Portland Public Schools Institutionalizes Harm with Its "Teacher Professional Learning Plan" and Racist, Profit-Driven Curriculum

The curriculum adoption process and transition to curriculum-based professional learning currently under way, continues to stir up controversy among Portland educators. The five biggest concerns with this transition, which is outlined in the PPS Adoption Toolkit and the guiding document, The Elements, by the Carnegie Corporation, are the following:

1. The curriculum up for adoption is racist.
2. The move to curriculum-based professional learning is bound to result in the loss of teacher autonomy, leading to demoralization and teacher pushout.
3. The plan ramps up data mining targeting students and uses children as human capital to build a new virtual world meant to supplant the public education system as we know it.
4. The process has entailed exorbitant spending in--what the district claims to be--a time of a financial crunch, with money spent for not only the curriculum, but also outsourced trainers, consultants, and evaluators who will become entrenched in the way the district functions and delivers its services.
5. The evaluators of the implementation process are not trustworthy and are instrumental in the pushout of teachers.

Here is a look at the five main problems with the new curriculum adoption and switch to curriculum-based professional learning:

1. The Curriculum is Racist 

Portland Public Schools insists it is operating through a culturally relevant, anti-racist lens in its mission to “disrupt the predictability of learning outcomes for our most persistently underserved students.” The district claims its plan is “centered in equity and culturally responsive learning, and working towards PPS’ Graduate Portrait.” However, the truth is that much of the curriculum being considered for adoption is Eurocentric, overrepresentative of white authors and viewpoints, and just plain racist.

a. Elementary Choice: Wit & Wisdom

An in-depth study of Wit and Wisdom, one of the top two choices of elementary-level English Language Arts curriculum being considered for adoption, concluded that the curriculum is “a de facto ‘white supremacist master script.”

The authors of the February 2022 Journal of Curriculum Studies article, “​​Overwhelming whiteness: a critical analysis of race in a scripted reading curriculum,” thoroughly examined the scripted Wit and Wisdom English Language Arts curriculum for grades K-8. The research team used “guiding questions grounded in a critical discourse and anti-racist teaching framework to qualitatively analyse teacher-facing materials at each grade level.” They found that “whiteness is centred at every level of the curriculum in text selection and thematic grouping of texts, as well as through discursive moves in teacher-facing materials (e.g. essential questions for learning modules).” The authors warn of reform initiatives such as the current one in PPS, which seek to standardize curricula and emphasize ‘performativity’ because of the dangers standardized curricula may pose to students of color. The research team urges resistance to “the whiteness-centered curricula at the system, school, and classroom level.” The study also offers educators a framework to evaluate curricular materials through a lens of anti-racism in order to make decisions about how to challenge “the adoption of harmful programmes, as well as safely adapt their instruction to meet the needs of their students.”

Among the researchers' findings were the following problems:

• The curriculum repeatedly supplants BIPOC authors with white voices. Overwhelmingly, the materials contain writing 'about' rather than ‘by’ people of color. There is high occurrence of erasure of the stories and voices of people of color in the curriculum
• The narratives mainly center white male figures
• Passages about justice and key events in U.S. history "lack human agency," are "written in the passive-voice," resulting in "the travesties of settler genocide and the anti-Black racism still plaguing America" being "framed as naturalized, agentless forces, as elemental as weather or vegetables." The curriculum is guilty of whitewashing history, excluding people of color "from conversations about courage and strength," and uses "colour-evasive discourse," or "the racial ideology of refusing to address race"
   

The end result, assert the researchers, is this: 

"(The curriculum) may not only negatively influence students’ senses of affirmation but also their literacy acquisition. Research indicates that representation drives engagement in both early literacy acquisition behaviours and continued engagement in reading as children progress through school. Erasure of people of colour from multiple modules, including those centred on American history, threatens literacy acquisition and engagement for children of colour as early as Kindergarten. More broadly, it threatens the foundation of an equitable and democratic society by privileging white-centric stories, written overwhelmingly by white authors."

In contrast to PPS' claim that the district is centering "equity and culturally responsive learning," the research team concludes that the Wit and Wisdom authors' pedagogical irresponsibility "flies in the face of decades of research demonstrating the effectiveness of culturally relevant and responsive teaching." The study emphasizes that "education research has repeatedly shown the positive effects of curricula and pedagogies that honour and integrate students’ histories, cultures, interests, and funds of knowledge."

