Peter Greene has a solution to the Washington State charter school problem. We know that charter advocates are very upset because the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools sent out an “urgent” notice, calling on its allies to write to Washington Governor Jay Inslee and urge him to call the legislature into special session to keep the state’s handful of charter schools open. This doesn’t seem to be a good solution, because neither the governor nor the legislature can override a decision by the state’s highest court, which said that charter schools were unconstitutional because they are not “common schools” controlled by an elected school board. In other words, contrary to the state constitution, they are not public schools and cannot use money designated for public schools.
Peter Greene says there is a simple solution to solve this issue.
Just submit to being overseen by an elected school board.
Act like the public schools you claim to be. Make your finances and operation completely transparent to the public.
And allow yourselves to be overseen by an elected school board instead of a collection of individuals who are not answerable to the voters or the taxpayers.
I mean– what’s more important to you? Providing a strong educational alternative for those 1,200 students, or holding on your ability to do whatever you want without having to answer to the public? Is it so important to you that you not be accountable to the public that you would rather engage in timeconsuming rewrites of state law, or even just close your doors, rather than let yourself submit to transparent and open oversight by a group of citizens elected by the very taxpayers whose money you use to run your school?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Amen to Mr. Greene’s comments. But the larger issue is the one million students in Washington public schools which are underfunded. Our legislature is under a Supreme Court order to fund and submit a plan for full funding basic education but has failed to comply.
I just wanted to register a thank you for all your efforts to enlighten and encourage the efforts to return schools to public control. I am currently teaching 1st grade in Common Core-ruption land where though the statewide system is completely controlled by an oligarchy that sends its offspring to independent schools and the ordinary public has little connection with the centers of decision making and the employees remind me of what Alice saw when all the players simply strove to keep their heads from being separated from their bodies.
Thank you, Joseph. We are fighting together for research-based, proven reforms and to rid the field of rich snake oil salesmen
Generally, there is no such thing as a “public” charter school. Both existing case law and public policy have long established the logic for the Washington State Supreme Court holding. The California Court of Appeals (2007-01-10) ruled that charter schools are NOT “public agents.” The 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals (2010-01-04) ruled that charter schools are NOT “public actors.” The National Labor Relations Board joins a host of other government agencies that have unequivocally ruled that that charters are “private entities.”
By definition whether a charter is run by a for-profit firm, or a (501c3) non-profit, then it is not public. The United States Census Bureau frames this issue best: “A few “public charter schools” are run by public universities and municipalities. However, most charter schools are run by private nonprofit organizations and are therefore classified as private.” (US Census Bureau. (2011). Public Education Finances: 2009 (GO9-ASPEF). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Oce. Print. vi).
Because these lucrative charter schools are not public, and are not subject to public oversight, they are able to get away with violating the constitutional rights of their students. The decision in Scott B. v. Board of Trustees of Orange County High School of the Arts saw Rosa K. Hirji, Esq. write: “The structures that allow charter schools to exist are marked by the absence of protections that are traditionally guaranteed by public education, protections that only become apparent and necessary when families and students begin to face a denial of what they were initially promised to be their right.” It’s time that we shut down the profitable charter school industry and divert our attentions to improving our public schools.
Charter schools are a lot like bottled water. Even though study after study shows it is no better and in many cases worse, people keep consuming it fueled by American consumerism, snobbery and greed. As a result we have a mountain of plastic the size of Texas floating around in the Pacific Ocean. The DNA of the fish we eat is is changing from eating the plastic, but we keep buying the product!
What they really are is a wealth transfer scam consistent with all of the privatization schemes that are being implemented or proposed for a variety of public agencies and programs. It is all about enriching the few at the expense of everybody else. Neoliberalism started rearing its ugly head during the Reagan years, and it has polluted both political parties.
I have been saying that for years. Charter schools are private schools that get public money. They should not exist.
For many years, Washington state legislature has supported a program that allows high school students to earn free college credits on campuses on various colleges and universities. These colleges and universities are not controlled by local school boards.
3 Washington State Supreme Court justices pointed this out. The majority ignored it.
We will liberate California from your lucrative industry’s grip soon too. Now that I’ve passed the State Bar of California’s FYLSX, I only have a few more steps towards becoming an attorney. Who knows, maybe I’ll be the one who will be arguing in court to pull the charter profit plug in a few years.
I support you, Robert Skeels. Maybe you can write to Bruce Lederman, an attorney in Great Neck, NY and pick his marvelous brain.
Joseph Nathan is a one-dimensional thinker, even though he has the ability to be otherwise. About the only thing he has ever shown any growth in was his advocacy for charter schools becoming unionized, which, in addition to being beholden to the public, they should be.
No apologies, Joe. Charters are not public schools and privatization is not the answer, unless you want to be like Columbia, Brazil, China, or Mexico, to name a few; pick your poison in terms of social equality and opportunity.
For too many years have non-educators been driving education reform policy, and it will end at some point. Far be it from you to advocate for state funding and taxing the rich and wealthy corporations to pay for schools, the way most of Europe does. I just came back from Sicily, where movements like these are virtually unheard of. Instead, you pave a path for privatization.
Go be the concubine to Eli Broad and Bill Gates in some other country . . .
Robert,
Joe Nathan just stated the fact about Washington State. This is also true in California. High schools Juniors and Seniors can and do attend and get credits from local colleges not controlled by the local school board.
Why do you resort to name calling?
