A reader writes:
I just finished watching Mitt Romney’s speech to the NAACP. I would say that more time was spent talking about education, and he used charter schools as the solution to the problem. It was essentially a “why charters are great” speech. I wish his people would read this post by you. If charters are so successful with these policies, why not grant traditional public schools the same privileges? Oh, it’s not about these policies. It is about busting the union and getting rid of the older ($$$) teachers.
I reviewed Romney’s education plan in the New York Review of Books. It’s a blueprint for privatizing education at every level. Romney buys the phony narrative that our schools are failing and don’t need any new money. He says we spend enough already. But he plans to ask for new money for charters, vouchers, and online schools. In his views, they don’t have enough money.
Research is clear that there is very little difference in the comparative performance of charters and public schools when they educate the same kinds of children. However, charters get better results when they spend more money and keep out those troublesome kids who don’t read English, who have special needs, and who are behavior problems. Vouchers make no difference, although Romney doesn’t know that. And online charters get abysmal results.
So, if it is results you are after, Romney’s plans will be a disaster.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I’m okay with not increasing funding at this point in time in our economy. However, if I were a governor, I would scale back a lot of the unfunded mandates that were passed throughout the past few years in the name of reform. During the same year (2011-2012) that $1.3 billion was slashed from education budgets, Florida school districts had to adopted expensive, new teacher evaluation systems to comply with a new state law. The iObservation system required observing administrators to have iPads to provide real-time feedback.
A local news station did an investigative story about one district’s iPad purchases a few months back. The spokeswoman for the district said over and over again that they “had to buy these iPads to use with the observation system that was required by the passage of the new state law.”
Romney will be addressing the Press Club of Baton Rouge, LA on Monday. I’m sure Jindal will be by his side. Stay tuned…I’m sure there will be much praise for Louisiana’s “reform” efforts, including charters, online schools, and vouchers.
A $50,000 a plate fundraiser. Romney was not to have been the guest, but was arranged quickly by one of LA’s wealthy businessmen! Isn’t it just grand that Romney could squeeze it into his busy campaign schedule.? At least it might get Jindal off the Romney campaign bus for a few hours in the state that he “loves” so much.
Yes, this is part of the privatization agenda, but it’s also important that when it comes to the Black vote (his reason for speaking to the NAACP), charters/choice/vouchers have been utilized as wedge issues in Black communities for years. Cory Booker’s ascendancy in New Jersey is the result of the same kind of money and thinking. The right has been dumping money into conservative Black organizations for years hoping to get more Black votes. For more details: http://www.blackcommentator.com/55/55_cover_vouchers.html
I hope there will be reporters there to ask about vouchers for schools that don’t teach evolution and vouchers for schools that don’t have facilities and teachers. Ask him if that’s what he did when he was Governor of Massachusetts.
I read in a conservative blog recently the theory that Romney will be turning up the heat on his education plan and thus talking about it more on the campaign trail. From what this reader writes, it appears that it might be turning out to be true. Romney is looking to divert attention away from RomneyCare backlash. I didn’t watch the speech, but I’m willing to bet he praised vouchers, as well.
Diane,
Here’s a better link to your review on Romney’s education plan:
http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/jun/05/miseducation-mitt-romney/
You can read the entire piece here without having to subscribe. 🙂
The ironic thing is that he spent so much time at the beginning of the speech talking about the importance of the family, but then went ahead and continued to blame black economic conditions on the public school system.
Teenage pregnancy and general unplanned pregnancies are not the fault of the school system.
Romney’s Plan, Obama’s Plan articulated by his Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, and the Council on Foreign Relations’ recent plan for education, are essentially the same message. All the analyses done in terms of comparing “successfulness” of charter schools vs regular public schools, “union busting” vs “liberating schools from unions control”, the arguments pertaining to underfunding of schools whether charters or regular public schools, etc, is diversionary rhetoric avoiding the real underlying agenda which is not addressed except by a few voices in the wilderness. That is, the ultimate destruction of the concept of elected representation at the most local of levels, with accompnaying consequence of taxation without representation . That is the issue about which the subject needs to be framed. All the other symptomatic factors fall into place as nibbling at the edges of the fundamental question re: accountability under a constitutional system of elected representation. Unless that is addressed at the most local of elected representation, the school board, next will be elected city councils, county representives, state legislators.
“Forests” of Regional bureaucracies inlcuding education , city alliances, etc., maturing since their inception in the 60’s never have had elected representation, have already usurped much of the authority at all levels of governance. Charter Schools (school choice) is the vehicle now for the final death blow to local elected representation starting with end runs around school boards. Both mainline political parties are playing the same tune in the same orchestra along with the advisory “instrument” (CFR) setting policy having to do with international interests.
