Center for American Progress (CAP) caught passing off propaganda as legitimate research, again

"In the US, teachers are paid poorly and treated even worse by having their priceless work reduced to meaningless scores on bad tests"—Joe Bower

The infamous Center for American Progress (CAP or C*AP maybe?) outdid themselves in the mendacity department this week. Not only did they try to pass off one of their usual neoliberal corporate education reform propaganda pieces as legitimate research, but they were caught using a photograph in the policy paper that contradicted their central thesis.

CAP's latest disinformation campaign is centered around attrition rates for new teachers. Chicago Teachers Union's honorable Karen Lewis posted the piece asking the venerable Jersey Jazzman about its veracity. He responded with some excellent analysis, and said "this "report" is light on methodology". He also mentioned offhand that "CAP is not a hacky group". I felt compelled to address the latter:

Robert D. Skeels: Center for American Progress (CAP) regularly does events with the fringe-right American Enterprise Institute (AEI) (e.g. http://www.aei.org/events/forward-progress-global-development-in-the-21st-century/ image used here is from that page). Why not? Their politics, particularly education policies, are nearly identical. In the past I used to always call CAP's press contact whenever they released one of these sensationally titled "studies." I'd ask them "is this a peer reviewed (juried) study or a policy paper?" Every time they'd respond the latter. I don't even waste my time asking them any more. While I have the utmost respect for the eminent Jersey Jazzman above, I would posit that CAP is a hacky group. Moreover, the only "progress" CAP is interested in is that of plutocrat profits.

This isn't the first, nor last time Schools Matter has pointed out both CAPs enormous credibility issues and right-wing leanings. For example in 2009: CAP, Chamber of Commerce, Rick Hess team up to Bash Public Schools.

CAP keeping it real… fake

That same article was circulating BATs, and Professor Mitchell Robinson had some important information to share about the young Teach for [corporate] America missionary depicted in CAP's puff piece as a teacher, in CAP's words, "staying in their job longer", "despite reports to the contrary". Robinson's observations on the above photo:

I knew something didn't smell right about this story…

The "teacher" in this picture, Gabrielle Wooden, is…wait for it…from Teach for America. She taught in Mississippi for 2 years, and is now an account manager for Insight Global in St. Louis.

So, the teacher that the Center for American Progress used to illustrate their "story" on how new teachers are staying in the classroom longer only stayed for two years before leaving the profession.

You can't make this stuff up.

And he certainly didn't make it up. Here's Teach for [corporate] America's Wooden's LinkedIn profile, including the first paragraph of prose from the corporate entity with "revenues over $1 Billion" where our hapless CAP photo model now utilizes her 5.5 weeks of Wendy Kopp approved TFA training.

Insight Global is a premier technology staffing services firm, ranked as one of the fastest growing staffing firms for 9 consecutive years and named the 4th largest IT staffing firm in America. Since our inception in 2001, we have experienced unprecedented growth within our industry. We have expanded from an Atlanta based start-up to one of the most successful IT staffing firms in America, with 39 offices and counting. Insight Global employs over 20,000 people in companies each year and currently boasts revenues over $1 Billion. We plan to continue this growth by expanding to 98 offices nationwide, entering into industries such as Finance/Accounting, Administrative and Healthcare staffing, and continuing to expand internationally.

Robinson also weighed in on CAP:

CAP is about as "progressive" or "Democratic" as Democrats for Education Reform. Not sure what is meant by "hacky", but publishing "research" that has not been peer reviewed or including any of your methodology isn't just non transparent, it's borderline unethical.

In fairness CAP, on very rare occasions, publishes actual studies by legitimate researchers. Jersey Jazzman pointed that out, and the remainder of our exchange is reproduced here.

Jersey Jazzman: I'm not a fan of all of CAP's education work, but some of it is very high-quality: https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education/report/2012/09/19/38189/the-stealth-inequities-of-school-funding/

Mitchell Robinson: That's a policy analysis--the article linked at the top of the page is a puff piece. Huge difference. CAP needs to police what they publish--it's their reputation.

Robert D. Skeels: I'm actually shocked that they would publish anything by Dr. Baker, but I know his work is of the highest quality and truthfulness. I suppose occasionally publishing legitimate material lets the C*AP reactionaries feel better about their constant stream of neoliberal corporate propaganda.

I am a fan of Professor Bruce Baker, the Jersey Jazzman, and now Professor Mitchell Robinson. Special thanks to Professor Diane Ravitch for leading me to the Joe Bowers quote, and for reproducing Peter Greene's take on the above topic.