Actually, Raj, even HS freshman can take college credit courses. Several do this across CA. Several of the CSUs and CCs have that in place. But getting college credit is not the same as getting HS credit. Getting HS credit requires approval from the elective school board. Without board approval, students have to pay at least half or all tuition costs, unless it is an acting charter school affiliated with the college. If students have to pay, then that is not a free public education.Therefore, somewhere along the lines, at least in CA, the comparison falls apart. My guess is that is the case as well in the state of Wash.
State laws in several states mandate that participants in dual credit courses earn both high school and college credit.
That’s great, Robert Skeels! As a CA teacher, I appreciate your work for our schools and your courageous voice. Thank you and go get em!
Joe,
I just looked up Washington State Running Start. It appears that only qualified low income students receive the fee waiver; however, they still must pay other college fees, like parking and health, etc. So again, it is not quite a good comparison.
TM – district public schools around the country in some cases charge families, except families that are low income, fees to participate in some parts of their program. For example, some districts charge families, except those from low income, if they want their youngsters to participate in music, debate, athletic or other activities. Some districts charge students the cost of Advanced Placement or Int’l Baccalaureate tests that are offered at the end of those classes.
In Minnesota, the Post-Secondary Enrollment Options program provides free tuition, books and lab fees for all students. Transportation funds also are available for students from low income families. The state also provides support for AP, IB and College in the Schools courses.
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/StuSuc/CollReadi/PSEO/
My preference would be for public education to be free, k-12. Free meaning free, meaning no charges to families. Sadly, that is not the way things have evolved in some states and some districts.
But I think free is what many of us are working for. Would you agree?
Perhaps that’s because the colleges and universities are not free, being funded only in part if at all by tax dollars, nor are they open to all. The fact that high school students attend them for some but not all of their classes does not change this difference. Also, the students that attend the classes do so on their own, by their own choice. They are not compelled to attend as they are for regular high school. Again, a major difference. Nice try at a logical fallacy though, but they always fail.
Jon, state allocations make attending the college or university free for high school students. High school students who attend classes on college campuses are fulfilling state hs graduation requirements as they earn free college credit.
Also attending a district or a charter public school also are choices.
Over 45 years of work with public schools, it’s been great to work with people who believe in the value of teachers or teaching, parents and other groups working together to create new options. When some of us created options within districts, we faced very similar, intense opposition.
Fortunately much of the country has moved beyond the idea that families – especially low income families – should have no options in public education beyond the neighborhood school.
And with all the defense of school boards, it’s disappointing how little attention is given here to corruption within traditional school districts. Indeed, one of the reasons that NYC moved away from local elected boards was that there was so much corruption in the community (elected) boards.
Since you are concerned with corruption Joe please take care of the situation in Ohio. Call Kasich ASAP. Share your indignation equally.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/05/kasich-campaign-hit-by-charter-school-data-rigging-scandal/
Joe Nathan:
“Fortunately much of the country has moved beyond the idea that families – especially low income families – should have no options in public education beyond the neighborhood school.”
In other democratic modern stabilized countries, low income families have widespread safety nets unlike our tattered and torn ones, and their child poverty rates are dramatically lower than our scandalous American 24%.
Never will you hear Joe Nathan calling for redistribution of wealth to help solve these problems in the US. European countries have issues with debt and immigration, but they are not dealing with inequality the way Americans are. Their banks are regulated; their wealthy pay their fair share.
Read Picketty, Mr. PhD. Nathan.
Nathan never mentions the offshore tax breaks Apple gets in Ireland to hide American money being made and to keep it tax free; Nathan never even thinks about how we bailed out Wall Street and now Wall Street wants a piece of American public schools. He does not mention that paying back TARP funds never required failed banks to regulate their CEO and executive pay. He does not – even though he is aware of – display the connection between Charters being an allegedly cheaper and more efficient way to deliver education while the starving of public schools is caused by companies like Apple and Easy forming offshore partnerships to avoid paying taxes back to the United States.
Joseph always mentions what he wants to and omits that which is he fully aware of.
Actually, Robert, I constantly work with, encourage and praise district public school educators. Here’s a newspaper column from this week: http://hometownsource.com/2015/09/03/joe-nathan-column-new-approaches-help-high-school-and-college-faculty-students/
Brace yourself folks. The next ten posts from Joe will be all about his greatness and how to collaborate and improve education if we would only worship his pearls of wisdom.
I see your words and am trying to listen to your messages, but all I hear is “Blah blah blah blah blah.”
Please articulate more about equality in this country, Joe, and not just thought education.
Cx:
. . . Not just through education.
The majority ignored it because it was not relevant. It is a red herring.
Joe these are college credits. Explain please why college credits by a college on college grounds need to be overseen by a school board.
Do you have any other input about the actual concerns besides trying to find a false outlier to construct as a straw man?
That’s what I was thinking too. I think Joe seems to think he has to try to confuse the situation.
The colleges don’t need to be overseen by a local board. But the Running Start program is part of Washington state’s public education program, paid for by public funds in Washington state.
We have a similar program in Minnesota. Many states include as part of free public education, schools and programs not controlled by local school boards.
Joe Nathan, what are you talking about? If college level courses were REQUIRED for graduation from high school, then no student could graduate without taking these courses. But it sounds as if what you are talking about is ADVANCED courses for students who have already completed their required courses.
No, as noted in another comment, Running Start (and Minnesota’s Post Secondary Options allow high school students to earn both high school and college credits simultaneously. Program details vary somewhat between Washington and Minnesota and some other states. But both states (and others) provide these options for students and families.
Joe Nathan, I went to the running start website and I saw nothing about high school classes being given. What I did see is college level classes that will be included on the high school transcript.
Can you please name one or two high school classes that a student would take at a college? If you are talking about college classes that are included on a high school transcript, that is an entirely different thing and pretending that this is disallowed is pretty outrageous. Hopefully that is not what you are doing and you are going to post here to clarify. Do you mean that students can take high school classes at a college INSTEAD of taking them at their high school?
Yes, students can take classes on a college campus that earn both high school and college credit. Minnesota has a similar law.
I find it fascinating which threads you show up on and which you don’t. Any comment on the thread below about how one third of Florida’s charter schools have failed?
Dienne, Joe is paid far too much as a lobbyist/cheerleader for charters to actually engage in open discussion around inconvenient facts. He always attempts (poorly, I might add), to deflect unflattering stories about charters with an obscure reference to a public school scandal, often far in the past or completely isolated and contained, to prove that ‘everyone does it’.
Joe wants to be lauded as a hero and given accolades for standing up for the ‘right kind of children’ and throwing the rest to the wolves, like the Charter Industry does. He is bitter because public school teachers, parents, amd supporters see through him like glass. He claims to be many things that he then proves he is not through his actions.
I am glad that he and teachingeconomist et al. come here because it helps expose the true nature of those who work hard to ensure certain children have the best of everything while other people’s children are left to drown in a sea of greed, corruption, racism, religious bigotry, and neglect.
Never forget that one out of three children in the USA live in poverty and no sane person can claim, with a straight face, that the solution to that problem is destroying public schools and the teaching profession, CCSS, or for-profit Charter Schools.
Returning to a fair taxation rate and equitable funding with a strong and well-endowed safety net is what works the world over but these folks will never call for that!
The kind of people that are willing to use other people’s children as pawns in a global campaign to support a capitalist dystopic ideology are dangerous and need to be watched, challenged, and guarded at all times by decent people else they take over our world completely and ruin it for generations to come.
Just say no to Joe!
Diene – There’s nothing magic about the terms “district” or “charter.” We should be learning from the most effective of each. Here’s how this can work – district, charter, college and university educators working with and learning from each other.
http://hometownsource.com/2015/09/03/joe-nathan-column-new-approaches-help-high-school-and-college-faculty-students/
Joe Nathan, the best way to learn from one another is to have total transparency. Why are you so afraid that if the boards were elected by the people, and overseen by the public, you can’t have the kinds of schools you claim are better. Your argument seems to be that the public — if allowed to know exactly how those schools are run — would not agree to fund them!
NYC – I’m fine with elected school districts offering options. In fact, all 3 of our children attended the ST. Paul Public Schools, k-12.
I think the experience around the country is that some districts react in constructive ways when there are other public options available. Moreover, there is considerable hostility within some districts to offering options.
Here’s an Ed Week blog in which I tried to describe a progressive education agenda. Reactions welcome from you and anyone else who cares to comment.
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2015/05/whats_are_priorities_for_a_pro.html
Don’t the high school kids taking college classes need to get approval from the elective school board to do that in the first place?
I know it is the case in CA.
Plus, most of the college courses that high school students take are offered by community colleges and state schools that are paid for by tax dollars and represent democratic governance.
6 Washington state justices said that charters were not legal because they were not controlled by local board. They seem to have forgotten or ignored the fact that other parts of public education – which is available for high school students in Washington state (ie Running Start) are not controlled by local boards.
Many states offer programs and schools as part of public education that are not controlled by local boards. – there are programs similar to Running Start, there are independent public schools for youngsters gifted in science, math, arts, etc. there are schools serving students who are hard of hearing or blind.
Public education is far broader in many states that what’s offered by local school boards.
Running Start does not waive fees for all students. Most students will still have to pay up to 65% of the fee while the legislature fee only covers 35%. Low income students do receive a full fee waiver. However, they still need to pay technology fees, health fees, and any consumables that a class might require (textbooks). One basic Eng. 101 class could potentially end up costing a low income student over $150–it would obviously be much more for non-low income students.
See this page for a run down on the fees: http://www.sbctc.edu/college/_f-tuitionwaivers_runningstart.aspx
See the actual law here: http://app.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Bills/Session%20Laws/House/2119-S2.SL.pdf
This is nothing like charters at all.
Washington State explains the following: ” The Running Start Program was initiated by the Legislature as a component of the 1990 parent
and student “Choice Act” (Chapter 9, Laws of 1990, 1st Ex. Sess.). As amended, the provisions of the “Choice Act” that pertain to Running Start are codified at RCW 28A.600.300 to RCW 28A.600.400. It is intended to provide students a program option consisting of attendance at certain institutions of higher education and the simultaneous earning of high school and college/university credit.
Eleventh and 12th Grade students have a right granted by the Legislature to participate in
Running Start at public expense. The exercise of that right is subject only to minimal eligibility and procedural requirements, which are spelled out, in state administrative rules.
Click to access RunningStart-FAQs.pdf
The FAQ makes clear that students can do this full or part time.
Joe,
But isn’t it the case that these students are enrolled in a public high school and are not taking a full load at the university? Do these credits count toward their public high school diploma? The student’s program is still supervised by the publicly elected school board. The argument lacked merit.
Stiles, the point is that part of public education in Washington state is not controlled by local boards. In fact, some students are earning a year or more of college credit while still in high school. State funds pay for Running Start.
I just posted the same question above (I probably wasn’t as clear). And Joe, you did NOT answer it but posted nonsense. Earning a year of college credit while still in high school means you already have your high school courses behind you, all of which are overseen by the local school board. Are you saying that the charter folks are now protesting allowing any student who has completed all his high school requirements under the supervision of a public high school, as required by law, to take any college level class to supplement that education? I have never heard such hatred of public education in my life, and I wonder how badly you must want to destroy it to post here.
No NYC, participating in the Running Start program does not mean you have finished all of your high school courses. As noted in another post, Washington State Running Start regulations permit 11th & 12th graders to simultaneously earn high school and college credit.
The larger point is that in many states, public education consists of a broader array of opportunities that those controlled by local boards.
You still are being vague. Does a student take any REQUIRED high school courses in college? Or are those extra courses that get both high school and college credit?
Years ago and long before charter schools were in existence, my public high school allowed seniors to take extra courses at college. It did NOT mean that my high school no longer supervised my education and assigned it to a private entity. But you seem to be implying that any student who takes a class at university is no longer overseen by the high school. I suspect you are trying to mislead about this and I wonder why you can’t just be straightforward.
A Washington state high school student can take a course on a college campus that is required for graduation from high school.
The central point for this discussion is this: Washington state funds are paying costs for an institution not controlled by a local school board (ie a university) which is providing what amounts to up to 2 years of a high school education.
This provides an option for high school juniors and seniors. They can continue to take courses in high school; they can take a mixture, some courses on the high school campus, some on the college campus; or they can spend full time on the college campus.
Sorry Joe, but your reply makes no sense. What kind of college would offer “2 years” of high school courses? There are required courses that every state makes students take, and there are extra courses. I doubt students are taking Algebra I or Geometry in college since those are high school level classes. Do they get a waiver and get to skip their state’s English requirement to take a college level course for 2 years? I doubt it. Do kids get to skip taking US History or other required subjects to take a class in the college instead and let that substitute for the class? I doubt it.
In every state, there are REQUIRED classes to graduate. And there are choice classes that are extra. You seem to be making the claim that after a typical sophomore year, in which a student has only done the required freshmen and sophomore classes, a student in Washington state can simply leave high school and somehow take all his classes in college instead. Is that your claim?
Both Washington State and Minnesota allow high school juniors and seniors to take courses required for high school graduation either on the high school campus, or on a college campus, or some in the high school and some at the college.
NYC and some other communities offer a variation on this theme, called “early college high schools.” It’s possible for high school students to earn up to an A.A (2 year college) degree as they earn a high school degree.
Joe thank you for clarifying. I happen to know about those “Early College High Schools”, and a student DOES need to get their required classes out of the way in the first two years. You are wrong that the college level classes are “required”. They are the electives allowed because the student has fulfilled the other requirements. And the high school is still responsible for the student.
The other important fact is that these “early colleges” are for advanced learners. Since charter schools are supposed to be educating at-risk kids who are being failed by public schools, I don’t understand your concern. Those students are not getting their high school requirements out of the way in two years.
As mentioned, the Washington and Mn programs are similar but not identical to the early college high schools in NYC. In Washington state and in Minnesota, high school students are able to take courses on college campuses that meet high school graduation requirements.
Moreover, there is a huge movement both here and in other states to include a much wider range of students in dual credit than the “high flyers” that some early college high schools accept. That’s because of research like this from Teacher’s College, Columbia
“Males, low-income, and low-achieving high school students all appear to benefit from participation in dual enrollment to a greater extent than their dual enrollment peers who enter college courses with more social, economic, and educational advantages. These findings indicate that dual enrollment can benefit a range of students, and may have the greatest positive impact on those students who are often excluded from participation.”
District and charter public schools have been created for a range of students, and I think that’s fine.
Joe,
No question there is great diversity in terms of college course opportunities for high school students across the states. Youth options type programs, concurrent enrollment programs, gateway to college programs, etc encompassing the range of students from at-risk to advanced learners. So generalization is risky and no doubt there will be a unique example that can be cited as the exception to the rule.
Having said that, I’m comfortable saying that with few exceptions high school students have access to higher education courses as part of their high school program or as a partial extension to their high school program, not as wholesale substitutes for their high school program. And it those few situations where it is a complete substitute, in most if not all cases the local board approves the program (although they often do not have the real power to deny) or enters into an agreement with the IHE.
Stiles, as mentioned previously, arrangements vary. In some states, local school boards can not veto or block the participation of high school students, part of full time on college campuses. In some states all or part of the state funding follows high school students to the college. As you note, arrangements vary.
The larger point is that throughout the country, there are numerous schools that are part of public education that are not controlled by local boards. These include schools created for students with special talents, such as art, math and or science, schools created for students with special needs, such as the blind or hard of hearing, and chartered public schools.
And in fact, in some cities (such as Chicago and New York), public schools are not controlled by locally elected boards.
In Newark, NJ, Joe, some children and their parents have NOT chosen to attend charter schools. Cami Anderson’s “One Newark” enrollment application took care of that. Children who lived across the street from their local public school were during the roll out year of One Newark sent across town to charter schools, schools that they did not choose nor want to attend. This was so Cami could fulfill her lie that there was a waiting list to get into some of these charters, where truly there was a lack of enrollment. This was to perpetuate the lie that “everyone wants to attend those ‘better’ than public school charters.” Cami Anderson FORCED people into those schools.
This year, in retribution to the community and teachers and students pushing back, Chris Cerf has moved not only students around the city of Newark, but transferred teachers from one school to another, just to screw with them.
Newark is a huge city. For children to have to take public transportation to get to a school across the city, when they have a neighborhood school they’d prefer to attend, is just insanity.
This is the tip of the iceberg.
Funding and programs were STOLEN from the public schools, while charters are funded to the hilt no only by diverting taxpayer dollars, but by private funding through “philanthropy.”
TFA is benefitting by the building of “Teachers Village” on Broad and Halsey Streets in Newark, which will have retail, 3 charters, and taxpayer supported reduced rent units for TFA teachers. Shame on them all.
Donna, the “Teachers Village” housing development for TFA in Newark was financed by the US Government, Goldman Sachs, and several other equity investors. Your tax dollars at work.
One of the Dyett Twelve, has explained that her 14 year old daughter will have to travel 16 miles across violence wracked Chicago to attend high school because there is no open enrollment high school in Bronzeville.
If these are credits for college, that shouldn’t be a concern for K-12 schools. If seeking blurred lines for public-private monetary support, look to the use of Title 1 funds. The public school districts receive the money, but include services to private schools, for those who request it and demonstrate a need. That is the proper way to do this; the money does not go directly to the private schools.
Bonnie, the history of Title I funding of services for nonpublic schools goes back to 1965, when the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was passed. In order to get it enacted, President Lyndon B. Johnson agreed that religious schools should get funding for their poor students, thus guaranteeing the votes of urban Democrats who had many Catholic constituents. The Supreme Court struck down the inclusion of aid to religious schools, but a compromise was reached in which specific services required by the state (like testing and remedial services) could be funded.
In the interest of full disclosure, Joe Nathan should be required to post both his salary from, and the funders of, the Center for School Change any and every time he promulgates his charter school industry propaganda here.
Here you go Joe…..saved you some time. Is it still deleted from your website?
Funding for Joe Nathan’s center for school change:
Funding for the Center has come from Cargill, Gates, Annenberg, Blandin, General Mills, St. Paul, St. Paul Companies, Peters, Minneapolis, TCF, Joyce, Bradley and Rockefeller Foundations, the U.S. Department of Education, the University of Minnesota, the Minnesota Initiative Funds, Best Buy, Pohlad, and Wallin Foundation.
Thanks Linda: love that “transparency” of Joe’s lol;)
Those documents Ohio finally released the Friday before Labor Day are interesting.
Three ed reform “movement” activists seem to be running Ohio public schools, completely unsupervised.
John Kasich and his education director are MIA, which certainly goes a long way toward explaining why the 93% of students who attend public schools have zero representation in state government. That agency is completely captured. It’s all charters all the time.
I’d like them to get off my payroll if they are ideologically opposed to the schools 93% of the kids in the state attend. I don’t want to pay them . Let Gates or Walton pay them.
Plus a variety of district public schools, Linda. Some of them worked together with CSC on this project. http://hometownsource.com/2015/09/03/joe-nathan-column-new-approaches-help-high-school-and-college-faculty-students/
(yawn).
I have a simpler solution for the charter operators.
Tack “Common School” onto the name of all the charters operating in Washington state and officially call the board/owners of each school “The Elected School Board” (TM)
Like those ads on TV for collections of songs by the “Original Artists” (only $19.95!), where that was the name of the group that performed the covers.
PS
Charter operators: That will be only $19.95 for my advice.
You can make the check payable to SomeDAM Poet, 1313 SomeDAM Lane, SomeDAM Town, USA
Nice. Hopefully you get at least one check.
Have any of you been to a public school board meeting lately? I know mine spends about 2% of their time talking about teaching and learning. They are experts about talking about everything else despite 50% graduation rates in their high school.
Hopefully, the legislature will convene and change the law to support schools that are governed by people who answer to the parents and children instead of by politicians (and make no mistake about it, school boards are about politics).
The adult interests in public education like publicly elected school boards because they can have disproportionate influence there, making it easier for adult interests to override what is in the best interests of the students. With voter turnouts typically less than 10% of eligible voters and minorities almost completely not represented, it’s pretty easy for teacher’s union members or supporters to end up on both sides of the “negotiating” table.
Mark Twain said, “In the first place, God made idiots. That was for practice. Then he made school boards.” I appreciate those on public school boards that are there for the right reasons and working for the best interests of students, but they are few and far between.
This paragon of democracy that “won” is hardly what you’re cracking it up to be.
And that’s not even to mention the lack of democracy inherent school populations and performance largely dictated by what neighborhood you can afford a house in.
It’s hypocritical to support taking that choice away from low income families if you had it. It’s only low income families that have to “take one for the team”. That’s not progressive.
Stop claiming that you are advocating for low income families when it is clear as day that your only interest is yourself and getting the best. for you and yours.
Don’t like democratic republican rule? Live in a place that doesn’t have any democracy. There are still plenty pf places where you can go and live under the iron fist of a wealthy upper class who decide what is best for all with no input from the governed or rights to protest or change things.
It’s hypocritical to support giving that choice ONLY to low-income families who agree to do all that is asked of them in order to remain in the charter school. Because of course, there is no real oversight in their operations except by people whose main interest is keeping the charter school going! So it’s so very easy to make a child feel miserable until their parents pull them out for “another choice”! And since your charter isn’t a public school, you don’t have any obligation to that child whatsoever! In fact, you can even lobby with all your money to make sure the public schools where those children don’t go have BIG class sizes! All the better to make those children you don’t want suffer and of course, make your own charter school look better in comparison.
