In late night negotiations, rushing to finish the legislative session, the New York Legislature reached a package deal to extend mayoral control by only one year. Part of the package creates a parallel system for charter schools, which can switch authorizers and choose one (either the State University of New York or the Board of Regents) that will give them freedom from any regulations and standards that apply to public schools. In other words, there will be one set of rules for public schools, and no rules for charter schools. This will be the first time in New York state’s history that the Legislature has officially established a publicly-funded dual school system: One sector is subject to democratic control, the other is not. One must accept (or take responsibility for) all students, the other is free to accept and reject whichever students it wants.
A one-year extension, with few or no caveats, had seemed all but cemented when lawmakers went to bed on Thursday evening. But the morning found Mr. Flanagan pushing for the funding transparency requirement, followed by the charter-school provision in the afternoon. It would effectively create a parallel system of charter schools within the city, allowing “high-performing charter schools in good standing” to switch to join the State University of New York umbrella or the Board of Regents of the State Educational Department.
Not since the era preceding the Brown decision of 1954 has a state legislature so brazenly established a two-tier system of K-12 schools.
The leader of the State Senate, John Flanagan, has made no secret of his contempt for Mayor Bill de Blasio. De Blasio helped to raise money for Democrats running for the State Senate; had they won, the State Senate would be controlled by Democrats, not Republicans. Governor Cuomo has stabbed the mayor in the back repeatedly, because he doesn’t like to share the stage with any other prominent Democrat in the state. So, the mayor had a losing hand when he asked for a three-year extension of mayoral control.
When Mike Bloomberg asked for a six-year extension in 2009, the Legislature granted it. The State Senate loved Mayor Bloomberg, because he often contributed to individual Republicans running for re-election (three years later, in 2012, the Mayor gave $1 million to the Republican campaign fund for the state senate). When Mayor Bloomberg asked for a renewal of his unlimited power over the schools in 2009, he boasted of the dramatic increase in test scores that were a direct result of his control. However, a year later, the New York Board of Regents commissioned an independent study, which concluded that the New York State Education Department had lowered the passing mark every year and test scores across the state were inflated. When they were adjusted after this revelation, the dramatic gains disappeared. NAEP scores never confirmed the boasts by Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Joel Klein about “historic gains.”
If anyone remembers what all these political maneuvers over control have to do with educating one million children, please remind me.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
It is stunning and depressing that more than a half-century after the Supreme Court found that separate-but-equal is a sham, that that the old inequitable segregation wolf has reemerged in the sheep’s clothing of a “portfolio system.” We need a new explicitly multi-racial movement that fights for social and economic justice. An injury to one is still and injury to all. http://www.arthurcamins.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Injury-to-One-is-An-Injury-to-All_HP.pdf
LikeLiked by 1 person
Remember what happened when the GOP dominated US Congress voted overwhelmingly in 1999 to repeal the Glass Steagall Act for the banking industry?
What New York State has just done to education will eventually lead to a catastrophe in education with simliar results that will affect teachers, children and parents.
LikeLike
Lloyd we are rewriting history a bit you do mean the overwhelming majority of the GOP with the assistance of the Clinton Administration and Bill Clinton’s signature. . Much the same as we have here in NY where the Governor assured a republican majority in the State Senate by convincing several Democratic Senators to caucus with the Republicans or was that switch parties after the election.
Dismal neo liberal Democrats the NDC , create the climate where Republicans seem like an alternative to hard working Americans . The dog and pony show has gone on for way too long. Although I have voted Democratic for over 40 years it is a sickening charade. The Republican party always appealing since 68 to racism has managed to re-brand itself as the conservative party of Business and right wing social dogma . It has finally fallen apart this year to the dismay of the Business wing.
The Democrats have since Clinton for sure and to some degree Carter abandoned the progressive ideals of the 30,s -70’s . They have become the party of Wall Street and Corporate raiders. While pursuing social issues . No where is this more evident than in education. Cuomo along with sever other Governors and Mayors ,is leading the charge on Teachers on Public Workers pensions on Public Schools . This was not the GOP, I expect privatization of public goods from them , this is Cuomo the buck stops with him.
LikeLike
Who is rewriting history — the far right wing of the GOP I think!
Regardless of the evidence that Bill Clinton was allegedly tied to the neo-liberal movement and the fact that he signed the Bill that repealed much of the Glass Steagal Act after the GOP dominated Congress passed it with an overwhelming veto-proof vote, if Clinton had vetoed the GOP backed bill, it would have been only a gesture because the bill would have passed anyway.
In addition, the extremist wing of the GOP has had 17 years of dogma-driven propaganda through their hate media machine to put all the blame on the Clintons when the actual blame is on the shoulders of representatives in both house of Congress that pushed the bill through congress for the president to sign.
The Bill that repealed much of Glass Steagal was called the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and that bill repealed part of the Glass-Steagal Act of 1933.
