Senator Sanders said in Ohio that he supports “public charter schools” and opposes “private charter schools.”
His statement left many people wondering what he meant. All charters claim to be “public,” because they get public money. Even for-profits call themselves “public,” as do corporate charter chains, like KIPP and Success Academy.
Anya Kamenetz reported at NPR about Bernie Sanders’ statement during the Ohio Town Hall.
Kamenetz writes:
Here’s the contradiction: Charter schools are all public. And, each has some element of private control….
Charter schools, by definition, are publicly funded schools, free to students and paid for by taxpayers. They are also subject to public oversight and control; for example, they have to employ licensed teachers and administer state-mandated tests, which private schools do not. They can also be closed by districts for underperformance.
However, also by definition, charter schools maintain a measure of independence from public oversight. They have freedom from certain district and union rules; for example, they can have a longer school year or school day, require uniforms, or incorporate different topics in the curriculum. They are also governed by privately appointed boards.
This is not entirely accurate. Some states, like North Carolina, do not require charter schools to employ only licensed teachers. And while it is true that charters may be closed for underperformance, most are controlled by their authorizers, not by their district; in some states, the governor appoints a commission to authorize charters that can overrule the local district (this is an ALEC model statute). In many states, charters completely avoid accountability of any kind by making political contributions to legislators and the governor (see, Ohio and Florida).
Robert Skeels, a teacher who is earning a law degree, disagrees with Kamenetz:
He writes:
Addressing Anya Kamenetz’s confusion on charter schools
Journalist Anya Kamenetz provides the charter school industry’s public relations definition of “public” in her NPR piece on Senator Sanders and charter schools. ( http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/03/15/470376273/bernie-sanders-says-he-opposes-private-charter-schools-what-does-that-mean ) As a Juris Doctor candidate whose specialty is education law in the era of neoliberalism, allow me to present the legal arguments both on why Kamenetz’s definition is incorrect, and on how privately managed charters are not at all “public.”
Generally charter schools are not public schools. This has been long established by both existing case law and public policy. The Washington State Supreme Court (2015) held that charter schools are not “common schools” because they are governed by appointed rather than elected boards. The 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals (2010) ruled that charter schools are not “public actors.” The California Court of Appeals (2007) ruled that charter schools are not “public agents.” Additionally, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) joined scores of other government agencies in unequivocally determining that charters are, in NLRB’s words, “private entities.”
By definition if a charter school is operated by a for-profit company, or by a 501c3 non-profit corporation (e.g. Harlem Success Academy), then it is not a public school. The United States Census Bureau frames this latter issue best:
> “A few “public charter schools” are run by public universities and municipalities. However, most charter schools are run by private nonprofit organizations and are therefore classified as private.” (US Census Bureau. (2011). “Public Education Finances: 2009 (GO9-ASPEF)”. Washington, DC: US Government Printing O ce. Print. vi).
Because these lucrative charter schools are not public, and therefore not subject to even a modicum of public oversight, they are able violate the constitutional rights of their students. The decision in Scott B. v. Board of Trustees of Orange County High School of the Arts saw scholar Rosa K. Hirji, Esq. write:
> “The structures that allow charter schools to exist are marked by the absence of protections that are traditionally guaranteed by public education, protections that only become apparent and necessary when families and students begin to face a denial of what they were initially promised to be their right.” (American Bar Association https://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/childrights/content/articles/winter2014-0114-charter-schools-upholding-student-rights.html )
===
Robert D. Skeels is a Los Angeles based social justice writer, public education advocate, and immigrant rights activist. He holds a BA in Classical Civilization from the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), and is currently a Juris Doctor Candidate at Peoples College of Law (PCL).
I hope both Sanders and Clinton give a speech soon on K-12 education and explains their views.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Thank you Diane for publishing Robert Skeels carefully researched and erudite professional article on what constitutes a public school, and what a “public” charter school claims to be, but is not.
Skeels has both the academic and the long term empiric view of LAUSD and California charters as well as the nationwide charter privatization phenomanon, and he is clear and accurate in his statements.
In 2008 our Democrat governor at that time did not support charters
https://www.carolinajournal.com/news-article/no-change-on-horizon-for-charter-schools/
until. . .(what happened??? Race to the Top?)
http://pefnc.org/2011/its-official-gov-perdue-signs-measure-eliminating-charter-cap/
(a Democrat governor, mind you)
http://www.wral.com/news/state/nccapitol/story/9166891/
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2011&BillID=S8
https://ncpubliccharters.org/primer-on-nc-charters/
http://www.wfdd.org/story/are-charter-schools-threat-traditional-public-schools
(state supe not worried here–she’s a Democrat, just to note)
http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2016/01/08/atkinson-we-have-used-the-facts-about-charter-schools/
I think Democrats in charge before the 2012 elections hoped they could get the money from RttT and the negative changes would just blow over. I sort of hoped the same thing at the time. Then the General Assembly started throwing on the budget cuts and push for vouchers and push for taking oversight of charters away from DPI. I still get the feeling that Dems who are still in office (like our state supe) are hoping the issue will just go away with time. But what if the opposite is true? There need to be conversations about where we are going. Because if you don’t know where you are going, you will probably end up somewhere else.