It’s ironic that Peter Greene is calling the charter schools’ bluff! And their supporters on here are making it clear that they will do anything but having anyone looking over their shoulder! Because offering a better education to the small number of poor students who they allow to remain in their school is supposed to trump all their disgusting behavior toward the students who they spend so much time and effort to convince to make a “choice” that does NOT include their charter school.
I have no problem with charter school transparency. In my state, board meetings are open, schools are subject to FOIL, audits are done, there are strict conflict of interest and self-dealing policies, all charters have to be run by not-for-profits, etc. It should certainly be that way everywhere.
Chris, you no nothing about me. I’m a volunteer, donate a lot of time and money to my school, and get nothing in return except the satisfaction of providing a much better educational alternative to families who can’t afford to move to get that.
My point isn’t that there shouldn’t be democratic rule, it’s that it’s disingenuous to think that it’s working well. Why do we have mayoral control in NYC and many other cities? Those schools aren’t run by an elected school board either, because that board got hopelessly dysfunctional.
I assume you went and/or your children go to a school that you are happy with. My kids go to a neighborhood public school that is great. Great for those of us who can afford to live where that is the rule, rather than the exception.
You are all disdainful of parents choosing schools as if they have less of a vested interest in the school than taxpayers/voters do. Again, nonsense.
“You are all disdainful of parents choosing schools as if they have less of a vested interest in the school than taxpayers/voters do.”
The problem is that the parents have no rights once they “choose” the charter school, if the charter school decides that their child just doesn’t fit.
John, if you are going to propose a system where one type of school gets to discourage kids who don’t “fit” from staying, then why hand over that franchise to a private organization that isn’t overseen by the public? That just encourages corruption, as we have seen in Ohio and Pennsylvania, and elsewhere. If you think that there should be schools where parents have to commit to certain things — even if they win the lottery — then those should be PUBLIC schools, too. Have them side by side with each failing public and let the parents who are savvy enough “choose” them, and then let the school “choose” to teach those students who fit and encourage the rest to leave for the falling public school if they don’t.
That is what I truly don’t understand about you “reformers”. There is an enormous cost-savings to educating the students who “fit” your school and that is the little talked about side effect of “choice”. That cost savings should be staying in the public system, not being used to pay high salaries for charter operators who are not educating the students who are most expensive to educate! How hard is that to understand?
John… Sorry to hear that your local school board is so dysfunctional. But of course we don’t know what school board you are talking about and we don’t know if others in your community would agree with your representation.
The most telling part of your screed is your apparent anger at teachers for demanding a voice through the negotiation process. Pushing the old tired meme that teachers are selfish, greedy adults who don’t care about the students in their classrooms doesn’t work quite as well as it used to and it must be difficult to accept for those like you who revel in teacher bashing.
I understand that the democratic process is messy and that there are those, including yourself apparently, that believe that public education should be privatized and taken out of the public sphere.
Most who post here probably do not agree with you. But thank you for reminding us of your existence.
I challenge John to name a community where the school board is “controlled by teachers”.
bmarshall,
I have no problem with teachers being represented at the negotiating table. My issue is when they essentially end up on both sides because they or their chosen candidates are elected to the board. In any other space, that would be considered a conflict of interest.
How else does a school district like Buffalo end up spending $5 million on elective plastic surgery for their teachers while not being able to fund music and art?
John, I was horrified when I read that the Buffalo school board was “controlled by teachers” and allowed this plastic surgery perk. But then I did a bit of research to see how this came about and whether, as you claim, it was because the teachers “controlled the school board” (which is your rationale for allowing private corporations to run charter schools however they please, with no one to answer to but their privately appointed boards.)
” It dates back at least to the 1970s, when “getting a little work done” wasn’t par for the course among women (and some men) of a certain age. Instead, it was intended to cover serious reconstructive surgery on patients such as burn victims. In 1996, the rider was nearly cut. But after the daughter of a district employee was hurled through a windshield during a car wreck, requiring surgery to repair scars on her face and body, union officials lobbied to keep the benefit in place. ”
OMG – and to think the union could have negotiated higher salaries instead back in 1996 but for their having a modicum of sympathy for this poor girl. I’m sure had you been on that school board at the time, you would have told the girl to find some charity to pay for her reconstruction or just live with a few scars like all the people who don’t have good health insurance do.
I agree that the unscrupulous cosmetic surgery business (which I’m sure you don’t have a problem with) used that to market to teachers years later. And the only reason the benefit remains now is because there hasn’t been a new contract negotiation! But I’m sure you feel that at approximately $52,000/year the teachers are way overpaid anyway. I mean, just think, they will get a $1,300 raise next year and will soon be joining the 1%, right?
Thank you for reminding us all how the pro-charter movement can’t argue honestly to try to convince people they are right. Maybe if you have to resort to Tea Party rhetoric, it might be because you don’t have a case to make for your own charter schools.
Thank you NYC public school parent. I just read Johns inflammatory response, insinuating and pushing his greedy, selfish teacher meme. The twisting and turning of information, until it looks nothing like the actual facts, comes easy to some people I guess.
NY Parent and bmarshall,
Just look at the data instead of guessing. Studies show voter turnout by teachers who live and work in the same district at 3 times the turnout of non-teachers. And, in case you think teachers just care more about education, teachers vote in their own board elections roughly twice as frequently as they vote in their town if they don’t work there.