In its disclaimer, Wit & Wisdom publisher, Great Minds, states that the curriculum is impartial and accurate, ensuring its marketability in all states, including those which have passed laws banning the discussion of race and racism. The publisher states:

"The much-loved books in Wit & Wisdom do not teach critical race theory (CRT) and the program is in full compliance with all federal and state laws. Wit & Wisdom is built on books that have been esteemed and cherished for years. . . Great Minds provides students and teachers with dynamic, award-winning texts and instructional materials that offer impartial information about the triumphs and tragedies of the progress of humans throughout history, including the great American experience."

b. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (HMH) Into Literature

Similar issues as above can be found in the HMH Into Literature curriculum. The texts focus overwhelmingly on Eurocentric viewpoints. Complex history is told in passive voice, avoiding white culpability.  The authors are heavily white and male, and even some of the selections by authors of color are either outdated in their treatment of the topic of race and racism, or taken out of their larger political context, neutralizing their potential to galvanize students to become advocates for racial and social justice. Erasure of racist violence and policy, as well as of BIPOC resistance, is commonplace. For example, the textbooks contain numerous passages glossing over the truth about the Native American experience and history, omitting any mention of genocidal policies. This is in direct contradiction to Oregon Senate Bill 13, Tribal History/Shared History which was enacted in 2017 in order to correct the practice of teaching racist ideas about Oregon's indigenous tribes in schools. 

c. Savvas MyPerspectives

The curriculum by Savvas--formerly Pearson Learning--is also dominated by white authors. The student paper, The Franklin Post, investigated the curriculum and reported that in Savvas MyPerspectives, "texts by white authors make up a disproportionate majority." 

Specifically, these are the findings by the Franklin High School student journalists:

"Only 6.25 percent of the authors recommended for 11th-grade American Literature are non-white. 12th-grade British and World Literature is the second to least diverse with only 14 percent of authors being BIPOC. 9th-grade and 10th-grade literature are the more diverse groups of texts, with 17 and 23.5 percent of recommended authors being BIPOC respectively."

The youth reporters concluded that "while the marketing of these curriculums is full of buzzwords like diversity and inclusion, the demographic breakdown of featured authors falls flat."

d. Amplify

The Amplify English Language Arts curriculum also fares poorly when it comes to race and diversity. The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CURATE project's review of the grades 6-8 ELA Amplify materials concluded that "though materials include some texts representing diverse cultures and perspectives, they reveal many missed opportunities to represent diverse perspectives and voices." The reviewers found that "few anchor texts are authored by people of color." Additionally, the panel of CURATE project educators who reviewed Amplify, argued that "the materials incorporate some diversity of perspective but could do more to help readers make connections to issues of justice and equity in today’s society."

Equally problematic is Amplify's owner's commitment to the privatization and monetization of public education, a point which will be explored below.

2. End of Teacher Autonomy, Beginning of Teacher Redundancy

The guiding document for the new PPS Instructional Framework and the accompanying shift to Curriculum-Based Professional Learning, is the "Challenge Paper" from the Carnegie Corporation of New York called "The Elements: Transforming Teaching through Curriculum-Based Professional Learning." As was described in detail in another post on this blog, the guiding document was authored by pro-privatization, pro-charter enthusiasts who see the unionized teacher labor force as standing in the way of their agenda. They are, therefore, proponents of prescribed, corporate curriculum on which money is to be made, and on whose implementation teachers are continually trained and evaluated, preferably scoring as not measuring up to standard to ensure continual improvement opportunities and profits. This type of reform has historically resulted in the demoralization and push out of dedicated teachers, as well as the deprofessionalization of the field, because at the heart of curriculum reform is the mistrust of teachers, the belief in the supremacy of corporate curriculum and outsourced expert consultants, and the desire to transition to individualized technology-based learning which renders classroom teachers obsolete. 

PPS has stated that current curriculum adoption is a “corrective action” as required by the Oregon Department of Education. The state does require districts to adopt curriculum, this is true. However, the state does not specify that teachers are required to use the curriculum at the exclusion of other materials, as PPS is attempting to mandate. The district is even micromanaging the choice of supplementary texts and has signaled that teacher-created materials will be frowned upon next year, and that teachers are to adhere fully to the adopted curriculum and strategies listed in the teacher guides which are to be honed and rehearsed in professional learning communities. This is a district decision, in violation of the Portland Association of Teachers contract, specifically Article 10 addressing academic freedom, which reads:

 

10.1.1 Professional educators shall be guaranteed academic freedom in instructional presentations and discussions and in faculty discussions of education policy. Professional educators may introduce controversial materials provided such presentations, discussions, and materials are appropriate and relevant to course content and grade level subject to accepted standards of professional responsibility (see PPS Academic Freedom in the Instructional Program 6.20.011-AD as of 03-15-13). 

10.1.2 The District shall consult with professional educators over decisions regarding the selection of districtwide textbooks. Within generally accepted professional and content standards, professional educators are responsible for determining the supporting materials and methods used for day to day instruction, including differentiating instruction based on student needs.

i-Ready is the PPS K-5 math curriculum adoption. Education researcher, Nancy Bailey, wonders what role the teacher plays in an i-Ready math class when student tasks consist of completing self-paced units online. Although the district in its first year of adoption supplies i-Ready lesson materials students complete on paper in addition to the online modules, the expectation is that teachers increasingly incorporate individualized digital learning activities and rely on proprietary assessment algorithms that track student mastery of discrete skills. Bailey writes:

 
"I-Ready provides teachers with data reports of student results, but teachers never see the child’s online responses. They don’t see the correct or incorrect answers. Grading has always involved teachers examining student work and evaluating their progress, but if teachers don’t have access to actual work, they end up relying on i-Ready’s conclusions. This raises transparency issues.

