You can’t say this often enough.
Money matters in politics.
Forget principle. Think money.
Andrew Cuomo wants to be re-elected Governor of New York with a large majority.
He has raised $33 million.
One of his biggest sources of money is Wall Street.
Wall Street loves charter schools.
Wall Street doesn’t love public schools.
The fact that only 3% of students in New York State attend charter schools doesn’t matter to Andrew Cuomo.
Cuomo now wants to take charge of dispensing millions in public funds to charter schools for construction, and he wants to assure them that they can have public space without paying rent. He wants the power to give free space to charters, no matter what Mayor Bill de Blasio says.
The fact that high-flying charters like Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy not only excludes children with special needs but literally pushes them out of their schools does not matter to Andrew Cuomo. Success Academy is for winners, not losers. Children with disabilities don’t belong in Success Academy’s charters.
I have been trying to remember something that his father Mario Cuomo said. I can’t find it. I have googled, and I can’t find it. Mario Cuomo, known for his eloquence, once explained that a parent gives more love and affection to the weakest child, not the strongest one. I remember it well, even though I can’t find the source. It was very moving, spoken by a decent and kind human being, a loving father.
Did he teach this lesson to Andrew? I think not. Andrew is ready to toss the neediest children overboard. They don’t have high test scores. They don’t count. They drag down scores. They don’t matter to Andrew Cuomo. In his eyes, they are dispensable. They are invisible. And the hedge fund managers, so necessary for his re-election, don’t like losers. They like high scores. They like winners.
And that is why Andrew Cuomo has become the lobbyist for the hedge-fund supported charter sector. After all, they did give him $800,000 for his re-election campaign.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Charters are the “weaker child” here, and political donations supporting charters pale in comparison with NYSUT political spending. http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/NYSUT-spent-4-5M-to-be-heard-at-the-polls-4038821.php.
Kudos to the Governor for helping charter families (mostly economically disadvantaged minorities) be heard and supporting equitable funding (vs. the current roughly 70% funding).
Shame on “progressives” who want to close these children’s schools because their union supporters are threatened by them. Charter students, families, and teachers deserve the same support as their District counterparts.
LikeLike
Weaker? Funny.
70% funding that is more than made up for in private donations. Of course, we’ll never really know how much in donations because they don’t have to disclose anything financial. Oh, and Eva’s massive salary should be an issue if you believe they only spend 70% of what a PS does. I mean, where is all that money coming from?
Also, they don’t have the costs, especially legacy costs, of a long-established public school system. They don’t pay rent either. Another cost eliminated.
Seems charters are making out just fine.
And the union / political contributions argument is so, so tired. Wealthy families outspend unions all by themselves. In a recall election in Michigan two years ago, the MEA contributed $70,000 to unseat the candidate. The DeVos family spent $250,000 in support of that candidate. One family outspent a union of thousands 3-to-1.
Spare me.
Charters aren’t weaker, they get every conceivable advantage then complain that they don’t.
And economically disadvantaged? Not compared to their neighborhood traditional public school. Check out a study sometime. Many have noted the lower number of ELLs and Special Needs students in charters. Plus high attrition rates.
I don’t want to close charters. I just want acknowledgement that they are functioning in a way very different from public schools in terms of student selection and retention and the admission that they aren’t really a public school. Once that admission can be out there, then we can stop comparing their performance to public schools.
LikeLike
Some charter schools get private donations, most do not. Some district schools get private donations too.
All charters in NY are 501c3s and fill out 990 forms, like any other charity, that show their sources of income.
You are absolutely right that charters don’t have legacy costs, but Districts should be finding ways to lessen them instead of blaming charters for their fiscal problems.
Re funding, it’s not what “I believe”. It’s fact. In NY, charter schools get a percentage of the operating budget of the district the student comes from. They get no building money. In almost all cases, charters spend substantially less than district schools.
Charter schools in NYC don’t pay rent because they are public schools. District schools don’t pay rent either. Their capital budgets are largely funded by the state. Charters don’t get any capital money at all.
Believe me, I’m no fan of wealthy people contributing so much in political money. I just pointed out the insincerity of saying money is an issue when it’s given to your opponents, but not when it’s given to your friends. Everyone considers the NYS Assembly to be in NYSUT’s pocket.
It is true that charters generally have lower ELL and IEP students, but they are generally the same or higher in economically disadvantaged and almost always higher in minority students.
I agree with you that charter and district schools are not exactly comparable for a few specific reasons that you mentioned, but I disagree that there is such a thing as “student selection”. I also agree that charter attrition should be looked at when comparing schools, but I’ll point out that very little attrition data is even measured, much less available, for district schools.
Charter school attrition is generally obvious because they don’t admit students later in the year. But, a student that leaves a District school is still attrition even if another student takes their place. (BTW, not accepting students mid-year is one of those valid criticisms of comparing charter to district data). But charters have a point here when District students decline in performance every year they’re in school (true at least in my district) and if District schools continue promotion without regard to academic readiness. My understanding is that charters in New Orleans now take all comers or will soon. That is possible there because the schools are upholding similar standards for promotion.
LikeLike
Legacy costs are massive. And those were agreed upon. You can make the argument that districts should be trying to lessen those costs but it doesn’t really change the equation.
Charters spend less because they have fewer costs, like legacy and often transportation (at least that’s true here in Michigan). Charters also pay teachers lower incomes and create atmospheres that are hostile to building careers. The attrition isn’t just students and this is clearly by design. And we don’t really know HOW charters spend their money because they’re private institutions. (Yet another convenience for charters).
I’ll never buy the union political contribution argument. It’s a pittance compared to what wealthy people donate to campaigns. My DeVos example above is not the only instance of such a thing.
As for the economically disadvantaged argument, it doesn’t really hold water. Charter schools start with the base of those who are self-selected. Meaning that functional families apply. That’s a huge advantage. I teach AP European History and they choose whether or not to take the class. They’re very different than the students I have who take mainstream history courses (which are required classes). Charters also select later when they create situations designed to make students leave (excessive suspensions, fines for misbehavior and general counseling out) which I have experienced when former charter kids get dumped in my classroom mid-year.
And it isn’t just that charter don’t take kids mid-year, they also don’t take them after a certain grade. Many, in fact most, charters, only take kindergarteners. When the attrition hits, for whatever reasons, and 15 leave, they are not replaced by 15 new first graders the following year. That’s a huge advantage when making comparisons between schools. Public schools have no choice but to take a student regardless of date. (Michigan has count day for enrollment in mid-February, then state testing at the high school level in early March. Last year I had five kids added to my class the last week in February. All from charters and all way behind academically. Charters got the money and we got the test score.)
As for the New Orleans claim, please provide a link. Charters have never accepted all comers. And just because they accept them it doesn’t mean they’ll do everything they can to retain them. And using New Orleans as some shining example couldn’t be more flawed. Those Recovery schools have graded out very poorly.
I do appreciate your thoughtful response but I have disagree on the basis that charters get many advantages over public schools that more than make up for the money. And where I’m at, Michigan charters get around 90% of what public schools do. Without any kind of oversight. Charters can only close themselves and their finances are more closely guarded than nuclear launch codes. Yet their leaders make a crap-ton of money.
LikeLike
Steve K,
Re OneApp, the reason only 75% get their top 3 choices is competition for the best schools, not selection. After family preference and sibling priority, entry is by random lottery.
As I’ve mentioned before, the Boston Charter School study refutes the “motivated parent” rationalization as it compared students who “won” lotteries with those that entered but lost and found significant gains for the charter students. Frankly, many parents choose charter schools because the longer school day is more convenience.
I’m most surprised by your comment about RSD schools in New Orleans. By every measure I’ve read, they’re doing hugely better than pre-Katrina. I think even critics acknowledge that. Here’s what looks to be a good report on the subject:
Click to access 2013_SPENO_Final2.pdf
As for selectivity, my school gets accused of it all of the time, but we’ve been audited and there has been none, and only 4 of our incoming 5th graders ever passed a state exam before coming to us. I can only speak for my school, but it feels to me like people are always looking for the “gimmick” instead of thinking that longer school days and years, etc. could have something to with it.
LikeLike
Just looked up New Orleans OneApp policy. It favors those from functional families. It requires the completion of an application to even be included in the process. And only 75% get a top three choice. So again, it isn’t parent choice, it’s school choice. The school chooses.
That’s hardly accepting all comers. And ultimately, those who process the applications determine where these kids can go to school. That’s not really parent choice. It’s bringing the college application process down to K-12.
It also has built in preferences regarding choice. So in order to get into one still has to fill out an application. At most public schools, one just shows up at the main office and enrolls. Again, that is a self-selected student / family population.
And what are the options in New Orleans? Pretty much all bad. Ever seen the grades for the RSD schools. Doesn’t seem like competition has done much to improve education there.
LikeLike
“By every measure I’ve read, they’re doing hugely better than pre-Katrina.”
Well, yeah, when you make it impossible for the really poor people to ever return, chances are scores are going to go up. You’re not comparing the same kids. Fact is the RSD is still the lowest performing district in a state that ranks 49th in education. Still want to call that a success?
LikeLike
Dienne: the same reasoning that leads to lauding the mythical success of the RSD of NOLA finds no problem in abandoning all reason in order to worship charterites/privatizers like Eva Moskowitz and sneer at public school leaders like Carmen Fariña.
After all, for every student@year, the bank account of the former, compared to the latter, is swelling up at the rate of 368 to 1.
Link: https://dianeravitch.net/2014/03/13/my-interview-with-salon-about-education-reform-today/
Poor charters! Poor charter operators! The sacrifices that the leaders of the new civil rights movement have to make—
Or not. You don’t have to be an old dead Greek guy to figure this one out:
“For greed all nature is too little.” [Lucius Annaeus Seneca]
😎
LikeLike
A few things, jpr. First, you never mentioned the Boston Charter Study before and comparing lottery “winners” to lottery “losers” is highly flawed. The winners ALL get placed in classrooms with winners. Meaning classrooms of kids from functioning households. The lottery “losers” get placed with kids from all kinds of households and therefore are much more likely to be in a more disruptive environment. As a teacher, (and you don’t appear to be a teacher), I can’t begin to tell you what a huge difference it makes to educational quality to have all good kids. In fact, many charter parents will tell you that the chief reason to go to a charter is simply the make-up of the student body. So that study doesn’t truly compare “like” populations. The motivated parent rationale has been far from refuted. (And if you honestly can’t understand the effect of even one disruptive student in a classroom, which is highly unlikely to happen in a charter due to their admissions, discipline and expulsion policies then I think this debate is over.)
Second, New Orleans has a different city population than it had before Katrina. And again, check the grades on their schools. Near the bottom in a state that ranks near the bottom. Plus, students there have protested against their own schools.
Longer school days and years can be helpful but they have not proven to be proportional beneficial. For example, 20% more days has not led to 20% greater improvement. In fact, the benefits of such schedules have proven to be minimal. I’d also like to point out that survival in such a system requires supportive parents and kids interested in education. It’s another mechanism to weed out the weak. Charters do this a lot. By making the curriculum super demanding, it frustrates and pushes out the weakest. Thus causing those high attrition rates.
LikeLike
Also, I just did a little research on the Cowen Institute. Which took all of ten minutes.
Here’s a critical link: http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2010/08/tulanes-cowen-institute-chief.html
Also, it appears that the Cowen Institute, named after a Tulane University president and run by Tulane, has an agenda. Namely, Tulane was tasked with running many of the reforms in New Orleans Schools. Any surprise that they found their reforms “successful.”
Must be nice to self-evaluate. I also give myself high marks as a teacher. Let me see what I can cherry-pick.
Hardly an objective source.
LikeLike
“But you go ahead with your belief that because a private organization runs a school, that it will be inherently better because of its test scores..”
Steve, I believe no such thing. But you apparently believe that a charter school has to be worse because it not a district school.
As for my choice being a strawman, it’s unfortunately reality. Yes, there are more detailed questions to be asked about the situation, and I’m not even saying that the charter is great. But, your refusal to think that a zero percent passing rate on English and Math exams might be a problem for those kids, and that the teachers in that building can have no effect on that is what gets me.
As for your link from ed.gov, that’s exactly what I said: no reformers think that teachers are more important than poverty in determining outcomes, but teachers have the most influence within schools.
It must be hard to argue that teachers can’t have any influence on one hand and that they should be paid more, be treated more professionally, etc. on the other.
As for proof that better outcomes can be achieved with the same students, it turns out that those who don’t want to change will find fault, with any data and any person who studies the field in order to rationalize current performance. If you can dismiss any outcome better than your own as trickery, and can blame any negative outcomes on outside factors, you have no need to improve.
LikeLike
People want them closed because they don’t believe in corporate welfare.
LikeLike
“My understanding is that charters in New Orleans now take all comers or will soon. That is possible there because the schools are upholding similar standards for promotion.”
Actually, that is possible there because public schools barely exist and these charter and voucher-driven “schools” are now the only alternative: The goal of people like Andy Cuomo, Michelle Rhee, Jeb Bush and Rupert Murdoch.
I guess you would call those miscreants “progressives”. Huh?
Public schools in New Orleans have been virtually eliminated by a swarm of lavishly funded, Milton Friedman-inspired Privatizers that flew in after the horrors of Katrina, determined to fully exploit that tragedy by crushing the last vestiges of anything publicly owned and operated, as in transportation, housing and “The Big EASY Main Course, Education.”
Yummy. A Neo-Canjun Special, no doubt.
At least you finally admitted what we suspected all along: you work for a charter company. How shocking.
AND, one final thing: STOP spewing this vile and false narrative about “the unions” and how they’re the only ones against charters. (How I wish that were true; if the confused and compromised non-actions of the NEA and AFT “leadership”, constituted “opposition”, I’d hate to see what neutrality or acceptance looked like.
I am a PARENT and TAXPAYER. MY opinions, and that of my fellow parents and TAXPAYERS count too.
Get It?
And I detest charters, vouchers, constant standardized testing and the privatization of our schools, using our tax dollars. OUR tax dollars to enrich private, corporate interests!?!? It’s pathological.
I’m part of a growing movement of PARENTS that are fed up with this false, self serving, billionaire-funded narrative of “Unions vs. Children”. It’s nonsense.
There are no teachers in my immediate or extended family. Never have been. Yet, when the organization I’m a member of, “Parents Across America”, organized a very successful protest against Michelle Rhee last year during her “fabulous” book tour, some very well dressed guy with perfect hair—this is literally true—got out of his Porsche, arrogantly smirked at us with complete contempt, as he was walking in to see the “Queen Of The Privatizers”, and started screaming “YOU FUCKING UNION THUGS! YOU SCUMBAG LAZY ASSHOLES RIPPING PEOPLE LIKE ME OFF WHILE YOU SCREW OUR KIDS! WE’RE GOING TO CLOSE YOU DOWN AND MAKE YOU ALL GET REAL JOBS! YOU WORTHLESS SHITS…FUCK THE UNION THUGS. YOU PEOPLE ARE SCUM, CRIMINALS AND CHILD ABUSERS!”
But there wasn’t one single union member—of ANY union—among us.
I tried to catch up why this guy to set him straight—and to tell him I didn’t care for his language and cliched hatred, but he disappeared.
And people like you wonder why we don’t like nor trust the people running and funding charters?
LikeLike
No,. what no longer exists in New Orleans is the spectacularly corrupt district school system that was there pre-Katrina and the dismal results they got. They have a long way to go, but things are headed in the right direction. Obviously, you don’t think charters are public schools, but explain to me exactly what is missing?
As for “outing” me ;-), I do not “work” for a charter, I’m a volunteer. I certainly understand that there are parents against charters, but obviously, they’re not the parents whose children are in the charters. They’re the ones that I’m fighting for.