Respective versions of the Financial Services Act were introduced in the U.S. Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the U.S. House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa). The third lawmaker associated with the bill was Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R-Virginia), Chairman of the House Commerce Committee from 1995 to 2001.
During debate in the House of Representatives, Rep. John Dingell (Democrat of Michigan) argued that the bill would result in banks becoming “too big to fail.” Dingell further argued that this would necessarily result in a bailout by the Federal Government.
On November 4, the final bill resolving the differences was passed by the Senate 90–8, and by the House 362–57. The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.
A Bill Clinton veto would have been waste of time and only a statement that he disproved of it but the bill veto proof so why waste his time and cause more fuel for the fire the GOP kept stocking throughout his presidency with one attack after another that all failed to convict Clinton of anything. Even the attempted impeachment driven by the hate filled GOP failed.
Now we see it all coming back to bite the GOP in the ass with Trump, the party’s presidential candidate, revealing just how hate filled the Reublican Party has been for decades. I think the GOP’s cauldron of hate is going to boil over and give them 3rd degree burns.
Fact, a president does not have the power to veto every bill Congress passes. There are limitations to a president’s power. Even the pocket veto has its limitations – Congress has denied this use of the pocket veto. The Legislative Branch, backed by modern court rulings, asserts that the Executive Branch may only pocket veto legislation when Congress has adjourned sine die from a session.
http://history.house.gov/Institution/Presidential-Vetoes/Presidential-Vetoes/
When it comes to pointing fingers, both parties get the blame. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was co-sponsored by three Republicans, signed into law by a Democratic president and had the overwhelming support of both parties when it was eventually passed.
LikeLike
Yes an absolute rewrite,Republicans had a 55 vote majority in the Senate so you are either profoundly ignorant of the working of Congress or you are being disingenuous in your defense of Clinton . Judging by some of your other writing the second would be my choice.
All accounts have it that the Clinton administration working with the Republicans pushed it through.
55 votes is not even a supper majority needed for closure ,no less a veto proof majority . 38 Democrats voted with 52 Republicans .
Hello Monica!!!! We had just gone through the specter of a politically motivated impeachment. After 8years of witch hunts in-part inspired
by the actions of Slick Willy. That’s a lot of inter party love fest.
38 democrats vote with the Republicans because Robert Ruben , Larry Summers and Clinton crushed Brooksley Born and others who warned about deregulation and not only lobbied for, but engineered the attachment of the Bill to a must pass Budget Bill . By the way this was the fourth Banking de-regulatory act passed by Clinton.
In 1999, on signing Gramm-Leach-Bliley into law, “This is a day we can celebrate as an American day” and that ” the Glass-Steagall law is no longer appropriate for the economy in which we live” and “today what we are doing is modernizing the financial services industry, tearing down these antiquated laws and granting banks significant new authority” and “This is a very good day for the United States.”
Slick Willey, POTUS
Please lets not give Slick Willy a pass here being one step above Trump and the Republicans is nothing to be proud of
http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/bill_clinton_the_republicans_m.php
Just as New Yorker’s and NY students have been done a tremendous disservice by Cuomo . Palidino and Trump must really be secrete Democrats running to make Clinton and Cuomo look like acceptable choices .
But have a Happy Fathers Day anyway
LikeLike
It is obvious that you drank the GOP Kool-aid that has been demonizing the Clintons for decades.
You didn’t read all of my comment and ignored many of the points I made – specially the last paragraph. Clinton is no more gulity that Nixon, Reagan, Bush #1, Bush #2, and Obama. Clinton was the product of a move to the center in the Democratic party after Reagan won the South from the Democrats.
Michael Meeropol’s study of U.S. economic policy from Reagan to Clinton, Surrender: How the Clinton Administration Completed the Reagan Revolution, makes a timely contribution to such an assessment. Meeropol, a professor of economics at Western New England College and researcher for the Center for Popular Economics, argues that a major counterrevolution has transpired in American economic policy since the 1980s as the reformist Keynesian New Deal was overturned in favor of the revanchist neoliberal “social contract with America.”
http://monthlyreview.org/2001/04/01/neoliberalism-from-reagan-to-clinton/
LikeLike
“How the Clinton Administration Completed the Reagan Revolution, makes a timely contribution to such an assessment” Exactly my point .
Bill Clinton was not elected to complete the Reagan Revolution neither was “Hope and Change ” He moved the party to the right .
and Obama is not far behind . Clinton wasn’t dragged kicking and screaming he led the troops. Obama pushing the TPP against the party base the same, opposed by almost every Labor , Environmental and Consumer group. A pivot to Asia by making drugs more expensive for the people of Vietnam… … And this President came in with a mandate in 2009 . Supper majorities for the first 134 days . Roosevelt reshaped the nation in that time .