Placing children online to work and allowing nontransparent computer programs to grade them might seem like a solution for managing large class sizes. However, this is not what i-Ready or any online program should be about. . .

I-ready marketers also claim iReady is not about replacing teachers, but if teachers only rely on i-Ready, it removes a teacher’s judgment. Teachers might use the nontransparent program’s results, use the data for grading, instead of their own knowledge about the student, especially when they face overcrowded classrooms . . . (The way the program is designed results in) teachers wind(ing) up taking a backseat to iReady."

This example shows that embedded in the district's curriculum adoption process is the devaluation of the role of the teacher and the elevation of digital, self-contained, individualized "learning."

3. Kids as a cash crop fueling the 4th Industrial Revolution

A highly disturbing element of the adopted curriculum is its reliance on technology and user surveillance through the platforms utilized for digital learning. This is not a new phenomenon, especially following an extended period of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, education technology companies, investors and education-focused foundations are moving in for a total takeover of public education. 

Tech Detox Box, a website which advocates for digital wellbeing for families, provides a succinct primer on Big Data:

"What is Big Data? To put it simply, it’s the analytics used by Internet-based industries to run their business more efficiently and to make more money. Big Data deals with incredibly large data sets that are too complex for traditional analysis, and uses them to extract valuable information about patterns of behavior. The exponentially growing metadata, or 'data about the data' includes data tracked across multiple devices, mobile data traffic, cloud storage, as well as data tracking by Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT).

More of our lives are being tracked by the Internet of Things – the growing number of 'smart' devices that invade our lives, from thermostats to fitness trackers. This is the new frontier of innovation and wealth. Every new bit of data captured is linked and added to other bits of data: video+time stamp+likes+shares+statistics, generating metadata.

This metadata is being organized and repackaged into new innovative digital products that demand more of our time and attention – and collect more data at the same time.

The value of data bits increases when they are linked together this way, building comprehensive profiles for AI that can understand humans better than humans understand themselves.

How big is the business powered by Big Data? Way bigger than oil, and growing at double digit rates. Market capitalization (calculated as the number of shares in circulation multiplied by price per share) of the top global technology companies is how the value of the company can be measured. Apple is valued over $1 trillion. Microsoft is over $1 trillion. Amazon dipped in and out of $1 trillion market capitalization a couple of times since 2018. Google hit $1 trillion in January 2020. Facebook is half a trillion."

Education researcher, Allison McDowell, has lectured and written about Big Data and data-mining for profit extensively. She differentiates between Education Reform 1.0, which consists of charters, vouchers and standardized tests--all of which are still on the agenda in Oregon--and Education Reform 2.0 which is based on "gamified," personalized digital learning through computers, phones and wearable technology. It centers around the concept of "learning ecosystems" and spreads beyond school buildings to expanded learning opportunities (ELOs) through partnerships with private industries, foundations, community organizations, and more. It is connected to career learning. The collection and monitoring of behavioral and personal data is instrumental in building this new vision of learning which is, in a matter of a few years, supposed to replace seat time in public school buildings, rendering highly qualified classroom teachers unnecessary.

McDowell speaks about this transformation to a world of education defined by increased surveillance in her 2019 talk, "When Teachers Are Avatars and the Students are Data." She details how "schools are being remade to feed a new type of economy that is very much data-driven, . . . increasingly automated, and in which human beings and human relationships are seen as redundant by those in power." Through the use of corporate digital curricula and platforms, this generation of children, argues McDowell, is building this new virtual world in which learning is mediated by technology, and in which predictive profiling is perfected, spurring financial speculation, investment and profits.

Portland Public Schools may be further down the track towards Education Reform 2.0 than appears to the casual observer. In its strategic plan for 2021-25, Forward Together, PPS articulated its goal for student learning as individualized, self-directed experiences, echoing McDowell's description of Educational Reform 2.0.

PPS strategic plan lists the following as one of its chief learning outcomes for students:

Design Learning Experiences that Promote Self-Directed, Future-Ready Learning 

Every student has access to flexible, personalized, and differentiated learning experiences throughout their PK–12 journey that are centered on their interests and needs, support self-directed learning, are real-world relevant, and provide multiple pathways to graduation or a certificate of completion.

Personalized learning design "use(s) space and time creatively, in ways that expand the learning environment beyond the traditional 'bell' structure."

Forward Together also sets out to create ELOs, with one of the goals being developing "a comprehensive plan, and prototype external and internal career-related learning with students that emphasizes real-world, hands-on experiences, such as internships and externships, job shadows, and simulations." At this rate, the role of a veteran teacher will soon be replaced by technology, private sector tutors and mentors, and non-unionized community organizations.

