A Blog About Politics, Education Policy, and Schools
"Turnarounds." will follow 18D of UFT contract, which is not precisely what Obama prescribed. It will therefore be unlikely that they qualify for federal funds. I'm not defending Obama's plan, which is potentially worse. Still, Bloomberg doesn't really care about federal funds, wasting millions, or pretty much anything other than making teachers miserable and improving his own PR, by any means necessary.
Thanks for the clarification, NYC. The media still frame these turnarounds as part of the Obama program and often fail to mention that since Bloomberg is not following the guidelines per USDOE they will not qualify for the money. Or if they do state that in the story, it's usually buried far below the lead.Also the Obama people have definitely promoted closures of "drop-out factories" and Obama himself relished when those Central Falls teachers were fired. So Obama bears as much blame for this policy as Bloomberg. A true progressive would not blame teachers, scapegoat schools as "drop-out factories" etc. he might even stand up for the teachers and call for more support for these schools.Instead Obama is silent on the 24 schools. And since he cheered the firings at Central Falls, I have to think he is actually happy about this.
I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of Obama, not by any means, and I'm aware of everything you've mentioned. Media does not distinguish between Obama's plan and Bloomberg's, so few people know. In fact, yesterday 1010 WINS reported that teachers not selected for new schools would be fired, which is completely false. Teachers are vilified in the press day after day by a press corps that cannot be bothered doing its homework.
1010 WINS, you give us 22 minutes, we'll tell you bullshit in between the commercials...