The National Education Association passed a resolution on charter schools on July 4, 2017, which is appropriate because public schools are the foundation of democracy.
Add this to the resolution passed last year by the NAACP.
And the statement by Black Lives Matter in opposition to privatization of public schools.
And the statement endorsed by the Network for Public Education, saying that charter schools are “a failed experiment” and calling for an immediate moratorium and eventual absorption of them into school districts.
And together, you begin to see the growing backlash against private management of public money in schools that select their students and are exempt from most state laws.
This is the NEA statement:
Adopted by the 2017 Representative Assembly
July 4, 2017
Introduction
Charter schools were initially promoted by educators who sought to innovate within the local public school system to better meet the needs of their students. Over the last quarter of a century, charter schools have grown dramatically to include large numbers of charters that are privately managed, largely unaccountable, and not transparent as to their operations or performance. The explosive growth of charters has been driven, in part, by deliberate and wellfunded efforts to ensure that charters are exempt from the basic safeguards and standards that apply to public schools, which mirror efforts to privatize other public institutions for profit.
Charters have grown the most in school districts that were already struggling to meet students’ needs due to longstanding, systemic and ingrained patterns of institutional neglect, racial and ethnic segregation, inequitable school funding, and disparities in staff, programs and services. The result has been the creation of separate, largely unaccountable, privately managed charter school systems in those districts that undermine support and funding of local public schools. Such separate and unequal education systems are disproportionately located in, and harm, students and communities of color by depriving both of the high quality public education system that should be their right.
As educators we believe that “public education is the cornerstone of our social, economic, and political structure,” NEA Resolution A-1, the very “foundation of good citizenship,” and the fundamental prerequisite to every child’s future success. Brown v. Bd. of Ed. of Topeka, Shawnee Cty., Kan., 347 U.S. 483, 493 (1954). The growth of separate and unequal systems of charter schools that are not subject to the same basic safeguards and standards that apply to public schools threatens our students and our public education system. The purpose of this policy statement is to make plain NEA’s opposition to the failed experiment of largely unaccountable privately managed charter schools while clarifying NEA’s continued support for those public charter schools that are authorized and held accountable by local democratically elected school boards or their equivalent.
I. NEA supports public charter schools that are authorized and held accountable by public school districts. Charter schools serve students and the public interest when they are authorized and held accountable by the same democratically accountable local entity that authorizes other alternative school models in a public school district such as magnet, community, educator-led or other specialized schools. Such charters should be authorized only if they meet the substantive standards set forth in (a) below, and are authorized and held accountable through a democratically controlled procedure as detailed in (b) below.
a. Public charter schools should be authorized by a public school district only if the charter is both necessary to meet the needs of students in the district and will meet those needs in a manner that improves the local public school system. Public charters, like all public schools, must provide students with a free, accessible, non-sectarian, quality education that is delivered subject to the same basic safeguards and standards as every other public school, namely, in compliance with: i) open meetings and public records laws; ii) prohibitions against for-profit operation or profiteering as enforced by conflict of interest, financial disclosure and auditing requirements; and iii) the same civil rights, including federal and state laws and protections for students with disabilities, employment, health, labor, safety, staff qualification and certification requirements as other public schools. When a charter is authorized in a public school district that has an existing collective bargaining agreement with its employees, the authorizer will ensure that the employees will be covered by a collective bargaining agreement. Those basic safeguards and standards protect public education as a public good that is not to be commodified for profit.
In addition, charter schools may be authorized or expanded only after a district has assessed the impact of the proposed charter school on local public school resources, programs and services, including the district’s operating and capital expenses, appropriate facility availability, the likelihood that the charter will prompt cutbacks or closures in local public schools, and consideration of whether other improvements in either educational program or school management (ranging from reduced class sizes to community or magnet schools) would better serve the district’s needs. The district must also consider the impact of the charter on the racial, ethnic and socio-economic composition of schools and neighborhoods and on equitable access to quality services for all district students, including students with special needs and English language learners. The impact analysis must be independent, developed with community input, and be written and publicly available.
b. Public charter schools should only be authorized by the same local, democratically accountable entity that oversees all district schools such as a locally elected school board or, if there is no school board, a community-based charter authorizer accountable to the local community.