No Hillary being on the Board of Walmart the most vehemently anti union co in the country should have been a non starter . Bill running
down to execute a man so mentally handicapped that he wanted to know if he could have a different desert after the execution, another…. I didn’t need republicans to tell me that I had supported Tom Harkin
I did not buy the Republican smear campaign. I loathed Clinton on policy for eight years and voted for him twice and for Gore . The best thing he did in the White House happened under the desk, because it did no harm. But try as they may the Republicans have not managed to smear Obama’s personal life !!!!!!. They resort to the absurd and nothing sticks . Why is that ?, because his personal life has been exemplary . I wish his policy was. Clinton supplied just enough ammo and they went after him.I don’t care about the emails . Its the speeches, I want to see.
You state that the Republican Southern Strategy was responsible for the party moving to the right . I would say being gutless shills without conviction ,was responsible for that move .Gutless shills who took Reagan’s welfare queen for real and gutted welfare without creating an economy to replace it. Increasing extreme poverty .
No body has given up on Keynesian economics . The Republicans are only opposed to Keynesian economics when Democrats are in office . As Darth Vader said “deficits don’t matter” and Reagan blew the biggest hole in the budget since WW2. . Helicopter Ben not exactly a Liberal .So even Cheney was a Keynesian. But unlike the Republicans who doubled down after Goldwater . Mondale’s defeat had the party running as fast as they could to the right. To preserve their butts not for the American people who elected them.
But guess what if a Democrat never got elected again and the party went the way of the Whigs, I could care less. This is not a game of Stratego it is about the lives of the American people and the future of their children. It is about Democratic Governors and Mayors going after America’s largest union and most precious public good . I suppose they have no choice there either. I suppose Cuomo ,Emanuel ,Raimondo, Malloy have no choice but to lead an attack on teachers and public schools on Public worker pensions . ., And Barney Frank had no choice his pension so tiny 140 grand that he had to go onto the Board of Signature Bank.
So If !!!!!!! I can I will vote for Jill Stein, not because I drank the Kool-aid but because after voting Democratic in every race since 1970 I am sick of the rat poisoning be served by DLC-NDC Democrats .
Thank God I live in NY and will probably have that option.
.
LikeLike
Once again, Bill Clinton is not the only guilty party. Many in both major parties are guilty. Congress makes the laws. Without support from Congress, no president can get a law passed. It’s time for both major parties to go. With Trump leading the GOP, before he is done spouting off his big lying mouth, we may see the Republican Party implode and split apart and become two or three new parties. With luck, in a few years the Democrats will go the same way.
LikeLike
Well Lloyd we agree . Clinton certainly did not do it alone,if the Republicans never rebuild I could care less. They can remain the party of small minded bigots and billionaires. The quicker the Democrats rebuild and become the party of the working class instead of the donor class the better. .
LikeLike
It may be too late to expect the Democratic Party to rebuild itself into the real progressive movement it once was. The neo-conservative lunatics were lured from the Democratic Party into the Republican Party by Reagan and started to take over the GOP when the 1st Bush was president and succeeded with the 2nd Bush. The neo-liberals moved into the White House with the Clintons, and then entrenched themselves with Obama. Right behind the neo-conservatives and neo-liberals are the libertarians who want to turn the world into a free for all with no rights for all and buyer beware of everything.
LikeLike
It’s not “political” Diane! Just ignore the lobbying and political machinations! That is NOT happening!
Ed reformers never deal in icky dirty “politics”. They float above such things, on a pure cloud of data, science and noble intentions .
They’re simply BETTER people than the mere mortals who lobby for public schools-that’s why they don’t require oversight
LikeLike
TAGO!
😎
LikeLike
Didn’t SUNY say recently that they were so overwhelmed that they would not authorize another single charter unless they got a lot more money?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Did public schools get anything out of this political deal?
Anyone advocating for the unfashionable “sector” or did we get stuck with the useless, weak “agonostics” again?
They got rolled by the charter lobby again, right? Can we hire an actual advocate? We don’t seem to be represented in the end reform club.
LikeLike
In New York State, traditional public schools will still have to follow all the rules in the state Ed. Code, while charter school operators — who can refuse and kick out kids whenever they feel like, and have no shame in doing so — will not just have different rules which they must follow, will not just have fewer rules … they will HAVE NO RULES which they must follow, while getting all that public taxpayer money.
CUE Tim to come in and post, “Well, yeah, but this is good, and here’s why.”
LikeLike
typo ABOVE … “now” instead of “not”
“… they will now HAVE NO RULES … “
LikeLike
NY government is a cesspool, where the richest buy whatever they want, including souls..
LikeLike
That is rapidly becoming America at large, and we are doing our best to spread it overseas, as well. This is 21st century colonization at heart. The greed is just unfathomable, and it will come crashing down eventually – if we don’t start pushing back as a society soon, it’s going to be a very unpleasant ride on the way to said crash.
