T.C. Weber, a public school dad in Nashville, attended the annual convention of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, which was held in his hometown, and describes the tone he heard and the people he met.
The leaders, the ones who gave keynote speeches, were militantly insistent on the expansion of charter schools and militantly determined to portray public schools as failures. They think they are fighting a “civil rights” battle against bastions of injustice (public schools) and that they are akin to the freedom fighters in Iran. No talk of collaboration, of being in common cause with those who work in public schools.
The people he met, the teachers and principals, not so much. Many of those he met were doing good work, not at war with public schools.
The movement, however, is implacable and determined to destroy public schools.
Worst of all, they credit their greatest successes to Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
The ISIL of America is the autocratic, for profit at any price and in anyway, corporate charter school industry that worships at the alter of avarice.
Good for him. I think people have to attend these events since ed reform so dominates government.
This is the status quo. If you want to know what’s in store for your public schools you shouldn’t be listening to lawmakers- you should go to the source.
Any mention of public schools at the charter schools conference? Outside of vowing to defeat them, I mean.
I’m old enough to remember when these political professionals sold this to the public as “improving public schools”
Did they mean “replace”? That seems like an important omission. Might be time to let the public in on their plans.
What is sad is that these opportunists fail to understand the incredible value of strong public education that has helped us build this nation. Public education has no means other than the community to defend itself or compete with the voracious charters. It just has to sit there like a Mercedes in a parking lot waiting for a horde of gangbangers to come along and strip it.
I believe in public education, I believe in educators, I believe in all of you! @HillaryClinton tells the delegates of the #NEARA16
What does this mean? President Obama said the same thing and so did President Bush.
She “believes” in it? Was there doubt it exists? WHAT do they believe in? What does “public” mean to them? Publicly-funded? Outsourced to contractors as a subsidized purchase of a service?
I would guess that it is propaganda like what the NAPCS has on their website to counteract the ‘lies’ promulgated by research, statistics, and facts.
For example, they claim that charter schools must accept all students as a counter to the ‘lie’ that they cherry-pick only the best.
They completely ignore and don’t and won’t address the fact that many, many charters have been caught, repeatedly, counseling out students who don’t make the grade, re: test scores.
They do not and will not refer to the stark data that shows so very clearly that the class of 100 that starts in a ‘successful’ charter most often only graduates 30 or 40 of those original ‘scholars’ because the rest just up and left. Yet they continue to claim higher success rates.
This kind of doublespeak and PR shenanigans is de rigeur for neoliberal politicians like Obama and Clinton.
Look at what she does, like seeing an opportunity to scoop up support from Wall Streeters who are alienated by Trump’s idiotic ramblings. Don’t pay attention to what she says because it is carefully parsed, tested, run through a gauntlet, and vetted before it ever leaves her mouth.
School reform is a religion, so when they say “I believe!”, it means the same thing as when someone says it in church.
It’s a pronouncement of faith.
“I believe!”
I believe!
In charter schools
I believe!
That silence rules
I believe!
In test and VAM
I believe!
In flim and flam
I believe!
That Money’s God
I believe!
So praise the wad!
She’s a Believer in the Magic of the Marketplace, so draw your conclusions about what that means for public education.
“they credit their greatest successes to Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.”
No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top?
The architect of Race to the Top agrees with them:
“Joanne Weiss, former chief of staff to U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and director of the federal Race to the Top program, argues that the initiative spurred comprehensive improvements nationwide and in numerous policy areas, among them standards and assessments, teacher evaluation methods, and public school choice.”
Testing, VAM and charters. It’s only lately that the Obama Administration pretend it was about anything else.
Public schools get the stick and charters get the carrot. That’s ed reform in a nutshell.
How can one even begin to argue with such logic?
I mean, even world class logician Kurt Gödel would have been no match for someone like Joanne Weiss or Arne Duncan.
Obama in Ed:
The audacity of a dupe.
Yes we could have, if maybe I had known the right people and didn’t have one giant gaping blind spot in this area.
King in Ed:
Please, lower your voices. I don’t want to hear them. I mean, I can’t hear myself stink — I mean, I can’t fear myself think.
King:
Talk to the VAM.
Face the facts, public schools are sucking up potential profits. Charters can stick there hand right into the taxpayers wallet, but public schools are a socialist endeavor slowing progress towards schools by business, for business and of business.
Just because public schools do not discriminate among students and outperform charter schools and are less expensive to operate is no reasons to slow profit growth. Of course charter are at war against public schools. It is all for the benefit of the charter school profiting adults.
