Ten percent of the children in California attend privately-managed charter schools. But that small number of students has the most powerful and richest lobby in the state, funded by billionaires.
The overwhelming majority of charters are non-union, which appeals to the Walton family, the richest family in America, with a net worth of $130 billion or more, produced by their non-union Walmart stores. It appeals to billionaire Eli Broad, who never saw a charter he didn’t like. It appeals to billionaire NETFLIX founder Reed Hastings, who wants to eliminate the nation’s school boards.
The charter lobby gives large sums to individual candidates, both Democrats and Republicans. Their major adversary, the California Teachers Association, spends most of its lobbying money on issues, not individual candidates. When there is more funding, both charter schools and public schools benefit.
The charter lobby uses its influence to increase its power and its numbers. It wants more: more money, more schools, more students. It wants less accountability, less regulation, less transparency, and less oversight.
In the past, the charter lobby relied on Republicans to sponsor its bills. Because of its spending, it now has Democrats on board too.
“Though the union gave nearly $29.5 million in political contributions in 2015 and 2016, most of it supported measures on the November 2016 ballot, and only $4.3 million of that went toward candidates and other committees. Conversely, the charter association spent more than $17 million in those years to help finance the campaigns of 137 local and state candidates, plus an additional $340,000 on various local and state measures.
“The teachers union instead focused most of its financial fire power on ballot initiatives, having spent roughly $21 million in 2015 and 2016 to support Proposition 55 – the successful measure that sustained past increases on income taxes to raise funds for schools – and an additional $1.7 million in 2016 on Proposition 58, which largely overrode restrictions on bilingual education in public schools.
“The charter school association committed just $4,678 to Proposition 55’s passing in 2016, state records indicate. Charter schools are also major beneficiaries of the revenues generated by Prop. 55’s passage…
“And while in past years the association partnered with Republicans to craft legislation, this year’s slate of sponsored bills was drafted entirely by Democrats. “That’s a big change for us,” Rand Martin, a lobbyist for the charter school association, told the March conference.”

“Walton family, the richest family in America, with a net worth of $130 billion or more, produced by their non-union Walmart stores”
In addition, non-union Walmart pays poverty wages to most of its employees and teaches them how to fill out forms for food stamps through SNAP. How much public money that pays for SNAP is used to subsidize Walmart’s poverty wage paid employees who mostly do not have any medical coverage?
“Walmart’s low-wage workers cost U.S. taxpayers an estimated $6.2 billion in public assistance including food stamps, Medicaid and subsidized housing, according to a report published to coincide with Tax Day, April 15.” … “It found that a single Walmart Supercenter cost taxpayers between $904,542 and $1.75 million per year, or between $3,015 and $5,815 on average for each of 300 workers.” …
“Walmart told analysts last year that the company has captured 18 percent of the SNAP market,” it reads. “Using that figure, we estimate that the company accounted for $13.5 billion out of $76 billion in food stamp sales in 2013.”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-walmart-workers-cost-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/#75e3ed4f720b
LikeLike
THANK YOU, Lloyd.
LikeLike
Is this correct?
“The charter school association committed just $4,678 to Proposition 55’s passing in 2016, state records indicate.
LikeLike
Yes. The charters rode on the coat tails of the CTA.
LikeLike
Let’s not forget what Eli Broad did in NJ. Paying $60,000 for a “consultant” for Broad grad Christopher Cerf when he was NJ Education Commissioner along with a “grant” of $430,000 with strings attached aimed at “’accelerat(ing)’ the pace of ‘disruptive’ and ‘transformational’ change”.
LikeLike
“that small number of students has the most powerful and richest lobby in the state, funded by billionaires.”
Diane, your own article points out that the unions spent more on lobbying. The union is still “the most powerful and richest lobby in the state”, even more so when you consider it’s ability to mobilize. It just can’t count on getting its way every time as it has for decades.