I’m wondering at this point how advocacy would even make a difference when laws are being changed or eliminated all together. This is what a caste society looks like, folks.
LikeLike
Amen
LikeLike
Which reminds me, when exactly were the apostles of accountability Bloomberg and Klein and their lackeys in the New York State Education Department held accountable for their crude, cynical and completely conscious deception of the citizens they were meant to serve ?
Oh, now I remember.
Never.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The portion of the new law that requires New York City to provide a full and complete accounting of how much is spent at the school level is long-overdue and hardly an unreasonable expectation. Right now, the published school-based budgets are insultingly incomplete and essentially useless: they cover only cash salaries and basic supplies like books. Fringe benefits, central and support services, energy, debt, pensions, buses, custodians, safety officers, food and food service staff? All paid for by magic fairies, according to NYC DOE official school-level budgets!
And introducing the ability for charter schools to switch authorizers isn’t anything nearly as dramatic as what you’ve described. It is primarily meant to address the fact that the NYC DOE is a lame-duck charter authorizer, responsible for the oversight and renewal of about 50 schools (out of around 190 charters located in NYC), but with no power to issue new charters. In fact, if most or all of the DOE charters switch to SUNY or NYSED, it will allow the DOE to redirect those resources to district schools.
Whether a charter’s authorizer is the DOE, SUNY, or NYSED, none of the rules and laws regarding enrollment (charters are open to any child who resides in New York State), transparency (all charters must conduct monthly board meetings open to the public), accountability (all charters must post annual budgets and third-party financial audits; any charter can be closed or not renewed if it fails to make academic or enrollment goals), and non-profit status (all charters and charter management organizations in NY, with a small handful of grandfathered exceptions, are required by law to be nonprofit) are changing.
LikeLike
“High performing charter schools” is the rhetorical bait for legislators and for school boards to go along with the use of public funds to subsidize private operators of charters. The politically savvy charter school lobby will use all tricks of the trade to push through legislation when most people are distracted. New York is a likely to be a model put into motion ASAP in many states before the national elections.
Meanwhile nine teacher prep programs feeding charter schools–TFA, TNTP, Relay Graduate School of Education, Match, Aspire Charter Schools, and several residency programs– have formed a coalition to lobby Congress and USDE for “guidance” that will guantee test scores of k-12 students must be used to: ( a) stack rank the productivity of teachers and (b) rate the teacher prep programs attended by teachers based on the test scores and other productivity measures of their graduates.
These teacher pre programs, the darlings of philanthropists, hope to eliminate university-based teacher prep, put school districts and charter operators in charge of coursework, (much of that online) and increase the compliance of candidates with detailed rules. These programs are keep to indoctrinate their teachers so they can run perfectly conformist classrooms, relentlessly focused on test prep.
The coalition seems to be pushing for ratings that will eliminate teacher prep programs that fail to produce graduates who receive unfavorable “customer” ratings from their employers –district officials, principals, colleagues, students, parents. This “please the customer ethic” for teacher prep depends on making sure that USDE guidance on ESSA (needed because the legislation was thrown together to please lobbyists) keeps accountability focused on test scores.
LikeLike
A true nightmare, happening while teacher educators are seemingly oblivious and/or powerless to stop it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“…and choose one (either the State University of New York or the Board of Regents) that will give them freedom from any regulations and standards that apply to public schools. In other words, there will be one set of rules for public schools, and no rules for charter schools. This will be the first time in New York state’s history that the Legislature has officially established a publicly-funded dual school system: One sector is subject to democratic control, the other is not. One must accept (or take responsibility for) all students, the other is free to accept and reject whichever students it wants.”
There are so many lies in just this one paragraph that it’s hard to know where to begin. If you can’t support your case with truth, it’s a sure sign that you’re position is weak. Since you believe your position is strong, why lie to make your case; it only weakens it.
You know full well that charter schools have to meet all safety, curriculum, and testing standards as traditional public schools, as well as FOIL, FERPA, etc, regardless of which authorizer they have. You also know that charters are not permitted to “accept and reject whichever students it wants.” There’s a valid point to be made that charter schools can either be admitting or not admitting in a given grade and traditional public schools can’t make that choice. Why not mention that legitimate criticism and instead outright lie that charters are allowed to pick in choose.
You are deliberately misleading people and obscuring the true issues. Reminds me of Fox News. I suppose they have legitimate differences with Obama, but when they talk about his birth certificate, they lose all credibility except in the eyes of a very few loyalists. You’re doing the same thing.
LikeLike
Your banner headline, “New York Legislature Frees Charter Schools of Regulations and Oversight”, implies no regulation or oversight as a result of this “historic” change. Please provide a *single* regulation or oversight that was removed by this legislation. Since you say all were removed, that should be easy, right?
LikeLike
John, you make a good point, but I have to wonder why pass legislation singling out charters if they are the same as public schools?
