“Stand for Children” was once a civil rights group; it once advocated for more funding and for programs to help children. Then it was taken over by the corporate reform movement and became outspoken against unions and teachers. The budget surged into the millions, due to its new-found friends (the Gates Foundation, the Walton Foundation, and friends from Bain Capital). In Illinois, it bought up all the top lobbyists to push through a bill to limit teachers’ rights and prevent teachers in Chicago from striking. Stand’s founder, Jonah Edelman, boasted about his success in beating the unions and was videotaped doing so at the Aspen Institute (here is the videotape). (He later apologized for what he said but not for what he did.) In Massachusetts, Stand threatened an expensive referendum to eliminate teachers’ job rights and won.
Many of its original friends left the organization because they did not like its alignment with the forces seeking privatization of public education and demonization of teachers. Some now call the group “Stand ON Children.”
In Oregon, parents and teachers fought hard for a bill to establish the right of parents to opt their children out of state testing. The bill was passed by the Legislature and is now heading for the Governor’s desk for her signature.
Stand for Children has been lobbying and campaigning to persuade Oregon Governor Kate Brown to veto the bill. They wrap themselves in the mantle of “it’s all about the kids” and “it’s all about disadvantaged kids,” to attack the right of parents to say no to abusive high-stakes testing.
If you are a parent or educator or student in Oregon, let Governor Brown hear from you.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Not wanting parents to be able to opt out their children from standardized tests — another example of Stand for Children’s commitment to “choice.”
LikeLike
There was a hostile takeover of Stand For Children by privatizers.
Watch this video
LikeLike
Thanks for the video, Jack!!
LikeLike
Testing, testing, testing.
Doesn’t anyone in ed reform have anything to say to public school parents other than “turn your kids over for testing”?
What does ed reform offer public school parents? What is the positive agenda? I’ve heard the scolding and threats and grim warnings for going on two decades. Is that all they have?
If we all go along with the testing what do we get? The same leaders, same agenda, same approach? This “movement” is all stick and no carrot.
LikeLike
Chiara: yes, in rheephormish [thank you, Bob Shepherd!] “choice” means “the [advantaged] few make the choices for the [increasingly disadvantaged] many.”
And when the many start to make the choice of opting their children out of a openly rigged “measure to punish” hazing ritual?
Suddenly they have no “choice.”
But, when it comes to THEIR OWN CHILDREN, the leading rheephormsters (with the help of their enforcers and enablers and employees) make dramatically different choices. *Note the word “dramatically” and read the following.*
To wit….
Lakeside School. Bill Gates. His own two children. From the first paragraph of an online piece of 6-16-2015:
“Starting this summer, Lakeside will begin a master-planning process, working with Seattle firm The Miller Hull Partnership. As part of the master plan, the school will explore the possibility of adding a performing arts center to the Upper School campus and performing arts practice space at the Middle School, as well as consider possible locations of future buildings, should the board decide to increase the size of the student body.”
Link: http://www.lakesideschool.org/podium/default.aspx?t=204&nid=984830&bl=/default.aspx
Yes, y’all read that right. Not a master-planning process to explore the possibility of a “test-prep center” so those little tykes can learn how to pass those all-important CCSS-aligned standardized tests that will enable them to think critically and be globally competitive in the 21st century. Because, you see, when you are planning for genuine teaching and learning (and leave out the hype and spin) you increase the inputs necessary to ensure the best possible results.
Lakeside School for everyone. No exception. No excuses. Whatever it takes.
😎
LikeLike
We had community meetings here on a new school. You know what the most popular idea was? Project based learning. By a mile. Not even close. Low income, high income, they all wanted project-based learning.
Maybe they could ask the parents why they’re opting out instead of lobbying the governor?
LikeLike
They have SLANT.
LikeLike
Again we make the only choice between for or against opt out. The issue should never be about those as the only two choices. A third choice is a viable alternative to the test as an assessment of children and the success of a school.
WHEN WILL WE EVER LEARN! WHEN WILL WE START PRESENTING VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE TESTING FIASCO!
Civil rights groups want to assure all children have the opportunity to learn, and the only option out there is the test. Let’s give them another option. Come on teachers, Start the conversation now. Respond with ideas, not the same old junk!
LikeLike
So let’s say we implement your whole child assessment program. What then? Don’t you think your assessment program is going to find the same things that standardized tests find? That poor kids and kids of color are disadvantaged compared to their wealthier and whiter peers? And what then? Is money magically going to fall from the sky to help these kids? More teachers? Smaller class sizes? Better materials? Other resources? No assessment yet, despite multiple promises, has ever resulted in more resources or support for poor kids or kids of color. Why would your assessment be any different?
LikeLike
Gosh, I’m so confused. I thought education reform was all about parent choice.
LikeLike
Thanks for asking. The assessment drives the curriculum and the curriculum becomes whole child with real successes and failures determined by real assessment. And assessment is only the beginning. It identifies what is needed as well as showing success of a school in a valid manner, not everyone judged on a singular standard and singular test. This gives civil rights groups a reality of 1st class achievement, (whole Child) and the progress made. It becomes more important to see every child progressing rather than every child being the same like the Stepford Kids. It changes the conversation.
In addition systemic change must follow. Change is a process that must begin with a viable alternative to the testing fiasco. I don’t know what it will show re: minority kids in poverty, but I do know that when we see individual progress, it would put the emphasis on learning and show successes that are far better than what is shown now. And will drive future successes as we don’t fail kids into oblivion.
If a child who has never learned to read in 7 years, learns in your 8th grade and gains the ability to read and understand 4th grade level words, your school is a success, not a failure like now.
A specific assessment then more clearly justifies smaller class size, more resources. Not that anyone would listen but it is a beginning.
It also shows that public school teachers are the best at innovation. The ability to develop lessons that meet the needs of every child so they would make gains that improve from past efforts.
Now Charter Choice etc, can lean on the test and brag about progress using every trick in the book to pretend success After this new assessment, that is allowed by the Collins amendment to ESEA (to read go to http://www.wholechildreform.com) Public Schools will skyrocket as we are the best at innovation. You can’t fake demonstrations of learning.
The assessment is only one piece of the puzzle. But it is a piece at which public school teachers will excel. and will change the conversation to one that is real. With public school teachers in the lead.
Current “reform” is about choosing and the choice is made on a false premise. I am not a choice person. And I believe “opt out” led to the Collins amendment.
It is time for public school teachers to take the lead, and, yes, hit the bricks for children issues, small class size because we can show specifically the attention needed for all students, more resources ( salaries and pension issues must come later) more planning time as we will be able to demonstrate the planning necessary to teach every child, we demonstrate that children are different through this assessment and specifically how they are different.
Yes, I was on two strikes back in the day and marched in Wisconsin. But the last one set the table but we lost the battle. We must show “children first” what it really means. And I will march with you
Change the assessment and the dominoes will fall!
LikeLike
And it isn’t my assessment, it will be your assessment
LikeLike
Opting out is a right that cannot be taken away. School tests in general are voluntary. We make it so that children should take tests and volunteer to do so. They are no more a mandate than homework. Students must pass a certain number of Regents exams to graduate in New York State but all other tests are voluntary. Opting out is always an option and there is nothing we can do about it
LikeLike
Thank you, Dr. Ravitch, for helping to point out what the true agenda of Stand for Children is: promoting the corporate/Gates vision of K-12 education.
Those of us who left Stand for Children in Oregon between 2009 and 2011 have been fighting them here ever since, especially as they gained more power with our former governor, John Kitzhaber. I hope now that he has resigned we will see this astroturf group’s influence continue to diminish in Salem. Parents and teachers have worked long and hard in a true grassroots movement, forming coalitions that cross traditional political lines of “liberal” and “conservative”, to try and take back our schools from the testocracy. The obsession with testing and “school report cards” (based on test participation and test scores) resulted in many schools and districts using inappropriate tactics to avoid falling below an acceptable participation rate on the report card. This happened because larger numbers of parents began to balk at having their children take the SBAC, a flawed instrument that takes weeks away from actual teaching and learning time. This law clarifies that it is a parent’s right to opt their child out and requires all districts across the state to give parents the same information.
We need parents, teachers and students back in control of our schools, not corporations and their lobbying organizations.
LikeLike
Here’s a letter to Oregon Gov. Kate Brown from a group of local Dems urging the Governor to sign HB2655 that makes a lot of sense to me!
Dear Governor Brown,
The education-reform industry has controlled the narrative of our school system long enough. It’s time for the voices to be heard of those who educate and those being educated. Here we have an assault on education, as former Labor Secretary Robert Reich calls it, and with that assault comes an assault on the culture and mission of our nation, on any forward-looking productive economy we might produce from creative minds and on the power of the liberated minds necessary for governing our republic. The entire crisis in education as defined by the reform industry is a manufactured one with devious motives.
Oregon House Bill 2655 is an outcome of a justified response to conditions of life on the ground by important members of your constituency. Among them are both knowledgeable leaders and people rallying to that leadership. We understand that the Opt-out process is but a step needed to break the stranglehold of manufactured crisis and open up dialogue so that persons of truly good faith, who are dedicating their lives to educating our next generation as teachers, parents and support staff, dominate the conversation.
We urge you, Governor Brown, to sign into law Oregon House Bill 2655. Then we can begin the steady march of redefining, realigning and reinvigorating the social life, standing and mission of our schools.
LikeLike