First to fall will be laws that seek to harm charters solely because they are viewed as competition. Lawmakers who aren’t beholden to the unions are able to see these thinly veiled efforts as having nothing to do with students’ educations. If it takes money to gain their independence, that’s unfortunate, but it’s a lesson learned from years of union political spending.
LikeLike
I like laws that attempt to regulate charter transparency, mistreatment of students in enrollment, misappropriation of funds, and quality of teacher credentials and subject content, especially online. I would also support laws that restrict charter growth, as would the NAACP and Black Lives, to stem the return of segregation. I like laws that return public and civic services to democratic, community control. I like public education.
LikeLike
“The union is still “the most powerful and richest lobby in the state”
Then why isn’t the teachers’ unions in California on this list of the top contributors in 2016 and who or what is FahrLLC?
https://www.opensecrets.org/states/donors.php?cycle=2016&state=CA
LikeLike
As the article points out, unions supported ballot initiatives and issu s this year way more than candidates.
LikeLike
Here’s what Open Secrets has to say about Teachers Unions
“Teachers unions have steadily amped up their political involvement: From 2004 to 2016, their donations grew from $4.3 million to more than $32 million — an all-time high. Even more than most labor unions”
https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=L1300
And why shouldn’t teachers fight for the survival of their profession through their labor unions?
For instance, just in 2016, 11,186 lobbyists spent $3.15 Billion dollars in the United States to influence the government.
$3.15 billion vs $32 million – what teachers’ unions spent lobbying for the interests of the teachers that pay dues.
https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/
I don’t think teachers’ unions are spending enough.
LikeLike
Sure, not disagreeing that they should spend to advocate for themselves. So should charter schools. And anything the union opposes will always be the underdog in the fight.
LikeLike
I’m still digging and found this from 2015.
“Charter school proponents were the biggest special-interest group in (New York) state politics in 2014, outspending teachers’ unions by better than a 2-to-1 ratio, according to a report released Wednesday.”
http://www.newsday.com/news/region-state/charter-school-backers-are-state-s-top-spenders-on-lobbying-1.10350459
For California: “Buttressed by its roughly $18 million in political spending in 2015 and 2016 by its political action arms, the California Charter Schools Association is a rising political force in California that’s challenging the teachers unions’ prowess in shaping local and state education law, at least when it comes to anything affecting the future of charter school growth.”
https://edsource.org/2017/californias-largest-charter-group-pushes-its-agenda-with-money-and-people-power/581044
LikeLike
Yes, that year in NYC was the first time they’ve been outspent. Guessing it won’t repeat for quite awhile, but we’ll see.
LikeLike
I did read a piece that pointed out the teachers’ unions are not specifically focusing on combating corporate charters and most of their lobbying efforts are in other areas that deal with education. After all, this is a war and there’s a lot of battles raging. For instance the Common Core, the high-stakes testing, vouchers, corporate charters, shortage of teachers, bills being introduced to state legislatures to make it harder to become and be a teacher, tax cuts to education, etc. The teachers’ unions are being overwhelmed on may fronts.
LikeLike
I agree 100%.
LikeLike
Exactly so, Lloyd.
And it’s interesting (and totally disingenuous) that John believes that “anything the union opposes will always be the underdog in the fight.”
Oh, sure. The Gates Foundation, the Waltons, Eli Broad, and all the other multi-billionaires who have spent megabucks pushing for charter schools and denigrating public schools, are “the underdogs.”
Right, uh huh, and if John really believes this, I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I’m willing to sell him.
LikeLike
Zorba,
Facts are pesky things, but in most cases, teachers unions far outspend these others on political issues. That makes them the underdogs. Also, charters wouldn’t exist without parents who choose them. Interestingly enough, the number of students in charter schools is about the same (3 million) as the number of FTE teachers in the USA.
LikeLike
Zorba,
Public education today looks way more like what unions want it to look like than like reformers want. Hours look the same, LIFO looks the same. Tenure looks the same. Lockstep pay looks the same. Evaluation (despite many attempts) looks the same. Teacher education looks the same.