Well as gardnernorcal stated on a comment on Commondreams.org a while back: If charters are so great why would they need public funding to succeed? Shouldn’t they be able to thrive on their own in the “free marketplace” of education without public assistance?
What is the brave new world of corporate education going to look like?
And once they get their foot in the door will we ever be able to extract it? Have we already reached the tipping point? I hope not!
I’m in the unusual position of having worked in two district public schools and now two years in a public charter school, all of them in a high-needs area of Brooklyn. Here’s what I’ve noticed: charter schools do NOT selectively choose students, or weed out children with special needs or English-language learners. It may be that the parents of children do not enter the lottery, but that is not the fault of charter schools and hardly qualifies as handpicking students. Yes, charter schools should do a better job at soliciting parents, and I know my school is making an effort in this area. Also, it is a myth that charter schools bar students with behavior issues. In fact, my current charter school has an equal amount or even more students who have behavior issues than the other two district schools where I worked (in East New York and Cypress Hills). The difference is my school manages behavior with incentives and consequences that are much more effective than what I witnessed and endured at the two district schools I worked at. The biggest difference I’ve noticed between charter schools and district schools is that charter schools are far more better managed and a lot more organized than district schools. That has nothing to do with funding and everything to do with the fact of better leadership, pure and simple. I don’t think we can talk about real reform unless we really look at the positives and negatives of both district schools and charter schools. In fact, why are we pitting one against the other? Where is the real dialogue? I understand the idea that people want to break the union, I get it, and I get the fact that corporations want to make money in education, but I also think that we can’t continue to see this as charter schools are bad and district schools are good. It’s too simplistic and not honest. The fact is that there is good and bad in both charter schools and district schools. Why not engage teachers from both sides of the aisle? Just some thoughts from a teacher who finds herself seeing the pros and cons on both sides and wanting what’s best not for a cause but for the children. The current debate reminds me of two parents bickering over things and forgetting the child who has to endure the fallout from such discord.
Teacher in Brooklyn,
If you don’t mind me asking, my question for you is how many years did you work as a teacher-not just worked in your two prior schools? What subjects/grades did you teach and for how long? What do you teach now?
The reason I ask because I want to know if you are comparing apples to apples as you did not state that you “taught” at the public schools but more than once said “worked”. Big difference.
You stated “I understand the idea that people want to break the union, I get it, and I get the fact that corporations want to make money in education. . . ” What happens when that corporation decides that due to whatever reasons they decide to let you go?? How can a profit making venture be more “efficient” than a public entity?
Thanks,
Duane
I worked for two years in a district school and two years in a charter school, all those years were in the most economically disadvantaged neighborhoods–the neighborhoods of East New York, Cypress Hills, and Brownsville Brooklyn. I’ve only taught second grade, so given that as well as the similar demographics, we are talking apples and apples.
Having worked in publishing before becoming a teacher as part of the New York City Teaching Fellow program, I have no problem losing my job. That’s how it is for most professions. The point of my writing is not to take sides but to open the conversation between charter schools and district schools.
TiB,
Thanks for your response but again at one point you state that you “worked” and at another “taught”. By worked do you mean taught or was the “work” part of the New York City Teaching Fellow Program. The program and teaching per se are two different things. I read a little about the NCYTFP and it seems that it is like Teach for America in that the “graduates” did not complete the same course of study of the traditional teacher undergrad degree prep programs.
I point this out because it could be that your first two years were a matter of “getting your feet wet” and/or “learning the ropes” so that by the time you got to the charter school you might have been that much more “seasoned” as to have a lot better control not only of your students but of your own teaching capabilities.
Unfortunately I have read/heard of many charter folks wanting to “open a dialogue” and doing so by misstating/embellishing charter “successes” and denying/obfuscating their problems. I’m not accusing of that but what you’ve written so far has not been clear as to your comparisons of your experiences in public vs private charter schools.
I have been teaching a total of 4 years; 2 in a district school, second grade, 2 in a charter school, second grade. I’m a career changer, so I’m older and bring a little more experience to this dialogue than a typical TFA graduate, having edited books on education, etc. I do not have an agenda other than serving children and giving them the gateway skills to succeed. I’m not trying to advocate for charter schools here, but rather trying to give my perspective as a teacher in both types of schools. I see pluses and minuses to both charter and district schools. I think to say that all charter schools are bad is simplistic and some of the arguments go against my experiences, so want to articulate that. Believe me, I don’t want to see corporations take control of education. I do not believe in privatizing education. I’m for what works for children.
