Wednesday, October 29, 2014

OAXACANS WANT THE RIGHT TO NOT MIGRATE

LETTER FROM MEXICO #3
Oaxacans Want the Right to Not Migrate
By David Bacon
The Progressive, web edition


OAXACA DE JUAREZ, MEXICO (10/20/14) -- For six weeks hundreds of teachers in the southern Mexico state of Oaxaca have been living in tents, in the capital city's main plaza, the zocalo.  Bonifacio Garcia, one of the protestors, declares, "We will stay here until the state Chamber of Deputies agrees that our education reform will move forward in all our schools." 


Teachers planton in the Zocalo, or main plaza, in Oaxaca.

Each week teachers from one of Oaxaca's regions take a turn at sleeping in the tents.  This is the week for the schools on the coast, including the communities of people whose ancestors were slaves.  Garcia comes from Santiago Tapextla, near Pinotepa Nacional, where most people trace part of their ancestry back to Africa. 

On the coast, family trees are very mixed.  Most also reveal other ancestors among the indigenous people who were here long before the Spanish conquerors arrived.  "Spaniards brought slaves with them from the Caribbean and Africa," Garcia explains. "After Mexico outlawed slavery in 1821 we became an autonomous community.  But in Mexico African people aren't considered an original people, the way indigenous people are.  We're still not really recognized, so we have to fight for our rights."  

Garcia is principal of a "telesecondaria" -- a secondary school in a remote area where part of the instruction is given through a national televised curriculum.  While he uses that TV program, he and his fellow teachers reject most of the other reforms Mexico's national government has attempted to impose.  Oaxacan teachers and their union, Section 22 of the National Union of Education Workers, say the Federal education reforms rely too heavily on standardized testing, and punish teachers for the low scores of their students. 


Teachers Bonifacio Garcia and Gabriel Vielma Monjaroz talk with another teacher in their encampment in the main plaza of Oaxaca.

Instead, Section 22 formulated its own education reform plan five years ago, the Program to Transform Education in Oaxaca (PTEO).  It seeks to develop an intensely cooperative relationship between teachers, students, parents and the surrounding community. Lulu, a young preschool teacher from Huatulco, further south along the coast, says, "I have a much closer relationship now to the parents of my children than we did before."

For Garcia, the central purpose of PTEO is to help students get a better education, especially those in rural areas who speak pre-Hispanic languages like Mixteco, Zapoteco or Triqui -- Oaxacans speak 23 indigenous tongues.  But education, he believes, should also provide an alternative to the out-migration that is devastating small farming communities. 

"I know the cost of migration very well, " he says.  "I lived for four years in Elgin, Illinois, working for an organization there that helped immigrants understand their rights.  So I know how hard life can be in the north.  Migration also hollows out our communities here.  If we want young people to stay, we have to have an alternative that is attractive to them.  That starts with education.  That's why our program to change the schools is so important, and why we're willing to sit here in the zocalo until the government agrees."


A group of preschool teachers from the coast in the teachers' planton.

Oaxaca has about 3.5 million people, who began leaving the state because of intense rural poverty in the 1970s.  At first people migrated to work on the industrial farms of northern Mexico.  But then indigenous Oaxacan towns, dependent on growing corn and other agricultural products, were hit hard by the North American Free Trade Agreement.  In 1990, before the agreement was implemented, about 527,000 people had already left.  A decade later that number had mushroomed to 663,000.

Beginning in the 1980s, Oaxacan migrants began crossing the border, first into California, and then dispersing into states all over the U.S.  By 2008 about 12.5 million Mexican migrants were living north of the border (up from 4.6 million in 1990) -- 9.4% of the population of Mexico.  But even in this huge wave, Oaxacans have been over-represented -- 19% of its people are migrants.

Rufino DomÆnguez, who heads the Oaxacan Institute for Attention to Migrants, estimates that there are about 500,000 indigenous people from Oaxaca in the U.S., 300,000 in California alone.  One result has been an explosion of Oaxacan culture in exile.  Currently, at least 16 Guelaguetzas (the annual festival that showcases the elaborate dances of Oaxaca's many regions) take place, not just in California (where there are 11), but also in Seattle WA, Poughkeepsie NY, Salem OR, Odessa TX, and Atlantic City NJ.


Two teachers in their encampment in the main plaza of Oaxaca.  Their banner says, "In these times, it is more dangerous to be a student than to be a criminal," which refers to the murder of students at the teachers' training college in Ayotzinapa.

Beautiful dances, however, are performed by communities that live on the economic margin.  Rick Mines, author of the 2010 Indigenous Farm Worker Study, says surveys reveal that among Californias indigenous Mexican farm workers (about 120,000 people) a third earn minimum wage, while a third are paid illegal wages below that.  The U.S. food system has long been dependent on the influx of an ever-changing, newly-arrived group of workers that sets the wages and working conditions at the entry level in the farm labor market, he elaborates. 