Tell me what substantial change has happened in public education in the last decade besides testing (which hasn’t even changed all that much), which is a blunt force way to try to impose some measures of quality from the outside on a bureaucracy unwilling to look at itself critically.
LikeLike
John,
That is strange that education has been molded by the unions, because more than half the states don’t have unions. The “reformers” have controlled the federal Department of Education since 2001. Two=-thirds of the states are run by ALEC-inspired Republican governors. Trump and DeVos are in charge and they too support the agenda of school choice. Are you saying that unions are more powerful than the president and the federal Department of Education and the governors? Who knew?
LikeLike
“Are you saying that unions are more powerful than the president and the federal Department of Education and the governors?”
Yes. Federal spending on education is 8.3% of the total; not much influence there. Do you think the life of the average student in NY (for example) is more affected by anything the Governor does than by the teacher’s contract?
If so, how about some examples that compare to things like the number of hours in a day, days in a year, etc. Budgets are largely determined by people costs that are determined by collective bargaining as well.
LikeLike
John,
The President, the Congress, and most governors are controlled by rightwing anti-union people who love charters and hate unions.
LikeLike
Yes, but I stand by my statement that reformers maybe have influenced 10% of what public education looks like in this country.
LikeLike
Be sure to get a photo with Paul Ryan tomorrow when he visits Success Academy
LikeLike
Teachers’ union spending really isn’t comparable to the charter sector’s spending to begin with — the entire concept that it is is propaganda. Teachers’ unions spend (and always have spent) money lobbying legislators for support for schools — funding, small class sizes, facilities, resources. They’re representing and supporting their members, whose careers are working in schools; teachers’ unions also collectively bargain on behalf of their members.
The charter sector is part of the so-called education “reform” sector, funded by outsider billionaires — many of them far-right billionaires. Its spending is based on promoting policies that support charter schools, which early on evolved into attacking, harming and punishing public schools and districts.
The “reform” sector has also run a carefully calculated campaign to attack and discredit teachers’ unions, which in my view haven’t even tried to mount a defense, and which have no resources deveoted to countering the campaign — the union members are just, well, doing their jobs teaching kids. The “reform” sector also has an enormous army of well-paid folks whose job is simply to promote policies; the teachers’ unions have nothing comparable.
There’s plenty of antipathy from the right and often from neoliberals aimed at labor overall, but nothing like the hostility and contempt heaped on teachers’ unions. The only rational explanation for that is pure sexism, since teachers’ unions are largely female. Some teachers’ union bashers say educated white-collar workers shouldn’t be union members, but I’m a member (and officer) of the Pacific Media Workers Guild, a union that represents newsroom employees, and my union isn’t barraged with that kind of hostility.
LikeLike
Carolinesf,
I think you have this exactly backwards.
Teachers unions back anti-charter initiatives constantly, trying to take away funding, block expansion, and impose “poison pill” changes. Meanwhile, charters have not tried to do anything to traditional public education.
I guess if you lump all “reformers” together, you could say that some of the same people who support charters also denigrate traditional public schools and fight against tenure, LIFO, etc., but charter schools don’t attack unions, unions attack charter schools.
If you disagree, please provide some counterexamples.
LikeLike
The privatization-thru-charter-expansion industry simply buys people.
Antonio Villaraigosa started his career as an employee of UTLA, who backed his rise politically in the legislature, and most prominently as mayor. UTLA backed him in his successful 2005 campaign to become Mayor of Los Angeles.
Shortly after being elected, he “came out,” as it were, as a union-buster … dropping the facade he put forth during the campaign. Since then, he’s blathered the most anti-union bilge, attacking teachers as “unwavering roadblocks to reform.”
In short, they bought him.
Davis Guggenheim was a progressive liberal documentary film maker, following in the tradition of his father, another progressive liberal documentary film maker. His father won an Oscar for a doc about the Little Rock Nine, while Davis won one for THE INCONVENIENT TRUTH.
