public and private

Can Free, High-Quality Education Get You A Job? | MindShift: "Still, Wilson said there are anomalies in the Valley — not all great programmers went to the top 25 computer science schools. And although he doesn’t think that getting in the door will be easy without an official degree of some kind, he said the idea that down the road when educational models are less fixed, a hard worker with a free online education that comes with practical skills could make the cut."
...
The skepticism was palpable from those interviewed who know the Silicon Valley job market well. There’s a sense that free education could not be great education. “If you are a smart student some school will take you and you’ll get a degree,” Greene said. “In the Valley, the education is usually a pretty good barometer.” 
"Companies in finance and banking had similar responses. “Generally we would not look at someone without college experience,” said Rebecca McGovern, executive assistant at the global private investment firm H.I.G Capitol, and the person in charge of recruiting for their San Francisco office. “A college degree is very fundamental — a weeding out process,” she added. She said no H.I.G office would take someone without a four-year degree." 'via Blog this'
Well FaceBook doesn't seem to hire anyone really but aside from that fact, paradox lives on in the education-industrial complex: a Stanford prof offers a MOOC but Silicon Valley still looks at traditional college grads from traditional schools. At least Zoho is tracking the data. Good to know that the financial class that wiped out the economy all had college degrees. 

Not the only paradox out there.

UCLA business school was begun and grew on the taxpayer dime but they are going private and the spin says it will bring in more tuition and thereby help the public part of the school. How can a public system just vote itself private?
UCLA Business School to Go Private: A Blow to the Public University | The Nation: "But what makes them so sure the $8 million they are renouncing will in fact go to other parts of UCLA? It’s not the business school’s money to give away. And any business school student will tell you that, if a unit doesn’t need $8 million, the central administration should take it back. Reassurances from the chancellor on this point were unconvincing to many on the faculty. 
Opponents of the move argue that privatizing part of the university undermines the university’s mission as a public institution that serves the entire state. A private institution of course serves its own interests and those of its funders. Opponents also point out that a private MBA program won’t have to follow the rules and requirements of the university, especially in regards to admissions and other issues of fairness."   'via Blog this' ....
Outside of UCLA, there is anxiety at the less prestigious campuses of the university—Riverside, Irvine, Santa Barbara etc.—that UCLA and Berkeley will pull away from the other seven campuses and establish a separate privileged status, relying partly on private funding.
Academic Senate leaders also pointed out that the university has spent seventy-five years building the UCLA business school, creating whatever value it now has. How is the school going to compensate taxpayers for the takeover of this historical investment? 
The Senate leadership suggested that the market model was inconsistent with the research mission of the university as well as its commitment that faculty engage in public and community service. 
The university’s official statements described the plan as “self-sufficiency” and denied that it amounted to “privatization.” Before being put into effect, the plan has to be approved by University President Mark Yudoff, which is expected.
Are they paying back the seed money? You wouldn't think it could be done so easily since state taxpayers have invested for so long. Just a vote or two and the state taxpayers lose everything for all those years?

Community Colleges are getting in the act, too. That whole mission thing isn't really a concern for so-called public institutions that can now leave citizens behind and declare themselves a different entity. When push comes to shove, the overgrown administrative layer will seize the institution. Is this the equivalent of what banks have doing? Santa Monica opens a nonprofit that profits from expensive courses.

Santa Monica College To Offer More Expensive Courses For Students Who Can Afford Them (VIDEO): "he community college will price units for the most sought-after classes at five times the current cost, effectively allowing rich students to get first dibs on enrollment. 
Starting this summer and winter semesters, the college will form a separate nonprofit foundation that will offer core courses at about $600 each, or about $200 per unit, the Associated Press reports. Regular courses are currently priced at $108 each, or $36 per unit."  'via Blog this'
Education: the system whereby rich people distribute jobs to themselves. 


Schools with semi-private funding tied to neighborhood are relics of when the investment in build out of the physical infrastructure was made. But whether corruption or laissez faire or the growth of private sector coalitions, the education system itself is becoming an institution that impoverishes some by design.
The 10 Richest -- and Poorest -- School Districts in America | | AlterNet: "With a median income of $177,766, the Darien School District is one of the wealthiest in the country. According to an estimate from the Darien Assessor’s Office, home buyers can expect to pay approximately $15,000 per year in property taxes. According to the NCES, 86% of school funding comes from property taxes and other local revenue sources. This allows the district to spend $18,047 per student, which is more than $7,000 more than the national average. The district’s students regularly perform well on state exams. On the 2008-2009 Connecticut Academic Performance Tests, close to 100% of 10th-grade students from the district demonstrated proficiency in reading and writing, while the average Connecticut school had 80% to 90% proficiency. U.S. News ranked the district’s high school seventh in the state of Connecticut." 'via Blog this' 
People in neighborhoods like this would not even have accessed public schools when schools were created; they would have attended private schools and paid to do it. But now they can make so-called public schools into semi-private fiefdoms that get public money and they add into that. And their children compete against the poor on tests and for grades. 

A public system? Not really. Not public, fully public as in families can access for services they need and want. Public as in a service provided for all children, helping the general welfare by investing across the board in people in some coherent and fair way. The work and investment of generations of Americans for public institutions is a goal few seem to remember.  Many do not notice the lack of a real public school system, a public college option (free and open to all), a public option for health insurance, a public financing plan for elections, a public pension plan: there is no plan for the public and no plan for the common good.




background
hiring practices at Zoho
Post a Comment