Maintaining local democratic control over decisions as to whether to authorize charters at all, and if so, under what conditions, safeguards community engagement in local public schools. A single local authorizing entity also ensures comprehensive consideration of whether each option, and the mix of options offered in a district, meets the needs of students and the community as a whole given the resources and facilities in the district. A single entity also permits effective integrated oversight of all schools, including charter schools, and a central mechanism for identifying and sharing successful innovations throughout local public schools.
The overall goal of the authorization and review process must be to improve the education offered to all students. That goal cannot be accomplished with a diffuse authorization system, comprised of multiple different entities, with differing partial views of the students served by a district and the overall scope of its educational offerings.
The local authorizer also must ensure that parents are provided with the same information about charters that is provided to parents about other district schools, as well as information about any significant respects in which the charter departs from district norms in its operations including the actual charter of the school.
The state’s role in charter authorization and oversight should be limited to ensuring that local school districts only authorize charters that meet the criteria in (a) above and do so by way of a procedure that complies with (b). To that end, the state should both monitor the performance of districts as charter authorizers and hold districts accountable for providing effective oversight and reporting regarding the quality, finances and performance of any charters authorized by the district. In addition, the state must provide adequate resources and training to support high quality district charter authorization practices and compliance work, and to share best authorization practices across a state. States should entertain appeals from approvals or denials of charters only on the narrow grounds that the local process for approving a charter was not properly followed or that the approval or denial of a charter was arbitrary or illegal.
c. Unless both the basic safeguards and process detailed above are met, no charter school should be authorized and NEA will support state and local moratoriums on further charter authorizations in the school district.
II. NEA opposes as a failed and damaging experiment unaccountable privately managed charters. Charters that do not comply with the basic safeguards and standards detailed above and that are not authorized by the local school board (or its equivalent) necessarily undermine local public schools and harm the public education system.
The theory that charter competition will improve public schools has been conclusively refuted. Charters have a substantial track record that has been assessed in numerous research studies. Those studies document that charters, on average, do no better than public schools in terms of student learning, growth or development. And those charters that do perform better are not incorporated into district-wide school improvement efforts.
In fact, at their worst, charters inflict significant harms on both students and communities. Of the charter schools that opened in 2000, a full fifth had closed within five years of opening and a full third had closed by 2010. Because the very opening of charters often prompts cutbacks and/or closures in local public schools, these alarmingly high charter closure rates subject students and communities to cycles of damaging disruption. Such disruption can leave students stranded mid-year. Even closures that occur at the year’s end disrupt students’ education and unmoors communities that previously had been anchored by the local public school.
Charters that are not subject to the basic safeguards and standards detailed above also open up the local public schools to profiteers. Such charters operate without any effective oversight, draining public school resources and thereby further harming local public schools and the students and communities they serve.
Finally, one particular form of unaccountable privately managed charters deserves specific discussion. Fully virtual or online charter schools cannot, by their nature, provide students with a well-rounded, complete educational experience, including optimal kinesthetic, physical, social and emotional development. Accordingly, they should not be authorized as charter schools.
III. Organizing Communities for Quality Public Education
NEA stands for our students wherever they are educated. Relegating students and communities to unaccountable privately managed schools that do not comply with the basic safeguards and standards detailed above has created separate systems of charters that are inherently unequal. To counter the threat to public education of such charters, NEA supports both communities organizing for quality public education and educators working together to improve charter schools.
a. NEA supports communities that are working to hold charters accountable whether that work takes the form of state legislative initiatives, local school board resolutions and actions, or efforts to raise local awareness of the need for charters to comply with the basic safeguards and standards detailed above. NEA also will support state and local efforts to preserve public school funding and services by eliminating such funding and services from unaccountable privately managed charters that do not comply with those basic safeguards and standards.
b. NEA believes that all educators deserve the right to collective voice and representation, and that an organized workforce is a better guardian of quality standards for students and educators alike. For that reason, state affiliates that seek to organize charter schools may continue to seek NEA’s assistance in those organizing efforts.