California has a farm labor force of about 700,000 workers, so the day is not far off when indigenous Oaxacan migrants may make up a majority.  Indigenous people constituted 7% of Mexican migrants in 1991-3, the years just before NAFTA. In 2006-8, they made up 29%four times more.  The rock-bottom wages paid to this most recent wave of migrants sets the wage floor for all the other workers in California farm labor, keeping the labor costs of California growers low, and their profits high.

It was no surprise, therefore, that anger over discrimination, displacement, migration and poverty ran through many denunciations heard last week in Oaxaca at the triennial assembly of the Binational Front of Indigenous Organizations (FIOB).  "We are not people who were 'discovered' by the Spaniards, the Americans or anyone else," thundered Romualdo Juan Gutierrez Cortez, FIOB's new binational coordinator.  "We are people in struggle!"


The newly elected binational coordinator of the Binational Front of Indigenous Organizations (FIOB), Romualdo Juan Gutierrez Cortez.

Gutierrez is a teacher with a long political history in Oaxaca.  He was elected a decade ago to the state Chamber of Deputies, and after his term ended, was jailed in reprisal by the governor from Mexico's old ruling party, the Party of the Institutionalized Revolution.  When a teachers' strike spiraled into a virtual insurrection in 2006, the following governor put his name on a list of activists to be arrested yet again.  When the PRI lost the governorship for the first time in 70 years in 2010, Gutierrez went to work in the state's migrant assistance agency.

FIOB is a unique organization created in 1992 by both Oaxacan migrants in California, and by the communities in Oaxaca from which they come.  It has chapters in four California cities, in several towns in Baja California in north Mexico where Oaxacans work as migrants, and in many indigenous towns in Oaxaca itself.  Many FIOB activists are teachers because educators play such an important role in community life.  Now FIOB will be headed by two of them -- Gutierrez and Ezequiel Rosales, who led the union during the 2006 strike.

In 2010 both FIOB and the union supported the candidate who defeated the PRI -- Gabino Cue, the former mayor of Oaxaca's capital city.  That gave teachers enough political influence to insist that the Oaxaca Institute for Public Education, which administers the states schools, begin implementing their PTEO reform.  It's been a fight, however.  Two years ago, Claudio Gonzçlez, one of Mexico's wealthiest and most powerful businessmen and head of a national group backing standardized testing, warned Governor CuÄ that he had to break the hijacking of education by Secciùn 22.  He called the teachers tyrants.  Under pressure from the PRI administration in Mexico City, Oaxaca's state government is backtracking on its commitment to PTEO.  That's the reason for the encampment in the zocalo.


A delegate speaks from the floor of the FIOB assembly.

When Cue was elected, FIOB met with him to ask that he appoint Dominguez, FIOB's former binational coordinator, to head the Oaxacan Institute for Attention to Migrants.  Cue then declared that his administration was dedicated to implementing the "right to not migrate."  This right, a centerpiece of FIOB's political program for a decade, calls for alternatives to forced migration, including better schools, higher agricultural prices, jobs, and health care in rural areas.  If people have an alternative, FIOB activists argue, they can choose freely if they want to leave home or not. 

FIOB's outgoing binational coordinator, Bernardo Ramirez, says people in the U.S. don't really understand what causes migration.  "The wage here in Oaxaca is 73 pesos ($6) a day," he explains, "and in some of the poorest areas people are living on 30 pesos a day.  They'll eat if they produce their own corn for tortillas and beans, but they just have enough money to buy an egg.  When the free trade agreement came in, they lost the market for the little they were producing.  The products coming in from the U.S. had government support and subsidies.  Mexicans couldn't compete with that.  People see migration as their only option to survive." 

In a poor state like Oaxaca it is difficult to provide the alternative.  High hopes for Cue led to frustration and anger when the state couldn't deliver on many promises of economic development.  FIOB has tried to encourage its own rural development projects.   "We want people to produce what we eat," Ramirez says, depending less on buying processed food, or instance. 


A delegate speaks from the floor of the FIOB assembly.

FIOB also goes into the schools, especially secondary schools where young people are already thinking of leaving, to dispel illusions that life is always better in the north.  "The people who come back just talk about the good part of migration," Ramirez charges bitterly.  "They don't talk about how many days they had to walk through the desert.  They don't mention that seven or eight people were sleeping on the floor in the room where they were living.  They don't say they were robbed or beaten while they were traveling, and the government did nothing."

