During this serious time when public schools are under siege and threatened by a tech, anti-teacher, anti-brick-and-mortar schools, and an anything goes takeover, it’s important to define public schools.
It goes without saying that public schools should be creative places for learning. Some children, especially those who are at-risk, require different learning environments.
The alternative schools I’ve known have been great schools, run by creative teachers. They received oversight by the local school district. This includes magnet schools.
But alternative education has changed. Now alternative schools are sometimes considered charter schools. This makes the concept of alternative schooling murky.
With DeVos and her school choice agenda looming, I don’t think we can afford murky when it comes to saving public schools.
For years I have received notifications from AERO which stands for Alternative Education Resource Organization. They recently had their conference. They often have well-known speakers who are impressive, and this year was no different.
However, I also question many of the presentations.
AERO’s current agenda sounds supportive of school choice, personalized learning, and disruption with technology. They advocate an “education revolution” which seems eerily like “transformation.”
It sounds like the Republican agenda for privatization, even though AERO promotes itself as supporting democratic schools.
Susan Sarandon’s Subtle Anti-Public School Message
Here is the first example.
This is a video with liberal activist Susan Sarandon, a spokesperson for AERO, a fervent Bernie Sanders supporter. She implies public schools are boring and have bullies. And she suggests that parents have options including private schools.
Remember that private schools can also have bullies and be boring!
I can imagine Sarandon getting together with Parent Trigger groups and sitting down to have tea with Betsy DeVos!
Sarandon attended mostly Catholic schools, but graduated from Edison High School in New Jersey, a public high school. Her high school served a diverse student body.
Workshops and Speakers Sounded Pro-Charter School and Pro-Tech
Scan the presentations of AERO’s recent conference . There was much that sounded supportive of public schools and creative thinking. It’s the few who seem to have a privatization agenda that raise concerns.
The emphasis on personalized learning was especially troubling. Some of the speakers seem anti-public school and are well-connected to today’s tech environment.
Here are some examples:
Museum and Non-Profit-Based Learning.
There was a presenter who specializes in Museum and Non-Profit based learning.
There’s concern that museums and other unconventional locations, and non-profit programs will eventually replace locally governed public schools. Brick-and-mortar schools appear threatened by “disruption” which means technology. Children will learn anyplace anytime with their digital devices. Public schools as we know them will be a thing of the past.
Hackerspaces.
Hackerspaces (makerspaces) are where students use digital devices to make things. This looks nice, but there’s talk about becoming catalysts for self-determining and self-directed learning through a variety of programs designed to meet different needs. Hard and soft skills, along with low tech and high tech projects are emphasized.
The worry is that this is all about technology and children working without teachers.
Creating Alternative Colleges.
Do you want to start your own college? One presenter claims to draw on her experience with TEDxMtHood and the World Domination Summit and founding non-profit organizations such as SuperThank.
Participants discussed creating a different kind of college based on three core values: human, on purpose, and adventure. In both small groups and large groups we will generate ideas for what such a college would look like. If participants are interested, we can also discuss a step-by-step process for starting an alternative college in their home city.
America is home to the best public university system in the world! Surely we haven’t gotten to the point where anyone should be able to start a college!
Dual Enrollment and Distance Learning Opportunities
This presentation mentioned U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan favorably because Duncan described dual enrollments as “good dropout-prevention programs.”
They highlight the James Irvine Foundation who support Pay for Success.
They say: More and more a world of choices is available to students regardless of background. How do we support underrepresented communities in discerning within and benefiting from the growing field of choices? Like Sarandon, this sounds like an ad for vouchers.
Special Education for Private Schools?
Increasingly special education services are being stripped from public schools. Betsy DeVos may get rid of them altogether.
One AERO workshop was designed to explore how students with disabilities may experience academic, social and emotional success within various private school settings in a manner which meets their unique strengths and needs. Some students are able to experience success within their local public school environments. However, other students find it increasingly difficult to meet their needs in public school settings but are able to thrive in alternative educational settings. This workshop will present parents with a process which may enable them to match their child’s unique needs with an alternative school setting.
There’s much more. If interested, scan the the AERO link.
Nancy–Are you a member of AERO? Have you actually attended any of their conferences, or are you basing your comments on your interpretation of what you’ve read on the website? Although I just joined AERO a couple of years ago, I’ve attended two conferences. The mission statement of AERO is the make “alternative education” available to every learner. “Alternative” is often replaced by “learner-centered” education. It’s important to understand that AERO’s members include all forms of alternative education in the U.S. and abroad–including unschooling, home schooling, free democratic schools (e.g. Sudbury and Brooklyn Free School), Self-Directed Learning (see Peter Gray’s Free To Learn), Montessori, and other types of hybrid education. The single unifying factor, if there is one, is an approach that respects individual learners and attempts to provide them with what they want and need to develop their unique abilities and interests. They aren’t trying to replace public education, but to give learner-centered education a voice to promote awareness of its effectiveness. More and more public educators and administrators have begun attending the conferences to learn more about how to make their own schools and classrooms more learner-centered.
