The charter schools are making the big money grab. Not content to have the full support of both ALEC and Obama, of hedge fund managers who control billions of dollars, of the Gates Foundation, the Broad Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation, the Dell Foundation, the John and Laura Arnold Foundation, and scores more foundations, they now seek additional federal funding. Having seen the havoc that the charter schools wreaked in New York City in the past two weeks, I don’t see the need for more federal funding when so many philanthropists are pouring millions into charters, and our urban schools are in dire need of help. Instead of pumping more money into the hedge funders hobby, save the public schools of Philadelphia, for example.
I remember back in 1988-90, when charter advocates said they would cost less because of lacking a bureaucracy. Ho, ho, ho.
John Kline is a Republican. George Miller is a Democrat who is a favorite of DFER, the hedge fund guys who love privatization. Happily, Miller is retiring and might be replaced by a progressive Democrat.
Here is the press release:
From: “Education and the Workforce Press”
Sent: Tuesday, April 1, 2014 11:18:55 AM
Subject: Kline, Miller Introduce Legislation to Support Quality Charter Schools
Congressman John Kline, Chairman
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 1, 2014 CONTACT: Alexandra Sollberger, Brian Newell
(202) 226-9440
Kline, Miller Introduce Legislation to
Support Quality Charter Schools
WASHINGTON, D.C. – House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman John Kline (R-MN) and Senior Democrat George Miller (D-CA) today introduced the Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act (H.R. 10), legislation to encourage the growth and expansion of quality charter schools.
“I had the opportunity yesterday to visit two exceptional charter schools in Minnesota: Global Academy and Aspen Academy. Through conversations and classroom visits with students, parents, and teachers, I saw firsthand the remarkable progress that can happen when we encourage creativity, flexibility, and choice in education,” said Chairman Kline. “The Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act will strengthen our education system and help more children access the excellent education opportunities they deserve. I’d like to thank Mr. Miller for his hard work and collaboration on this legislation, and urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to lend their support.”
“Charter schools play an integral part in our public education system,” said Rep. Miller. “In many ways, these innovative schools have been teaching us what is possible when it comes to educating kids—and the work of charter schools helps break down many of the stereotypes that often plague kids who happen to be from the wrong zip code. But we must not sacrifice quality for quantity. Through a reauthorization of the federal Charter Schools Program that emphasizes quality, equity, and accountability, we are not only ensuring that federal funds go to expand high-quality schools that serve all students, but we are also working to uphold our commitment to ensuring that every neighborhood has high-quality public schools.”
Under current law, the federal Charter School Program awards grants to states for the development of new charter schools, but does not include support for the replication or expansion of successful charter schools. H.R. 10 will modernize the Charter School Program to better support state efforts to develop and expand successful charter schools.
The Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act:
Improves the Charter School Program by authorizing the replication and expansion of successful charter models;
Promotes state efforts to develop, expand, and authorize high-quality charter schools;
Supports the sharing of best practices between charters and traditional public schools; and
Encourages charter schools to reach out to special populations, including at-risk students, students with disabilities, and English learners.
To view a bill summary, click here. To read a fact sheet, click here.
# # #
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Scott Garrett, the extremist congressman from the 5th district NJ has proposed the L.E.A.R.N. Act which removes any Federal mandates from education. The anti Common Core argument along w/the “Federalization of education” mantra, and giving the state/parents (a la local control) “back” It could help our Democratic candidate Roy Cho, ammunition to counter his extremism. BTW, Garrett home schooled his children, and has one of the lowest ratngs of the NEA.
Last week, Riverside Representative Mark Takano (Dem CA district 14) joined the committee. He told Politico he’s “agnostic” on charter schools, and mentioned test hearings as an interest.
A “Teacher for Congress” surely understands the issues, and his role now depends on his political courage and confidence. His education policy page is carefully bland:
“Mark supports reforming or ending the Federal mandates of “No Child Left Behind” and a renewed commitment to building an educational system that will prepare Americans to compete in the emerging economy.”
http://www.marktakano.com/issues/education-and-workforce-development
There is no coded support for Corporate Education Control whatsoever, and that says a lot to me. He got elected to congress without uttering the word “accountability”, one way or the other. The Dem leadership might have put him on this committee to mitigate the damage Miller has done to their own education credibility.
Takano goes on to describe sound and concrete job and workforce opportunities for Riverside, of the sort that are scaleable nationwide. I see intellectual energy, warmth and humor. This is his first big test.