Therefore, in addition to advocating the right to not migrate, FIOB also says people have the right to migrate, and to basic human and civil rights when they do.  Deportations from the U.S. were on everyone's mind.  FIOB members in California have been marching for months to demand a halt to the separation of families, and to support the thousands of migrants who spend time in detention centers every year.  In Oaxaca, people in almost every community have had a deportation experience that has left its bitter memories.

The California section of FIOB has criticized for years U.S. proposals for immigration reform, because of their emphasis on enforcement and guest worker programs.  It has called for a progressive alternative, based on labor and human rights, and at the Oaxaca meeting voted to join a U.S. network of organizations supporting it, the Dignity Campaign. 


Cheers at the end of the FIOB assembly.

Last year FIOB activists implemented this formal position by helping Oaxacan farm workers organize an independent union in Washington State.  During that fight the grower employing them, Sakuma Farms, fired several workers, denied families a space to live in the company labor camp, and tried to keep wages at the level of the state's minimum.  When workers organized to protest, ranch owners tried to bring in a replacement force of guest workers from Mexico, under the H2A work visa program. 

During the workers' strike last year, Ramirez went to Washington State.  FIOB and the new union, Familias Unidas por la Justicia, then mobilized opposition that kept the U.S. Department of Labor from approving the farm's application.  In last week's assembly one worker, Herminio Ortiz Espinoza, described his four years as a guest worker in Canada.  "The bosses always yelled at us and treated us as though we were inferior," he recalled.  "I had a friend who protested, and he was deported right away.  After that, we were all afraid to say anything."

"We've talked with 70% of the people recruited in Oaxaca, and there are enormous violations of the rights of workers by guest worker programs," Ramirez adds.
"We're also concerned about the Oaxacans who are already living in the United States.  Sakuma Farms already had a lot of workers, very good ones.  But the grower wanted to keep them from organizing, defending themselves and demanding higher wages.  He knew people here in Mexico are desperate for work, and that he could make them work for the minimum.  He wanted to put Oaxacans into competition with other Oaxacans.  That's why in FIOB we want an immigration reform in the U.S. that doesn't have guest worker programs.  Migrants need the right to come and work, but to work with rights."


The newly-elected leaders of the FIOB.

At the end of the assembly, FIOB reiterated its support for the union at Sakuma Farms, and its opposition to guest worker programs.  When it announced its opposition a decade ago, it was virtually alone among migrant organizations in Mexico in doing so.  Today, as guest worker programs grow in the U.S., and the number of people who return with direct experience in them grows as well, so does that opposition. 

As the delegates left at the end of the assembly, a number went to talk with the teachers in the zocalo, sharing their outrage over the students killed and kidnapped at the teachers' training school in Ayotzinapa, Guerrero.  This issue is convulsing Mexico.  Banners and signs hung everywhere in the encampment, expressing revulsion at the attack. 

The assembly itself accused the government of responsibility for Ayotzinapa, calling it "state terrorism that the government is implementing in order to suppress social protest." Back in the U.S., FIOB members mounted protests at consulates in Los Angeles, Santa Maria, San Diego, Oxnard and Fresno.  In a letter delivered in each, FIOB's new officers also demanded that the U.S. government recognize its responsibility "for the economic and political instability of Mexico, because it is the greatest consumer of drugs, because it supports the big corporations that produce the arms used by Mexican criminal groups, and because it imposed on Mexico the North American Free Trade Agreement and other neoliberal policies."


A sign in the teachers' encampment in the main plaza of Oaxaca has a slogan common throughout Mexico:  "Ayotzinapa, your pain in my pain, your fight is my fight.  They took them away alive, and we want them returned alive."  It refers to the murder of six students and the kidnap of another 43 at the teachers' training college in Ayotzinapa.

The letter added, "We want a Mexico with democracy, justice and liberty, where young people who are the future of our country can thrive and participate with their knowledge and skills in building a healthy, strong and dignified country." 


Today people speaking Oaxaca's indigenous languages live in very distant places, separated by thousands of miles and a militarized border.  But whether in the zocalo or the FIOB assembly, they increasingly function as a single community.  Anti-immigrant hysteria may have come to dominate politics in the rich countries of the north, but Oaxacans are moving in the opposite direction.  They are asserting the right to decide when and how crossing borders is in their interest.  And instead of being simply divided by borders, they are organizing across them.

TRIBUNAL TAKES UP MEXICO'S MIGRANT "HELL"

LETTER FROM MEXICO #1
Tribunal Takes Up Mexico's Migrant "Hell"
By David Bacon
The Progressive, web edition




MEXICO CITY (10/5/14) -- Just before judges heard testimony on migration at the Permanent People's Tribunal in Mexico City last week, the Mexican government announced a new measure that might have been deliberately intended to show why activists brought the Tribunal to Mexico to begin with, three years ago.  Interior (Gobernacion) Secretary Miguel Angel Osorio Chong told the press that the speed of trains known by migrants as "La Bestia" (The Beast) would be doubled.