The school privatization industry was casting about for the perfect sell-out to trash traditional public schools, and promote school privatization in a new documentary. They approached Guggenheim and offered him a multi-million dollar salary to sell out, and he delivered in spades, producing and directing WAITING FOR SUPERMAN. As the first-person narrator / protagonist of the documentary, he essentially played the role of the progressive, pro-union supporter of public schools WHO SEES HE LIGHT, and realizes that crushing teachers unions, and turning over public schools to the private sector is the only hope for our nation’s children.
In short, they bought him.
I could name another ten of these examples of craven sell-outs like these two just off the top of my head, but you get the picture. Greed and self-interest are powerful motivators.
But, for the moment, let’s focus on Davis Guggenheim.
Here he is, blaming teachers in impoverished neighborhoods for causing that poverty:
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
( 23:51 – 24:06 )
https://vimeo.com/69353438
( 23:51 – 24:06 )
DAVIS GUGGENHEIM (narrator):
“For generations, experts tended to blame failing schools on failing neighborhoods.
“But reformers have begun to believe the opposite, that the problems of failing neighborhoods might be blamed on failing schools.”
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Again, teachers are to these “reformers” what the Jews were to the Nazis, the scapegoats for all that’s wrong with distressed neighborhoods. Teachers — especially unionized teachers — are also obstacles to these plutocrats’ desire to privatize the schools system, and profit from that privatization, so the more they can smear and portray teachers as greedy, lazy scum, the better. The sooner they do so, the sooner teachers unions will be wiped off the face of the Earth, or rendered so weak that they are no longer a relevant or powerful enough force of resistance.
Blaming teachers for the conditions in South L.A. — or in Detroit, or in East Baltimore, or in Camden, New Jersey, or in South Chicago, or in the Anacostia neighborhoods in D.C. — that’s like blaming the rescue workers for causing Katrina or 9-11.
Again, this statement of Guggenheim’s was one of the made-to-order messages that Davis deliberately included in this this movie, at the command of his plutocrat masters. Demanding that the film conclude this was, to Philip Anshutz and the rest of film’s backers, like ordering up a cheeseburger, and that sell-out Guggenheim was their short order cook / film director / slave.
“Davis, here’s one of the key messages that you must include in the documentary …. in order to earn your multi-million dollar salary as producer and director, this better damn well be in there.
“Now go and dig up as much footage, and cute animated graphics, and on-camera spokes-holes that support that message, and leave out anything that doesn’t support that message, or that refutes it.”
That’s how propaganda is manufactured.
Indeed Davis Guggenheim was perfectly cast to deliver that message as well. You see he’s the pro-union progressive who used to love public schools, with all their problems, BUT NOW HE’S SEEN THE NEO-LIBERAL PRIVATIZE-EVERTHING, UNION-BUSTING LIGHT.
That’s the trajectory the film makers want its progressive viewers to have as well.
He made a two-hour movie about public schools WITHOUT ONE POSITIVE ASPECT OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS MENTIONED EVEN ONCE, AND WITHOUT ONE INTERVIEW WITH ANYONE COUNTERING THE WALL-TO-WALL ANTI-PUBLIC-SCHOOL MESSAGES AND ON-CAMERA INTERVIEWS SPOUTING THOSE MESSAGES.
It’s both stupid and stupefying to consider.
Guggenheim’s press interviews promoting this trash are horrifying to watch. You’re looking at and listening to a man who has lost his very soul.
Guggenheim’s father was a great progressive documentarian, winning an Academy Award for a documentary on the Little Rock Nine. He’s gotta be twirling in his grave as to what’s become of his son Davis.
LikeLike
Excellent, excellent comment, Jack. Kudos.
LikeLike
“Blaming teachers for the conditions in South L.A. — or in Detroit, or in East Baltimore, or in Camden, New Jersey, or in South Chicago, or in the Anacostia neighborhoods in D.C. — that’s like blaming the rescue workers for causing Katrina or 9-11.”