Responding to Karin Klein of the LA Times' 'Why my family is opting out of the Common Core testing'

"The U.S. can do a much better job evaluating children, teachers and schools. That's why protests against standardized testing misuse and overuse are exploding across the nation."—FairTest

The Los Angeles Times' long time school privatization cheerleader Karin Klein penned an interesting piece today entitled Why my family is opting out of the Common Core testing. The following is my response to her editorial:

Ms. Klein:

For roughly a decade you've mocked both education experts and activists who have maintained that high-stakes standardized tests narrow the curriculum, and now you've had an epiphany? Your newspaper, the one that recklessly published pseudoscientific VAM scores from those selfsame tests, and has been the biggest cheerleader of the testing-industrial-complex, is now suddenly concerned with the "socially responsible" thing to do? Call me cynical, but I'd posit that this one editorial does not absolve either of you of your complicity in the long string of neoliberal corporate reforms that have been inflicted on an entire generation of children with your blessings.

I'm glad that you're sparing your own child the abject effects of this year's test. However, I recall sitting across a table from you in early 2013 when you conducted the school board endorsement interviews and having to endure your scoffing at me for suggesting that we end the high-stakes standardized test regime for all students. Your exact words were "if we do that, we'd go back to the 'Johnny Can't Read' days." I remember how astonished I was that a professional journalist covering education could be so ignorant of pedagogy that they'd cite Flesch's right-wing phonics garbage as their defense of the unholy policy trio of No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, and Common Core State Standards.

So don't expect those of us who have been trying to defend all children from the effects of standardized tests—the worst of which robs them of that very fleeting joy of learning—to welcome you aboard. Unlike your offspring, privileged in every regard, there are countless other children who have had their opportunity to love learning stolen by mind numbing test preparation in the name of profits and propaganda.

Robert D. Skeels

Exxon-Mobil Concerned with Teachers As Its Tar Sands Oil Spreads in Arkansas

If you were watching golf for the past 4 days, you would see hundreds of millions spent by Exxon-Mobil to push the Common Core Corporate Standards and to convince Americans there is some educational emergency in our schools.  I guess I would be trying to change the subject at hand, too, if I were responsible for ruining another American community with a flood of dirty oil.  From Nation of Change:
________________

Cleanup Workers Collect Oil Faster than Media Collect Information

Ten days after the ExxonMobil Pegasus pipeline burst, spewing thousands of barrels of Canadian tar sands oil into the North Woods residential development in Mayflower, Arkansas, much of the oil spill has been collected, although it continues to spread slowly, seeping into wetlands and nearby Lake Conway. 

Slow as the oil’s movement may be, it seems to move faster than news related to the spill, the cleanup, or ExxonMobil and the local, state, and federal agencies who keep tight control over information that, in ordinary circumstances, the public would expect to hear in a timely fashion. 

Even those directly affected say they are told little, mostly generalities from ExxonMobil public relations people.  As RT.com reported April 7, “Town residents say they are being kept in the dark over compensation and the cleanup by Exxon.”    

Over at Lighthousesolar.com, the sardonic view of this tight-liddedness was that the news control machine was working:

“The big news is that for the most part, only fringe online new outlets are reporting on the disaster! The federal and state government appear to be working together to keep the news of the spill from making it onto front page news.  Consider this: 

“The oil spill was kept off front page news on all major new outlets. 

“Exxon has asked the FAA to enforce a no-fly zone over the area, most likely to

prevent aerial photography.  The FAA did as Exxon asked. 

“Local and state police are keeping the media and public away from the spill

site.

This situation continues to raise questions like these, increasingly in need of future refinement. 

Who’s taking care of the 40 or so people evacuated from 22 houses close to the spill?    

They seem to be pretty much taking care of themselves as far as one can tell.  Despite a wide range in their ages, and hence vulnerability to the toxic exposure they’ve suffered, there’s no word that they’re being screened by public health officials or anything like that. 

Members of the Pipeliners Union 798, who work on pipelines like the one that burst, have given a check for $1,000 to each of the 22 families who were evacuated. 

ExxonMobil has repeatedly promised to pay all valid claims from anyone harmed by the spill, but there’s no report that they’ve paid anyone a food allowance or anything else yet. 

As of April 8, four families were allowed to return home.  One said he was glad he didn’t need to weak a gas mask on his return. 

Help us speak truth to power. Donate what you can afford to support NationofChange.

Why did ExxonMobil deny it was dumping oil in nearby wetlands? 

Perhaps because it didn’t do that. 

ExxonMobil tweeted on April 7: “Claims that ExxonMobil is dumping oil into wetlands are completely unfounded. Cleanup in Mayflower, AR continues.”    

