britain's doing education "reform"/charter schools too...

[Hannah Bell]

On September 7, Labour’s drive to privatise state education lost some of its cosmetic disguise when it announced it is to stop charging businesses, entrepreneurs and private charities a nominal £2 million sponsorship fee to run the academy schools.

New private sponsors will now simply be vetted by an accreditation system based on their “educational record”—a meaningless stipulation.

Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers (NUT), noted for example, “The requirement of interested companies simply having to prove they have the ‘necessary skills and leadership’ to run an academy does not stand up to scrutiny. One of the latest academies to open is being sponsored by Aston Villa Football Club. I defy anyone to suggest that a football club can know more about the running of schools than a local education authority.”

Sponsors will contribute nothing towards the start-up and running of future academies, the full cost of which will be borne by the state.

As soon as the government announced the academies programme in 2000, many corporate sponsors made it clear that they wanted control of state schools without paying anything in return. Ministers soon assured sponsors that they could provide the “up to £2 million” as “cash in kind” in the form of gifts of company products, or the services of former company executives to sit on school committees.

Few of the sponsors ever produced the full £2 million in any form, but the notional fee was used by the former Prime Minister Tony Blair to face down critics as proof of the benefits of turning to the private sector.

The government sought to bury the news of the removal of the £2 million fee in a flurry of media-friendly propaganda surrounding the opening of the latest batch of academies...In light of the removal of the £2 million requirement, sponsors are being considered from companies such as the Co-operative Bank, the high-priced super-market giant Waitrose and building firm, Kier.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/sep2009/acad-s26.shtml

[rebel with a cause]

1. I am sorry to hear this.

I hate privatization big time.

The only dealings I had with Charter schools was about 15 years ago when the state was putting youths with behavior disorders in them when there were no public schools who would take them. My experience was that they could care less what the kid did. There did not seem to be any regulations or rules. The kid could come to class if they wanted to, or they could go out side and smoke, go home or do what ever. It was no wonder they could take these kids, as long as they got payed they were happy. I had to check on a kid for another agency and found the child had not been in class for about six months. His absence had not been reported to anyone but the principle assured me that if the child (15 year old) decided to come back, they would welcome him. This was after he had admitted to me that when the boy had came he never really achieved anything in class because he would come to school and stay outside smoking (sometimes with teachers on breaks) for a while and then leave.

Yeah, if Charter School are like they were then, I really think sending our kids there is a good idea. :sarcasm:

[Hannah Bell]

2. i don't think the move to privatization is only in the us - it's global.

[rebel with a cause]

3. I agree.

We (the US government and corporations) have done this for years to third world counties. I think it is only after they perfected it that they began it in this country. I find it surprising how similar the things happening here are to what I studied about globalization and the privatization of countries around the world. It is terrifying but kind of pay back to all the americans that did not think it was a problem when it was happening to others. :shrug: