Mercedes Schneider has been watching the money flowing in to Massachusetts from out of state to influence voters to lift the cap on charters.
While more than 100 school district boards have voted against Question 2, while the teachers’ union opposes it, it has the passionate support of hedge fund managers in New York City.
Thus far, about $12 million has been allocated to fight for charters; most of that money comes from out of state.
About half that much has been spent to defeat Question 2, mostly from the teachers’ unions, which understand that the charters will kill the union and remove teachers’ rights.
Will Massachusetts allow millionaires and billionaires in New York to create a dual school system in their state and privatize public money meant for public schools?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
What else can one say other than this is obscene, but also likely emerging as a pattern for taking over public education while keeping up the appearance of not rigging the vote.
This opportunity for philanthrocapitalism was created by the Supreme Court, Citizens United case.
And is very sadly sustained en force inside the new ESSA laws which philanthrocapitalists see as a dream come true.
It’s hard to believe that Sen. Elizabeth Warren is watching this money flow in and doesn’t care at all. When it comes to charters, she seems to be on the side of Wall Street and hedge fund money. No regulation necessary.
Here’s a twist.
The pro-charter Governor Baker seems to be a hypocrite on this out-of-state funding issue.
In Massachusetts, Governor Baker is desperate to stop the initiative that legalizes marijuana from passing, and his latest argument against its passages is that the “YES” campaign is being funded by ‘outside, out-of-state money trying to influence and internal matter for the state of Massachusetts, and those out-of-state marijuana forces are only putting the money up because they will financially benefit from its passage.
Hmmm … that sounds familiar …
Indeed, Governor Baker is also desperate to pass Question 2, which will lift the charter school cap, and expand charter schools, which is getting 20 times the out-of-state money that the marijuana initiative is getting, and the pro-Question 2 forces are also pouring in this money because they will financially benefit from Question 2’s passage.
So let’s review …
According to the Massachusetts’ governor…
It’s wrong for out-of-state pro-marijuana groups to fund the marijuana initiative because … well … marijuana is BAD, and those backers are just money-motivated pot-pushers.
But it’s right for out-of-state pro-charter forces —- Walton, Gates, Broad, etc. — to fund the charter school initiative because … charter schools are GOOD, and it’s good that those pro-charter forces will financially benefit from Question 2’s passage.
(NOTE: the first half of the article deals with all the campaign finance violations during Baker’s 2014 successful run for governor, and the recent “purge” the governor had to execute.)
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_politics/2016/09/dodgy_donors_prompt_56g_charlie_baker_purge?utm_content=buffer894ef&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
BOSTON HERALD:
“Baker is pushing two separate ballot questions — hoping to get a ‘yes’ on more charter schools and a ‘no’ on legalizing marijuana — and he is defending outside money on the former and condemning it on the latter fight.
“On the charter school push, campaigns supporting Question 2 have drawn millions of dollars from outside the state. The committee Great Schools Massachusetts, for example, took $1 million from a New York advocacy group in the past three weeks alone.
“ ‘We live in an internet age and that makes drawing lines around state borders on this tough and complicated,’ Baker said last week. ‘I think as long as the money is supporting an issue, it’s going to be really hard to draw a line … based on geography.’
“On the other hand, the campaign Baker is leading to oppose Question 4, which would legalize marijuana, has repeatedly pointed out that the question’s proponents have drawn the vast majority of their money from out of state.
“ ‘More Outside Marijuana Industry Money Flows Into Massachusetts,’
” … screamed the subject line of an email the committee sent — the day after Baker made his comments about how tough it is to keep outside money out of a ballot question campaign.
“Now, legalization opponents’ main argument is that all that outside money is coming from those who would benefit financially from the question passing. But the dual arguments — rationalizing the presence of outside money in one push and denouncing it another — creates a dichotomy that’s hard to ignore.”
Baker must be in the pockets of Big PharMa. I, myself am hoping for the day when I can de-stress with one of Mother Nature’s herbs instead of the offerings of our liquor industry. Ironic that tens of thousands of people die from Big PharMa’s products,a swell as from alcohol-related illnesses and violence. I dare not go near the herb now, as I cannot afford to put myself or my family at risk.