Good, but the 90% bad ones are giving the legit 10% good ones a bad name.
LikeLike
I have come to accept that the legit 10% good charters are complicit.
They are like the supposedly “moderate” Republicans who look the other way because they care more about getting re-elected — and not having the rich Republicans run a primary candidate against them — than about doing what is right. Case in point: Susan Collins, who can only voted the “moderate” way when her vote is not needed. (Case in point – Betsy DeVos).
“Good” charters are like this. They only speak out in the way that is acceptable to the powers that run the charter industry, which means you don’t rock the boat.
Susan Collins and the “good” charter folks have decided that their own careers are far more important than doing what is right.
LikeLike
I’m not so sure about this – there are big and growing divides between charter operators over things like cherrypicking, backfilling and especially support for Trump/DeVos.
I spoke to a charter school founder whose network over-enrolled high need students and exported original curriculum/methods to public districts. They were frustrated about getting lumped in with the more unpopular charters.
LikeLike
Jake,
The corporate charters exclude high needs kids. So do those established by Walton.
93% of charters are non-union.
LikeLike
Right – whatever “good” charters there may be, such as those serving ONLY high needs students, are unicorns at this point. The vast majority cherrypick and hurt the system. There is even contention between Success and the other major NYC chains because Success embraced DeVos, Paul Ryan and Trump.
LikeLike
Charter teachers need to be part of the union so that teaching can be a more appealing profession, and charter teachers need to pay into the retirement fund from equitably decent salaries so that teaching can remain a lifelong profession. Charters have grabbed up 16% of students in my district. Even if a charter here is good, it’s still contributing to a two-tiered system, one in which already unstable, unsustainable competition for funding is Rocket fueled by charter chain marketing. Overall quality is deterred by inequality. Worse than that, good charter schools not only contribute to corporate charter scams, they normalize them. I’m sorry to disagree that there are good charters anymore.
LikeLike
“There is even contention between Success and the other major NYC chains because Success embraced DeVos, Paul Ryan and Trump.”
Which is exactly why I say those other charter chains are COMPLICIT.
You sound just like the people saying Ivanka Trump doesn’t agree with all of her dad’s policies.
There is as much contention between Success Academy and any other charter as there is between Ivanka Trump and her dad.
Maybe the other charters don’t agree with everything Success Academy does, but they will never criticize, never speak out because ultimately they understand that in order to stick around they must be complicit.
I won’t hold my breath to hear the criticism from other charters. The SUNY Charter Institute has given Success Academy a free pass to do anything they want. No examination of attrition rates of the entering Kindergarten classes and how many (or how few) actually make it to 3rd or 4th grade with their cohort. And then their excuse is that students leave failing schools also. Yes, but they leave because their families are transient or move or they attend BETTER schools. According to the SUNY Charter Institute, that means there is absolutely no reason to look closely at suspension rates, attrition rates, rates of flunking children over and over again so that they are two grades behind, etc. It is called being COMPLICIT.
And Eli Broad will reward them for it.
There is as much “contention” between other charters and Success as their is between Ivanka Trump and her dad. The other charters understand who has the power and who doesn’t and they will never challenge those with power unless their billionaire supporters give the go ahead.
LikeLike
Here is a recent article about contention between charters groups – it mentions a new push by DeVos to expand charters with “parent triggers” and it also mentions Diane: http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/us/2017/07/05/has-the-charter-school-movement-gone-awry-a-new-book-says-yes-and-its-causing-a-stir/
LikeLike
Jake,
That’s the choice-happy club that assembled that book. Even Checker Finn criticized it for jettisoning accountability of any kind.
LikeLike
In related news from the NEA RA, the delegation also passed New Business Item #47 to seek a moratorium of new charter schools at the state and county level:
“NEA will develop and promote resolutions that local associations can introduce at school board meetings calling for county-wide and state-wide moratoria on new charter school authorizations in every state that has legislation authorizing the creation of charter schools.”