McDowell cites a 2019 policy paper by the Aspen Institute entitled, "Future of Work Initiative State Policy Agenda," which outlines a new vision for the future of employment. Aspen Institute's vision promises to "partially automate over 90 percent of occupations over the next twelve years," and encourages states to pass legislation to support the "gigifying" of the economy. PPS is part of the Aspen Institute K-12 Education CFO Network, and PPS Chief Financial Officer, Nolberto Delgadillo, is a 2021-22 Education Resource Strategies (ERS) CFO chair. ERS is "a national non-profit that partners with district, school, and state leaders to transform how they use resources (people, time, and money)." ERS and the Aspen Institute jointly strategize as part of the ERS-Aspen CFO/CSO Strategy Network, "which brings together school district finance leaders from across the country who are committed to transforming outcomes for students and maximizing the impact of their districts' resources (people, time, and money)." The network "aims to support CFOs and CSOs by equipping them with the knowledge and skills to enable them to act as strategic leaders within their districts and provides a venue for them to meaningfully collaborate and learn together." The Aspen Institute, of course, supports the collection and pooling of data in the field of education, euphemistically calling it "(breaking) down (of) silos in data to spark and support collaboration." The Institute is enthusiastic about the very idea discussed by McDowell of moving beyond the confines of traditional education and "getting outside the school system into the ecosystem of community partners and organizations that understand the culture and stories of the students we hope to serve." 

McDowell explains the future of education as intertwined with how social services will be delivered: "Through predatory public-private partnerships, global financiers are in the process of digitizing not only our education system, but many other aspects of public service delivery."

In a short video, she details the scheme, “Pay For Success," also known as social impact bonds, which the Urban Institute funded by Enron founder, John Arnold, defines as an "innovative financing mechanism that shifts financial risk from a traditional funder—usually government—to a new investor."  McDowell says these "hinge on intrusive and oppressive collection of data from our classrooms, homes, jails, and clinics." She warns that "by defining 'success' in narrow terms suited to outcomes-based contracting, powerful investors will control how public services are delivered." She cautions that if not resisted, "securitization of debt associated with program operations will turn our lives, including those of our children, into fodder for financial speculation."

Carnegie Corporation of New York which authored the guiding document for PPS's "Teacher Professional Learning Plan," is also an enthusiastic driver of the shift to personalized learning as a means of data mining and profit generation. As an example, the surveillance they funded during online learning at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic extended beyond individual students to their entire families, signaling a pattern of education technology being increasingly used to mine, profile, and profit off sensitive data on students and the wider community. 

The Carnegie Corporation recounts:

"During the pandemic, many schools enhanced their communications to build stronger relationships between educators and students’ families. At Concourse Village Elementary School in the Bronx, communication with families had been done mostly as needed, and the principal feared parents didn’t really want to talk to the school. During COVID-19, the school began a weekly electronic survey to check in with families — first about their technology needs, then, increasingly, about mental health, food security, and other challenges. Families could report positive COVID diagnoses, request assistance with food or technology, or share other pertinent information."

The company, Amplify, was built on the foundation of Wireless Generation, which the educational company News Corp bought in 2010 for $360 million dollars. Wireless Generation was co-founded by Larry Berger in 2000 along with Greg Gunn, a former associate of the Carlyle Group who had earned a Masters of Electrical Engineering from MIT. Berger, who is now the CEO of Amplify, has been instrumental in the invention of mobile software for early reading and next-generation curriculum for elementary and middle schools. Berger was a Rhodes scholar and a White House fellow working on educational technology at NASA, as well as a Pahara-Aspen Education Fellow. By the way, Pahara Institute was founded in 2007 by "education innovator and entrepreneur" Kim Smith, who previously co-founded NewSchools Venture Fund and also served as a founding team member of Teach For America, which ProPublica has called "an arm of the charter school movement." NewSchools Venture Fund is a venture capital company that education researcher Thomas Ultican identifies as "the most strident in its commitment to disrupting public education."

Here is an excerpt from Larry Berger's Aspen Institute bio:

"Larry Berger has been active in the education and technology fields for more than fifteen years. As chairman and co-founder of Wireless Generation, he has led the invention of the patent-pending mCLASS® software system for early reading and math assessment, which has transformed the way educators collect and use assessment data, creating a culture of continuous feedback in classrooms. The mCLASS software streamlines the assessment process and increases the value of data by delivering it immediately in handheld- and Web-based reports for teachers and administrators, with recommendations and tools for linking data to instruction. Prior to launching Wireless Generation, Larry was President of InterDimensions, a Web solutions company based in New York and Boston. He also served as the Educational Technology Specialist at The Children's Aid Society, where he led the development of four 'Technology Playgrounds' in Harlem and Staten Island, community computer labs in disadvantaged neighborhoods that have served as models of using technology to empower young people. . . . As a White House Fellow, Larry worked on Educational Technology at NASA, where he authored a vision of NASA's 21st century educational technology agenda, and did the conceptual design and early development of NASA BioBLAST, a curriculum module for high school biology. Larry has published numerous articles on education technology and the use of handheld computing to support diagnostic instruction. . . Larry holds a B.A. summa cum laude from Yale and was a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford University. He is a Fellow of the Aspen Pahara Education Fellowship and a member of the Aspen Global Leadership Network." 