This issue has to be talked about in regards to the future. Not grandiose philosophical statements about charters. . .but where to go from here lest they eat up our public school system (that is supposed to be uniform, according to our state constitution, but I guess that’s where the standards and tests come in. . .that the only uniform aspect is what is tested and how).
I continue to think that the more important questions are where are we going from here? Charter caps lifted. . .now what? Unbridled “competition” of tax dollars being spent on charters vs. tax dollars being spent on traditional public schools?
What does the future hold?
Segregation. And ultimately, incarceration.
You can also add California to your list of states that do not require a credential (or even a Bachelor’s Degree for that matter) of charter school teachers. It is a little known fact that I wish was KNOWN.
In complete agreement, Tina. It is shocking to see the academic array of those who are identified teachers in LA, in both charters and at LAUSD. There are so many marginal credentials, even with administrators and principals, from an online “university.”
Kamenetz states that “…[charter schools] have to employ licensed teachers and administer state-mandated tests… The second part is true but not the first. In Massachusetts charter school teachers do not have to be licensed. In how many other states is that also the case? Kamenetz again: “….charter schools maintain a measure of independence from public oversight. They have freedom from certain district and union rules …”. Ya think? How about ALL district and union rules. Very few are unionized so that takes care of the union rules and most are not part of or overseen by a district.
Yes, and in other states there are all sorts of “alternative certification” programs, to the point where certification is largely meaningless.
If TFA temps, with their five weeks of indoctrination, er, “training” are considered certified, then the term has ceased to have any meaning.
“If TFA temps, with their five weeks of indoctrination, er, “training” are considered certified, then the term has ceased to have any meaning.”
It also makes you wonder why the reformsters are all hept up about teacher preparation programs and holding them accountable for the”performance” of their graduates. Just how are TFA “teachers” held accountable? Are we supposed to believe that their preparation is preferable? Me thinks I smell some hypocrites.
Although Bernie co sponsored an amendment to ESSA that allows innovative assessment in lieu of the test ( read at http://www.wholechildreform.com ),I am not sure he understands the issues.
At Hillary’s speech in North Carolina she talked about supporting public schools but I’m not sure of the details. In an interview with public radio I said I was there to hear details.
I did leave Hillary (and Bernie) a copy of my book that would clearly emphasized the games played and how schools improve their ratings through selectively enrolling students and pushing out those who didn’t score well on tests. It also gives a vision for the future.
Charters follow the same archaic philosophy the traditional public schools are forced to follow but have two way choice, parents choose them but they choose he kids.
However, there are charter schools in Milwaukee, WI that are a full instrumentality of the public school board including unions. New York has “conversion schools” that are fully public and Superintendent June Atkinson, in North Carolina is supporting “restart” schools that are fully public but with more flexibility. This would stop the closing of public schools for charters. She also hopes to have North Carolina apply for the 5 innovative schools under the Collins – Sanders amendment to ESSA.
The movement is beginning to allow innovation in traditional public schools but I am not sure they have direction. It’s time for all supporters of public education to back away from the rhetoric of how bad everything is and prioritize a vision for the future.
The movement will only succeed if we, as educators, offer a viable alternative to the testing fiasco that drives the insanity in schools. With that vision for the future, civil rights groups and many others will realize that public school teachers are the best innovators in the world. Without that vision we will continue to be seen as whiners.
I never know what anyone means by “supporting public schools” anymore, other than the PTO moms I volunteer with.
Many citizens do not realize that a private individual or corporation can come along, take control of their neighborhood school, and make all decisions regarding the tax money that goes to the school. In short, the citizens are taxed for the school but lose all governance over it.
It appears to me that many people like the idea of a charter school. To me that means a school that is managed by parents and teachers but is still under the governance of a duly elected school board. That was the original idea. However, charters have now become privately owned schools that are supported by taxpayers who lose almost all control over them. It’s easy to see that Eva Moskowitz’ schools are her schools and she can do what she wants with them. And she does it with taxpayer money. Perhaps I am clueless, but it’s difficult to believe that the public would accept this. I prefer to think that a majority of people do not know.
If citizens want PUBLIC (i.e. under the governance of an elected board) charter (similar to magnet school) they should have it. But taxpayers need to continue fighting against the privatization of our schools. They belong to us.
