“Corporate” education reform — shorthand for privatization, charter schools and mandates from officials who never set foot in a classroom — was believed to be on its last legs, after greater scrutiny of charter school operations around the country found discriminatory practices and dubious academic results.

But with the election of Donald Trump as president, all bets are off, and public school advocates are bracing for the worst.

That was the consensus of a panel on the future of “corporate” education reform that was part of a Nov. 16 conference, organized by the UFT, on the future of public schools.

“We’re so fed up with government telling us what to do,” said UFT President Michael Mulgrew, one of the panelists. But, he added, the Trump election is also an opportunity for UFT members to rededicate themselves to working together. “Public education has to be more of a team effort; it has to be a rallying cry,” he said. “We need to ask: How do I make sure my school is working and how do I become an advocate for my students?”

David Kirp, a New York Times contributing op-ed writer and a professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley, said school choice was Trump’s only concrete education policy. He said the president-elect advocated a mix of federal and state funds that would enable every child in poverty to have $12,000 that can follow the child to any school of the parent’s choice.

On the campaign trail, Trump also called for the elimination of the U.S. Department of Education, which provides 12 percent of New York City’s school aid, mostly in the form of Title I funds for schools that serve children in poverty.

“For a city like New York City, the biggest fear is the loss of federal funds,” said Aaron Pallas, the chair of the Department of Education Policy and Social Analysis at Teachers College, Columbia University. “Title I funds are critical to the operation of the New York City school system.”

Journalist Dale Russakoff said the Newark, New Jersey, story is a cautionary tale for Trump. She wrote “The Prize,” about the $100 million that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg gave to Newark for school reform that ultimately failed.

“Trump is talking about a massively top-down approach, and Newark was a completely top-down effort to bring corporate values to the Newark schools,” she said. “It can’t be done well or sustained very long without respecting and including the community.”

Kirp’s book “Improbable Scholars” examined how Union City, New Jersey, one of the poorest cities in the country, was able to turn around its struggling schools. He said the answers were not flashy. “You want an engaged student, a competent, able teacher and a challenging curriculum,” he said. “That’s the core of the enterprise, and you build out from there.”

Pallas pointed out that the chronic scarcity of funding for public schools nationwide has left them vulnerable to deep-pocketed reformers whose money always comes with strings attached.

”If schools weren’t so underfunded, there would be less ability for these private actors to exert the influence they have,” Pallas said.

Kirp advised public education reformers to model themselves after corporate school reformers in one key respect. “The reformers are very good at capturing media attention, and public schools are not,” he said. “That’s a clarion call. Find a voice, find someone to tell your story.”