Amplify is an ed tech firm that develops content, assessment tools for K-12 schools, and teacher evaluation tools. Amplify also provides secure data hosting, reporting and management for educational institutions.

Ultican traces the history of Amplify as a company that has vied to monopolize the digital learning market, highlighting News Corp mogul, Rupert Murdoch's aspiration "to beat Pearson and Houghton Mifflin to the digital education market place," as well as Amplify's partnership with AT&T, and the company's "$12.5 million dollar contract with the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium to develop a digital library of formative assessments."

When Amplify's own tablet computer and bundled education software for classrooms across the country didn’t deliver on its financial objective, Murdoch sold the company to private investors in 2015. The buyer of Amplify was Laurene Powell Jobs, wife of the late Steve Jobs co-founder of Apple. She purchased Amplify through her non-profit the Emerson Collective. Powell Jobs is also on the board of NewSchools Venture Fund. In the past, she worked on Wall Street for Merrill Lynch and Goldman Sachs. Business Insider says of Powell Jobs:

"In the 10 years since Jobs died of cancer, Powell Jobs has nearly doubled a fortune that was based on Apple and Disney stock into a diversified collection of assets and businesses which her team estimates to be worth $16 billion."

Ultican writes of the contempt Powell Jobs has for seasoned teachers, and her desire to transform public schools into charters and learning into a technology-driven individualized experience.

In 2015 Powell Jobs cofounded XQ Institute, an independent nonprofit backed by Emerson Collective with the key question: "What if schools unlocked the power of technology to transform education?"

Social Emotional Learning (SEL) is one of the most insidious schemes for data mining and profiling of students and their families. PPS is currently in the process of adopting SEL curricula. PPS describes SEL in this way:

"SEL is the process through which all young people and adults acquire and apply the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to develop healthy identities, manage emotions and achieve personal and collective goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain supportive relationships, and make responsible and caring decisions."

In its article, "Big Tech Sees Big Profits in Social-Emotional Learning at School," LA Progressive exposes the way tech companies use SEL to reap in enormous profits off collecting and monitoring students’ behavior data. 

The LA Progressive article states: 

"Before the pandemic temporarily shuttered school buildings, the demand for tracking what students do while they’re online, and how that activity might inform schools about how to address students’ social and emotional needs, was mostly driven by desires to prevent bullying and school shootings, according to a December 2019 report by Vice.

Tech companies that make and market popular software products such as GoGuardian, Securly, and Bark claim to alert schools of any troubling social-emotional behaviors students might exhibit when they’re online so that educators can intervene, Vice reports, but '[t]here is, however, no independent research that backs up these claims.'"

Top investors in SEL programs for schools are billionaires Mark Zuckerberg, his wife, Priscilla Chan through their Chan Zuckerberg Initiative as well as other as other Silicon Valley venture capitalists such as Powell Jobs' Emerson Collective.

One SEL curriculum being considered for adoption by PPS is Collaborative Classroom, a non-profit funded by such giants as Google, the Ford Foundation where Laurene Powell Jobs is a new board of trustees member, and the Rockefeller Foundation, which launched its data.org initiative in 2020 to supposedly "democratize and reimagine data science to tackle society's greatest challenges and improve lives across the globe." The platform "brings together philanthropy, private sector technology, academia, and social impact organizations to build the field of data science for social impact." 

Fly Five is another SEL curriculum up for consideration by PPS. They not only collect student behavior data, but extend their reach into students' homes to monitor families' online activities. Their website states: 

"The School-to-Home Connections (SHC) are designed to support parent/caregiver engagement, continue SEL learning at home, and connect parents/caregivers to what students are learning at school. The SHC unit is formatted as a newsletter with an overview of the standards, competency, and skills that are being taught in the unit. It also provides five activities that parents/caregivers can choose to incorporate at home based on their schedules. The activities vary in time and depth of engagement. Parents/caregivers can choose these activities based upon their context and time. Some activities can be completed in as few as 10 minutes, while having dinner, before bed, or even in the car. Others may take up to a full day if the parents/caregivers decide to invest that amount of time."

Needless to say, the scope of the surveillance under the guise of helping with students' social emotional health is enormous and daunting. 

Education researcher, Thomas Ultican, details the history of i-Ready curriculum being adopted by PPS. In his piece, "iReady Magnificent Marketing Terrible Teaching," he quotes "a self-described soccer-mom from Florida, Deb Herbage," who wrote a well-documented article about i-Ready. 