I mean if, as you imply – charters have to meet the same regulatory requirements as public schools, what was the need to pass this law?
Is charters are subject to the exact same transparency regulations as public schools, if their boards are elected by the public (as are the vast majority in NYS), if the public have the ability to alter school policy if they so wish, if all the educational staff are certified and required to obtain Masters Degrees, etc…if they are the same why consecrate into law these similarities?
The fact is, private charter schools are very different from public schools, and this law enshrines those differences, thus creating two separate and unequal school systems, only one of which is truly subject to democratic control.
The effect of this law will be to begin to remove or weaken many of the regulations and standards that you cited as applying to both types of school systems.
LikeLike
Y ya hablaron Santiaguitito y Juanitito.
LikeLike
Transparency, oversight and regulation are perfectly A-OK with charter schools—especially $ucce$$ Academy, the leader of the pack—because they will not be “keeping anything hidden from those who approach them in good faith.”
So saith Non Sequitur. Take that, O ye of little good faith!
Link: https://dianeravitch.net/2016/05/10/bombshell-former-staff-member-at-success-academy-alleges-cheating-on-tests/
😎
LikeLike
I’m confused. When public school advocates lobby statehouses that’s very, very bad and divisive.
Yet, when charter school advocates do the same thing it’s pure and noble and scientific .
Other than the obvious pro-charter bias of the ed reform echo chamber, why is this ridiculous double standard used?
Why would anyone outside this exclusive club accept this? They know it’s pure self-aggrandizing BS right? They can’t actually believe they’re inherently morally superior, can they?
LikeLike
“I’m confused. When public school advocates lobby statehouses that’s very, very bad and divisive.”
Chiara, you must be kidding. Teacher’s Unions are among the largest political donors and lobbyists in the country.
LikeLike
Don’t forget to mention that there are two special interests in this war.
There is the autocratic, for profit, opaque and often fraudulent and inferior corporate charter schools and the billionaires that support them. The Credo study out of Stanford has proven repeatedly that more than 70% of the corporate charters are the same or inferior to the public schools they are competing with.
“Hundreds of private philanthropies together spend almost $4 billion annually to support or transform K–12 education, most of it directed to schools that serve low-income children (only religious organizations receive more money). But three funders—the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Eli and Edythe Broad (rhymes with road) Foundation, and the Walton Family Foundation—working in sync, command the field.”
https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/got-dough-how-billionaires-rule-our-schools
What about the teachers’ unions, that other special interest. What are they spending to support public school teachers and protect the educatoin of American’s 50+ children from the profiteers.
Fox News, arguable a bastion of hate and lies for the GOP’s far right, reports that Teachers’ unions spent $80 million on 2014 elections.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/11/06/do-math-teacher-unions-spent-80-million-on-2014-elections.html
Who benefits on each side?
On one side we have a few dozen autocratic psychopathic billionaires and their highly paid unscrupulous, lying and often fraudulent minions vs. 3.5+ million mostly middle class, empathetic teachers; more than 50 million school children, and the children’s parents.
Corporations are not democratic. They are autocratic and their main goal it to make money.
The teachers’ unions are democratic organizations and the main goal of the voting membership of those labor unions is to teach children and offer than an opportunity to learn. The teachers’ unions exist to protect teachers from the abuse of the corporate overlords.
Let’s put that another way:
Bill Gates, the Walton family and Eli Broad vs more than 150 million Americans: teachers, children and parents.
LikeLike
John,
You echoed the stale canard that teachers unions are major lobbyists, and therefore there is some equivalence between the unions and the hedge fund managers who pour millions into lobbying for privatization. Teachers unions represent the people who work in schools every day; the unions lobby on behalf of public education and teachers. Who do the hedge fund managers represent? What is their interest in changing control of public schools and shifting it to the private sector?
LikeLike
Diane,
They largely represent the interests of parent and students, pushing for things like school choice, longer school day and year, greater accountability, and other things that unions are against because they solely represent the interests of teachers (as they should).
Will you be responding to my question about your misleading headline. What regulation or oversight was removed from charter schools by this legislation?
LikeLike
Who represents the interested of parents and students — the teachers’ unions or the hedge funds?
My bet goes to the teachers’ unions, because they are democratic organizations where the members elect their leaders and the members often have to vote to allow the union to use a portion of the member dues to defend public education through lobbying or media.
Th autocratic CEO’s of hedge funds do not have to seek permission from anyone and often profit off of their agendas. They are not throwing billions of dollars away to get nothing back, but every penny teachers’ unions spend to defend teachers’ rights and children’s rights gains nothing back in profits.
Thanks to a little discussed law passed in 2000, at the end of Bill Clinton’s presidency, banks and equity funds that invest in charter schools and other projects in underserved areas can take advantage of a very generous tax credit – as much as 39% — to help offset their expenditure in such projects.