Very logical and reasonable to wonder why on earth charters would need to take from the public coffers when vast amounts of private money is invested in them. But whether it is logical depends on the underlying strategy. Charters are not opened to provide CHOICE between public and private schools. The underlying and REAL strategy is to open charters TO TAKE OVER THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS. So it follows that charters would WANT IT ALL… public and private money – especially when taking public money starves public schools of necessary funding.
I do think the public needs to be aware and one step ahead. An organic farmer needs to prep and tend to the soil BEFORE planting to maintain the organic quality. Our beloved “ed reformers” are still “tending the soil” so they can plant charters around the nation. How? One good example is continuing to support Teach for America. PG County in MD will most likely have an upsurge of charters in the future. Here is an article on the subject… http://www.princegeorgescountymd.gov/sites/ExecutiveBranch/News/Pages/County-Executive-Baker-Announces-1-Million-Donation.aspx
Just wondering what other mega millionaires are supporting TFA and in what areas of the country now? Where is “the soil being tended” for new surges in charter schools where public schools are still in the majority?
I also have questions that also relate to how charter schools were sold to the public:
“The big difference in this new piece of legislation: The bill would create a grant program to help Charter Management Organizations (think KIPP or Aspire) open new charter schools. That’s something U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan supports.”
So they would be choosing which national CMO’s go into states, cities and towns at the federal level by funding the CMO’s they prefer?
Isn’t that a really radical change from current public school governance? A strong public school system can’t expand into another district, city, town or certainly STATE. We already have national charter chains. Now we would have certain federally-funded CMO’s opening schools all over?
We were also told that charter schools would be small, local, and “creative”, but this bill doesn’t do that, this bill attempts to “replicate and expand models”- it rewards uniformity and replication of the type of schools that are celebrated and promoted, and those are “no excuses” charter schools. Won’t we end up with three or four large CMO’s that are national, and chains of schools? The large operators will have a huge advantage over individual charters (and, incidentally, your local public school) because of economies of scale.
“In the past, federal charter laws were “really focused on growing new models, and that was very appropriate when the charter movement was getting launched,” said Alice Johnson Cain, the vice president for external relations at the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools in Washington. “Twenty years in, we have a good sense of what the effective schools are.” She said the bill would encourage “replication and expansion of models we know work.”
The bill would also help charters gain access to high-quality facilities; advocates say charters are often stuck in some of the least desirable buildings. And it would encourage states to work with charters to help them serve special populations, such as students in special education.”
And, as to “access to high quality facilities”, who will own the facilities that are “accessed” and improved with public dollars? Who will own the value-added by facilities upgrades? If a CMO leases a private space for a charter and the public pays to improve it, does the value-added there remain with the private landlord? If the CMO purchases property with public dollars, who owns that facility? The CMO? Because that isn’t true of public funding that goes to public schools. Those facilities, that public investment, is owned by the public in those districts.
If I had a map of a city with public schools and then a parallel charter system, when I close a public school and open a charter, do I then have a net loss of publicly-owned property and facilities in that city?
Also, the idea that this better “regulates” charter schools is nonsense. These are “suggestions” to states. The federal government can’t manage a school from DC.
“And the bill makes it clear that states can use so-called “weighted lotteries,” meaning that they can give preference to low-income students, racial minorities, and other disadvantaged children in admissions. That’s something the administration has also been pushing. In addition, it would allow students who graduate from one charter school (say, an elementary school) to enroll in an affiliated school (say, a middle school) without having to go back through a lottery.”
This is an admission that charters aren’t serving the same mix of kids that public schools are serving, incidentally. Although that was never admitted publicly by charter proponents, they’re now attempting to regulate their way out of the fact that charter schools cherry-pick. That’s what Cami Anderson is doing with One Newark. She’s set up a system that better distributes students through the privatized schools. That’s an admission that “choice” wasn’t achieving “equity”. We never got an admission of that, but she’s attempting to regulate her way out of a problem she knows exists.
Except this isn’t a regulation. It’s a gentle suggestion that states put in legislation leveling the playing field between public schools and charters.
It’s nonsense that this is “regulation”. It’s a subsidy that encourages certain CMO’s along with a suggestion that states better regulate charter schools. States don’t have to do that. They CAN level the playing field so charters don’t have an advantage. They don’t HAVE to. The federal government can’t regulate lotteries. They don’t have the legal authority.