I don’t believe teachers are greedy; anything but. However, teacher’s unions represent the best interests of teachers, as they should. Where the interest of students and teachers diverge, unions represent teachers; again, as they should.
Students are ostensibly represented by voters. Parents of students unfortunately have little voice in this system except when they exercise choice by moving to a neighborhood with “better” schools.
Finally, publicly elected school boards have resulted in many districts that cater to the needs of the majority and screw the minority. Look at East Ramapo, NY for a good example, but also look at the list of NYS failing schools, which neighborhood they’re in, which districts have other, “whiter” schools that are doing much better, etc.
My point is that publicly elected school boards are hardly a panacea. If you want to pretend they are and attack me instead of engaging in the discussion, enjoy.
John says: “My point is that publicly elected school boards are hardly a panacea.”
No one thinks democracy is perfect or a panacea. But as the founders of this nation noted, it is far, far better than the alternative. You seem to strongly disagree, which is a bit scary since you are an educator.
NYC parent,
This isn’t democracy vs. no democracy. It’s whether schools should be run by publicly elected school boards, or whether they can be run by mayors (e.g. publicly elected officials), or charter schools enacted in law (by publicly elected officials) overseen by authorizers (who answer to publicly elected officials).
As a reminder, your city does not have schools run by a publicly elected school board.
The structure of the law is what’s important. The voters have to take it from there. In my NJ town (pop 30000) BOE meetings are well-attended, occasionally bursting at the seams, with plenty of discussion open to the floor, covered by the local newspaper, and televised on the local channel. Candidates for the BOE are grilled by the public at open meeting and debates covered in the same manner. The school budget is published in all its detail, as well as proposed changes, which are discussed point by point in public fora. The BOE in the upstate-NY town I grew up in was and is run the same way. If the citizens allow their board to become a politicized puppet that’s on them. You can’t justify public-supported schools managed outside the public eye by saying ‘BOE’s don’t work anyway’.
Hi John,
Actually, a lot of us are teachers and we do go to board meetings. The board of my urban, successful school district is quite high-functioning, thank you very much! We have no charters in our district (not allowed by law), but there are charters in other places near to us. The vast majority of the charters are terrible — once people realize that, they “vote with their feet” and move into our district….
If I were a taxpayer in a district where they allow charters, I would love to be a named plaintiff in a lawsuit similar to the League of Women Voters case in Washington state — there is NO WAY I should have to pay my $5000 / year in property taxes for the use of any privately run entity that I have no say (vote in the school board race, or better yet, run yourself….)
They’re not big on compromise in end reform. They could have addressed complaints on Common Core or testing too, but they chose to try to discredit critics until critics were parents and it didn’t work anymore
Ohio charter schools are a disaster. They are harming both charter schools students AND the 93% of students who attend public schools. The ed reform “movement” response? Double down! Take over Youngstown and vastly expand this disaster! No retreat in the face of reality. This is a war and the people who live in these States are just collateral damage. On to victory!
I love the language in that press release. Parents are shocked. Their schools have been taken from them.
This is the same “movement” who cheered when Chicago shuttered 50 public schools and the same movement who just engineered a takeover of Youngstown, Ohio right?
The Youngstown Privatization Plan will probably be stopped by a court too. Maybe they could consider following state law like everyone else does instead of end runs and short cuts?
Indeed Chiara, where was former Dick Cheney aide Nina Rees decrying neoliberal corporatist Rahm Emanuel’s shocking closure of actual public schools in Chicago. I guess the profiteers in the lucrative charter school sector suffer from selective shock syndrome. Maybe Joe Nathan can chime in on this and spin it for his corporate handlers.
Excellent analysis – as always!
The only thing I would say to Washington public school parents is if they capture state government that is all she wrote. We were given the same assurances you’re getting in Ohio 15 years ago and we’re still waiting for the promised “improve public schools”. Public schools are a distant THIRD in ed reform, behind charters and vouchers. You’ll be amazed how your schools simply disappear from discussion, other than scolding lectures or unfunded mandates and punishments and threats. Ed reform is ALL negative for existing public schools. There is no upside.
You bet ya!
Their secret is not in INNOVATION, but SECRECY, and sold as SUCCESS!
Anyone working this intensely, keeping ALL cards so close to their chests, threaten and control every inch of their actions, lie, make unbelievable claims, allow every charlatan to hang out their shingles, no credentials needed – NONE, and on & on…you know the rest. The $B controlling this public theft of public funds & education by billionaires MUST be exposed, fought, challenged and stopped.
WA state is a good beginning.
We cannot rest!
Selling is what the corporate interests do best, and we have to stop buying their garbage. They think only about the short-term private gain and have little understanding of the greater good. That’s why they deny climate change.
There’s a charter school case that has been in front of the Ohio Supreme Court for a year. No decision yet. The issue is whether charter schools are private entities or state entities as far as assets and management. The charter school contractor argued that they are private.
“Operators of Ohio’s growing number of lousy charter schools are one win away from hitting a trifecta.
They’ve got the legislature in their hip pocket and a governor who is an inexplicable and inexcusable no-show on the issue.
Two down, one to go: The payoff for controlling the judiciary won’t be millions. It’ll be tens, maybe hundreds, of millions.
The case in question is Hope Academy v. White Hat Management. Nearly a year and a half after this controversial case landed in the court’s lap, and a full year after oral arguments before the court, a decision has yet to be announced.
That’s an extraordinarily long time, even for a branch of government that can be understandably deliberate. In fact, it’s long enough to cause many to wonder what’s going on behind those closed doors.”