A quick search turned up no such claim.  But there is a report on Treehugger.com that members of the Tar Sands Blockade have “heard reports” of some dumping, which RawStory tried to clarify: 

“… the activist group, Tar Sands Blockade, has members on the ground in Mayflower risking arrest to show the public areas even local media have not seen, such as this "dumping ground" in the wetlands near the spill site. Tar Sands Blockade says they've heard reports that ‘because Exxon had already partially destroyed this wetland, they pumped diluted bitumen spilled in other areas here to get it all in one place and keep it out of sight of the media.’ 

“As RawStory notes, ‘While it’s not clear if the oil was intentionally moved into the wetland, the company says it is cleaning pavement with power washing devices, which could cause some of the oil to be pushed off neighborhood streets and into other areas.’  Whether this area has been used as a place to put oil so it can be cleaned later or it was just polluted with oil during the initial spill, it is clear the wetlands are highly contaminated and will be a massive challenge to clean.” 

So for ExxonMobil to say the claims “are completely unfounded” really isn’t true?    

It’s misleading.  It leads a listener to conclude that maybe the wetlands are not polluted with ExxonMobil’s highly toxic, hard to clean up tar sands oil known as Wabasca Heavy. 

THAT is untrue.  An area of wetlands were clearly polluted almost as soon as the pipe ruptured.  There are pictures all over the internet, including many on the Environmental Protection Agency website. 

Because water is a dynamic environment, it’s probably also true that the spill is continuing to spread, however slowly.    Runoff from power washing paved areas also seems to have reached wetlands.

So the “claims” are founded, but there’s nothing but rumor to suggest that ExxonMobil did any deliberate dumping.  Whether ExxonMobil was negligent with its power washing or any other technique remains an open question. 

What about Lake Conway, is there tar sands oil in Lake Conway?

The short answer is yes. 

The more nuanced answer is that there’s tar sands oil from the spill in an area of Lake Conway known as the Cove, and ExxonMobil has equipment in place to keep it contained in that area. 

But Lake Conway is a single hydraulic system, so the more nuances answer may not be very meaningful. 

ExxonMobil seems perfectly aware of that, emphasizing in an April 8 press release that the fish are OK: 

“Fish in the main body of Lake Conway have not been affected. There is a series of seven containment booms deployed in the cove to protect the main body of Lake Conway.  Tests on water samples show the main body of Lake Conway is oil-free.” 

Of course it takes awhile for spilled oil to show up in fish.  And there’s nothing here about how to keep fish out of the Cove. 

So is the cleanup being done well or not?  And is it almost done? 

There’s no reason to think it’s not being done as well as it can be done.  There’s also no reason to think it’s an easy job or that the after effects, perhaps very minor, won’t be felt for years to come.

ExxonMobil has posted a slickly-produced “Newsletter to Residents” on the Mayflower, Arkansas, Facebook page on April 7.  The newsletter is very upbeat as it recounts progress to date and, near the end,  is quotes Gary W. Pruessing, President, ExxonMobil Pipeline Company: 

“We will be working here in Mayflower and on the

site for as long as it takes to get the job done.”  

The nature of oil spill cleanups is that they’re never “done.”  But at some point somebody decides to stop. 

So the people whose homes lose value or whose health is affected, people like that will never be made whole?    

ExxonMobil has made promises that are designed to assure people that they will be made whole. 

And there is a class action lawsuit filed in federal court to give ExxonMobil another incentive to keep those promises.   The plaintiffs’ 15-page filing was made April 5, ExxonMobil has yet to answer, and no hearing is yet scheduled. 

And what about the pipeline, what are they doing about that?    

There is a plan to uncover a length of the pipeline that includes the rupture.  That section will be cut out, removed, and examined to determine the cause of the failure. 

There’s a hitch.  There’s about 18 miles of pipeline between the two pumping stations that were used to shut of the flow after the spill was discovered. 

There’s still oil in that 18 miles of pipe that will have to be drained before any pipe is removed. 

Where can I get a good ten minute summary of the main issues raised by this pipeline spill? 

On April 3, the PBS News Hour ran an eleven-minute segment that is reasonably comprehensive, balanced, and inconclusive. 

If you listen carefully, you’ll hear the oil industry spokesman make a basic, two-part argument.  The first part of the argument (which passes without challenge or examination) is that since America needs all this tar sands oil, the safest way to ship it is by pipeline. 

The second part of the argument is: Trust us.   

So now I have to listen to Public Television?

No, you can listen to anything you want, even Stephen Colbert’s take on April 6.

Reader Supported News   is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to  Reader Supported News .