Herbage argued:

“i-Ready Diagnostic exploded onto the scene like … other 'competency based education' (CBE) curriculums since the implementation of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). It is now believed by many that the implementation of the CCSS and the focus on the standardized tests that went along with the CCSS was yet another extremely, well-crafted and timed implementation to distract parents, teachers, students and some school officials while district and state officials put in place the many ed-tech companies, corporations, investors, foundations, and non-profit companies … who all quickly and methodically jumped on the CCSS bandwagon …. While we were distracted with the CCSS and end of year standardized testing – in school districts all across the state of Florida and across the country, i-Ready Diagnostic, owned by Curriculum Associates, implemented and deployed their much touted 'progress monitoring' curriculum – i-Ready Diagnostic.”

i-Ready is a technology-based diagnostic and instruction program that "adjusts the difficulty level of the questions presented depending on student response to previous questions." Ultican sums up i-Ready as it is ultimately meant to function when he writes: "instead of a structured course with a teacher, students log into a computer and demonstrate competencies in an online environment." Ultican also makes the case that i-Ready is popular in districts led by privatizer-friendly administrators.

4. Tax Dollars to Corporations/Advancing Privatization

The connection to school privatizers was evident in the i-Ready Math overview by Curriculum Associates National Director, Megan Robinson, presented to educators during the PPS August Math Institute Kickoff last August. In her presentation, Robinson shared Curriculum Associates' philosophy which she termed "consensus on how to address unfinished learning" based on leading thinkers, including the fiercely anti-union, anti-educator, pro-privatization organization, TNTP, and the billionaire-funded Student Achievement Partners co-founded by Common Core entrepreneur and lead writer of the CCSS, David Coleman.

Robinson had the audacity to assert that the main mission of her company is racial equity while citing an article by Paul T. Hill touting the student achievement lessons learned from the post-Hurricane Katrina New Orleans, purportedly applicable today in the post-COVID-19 era. Omitted from the reference was the predatory nature of these "lessons learned" by venture capitalists and disaster entrepreneurs who pounced on the devastated community and privatized and charterized an entire public school district.

To understand the scope of Hill's work that no public school district in the nation should be eager to embrace lest it desires to be dismantled by business interests, here is Hill's bio:

"Paul T. Hill is the founder of the Center on Reinventing Public Education, and Emeritus Professor at the University of Washington Bothell. His current work focuses on re-missioning states and school districts to promote school performance; school choice and innovation; finance and productivity; and improving rural schools.

Dr. Hill’s ideas have profoundly impacted education reform nationwide, influencing the way that many scholars, policymakers, and education leaders think about how the U.S. public education system can be restructured. His development of the portfolio school district management strategy has directly shaped education reform initiatives in cities like New York and New Orleans, among others. He launched the Portfolio School Districts Project in 2008, and built a national network of district officials, mayors, foundations, nonprofits, and others pursuing the portfolio strategy. Dr. Hill has been a trusted advisor to many of the nation’s leading superintendents, state chiefs, and governors; he works closely with city and state leaders facing the need to transform their urban public school systems, and is a frequent source of expertise for legislators and the media. He chaired the National Charter School Research Project and its Charter School Achievement Consensus Panel, as well as Brookings National Working Commission on Choice in K-12 Education."

As another post on this blog details, the guiding document for the PPS Instructional Framework and the associated curriculum adoptions and shift to curriculum-based professional learning is Carnegie Corporation of New York's, "The Elements: Transforming Teaching through Curriculum-Based Professional Learning."

The paper is coauthored by Jim Short, a program director at Carnegie Corporation of New York, and Stephanie Hirsh, Strategic Advisor/Consultant to Carnegie Corporation's National Education Program Teaching and Leadership Division, and Managing Director with Hirsh Holdings LLC, a company providing consulting for "start ups primarily focused on preK-20 education and other related services." Carnegie Corporation is one of Hirsh Holdings LLC's clients. Carnegie Corporation supports "the creation of innovative schools and programs that personalize student learning experiences, as well as the capacity-building of adults and systems in support of these efforts." One of their philanthropic grantees is Charter Fund, Inc. Since its founding in 2005, Charter Fund, Inc. has "supported over 200 charter networks which collectively served approximately 535,000 students across thirty-six states in 2020-21." Carnegie Corporation's commitment to school privatization is clear.

Writer and educator, Tim Scott, outlines the aim of venture philanthropists, many of whom are listed above. Scott says their goal is to dismantle public education in his article for the Dissident Voice:

“Gates and other venture philanthropist’s have ‘pioneered’ and ‘seeded’ new education markets through direct funding and by shaping ‘education reform’ policies. Charter schools are an essential component of this mission… allowing impact investors to be the drivers of the education reform industry’s final mission: to fully dismantle public education by way of ‘anywhere, anytime learning’ and ‘personalized’ technologies.”

