It’s kind of funny when a blog talks to a blog, which then talks back to the other blog.
I wrote today about how the State Superintendent of Schools in Georgia came out in opposition to a constitutional amendment on the ballot in November that would allow a commission appointed by the governor to override the decisions of local school boards that reject charter schools.
The news story about him said:
“I cannot support the creation of a new and costly state bureaucracy that takes away local control of schools and unnecessarily duplicates the good work already being done by local districts, the Georgia Department of Education, and the state Board of Education,” Barge said in a prepared statement. “What’s more, this constitutional amendment would direct taxpayer dollars into the pockets of out-of-state, for-profit charter school companies whose schools perform no better than traditional public schools and locally approved charter schools (and worse, in some cases).”
Then, in response to my post, Jonathan Pelto wrote that Democratic Governor Dannel Malloy pushed for the same authority in Connecticut, to allow his Commissioner of Education Stefan Pryor (who founded a charter school and is a strong proponent of charters) to intervene in low-income districts with almost unlimited authority to impose the changes he prefers.
And here is the funny part: The idea is promoted by the conservative group called ALEC, which advocates for vouchers, charters, the parent trigger and opposes unions, tenure, and certification. As an organization of some 2,000 conservative legislators, ALEC would normally be in favor of small government and local control. But ALEC advocates that governors should be able to appoint a commission with the power to overturn local decisions about charter schools, so that more charters will be created despite local opposition. This is a case where ideology trumps ideology.
ALEC (the American Legislative Exchange Council) supports privatization and promotes a free-market ideology. It gained some unwanted attention this spring for its model “stand your ground” legislation, which figured in the shooting of Trayvon Martin in Florida by George Zimmerman.
Strange world we live in.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
ALEC is funded by corporations and writes model legislation that serves their funders. Small government, large, it doesn’t care: every one of their bills is designed to help corporations. In this case, companies that run charter schools. Another example: K12, Inc. writes legislation to allow or increase cyber schools, bills that have since been introduced across the country. Even the US Army won’t accept diplomas from cyber schools.
LikeLike
“This is a case where ideology trumps ideology.”
Actually, I think it demonstrates how the almighty dollar trumps ideology.
If funding can be earmarked for private for-profit enterprises, neither ALEC nor their conservative/neo-liberal partners care whether the government directing those funds is local or national, just as long as profiteers can get their hands on that money.
For those who thought the “greed is good” motto was left behind in the 80s, except for an errant individual and company here and there, I think this is evidence that greed is the principle that rules our nation today.
LikeLike
Today you asked “Who Wants to End Local Control of Schools?” Here in Bridgeport Connecticut, it is our Mayor Bill Finch. That’s who. There will be a Charter amendment on our Nov. 6 ballot that would permit the Mayor to make school board appointments. Through a bizarre set of circumstances, Mayor Finch has all ready tasted success in ending local control 13 months ago when elected BOE members of Mayor Finch’s political party voted themselves off the Bridgeport board saying they could not handle the job. The State stepped in and named a Board of Education that included individuals living in other more affluent towns. The highest court in Connecticut ruled that this take over was unconstitutional, but has allowed the appointed board to remain until a special election September 4. But wait. By Nov. 6, that elected board could be out of a job if the Charter amendment is passed. And who would not vote for this amendment that reads:
“Shall the City of Bridgeport approve and adopt the Charter changes as recommended by the Charter Revision Commission and approved by the City Council including education governance ” ?????
This is all it says. Voters may not realize that if they vote “Yes,” they are saying they no longer want to have public control of Bridgeport schools.
I am retired CT high school civics teacher who recently moved to Bridgeport, the state’s lowest performing school district. That change is needed is obvious. Turn out for past school board elections was low. The former board was faced with flat funding by the same Mayo, the consequences of staggering unemployment and social problems of Bridgeport, which are well documented. The appointed board has gotten a lot of support from City leaders of all stripes and with private money superstar Paul Vallas has been hired as superintendent by the appointed board, something that never would have happened with the previous elected board. Actions by this appointed board have tipped the district toward corporate reform models. The jury is out on this whole situation. Diane, let your readers way in.
Gail Janensch 203.856.4360 gailj2@optonline.net Bridgeport, CT 06604
LikeLike
He is proposing mayoral control, like Chicago and New York City.
Neither city’s schools have benefited by the suspension of public participation in school governance.
One-man rule doesn’t help schools.
LikeLike
Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix, board member of Rocketship, New School Venture Fund, co-founder of EdVoice, etc., is an outspoken proponent for the elimination of local school boards. He supports appointed oversight.
The charter school he founded has an appointed board well known for nepotistic appointments from private schools and regular violations of open meeting laws. Their latest endeavor is to direct public funds held in reserve into a private foundation.
Parents have no say in the composition of the board that governs their school, even when their behavior is unethical.
LikeLike