LikeLike
Diane Thank you for posting this. I have a (I think) related statement and question. First, not all rich folks are against public education as an institution. One that keeps coming to mind is George Lucas who created and has been involved with Edutopia for many years now (since 1991). When he wrote his letter to visitors to the Edutopia site, he says up front that “Education is the foundation of democracy.” Though, in other places, he says they are non-partisan.
I think he probably when he wrote public education as an institution was still considered “non-partisan.” I may be wrong-headed here and, please, if anyone knows anything more than I do on this, please say so; but am thinking perhaps, if what he says is still his mantra, then perhaps he needs to be contacted to persuade him to be a voice that combines a full understanding of wealth AND public education in a democracy. The below is from his site, and then some links.
Lucas’ short video on the introduction page is charming and informative but not clear on the matter at hand, at least as how we understand it, but it does move in that direction and it certainly doesn’t sound like double-speak. I’ve received their online magazine for years and don’t remember seeing anything about charters or vouchers (though for a long time I wasn’t keyed to those terms). FWIW
ALL BELOW FROM LUCAS’ EDUTOPIA SITE:
Dear Edutopia.org Visitor: Education is the foundation of our democracy — the stepping-stones for our youth to reach their full potential. My own experience in public school was quite frustrating. I was often bored. Occasionally, I had a teacher who engaged my curiosity and motivated me to learn. Those were the teachers I really loved. I wondered, “Why can’t school be engaging all of the time?” As a father, I’ve felt the imperative to transform schooling even more urgently.
Traditional education can be extremely isolating — the curriculum is often abstract and not relevant to real life, teachers and students don’t usually connect with resources and experts outside of the classroom, and many schools operate as if they were separate from their communities.
Project-based learning, student teams working cooperatively, children connecting with passionate experts, and broader forms of assessment can dramatically improve student learning. New digital multimedia and telecommunications can support these practices and engage our students. And well-prepared educators are critical.
The George Lucas Educational Foundation (GLEF) documents and disseminates the most exciting classrooms where these innovations are taking place. By shining the spotlight on these inspiring teachers and students, we hope others will consider how their work can promote change in their own schools.
Our Foundation staff is eager to know about your work in improving schools and what you think of our site. We encourage you to share your ideas on Edutopia.org by contributing to the comments field at the bottom of any content page, or email your comments to feedback@edutopia.org.
About Us: Whether you’re a teacher, a parent, an administrator, a student or any one of the other millions of visitors to our website and social media spaces each …
The George Lucas Educational Foundation, a nonprofit operating foundation, was founded by filmmaker George Lucas in 1991. Growing up, Lucas was curious and creative – but at school, he often felt bored. Years later, after becoming a father, he once again found himself focused on schools’ untapped potential to truly engage students and inspire them to become active, lifelong learners. He decided to invest in making a difference and created the Foundation to identify and spread innovative, replicable and evidence-based approaches to helping K-12 students learn better.
https://www.edutopia.org/mission-vision
Vision and Mission | Edutopia http://www.edutopia.org
Our Mission We are dedicated to transforming kindergarten through 12th-grade (K-12) education so all students can thrive in their studies, careers, and adult lives.
END QUOTED MATERIAL
https://www.edutopia.org/about?utm_source=Edutopia+News&utm_campaign=f83c718a7c-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_070517_enews_creatingasafe_mc&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_29295b4c8b-f83c718a7c-48228911
Edutopia http://www.edutopia.org
LikeLike
Why bother with charters at all? Public money should go to public schools
LikeLike
Now that Hillary was able to employ the NEA to help her have things both ways in the privatization issue, making it so impossible to sort out that it achieved meaninglessness and guaranteed minimal discussion of public education…..is there any point in the existence of the NEA?
LikeLike
To answer your question Joe: No.
Regarding the NEA’s resolution reported here:
I’m sure exactly nobody in the reform movement, privatizing movement, or their numerous political allies care one bit about said resolution. Meaningless.
LikeLike
Exactly what I was thinking One of my favorite movie lines ,from Preditor 2.