Thanks for the report, iincluding the titles of some of the sessions. These remind me of some at early conventions of the Education Industry Association…. The gist of all of them: Sell the sizzle, not the steak.
I note that most of the comments here ignore what the to dad said about the teachers and principals. If students are going to charter schools where they are loved and taught by good people, the their view of the charter movement will be positive, because they will exist in a world without the political war he heard about at the convention. If i am a kid who finds safety and learning in a toilet, I will love the toilet.
So we who oppose the way we are creating charter schools that rob money from neighborhood schools need to couch our arguments that way. If we need to get the votes, we need to be saying “hey! You know how good it makes you feel to go to school? I would like that too!”
We should not forget that private school teachers, like all teachers, are mostly in it for the chance to make young lives matter. When I taught at a private school, I loved my kids as much as when I have been teaching for the past 29 years in the public school.
Our argument should be with the bellicose purveyors of charters for the purpose of making money.
True, but then everyone knows “parents and teachers” aren’t managing this “movement”- the ed reform echo chamber cheerleads charter schools and either denigrates or ignores public schools.
You don’t have to take my word on it- read them yourself. Pick any of them- doesn’t matter.
https://twitter.com/Ninacharters
It’s the same across the board- Walton, Gates. the Obama Administration, all of them.
Ed reform IS charter schools.
Obama betrayed public schools and all the children who attend public schools, with children of color being harmed the most — and there’ll be more of the same if HRC becomes President.
The decision by the Washington State Supreme Court that public tax money shouldn’t be given to charter schools because charter schools aren’t public schools since they are run by private boards instead of publicly elected boards and since they aren’t subject to the same public-record financial reporting and scrutiny should raise the same challenge in courts nationwide that charter schools must be operated by publicly-elected boards and must provide the same public-record financial accounting as genuine public schools.
Why isn’t there a nationwide movement in courts in every state to challenge charter schools’ claim that they are public schools? Forcing charter schools to be run by publicly-elected boards and to provide the same public-record financial reports as genuine public schools would put a damper on the expansion of charter schools and would probably lead to most of them folding.
So, why is no one following the Washington State lead? Why?
Sadly, Washington State is not following its own court’s lead. A group of Democratic state legislators followed Gates, not their constituents, the court, or their conscience.
Did the Gulen charters participate?
Ms. Ravitch,
I attended the conference, and was present for the majority of the speeches Weber referenced in his own blog. I am disappointed by his skewed perception of what was said, and by your filtering of one opinion of a conference you did not attend, as fact. I am a fan of yours. As a public school teacher for 6 years, and charter school teacher for two years, and administrator for two more, I am a fan of both public schools and charter schools. I am also aware, as I know you are, that both have faults.
Dr. Fuller, in a part of the speech Weber must have missed while frivolously appropriating other quotes out of context on his notepad–spoke eloquently about this. Acknowledging that any group of people wishing to grow and develop (this conference marked the 25th anniversary of the “charter movement”) must acknowledge its history “the good AND THE BAD! (his emphasis, not mine.)” Fuller went on to speak about some of the accomplishments and victories of charters, as well as some of the pitfalls and failures. In fact he used the words “disasters”and “scoundrels” to describe some of the schools and individuals who have fallen under the umbrella of the charter movement. Roland Martin and Howard Fuller both did speak about the need for those in the room–a room which Fuller said charters have a duty to invite more into (progressives, conservatives, white, black, social justice advocates, common core advocates, and opponents.) However not once did they say a disparaging word about non-charter public schools. Rather, the “fight” they called the attendees to was a social and political one: against an overwhelming vocal and growing majority that disparages not only charter schools, but education, and educators in general.
I am sad for Weber that this was his interpretation of those speeches (which represented, by the way, less than 1% of all presenters in the entire conference–my favorite session was one on Charters’ Responsibility to disrupt the School-to-Prison pipeline.) Had he listened more closely, he would have heard from Fuller–and many others present–a very positive and much improved tone from charter school movement leaders, and attendees of self-reflection, and desire to do better by kids. It doesn’t seem, however, that was the angle Weber wanted to take. His angle, I suppose, did attract far more viewers…something Martin and Fuller might point to as evidence of the need for charters to fight for their honor.
Geoffrey,
I am always happy to present different perspectives. From the rhetoric of national charter leaders, it is easy to conclude that they see public schools as their enemy. Maybe Howard Fuller is having second thoughts. He has been handsomely funded by rightwing foundations (Bradley and Walton) who do want to privatize public education.