Anyone is free to propose a workshop at the AERO conference. I’m not sure why you believe that the bold-faced sentence in the workshop description was in support of charter schools. To me, it sounds like a simple statement of fact as you say (Increasingly special education services are being stripped from public schools.). While I wasn’t at this year’s conference and didn’t attend this workshop, I have consistently found that AERO’s main goal is to promote learning environments that provide all learners with the most authentic learning environment possible. I have NEVER heard any AERO member suggest that public money should be going to alternative/private/charter schools.. AERO members would LOVE to see public education become more learner-centered so that it DOES provide all students with their needs. They also don’t believe that one-size-fits-all, which is why “alternative” includes so many different options…all of which are supported because they are “learner-centered.”
There is a critical difference between groups that actively support charter schools and vouchers (often for their own economic benefit) and those who are focused on identifying the most effective and authentic way to support learners. Please don’t lump AERO in with that first group because that has nothing to do with who and what they are about!
Judith, I am not an AERO member, but, like I said, I admire many of the speakers.
Last year, for example, I met Jonathan Kozol after hearing him lecture for years–since when I was a graduate student. I own all his books. I am sure Kozol supports great schools and good teachers for all children.
My concern lies with those at the AERO conference who emphasize personalized (online) learning. A lot of this conference involves individuals who do not seem to be fans of public schooling.
My blog is supportive of democratic public schooling. My concern with the AERO conference is that the message is made murky by a few.
I listed a few examples, but there were others I didn’t even mention.
I am also supportive of democratic public education, but not of the mandated one-size-fits-all standards and standardized testing that have made it difficult, if not impossible, for teachers to do what they have been trained to do. Just to be clear on where I stand, here’s an article that explains my interpretation of “failing schools.”
https://medium.com/@judy.yero/the-lie-behind-failing-public-schools-28e84d20f7f6
Thanks for all you do.
Thank you, Judy! And thanks for the link.
I think it is difficult. We hate the standards and terrible reforms that have been foisted on public education, yet we want great democratic public schools, like many at the AERO conference promoted.
It can be difficult to separate the criticism with the ideal.
And it’s easy lately to find worms in the apple.
The most heartbreaking thing about people like Sarandan (and so many other famous and theoretically well-meaning but clueless public advocates) is that they so nonchalantly spread the message that our nation’s public schools and teachers are not trying — that classes are boring and kids are the victims. It is as if the actual facts of education are not happening: no child is being challenged, no child is enjoying school, no child is being EDUCATED.
The difference between Aero’s philosophy and that of many public education advocates, is that the latter do not agree with sharing the funding with “alternative” education providers. They believe a “learner-centered” education should at all times remain within the confines of support for public education. This is regardless of studies proving that special education is often ineffective and funding typically wasted, due to bureaucratic failures and absence of oversight. Still, when funding follows the student (outside of public education), it is considered anti-public ed. Public education may or may not be the best option for some students; but the choice made by an individual student must be respected, not scorned.
Public schools have funded alternative schools for years. I don’t understand your point.
I never said they didn’t fund alternative education, the point is that they do so begrudgingly while actively opposing expansion of the funding so that all students have access to “choice”.
In the 80s public schools were pro alternative schools. I taught students with learning disabilities. Students who needed something different and didn’t qualify for special ed. often found a home in an alternative school or programs within the school. These programs were often showcased by the school district.
Choice today is privatization. It involves charters and private school and deregulation. While Betsy DeVos likes to say it includes public schools too I don’t believe it does. Public education has been starved of funds, eliminating programs, and has driven parents to go elsewhere.
Alternative education seems to be now merged in with charter schools. I think it intentionally confuses people.
When I first began teaching, my first job was with a private school that billed itself as an alternative school. We probably made every mistake in the business, but we tried. Almost all the children had experienced failure in traditional schools. So we tried other things. It was really good for me, but I really wonder if we did the kids any favors. At least we got no money from public schools..
Children do sometimes need other approaches to learning. I’ve known of great alternative schools. My concern here is the emphasis on technology and several of the speakers who speak about the reforms tied to it. As far as your experience with an alternative school–you sound like a caring teacher, Roy, and well-qualified. My guess is the children did fine and got a lot out of it. Thanks for sharing.