideas were behind this recommendation, it was trashed simply because of who recommended it. Yeah, go Philly! You stay dependent and keep blaming whoever you can, so you can keep things the same when you are not the ones suffering. Love that status quo.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 06/04/2013 - 07:50.
BCG did not suggest that non-profits run schools. They suggested that just about anyone could, whether that person or organization, for-profit or non-, had any education background. Read the report.
And there is no doubt that plenty of people (present company excluded) examined its essential ideas. Several rebuttals to it and articles about it have been written. An entire report was issued by PCAPS to refute its essential ideas.
Submitted by Ms.Cheng (not verified) on Tue, 06/04/2013 - 10:40.
I have only had time to read what is published here on the Notebook. True, they did not publish the BCG report, but their interpretation was that nonprofits were suggested to run the "achievement networks".
Did you read the PCAPS report? I may have missed it -was it published here on the Notebook? I suspect that the refuttal relied heavily on using the "privatization" scapegoat.
Community schools obviously are a great idea. The first mission of PCAPS it seems is not the establishment of these, but the saving of Union jobs. Why villainize "business models" first, and bring up these CSs so late? Even Cincinnati's successful CSs attribute their success to using business models. We had over 10 years when 44,000 plus school age children left the City, to work on this. So long as empty schools were being propped up by taxpayer dollars, there was never a problem, nor "peep" from PCAPS.
This villainization of private business principles is one major obstacle to the establishment of these CSs here. We would rather cling to the "handout" model that does nothing to curb waste and abuse. Nonprofits must justify their expenses to their donors, but not so a "true" public school system it appears. But this is what we prefer.
Yes, a profit motive has led to wrongs. But teachers obviously have done some as well. They ask the public not to generalize or demean their expertise based on the abuses of the few, but apparently they can generalize about those who must justify their funding constantly.
Well, we have our preserved hierarchical system led by our education experts, Dr. Ackerman, and now Dr. Hite. We should be very happy: We've "made our bed", so let's "sleep in it".
Submitted by JUDITH ROBINSON (not verified) on Sun, 07/07/2013 - 14:11.
More information about formatting options
By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. We reserve the right to delete or remove any material deemed to be in violation of this rule, and to ban anyone who violates this rule. Please see our "Terms of Usage" for more detail concerning your obligations as a user of this service. Reader comments are limited to 500 words. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Tweets from @PSNotebook/philly-ed-feed
699 Ranstead St.
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Phone: (215) 839-0082
Fax: (215) 238-2300