Drug prices are significantly cheaper in the other industrialized democracies (France, Canada, the UK, Germany, Finland, etc.) which also have true universal health care in which everyone is covered and no one goes bankrupt from medical costs. USA, USA, USA, unique, exceptional for profit over the people.
It takes a lot of cash to spread the ed reform mantra.
Here’s a typical ed reform piece on the unmitigated horror that is US public schools:
“Much of America’s public school system remains freeze-dried in obsolete teaching methods that reject the current needs and future career aspirations of young digital natives. Schools like Brooklyn LAB provide a compass to the future. Yet it remains unclear if other schools, within and without New York City, can learn from LAB, open themselves to educational innovations, and reinvent high school”
All their sites are like this. It’s a constant drumbeat- “public schools suck, charter schools are wonderful” . That’s what 10 million from Gates gets you, I guess.
http://educationpost.org/this-xq-super-school-in-brooklyn-is-providing-a-compass-to-the-future/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=Betcon&utm_content=TwBetconXQSuperSchoolBrooklynLw1
Did the “SuperSchools” competition award any money to public schools or were they the designated losers again? Weird how public schools never seem to win these totally unbiased competitions. What are the odds?
It is remarkable how often the Obama Administration promotes the Summit charter chain:
“One example of schools in which individual learning plans are used is Summit Public Schools, where each morning, students connect to their Personalized Learning Plans through their mobile devices. The plans contain both their short-term and long-term project views, the materials they need to complete their projects, and just-in-time formative feedback to improve their individual learning, all in one location.”
Is there any public school district in the country that gets this kind of promotion from the federal government? How did this one charter chain get all this access and clout in DC?
There’s a sex scandal that took place at the Summit Tahoma Charter school in San Jose that initially got some attention from the media, but then mysteriously the coverage ceased like the turning off of a blowtorch.
I’m trying to keep it alive. Here goes:
Well, I’ve been following the developing scandal occurring at a certain charter, Summit Tahoma San Jose Charter school.
It’s yet another example of the double standard:
— how charter school administration scandals are handled
VS.
— how traditional public schools scandals are handled
BELOW is a detailed story of a sex scandal at the Summit Tahoma Charter School in San Jose, CA,
First, here’s some TV news coverage of this that I just found:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2016/02/29/police-investigate-whether-sj-principal-broke-law-in-teacher-sex-case/
At this point when this was broadcast, there still existed the possibility that the principal at Summit Tahoma, Nicholas Kim, might face criminal charges, but as the story BELOW indicates, that never happened, or hasn’t yet happened.
And here is that more detailed story — relevant to the issue of deregulation of charters — that I’ve been sitting on for a couple months. (long post, but worth reading, trust me)
This sordid tale was going around at the California delegation at the NEA-RA convention held in D.C. in early July of this year. (and yeah, Ifreely concede that there’s a possibility of the story being embellished in the re-telling, as in the “telephone game” effect.
However, I was able to find some corroboration of the main facts in media reports available on the internet. (SEE ABOVE video news link.)
It’s about how Nicholas Kim, the current principal at a Summit Tahoma Charter School in San Jose:
1) heard a report that one of his teachers was having sex with a female student;
2) Kim conducts “an internal investigation,” where he, on his own, concluded that nothing happened, and thus, never goes to the authorities;
(This action on his part is a total violation of California law, and a major dereliction of duty, as he is not allowed to make that call NOT to tell the police. Like all adults working in a school setting — administrators, teachers, counselors, nurses, etc. — he is a mandatory reporter. Under penalty of jail and a steep fine for failing to do so, he MUST IMMEDIATELY contact the police. In LAUSD, we have to watch a video and take a test to this effect twice a year.
This situation is similar to when the officials at St. Hope charter school failed to report what Kevin Johnson was doing.)
3) it’s rumored by some (again, I heard this from some people at the NEA-RA in early July) that during the charter principal’s so-called “internal investigation,” he found out the story was true; it’s further alleged that, instead of reporting this to authorities as he was legally required, he pressured both the student and the teacher to deny the affair if and when any police or any other oversight authority questions them as in
“Do this — deny, deny, deny no matter what — and it will all go away.”
“You don’t want ruin Mr. So-and-so’s life and send him to prison. Do you?”
… or words to that effect.
(UPSHOT: the best interests and reputation of the Summit Charter Schools are more important than the well-being of the schools students, or following the law, or removing a teacher whom the principal knows full well likes to get it on with underage girls.)