Rescue workers arrive after the fact. Public education existed before, during and after. Absolving schools from any responsibility is counterproductive.
LikeLike
You know what else existed before, during and after?
Poverty.
LikeLike
Agreed, but it’s disingenuous to say teachers are like rescue workers arriving after the problem was created by someone else. Framing it that way absolves schools of any role in the issue, which is not appropriate. You can argue about the degree to which schools contribute or why they do, but lopping off a component of the cause isn’t intellectually honest. For example, schools largely populated with low income students in my city were not given textbooks. They also disproportionately get the least experienced teachers.
LikeLike
According to studies, a child’s teachers are not that much of an influence compared to the child’s home environment and family. There are many factors involved in why a child learns or doesn’t learn and teachers are not that significant when compared to all the other factors, so why is the focus only on teachers and not the family and child’s lifestyle, and socioconomic environment away from school?
According to one study that The Guardian reported on, “Father’s education level strongest factor in child’s success at school.”
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/23/fathers-education-child-success-school
The next study says, “Globally, more than 200 million children under five years fail to reach their potential in cognitive and social development due to poverty, poor health, malnutrition, and deficit care.”
https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/factors-affecting-early-childhood-growth-and-development-golden-1000days-APN-1000101.php?aid=66362
Next, Parents have the biggest influence over their child’s language and emotional development.
https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/factors-affecting-early-childhood-growth-and-development-golden-1000days-APN-1000101.php?aid=66362
But who is blamed for almost everything that happens to a child in school, the teachers who have little to nothing they can do to fix the problems that follow children to school from home.
LikeLike
I agree with much of what you said, but have two issues with it:
– Sure, parents have more influence over kids, but we the public spend our money on schools, so we have some expectation that schools can at least try to overcome parental challenges.
-Also, many of these parents were in school 5 or 6 years ago. Something has to break this cycle, and school seems to be the place where it can happen.
IMO, the reason teachers get “blamed” is because they (collectively) don’t seem to be trying to do anything to improve the issue. Individuals certainly do, but collectively, unions generally are fighting changes. Maybe that’s there job, in which case the system just doesn’t reflect the needs of students, especially in urban areas where the parents have less voice than in suburbia.
LikeLike
John, teachers are in the classroom. They don’t control the flow of money or the policymaking. All that is in the hands of your allies–Trump, DeVos, Jerry Brown, the CCSA, the Walton family, the billionaires, DFER.
LikeLike
“John, teachers are in the classroom. They don’t control the flow of money or the policymaking. All that is in the hands of your allies–Trump, DeVos, Jerry Brown, the CCSA, the Walton family, the billionaires, DFER.”
Nonsense. The vast majority of policy and money is local and state, and unions disproportionately influence both.
People who deny that and refuse to look at those issues will continue to find more and more dems and others against them.
LikeLike
I’m not sorry that I disagree with your willful ignorance. The teachers’ unions do not disproportionately influence local and state decisions. They attempt to influence just like billionaires like Gates, Walton, Koch and DeVos. They attempt to influence just like corporations; for instance Pearson.
There are thousands of local union branches that negotiate contracts at the local district level with elected school boards. If those school boards are packed with minions of the autocrats, the efforts of teachers’ unions are like trying to talk sense into a block wall.
For instance, I taught for 30 years in the same school district in Southern California. The local represented about 700 teachers (with about 19,000 students) and that local focused on protecting the due process rights of most teachers (except for allegations of sexual misconduct and then the teachers are on their own until proven innocent in court) and negotiating contracts that often included sacrifices in wage increases to keep class sizes down and elective classes like band, drama, art, etc. At the local level where most if not all of the contracts are negotiated, the president of the local is a classroom teacher in the same district and the representative council are made up of classroom teachers elected by the teachers at each school.
At the state level, teachers’ unions lobby for bills that are in the best interest of teachers and against bills that are not. That does not mean they win. In fact, they often lose.
At the national level, the teachers’ unions do the same thing with both Houses of theU.S. Congress.