In essence, that credit amounts to doubling the amount of money they have invested within just seven years. Moreover, they are allowed to combine that tax credit with job creation credits and other types of credit, as well collect interest payments on the money they are lending out – all of which can add up to far more than double in returns. This is, no doubt, why many big banks and equity funds are so invested in the expansion of charter schools. There is big money being made here — because investment is nearly a sure thing.
Hedge funds are not Democratic institutions. They are autocratic and their main agenda is to make money, as much money as possible.
Teachers’ unions because they are democratic institution represent the will of the majority of their members. The union presidents are elected to office and if they abuse their responsibly can be replaced in the next election. There is not one teachers’ union. There are thousands and they start at the local, district level where the local’s president is often a working classroom teacher.
Now let’s compare how much teachers spend and what they spend it on. The Journal reports that the nation’s public school teachers spend about $1.6 billion annually on classroom supplies and material, and those same teachers pay union dues and vote for the president of their local chapter, the state chapter and the national chapter of their union. Those democratic unions also have their union members vote on policy.
https://thejournal.com/articles/2013/07/01/k12-teachers-out-of-pocket-1-point-6-billion-on-classroom-tools.aspx
The Washington Post published a piece explaining “Why hedge funds love charter schools.” And, John, if you dare to click the link and read the real reason Hedge Funds support corporate charters, you will discover it isn’t for the children and parents. It’s for the money.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/06/04/why-hedge-funds-love-charter-schools/
In addition, classroom teachers are only allowed to deduct up to $250 ($500 married filing jointly and both spouses are educators but not more than $250 each).
So, the average teacher spends about $500 annually and is allowed to only deduct $250 off their taxable income. They do not get $250 back. If their tax rate is 15%, then their tax would be reduced by $37.50, I think. It might even be less.
But what about those Hedge Funds that you allege are there to help parents and children?
Business Insider reports “The Walmart family is teaching hedge funds how to profit from publicly funded schools.”
http://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-is-helping-hedge-funds-make-money-off-of-charter-schools-2015-3
LikeLike
Lloyd,
You (and Diane) are conflating a lot of different things here.
First, the “hedge fund managers” that Diane refers to are a pretty specific group of people that support charter schools in New York City. AFAIK, they have no investments in in charters or charter real estate. In fact, one of them has a pretty public “short” position on K12 Education. They are just philanthropists where charters are concerned. If you know otherwise, please share.
The New Market Tax Credit that you refer to is used way more to build hospitals and other similar buildings than charter schools. Also, hedge funds do not invest in things like this, banks do. Finally, this isn’t “investing in charter schools”, it is investing in the construction of buildings for them. In my experience, the people doing this have little interest in education reform.
So, while I agree that the interests of teachers and students align in many ways, I think the majority of lobbying by teacher’s unions is more about protecting themselves, then to some extent protecting teachers, and very little about students or families.
Do you think unions oppose charter schools and other school choice because they think they’re bad for families or that families don’t want them? Do they oppose accountability for the same reason? Longer school day and year?
I don’t at all begrudge teachers having unions, and when unions act in the best interests of most teachers, I think that’s good. When they start to act more in their own best interests, I think they run the risk of protecting the least desirable aspects in public education because that’s where they provide the most value. It’s a perverse incentive and IMO, does not work to make things better for students.
Also, my overarching feeling is that the confrontation between unions and reform efforts, as played out in the legislatures and state ed departments, has resulted in horrendous “compromise” implementations that nobody is happy with.
LikeLike
John,
Why did you ignore so many of my points? Teachers’ unions were formed to protect the unions’ members so, yes, that’s the job of the unions, to protect and not profit off of its members. Then the teachers, knowing the union has their backs can teach without fear.
What is the job of the CEO/managers of a Hedge Fund? The answer is obvious: to make money, as much money as possible. To discover how much these hedge fund managers spend to manipulate government, just click the following link:
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=f2700
I wonder what the average pay is for a teachers’ union president. I’m talking about all the union presidents from the thousands of local branches in school districts to the states and nation.
You can find the answer here, and before you think of cherry picking facts to support your thinking, don’t forget that this link is available to anyone that reads my comments.
Click to access ILEPI-LEP-Economic-Commentary-The-Pay-of-Union-Leaders_FINAL.pdf
Anyone who wants to can fact check the hedge fund billionaires and discover their interests. For instance, what hedge funds are doing to loot public union retirement funds and the hundreds of millions they spent on media propaganda and lobbying to get their greedy, grimy, slimy hands on more than a trillion dollars.
http://billmoyers.com/2013/09/30/matt-taibbi-on-wall-streets-campaign-to-loot-public-pensions/
Again, why have you ignored many of the points I’ve made. For instance, the fact the billionaires are splending an average of $4 billion a year to promote the autocratic, for profit, opaque, sometimes fraudulent, discriminating, cherry picking, and often inferior corporate charter school, voucher, and internet education movement vs. the $80 million the teachers’ unions spent in 2014 to lobby in the interests of the millions of public school employees that pay dues to support the unions’ feeble efforts.
