A good and balanced article in the New York Times about the division among black organizations about charters.
The writer, Kate Zernike, also wrote this stunning article about the failure of school choice in Detroit. Lots of choice but no good choices.
Howard Fuller runs Black Alliance for Educational Options. BAEO has been lavishly funded by rightwing foundations for many years, to advocate for vouchers and charters.
Shavar Jeffries, of course, speaks for Democrats for Educational Reform, which has zero roots in the black community. Its members and funders are hedge fund managers. DFER probably hired him so it would have a voice in this conversation. It has long claimed to speak for “the civil rights movement,” but no one could take that claim seriously when DFER consists only of billionaires, millionaires, and others whose roots are in Wall Street, not Main Street or Harlem or BedStuy.
The NAACP and Black Lives Matter are indeed grassroots activists who advocate for improvements in policies that affect the black community.
The debate will heat up as more and more black parents in places like Philadelphia, Detroit, Newark, Camden, St. Louis, and Baltimore see their public schools underfunded, understaffed, and losing resources to charters.
I thought it was waaayy too pro charter but maybe i’m wrong. balance would be no charter boosters quoted, given the bias of The Times.
True
I agree with Lauren. Kate barely put forth the NAACP/BLM argument for the moratorium before quoting grasstops mouthpieces like Shavar about how misguided they are. This is the article that should have appeared AFTER the article explaining what the NAACP/BLM resolutions stated.
thank you Dorothy. I was hoping someone else would see what I saw.
Dorothy, you are right.
Let NAACP-BLM story be told before the paid shills are called in
It seems less like there is a division among black organizations than a division between black organizations and black shills of white billionaires.
One can barely trust the NY Times. It is a corporate piece of machinery, and while I would never vote for Trump if I could vote, I think it is disgusting that the NY Times has article after article showing disapproval of Trump, a bias towards Hillary, and no mention of the DNC staff members who have died or were murdered. The NY Times written about an analysis as to why people, however ignorant they are, would be attracted to Trump, and therein lies a great deal of populist angst.
They don’t write about how bought and paid for Hillary is.
They downgraded Bernie Sanders at every possible opportunity they could gather.
The NY Times is supposed to be a fact finding and fact reporting instrument, not one big fat editorial. There is no balance.
Still, I will personally take whatever anti-charter school articles I can get.
Norwegian,
Trump is running against three opponents:
1. Hillary
2. The Republican Party
3. The media
@Filmmaker–Why would Hillary change?
No one has threatened to vote for Jill Stein instead of Hillary.
All Hillary reads is “I’m going to hold my nose and vote for Hillary because I hate Trump.”
What message does that send to Clinton?
This message: I am voting for Hillary no matter who she sells me out to.
I am not voting for Hillary. She has not earned my vote as a teacher. That doesn’t mean I’m voting for Trump, but I’m certainly not voting for her.
Teachers, in their rush to hate Trump, have signaled to Hillary that, regardless of what she does, she has their vote.
From the NY Times article:
“But Mr. Stewart said a moratorium on charters would effectively make black parents “wards of the state.”
“That’s just stupid,” he said. “Can you imagine us saying that with police forces? ‘They’re good institutions. All we need to do is double down on supporting them.’”
I almost fell off my chair when I read this comment. Here you have a pro-charter advocate claiming that the answer to problematic and/or corrupt police departments cannot be addressed by working to reform them. Instead we should open competing “charter” police departments and take the money from the regular police department and give it to those new private police departments. Problem solved!
I am trying to imagine what the “charter” police department that Mr. Stewart is advocating would do. Could it simply refuse to patrol in certain neighborhoods it found too expensive to patrol? Target families who seemed to be “trouble” and make them feel some patently “misery” until they moved away and out of their jurisdiction? The only oversight being a board whose main purpose is to promote private police forces? Surely some nice police “reformers” could get very rich working for the privatization of police force movement.
I am glad Kate Zernike allowed the reformers to speak for themselves. Whenever reporters ask follow up question — which they rarely do — and force reformers to confront their inane statements, they reveal their real motives. And it isn’t about the kids at all. Or maybe it is about some of the kids but certainly not all of them.
Private police forces would do all the things you mentioned and more. When Marcus Crassus had the only fire brigade in ancient Rome, he would rush his brigade to a burning house and negotiate with the owner to buy the house. If he didn’t get a real bargain, he would let the house burn down. We need public fire protection, we need public police forces, and we need public education.
Privileged-consumer “public” services…
“But Mr. Stewart said a moratorium on charters would effectively make black parents “wards of the state.”
When I read this statement, I started to cringe because it is exactly the same type of reformy language as calling public schools “government” schools. This is supposed to convey a negative connotation. Public is the correct word because public schools serve all members of the public supporting our common, collective future. Word choice sends a message, and that is why I prefer corporate school to charter school.