Photos of "La Bestia" have become famous around the world, showing young migrants crowded on top of boxcars, riding the rails from the Guatemala border to near the U.S. It's a slow train, but many boys and girls have lost arms and legs trying to get on or off, and wind up living in limbo in the Casas de Migrantes -- the hostels run by the Catholic Church and other migrant rights activists throughout Mexico.  Osorio Chong said Mexico would require the companies operating the trains - a partnership between mining giant Grupo Mexico and the U.S. corporation Kansas Southern - to hike their speed to make it harder for the migrants. 

In the Tribunal, young people, giving only their first names out of fear, said they'd see many more severed limbs and deaths as a result, but that it wouldn't stop people from coming.  Armed gangs regularly rob the migrants, they charged, and young people get beaten and raped.  If they're willing to face this, they'll try to get on the trains no matter how fast they go.  "Mexico is a hell for migrants already," fumed Father Pedro Pantoja, who organized the Casa de Migrantes in Saltillo.

Outrage wasn't limited to the Tribunal hearings.  Former Mexico City mayor Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, now the head of one of Mexico's left parties, the Movement for National Renovation, asked, "How can the government keep them from freely moving through Mexico, when they're trying to stay alive, and find work so their families survive?"  If Osorio Chong really wanted to reduce migration, he told La Jornada, Mexico's leftwing daily, "he'd support the farmers, so that people have work and don't have to leave to seek life on the other side of the border."

While the Tribunal hearings offered an insight into the way the Mexican left sees migration to the U.S. and Canada, the Tribunal itself is an international institution based in Rome.  It was first organized by the British philosopher Bertrand Russell to investigate U.S. war crimes during the Vietnam War.  Since then it has held hearings about the violations of human rights during the "dirty wars" under the military dictatorships in Latin America, as well as in the Philippines, El Salvador, Afghanistan, East Timor, Zaire and Guatemala.

In 2011 the Tribunal announced it would hold hearings in Mexico on a wide spectrum of issues, including attacks on unions, farmers, the environment and women.  Of them, the hearings on migration have been the most extensive, including three pre-hearings in Mexico, three in the U.S., and a weeklong debate at the national autonomous university (UNAM).  Bishop Raul Vera declared at their start, "We are experiencing the breakdown of the social order and the militarization of the fight against drugs [and] actions imposed by a state whose leaders are full of ambition, where it is not political proposals that count, but business and theft."

For many Mexican migrant rights activists, the most serious violations are committed against migrants passing through Mexico.  In August of 2010 seventy-two people were found massacred outside San Fernando, a small town in northern Mexico.  All were migrants passing through Mexico, and had been kidnapped and murdered.  The following April 193 bodies of migrants were discovered in 47 graves.  Many were Central Americans, but others were Mexicans.  In May of 2012 another 49 graves were found.

While the perpetrators of these crimes were, according to Tribunal testimony, members of drug cartels and their paramilitaries, the accusation submitted to the judges charged the Mexican government was ultimately responsible.  Not only did the government fail to protect migrants, knowing that they were being kidnapped regularly for extortion, but it did not recognize their right to migrate at all, treating them instead as criminals.  "All these acts are the predictable and preventable result of its policies and actions," emphasized Mexican academic Camilo Perez at the hearing's start. 

He urged the judges to use the massacre in San Fernando as a lens through which to examine the causes of migration and the reasons for the vulnerability of migrants.  "Government policies actually depend on migration at the same time it criminalizes migrants," he cautioned.  "The responsibility is structural, not just the actions of individuals."

Raul Ramirez Baena testified before the Mexico City hearing by Skype from Mexicali, the capital of Baja California, just across the border from California's Imperial Valley.  Ramirez Baena, Baja's former human rights prosecutor, argued that U.S. border enforcement policies were also linked to violence against migrants south of the border.

"U.S. border enforcement really got going when NAFTA took effect in 1994," he explained, "and national security became a major justification, even extending U.S. authorities' reach to Guatemala.  At the same time, it established a policy of deportation, which made the problems of poverty and gangs here worse.  Then Mexican government militarized the Mexican side, using the war on drugs as a pretext.  The killings and kidnappings in northern Mexico are a consequence of this joint policy."

There was something very Mexican about focusing on the situation of Central American migrants passing through Mexico.  In one way it highlights a generosity of spirit - "their situation is worse than ours" - and responds to the extreme brutality of kidnapping and murder.  But it also reflects the way Mexicans, especially on the left, have looked at the migration of their own countrymen.  Historically, many leftwing activists saw those who left for the U.S. as people who had abandoned the struggle for social change at home.  In addition, they sometimes argued, migration relieved the social pressure of poverty on the Mexican government. 