You cite leadership. I take that to assume good administrators.
In the debate about public education, you NEVER hear the commentators or politicians talk about school-level administrators other than their need to be able to fire bad teachers quickly. The conversation is always about teachers.
However, when you read any book about business (since they like to compare government to the private sector), they always talk about leaders when it comes to employee performance.
There is one leadership person who goes as far as to say that if an employee ends up performing poorly, it’s because the employer made a bad hire and didn’t take the time to do effective interviews.
We NEVER hear that about school-level administrators. No, I am not placing the blame for all of public education’s ills on principals and assistant principals. I am just acknowledging that no one ever talks about what they need to do in order to improve education.
You are so right, Teacher111. I agree! Why don’t we talk about administration. My last school had a principal who taught for 5 years only and in one grade only before becoming a principal at the Leadership Academy, which someone should really do a story on as it trains people with little experience teaching to become principals in high-needs communities before ever having had any leadership position! That school was an absolute mess–completely disorganized and had the kind of footage you would see in a documentary about the ills of public education. I wish the national dialogue on this subject would include administration. Why aren’t they accountable in the same way as teachers. In fact, many principals treat teachers as if we’re the problem.
That may be true about your charter school. Some don’t skim, some don’t exclude, some don’t push out low-performers. But these behaviors have been documented in many charter schools. The federal General Accounting Office recently issued a report (I wrote a piece about it) saying that students with disabilities are under represented in charters. The figures in urban districts like NYC show even bigger disparities than the GAO report. When I looked at the figures in the South Bronx, I found that the charters there had half as many ELL, and half as many SP-ED as the neighborhood schools. What you are calling myth is reality for many charters that succeed by skimming and attrition. You need to read Gary Rubinstein’s posts about “miracle schools,” where such actions are commonplace.
How do they skim? Are you saying that students with disabilities or who are ELL are rejected from the lottery? Most charters work on a lottery basis, as far as I know, so how does this skimming actually work? I’ll look at the report and your piece, but I don’t see how it’s possible to skim.
Here’s one example:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-26/features/os-feds-investigate-seminole-charter-20120526_1_handicapped-student-disabilities-learning-charter-school
There are 50,000 schools in the United States and 3.4 million teachers. What useful knowledge can we gain from the anecdotal experience of one teacher in two of those schools? Is it valid to extrapolate from the experience in one charter school that as Duane says “charter schools do NOT selectively choose students, or weed out children with special needs or English-language learners.”?
I have seen charter school lottery applications that ask for past report cards and test scores. Can this information be used by school administrators to contact parents who win a lottery seat and tell them that the school is a bad choice–that the school can’t accommodate their special needs child–and that they should not enroll their child? This is precisely what we have found occurs based on interviews with charter school staff. But even that level of research simply establishes that some charters engage in this practice. There is data available that can provide more scientific evidence of skimming (attrition rates in particular, if they correlate with an increase in test scores).
Individual experience can be a great source of information and knowledge about some aspects to teaching, but it is bad data for making policy decisions about school privatization and school governance.
Lance Hill,
I am not saying that I speak for all schools and teachers. I simply threw my hat in the ring, so to speak, to share my experience because I’ve noticed that the national conversation about education generally excludes what you dismissively called “anecdotal experience,” of teachers–as if that counts for nothing!
Teacher in Brooklyn, you said: “Here’s what I’ve noticed: charter schools do NOT selectively choose students, or weed out children with special needs or English-language learners. It may be that the parents of [?] children do not enter the lottery, but that is not the fault of charter schools and hardly qualifies as handpicking students.”
I decided to fill in what you accidentally omitted in that sentence, since that was the context. So let’s assume that:
? = special needs or English-language learners
Here, then, is your complete sentence:
“It may be that the parents of [special needs or English-language learners] do not enter the lottery…”
However, you need to add “parents of at-risk students” to your list. So I’ll take it one step further:
“”It may be that the parents of [special needs, English-language, and AT-RISK learners] do not enter the lottery…”
Lotteries do not bring education to the public. Instead, lotteries eliminate those families from the equation who do not value education or do not have the capacity (whether physically, mentally or emotionally) to go that extra mile for their child’s education. The families applying for spots in these lottery-picked charters are the ones who DO value education or who are in positions to make additional efforts for their children’s education.
So what do charter schools do for the children whose parents don’t give a damn or can’t devote any more time to their children than they already do because they have two or three jobs? Do we just let these children rot in the public schools? Do we just expect these particular children to know what they themselves need and insist that their parents play roulette with their education by entering a “lottery?”