4) even though the principal allegedly tried to bury the story, the word got out anyway, and — THANK JESUS!!!! — a non-involved parent did what the principal had a mandatory legal requirement to do, but did not — she called the police;
5) the police, responding to that parent’s reporting, show up at the school site while the principal is off-campus, and the assistant principal allows the police to question the girl in question in a private room;
6) the questioning starts just as the principal arrives back at the school;
7) the principal discovers what’s going on, and frantically calls the Summit charter chain’s main headquarters, and talks his superior and the charter chain’s lawyer, who tells them the principal has a legal right (???!!!) to barge in to the room, stop the police questioning, and order the police to leave. Incredibly he attempts to do just that, invoking the legal advice he was just given over the phone to the police present;
8) the police tells the principal that their Summit Charter School chain’s lawyers or management to whom he just spoke are in error, and furthermore, the police allegedly tell the principal that if he doesn’t back off, he will be charged with obstruction of justice, and handcuffed; suitably chagrined, he backs the-hell off, and shuts the-hell up;
9) the police questioning continues, but the girl sticks to her story — the same story that the principal allegedly pressured her earlier to tell — nothing sexual happened between her and the teacher;
(Whew! That was a close one! … ehhh … Not so fast, Principal Kim!)
10) later, the girl is questioned again by police at her family’s house, and away from the allegedly obstructing principal, she spills the beans;
11) the teacher is arrested and is currently being prosecuted;
(He’s a goa-teed loser, from the mug shot in the media coverage BELOW… “Seriously Dude, does affecting that ‘Robin Hood look’ help you score with the girls whom you teach?” Sweet Jesus! God save us all! )
12) the principal and Summit Charter School put out a very carefully and legally vetted statement, saying that the school’s administration is happy that the evil pedophile teacher has been removed, that’s what they wanted all along if the story was true, and that, contrary to the gossip that been going around, he and the Summit Tahoma Charter school administration cooperated with authorities at all times, and they view the well-being of the victim and of all their students as paramount … blah-blah-blah…
———————————————
Quite a yarn? Ayy?
Here’s more actual media coverage I was able to find corroborating the this rumor/story floating around the NEA-RA convention in D.C. this July:
http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_29568103/san-jose-house-probe-teacher-student-tryst-elicits
The police and other authorities were furious at principal’s outrageous claim that he could simply conduct his own investigation, and then conclude on his own whether or not this matter did warranted contacting the police.
William Grimm, senior attorney for the National Center for Youth Law based in Oakland was quoted in the above article link, and did not mince words:
——————————————
SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS:
” ‘The fact that he decided to take some of his time to investigate it automatically means it crosses the threshold of ‘reasonable suspicion,’ he (Grimm) said. ‘And what expertise does the principal have in identifying potential teacher-student sexual relationships?
” ‘He (the principal himself) posed a danger to the school by doing this and not having the qualifications necessary.’ ”
——————————————
When the principal of Summit Tahoma Charter, Nicholas Kim, entered the room where police were questioning the alleged victim of a teacher’s molestation, this transpired:
——————————————
SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS:
“And in the early stages of the police investigation at Summit Tahoma Public School, the same principal, Nicholas Kim, burst into a room to demand police stop interviewing the alleged victim, only to be rebuffed by a sex-crimes detective. This came a short time after the detective reminded the principal about his duty to report any potential child abuse allegation; the principal asserted he was following the direction of his management and legal team.”
——————————————
Here’s some of Summit’s legally vetted statement about this affair:
——————————————
SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS: (with my editorial NOTE’s in parentheses)
“In a statement to this newspaper, Kim (and the Summit Charter chain) wrote that …
” ‘At no point was there any intent by the school to conceal or hide any information. We acted in good faith. Under the circumstances and evidence available to us, we acted immediately and with speed to find all information. When we received information we followed up according to legal requirement.’
(NOTE: “followed up according to legal requirement”
TRANSLATION …chose not to go to the police when he heard a report alleging sexual abuse of a minor, so that, had the parent not gone on his or her own and reported it to the police himself or herself, no one would have ever been the wiser, and that goa-teed Robin-Hood-looking perv would still be on the loose preying on minors at San Jose’s Summit Tahoma Charter School.)