While the NY Times attempted to present a more balanced discussion, I didn’t think they went into much depth, and they glossed over some of the issues associated with charters. With two major African American groups calling for a moratorium on charter expansion, at least the NY Times feels compelled to cover the story. It is a small step forward.
Whether it is in Chicago, Detroit, or in Nampa-Caldwell Idaho, charter schools do a disservice to children of color. Not only do kids get the back of the bus treatment but communities often have to shell out more in taxes. Does commonsense prevail. Not when the politicians are on board. In Idaho, a community can reject a charter school but it does not matter because the state can over-ride local control. https://idahospromise.org/2016/08/21/charter-school-price-now-also-includes-loss-of-voting-for-local-school-board/
The Walmart-ization of schools in pursuit of better test scores (because that’s how charters promote their “high quality.”
What the reformers won’t tell anyone is about the long-term effects of such a system. No more neighborhood schools means no more neighborhood cohesion. Schools with lotteries and attrition rates will continue to sift through the best acclimated students to get those test scores. The whole system becomes a marketing competition for the best test takers.
And very little is gained. Most people hover within a stone’s throw of average. That won’t ever change. So in the end, if a system fully charterizes, a city ends up with virtually the same quality schools overall. And what gets lost? Community voice. Community cohesion. Middle class pay for teachers. (But not high salaries for administrators!)
I know the reformers would say: But loom at how much New Orleans has improved since Katrina! But, did you ever notice that their barometer always starts the year before Katrina? You know, when the hurricane changed the demographics by washing out the most impoverished parts of the city. Ever notice how they never compare say 2010 to 2015? It’s because the needle hasn’t moved in that time. (And even shameless researcher Douglas Harris sadly noted the large numbers of New Orleans kids unaccounted for in school enrollment lists.)
So, yeah, go the charter route. All a community has to do is give up its voice (no elected school boards), its cohesion and fight each other tooth and nail to get in that one school that kills it on tests. Sounds wonderful!
Walmart-ization indeed .
So a family that is chiefly responsible for a race to the bottom and enslavement in poverty level wages. That is the chief benefactor of the outsourcing of American jobs that leaves American’s black and white in poverty . That is a proponent of vouchers in a thinly veiled attempt to provide funding for segregated schools. Is the chief source of funds for this organization.
If I were Black there would be a description I would use. I will just second West Coast on this one. Shills !!!!
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Black_Alliance_for_Educational_Options
Corey Booker on the Board of Directors. Senator Shill.
Glad to see people are on to the the scam perpetrated by Harold Fuller and BAEO. In Philadelphia we have been dealing with them for ten years. They were instrumental in the take over of Philadelphia by the state in 2001. They are still trying to create ethnic divisions to promote the Walton Foundation’s agenda of privatization of public schools. This article is two years old, so the information about the NAACP is dated, but it has a lot of history about BAEO and its connections with the Walton Foundation. http://www.defendpubliceducation.net/corporate-education-reform-and/
The corporate reformers are all about money, money, money … and how with everything in life, money or earning power is the proof in the pudding, the standard upon which everything should be judged. (That’s why the charter operators pay themselves so much … Charter CEO Eva Moskowitz raking in $570,000/year)
Thus, part of their strategy is ….
“Hey, don’t waste money on useless frills of a so-called rich curriculum — the arts, music, drama, foreign languages, a fully functioning library with a credentialed librarian, physical education, etc. Stick to test prep, test prep, test prep… and MORE test prep to attain those all-important high test scores that we can later brag about as proof that privately-managed charters rock.”
For example, charter operators and proponents claim how, in contrast to the graduates of traditional public schools, charter schools will help their students — the ones who attend and graduate from those charter schools — make more money in their adult careers, and thus, lead to a move from the working class to the middle class. Unfortunately however, the charteristas argue, the evil “status quo” that puts adult interests ahead of children’s interests (i.e. teachers unions) is keeping more charters from opening, and that’s just keeping the kids of color trapped in a permanent underclass.
However, in a study conducted by the pro-charter, corporate ed. reform darling Roland Fryer, the results indicate that — in every demographic, apples-to-apples comparison — CHARTER SCHOOL GRADUATES MAKE LESS MONEY LATER ON AS ADULTS THAN THE THE GRADUATES OF TRADITIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS from the same demographic, ethnic, and socio-economic groups.
Doh! (as Homer Simpson would say)
That’s right, Homer. The study shows that those test scores — and the other strategies employed in charter schools (i.e. “No Excuses discipline / school management) — so coveted by Eva and the other charter operators and promoters DO NOT *** repeat *** DO NOT LEAD to higher earnings later in life.