I also love the laser-like focus on charter schools at the state and federal level.
That’s the result of having a Republican Party that is anti-public schools and pro-charter and voucher, and a Democratic Party that is “agnostic” on public schools, and ready to “relinquish” public schools to private operators.
Public schools don’t have an advocate in government.
We have passionate advocacy for privatization on one side of the aisle and wimpy “agnostic” mush on the other side of the aisle.
No wonder public schools are faring so poorly under ed reformers. No wonder state after state has gutted funding for public schools. “Agnostics” don’t make great advocates. One would have to actually VALUE our schools to act as an effective advocate. We’re sort of missing a vital piece of effective advocacy, which is why our schools are getting creamed under ed reformer government. This isn’t a big mystery.
The money quote for me is:
“Encourages charter schools to reach out to special populations, including at-risk students, students with disabilities, and English learners.”
Notice is does not REQUIRE charter schools to accept these students and to educate them, as public schools must do in all cases.
Encouraging makes it sound nice, implies that there could be equality but it leaves it up to the charters to decided and, as so many do now, the ones who want to prove their test-taking superiority will not reach out to the “special populations” but will rather exclude them and counsel them out ASAP if they somehow get in by accident.
Orwellian but obvious and quite disgusting.
They don’t have any regulatory power over those private entities, certainly not at the federal level. What are they going to do? Require states to enact certain lottery procedures for charter schools? They can’t. So they offer “encouragement” and pretend they’re regulating.
How would that fix it anyway? This is a huge complex system in 50 different states where you have two sets of schools, public and charter. They have no earthly idea how “weighted lotteries” would work out, on the ground. It would be difficult to predict “equity” BETWEEN the two systems in one city or district, let alone at the national level.
I notice Duncan is energetically lobbying Congress for charter school subsidies, too. Does anyone at the DOE spend any time on public schools? Is this the US Department of Charter Schools?
Even if they prefer and promote charters in the Obama Administration, they might reflect on the fact that there are also public schools out here, and those schools are part of their JOB. It’s what they’re paid to do. Where’s the advocacy for public schools?
They have regulatory power if they choose to exercise it. Witness that requirement that all states that accepted RTTT funding must implement CCSS and VAM ratings of teachers.
The DOE could easily make such requirements for charter schools accepting public moneys but they won’t — that’s the whole point of letting a two-tier system arise in the USA.
I don’t understand why Obama and Duncan aren’t constantly followed and questioned publicly about their destruction of the public school system by teachers, parents, and students. Are they really in that secure a bubble?
I follow several (ok, tons) of RSS feeds on my netvibe account. One tab is called political ed, this blog is on that. I have another tab called news and boing boing is on that one…I love it when the two tabs collide in what might seem like unrelated stories but really are not. This story on boing boing about private equity is exactly what is happening to the ENTIRE public schools system (http://boingboing.net/2014/04/04/private-equity-an-infection-t.html). So, if we can just think of schools as one giant Guitar Center, ripe for the picking but soon to be left an empty battered shell of it’s once glorious, John Dewey idealized self, we know what we are really in for. Sad that investors can’t see beyond the width of their own wallets.
Some more bought out charter clowns… “innovative” hmm. .. please tell us about that “innovation”. It’s funny how the “innovation” in New Orleans and Detroit has led to “failing” charters with huge numbers of teacher and student turnover. Please, representatives, tell us more about the magical “innovation”. Is part of it the magical campaign money that has made its way into your campaign coffers??? Go into detail. Explain what “innovative” means.
quality and charter schools is mostly an oxymoron
Miller is not retiring. He will be working for a Reformy Think Tank and earning more money than ever!
http://www.cato.org/blog/budget-proposal-its-not-just-about-core-coercion-anymore
The big story in the [education budget] proposal is – or, at least, should be – that the president almost certainly wants to make the Core permanent by attaching annual federal funding to its use, and to performance on related tests… In fact, President Obama proposes changing Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act – of which NCLB is just the most recent reauthorization – to a program called ‘College- and Career-Ready Students,’ with an annual appropriation of over $14 billion.”
“Encourages charter schools to reach out to special populations, including at-risk students, students with disabilities, and English learners.”
Give the dog a bone.
Where are all the charter superteachers coming from. Is there a special Gates University I’m unaware of?
Teach for America
http://www.teachforamerica.org
Our saviors.