” ‘Once law enforcement became involved and interrogated the student, new evidence came to light that we acted on immediately.’
(NOTE: while that “new evidence did eventually “come to light” in the context of a police interview, it was no thanks to either Principal Kim, or to the Summit Management or to its legal team who gave Principal Kim the ridiculous and unlawful direction to barge in the room where police were questioning a witness, and attempt to stop this information from “coming to light”. Therefore, it’s DESPITE Principal Kim and his Summit Charter superiors, that the truth DID, in fact, “come to light,’ NOT BECAUSE of them.)
“The District Attorney’s Office said Friday that Kim’s decision not to notify police or Child Protective Services was not a violation of the mandated reporter law because the rumor alone did not create a level of ‘reasonable suspicion’ abuse had occurred, as the state penal code requires.
(NOTE: Now, this bit gets me really steamed.
I don’t know if the Summit charter folks are plugged in with, or have clout with the police in San Jose, so much so that they able to elicit such a statement and treatment from the local police, but I can say with absolute certainty:
THIS NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN ACCEPTABLE WITH EITHER LAPD, or WITH LAUSD management. (especially in the wake of the Miramonte fiasco a few years back.)
ALL HELL WOULD HAVE RAINED DOWN ON ANY LAUSD PRINCIPAL — or teacher or administrator or other mandated reporter working in an LAUSD school — WHO ACTED THUSLY — both from the police, and from LAUSD administration. He or she would have been canned, banned from education for life, and probably prosecuted and fined, if not imprisoned.
What’s wrong you guys up in San Jose?
Once again, you see the difference between what goes on in a traditional public school setting, and in a deregulated charter setting.)
——————————————
SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS:
“The code reads, in part:
” ‘Reasonable suspicion’ does not require certainty that child abuse or neglect has occurred nor does it require a specific medical indication of child abuse or neglect; any ‘reasonable suspicion’ is sufficient.”
” ‘Where we see administrators making mistakes is when they have a victim telling them that some abuse occurred and then the administrator does their own investigation to see if it’s accurate, to see if it’s true,’ Assistant District Attorney Terry Harman said.
” ‘If you have a situation where what you’re hearing is a rumor and you’re not hearing from someone who saw something or someone who experienced something, then can you have a reasonable suspicion from what appears to be a rumor?’ ”
———————————–
Here’s more coverage of this:
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/San-Jose-teacher-arrested-for-allegedly-having-6855398.php
As I reflect on this charter school abomination, I wonder how Campbell Brown — that simultaneous privately-managed-deregulated-charter-lover, and crusader against teacher child-abusers — and her crack team of reporters at The 74 would handle this story, had it happened …
… at a traditional public school
VS.
… at a charter school … as it most certainly did in this case.
The former would have rated a sizzling expose article on Campbell’s The74 website, proving once again how horrible traditional public schools are … “Unionized teachers are pedophiles!!! And their administrators protect them!!! We need to close ’em all down, and convert them to privately-managed charters, where these horrible things NEVER happen.”
The latter? … Ehhh … not so much… as in … “Oh no. We need to bury this one folks. We can’t make charters look bad.”
On that score, here’s a piece about how reporters at The 74 are allegedly barred from reporting anything negative on charter schools.
(NOTE: since last fall, the Success Academy charter chain has faced on public relations disaster after another, and not a word from The 74 about any of them. Campbell Brown, naturally, serves of the Board of Directors of Success Academy charter schools)
———————————————-
DIANE RAVITCH:
“Jennifer Berkshire, aka EduShyster, got a tip about a journalist who applied for a job with The 74. She was told that the 74 news service needed investigative journalists but they would not cover the subject of charter school scandals. She shared her story with EduShyster but insisted on anonymity as revealing her name would be “career suicide.” EduShyster repeatedly reached out to a high-level official at The 74. Eventually he responded and insisted that he could not comment based on a report from an anonymous source.
“And of course, the site will be ‘fair and balanced.’ Where have we heard THAT before?”
Here’s the Edushyster story to which Dr. Ravitch refers:
http://edushyster.com/will-the-74-investigate-charter-scandals/
———————————————-
Indeed, this whole Summit Tahoma Charter School story goes to the heart of why it’s such a danger to allow charter school operators to be so free of regulation — as those in the charter school industry so often demand in order to … in their words … “be free to innovate” or whatever. … more like “free to cover up pedophile teachers on the loose at their school, so the charter school’s reputation doesn’t suffer any damage.”
