D.C. Chancellor Kaya Henderson is determined to close more public schools, which will create larger enrollments for charter schools. As more public schools close, more charter schools open. As more D.C. public schools lose enrollment, the chancellor has more reason to close them.
Henderson claims she will save money by closing underutilized schools, but somehow the savings never materialize. Net-net-net: privatization of the public schools of D.C.
It is a shame that D.C. does not have a chancellor who actually wants to compete with the charter sector, who will fight to improve the public schools and show that they serve their students well.
Competition implies two teams, each promoting their own wares.
In D.C., in New York City, in Chicago, and in other cities and towns controlled by corporate-style reformers, the leaders of the public school system are working on behalf of the competition.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Exactly, and Kaya even acknowledges that public schools are not free to “innovate” due to bureaucratic constraints. I didn ‘t believe it at first, but now I acknowledge there is an agenda to privatize and that the reformers are the agents of the corporate interests that are seeking to profit.
LikeLike
Not sure if DCPS (Rhee, Henderson, et al) affirmatively want to grow the charters at the expense of the neighborhood public schools. If so, that would be eroding their empires (since they do not control the charters).
My explanation for DCPS’ failure to improve the neighborhood public schools is that the DCPS leaders either 1) have little/no knowledge regarding the actual real-world obstacles to instruction in the neighborhood public schools (particularly minor but endemic student misbehavior and large numbers of students reading far below grade level), or 2) the DCPS leaders have no ideas for addressing these specific obstacles. Another possibility is that the DCPS leaders know about these obstacles to instruction and have ideas for addressing these obstacles, but recognize that the ideas might generate blow-back from some parents and/or interest groups, so they do not implement the ideas.
If we’re looking for political villains here, I nominate the elected DC politicians — mayor and city councilmen. These folks are looking for a way to provide publicly-paid-for schools in DC that concerned/functional parents are happy to send their children to. The neighborhood public schools, particularly in the low-sES areas, have the reputation of being chaotic with rampant student misbehavior. Concerned/functional parents do not want to send their children to such schools. Charters, by enrolling via application, inherently screen out children of the unconcerned/dysfunctional parents (of whom there are many in DC, particularly in the low-SES areas). Also, charters, by counseling-out/expelling “problem” students, make sure that, if a disruptive/bad-influence child makes it through the enrollment screening, that child will be sent back to the neighborhood public school. So, charters give the concerned/functional parents a publicly-paid-for school they are happy to send their children to.
The concerned/functional parents are the folk who vote, who get involved in local politics, who know the important people, and who can influence the media and public opinion. So long as the charters keep the concerned/functional parents happy, school issues will not result in the ousting of incumbent politicians.
LikeLike
This has been where my view of all of this has evolved. There is money to be made by managing education–6 figure salaries and fantastic pensions not to mention other contract perks. The public school bureaucracy and the private charter managers all do very well financially. The consultants, book sellers, online vendors, etc. all reap financial gains due to their relationships with these so-called education leaders. Even investment funds have targeted education as recession proof growth area for their clients. Teachers are vilified and asked to do more with less. The disinformation that goes forth from education managers is never ending. When will this end?
LikeLike
Just goes to show what a coward the new mayor turned out to be.
LikeLike
The charterites/privatizers love sports analogies. Here’s one for you: you are the owner of a professional sports team, let’s say, basketball. Your main historic rival is in the same state, not far away. You hire a coach who wears that team’s jersey to televised games, refuses to dispute bad calls by the referees that favor your chief rival, and not only keeps urging you to trade away your best players so you can’t compete talentwise, he even publicly berates the outstanding players that insist on remaining [even with pay cuts] which further undermines team cohesion and effectiveness. But you ignore the many fans who can’t understand why you won’t put in a coach who will do a better job against the other team. *What the dummies who pay for season tickets can’t seem to understand is that you would hate to undermine your spouse and the other members of your family who are majority owners of that other team. Yay us!*
Substitute “mayor” for “owner” [same mentalities, though] and “superintendent” for “coach” and you begin to appreciate the dire straits of places like NYC and DC. The people calling the shots and leading the ‘public school’ team are rooting and essentially working for the other team. They aren’t interested in anything resembling a fair competition: it’s not just a hidden thumb on the scale or a little-known law that favors one side over the other, it’s doing so openly without a tinge of embarrassment or a feeling of shame. Just consider this: how can CA have a law on the books that allows astroturf organizations to organize small minorities of parents to turn public schools over to charter operators but not allow even huge majorities of parents to convert a charter into a public school?
I won’t argue that this is a perfect analogy but I would argue that it understates what public school advocates are up against.
LikeLike
KrazyTA is anything but krazy!
LikeLike
At one point, NYC had a thriving sector called “New Vision” schools. These were not charters, but were schools that groups of educators, sometimes with social service agencies and other groups, created. The group of schools in the Julia Richman complex is a great example. Diane, are you saying that there no longer is such an option to create non-chartered, new public schools? (I’m not arguing, just asking). I have worked with people like Sy Fliegel who have been involved in doing both but I am not sure if this non-chartered options remains. So I am asking.
LikeLike
New Visions still exists. It is well funded by Gates and Bloomberg’s DOE. Bloomberg specializes in mass-producing small schools. Come up with a name and a theme, find a leader ad exclude low-performing s kids for a few years. Pretty good formula.
The Julia Richman schools are thriving. They are part of New a york Performance Standards Consortium and are exempt from most state tests, an exemption created in 1995. They are quite diverse and successful.
LikeLike
How about “The leaders are working on behalf of the destructive puppet masters.” I just like to call it what it is and what is wrong with that. Enough political correctness, this is war and if you do not realize that get out of the way.
LikeLike
What an apt phrase to point out that Henderson is playing for the charter team when she closes schools. We DC citizens have NO say in the unfettered proliferation of new charter schools by the congressional chartering authority. In addition each charter school may open unlimited numbers of additional campuses at additional grade levels and in new neighborhoods without any consultation with DCPS, elected officials or even the chartering board. I find it incomprehensible that Henderson hasn’t been out in the community bonding with parents to keep children enrolled and parents involved in the local schools. Playing for the wrong team is sadly all too accurate. Gail Sonnemann. Parent
LikeLike
I had the unfortunate experience of working with Kaya Henderson when she first oozed forth from the TFA program. She was a self-serving opportunist then, and she’s no different now. Well, other than being about 100 pounds fatter.
LikeLike