Magic Johnson and EdisonLearning: A Winning Team?
I have to admit, I was intrigued by today's Huffington Post item about basketball legend Magic Johnson's new partnership with EdisonLearning in Los Angeles. The company will set up 10 Johnson-endorsed learning centers, intended to reach students in urban areas.
Every now and then, I think back to the days before No Child Left Behind, when it was considered fairly controversial to bring in a private company to help with the daily business of public schooling. Today the push is so intensive to demonstrate achievement, and the need is so great, that help is more welcomed from non-traditional avenues.
For those who might not remember, EdisonLearning (formerly Edison Schools Inc.) was one of the first private, for-profit companies to delve into the business of public school management.
There was almost always a fair share of controversy when Edison came to town. Critics argued the district was throwing away public money for services that should have been handled by public employees. But Edison claimed its instructional methods were far superior to what the district could provide, and that the company would be able to do more with the same amount of per-pupil funding.
Edison had a seven-year contract to manage six elementary schools and one middle school in Southern Nevada. The middle school had significant problems from the outset and that contract was not renewed by the Clark County School District.
The Edison elementary schools in the Las Vegas area have been a mixed bag. When it came to student test scores, a few Edison campuses did better than other district schools (with similar populations), some were about the same and some were worse. In other words, the overall impact of the Edison model was minimal.
The name change to EdisonLearning makes sense, given how over the years the company has branched out to provide a host of supplemental programs and services beyond school management (although they still do that, too).
When I visited Edison campuses, what impressed me was the emphasis on literacy. There were 90-minute daily instructional blocks when the entire school worked on reading skills, often at the same time. Over the years I saw dozens of non-Edison campuses adopt similar approaches. Teachers at Edison schools told me they appreciated the professional development support provided by the company. Parents also seemed generally satisfied, even if a particular school's test scores hadn't shown marked improvement.
But there was also another factor at play. When one particularly dynamic principal left an Edison school to open a new, non-Edison campus for the district, as many teachers as were allowed defected along with him. Student achievement at his former Edison campus slipped sharply in years after their departures. In other words, Edison or not, school leadership has a great deal to do with teacher performance, student achievement and the overall success of a campus climate.
Are there Edison-managed campuses or programs in your district? What are the results thus far?
Have a question, comment or confidential concern for the Educated Reporter? Email me at erichmond@ewa.org. I'm also on Twitter @EWAEmily.
Every now and then, I think back to the days before No Child Left Behind, when it was considered fairly controversial to bring in a private company to help with the daily business of public schooling. Today the push is so intensive to demonstrate achievement, and the need is so great, that help is more welcomed from non-traditional avenues.
For those who might not remember, EdisonLearning (formerly Edison Schools Inc.) was one of the first private, for-profit companies to delve into the business of public school management.
There was almost always a fair share of controversy when Edison came to town. Critics argued the district was throwing away public money for services that should have been handled by public employees. But Edison claimed its instructional methods were far superior to what the district could provide, and that the company would be able to do more with the same amount of per-pupil funding.
Edison had a seven-year contract to manage six elementary schools and one middle school in Southern Nevada. The middle school had significant problems from the outset and that contract was not renewed by the Clark County School District.
The Edison elementary schools in the Las Vegas area have been a mixed bag. When it came to student test scores, a few Edison campuses did better than other district schools (with similar populations), some were about the same and some were worse. In other words, the overall impact of the Edison model was minimal.
The name change to EdisonLearning makes sense, given how over the years the company has branched out to provide a host of supplemental programs and services beyond school management (although they still do that, too).
When I visited Edison campuses, what impressed me was the emphasis on literacy. There were 90-minute daily instructional blocks when the entire school worked on reading skills, often at the same time. Over the years I saw dozens of non-Edison campuses adopt similar approaches. Teachers at Edison schools told me they appreciated the professional development support provided by the company. Parents also seemed generally satisfied, even if a particular school's test scores hadn't shown marked improvement.
But there was also another factor at play. When one particularly dynamic principal left an Edison school to open a new, non-Edison campus for the district, as many teachers as were allowed defected along with him. Student achievement at his former Edison campus slipped sharply in years after their departures. In other words, Edison or not, school leadership has a great deal to do with teacher performance, student achievement and the overall success of a campus climate.
Are there Edison-managed campuses or programs in your district? What are the results thus far?
Have a question, comment or confidential concern for the Educated Reporter? Email me at erichmond@ewa.org. I'm also on Twitter @EWAEmily.
Labels: Edison, for_profits, leaders, Magic Johnson, school reform
posted by Emily Richmond at
6:46 AM
2 Comments:
Are there any Edison-managed campuses or programs left in any district, besides the hoax being perpetrated on Magic Johnson and LAUSD? They obfuscate this so much that it would be hard to know.
In response to the question, here's the status of the former Edison School in my district -- Edison Charter Academy in San Francisco, which was a national (and even international -- the Economist and the International Herald Tribune) news story in 2001.
The school limped along for some years -- after it fell out of the news, it simply kept a low profile. But a couple of years ago, under circumstances that even the public here in San Francisco doesn't know, forces within the school community severed their ties with the remaining shreds of once-triumphant Edison Schools Inc., portraying it as throwing off the yoke of the oppressor. So now they're trying to make a go as an independently run charter school.
You must know that Edison Schools Inc. was a crashing failure, despite the gushing press it won 10 years ago and the enthusiastic support of political leadership in both parties. Its former cheerleaders now pretend they never heard of it, or treat it like an embarrassing odor in the room. Its schools' achievement was illusory, if not simply dismal. Its client districts severed their contracts one after another because of the numerous problems -- higher costs (than anticipated and than other schools), low achievement, and dumping of high-need and challenged students on public schools.
They must have been good at one time at orchestrated tours for the press -- though actually when I toured Edison Charter Academy once as a parent/community member, Los Angeles Times reporter Maria La Ganga slipped in with me because Edison had refused access to her. That may have been after the press had started to ask a few tough questions.
Please, education press, remember that that's your job.
The press was badly overmatched by Edison last time around -- as one veteran major metro reporter said to me at the time, you just assume that your sources won't lie to you, because it will be outed when it comes out in print. Wrong! Those sources DO lie to you. Don't be fooled again, as they say. But it may be that Edison has given up flimflamming the press and now has to resort to flimflamming unsuspecting basketball legends.
Caroline, thank you for your thoughtful response. I appreciate hearing from you.
Post a Comment
Considerate comments are welcome. Uncivil remarks will be deleted. Anonymous comments -- including those unaccompanied by the author's first and last name -- are not permitted.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home