I’ll say it again: regarding this situation at Summit Tahoma Charter School, these same events would NEVER have played out this way in a traditional public school, at least not without serious consequences for the administrators or any adults who acted the way Principal Kim and the Summit Charter School management did.
Here’s how it works in California, in a traditional public school:
Both teachers and administrators in traditional public schools are “mandated reporters.” They have to attend “mandated reporter” training twice every school year (I’ve taken it over 20 times), in which it is made loud and clear that once you have knowledge or suspicion that abuse has taken place, a 36-hour clock starts from that very moment.
If you don’t report it immediately, or within 36 hours at the latest,
1) the teacher or administrator will be fired;
2) the teacher or administrator will lose his/her credentials, and be banned from education for life;
and possibly …
3) be prosecuted as an accessory, if you collude with the perpetrator in covering up or destroying evidence.
In contrast to the way it works in LAUSD, with the adult administrators and teachers at a California charter … they apparently can get away with a lot … even if it puts children at risk of sexual predators.
=======================
PT. 2
Here’s another wrinkle to this story about Summit Tahoma Charter School sexual molestation scandal (just ABOVE).
The inexperienced principal who acted so outrageously, Nicholas Kim, was the same age as the alleged pedophile teacher, Zachary Drew, whom he hired to work at Summit, and whom he supervised during Drew’s alleged predations.
Here’s Nicholas Kim’s LinkedIn page:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicholas-kim-14638b90
Kim graduated college the same year, 2009, as as Zachary Drew, the alleged pedophile teacher, which makes them both around 29-30.
For a visual, here’s the goa-tee-less Zachary Drew:
http://calpoly.classfaqs.com/listings/view/Zachary-Drew#.V8weQIUVP-U
It’s from page identifying Drew as a professor at California Polytechnic (Wait! Did Cal Poly hire him after being arrested for sex with a minor? What’s up with THAT?!)
In short, both Principal Kim and Drew are contemporaries, or buddies.
While the motive of the charter chain’s brass and legal team was in suppressing this information was to protect the school’s and the Summit charter chain’s reputation, Kim’s motives may have been different or more personal. As a contemporary of Drew’s, as well as a fellow graduate of the California university system, Kim may have identified with Drew to the point where he put his friend Drew’s best interest — avoiding jail time for jail bait — against the well-being of the “jail bait” whom Drew was victimizing.
This points out one of the dangers of promoting teachers so young, so untrained, and so inexperienced in a position of high authority at a school site, and not mandating any kind Child Abuse Awareness Training.(CAAT, as it’s abbreviated in LAUSD.)
If Kim had been properly trained on child abuse protocols — as he would have been had he worked in a regulated traditional public school under the oversight of a district… and not in an unregulated charter school — Kim never would have barged into a police interview of an alleged victim, then ridiculously ordered the police to cease questioning and leave the building. (Sweet Jesus! You gotta have big cojones to try and pull that off! Either that, or you’re a complete idiot!)
Once more, had Principal Nicholas Kim obstructed justice like that in LAUSD, he would have been immediately put on leave, then fired soon after.
Here’s another story relevant to the Summit Charter School molestation scandal.
In late May of this year, there was a protest of African-American students against the racist school discipline policies, and the lack of African-American teachers at their privately-managed charter school — Achievement First Amistad (a better-named school there never was… look up Amistad) in Connecticut.
I noticed the same thing about the principal in the Amistad situation. Her name is Claire Polcrack. From the newspaper accounts, Polcrack was bungling the whole situation, and seemed to be way in over her head. Like Nicholas Kim, she was way young for the job …. just 28. I called this the Doogie-Howser-ization of school administration (That’s for you Gen-X-ers out there. For the Boomers, you can call it the Bugsy-Malone-ization of school administration).
The charter chains are so desperate to expand as quickly as possible that they put people in charge who have neither the experience, training, nor the innate ability to pull off performing on the job.
Dr. Ravitch covered Amistad situation here:
Again, in the article, the school’s principal in the picture is Claire Polcrack, who has a Linked-in page:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/claire-polcrack-37340411b
According to this, Principal Polcrack’s career trajectory was the following:
Age 22, TFA teacher for two years, (right out of college in 2009 same year as Kim and Drew … hmmm … coincidence?)