Bernie or Hillary can garner a lot of votes if they make clear the difference between public charters and privatized ones.
Many also don’t realize there is generally no sibling guarantee for enrollment. Preference, maybe, but no guarantee. That’s a headache for parents.
The original charter notion may have been small and managed by parents in the community, but the current reincarnations of charters are more likely to be corporate owned and managed. Parents and taxpayers have little opportunity for input. In my opinion, it is the equivalent of taxation without representation. The whole idea of choice is lost when the school does the choosing, not the parents.
Yes, I agree.
Does any one else in the country notice that none of the candidates on either side have mentioned the public schools that 95% of kids attend?
It’s really remarkable how completely charters dominate any and all discussion of US schools. If I were listening to our presidential debates from another country and I didn’t know better I would think charter schools educate 95% of kids in the US.
I used to believe this was a DC obsession, but to listen to John Kasich one would think public schools in Ohio no longer existed and he’s a governor, not a senator. It’s remarkable, really, because it’s such a huge change from even ten years ago.
And it is so many of this 95% of citizens — citizens dependent upon all-student-inclusive public options for their own children, especially for those who are low-income or have special needs — who keep mindlessly voting in choice school/test-score-based reformers.
Many policymakers have shown total partiality towards charters. It think this reflects the degree of power and money behind them rather than results or facts.
Professor Ravitch writes I’m “a teacher who is earning a law degree”. Other than a dozen years as a catechist at a local parish in the past, I cannot claim the honorable title of being a teacher. I seriously considered pursuing a teaching credential after graduating UCLA. However, as an adherent of critical pedagogy, the idea of teaching the white supremacist curriculum embodied in Common Core State Standards (CCSS) went against my principles. That’s why I chose law school. At least as an attorney I’ll be able to defend families against the discriminatory practices of the lucrative charter sector.
Robert, Many of us appreciate your efforts, and posts on this blog.
For our legal eagles ( I am not one), the IRS has a problem with non-profit hospitals, the parsing of which services are “in the public interest,” and justifications for the compensation packages offered to administrators. I think the fuzzy reasoning here shows exactly how charter managers can pay themselves $450,000 or more and still be called non-profits. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/execsum_hospprojrept.pdf
There are additional sources of information about the difficulty in nailing down one legal definition for charters. Basically there are not uniform laws, statues, agencies and arrangements. This is one outfit that does a pretty good job of keeping track of information http://www.ecs.org/trends-in-charter-school-laws-authorizers-caps-performance-based-closures-and-virtual-schools/
You can also see where the charter industry and its public relations arm wants to go by checking out this website. You will find state rating scheme for charter-friendly authorizing policies is worthless except for self-promotion. A state with not much action on behalf of charters is called “moribund.”
http://www.qualitycharters.org/research-policies/archive/state-of-charter-authorizing/
Does Vermont even have charter schools? Has Bernie Sanders ever entered one? Did Arkansas have them when Bill Clinton was governor? How many has Hillary Clinton been inside?
This is a good Ohio editorial on charter schools:
“Last summer, the Ohio Legislature, finally recognizing this lack of accountability, enacted some measures designed to correct this.
Now, reportedly, the offending charter schools, filling the campaign coffers of our representatives in the Ohio House and Senate with hundreds of thousands of dollars, are working over our state senators and representatives asking them to weaken these measures. They believe the people we send to Columbus will willingly sacrifice the education of Ohio’s young people to their ability to fund their election campaigns.”
http://www.the-news-leader.com/opinion/2016/03/02/our-view-weakening-charter-school-oversight-is-turning-into-an-ohio-scandal
It probably does not matter at this point. Bernie has a real uphill battle. If Hillary faces Trump, a real probability, it is not clear that she could win, probably according to polls now but …
I feel Trump won, the U. S. lost after yesterday’s primaries.
My view:
The corporate media which has given Trump huge free air time bears responsibility if Trump actually wins the presidency.
The English petitioned by several thousand if memory is correct not to even let him enter their country. Europe and much of the rest of the world is appalled by his rhetoric.
The difference,
The corporate controlled media – which pushes charters too. If one travels even to Canada but Europe too and listens to the “news”, it is a far cry from what is heard on our corporate media; TV especially.
For me the real issue which the media does not touch, climate change, is something with which our children and their children will have to face.
For me
THAT is the big issue.
You are so right about how the corporate controlled media pushes the narrative in our country. And I agree that the media is complicit if Trump wins the presidency. Would Bernie be doing better if he got as much airtime as Trump? I’d bet so, especially since his name is not as well known as Clinton or Trump. Climate change is an enormous problem facing all of us, globally, now and in the future, which is one of Bernie’s major issues on the campaign. Instead we get treated to watching violent xenophobic spittle come out of Trump’s mouth.