People in other states can learn from what’s happened in this state. We were sold the same line of BS they’re selling all of you.
http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/09/charter-school_data_scrubbing.html
Funny how this has been framed. Voters rejected charters in WA three times. The fourth time it passed, with Bill Gates, the Waltons, Jeff Bezos and others spending 17 bilion buckaroonies. It won with about a 2% margin.
“Not too long ago, in November 2012, Washington state voters became the first in the nation to approve a public charter school law by a ballot initiative. After years of discussion and debate, the people of Washington registered their clear and specific desire for public charter schools.”
Kinda disingenuous.
Diane, you are right on the mark. If these charters are so proud of their success, then they should be happy to be open to public scrutiny. They should be willing to turn themselves into true public schools as they claim they are. But we all know the truth. The purpose of these charters is to make someone rich at the expense of children–often the children of the most unsophisticated members of our society.
This is the way to go. Test cases of the constitutionality of charters in every state and let it head to the Supreme Court. But something tells me that the Supreme Court might not take it on. After all, education is RESERVED TO THE STATES. By the way, our charter friends are so inconvenienced by such things as constitutions and true legal rights. Too bad.
Reblogged this on World's Greatest Detective of Education and commented:
Another case of “motives revealed”
This article explains it simply. So my question to the ed reformers is this: If you are all about the kids – why not be under a school board and answer to the taxpayers of the local community ? and open your books ? Those are education dollars coming from my taxes paid and I would like all of it to go straight to the free, local public schools that my predecessors founded and supported. If you feel inventive start a local lab school or magnet school in your district and under the school board- otherwise what are you doing ? answer – a money grab.
I agree. It’s nonsensical — in fact, there are “choice” schools in NYC that do exactly that! But then, they are run by teachers and principals who care more about educating at-risk kids than they do promoting some kind of privatization of education or their own political aims.
Open your books. Stop hiding your high attrition rates. Why the desperation to say that if you can’t run your charter school without any prying eyes, then you can’t do it at all? What is it that these reformers are so terrified of the public finding out?
Yes, financial records, yearly audits and attrition rates should be available for all public schools, district and charter.
The school district in my area refuses to supply an itemized budget; instead, relying on about 30 line items that hide huge amounts of information from public view.
“Yes, financial records, yearly audits and attrition rates should be available for all public schools, district and charter.”
Yes, they SHOULD be, but they are not from charters . . . .
Laws regulating district & charters vary, state to state. Some of the finest charters around the country have been established and are being run by former district public school educators. It’s also true that some great educators have moved from charter to district public schools.
A terrific response! Love it!
Does Joe Nathan get a cash bonus for every time he posts a mistruth, half-fact, or distortion here? If that’s the case, it’s no wonder he’s so persistent.
Excellent observation! Charter welfare at its most shameful, LOL!
Anyone who thinks you can beleive anything Joe Nathan says here in comments in his role as ‘benevolent charter supporter’ need only do a Google search of his name along with the words “charter schools” and then read about some of the groups he hobnobs with and what they have to say about public schools, teachers, unions, liberals, Diane Ravitch, schools of education, etc. and then look at some of their funding sources and you will get a much clearer picture of what a spinmeister hypocrite he truly is.
Joe, you can run but you can’t hide! When you lay down with charter dogs you get up with charter fleas and we are not fooled.
Start denouncing the more egregious wrongs committed by your fellow charter supporters and speaking up about the lies, innuendos, and smear campaigns they engage in against public schools, teachers, and unions and the false research they create and then I’ll listen to what you have to say here and your supposed love for public schools and unions.
You’ve written one too many positive book blurbs for one too many charter fanatic spreading lies and distortions for me to accept anything you say at all as truth. $$$$$
Chris, here’s an effort in Ed Week to describe good and disturbing aspects of chartering.
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2015/03/what_does_the_charter_movement.html
What books do you find disturbing that I’ve written a note for? I’m interested because I’ve passed on a number of requests.
I’ve also written endorsed a group of books that you & others may enjoy, starting with “Teaching with Fire, Poetry that Sustains the Courage to Teach.” It’s a wonderful compilation of essays by educators about poems that they have used with students, and the poems themselves. A followup is “Teaching with Heart.” Both great books, I think.
Have you read either of them? If so, what did you think?
No one pays me to post here. I assume the same is true for others. They can speak for themselves.
The disdain, disrespect and personal attacks that some people post here help explain why growing #’s of families have sought options in public education. Some seek options within districts. Some move to other districts. Some enroll youngsters in charter public schools. There are many reasons families do this…disdain and disrespect are among, but certainly not the only reasons. Others have explained some of their reasons.
I have no disdain or disrespect for any family who opts to go to a charter. My close neighbor’s daughter downstairs from us is the principal of a charter school in D.C.
But the disdain and district for a shyster such as you, Joseph, flows freely and willingly. Your attempts to link people’s opprobrium for you to the same for such families who opt for charters is lame and wimpy at best, and just downright embarrassing for someone with a PhD at worst.
Please prostitute yourself somewhere else where people gullible enough are willing to pay your fee and patronize your services. You’re so merchandized that you appear to charge by the comment and not by the hour . . . .
Possible new site mottos…
“A site to discuss better education for all and to personally attack anyone we disagree with”
“If we want your opinion on better education for all, we’ll give it to you.”
Anyone think we could claw back some reparations for the damages done to public schools?
Excellent idea! Class action . . .
FLERP?
FLERP is a lawyer?