What are the interests of those public school teachers again that spend an average of $500 annually for classroom supplies and materials? The answer is obvious: the education of the children those teachers teach is what they are dedicated to.
LikeLike
Lloyd,
First, please supply a source for your $4 billion number.
Second, please tell me what the connection is between the hedge fund owners who choose to donate to charter schools and the New Market Tax Credit other than mumbling something about “Wall Street”. They’re not the same people.
There is clear motivation for Teachers Union members to oppose charter schools, and they do, by about 2 times the rate of the general public.
You’ve provided no clear motivation for these philanthropists to donate their money for selfish reasons. If you were one of them, wanted to improve public education, and wanted to donate where it would have the greatest effect for the benefit of students, where would you donate? Maybe the AFT or NEA?
They exist as a countervailing force against decades of outsized influence on education policy by Teachers Unions.
LikeLike
John, the source for the $4 billion was in another comment I left for you. Go back and find it. You are still wrong and once again, you ignored most of the other points I made and the sources I linked to. You are a good edu-bagger for the corporate swindlers.
LikeLike
People can see this echo chamber in action.
Go look at end reform sites (including the US DOE).
You will find glowing reviews of charter schools and elaborate plans to open more and more charter schools. If public schools are mentioned at all it’s only to list their failures.
Echo chamber. Calling this “education reform” is blatantly misleading. It has nothing whatever to do with “improving public schools”.
I don’t know why they won’t just run on privatization. Are they afraid we’d have a real debate if they told the public the truth?
LikeLike
The vast majority of voting members of NYSUT put these people in office. NYSUT can wield a might sword come election time. Why doesnt it? We are our own worst enimies.
LikeLike
Well said and so very sad.
LikeLike
Rockhound2,
The legislation allows charter schools to switch authorizers, but there’s no difference in law between the authorizers. The law did absolutely nothing like what Diane says.
I didn’t say that charters have to follow all of the same laws a traditional schools; I pointed out the specific ones (safety, curriculum, testing, FOIL, FERPA) that we have to follow. We are not bound to collective bargaining, don’t have to pay prevailing wage for contracting, etc. There boards are not publicly elected, but they also don’t set tax or tuition rates (the public school districts do that). On the other hand, if parents don’t choose a charter, it gets no income and closes (unlike a traditional public school that can lose students and keep getting the same funding). There *are* differences and they are important.
As for transparency, there are laws on the books against self-dealing and conflicts of interest. Charters are audited by public accounting firms and can be (and are) audited by the State Comptroller as well, just like traditional school districts. They also have to get their charters renewed every five years; a process in which they have to demonstrate that they perform above the local district average. Many charters have been shut down for not making these academic goals.
Again, this law made *no* changes in charter regulations that I’m aware of. You said, “The effect of this law will be to begin to remove or weaken many of the regulations and standards that you cited as applying to both types of school systems.” Please tell me one way in which it does that. And don’t quote Diane, she is not a reliable, objective source on this.
LikeLike
“. . . that we have to follow. We are not bound to collective. . . ”
If I may ask. To which charter school or charter school organization are you affiliated?
LikeLike
Duane, we’ve had this conversation before. I see no benefit to my students or teachers to identifying myself and that’s how I make decisions when it comes to my school. There are a few people on this blog that are too into personal attacks. Besides, my opinions are my own, and for the most part, I just like to point out factual errors like this post.
LikeLike
John,
I certainly don’t remember all the posts to which poster I have done. Sorry, for the repeat. But it also helps for folks to know, for example when you say “my school”, whether that is in an administrative or teaching capability. It’s a big difference as I think you probably know what I think of adminimals, no matter what school system they are in.
So do you mind answering (again, don’t know if I’ve asked this of you before) are you a teacher or an administrator? I think I know the answer by your statement “I see no benefit to my students or teachers” but just looking for clarification.
I still don’t understand why so many, including many on this and other blogs refuse to use their real names. There is something basically wrong in a system, whether public schools or the private sector of which I consider most charters to belong to, that so many feel so intimidated and afraid of speaking their mind in an open fashion. Personally I find hiding behind a pseudonym to be cowardly, but that is just me. I’ve been through the wringer more than once for speaking my mind, have been forced out, but goddamnit at least I have a clear conscience for what I did. Tis very sad indeed that folks are so afraid to speak what they perceive to be the truth! That fear permeates public education discourse to the detriment of the students.
LikeLike
Many charters have been shut down for not making these academic goals. I think you are an unreliable objective source of information on charters unless….
you can produce the list of charters closed for failimg to meet academic standards and for self-dealing contracts, and conflicts of interest. Choose your state. Also, per Duane below who is included in the “we” in your comments?