Charter schools are public schools that are awarded their charters by governing entities established by legislation and funded by public dollars.
Don’t make this harder than it needs to be.
No, charter schools are privatized entities that seek to use public money for privilege, profit, and propaganda.
(Not to mention union busting, creaming students, segregating students, providing temp jobs for Teach For Awhile, and attempting to destroy public education.)
Your opinions do not change the fact that they are public schools funded by public dollars.
They will never hold the same title as long as they keep avoiding the same public scrutiny as all public schools, period.
And your opinions don’t change the fact that multiple court cases and government entities like the NLRB have found that charters are NOT public schools. Even the charters say they are not public schools. They just want public money for privilege, profit, and propaganda.
I would love to learn more. Can you please direct me to at least one of the “multiple court cases” that have found that charter schools are not public schools?
Thanks in advance for your help.
Clearly all the courts and government agencies cited above don’t share your unqualified, and frankly reactionary, opinions. Unless you hold a J.D., I’m really not interested in your trying to lawsplain us here.
With the narrow exceptions of those charters run by “public universities and municipalities”, charters are private. A charter is, in essence, a contract. The public contracts with private entities all the time. That doesn’t change the character of the private entity.
hollowell-
Legislatures can take money, with the understanding that they will proclaim, apples are frogs. It’s still a lie.
Public vs. private isn’t hard to understand. Charter school assets, bought by taxpayers and owned by the charter operators, describes private firms.
Court case- Ohio’s Supreme Court ruling last fall in the case of White Hat Management.
Legislators will cleverly add a clause to charter school laws stating they are “public” schools, but that is done precisely so that people will be deceived and misdirected. In fact, New York State’s charter school law of 1998 makes it clear that, despite the “public” appellation, they are private entities that are privately managed.
Hi Gordon:
IMHO, the immediate concern is to cultivate American Conservative thinking mindset regarding the pros and cons of being righteousness or entitlement and of being rightfulness, with and without responsibility toward the welfare of society as a whole.
Secondly, there must enforce to have at least one radio station and one television channel specifically dedicate to educate all young and old citizens regarding their human rights WITH their responsibilities for their own well being and the welfare of their community and society where they live in.
The consequences of understanding of the human rights will lead people to live with self-respect for themselves and for the environment, like water, air, and organic foods. Most of all, people and corporate SHALL accept the penalty that they have thoroughly cultivated and understood daily. Back2basic
Hello jdhollowell:
Do you know or understand the word N and O in spelling and in pronouncing?
It is difficult to get through a thick head of greedy corporate that it is not worth to grab the impermanent and valueless material like money, power, and luxury enjoyment at the expense of people’s sufferance on Earth. All living things from sentient beings to all planets in the galaxy will eventually follow the universal law of the cycle of empty hand, but suffer bad karma, regarding: born (forming) – growth – sickness or decay – death.
In the same vein, all addicts (to alcohol, drug, gamble, and lust) intentionally commit to or enjoy the abused substance, and then suffer in the end of their lives bodily and emotionally.
What on earth do you keep insisting that CHARTER schools are privately controlled by hedge fund managers and greedy corporate with the help of “”CORRUPTED”” top down from Governors, appointed Chancellors, appointed Superintendents and elected BoE members, are entitled to call PUBLIC school without transparent audit??? Back2basic.
If Democrat, Richard Cordray, in charge of the recently-created federal consumer protection organization, and if, the head of the FTC, did their jobs they would demand that charter schools be punished for false advertising, when they claim they are public schools.
On 4/19/2013, there was a Ravitch post about Kamenetz’ “fawning” interview of Gates.
Anya willfully misunderstands the difference between public and private education. Gates is a privatizer and his view is the one reflected in oligarch media.
Corporate stenographers posing as journalists…
“Willfully misunderstands” indeed. She’s currently arguing with the distinguished Professor Preston Green about the distinction on Twitter right now. He holds an Ed.D. and a J.D. I think he knows a little bit more about the law, and its application to education than a corporate reporter whose career is marked by lauding “tech bros” and providing political cover for some of the worst “no excuses” chain gain charter chains.
All of these neoliberal corporate education reform cheerleading reporters, Chiat, Whitmere, Kamenetz, Russo, Matthews, etc., seem to think that their strongly held opinions are equivalent to facts.
The problem is that Dr. Green, who has the truth and a mastery in understanding the law, doesn’t have the audience that Kamenetz et al have for their lies. This is how the charters are public lie continues to be promulgated to the public, despite the fact that the courts determined they are private long ago.
Let’s never forget that Kamenetz’ falsities, along with a lot of other disinformation about education, is “brought to you by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation…”
Here is an article summarizing the cases in which charters successfully argues that they were “private” in court, including Success Academy.