LikeLike
The NEA often angers me, one of its members, but that is no reason to suggest that its existence is ineffective. It’s efforts, certainly its state affiliate, have meant thousands of dollars in my pocket over my 30 years of teaching. This is, notably, without holding the status of a real union. In Tennessee, the TEA cannot strike. Thus its status is more that of a professional organization. It had consistently fought in the state legislature for positions that we needed. It has opposed testing. It has opposed VAM. It has pushed against the radicals who would abolish public Ed for religious reasons.
So I say good for them. If all they can do is talk, at least this statement is saying the rig thing for the most part. Is that not what dialogue is about?
LikeLike
This describes Utah’s association feelings and actions. Many of us responded in open rebellion to their endorsement of CC$$. We worked hard to develop good relationships with our legislatures and governor. While this has not been perfect, we have seen improvement. We still have more work to do.
LikeLike
Q public schools are the foundation of democracy.END Q You (and others) have stated this many times. Why? What makes publicly-operated schools the foundation of democracy? I really want to know.
I learned that ancient Athens was a functioning democracy (except for the slaves).
The USA had a constitutional republic, and there were not a huge number of public schools. Many of the founders were privately educated, and did not attend taxpayer-financed schools.
Our nation functioned for over two centuries, prior to formation of the federal Department of Education (October 1979).
Why are publicly-operated schools so essential to our republic?
LikeLike
Charles,
Public education is a foundation of our democracy. It has. Rested near-universal literacy. It’s doors are open to all without regard to race, religion, ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation.
As our Founding Fathers knew very well, democracy cannot co-exist with ignorance.
Public schools teach us to live with those who are different from ourselves.
You should read books about education that are not written by right wingers.
Start with my last two.
LikeLike
Interesting comment. And I find myself in agreement with many of your points. But, one thing still stumps me.
When neighborhoods are segregated by income, they tend to be segregated by race as well. When children are “locked in” to the publicly-operated school, in their segregated neighborhoods, the result is segregated education. This is happening, and has been happening, over the years, and (public) schools are re-segregating. This is well-documented, especially in current publications.
There are many topics that you and I agree on, and this “educational apartheid” system, where public schools are increasingly segregated by race/class/income, is abhorrent.
And I read all types of material, from all types of sources, mostly leftist periodicals, like Atlantic, and the New Yorker.
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” -Sun-Tzu
LikeLike
Sun-Tzu was wrong (or else the quote is wrong) as if one doesn’t know oneself and the enemy then there will only be one battle in which to succumb, no more.
LikeLike
Hmmm… there is no discussion of the parasitic nature of the charter and public school relationship. In a purely parasitic relationship one system thrives at the expense of the other and eventually leads to the demise of the other. Taxes are like all-important food. So it is more than just no required accountability of charters that’s a problem. The NEA needed to state this boldly!! The charters are not designed to coexist. They are designed to annihilate public schools…. to starve them of nutrients!!! At the heart of this is profit for a few – the operators of charters. Public schools put citizenship and learning as its goals; cornerstones of democracy. Why was this crucial point not addressed?
LikeLike
When people make choices to utilize one service, and not to utilize the other service, the former will fail, and the latter will succeed. When people took up automobiles, and stopped riding horses, automobile manufacturers made many millions, and blacksmiths and livery stables went out of business.
This process is called “creative destruction”. Blockbuster video stores are gone. The post office no longer sells post cards.
When parents make the choice to withdraw their children from publicly-operated schools, and enroll them in alternate means of education, publicly-operated schools will shrink in enrollment. When the per-pupil funding for these students follows them (in the form of vouchers), the public schools will lose money.
Public schools which cannot offer an education that meets the requirements of the consumers (parents/children), will have to down-size. Some may disappear, entirely. This is what happens in a dynamic economy.
Q Public schools put citizenship and learning as its goals END Q.
Why do you say this? Most observers would agree, that our nation’s public schools are not doing a proper job, in instilling citizenship in students. The actor, Richard Dreyfus has put up some millions of his own money, to bring civics and constitutional law, back into public schools.
LikeLike
Those observers are wrong.