Until charter schools educate the WHOLE public AND until charter schools are expected to answer to the same requirements as public schools, you are absolutely not comparing apples to apples.
Charter schools are just microcosms–they do NOT educate the populace. At one time, charters were conceptual sub-sets of the public school system, and some actually were making a difference in a handful of communities, but now that the corporate reformers have entered the “education market” (that would be the marketing of children for profit), many charters have failed to solve any community issues through “education.”
So no…I do not see the practice of running charter schools that cannot educate the public as a good thing. NOW…if a charter school supports the whole public AND it values its teaching staff by allowing them to organize and negotiate for their working conditions, well then you’ve got yourself a hybrid charter/public school with a chance.
I think the problems you are stating with public schools are more about the communities themselves and less about the schools, but it’s easy to see how despair can permeate a school environment in a community that is failing its people.
Are you a teacher? I don’t think you can dismiss my observations, stating the difference between charter schools and district schools as simply “more about the communities than the schools.” It’s presumptuous and plain wrong. The neighborhoods where I worked in district and now in charter are comparable in terms of demographics, income, etc. In fact, the neighborhood I work in now is far worse in terms of crime, etc.
To your point about lotteries–yes, you are right to a point. Still, please let’s be accurate in how we discuss these issues. Lotteries are not exclusive or skimming since anyone can participate. If a parent doesn’t want to or doesn’t care, that’s not the fault of the school. My saying that doesn’t mean I don’t care about the kids whose parents don’t care about education. I teach in a place that I see has strong culture, discipline, leadership, and curriculum. Have you ever been inside a high-needs district school? How about a high-needs charter school? I think it would enlighten your understanding. Yes, we can make political arguments but as far as I can see those who make these arguments are far removed from the realities of inner-city life.
Your experience and mine are not the issue here. As Lance Hill asked here, how useful is anecdotal “evidence” from one person? Anyone who has ever done research would know that you need a larger sample to reach a conclusion in one study—and then corroborating results from reproductions of the study will bring more validity to the conclusion.
No one is trying to devalue your experience or your good intentions.
The point I made was that lotteries attract the kinds of students who will do well because they have an interest in doing well. What about the students who do not have the interest in doing well and subsequently whose parents do not put their names into the lottery? They are not served by charter schools because they choose not to participate. Therefore, charter schools do not represent a way to educating the public as a whole like public schools do.
Until charter schools serve the public without exclusion, you cannot compare them to the public schools apples to apples.
Mary Thompson is correct. Every state belongs to Education Commission of the States that ties us into a region. Legislators are paid to attend the meeting by taxpayers. The ECS also ties us into one of the federal regional labitories. If the state legislator/assembly does not follow ALEC’s cloned laws, they follow the dictates of the federal government through the labs. Citizens can check the web to find their region, or call their state representatives.
I think it is important to note that one of Romney’s sons is part of a management company that owns some charter schools. Is this a conflict of interest? For the conservatives without consciences is it all about PROFIT.
Joe Biden’s brother Frank Biden runs a chain of charter schools in Florida called Mavericks. I think it is a for-profit chain.
Well, in Louisiana we have a BESE (state ed board) member whose sister is the top dog in the Louisiana Charter School Association. Talk about conflict of interest! We now have direct funds coming from the public school money to go to vouchers, thanks to John White, who as Diane said in a previous blog, learned from the best while in NYC. and Gov Bobby Jindal.
What management company owns some charter schools that Romney’s son is connected? I think it is important to name and document at this point in history. I try never to say or put in print anything that I can not document, so let us be careful to prove our statements, otherwise it just becomes trivia or propoganda like the promoters of choice/charter schools. No doubt, there is much conflict of interest involved in this madness, but let us produce the proof. However, this does not rule out ones opinion which is important to express in “free speech”.
I can’t tell you about Romney’s son, but here is Frank Biden, Joe Biden’s brother, defending his for-profit charter chain in Florida: http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/2011/12/frank_biden_says_not_profiting_from_mavericks_high_schools.php
I too listened to Romney’s speech to the NAACP. His plan consists of closing public schools and earmarking Federal Education funds to individual students. He believes student’s should go to the school of their choosing using those federal funds.
Wonder if the communities where he has one of his mansions will welcome inner city kids bused in?
Heck you can’t even go in the lake near one of his summer homes.
I don’t think much of any voucher program’s money will be going to long-standing, well-respected private schools. Some kids want their kids in private school to avoid certain types of students in the public school.
Vouchers will mostly likely be used at pop-up schools. These will be entities who see the possibilities and jump on the bandwagon.
Diane, thanks for information on Frank Biden and his connection with charter schools in FA. Unreal!