I actually don’t care much that unions are against charters; they should be since most of their members don’t work for charters. My comments about the union were about changes that I think District schools need to make in order to compete against charters.
Contrary to the belief of many here, there are people who support charters because we want change in public education that otherwise didn’t/doesn’t seem to be happening. We don’t think the answer is charters for everyone, though the longer that districts and union rationalize charter’s results and demonize them instead of adopting positive practices, the more it looks like that might have to happen.
In NY, all charter schools are 501c3 not-for-profits and they are not allowed to contract to for profits for operations. There are a lot more “private, corporate interests” in our District schools than in charters. For example, my charter doesn’t use textbooks. We contract for transportation with a for profit company (just like the District), but we competitively bid it. The District pays lots of consultants and attorneys and other for profit companies that we don’t.
I don’t know much about charters in Washington, but the majority of charter schools (with exception of online ones as pointed out) are started and filled with dedicated educators. The evil, “corporate” charter school is mostly myth. In fact, investors in for-profit educational companies like have mostly lost their shirts.
Do you know why there are a lot of hedge fund managers on charter boards in NYC (for example)? They don’t make any money at it, they are volunteers. Their day jobs involve looking at companies and determining which are run efficiently and getting results and which aren’t. They buy stocks of those that are doing well and “short” those that aren’t. When they look at much of urban public education around them, they see a system that isn’t working for it’s customers (students). They volunteer, and in some cases donate money, in order to improve that.
Yes, there are some conservative supporters of charter schools that support them because they want to undermine unions. But, many are progressives that see the undue influence that the union has in Democratic politics and the degree to which it represents the adults in the system while ignoring what it is doing to children.
It sounds like you are protecting your children’s school, which is what you should do as a parent if you are happy with it. I’d do anything to protect my children’s district school, which is outstanding in so many ways and is embracing higher rigor and standards. In fact, I can’t help thinking that you would be a charter supporter if you were economically disadvantaged, your children went to a school with a 50% graduation rate, and you couldn’t afford to move.
But, you are attacking the schools of choice of economically disadvantaged families that don’t have access to the same school that you do. And frankly, you are attacking the straw man that Diane and others have constructed of the “corporate” charter school.
*Nobody* makes money on my charter school except the people who work in it, and the highest paid administrators and teachers make the same amount of money. We pay our teachers more earlier in their careers where it helps with retention (as opposed to the pay scales in most Districts that are partially causing retention issues).
Please tell me specifically who is making money on not-for-profit charter schools. Please don’t include Pearson, as they make way more money of District schools than charters.
Please remember that charters make zero $ if no parents choose them. Perhaps those who are fighting the mythical “corporate” charter school would better put their efforts towards determining why parents choose charters and what they can do about it as opposed to taking away that choice.
LikeLike
We are fighting an uphill battle. I have been watching the news reports and analysts and they all seem to be on the wrong side of the education issue. Little Eva seems benevolent when interviewed on TV. Why is that big, bad De Blasio picking on her? Her charter schools are achieving where others fail. And the one about to be closed is the most superior of all, as seen by test scores. The interviewers query about the ESL and SE factor, but beautiful Eva sweetly smiles and then lies through her teeth – “The gap is small and we are working on the problem,” she sleazes. And they scrape and bow and tell her how wonderful she is, then sneer at anyone who stands in her way. After all, she is selflessly doing her best for the underprivileged in the city. I almost threw up.
I am so afraid, my friends.
Yet, there is a glimmer of hope. Parents are pushing back. Some can see beyond the glitter of glib Mario when he proudly proclaims that children will no longer suffer from test scores. They realize that he did NOT say that the testing would stop. He did NOT say the teacher assessments based on the scores would stop. He did NOT say that the emphasis on testing would stop. These parents are STILL asking questions. They are STILL opting out.
I hope their efforts make a difference.
We must keep going, keep pushing back until our voices are heard over the din of half truths and outright lies.
Are you with me?
LikeLike
Are we with you?
Until the day we die or the day where we dance on the grave of privatization.
The tide has ALREADY turned; now it’s just a matter of time…but TALK to everyone around you. Bring this topic up and let them know the story—The REAL Story.
And insofar as Moscowitz goes, I say two things that generally shock people and begin their reconsideration:
1) If Moscowitz’s schools are “underfunded”, why is she paying herself a half million dollars per year?
2) If deBlasio is so “anti charter” whey then did he approve 15 of 18 (roughly 80%) of their applications?
Keep pushing. And if you do, WE will win. No doubt. Keep the faith.
LikeLike
The only thing worse than a Republican is a CORPORATE Democrat… for BOTH walk in locked step to Wall Street’s tune….
LikeLike
Please sign the petition in the link below to support Mayor De Blasio to charge Co-located charter schools rent or evict them from taking up public school space and resources. Every signature helps.
Sincerely,
Dan “Bad Ass Teacher” Leopold
http://www.change.org/petitions/mayor-de-blasio-insist-that-co-located-charter-schools-should-pay-rent-or-leave
LikeLike
They should be evicted. That’s how you treat squatters.
LikeLike
Jeez, who do you think you’d be evicting? Answer: public school students (mostly ecomically disadvantaged minorities), hardworking teachers, and dedicated professionals who start and run these schools.
LikeLike
The students can stay. I was referring to the private contractors who run charter schools.
LikeLike
That’s what I figured. But every charter school in NY is a 501c3 NotForProfit and they are not even permitted to contract with a for profit operator.
The part of the school that you want to evict is a myth.
LikeLike
A judge in New York just ruled that charter schools are non-government entities that cannot be audited, so nobody can say with certainty that charter schools do not contract with for-profit operators. Moreover, since when is a non-government entity, even one that calls itself a non-profit, automatically entitled to space in public buildings free of charge?
What’s to stop some other “non-profit” from demanding the same subsidy?
LikeLike
Hey JPR, what real, legitimate “non profit” pays its “principal” a half million bucks per year.
You may be a shill, or just someone who is dependent upon a charter for his next paycheck; but does that mean you have to buy their BS hook, line and sinker?
LikeLike
I’m a volunteer, and I spend a lot of time and money on my charter school. I know you think I must be a profiteer to be involved with a charter school, but like most people involved no money flows to me from my charter, but a lot flows out. In the years that I’ve been involved, I haven’t even taken reimbursement for thousands in expenses for conferences, etc.
Re the high salary, if you’re referring to Eva Moskowitz, half of her salary is paid from outside the school. I personally think her salary is too high, but I’d bet that her school’s total administrative costs are lower than the District schools surrounding her.
LikeLike
Perhaps Andrew was the strongest child and now it’s payback time.
LikeLike
I don’t blame Mario. Not all lessons we teach our children take hold.
And I think Ted Kennedy must be thrashing in the grave at what has become of NCLB and its spawn RttT.
LikeLike
Andrew Cuomo does not love charter schools.
Andrew Cuomo loves only one thing.
Andrew Cuomo.
Andrew Cuomo does not despise public schools.
Andrew Cuomo despises the thought of missing any opportunity to use his influence for politaical advantage; to advance his own ambitions. If that means disparaging teachers, unions, “failing [public] schools” then he will. He is a pure and absolute demagogue.
And for that reason, I despise Andrew Cuomo.
Send him packing Tuesday, November 4, 2014
LikeLike
For Twitter: Just copy, paste and ReTweet as often as possible
Wall Street
Who brought us the 2007-08 global financial disaster
Loves private Charter Schools
But not public schools
http://bit.ly/1o0THY4
LikeLike
Is this it? http://www.qcc.mass.edu/abeaudry/m_cuomo.htm
LikeLike
Foreign Affairs magazine/March April issue, p 90. [Mis]leading Indicators: Why Our Economic Numbers Distort Reality by Zachary Karabell – Head of Global Strategy at Envesnet [correct spelling] and President of River Twice Research.
GREAT reading. He shows why in our economic views the reliance on GDP and other statistical data are incomplete pictures of what – even in economics – although touted as THE answer are totally incomplete and inadequate plus counterproductive in analyzing even economics. Other non included but vital factors enter into the equation.
It is SO VERY parallel to what it going on in education.
The article is a condensation of his recent book: The Leading Indicators: A Short History of the Numbers That Rule Our World – Simon and Schuster, 2014
I highly recommend it.
If any are unfamiliar with Foreign Affairs, it is a magazine whose writers are leading thinkers in their particular field. The thing I like is that they have people with various points of view, sometimes in the same issue 2 or more whose views are antithetical to each other. Ergo, it is written for discriminating readers and is purported to be read my our political leaders. [After viewing and listening to some politicians I sometimes wonder about that.]
I would imagine that most good public libraries would have a copy of the magazine if you do not subscribe to it.
LikeLike
Andrew Cuomo – in the pocket of the oligarchs.
LikeLike
Not in the pocket, on the career ladder
LikeLike
I was reading about the Match Charter School teacher residency program.
I think you should all read it.
This is how they compare their program to TFA. Match doesn’t place in public schools, only charter schools, so they’re different than TFA:
“TFA places most of its teachers in traditional high-poverty schools; often teachers describe themselves as trying to create an “island of excellence” in struggling schools, closing their classroom doors and doing the best they can. MTR places all its teachers in the nation’s best urban charter and turnaround schools, with a crackerjack team of workaholic teachers, all rowing in the same direction. You can/should only work in these schools if you want to be part of a team. These schools are remarkably choosy in teacher hiring, often taking just 4 or 5 out of several hundred applicants. MTR graduates jump right to the front of the line, because of our track record.”
Got that? MATCH says TFA teachers have to “close their doors and try to create an island of excellence” presumably to protect themselves from those terrible public school teachers, in those…icky public schools.
You can’t make this stuff up, I swear.
http://www.matcheducation.org/match-teacher-residency/mtr-vs-tfa
LikeLike
A bunch of bs,
LikeLike
How are the rest of the public schools in New York doing, I wonder?
The public was told ed reform was about “improving public schools”. Maybe they should have mentioned they meant ” only charter schools”.
Seems like an important omission.
LikeLike
You should have read the memo – scaring the public schools with competition was supposed to bring out the excellence (or at least inspire public schools to dump deadwood and stop protecting teachers) in all teachers and raise all boats.
LikeLike
I read that charter schools “dumb deadwood”, except it’s not teachers, it’s students.
That’s not a rising tide lifting all boats. It’s throwing some of the people in the boat overboard.
We’re on, what, week three of the needs and demands and threats of charter schools? Are there any other schools in that system? What are all those kids up to during this star-studded, made-for-tv drama?
LikeLike
I completely concur – I’m just stating what seems to be the only workable premise for how charters were supposed to influence public education and improve education for everyone.
I didn’t say the charters don’t cheat – just that this whole debacle is really about the ability to fire senior teachers, and failing that, scare teachers into not holding back that magic dust they weren’t sharing with their students before that would make them college and career ready.
A lot of this discussion predicates itself on the belief that teachers are the primary factor in a child’s education, that the primary reason students don’t achieve is teachers aren’t working hard enough, and that the way to remedy that is to get rid of the teachers who aren’t cutting muster.
If you recall NCLB – there was no accounting for the problems of the children. Schools had to raise scores or else for all sub-groups with historic issues. When that didn’t work, they told the teachers to raise scores or else. So while charters may very well rid themselves of “problem students” that are tougher to educate, the current philosophy says that resources don’t matter, all children are equal, and if you raise the scores of the children in front of you, then you are superior as a teacher.
Once you get into issues of social equity with students and acknowledging a need for resources, you start absolving the teacher of some responsibility (“excuses”) and now you can’t hold the teacher accountable. Once you see that’s blatantly not true (if you choose not to hold your nose at the odious smell wafting from that pile of horse manure), you start tweaking things to equal the playing field mathematically and predict where students should be based on a lot of data of supposedly similar students.
The core idea though – is teacher laziness/stupidity is responsible for student failure and if you can’t get rid of those teachers easily (who are apparently blindingly apparent), then you are cheating students. That’s how schools were supposed to become excellent from charter competition.
LikeLike
“M
March 14, 2014 at 4:03 pm
I completely concur – I’m just stating what seems to be the only workable premise for how charters were supposed to influence public education and improve education for everyone.
A lot of this discussion predicates itself on the belief that teachers are the primary factor in a child’s education, that the primary reason students don’t achieve is teachers aren’t working hard enough, and that the way to remedy that is to get rid of the teachers who aren’t cutting muster.”
I don’t really agree with ed reformers that a teacher is the single biggest factor in a child’s education. I don’t tell my own kids that, nor would I ever tell my kids that. I tell them they’re the most important factor.
I think telling a fifth grader it’s all up to the teacher makes for a very passive student. I think it’s a terrible thing to tell a person another person is solely responsible for their success or failure.
I listened to the teacher trial, parts of it, and I know it has a political agenda, but IMO this is a very bad thing to tell students. As I said, I don’t think it’s true, so there’s that, but it also puts them in the position of passive recipient of “good” or “bad” teaching. Surely they have some role in this. I can’t guarantee they’ll always have a “great!” teacher (however that is defined) anymore than I can guarantee they’ll always have a “great!” boss.
Right before I started law school we got a new dean. He came in to “shake things up” and also get the bar exam passage rate up. He cut off the bottom quarter of applicants. My entering class. Smaller. Three years later, bar passage rates went up.
The difference was, he wasn’t a self-aggrandizing bullshitter, so when the newspaper asked him for the secret of his success he said “I cut off the bottom quarter” 🙂
LikeLike
Again we agree – the premise is ludicrous, ignorant, and frankly, just outright dumb. Yet, this is the narrative that seems to have succeeded to put so much pressure on teachers. Why has it succeeded so far?
I think teachers have always pointed to the responsibility of the parents and children – Obama did call out parents once I recall. As institutional policy though, it recognizes none of that – presumably since schools can’t control the students or their parents – but they can lean heavily on their teachers.
That’s why the teacher’s legitimate claims have been deemed to be “excuses” I think and how we end up with this very lopsided narrative that creates the opportunity to make failures of all teachers.
LikeLike
M,
Pretend you’re a parent in one particular neighborhood in my city where the district K-8 school has a 0% passing rate for English and Math in 8th grade. Should you send your child there for the good of the community?
Or do you send your child to the charter school nearby that has 80% passing?
Again, *your* child; not some hypothetical “them” that should be supporting these schools.
Re performance, I don’t know any ed reformers that say that a teacher is the single biggest factor in outcomes. Everyone acknowledges that poverty way outweighs that. But, there doesn’t seem to be any solution to poverty (and shame on republicans that are making it worse).
Ed reformers want to improve what we have control of, and that is schools. Improving a child’s outcomes is less expensive than trying to improve adult outcomes. The solution to poverty *is* education; the education establishment can’t be waiting for poverty to be “solved” in order to improve.
Our kids don’t spend enough time in school, standards for behavior and academics are too low, and yes, there are a small percentage of notable cases of very poor teachers who are coasting along and not giving kids what they need. Teachers Unions are very protective of job protections, but seem less interested in improving outcomes. They fight accountability plans, but have not put forward any of their own.
I would love to see teaching become a more honored profession, filled with people working on their craft and trying to be the best they can be, supported by administrations and policies that help train teachers effectively and mentor them as they are developing. Not sure how that can ever happen while Teachers Unions insist there is no such thing as a bad teacher, fight the firing of even blatantly incompetent and uncaring people, insist on lockstep pay based on factors that show little correlation with student outcomes, and in short, insist that their members get treated like some cogs in a 19th century “education factory.”
Now frankly, anti-reformers come across as self-serving; fighting accountability, fighting increased rigor, fighting any alternatives to district schools, etc. I get what you’re fighting against, I just don’t see you fighting *for* anything except the best interests of the adults who benefit from the status quo.
LikeLike
That’s a nice straw man you built for yourself there – rather than letting you take it apart for yourself let me burn it down.