We are the greatest nation in the world, and 90% of our people want to PUBLIC schools
LikeLike
Why do you think that observers are wrong, when many of them agree that public schools, are not doing a proper job in instilling values of citizenship in the students? Texas may start requiring all high school students to take and pass the citizenship test given by the US BCI, to foreign applicants for citizenship. At least 15 states have a similar requirement. See
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2017/05/texas_civics_education.html
My understanding, is that public schools in this nation, are not doing a proper job, in providing students with a basic understanding of our government, our federal constitution, etc. I believe that this lack of understanding, is part of the reason, that the voting rate of young people is disproportionately low.
If you assert that 90% of the people in the USA want a publicly-financed, and publicly-operated school system, then what is to be done with the remaining 10%? Some people, see the benefit in a publicly-financed educational system, where the parents/students have a measure of control over the disbursement of the spending, and have the options to seek educational services, outside the publicly-operated, government-run school system.
LikeLike
The election of an ignorant bigot makes your point, Charles, unless the Russians hacked the voting machines.
LikeLike
So much taxpayer money is being skimmed away by charter school operators that the Office of Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Education reports that “Charter schools and their management organizations pose a potential risk to federal funds even as they threaten to fall short of meeting goals” because of financial fraud and their hidden ways for skimming of tax money into private pockets. Charter schools bill themselves as “public schools”, but Supreme Courts in states like New York, Washington and elsewhere are catching on to the scam and have ruled that charter schools are really private schools because they aren’t accountable to the public because they are run by private boards that aren’t elected by voters and don’t even have to file detailed reports to the public about what they’re doing with the public’s tax money.
Even the staunchly pro-charter school Los Angeles Times (which acknowledges that its favorable reporting on charter schools is paid for by a billionaire charter school advocate) complained in an editorial that “the only serious scrutiny that charter operators typically get is when they are issued their right to operate, and then five years later when they apply for renewal.” Without needed oversight of what charter schools are actually doing with the public’s tax dollars, hundreds of millions of tax dollars that are intended to be spent on educating the public’s children is being siphoned away into private pockets and to the bottom lines of hedge funds.
In addition to the siphoning away of money from needy schools, reports from the NAACP and ACLU have revealed facts about just how charter schools are resegregating our nation’s schools, as well as discriminating racially and socioeconomically against American children of color; and, very detailed nationwide research by The Center for Civil Rights Remedies at UCLA shows in clear terms that private charter schools suspend extraordinary numbers of black students. Based on these and other findings of racial discrimination in charter schools, the NAACP Board of Directors has passed a resolution calling for a moratorium on charter school expansion and for the strengthening of oversight in governance and practice. Because of the racism in charter schools the ACLU has called for a complete moratorium on charter schools.
So, in order to assure that tax dollars are being spent wisely and that there is no racism in charter schools, charter schools should minimally (1) be required by law to be governed by school boards elected by the voters so that the charter schools are accountable to the public; (2) be a subdivision of a publicly-elected governmental body; (3) be required to file the same detailed public-domain audited annual financial reports under penalty of perjury that genuine public schools file; and, (4) be required to operate so that anything a charter school buys with the public’s money should be the public’s property.
Those aren’t unreasonable requirements. In fact, they are common sense to taxpayers and to anyone who seeks to assure that America’s children — especially her neediest children — are optimally benefiting from public tax dollars intended for their education. But, after the internal scams of charter schools become exposed to taxpayers through routine public reporting, the charter school industry will dry up and disappear, and the money that the charter school industry has been draining away from America’s neediest children will again flow to those in need.
If charter schools were required to file the same financial statements that public schools file, the skimming of tax money would stop and hedge funds would move on to their next target, leaving the charter school “movement” to dry up.
NO PUBLIC TAX MONEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO GO TO CHARTER SCHOOLS THAT FAIL TO MEET THESE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE PUBLIC.
LikeLike
“Escaped Horse Turned to Glue; NEA Insists Barn Door Be Closed”
LikeLike
The idea of charter schools was to end what proponents said was the “monopoly of public schooling” and introduce “competition”, a competition that in the beginning was advertised as improving both public schools and privately managed charter schools though the magic of competition.
