The Business of Education

I hope this title raises some alarm. If we think at all of education as a business, we most surely think of it as a nonprofit one. Education is a right - not a privilege - and public schools and districts are public institutions, paid for by public funds. The Boston Globe says, "Education is a public trust. For a century and a half, Americans have taken on the job of providing knowledge and skills to all the nation's children through a system of taxpayer-supported public schools."

But what if that isn't enough? As my recent post suggests, at least in California, this is certainly not enough to maintain the high standards of school infrastructure, teacher salaries, and technology resources, not to mention paying for professional development, collaboration with other teachers and schools, and innovative curriculum and assessments. So where does business find a place - if any place - in schooling our kids?

There's a great article in the Spring 2009 issue of Rethinking Schools, Goodbye to Schools as Businesses. The editors argue that "education is education - a humane and human process." They go on:

The purposes of schooling should not be degraded into privatized preparation toward the fattest paycheck. Clearly, schools should prepare students to earn decent livelihoods... And schools should go far beyond preparing students for work. There are many non-market (perhaps even anti-market) purposes for learning: to end wars, to effect racial equality, to curb greenhouse gases, to halt domestic violence, to appreciate the arts, to play sports and exercise,... to learn to live together.

I agree. I (we) don't go into teaching to make money. Go trade on Wall Street or work for an investment bank - that will make you some money (or used to at least). Funny that so many who argue that schools should be run by CEOs because "they know how to run organizations" forget that the past two years have been destroyed, economically speaking, by those who run the top banks and insurance companies. Maybe they shouldn't be running our schools. Just because you know how to run (even) a successful business does not mean you know how to run a school. These are two completely different beasts.

Or are they?

Take out the bottom line for a minute, and think about all the parts that constitute a school - you have the principal (and other administration), you have teachers (and other faculty), and you have students. I'm not big on hierarchy either, but let's face it, most schools - and most businesses - have vertical systems in place for checks and balances on one another. Some businesses are flatter than others, and some schools are flatter than others. My point is this: to run a good school - whether you're the principal, teacher, or student - you need collaboration, you need organization, and you need roles, rules, and responsibilities.

As a former teacher, tutor, and now business owner, these qualities are still as salient as ever. I love the fact that I can run a business model based upon how I'd like to run a school - my tutors have ownership (and creative power) over their curriculum, my employees have ownership (and alignment) over their unique roles and responsibilities (what we call our Superpowers), and my students get to choose what they want to learn, how they want to learn. We plan meetings as we would plan a class, by planning backwards and asking ourselves: What should students (or tutors) know and be able to do at the end of the day? What if all businesses were run like this? What if all schools were run like this?

Lastly, a good friend of mine recently shared with me a very interesting article about why to start a nonprofit - or more accurately, about why NOT to start a nonprofit. In just a few short days, we (Tutorpedia) will officially incorporate the Tutorpedia Foundation, a nonprofit whose mission is to provide free tutoring and other educational services to low-income students. The article's main points are as follows: there are too many nonprofits out there, we are all vying for the same money, we have limited time and resources so we should be working together instead of competing. We're a bunch of do-gooders who are too caught up in doing it our way; we neglect to see the true costs of starting our own 501(c)3, instead of partnering, collaborating, volunteering, and fundraising with already established nonprofits. I wrote a response at the end of the article, saying that while all this is true (Tutorpedia already partners with other nonprofits and schools, we volunteer and provide free resources, training, and tutoring), I do see value in doing things the Tutorpedia Way.

Bottom line, I want to provide more free tutoring to students who cannot afford it, and no one's going to donate to a for-profit company, so we must incorporate a nonprofit to raise money. I have no illusions that this will be simple (okay maybe a few illusions), but with a devoted Board of Directors, and a dedicated Board of Advisors, I am not alone in my fundraising pursuit.

Tax money won't pay for all of what needs to be learned. It won't pay for those who are struggling with algebra in East Oakland, it won't pay for SAT help in East Palo Alto, and it certainly won't pay for a gardening workshop in Hunter's Point, San Francisco. With the help of those with deep pockets and a deeper concern for the health and well-being of our future, we can support those who need the extra help, the extra tutoring, and the extra education that our budget-strapped state and country sorely needs.