LikeLike
287 charters have been granted in New York State, 27 have been closed, and one school knew what was coming and closed itself down before its authorizer could: http://nytimes.com/2015/02/28/nyregion/new-york-city-teachers-union-is-closing-portion-of-its-brooklyn-charter-school.html
LikeLike
30% of the charter closures in DC have been for failure to meet academic performance requirements.
LikeLike
I’ll also add that all charters in NY (except a handful of grandfathered ones in NYC) are 501c3 not-for-profits and therefore subject to NY’s stringent Nonprofit Revitalization Act,
Section 75 of that law has strict requirements regarding conflict of interest and whistleblower policies that charters are required to meet, but traditional public schools are generally not.
LikeLike
Prince Cuomo and Flanagan are also taking credit for the oxymoron “ethics reform”. NY has the most corrupt legislature in the nation and we citizens are waiting for the day we have three crooks in a cell.
LikeLike
We’re seeing a total blitzkrieg from big money against democratic institutions–from buying state and national politicians in both parties, even local school board elections, to creating so-called “think tanks” that provide phony “objective” studies that support what the billionaires want, to creating associations that foster their ideas among lawyers, academics, and businessmen. Charters are but one aspect of this blitzkrieg.
And our side responds as the Polish army did in September of 1939, as the real blitzkrieg overwhelmed the Polish countryside: the Poles rode their horses into battle against Wehrmacht tanks.
Will our side wake up?
LikeLike
People here don’t want to hear it, but based on Census Bureau data Bloomberg jacked up school spending to the moon, and the children got nothing for it.
The only legacy is a continuation of one or more years in retirement for NYC teachers, which had not been funded in advance. That will wreck the schools financially, but the deal is under Omertà.
Isn’t that a “win” from your point of view? I’ve concluded the right move is to stop lying and stop trying. Either pay up and accept that the problem is the NYC schools are better than people deserve, or move out. But no more discussion of “reform,” no more changes, no more pretending. Any improvement will only come outside the system.
LikeLike
Have any of the commenters read the law?
The NY Times article quotes form the presser describing the law.
In this cycle 22 Letters of Intent to open charter schools 9/17 were submitted, the Board of Regents approved three applications – two in NYC and one in Albany.
Click to access 616p12a2.pdf
The charter is for five years – New York City and Buffalo can also authorize charter schools, although final approval must be by either the Board of Regents or SUNY. (The State University of NY)
A charter school must comply with federal and state law as well as reach the goals set in the initial application. The definition of a charter school is a school free of regulation by the school district.
In the fifth year of operation the charter school files for reauthorization and undergoes an in-depth review by the chartering agency. The reauthorization can be for the full five years, a lesser number of years, or, in rare instances rejected and the school is closed.
In my experience the Board of Regents is stricter than New York City in both the initial and the reauthorization process.
I await a more careful analysis, although I think the change in the law is “Sound and Fury” signifying nothing.
LikeLike
Please can we consider the future of Our Global History & Geography Curriculum in communications. The what as well as the where of eduction is under assault!
How aware are the parents of this short-sighted, profit making switch and bait operation?
A 14 year old American will know less of global affairs than his/her global counterpart, if this is allowed to proceed.
It will be outrageous to teach the Renaissance without a reference to Ancient Greece
or Rome. Amnesia of the beginnings of civilization will lead to our demise.
See Below:
NYSED Announces Transition Plan for the
New Global History and Geography II Regents Exam
The New York State Education Department (NYSED) released a transition plan today for statewide implementation of the new Regents Exams aligned to the K-12 Social Studies Framework. The plan includes the following dates and exam formats:
TRANSITION YEAR
June 2018, August 2018, and January 2019:
The Global History and Geography Regents Exam in the “old” format(50 multiple choice, 1 thematic essay, and 1 DBQ) will be modified to measure only content from 1750 through the present.
OVERLAP PERIOD
June 2019, August 2019, January 2020, and June 2020:
The “new” Global History and Geography II Regents Exam will be first administered in June2019. Both the “new” exam and the “old”exam (measuring only content from 1750 through the present) will be administered during this period. During these administrations, districts will be allowed to accept passing scores on either of the Global Regents Exams to satisfy diploma requirements.
POST-TRANSITION
August 2020 – onward:
Only the “new” Global History and Geography II Regents Exam will be offered.
Linda Noble, Educator
Brooklyn College Academy
Social Studies Teacher
LikeLike
Linda,
There is no “measuring” going on with these tests. There is assessing, evaluating and/or judging going on but no measurement as there is no agreed upon standard unit of measurement, no standard of that unit against which one can calibrate a measuring device and there is no measuring device. Since all that is the case how can there be “measuring”???
The misuse and abuse of the English language by almost all involved in public education (and its discourse) is appalling. The lack of “fidelity to truth” in that discourse is appalling. And the discourse itself as a logical system of thought/practices is appalling.
LikeLike