Yet at the same time, Mexican political activists have not only come to the U.S. (sometimes fleeing repression themselves), but they've become increasingly outraged by the treatment Mexicans get there.  And the increase in migration has been phenomenal.  Today there is no town in Mexico so isolated that people haven't left for the U.S., and to which dollars now flow from those working in the north.  The most important achievement of the Tribunal, therefore, was not just assigning responsibility for the violence, but digging into the reasons and responsibility for the migration itself.

According to the conceptual framework established at the beginning of the hearing by Ana Alicia Peûa Lopez, an economist at UNAM, "Mexicans and Central Americans are forced to leave home because of their precarious economic and social conditions.  These are the product of neoliberal reforms, especially the free trade treaties implemented in Mexico and the rest of this region."

Peûa Lopez listed several changes in migration in the free trade era -- most important, its massive size.  In 1990 4.4 million Mexican migrants were living in the U.S.  At the beginning of the economic crisis in 2007 it was 11.9 million and in 2013 it was still 11.8 million.  In other words, jobs in the U.S. might have been harder to find, but people didn't go home because the conditions causing them to leave hadn't changed. Money sent home by Mexicans reached $27 billion by 2007, even during the crisis.     

But, she also noted, migrants now include women, young people, indigenous people and even children.  "Employers take advantage of this to lower their labor costs," she charged.  "Criminalizing migrants hasn't simply led to the violation of their rights, but has made their labor even cheaper.  And Mexico pushed this process, through reforms that lower wages and make jobs less secure, that drive rural communities off the land to enable mining and energy projects, and that put basic services like health and education out of the reach of more and more people."

The Tribunal's report on migration will be presented to another set of judges in November, where it will be included with those on other human rights issues.  The tribunal has no power to bring legal charges against the Mexican, U.S. or Canadian governments over human rights crimes.  But it can focus international attention on violations, and create a climate in which progressive jurists can try to use their own legal systems. 

Throughout Latin America, in the wake of military dictatorships and civil wars, truth commissions were established to counter the culture of impunity - that governments can jail and murder people with no consequences for those who give the orders.  Mexico has never had such a commission, nor has the U.S. or Canada.  The Tribunal hearings certainly found evidence and witnesses that testify to widespread abuses, and provide an argument for further proceedings with more formal consequences.

But to Andres Barreda, another UNAM economist involved in setting up the hearings, the ultimate goal is also to ask Mexicans themselves what direction they choose for their country.  "Trade agreements and economic reforms have undermined Mexico's national sovereignty, and led to its economic and political subjugation to the United States," he says.  "Mexico has a right to a national economic system that protects sovereignty and autonomy, and therefore places the needs of its people before the profits of corporations and an economic elite.  Unless we face this, we can't resolve the situation of migrants, whether our own or those passing through Mexico."



David Bacon was one of the judges in the PPT hearing in Mexico City.

ROCKETSHIP TO PROFITS

ROCKETSHIP TO PROFITS
Silicon Valley breeds corporate reformers with national reach
By David Bacon
Rethinking Schools, Fall 2014

Nearly every metropolitan area these days has its own wealthy promoters of education reform. Little Rock has the Waltons, Seattle has Bill and Melinda Gates, Newark has Mark Zuckerberg, and Buffalo has John Oishei, who made his millions selling windshield wipers.

Few areas, however, have as concentrated and active a group of wealthy reformers as California's Silicon Valley. One of the country's fastest-growing charter school operators, Rocketship Education, started here. A big reason for its stellar ascent is the support it gets from high tech's deep pockets, and the political influence that money can buy.

Rocketship currently operates nine schools in San Jose, in the heart of Silicon Valley. It opened its first school in Milwaukee last year and one in Nashville, Tennessee, this fall. Its first two schools in Washington, D.C., where almost half the students already attend charters, open next year. Rocketship plans include running eight schools in Milwaukee, in Nashville, and in D.C. in the near future.

Rocketship also proposed a charter school in Morgan Hill, just south of San Jose. But there they ran into resistance from parents, teachers, and the teachers' union. That successful campaign to block Rocketship and protect local public schools highlights the importance of confronting charter chains as they try to infiltrate school systems across the country.

"Blended Learning" The Rocketship Model

"Blended learning," the hallmark of the Rocketship education model, is based on using computers more and teachers less. Its roots lie in a valley dominated by high-tech factories, where electronic assembly lines belie the hype of entrepreneurship and "creative disruption." Education policy analyst Diane Ravitch describes Rocketship charters as "schools for poor children. . . . In this bare-bones Model-T school, it appears that these children are being trained to work on an assembly line. There is no suggestion that they are challenged to think or question or wonder or create."