To answer your question on the terms you’ve painted makes for an obvious answer – but let’s complicate it because you’ve just oversimplified things to the point of NYC school report cards.
My child has special needs. Your charter school probably won’t take her. But let’s say they do. Are they one of the charters that has strict discipline codes? Do they make children sit on their hands? Do they make them follow cues from a teacher like some insane game of Simon Says? Aside from the faux choice, I’d still go with the neighborhood school.
Before you base everything on a passing rate on an exam, as a parent, if you indeed are one, you’d definitely want to know what is it in that school that is getting those numbers. Is it because they’re a better school community, or are they better at just reducing education to the smallest number of pieces of knowledge needed to achieve that score.
There’s also the undiscussed piece as to whether your charter is better resourced which would effect my decision. And is the public school now inferior because all of the “good” kids it had that passed the exam fled to the charter while the public school was left to smolder in rubble.
As for your claim about ed reformers? You might try google – but I’ll do your work for you – “Research has shown that teachers are the most important school-based factor in determining student achievement.” – Chiefs for Change – https://www.ed.gov/teaching/our-future-our-teachers
If those aren’t ed reformers I don’t know who are – so meet your compatriots – they seem to feel differently.
As to your claim that the solution for poverty is education, this is a nonsensical chicken and the egg argument. We can’t solve for poverty so education is the de facto solution? Where in reality has that idea worked anywhere – ever. But let’s say we want to experiment, we have 30 years of ed reform under our belts. Over a decade of charters.
How well is education at charters in breaking that income inequality gap? Racial achievement gaps? We should have at least a pretty good percentage of people coming out of charters at this point with all of their wild success stories that have broken the bonds of poverty due to their incredible educations.
Oh wait…we’re using research right? “In fact, a child’s family income plays a dominant role in determining his or her future income, and those who start out poor are likely to remain poor.” http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2013/06/13-facts-higher-education
So…we don’t have many great examples of charters consistently bucking the problems with economic opportunity…apparently education can solve for globalization and wages that have been stagnant for 30 years…a trend that started before education was the step child for poverty.
So yes, we need to solve for both education and poverty – and there are many many documented concrete research based steps we could use to do that. I’d recommend ending the corporate subsidies that don’t actually promote any economic growth and dedicating that money towards the programs that would create the opportunities for educated people to take advantage of.
So…those notable poor teachers are responsible for the collapse of economic opportunity? And the best way to create a profession that teachers want to be a part of is to make it feel as unstable as possible? Do you think teachers don’t WANT those kinds of communities? You think that unions make them impossible? Yet the teachers make up the union – you realize that. Yes there are hierarchies – but it’s at least democratic for the membership.
Teachers unions don’t insist that there are no bad teachers – they insist that before we brand someone a bad teacher we look carefully to make sure that the person who was at one point deemed effective, has turned into this degenerate who deserves to be fired before we do so. There are plenty of cases too of teachers being abused and harassed as well with no recourse – teachers fight for work environments that make it so that they can work effectively for children.
We can’t get the best or brightest into our ranks either if everyone in the profession is a rank amateur, no one can support anyone else because EVERYONE needs that support, and no one wants to try because the income is low and unstable at that with such hard work in tough environments. As for pay, it’s simply the best system we have – merit pay has NEVER worked – anywhere – and unless you’re proposing that, I don’t see what your alternative is.
As for what I’m fighting for – is a stable school community run by a community professionals whose lives are dedicated to improving the lives of children while making a living that supports my having a family as well. Anything less than that is inviting a community of people who don’t need the money to support a family and will have to leave when they want to. Currently, that is the money I make – and I own no swimming pools, mansions, or yachts. I’m pretty sure some charter organizers do though…
I am fine with being accountable, but also being realistic in the goals that are attainable and within my sphere of control – reformers systems are out of control – it seems that even when the means they want “accountability” by are proven to be simply wrongheaded and unfair, that they plow ahead with them anyway (this whole building the airplane in midair stuff).
But you go ahead with your belief that because a private organization runs a school, that it will be inherently better because of its test scores, that its community is more coherent, that their 1st and 2nd year teachers care more and know what they’re doing. The least malicious excuse for the situation you set up is that we as a society still desire segregation and to be “grouped alike” rather than embrace multiculturalism – or at least – not go to school with “those kids” who are not “my kids”.
LikeLike
Several studies indicate teachers are responsible for about 10 – 15% of a child’s education. The rest has to do with home environment, diet, exercise, parents, etc. A child’s attitude has more to do with learning than a teacher no matter how well they teach.
LikeLike
PS – I’d be remiss to mention that this charter choice argument seems to dismiss that a geographically proximal community has any inherent value. Neighborhoods don’t exist anymore in the eyes of education – just consumers shopping for the best educators. ‘
To say that all families should act as independent units is to dismiss humanity as we know it and also delivers a horrible message about what we value as a society – your productive worth and not your unique contributions.
Yet, schools are doing precisely thus – smarter choices about what school locations to “choose” (ignoring for the moment that pesky bit where schools can refuse to become a choice for a child), substitute for a coherent community delivering consistent messages about a child’s worth and their commitment to society and humanity. It’s actually strangely narcissistic to tell a child that their education is all about them, what they’re entitled to, and not about their place in a larger society.