Scott explains the phenomenon of social impact bonds, to which surveillance and data collection is key, this way: 

"In the US, the global neoliberal project of the past half century has made significant strides in impoverishing record numbers of people through structural adjustment and austerity policies that center on disinvestment from public programs, services and infrastructure. In doing so, this has created the rationale to transfer traditional public sector responsibilities to venture philanthropists and financial investors . . . Guided by the belief that 'impact investing is a powerful model with the potential to build markets and drive change for the people who need it most' (Bill Gates), . . . investment. . . 'opportunities' in the US are focusing on: healthcare, education, microfinance, housing, real estate, small business development, natural resources conservation, sustainable agriculture, water and sanitation and clean energy.

Social Impact Bonds (SIB) are one of the most popular instruments of the impact investment industry, which are, in essence, derivatives or swaps (bets). . .

In sum, impact investing is promoted by neoliberal governments and their private sector partners through manipulative marketing storylines intended to convince us that elite financial investors are best positioned to mitigate long-standing social inequities. Never mind the fact that these social conditions are the generators of their wealth and power and result from the financial instruments they employ to allegedly do good.' Thus, in the age of financialization and within the ever solidifying state-finance nexus, venture capitalists — through the veneer of their generous and public spirited foundations — are the benevolent titans of international development and the arbiters of public, civic and social life. More dramatically, these powerful dynamics enable billionaire foundations to hasten the process by which financial institutions serve as the overlords of all aspects of life on our planet."

 

In addition to lucrative contracts with corporate textbook and learning platform vendors worth millions of dollars, PPS has contracted with consultants and evaluators including the notoriously anti-union and anti-teacher, TNTP, formerly known as The New Teachers Project. The district is also outsourcing the services of Research Making Change, or RMC Research Corporation. 

5. Evaluating the Evaluators

In January and May of this year, Deputy Superintendent of Instruction and School Communities, Dr. Cheryl Proctor, requested and the School Board approved funding for RMC Research Corporation to evaluate the implementation of the newly adopted curriculum for a total of more than $850,000. Who is RMC Research Corporation?

 
RMC Research Corporation was founded in 1966. Its corporate headquarters is located in
Portsmouth, New Hampshire, but the company has offices in four other locations, including Portland, Oregon. According to RMC's website, the corporation was purchased by Dr. Everett Barnes and M. Christine Dwyer in 1985. They are "responsible for RMC Research’s operations as principal owners, corporate officers, and members of the Board of Directors." Dwyer is the Senior Vice President of RMC Research, philanthropist, and former Portsmouth City Councilor. Her expertise is mainly in policy evaluation and implementation, early childhood education, the arts, and school reform. Barnes' areas of expertise include grant writing, program development and management, formative and summative evaluation, and online learning content development and delivery. Barnes’ background in education is extensive, as a teacher and administrator. At the University of New Hampshire’s Bureau of Educational Research and Testing Services, he was responsible for New Hampshire’s K-12 state testing program.

RMC produces reports on many different areas of education. The corporation evaluates teacher training program effectiveness, district-charter partnerships, classroom assessment practices, curriculum implementation, and school safety. The areas of focus listed on the RMC website are:

• Needs assessment, strategic planning, policy development
• Standards and assessment resources
• Curriculum-based interventions
• Equity in education
• Early childhood education
• School and school system improvement
• Reading and literacy
• STEM education
• Community, family, and parent engagement
• Talent development, educator preparation, and professional development
• School choice

One example of a study RMC conducted was "A Comprehensive Longitudinal Study of School Violence and the School-to-Prison Pipeline: Root Causes and Consequences of and Implications for Restorative Justice Approaches." For this, RMC used "a robust dataset (which) included more than 15 years of de-identified longitudinal individual-level data from at least 11 state agencies including, but not limited to, the Oregon Health Authority, Department of Education, the Oregon Youth Authority, the Department of Human Services," and The Oregon Department of Education.

Historically, RMC Research Corporation has had access to extremely sensitive data on students and families, and it is concerning that through the process of evaluating PPS' implementation of new curricula, the company will collect yet more highly personal data on our schools' children, families, and teachers.

Of special significance to PPS educators is RMC's experience with observing and evaluating teachers. In 2008, RMC secured a contract--paid for with tax levy dollars--with New York City public schools to "provide peer observers for tenured teachers who have been identified as in need of assistance with classroom instruction." The contract says that "the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) and the DOE have both agreed that the RMC offers a logical and sound approach to provide support to teachers with previously documented performance issues." 

RMC's task is described as follows, perhaps echoing their desired role in Portland next year:

"RMC Research Corporation proposes to provide a cadre of highly experienced classroom teachers, professional coaches and former administrators to be peer observers for identified K-12 classroom teachers in danger of receiving charges pursuant to Education Law 3020a for incompetence. These highly qualified Peer Observers will provide necessary instructional support for the participating teachers based on their individual needs. An individualized plan will be developed collaboratively and will become the roadmap for the professional support provided. Work with participant teachers will be conducted through an objective lens by all RMC Peer Observers and will result in critical feedback and meaningful recommendations about continued employment to principals and school administrators."