A report by Gordon Lafer for the Economic Policy Institute, Do Poor Kids Deserve Lower Quality Education than Rich Kids? examined the Rocketship model: "The 'blended learning' model of education exemplified by the Rocketship chain of charter schools," it found, "often promoted by charter boosters - is predicated on paying minimal attention to anything but math and literacy, and even those subjects are taught by inexperienced teachers carrying out data-driven lesson plans relentlessly focused on test preparation. But evidence from Wisconsin, the country, and the world shows that students receive a better education from experienced teachers offering a broad curriculum that emphasizes curiosity, creativity, and critical thinking, as well as getting the right answers on standardized tests."

The contradiction between high-tech hype and regimented reality is a hallmark of the Silicon Valley model, and is not just found at Rocketship. "Blended learning" is promoted by John Fisher, who started the $25 million Silicon Schools Fund. Fisher is the son of Gap founders Don and Doris Fisher, among the world's wealthiest clothing manufacturers and scions of San Francisco's elite.

On the website of Navigator Schools, for example, a video promoting its Gilroy Prep charter (at the south end of Silicon Valley's Santa Clara County) is full of superlatives like "incredible." It claims its 1st and 2nd graders are "engaged 100 percent of the time." Images show youngsters, each in an identical pale blue polo shirt with the Navigator logo, chanting in unison while a teacher holding an iPad moves through the classroom.

The slick video is just one indication of the big money at stake in the expansion of corporate charter schools in Silicon Valley. Students use "the best adaptive software," the video enthuses.  On their desks are "student responders," remote controls with buttons for answering multiple-choice questions. "Gone are the days of textbooks and endless worksheets," the narrator boasts.

The first goal of the Navigator mission statement is "to develop students who are proficient or advanced on the California state standards test."

The use of computers in the Navigator video is a pale shadow of the dependence on them at Rocketship. In Education Week, Benjamin Herold ("New Model Underscores Rocketships Growing Pains") explains: "For years, schools in the network have used the 'station rotation' model of blended learning, with students cycling each day between about six hours of traditional classroom time and two hours of computer-assisted instruction in 'learning labs.' That model . . . has allowed Rocketship to replace one credentialed teacher per grade with software and an hourly-wage aide, freeing up $500,000 yearly per school that can be redirected to other uses."

According to Lafer, students in Milwaukee will take the state standardized test every eight weeks and the MAP three times a year. All their work in the learning lab is converted to data daily. Teachers' salaries are primarily based on their students' math and reading scores.

Education As a Profit Base

Rocketship's tech connection starts at the top. Co-founder John Danner is on the board of a company that sells DreamBox Learning math education software. According to Lafer, venture capitalists John Doerr and Reed Hastings are primary investors in DreamBox and big donors to Rocketship; Hastings sits on the national advisory board. In turn, Rocketship uses DreamBox in its learning labs. "Thus," Lafer concludes, "Hastings and Doerr help fund the nonprofit Rocketship chain, which contracts with a for-profit company they partially own; the more Rocketship expands, the greater DreamBoxs profits."

Profits come other ways as well. Also according to Lafer: "Rocketship's school buildings are owned by a sister company - Launchpad - which in turn charges Rocketship rent for the facilities. Rocketship's official business plans include the goal that 'Launchpad will charge relatively high facilities fees' and that 'the profit margin will be used to finance new facilities.'"

Hedge fund investors fund individual sites. One of them is former tennis star Andre Agassi. "Now it's proven," Agassi boasted to Bloomberg Business News. "Across the board, everybody is starting to realize that there is an innovative private sector solution." His partner, Bobby Turner,adds, "If you want to cure - really cure - a problem in society, you need to come up with a sustainable solution, and that means making money." Investors in the Turner-Agassi Charter School Facilities Fund include New York City's Pershing Square Foundation. By summer's end it will complete 39 schools for 17,500 students, growing eventually to 60 schools for 30,000.

Where do teachers fit into this picture? Rocketship's charter application in Morgan Hill specified that its staffing ratio would go from 35.92 students per teacher in 2014-15 to 41.27 in 2016-17. Many teachers are hired from Teach For America, and non-credentialed paraprofessionals staff the learning lab.

"The student-teacher ratio at Rocketship schools is 27:1 during traditional classroom instruction," Rocketship media contact Shayna Englin responded. "The learning lab is staffed by tutors and individualized learning specialists who receive extensive professional development and training for the months before the school year starts and participate in required hours of additional development weekly throughout the school year."