LikeLike
“I’d be remiss to mention that this charter choice argument seems to dismiss that a geographically proximal community has any inherent value. Neighborhoods don’t exist anymore in the eyes of education – just consumers shopping for the best educators. ‘”
I agree. It’s one of the things that most bothers me about the whole idea. I think my kids benefitted enormously from having a public school “community” that extended to the town. I wonder sometimes if this comes from so many ed reformers attending private schools, because that’s a very private school mindset, where “school” is different and apart than “community”.
I was reading the Green Dot plan for coming into a community and taking over their school (sadly, it’s up on the USDOE website, so they’re endorsing it, I guess) and I’m a little horrified by it.
It talks about “us” (the people who live in the community where they’re privatizing the school) in this bizarre sort of sympathetic and vaguely social workerish way, but to me, patronizing as hell: “they may be attached to the school as the center of the community, attended sporting events, etc”.
My reaction is just “who ARE these people? Where do they get off with this?”
This is it:
Click to access green-dot-publics-schools-annual-report.pdf
The USDOE website is an extremely depressing place if you’re a public school supporter, so be warned. It’s all ed reform miracles, all the time 🙂
LikeLike
“To say that all families should act as independent units is to dismiss humanity as we know it and also delivers a horrible message about what we value as a society – your productive worth and not your unique contributions.”
From a public school parent’s perspective, I think it’s more damaging than that.
As I think I told you I’m not a teacher, but when I hear this ed reform refrain of “teachers are self serving! they’re not looking out for your kids!” I think that divides parents and teachers.
It sets it up as “ed reformers and parents versus public school teachers” and I’m just inclined to distrust people that set themselves up as “on my side” when I didn’t agree to that. I think that’s a political narrative.
I think my fifth grader and his teacher and me are “on the same side”.
I don’t even know these people. How did I end up (supposedly) aligned with them versus my local teachers? I didn’t agree to that. It’s ridiculous. I’m not going along with that.
LikeLike
Libby Nelson @libbyanelson 18h
Finally, this rule isn’t tough enough for student/consumer advocates. @BarmakN @RoryOSully
Duncan’s rule on for profit colleges are a joke, so there’s a shocker.
No one could have predicted the guy who hired the for profit college investor and adviser would water down regulations on for profit colleges.
Apparently “fraud” is now an integral and crucial part of “markets” which should scare the hell out of anyone investing in the US.
LikeLike
To be fraud there has to be a law against it, and they’re systematically changing the laws so fraud conducted by billionaires will be legal but if anyone who has to work for a living, like someone working for Wal-Mart, and they try the same thing, they go to prison—a private prison where they don’t have to follow the law and can keep you forever to make more money. Spit on the sidewalk and end up in a private prison for life.
There are now two sets of laws. One of the very rich and the other for the rest of us.
LikeLike
This is Anita Dunn. She’s a prominent DC person. She swings in and out of the public employ, but when she’s on the private side of the revolving door, she lobbies on behalf of for-profit colleges.
“Fundamentally, Dunn has been hired by clients who are in the midst of intensive lobbying fights. If her lawyer has concluded that she’s not a lobbyist under the law, common sense tells us that she is engaged to influence lobby battles in Washington. The Republic Report has compiled just a few examples of Dunn’s recent work for her clients:
– Dunn was hired by Kaplan Education to block Obama’s reforms on for-profit college companies, an industry plagued by by low quality education, false promises to students, and fraudulent business practices.”
It’s a club, and we’re not members.
There’s some hope. State AG’s are going after them, so maybe that will come to something.
I wish they’d stop accepting “settlements”. Force them to go to trial. They’re paying these settlements as just a cost of doing business. It’s ridiculous. Enforce the law. Don’t make “suggestions”. They’re stealing from people. Stop them.
http://www.republicreport.org/2012/anita-dunn-lobby/
LikeLike
And that’s the problem. I think the only way this will be settled will be through the courts and like you say, you can’t get to court if the other side settles (another word for bribe) to pay its way out of the mess and then continues business as usual until the next hand comes held out for another settlement.
LikeLike
One thing I don’t understand is how you believe that the charter schools are mainly minorities and low income. Also they are more successful because they are graded at the same criteria as district schools and parents who seek out a “better” situation for their children are already actively involved their children will do well in most settings
LikeLike
*Are not graded
LikeLike
Oops, and in NY at least, charter students take the same statewide tests as district students, so we are graded on the same criteria. There are major consequences for charter schools with poor performance though. If we don’t show better results than out District averages, our charters are revoked and we close.
LikeLike
Nationwide, about 50% of charter students are economically disadvantaged and about 36% are white. That actually was a surprise to me as the numbers in NY are 77% and 6% respectively, so I was expecting something similar nationwide. You can look up the data for your state here: http://dashboard.publiccharters.org/dashboard/students
Re selectivity, many parents choose charters because the longer school day makes it easier for them to work. Studies have compared students who won lotteries to those who didn’t and found significantly higher performance by the charter students (same parents). Also, at least at my school, the percentage of incoming 5th graders who have ever passed a state exam is lower than the 4th grade passing rate for the District, and our percentage of economically disadvantaged students is higher.
It is true that we have very few English language learners and that is a legitimate criticism. We prepare bilingual materials, but I certainly think parents who don’t speak English are less likely to seek out a charter school. However, in areas with large Hispanic populations, there are charter schools that are almost all Hispanic and have a very large percentage of ELL students.
LikeLike