Politico reports that Democrats for Education Reform, the hedge funders’ charter advocacy group, is not happy with the amendments to the platform proposed by supporters of public schools Troy LaRaviere of Chicago and Chuck Pascal of Pennsylvania:
NO CANDIDATE LEFT BEHIND: While Democrats have yet to publish their most recent platform language, education-focused groups are already sniping about it. American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten said the new language “represents a refreshing sea change in its approach to public education” and “makes it clear that Democrats are committed to ending the failed era of test-and-sanction.” AFT is pointing to amendments to the draft language it says were adopted in Orlando during the weekend platform meeting – amendments that voice support for parents who want to opt their children out of standardized tests, demand more accountability for charter schools, and oppose using student test scores in teacher evaluations. All of those stances are favored by teachers unions.
– But Shavar Jeffries, the president of Democrats for Education Reform, called the amendments an “unfortunate departure from President Obama’s historic education legacy” and said that these changes came about because the platform drafting committee “inexplicably” allowed the process to be “hijacked.” Your dutiful Morning Education scribes will post the final platform draft as soon as it’s available.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
This is when education activists will prove whether we have what it takes to make change. Or if throwing stones from afar is as far as they’ll go. What happened in Orlando was remarkable. No wonder those in unelected positions of power are freaking out. The people are taking charge. It’s fantastic.
I am flabbergasted by the audacity of the education profiteers whining about the amended Democratic Platform. This is The United States. We fought our original war of independence over government policies such as Taxation Without Representation and The Quartering Act.
As I work on presentations to inform Massachusetts’ citizens about the destructive ballot question we will have on our November ballot (Question #2), these two tyrannical actions keep popping into my mind. We must once again say “NO” to tyranny. The ballot question would allow 12 new charter schools in Massachusetts every year,
forever. These can be placed anywhere in the state. If, and only if, there are more than 12 good looking applications, is the BESE to give priority to low performing districts!
Our current Commonwealth Charter schools, the ones addressed in the initiative, are given their charters through the autonomous power of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE). Members of the BESE are appointed, not elected. They do not represent anybody. The Secretary of Education and Chair of the Board are open proponents for charters. James Peyser, Secretary of Education, has publicly declared that no teachers should have to be certified or licensed in response to a question about the certification of charter school teachers. Secretary Peyser doesn’t think teachers should have to go through all the paperwork!
Our charter laws stipulate that the financial or social impact a new charter school might have on sending districts is not to be considered in the BESE’s decision about granting a charter. Local elected officials can have absolutely no expectation that Charter Schools will account to them for their financial or educational actions. Their records are not public and not subject to FOIA. The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), alone, has the responsibility to oversee charter schools. According to recent reports from our State Auditor, DESE has minimal records and even less evidence of analysis of the financial or educational actions taken by charter schools.
This is Taxation Without Representation and Quartering. Towns are forced to open their community, public school funds, and students to charter schools that have been quartered there by the BESE who will not even consider the desires of impacted tax payers.
DFER already has annual testing and the bottom 5% hogwash in the ESSA. They already lost the ability to push VAM. They lost it in the ESSA. They have little about which to complain. They will simply unleash their lobbying power on states and large, metropolitan districts. There is one particular thing about the improved Dem platform, though, that I really like. It’s the line about democratic governance of schools.
I student taught at a great charter school in 1997, before the international hostile, corporatist takeover of the 21st century. It was a charter school that answered to a democratically elected district board. The board just gave the principal authority to let teachers and parents run the school. Once a week, all the teachers and many of the parents filled the cafeteria to make the budget and design the curriculum together. It was a great charter school. It was a PUBLIC charter school. I think that model is still viable.
A good charter school industry is not viable in Ohio. Campaign donors enabled gerrymandering, which opened the door for charter school contracts that give property, bought by tax payers, to charter school operators, and contracts that allow, payments to charters that make a service available, not actually, deliver it to students. Boards are not democratically elected and they are ineffective (see newspaper reports about Gunlock’s tenure on a charter school board. He heads the Ohio State Board of Education.)
The only way to rout the ed profiteers (rather in non-profits or, for-profits) is the elimination of charter schools. No community tax dollars. No state tax dollars. No federal tax dollars. Bear in mind, Wall Street makes a 10-18% return on charter school debt. The goal of Gates-funded New schools Venture Fund, is “to develop charter management organizations that produce a diverse supply of different brands on a large scale.”
Here are the key questions for the Democratic Party and for Hillary Clinton to definitively answer regarding the amended Party platform in regard to public education:
The amended platform states: “We support democratically governed great neighborhood public schools and high-quality public charter schools.” QUESTIONS THAT MUST BE ANSWERED: 1. Does the phrase “democratically governed” apply to both “neighborhood public schools” and equally to “high-quality public charter schools”? 2. And if the phrase applies equally to both, does that mean that the Party will, if Clinton is elected President, push the passage of legislation that requires today’s non-public (because they are not democratically governed by publicly-elected school boards) charter schools must be governed by publicly-elected charter school boards or by the publicly-elected school board of the district within whose boundaries the charter schools operate? Unless a charter school is governed by a publicly-elected school board, it is not a public school and should not receive tax money. Today, there are no “public charter schools.”
Next, the amended platform states: “We support increased transparency and accountability for all charter schools.” QUESTION THAT MUST BE ANSWERED: Does that mean that if Clinton is elected President, the Party will push through the passage of legislation that requires all charter schools to file at least the same detailed public-domain audited financial statements showing how the public’s tax money is spent that genuine public schools file? Filing the same public domain financial statements as true public schools file is a minimum requirement for charter schools that use public tax money.
The answer to these questions is “When the people demand it.” The platform is a guideline–and it has to pass at the convention. We need to send it to our delegates and elected officials, and remind them of their ability to fulfill it not just the President but everyone from City Council to Mayor to State Legislator to Congress and Senate. Tell your electeds and candidates now that you support the platform.
This was the quote from today’s Morning Education which caught my attention:
excerpt:
NO CANDIDATE LEFT BEHIND: Education Post Executive Director Peter Cunningham, a former Education Department official during Obama’s first term, writes in The 74 that the latest version of the Democratic Party platform was “adopted behind closed doors in Orlando” and “affirms an education system that denies its shortcomings and is unwilling to address them.” Education reformers have fumed over the recent platform changes, grumbling that traditional public school advocates had an outsized influence on the process.
Traditional public school advocates had an outsized influence …on public education policies! What nerve! Who do they think they are – professionals or something?
Peter Cunningham was Arne’s communications director. Nice guy. Never an educator. Never taught. Got $12 million from billionaires to create Education Post and promote corporate reform
He made it obvoius at NPE 2016 that it’s just a job to him. The moment that demonstrate this came at the end of his conference session with Jennifer Berkshire. A Seattle parent, voice shaking with anger, stood up and said “You are hurting real people. Do you understand that?” Cunningham made no response at all.
The pro-public school side has the passion of its convictions and are volunteers. The reformsters are just grifters.
Cunningham is spinning what really happened into the tired narrative about “status quo”. The actual truth is much more significant and will be harder for DFER to influence. The chair of the Platform Committee announced that this platform process was more public than any in decades. Although I never felt the Bern, I give credit to the Sanders campaign for engaging grassroots activists into the process, which they saw through to Orlando. DFER cannot buy that kind of involvement. God knows, they’ve tried. Now it is up to us to make sure our delegates to the convention know how intentional and important these amendments are. You better believe DFER is working the delegate list at this very moment.