However, a report by the Alum Rock, California, school district last spring said Rocketship was "misleading" when it didn't include computer labs in its calculation of teacher-student ratios. They decided to reject Rocketship's proposal.

Buying Politicians

There is a national trend toward corporate education reformers investing heavily in state and local campaigns - including city council and school board races. California is a scary example, with Silicon Valley money at the center.

In 2012, the Silicon Valley Community Foundation, run by the high-tech industry, formed an organization to promote charters, Innovate Public Schools. It got its first $750,000 from the Walton Foundation and $200,000 from Silicon Valley sponsors.

Innovate's head is Matt Hammer, who for 10 years has been executive director of People Acting in Community Together (PACT). PACT has a history of supporting immigrant rights and a base in Catholic parishes. In the Silicon Valley area, however, it has also mobilized support for Rocketship and Navigator.

School reformers have spent heavily on local school board races. The Santa Clara County Schools Political Action Committee (created by the California Charter Schools Association) and Parents for Great Schools raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the 2012 election - $40,000 from Fisher, $50,000 from Netflix founder Reed Hastings, and $10,000 from Rocketship board member Timothy Ranzetta, among others.

The PACs spent more than $250,000 to try to knock out Santa Clara County Board of Education member Anna Song, who survived nonetheless. They spent lavishly in East San Jose districts as well. Parents for Great Schools got $5,000 from Ranzetta and more from former San Jose Mayor Susan Hammer, PACT's Matt Hammer, and Rocketship consultant Erik Schoennauer. "Had donors given money directly to support high performing schools, they would have had a more beneficial impact," Song told the San Jose Mercury News.

Silicon Valley capital is bent on playing a much larger political role. Former California State Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuûez is now a strategist for Students First, the reform lobby set up by Michele Rhee and headquartered in Sacramento. Nuûez used to be a California Teachers Association representative and assistant to the late Miguel Contreras, secretary of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor. Nuûez shepherded $3.7 million to 105 candidates, including about $1 million to three Democratic candidates to the California Assembly, school board races in West Sacramento and Burbank, and $350,000 to the Coalition for School Reform, a political action committee that funneled money to candidates for the L.A. Unified school board.

This spring the industry's titans ran a trade negotiator from the Clinton administration, Ro Khanna, against one of the most progressive members of the U.S. Congress, Mike Honda. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Silicon Valley needed a voice for "those high-tech titans (Eric Schmidt of Google, Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook, Marissa Mayer of Yahoo among them)" and that the word among tech executives is "They just want more. They want - and this district deserves - a stronger voice in Washington."

Vergara v. California: Buying a Judgment Against Teacher Tenure

The valley's most far-reaching intervention took place this year - a successful legal attack on teacher tenure with chilling national implications. In 2012 David Welch, president of Infinera, a Silicon Valley fiber-optic communications corporation, set up another education reform advocacy group, Students Matter. He then filed a class action suit, representing nine children purportedly harmed by "ineffective teachers" to overturn teacher tenure in California. This past June, L.A. Superior Court Judge Rolf M. Treu ruled against teachers and in favor of Welch and the students in Vergara v. California.

Welch, whose company has revenue of more than half a billion dollars annually, gave half a million in seed money to Students Matter, and then lent it another million. The Broad Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation kicked in more. In 2012 alone, Students Matter spent more than $1.1 million on one of the state's most powerful corporate law firms, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, which fought the Vergara case.

In a Mercury News op-ed, Welch defended his attack on teacher tenure. "Experience is valuable," he said, "but years on the job alone do not determine effectiveness. California law must explicitly prohibit the use of seniority as the primary basis for critical employment decisions."

Diane Ravitch pointed out that at Rocketship "about 75 percent of the teachers are Teach For America, so we don't expect to see many experienced teachers... The founder of Rocketship is unalterably opposed to unions because, he says, they would limit his flexibility." There is no union at David Welch's Infinera, either, nor is there at any of the other high-tech firms active in promoting education reform.

"We believe the judge fell victim to the anti-union, anti-teacher rhetoric and one of America's finest corporate law firms that set out to scapegoat teachers for the real problems that exist in public education," Joshua Pechthalt, president of the California Federation of Teachers, told the Mercury News. "It's discouraging when people who are incredibly wealthy, who can hire America's top corporate law firms, can attempt to drive an education agenda devoid of support from parents and community."

Judge Treu was greatly influenced by a controversial Silicon Valley figure, Eric Hanushek, who writes about education reform at the right-wing Hoover Institution at Stanford University. "U.S. achievement could reach that in Canada and Finland if we replaced with average teachers the least effective 8 to 12 percent of teachers, respectively," he predicts, giving "astounding benefits, increasing the annual growth rate of the United States by 1 percent of GDP ... over the lifetime of somebody born today ... an increase in total U.S. economic output of $112 trillion."

