Question

Read the following article:

Give arguments to support your views.

Do you think that Mark Zuckerberg or any other CEO has the right to dole out large sums of money for philanthropy?

Do you say that is it enough for large corporations just to donate funds or should they also manage them? What are the merits and demerits of management such funds?

Five years ago, Facebook Inc. chief executive Mark Zuckerberg went on Oprah Winfrey's television show to pledge $100 million to transform education in Newark.

With matching donations, the pot would ultimately reach about $200 million. Now, most of it has been spent and there is intense debate in New Jersey's largest city about how much of a difference it has made, or will make, for roughly 49,000 public school children.

Some say the money has created the conditions for progress, and applaud its help in expanding high-performing charter schools. Others see a lost opportunity.

Many Newark families hoped such an unprecedented donation would help turn around a district that had been failing for decades. Clashing views over its impact highlights controversies over school choice, performance pay and the influence of private money on public policy.

Supporters of the Foundation for Newark's Future, which oversees the money from Mr. Zuckerberg, point to a wide range of initiatives to improve the use of data, overhaul teacher evaluations, bolster professional development and retain talented teachers through pay tied to performance.

Other projects have been more personal , such as handing out free backpacks, giving summer jobs to teenagers and promoting a "Text4Baby" service that sends text messages to young mothers with tips on nutrition and literacy.

But Richard Cammarieri, a member of the foundation's community advisory board, said the "flash and dazzle" of the rollout didn't translate into transformative change or stronger achievement in district schools. "It was a lost opportunity to do something truly comprehensive and coherent," he said.

Many have complained that wealthy philanthropists had too much clout in decisions affecting public classrooms. Kimberly Baxter McLain, president of the foundation, said her team worked with leaders of the city, district, foundations, charters and other groups to choose meaningful projects, and major improvements in test scores take time.

"Our grants have had an impact across the spectrum from early childhood through college," she said. With about $30 million left to spend by next June from the $200 million total, she said she sees "tremendous opportunity" for positive change.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Zuckerberg said he was encouraged by signs of progress in Newark and the expansion of high-quality options. Mr. Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla, learned valuable lessons for future philanthropy, the spokeswoman said, including "how important it is to engage directly with the community and across a lot of diverse stakeholders."

Efforts to fix Newark schools have been in the spotlight in recent months as Gov. Chris Christieappointed a new superintendent, Chris Cerf , and agreed with Mayor Ras Baraka to work toward returning local control. In recent years, the district grappled with serial deficits in its nearly $1 billion budget and angry protests against its overhaul plans.

A new book on Newark, "The Prize: Who's in Charge of America's Schools?" has drawn extra attention to the foundation. Its author, Dale Russakoff, said in an interview that while much of the donors' money went into changing tools for accountability and management, Newark's traditional public schools still can't provide enough of the intensive academic and social services needed by children facing poverty, neighborhood violence and family trauma.

"Without those supports it's hard to make a difference in kids' learning," she said.

Some district schools have improved on state tests in grades three to eight, but the district's overall passing rates remained roughly flat over the five years ending in spring 2014, and even dipped in some grades. In fifth grade, for example, state data showed only 29% of children were proficient in language arts. The district touts other gains, however, such as more children attending public preschool and graduating.

Mr. Cerf, the new superintendent and former state education commissioner who oversaw the system's turnaround plans, said the foundation had "massive impact," especially in helping to pay for a landmark labor contract in 2012 that offered merit bonuses of up to $12,500 , and required teachers to get effective ratings to get raises.

The foundation said $48.5 million went toward that contract, including retroactive pay. But the contract expired in June, and it is unclear whether the union will agree to performance pay again. The old contract governs until a new one is signed.

John Abeigon, president of the Newark Teachers Union, said the performance pay deal brought unfairly harsh evaluations, and "we'd have to take a real close look" before agreeing to such terms again.

Charter advocates say the real power of the grant money has been in increasing the number of these taxpayer-funded, independently operated schools. Foundation officials said about a quarter of the $200 million went to support them.

Last year 26% of the city's public school children attended charters, and the district projects charter enrollment will rise to 13,750 students this fall. Supporters say that thanks to high-quality charters, more Newark students attend good schools, but opponents say they leave a higher concentration of the most challenging students behind, with less funding to serve them.

Uncommon Schools, a charter network that outperforms the district on state tests, said it received about $9 million, which helped its North Star schools plan seven new sites, including four that have opened.

KIPP New Jersey's TEAM Schools, another successful charter network, received $8 million of the matching funds, said executive director Ryan Hill. That helped it expand from three schools to eight. On top of that, he said excitement about Mr. Zuckerberg's gift "brought talent to town and helped us get other donors drawn in by the appeal of making a difference."

Answer 1

Yes, I strongly think and believe that Mark Zuckerberg or any other CEO has the right to dole out large sums of money for philanthropy. This is because CEOs and people like Zuckerberg are doling out money from their personal fortunes and hence have a right to determine the appropriate manner and ways in which to use their hard earned money. Many large CEOs are now parting with a fraction of their fortunes for philanthropic purposes as they now want to make a difference to the society and use their power, position and wealth to make a positive difference to the society.

I think and believe that large corporations should not just stop at making donations and giving funds. Rather they should go a step further and manage the funds so as to be able to make a systematic and tangible difference to the cause being supported. The merits of management of such funds are that it allows the CEOs and the corporates to be more directly and actively involved and to control the eventual outcome in a much better manner. Also direct involvement in the form if management of funds will create the groundwork and conditions for sustainable improvement. In terms of demerits management of such funds can often lead to the presence of too much clout and this can negatively impact decision making at different levels.