Again, this study comes from Roland “Two-Tier” Fryer, no less:
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/texanomics/article/Do-charter-schools-help-kids-earn-more-as-adults-9143452.php?t=afc19008cb438d9cbb&cmpid=twitter-premium
(at least Roland’s honest enough not to bury the study 😉 … though his charter lobby friends are probably vexed that he didn’t.)
——————————————–
EXCERPT: (link from above link — CAPS are mind, Jack)
“The findings:
” — On average, CHARTER SCHOOLS HAVE no meaningful effect on test scores or employment, and actually have a slight NEGATIVE IMPACT ON EARNINGS.
” — The results are slightly better for so-called ‘no excuses’ charters, which feature stricter discipline and extended instructional hours — they increased test scores and four-year college enrollment and HAD NO EFFECT ON EARNINGS.
” — Regular charter schools boosted two-year college enrollment, but DEPRESSED test scores, four-year college enrollment, and EARNINGS.
“The authors aren’t able to come to any solid conclusions about why charter schools don’t seem to have the positive impact that their backers have touted. Perhaps it’s still too early for the potential of charters to have been fully realized. Or maybe,THE FOCUS ON IMPROVING TEST SCORES CAME AT THE EXPENSE OF PROGRAMS LIKE ART AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES THAT HAVE VALUE WHEN LOOKING FOR A JOB.
“It is plausible this is due to the growing pains of an early charter sector that was ‘building the plane as they flew it,’ the authors write, attempting to explain their results.
“Much more troubling, it seems, is the possibility that WHAT IT TAKES TO INCREASE ACHIEVEMENT (i.e. higher test scores) AMONG THE POOR IN CHARTER SCHOOLS DEPRIVES THEM OF OTHER SKILLS THAT ARE IMPORTANT FOR LABOR MARKETS.
“The charter school lobby hews towards that first explanation, saying it’s simply too early to measure labor market outcomes from a sector that’s only 20 years old, especially when most improvements have been made in the last decade.
” ‘We invite the authors of this study to continue their work with the entire charter school population over the next several years,’ said David Dunn, director of the Texas Charter Schools Association. ‘We are sure they will find results of positive impact.’
“Of course, this is just one contribution from one state to an increasingly vast literature on the impact of charter schools — some negative, some positive. Just today, Texas released evaluations for all schools in the state, and labeled charters as ‘needs improvement’ at nearly twice the average rate. Charter proponents, meanwhile, point to studies showing that charter school quality has already improved markedly, and that their students progress faster in both math and reading.
“But Dobbie and Fryer’s findings are also one of the first to measure lifetime earnings potential, not just academic performance, and suggests that CHARTER SCHOOLS MIGHT NOT HAVE THE KIND OF IMPACT ON ECONOMIC MOBILITY THAT REFORMERS HAVE HOPED.”
——————————————–
In Nov Massachusetts may decide to double-down on Two-Tiers’ duplicity.
They fund a false equivalence that the media responds to with Pavlovian consistency.
Did it not dawn on you. They(Billionaires behind ed reform ) own the media
It “dawned” but the power to frame arguments is insidious—their control extends beyond ownership and direct pressure. They colonize minds.
I would appreciate some help with this. I was glad to see Tony Messenger express outrage about the St. Louis problem with lead, compared to how small or non existent the problem is in nearby more wealthy areas. But there is an unbreakable rule with St. Louis writers. If, within the school system itself, the charter schools , now at forty percent, have a 70 percent black population and brag about it being so integrated. The 60 percent non charters have 88 percent black population and and almost all the leaded water fountains.
joe prichard @kjoe77 · 13m13 minutes ago
@palan57 StL has lead for 88% black population in non charters. 70% black students in charters have good water.http://interact.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1187352&sid=867d25d4d2ab92ebfe83bc2eeb0af746 …
the unbreakable rule with St. Louis reporters is to not report anything negative regarding charter schools. Slps has quietly grown to 10,500 out of 27,000 charter school students. How many of the behavior problems, and special needs children most vulnerable to the medical consequences of lead in drinking water are safely enrolled in the charters?
I looked at the study from Stanford that linked in this article that show charters have better gains in some urban areas, because I found it surprising and upsetting. I am concerned that it didn’t break down between students with mild disabilities and severe, as these are very different populations, the latter of which is not generally served by charters. I am also concerned that students were considered equivalents if they fell into categories such as black or low income. The study did not look into whether these students displayed behavioral challenges or had involved parents or were homeless. I don’t think it’s fair to claim that just by looking at race, ethnicity, income, and English learner status you can say you are looking at equivalent populations and compare scores. We know charters push out students with behavior problems, etc. Having worked in charter and public school settings, I feel that public schools tend to have harder to teach students in terms of factors not broken down in this study.
Sort of like being able to chose which poison with which to kill oneself.
NYT on segregation; very misleading title.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/milwaukee-segregation-wealthy-black-families.html?_r=0