And what is in the best interest of teachers is often in the best interest of their students. Anyone who criticizes teachers’ unions is criticizing teachers because those unions are democratic organizations and the leadership is elected. That doesn’t mean every teacher liked their elected leaders because, in every election, every candidate gets votes from teachers but only the candidate with the majority of votes wins. Teachers’ unions do not have an Electoral College that elects someone like Agent Orange, the malignant narcissist in the White House.
If you still question the motive and actions of teachers’ unions, look at how much classroom teachers spend for their classrooms annually because the school due to budget cuts often doesn’t have the funds to purchase the supplies teachers need to teach.
Why Teachers Are Going Broke Buying School Supplies
“As the beginning of a new school year draws near, it’s not just parents who are scouring the big-box and office-supply store sale fliers for deals on school supplies. Teachers are under more pressure than ever to provide the kinds of items that used to be stocked in supply closets or provided by school districts — and they can get yelled at for an infraction as small as using up too much copier paper.”
http://time.com/money/4455793/why-teachers-pay-for-school-supplies/
Those teachers that pay dues and vote in teachers’ unions’ elections spend about $1.6 billion dollars annually.
LikeLike
“The teachers’ unions do not disproportionately influence local and state decisions.”
Lloyd, I just don’t think that stands up to scrutiny.
The majority of money spent by districts is for teachers, and where there are unions, their compensation is governed by collective bargaining. Publicly elected school boards (you refer to them as packed with minions of autocrats) and public sector unions are not independent actors. Union-backed candidate win more than 75% of the time, which exceeds even the benefit of incumbency.
I agree that teachers spend a lot of money on their classrooms. Why do you think that schools are not providing adequate supplies? Those are local decisions.
LikeLike
“The majority of money spent by districts is for teachers, and where there are unions, their compensation is governed by collective bargaining.” Of course the majority of money is spent on compensation for staff; education is a labor intensive endeavor. Collective bargaining is more likely to assure that people are fairly compensated. While I have run into some union rules that I thought were stupid, as a new teacher coming in, I got a glimpse into the adversarial dynamics that created a sometimes nit picky approach to negotiation. Have you ever heard the adage “Unions are a failure of Management”?
LikeLike
“Lloyd, I just don’t think that stands up to scrutiny.”
Prove it and let’s see if your evidence stands up to scrutiny.
LikeLike
http://educationnext.org/the-union-label-on-the-ballot-box/
Click to access PEPG_03-05Moe.pdf
LikeLike
I question the source.
The Hoover Institution’s in-house publisher, Hoover Institution Press, produces multiple publications on public policy topics, including the quarterly periodicals Hoover Digest, Education Next …”
Media Fact Check.com says that the Hoover Institution has a Right-Center Bias.
“These media sources are slightly to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation.”
And many who pay attention and are aware know that most conservative causes do not favor community-based, democratic, transparent, non-profit traditional public schools, and all conservative causes are extremely biased toward all labor unions.
In addition, there is this statement directly from the Hoover Institution on education.
“The K–12 Education Task Force focuses on education policy as it relates to government provision and oversight versus private solutions (both within and outside the public school system) that stress choice, accountability, and transparency.”
http://www.hoover.org/research/education
Because teachers’ unions support teachers in community-based, democratic, transparent, non-profit public schools that resist CHOICE between those schools and autocratic corporate charter schools that puts teachers’ unions at odds with the Hoover Insitute.
LikeLike
Sure, but are you questioning Moe’s research findings?
LikeLike
Without spending hours countering Moe’s alleged research findings through an investigation into every dollar the teachers’ unions spend lobbying, I have a one-word response: CHERRYPICKING! That’s what biased sites do to support their agendas and the Hoover Institute clearly said they favor CHOICE.
As Diane said earlier in this thread, “The (Hoover Institute’s) K-12 education task force on which I served favors high-stakes testing, VAM, charters, and vouchers. It is strongly anti-union, more so since I left.”