Hanushek sees firing teachers as the solution: "The previous estimates point clearly to the key imperative of eliminating the drag of the bottom teachers," although he cautions it would be "politically challenging in a heavily unionized environment such as the one in place today."

Hanushek testified before Treu, who then argued: "There is also no dispute that there are a significant number of grossly ineffective teachers currently active in California classrooms. Dr. Berliner, an expert called by state defendants, testified that 1 to 3 percent of teachers in California are grossly ineffective. Given that the evidence showed roughly 275,000 active teachers in this state, the extrapolated number of grossly ineffective teachers ranges from 2,750 to 8,250."

David Berliner, the Regents' Professor Emeritus of Education at Arizona State University, accused the judge of misquoting his testimony. "I never said that. I'm on record as saying I've visited hundreds of classrooms, and I've never seen a 'grossly ineffective teacher.'"

Fighting Back

In Silicon Valley the commodification of education is proceeding rapidly. But the takeover of privatized education isn't inevitable. This year the flashpoint was Morgan Hill, a rural town and increasingly a bedroom community at the southern end of Silicon Valley. About half the district's 9,200 students are Latina/o. Last fall, both Rocketship and Navigator applied to the school district and then the county to open charter schools in Morgan Hill. Instead of a rubber stamp, they ran into massive resistance.

Theresa Sage, president of the Morgan Hill Federation of Teachers, AFT Local 2022, says, "In some schools, poverty is a big issue - the poverty rate is 23 percent in our district." Morgan Hill schools only get $5,700 a year per student, one of the state's lowest rates, and the legacy of Proposition 13, a measure passed in 1978 that limits property tax increases, is accentuated by the area's poor rural past. "We have to address that, look at our own practice, and make a commitment to moving API scores [California's ranked "academic performance index," based almost entirely on standardized test scores]. That means working with the district and engaging our community. But a corporate takeover isn't the right answer."

The Morgan Hill district rejected the corporate charter petitions because of a strong mobilization by the union and other groups. "When the petitions were filed we had to act quickly," Sage says. Concerned community members wrote a petition contesting the charters and supporting neighborhood schools, and posted it on MoveOn.org; it ultimately collected nearly 1,500 signatures. The petition explained that Rocketship's plan would result in closing a neighborhood school and shifting large numbers of students and teachers to different school sites.

When the district rejected the two charter companies, they both appealed the decision to the Santa Clara County Board of Education. Morgan Hill teachers and parents packed the November meeting of the county board to speak out against the charter applications.

Then, in December, the union and the school district co-sponsored a speech by David Berliner, author of numerous articles analyzing high-stakes testing and the expert misquoted by the judge in the Vergara case. "He spoke about the effects of poverty on test scores," Sage notes, "which is a big issue in our district. We absolutely believe we need to address the opportunity gap. And to do that we need to bring people together behind our public education system."

A panel commenting on Berliner's speech included Mario Banuelos, a board member of the Morgan Hill Community Foundation and a district parent, as well as two teachers, two administrators, and another community member. The sense of the meeting was a strong commitment to public education. In January 2014, the Santa Clara County Board of Education denied the petition by Navigator Schools to open an elementary school there. A week earlier, perhaps seeing which way the wind was blowing, Rocketship Education withdrew its appeal. Sage charges that the charter wave seeks to exploit years of budget austerity. "We've had a cut of $22 million since 2008," she explains. "So this charter push has come in at the peak of the impact of those lean years, and its been very aggressive."

Nevertheless, in the classroom, according to mentor teacher Gemma Abels, teachers and the district are committed to carrying out the mission of public schools to provide a rich education, beyond teaching to the test. "We want our students to know how to use technology in life, art, and music," she explains. "We've taken furlough days and even increased class sizes in order to keep programs so that kids have a wide range to choose from." As a partially rural district, Morgan Hill still has a Future Farmers of America program, which today teaches high-tech agricultural science to a diverse student body.

In 2012, the union and the district initiated a dual Spanish/English immersion program, covering culture as well as language, for kindergarten through 2nd grade. Every year, as students progress, a new grade is added. There are two new focus academies - one for science, technology, engineering, art, and mathematics, and another for environmental science. Project Roadmap focuses on helping students who are their family's first generation bound for college, while the district also increases the standards needed for graduation.


"Our teachers always say that test scores don't truly measure a student's progress, and that we don't just teach to the test," Abels explains. "I think we're a progressive district, and pretty innovative." She, like Sage, emphasizes the need to increase parent involvement. "Maybe this is one good thing to come out of this experience. It's brought parents out to school board meetings and, if that continues, I hope we can engage people we don't normally hear from."