RMC's tasks under this contract included: 

• conducting onsite visits to observe and confer with teachers
• preparing feedback sheets and observation reports after each visit
• preparing final reports of competence for each participant teacher
• participating in disciplinary hearings as necessary

RMC followed the Continuum of Teacher Development created the New Teacher Center at the University of California, Santa Cruz, the same organization PPS is drawing on for its professional learning plan.

This contract was procured by then New York City Schools Chancellor, Joel Klein, who championed corporate education reform and became Chief Executive Officer of Amplify.

RMC's current leadership is also concerning. The Florida RMC office director, Robin Jarvis, was the Superintendent of the post-Katrina Recovery School District in New Orleans overseeing the complete privatization of the entire public school district. According to her LinkedIn profile, Jarvis "developed (the) charter school application and approval process" for "for 112 school sites in Orleans Parish."

Her LinkedIn account states: 

  
"(Jarvis) worked with charter school operators and district-operated school staff to ensure the development and implementation of high quality schools in Orleans Parish. Collaborated with the community, neighborhood groups, Orleans Parish School Board members and staff on planning and collaboration issues to support the rebuilding of Orleans Parish through education following Hurricane Katrina. (She) established first central office in New Orleans for Recovery School District and hired staff to administer programs and services needed to operate 17 district schools and oversee 17 charter schools in first full year of RSD operation following Hurricane Katrina. (Jarvis) worked with groups including New Schools for New Orleans, New Leaders for New Schools, and the New Teacher Project to develop relationships and bring resources to New Orleans to support both charter schools and district-operated schools in recruiting and hiring effective teachers and leaders."

Jarvis led the mass firing of more than 4,300 unionized, veteran, largely Black teachers post Hurricane Katrina, almost one third of whom had 25 or more years of experience and qualified for full retirement benefits. According to The American Prospect article, "NOLA's Failed Education Experiment," as Superintendent, Jarvis spent $20 million on security, "altering the ratio of students to security guards from a pre-Katrina 333-to-one to a post-Katrina 37-to-one, while employing the services of out-of-state security firms with no background in school security and a tendency to hire inappropriately young and inexperienced personnel." The the new system of independent charter schools, Jarvis instituted, of course, operates without the constraints imposed by a union contract. 

The Portland branch director of RMC is Dr. Paul Smokowski. He has an interdisciplinary background in social welfare, criminology, child development, and public health. Dr. Smokowski has served as a Professor at the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill, Arizona State University, and the University of Kansas. He has published extensively on issues related to risk, resilience, acculturation, adolescent mental health, family stress, and youth violence prevention.

A key chapter in Dr. Smokowski's professional career--ironic considering the fact that his office was hired to evaluate PPS educators--is his unsuccessful stint as Dean of the School of Social Welfare at the University of Kansas. Smokowski's position as a dean ended after only 10 months as a culmination of protests, including sit-ins, by the Student Activist Committee who called for his resignation following "several months of inaction and lack of accountability regarding issues of race," racial discrimination, inclusion and equity on campus. The students asserted that the dean did not show adequate commitment to social justice, a core tenet of the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics, and prompted him to resign his position.

Are such evaluators to be trusted? Why should Portland teachers allow into their district a for-profit company with leaders enthusiastic about the charter takeover and a history of taking control of teachers' job performance evaluations in cahoots with pro-privatization reformers?

Resistance is Key

It is up to the parents, teachers and students to wrest control away from vendors of racist curricula, billionaires, opportunist education philanthropists, corporations, and venture capitalists.

The study, “​​Overwhelming whiteness: a critical analysis of race in a scripted reading curriculum, provides concrete steps for resisting the imposition of racist curricula. The authors suggest that “the most valuable juncture for resisting a curriculum that erases BIPOC experiences is before it is adopted in a school or school district” by pressing for explanation, countering with evidence, and seeking allies to form a unified front.

The Franklin Post reports that "members of the English departments at Franklin, Roosevelt, and McDaniel high schools have formally submitted letters of complaint to PPS," opposing the English Language Arts curriculum adoption. This is one small action that, when added to others, can form the tide of resistance needed to preserve free, democratic public education for all.

On the classroom level, it is recommended to use “strategies to create opportunities for critical pedagogy and social-justice oriented teaching, including reading against the grain of a text, prioritizing student engagement in lesson design, and engaging in dialogue about canonical texts in ways that ask students to consider contemporary social justice issues.”

Portland teachers have resisted a corporate high stakes testing takeover of the district and have fought for educators’ academic freedom before. It can be done again, but with the broadened understanding that considers the interconnected nature of corporate curriculum, data mining for profit, and the end goal of dismantling public education. In this fight, educators must be clear on how all of these elements together harm their profession, students, and families, forming a coalition to democratize and preserve free, public education for all.