Change of topic because I’m curious. Is the Hoover Institute named after J. Edgar Hoover or President Hoover? It doesn’t matter which one, both were corrupt and/or incompetent.
President Hoover is listed as one of the worst presidents.
https://www.usnews.com/news/special-reports/the-worst-presidents/articles/2014/12/17/worst-presidents-herbert-hoover-1929-1933
And The FBI Wall of Shame has this to say about J.Edgar Hoover:
“Hoover amassed significant power by collecting files containing large amounts of compromising and potentially embarrassing information on many powerful people, especially politicians. According to Laurence Silberman, appointed Deputy Attorney General in early 1974, Director Clarence M. Kelley thought such files either did not exist or had been destroyed. After The Washington Post broke a story in January 1975, Kelley searched and found them in his outer office. The House Judiciary Committee then demanded that Silberman testify about them. An extensive investigation of Hoover’s files by David Garrow showed that Hoover and next-in-command William Sullivan, as well as the FBI itself as an agency, were responsible.”
And this is only one example of how power corrupted him.
http://fbiwallofshame.blogspot.com/2008/12/j-edgar-hoover.html
LikeLike
Lloyd,
I was a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and a member of its Koret Task Force and of the editorial board of Education Next.
Hoover is a conservative institution. Some fellows there are moderate conservatives; some are very conservative.
The K-12 education task force on which I served favors high-stakes testing, VAM, charters, and vouchers. It is strongly anti-union, moreso since I left.
LikeLike
“we have some expectation that schools can at least try to overcome parental challenges.”
I’m not going to be polite in responding to the previous quote. In two words, “Bull Shit!”
I taught for thirty years and during that time I taught 5 and/or 6 sections with 7 minute passing periods between classes. My average class load was 34 students for each class. That means I was teaching 170 – 238 students a day. I was required to teach a list of standards that California required. There were more standards for each grade level then there were days in the school year.
And now you and those that think like you expect teachers with workloads like I had to step in and overcome parental challenges. For instance, my average work week ran between 60 – 100 hours FOR 30 YEARS. There were days when I arrived at 6 AM when the gates were unlocked and I didn’t have to drive home until the school’s alarms were turned on and I had to leave (along with the students who were also working late) at close to 11 PM.
Twenty-five to thirty hours in class instruction/teaching and the rest outside of class was correcting student work, planning and creating the next lesson, calling parents to let them know their child wasn’t doing the work and/or was disrupting the learning environment, attending staff meetings, department meetings, individual meetings with students, parents, counselors/administrators, etc. On top of that, I had about 20 to 30 hours of duty each year at sports events after the final bell. On those days, I usually didn’t get home until after 8 PM. I carried a clipboard with me and corrected student work while I was at the game.
LikeLike
Lloyd,
I wouldn’t expect you to work more, or even as much as you did.
There are other options besides superhero teachers.
For example, teacher student ratios are now 16:1.
Hiring more counselors would be another way that schools could go further.
I’m not saying that schools as they exist today should be working harder.
I’m saying that we, as a society, are missing an opportunity to help every student get an excellent education.
LikeLike
To hire more counselors and provide more programs to compensate for negligent parenting would mean reversing the trend of cutting taxes and cutting revenue to the schools. We can’t have both. We can’t work for free when we are starving, have no medical care, and are homeless.
LikeLike
“For example, schools largely populated with low income students in my city were not given textbooks. They also disproportionately get the least experienced teachers.”
And that is the fault of teachers? Teachers are not running the system. The last district in which I worked did not give individual textbooks to the students unless they were in the advanced track. Everyone else shared classroom sets that stayed in the classroom. I was forced to copy a workbook for all of my students that went with a program I taught that was key to the instruction because the school/district did not buy them.
LikeLike
speduktr,
No, but the public largely doesn’t differentiate within the bureaucracy and it’s all intertwined. Frankly, nobody takes the side of students when these decisions are made. If it’s a budget issue, it’s because some other cost won out over the cost of books. If it’s a trust issue, who makes the decision?