Age 24, TFA aluma and staff teacher (2011)
Age 26, Academic Dean (2013)
Age 28, Principal (June 2015)
Age 29 (today), 1st-year Principal facing a public relations disaster
Wow, that was fast!
Actually, this is nothing. In Los Angeles, I’ve heard of charter school principals as young as 24 (!!!). WTF?!
Chew on that for a while.
Mark my words, if and when Eli Broad commences his program of adding 260 more corporate ed. reform charter schools to the LAUSD landscape, this “Doogie Howser-ization” of school site management will become a routine and a widespread practice. The charter folks will be forced to do so, as there simply isn’t enough seasoned, trained talent with years of experience to fill those administrative positions.
Nobody will ever be able to tell me that this will be good for the kids being educated in those schools, or for the teachers working under the amateur principals — as is evidenced in the cases of Summit-San Jose’s Nicholas Kim, and Achievement First Amistad’s Claire Polcrack.
Indeed, this is very common in corporate Charter World. That child-abusing Charlotte Dial, the Success Academy teacher from the infamous “rip-and-redo” video …
… is only in her 20’s, and instead of being fired for the above abomination, has been put charge of training Success Academy teachers system-wide. Again, WTF?
Contrast this with LAUSD, where the process of becoming a principal is not so rushed. There’s more of a dues paying process, with greater requirements and demands for those who are aspiring to achieve the role of principal. A future principal usually teaches at least 10 years, before moving up to the position of Coordinator, a sort of hybrid administrator/teacher position, where he or she remains part of UTLA. A “Coordinator” has one foot in management’s camp, and one foot in labor’s.
After a few years — at least two — as a coordinator, they may move up to serve as Assistant Principal for a few more years. They attend a district training program while serving as coordinator to prep for the move to A.P. Only the most select move up to be an A.P. After several years as an A.P. — sometimes more than a decade — they finally achieve the role of principal.
In short, one attains a principal-ship (Is that a real word? At the very earliest, in your late 30’s at the absolute earliest.
“Throughout the entire decade-and-a-half-plus process, one is mentored by principals, seasoned pros with decades of experience. Prospective principals are followed and monitored closely to see if they can cut it, or have what it takes. I’ve seen many Assistant Principals — wanna-be principals — who get moved permanently back to a teaching position, after being deemed not up to snuff.
Anyway, by the time one survives this and becomes a principal, they know what they’re doing, or should. (with the rarest exceptions… another story or stories)
This is not a slight on Ms. Polcrack’s teaching ability, who appears to have been a top-notch Math teacher (TFA ain’t all bad). It’s just that she seemed to be way in over her head as principal, at least moreso than she would have in a program run like LAUSD’s.
(UPDATE: she was removed as principal at the end of the school year, around June 2016.)
What’s the origin of the “Bugsy-Malone-ization” of charter school administration?
For a little late Baby Boomer nostalgia, here’s Bugsy Malone (which first put Scott “Chachi-from-HAPPY-DAYS” Baio on the map):
For the “Doogie Howser-ization” reference, here’s a trailer or commercial for that show which makes my point — the front office of so many charter schools are staffed by far too many unqualified Doogie Howser’s running the show:
However, Doogie is eminently qualified for his profession … albeit he’s a fictional character.
Reblogged this on Mister Journalism: "Reading, Sharing, Discussing, Learning" and commented:
Mercedes Schneider: More New York Millions Arrive in Massachusetts to Sway Voters on Charters
by dianeravitch
Mercedes Schneider has been watching the money flowing in to Massachusetts from out of state to influence voters to lift the cap on charters.
While more than 100 school district boards have voted against Question 2, while the teachers’ union opposes it, it has the passionate support of hedge fund managers in New York City.
Thus far, about $12 million has been allocated to fight for charters; most of that money comes from out of state.
About half that much has been spent to defeat Question 2, mostly from the teachers’ unions, which understand that the charters will kill the union and remove teachers’ rights.
Will Massachusetts allow millionaires and billionaires in New York to create a dual school system in their state and privatize public money meant for public schools?
dianeravitch | September 25, 2016 at 1:00 pm | Categories: Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Massachusetts, Privatization | URL: http://wp.me/p2odLa-fiy