That promise to improve both publicly managed public schools and privately managed charter schools has not worked out over the last 25 years. Instead privately managed charters have become an existential threat to public schools with over 5% of the Nation’s schools publicly funded privately managed charters.
Unfortunately the NEA Charter School Policy uses the word “public” juxtaposed to charter seven (7) times in the text. This choice is misleading because in fact there are unionized charter schools that are created by democratically elected local school boards but the management is private. I had an amendment to the policy statement replacing “public” with privately managed but didn’t get my amendment in on time. Maybe, it will get to the RA floor next year.
NEA leadership is trying to counter attack the growth of charter schools with a rigorous attack on charters, but at the same time, they are trying to maintain the support and of the small number of charter schools with NEA membership working for the privately managed charter school.
An extra complication is that most of the charter schools that employ NEA members on staff are not charter schools meeting the NEA criteria of transparency and authorization by a democratically elected school board. This divided between the NEA good seal of approval charters and the charters it opposes is a policy that does not seem on the surface to support organizing charter staffs.
But, while it wants its NEA state affiliates to work against charters that don’t have its seal of approval, once they are approved, it wants to encourage each state affiliate to work to organize the privately managed charter school’s staff at those NEA unacceptable charters.
What the policy does not do is call for an outright ban on charter schools. Instead, it implies there are these bad charters and the good charters they inaccurately define as “public” charters.
I would argue there cannot be good charter schools in that there is an important distinction between publicly funded public schools and publicly funded privately managed schools. The important difference is that a publicly funded public school has a public interest and a publicly funded privately managed charter has a private interest.
In the competition for funding privately managed charter will join its state’s charter school association that will lobby for government policies and funding for the charter school sector. Thee most ideal charter, meeting all the NEA criteria and seal of approval, still has a private interest in competing for government funding and supporting government policies and court cases that advance the NEA defined good charter school’s collective private interest. That is what I mean by saying there can be no good charter schools.
Charters need to be labeled with a skeleton head and bones indicating they are poisonous to public schools. NEA is not ready to go that far, yet.
LikeLike
Jim,
The original idea of charter schools was introduced by AFT leader Al Shanker. They were to be started to help public schools as an R&D school, which would be staffed by union teachers, and approved by the local board. The charters would try new things with the neediest kids, dropouts, etc., and share what they learned with their colleagues.
THE ORIGINAL PURPOSE OF CHARTER SCHOOLS WAS COLLABORATION, NOT COMPETITION.
The charter was supposed to be 3-5 years. If they learned nothing new, the charter would lapse and they would return to their classrooms.
Shanker introduced the idea in 1988, then renounced it in 1993 when he realized that entrepreneurs were moving in.
LikeLike
Diane: I was wrong on the history of charters and you are right the AFT union leader Shanker’s charter vision was collaboration, not the privatization nightmare it has become.
But, in my state, California the charter law was clearly written, not with Shanker’s vision in mind, but with the intent of introducing privately managed “competition” as the means to reforming public education system.
Today the growth of charters is an existential threat to public education in the 44 states that have implemented charter laws. Those charter laws are frame to create competition between publicly managed and privately managed charter schools.
Unfortunately, the NEA policy that passed could not either include a ban on the charter failed experiment or clearly state that the enemy is privately managed charters. But, by cleverly worded language, the NEA policy sets up a rant against unaccountable private charters and endorses what the policy terms “public charters” that have the right stuff. The kicker is that public charters it endorses can be privately managed.
It is my opinion, as a 59 year member of NEA, that NEA needs to stand against privately managed charters; because privatization of public education is the existential threat to public education no matter its form.
LikeLike
Jim,
I fully agree. The charter industry is out of control, and California is the worst case scenario. The billionaires like Eli Broad and Reed Hastings have made no secret of their desire to substitute charter schools for public schools. They buy legislators through the California Charter School Association’s lobbying arm. They buy school board elections, as they did recently in L.A.
They think that democracy is the problem. They are wrong. What they are doing is an outrage. They think because they are rich, they can privatize public education.
Come to the NPE Annual Meeting in Oakland in mid-October and join the fight against privatization.
LikeLike