LikeLike
” If it’s a trust issue, who makes the decision?”
I am not following. I have no idea what you are trying to say.
LikeLike
In this particular district, they didn’t trust minority students to be responsible with books.
LikeLike
Okay. Yes, I heard a similar argument. So all students at my school, whether they had proven themselves responsible or not who did not take the advanced, college bound track, did not have access to books except in class. While there was some truth to their concern with how the books would be treated by some of the students, the real truth was that the district really could not afford them. My high priced, home district has students buy their books for several hundred dollars. You can sell them back at the end of the year at a greatly discounted price, which is partially determined by the condition of the book. Students who cannot afford their books are subsidized, which is obviously not a choice in many districts. I don’t have any good answers although my state way under funds schools and leaves them dependent on local real estate taxes, so the “haves” have it and the “have nots” don’t. Eventually maybe computer technology will allow good access even in the poorest and most remote communities.
LikeLike
” Frankly, nobody takes the side of students when these decisions are made.”
That’s just plain silly. You are right that budgetary concerns will trump what educators have laid out as important to the education of students. I find the assumption that teachers are only “in it” for themselves–that teaching students is just a means to get what teachers want–highly insulting.
LikeLike
speduktr,
Yes, the typical teacher contract looks like a manifesto of what’s good for students.
Now that’s silly.
Teachers unions look out for themselves and for their members (as they should).
LikeLike
Was there someplace that I mentioned teacher unions? Of course unions are to protect the interest of teachers. Who else is going to do it? There is a long history of abuse of many different kinds of workers which amazingly seems to be at least contained somewhat when workers unionize. Just imagine what Lloyd would have been required to do without one. What he chose to do and what teachers choose to do all the time is to devote far more energy than required by contractual hours. The system may be far from perfect, but unionization has improved the lives of more than its members, driving changes for the better for all workers.
LikeLike
The local teachers’ union I belonged to defended me when I was under attack by the administration a few years before I retired. The union’s lawyers gave me advice on what not to say so I couldn’t be fired. Instead of me going, it was the ruthless, autocratic, divisive principal who lost his job when the district bought out the last three years of his five-year contract after he lost the battle he started with me and the student journalism staff of the high school’s newspaper.
What would have happened without the union’s support? That is a major reason why teachers’ unions are under attack across the country because they are the teachers.
LikeLike
I don’t disagree, and I’m in general a big fan of unions. I just don’t think that they look out for kid’s best interests (nor should they), and I don’t think anyone else really does either.
LikeLike
Teachers’ union spending really isn’t comparable to the charter sector’s spending to begin with — the entire concept that it is is propaganda. Teachers’ unions spend (and always have spent) money lobbying legislators for support for schools — funding, small class sizes, facilities, resources. They’re representing and supporting their members, whose careers are working in schools; teachers’ unions also collectively bargain on behalf of their members.
The charter sector is part of the so-called education “reform” sector, funded by outsider billionaires — many of them far-right billionaires. Its spending is based on promoting policies that support charter schools, which early on evolved into attacking, harming and punishing public schools and districts.
The “reform” sector has also run a carefully calculated campaign to attack and discredit teachers’ unions, which in my view haven’t even tried to mount a defense, and which have no resources deveoted to countering the campaign — the union members are just, well, doing their jobs teaching kids. The “reform” sector also has an enormous army of well-paid folks whose job is simply to promote policies; the teachers’ unions have nothing comparable.
There’s plenty of antipathy from the right and often from neoliberals aimed at labor overall, but nothing like the hostility and contempt heaped on teachers’ unions. The only rational explanation for that is pure sexism, since teachers’ unions are largely female. Some teachers’ union bashers say educated white-collar workers shouldn’t be union members, but I’m a member (and officer) of the Pacific Media Workers Guild, a union that represents newsroom employees, and my union isn’t barraged with that kind of hostility.
LikeLike