The New York Times published an opinion article yesterday by Conor P. Williams of the New America Foundation, in which Williams argues that liberals should love charter schools and ignore the fact that Betsy DeVos loves them too.
He selects one school in Minneapolis to make his point. Hiawatha Academies, where 95% of the students are Hispanic. The school is non-union, like most every charter school. Williams proposes Hiawatha as a charter very different from the views of Betsy DeVos. But he forgets to mention that DeVos just gave Hiawatha Academies $1.8 Million. Maybe not so out of step with Betsy as he pretends.
But even though it is segregated and non-union, writes Williams, liberals should love it because it is good for Hispanic children.
But liberals are critical of charters, and Williams doesn’t understand why.
“And now the teachers are being forced to respond to criticism from people who by most measures should be their allies. Robert Panning-Miller, the former president of the Minneapolis Federation of Teachers, has called Hiawatha schools emblematic of a “corporate reform movement” that values “compliance and test scores over critical thinking” and criticized them as being part of an “apartheid education” movement, because their students are almost exclusively children of color.
“It’s true that nine out of 10 Hiawatha students are Hispanic. But if Hiawatha schools enroll a high number of minority students and English learners, that’s because they serve them well.”
Now why in the world would the leader of the state union reject a non-union school? Shouldn’t all schools be non-union?
Williams says certain liberals are picking on charters because they are part of the DeVos agenda.
“Progressive critics are taking advantage of the moment to tie charter-friendly Democrats to her toxic public image. On the day after President Trump’s inauguration, Valerie Strauss, a Washington Post education writer, accused Democratic reformers like Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, the former Newark mayor, of “advancing corporate education reform” through their support of school choice.”
Corey Booker is not only in favor of charters, he also supports vouchers. Is it possible for Booker to be completely aligned with DeVos’ school choice beliefs and still be a “liberal?”
Williams writes, “Progressives can ill afford this kind of sniping. The last thing the left needs right now is a war between teachers unions and liberal charter supporters.”
He does not explain why teachers unions should support non-union schools.
The New America Foundation has a long list of big donors. The biggest is Eric Schmidt ($4 Million), former CEO of Google. The second biggest is the Gates Foundation.
What Williams forgets to mention is that the biggest funder of charter schools is the far-right Walton Family Foundation, the far-right Anschutz Foundation, the far-right Koch Brothers, the Heritage Foundation, plus ALEC, plus every red state Governor and Legislature. The Waltons funded one of every four charters in Minnesota. This article is fundamentally dishonest.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Because of Donald Trump;s and Betsy DeVos’s support, his will become the standard big-moneyed “Democratic Party” argument FOR charters.
In California, the corporate Democrats have joined forces with the wealthy in the Republican party to back former mayor Antonio Villaraigosa because the the GOP candidate doesn’t have a chance in the Democratic election. Villaraigosa’s financial backing is ALL from the Charter School lobby and billionaires.
It is impossible to overstate the damage that Barack Obama and Arne Duncan have done to public education and the rich Democrats ALWAYS points to Obama to assert their progressive values.
It is crucial to note that all the billionaire charter supporters who woo municipal Democrat leaders in their very vocal on the need for education reform are ABSOLUTELY SILENT on Trump and the GOP on their economic policies. They benefit tremendously from Trumpworld.
Eli Broad can not be bothered to say anything about what Trump has done to the US in terms of economic inequality nor does he support any organization combating the multiple ways his administration wrecks havoc on the country and world.
But in terms of education policy, Broad, the former Vice President of the Democrats for Nixon organization, hold that their destruction of the public education and unions as “Progressive”. Likewise commentators like Connor P. Williams.
For those of us opposed to their educational and economic pedagogy, we have to provide the public (and the Democratic Party) a narrative that exposes these wolves in FDR clothing.
LikeLike
Like all ed reform editorials, it’s exclusively focused on charter schools, and comes completely from the perspective of charter schools.
I would turn the question around. Why don’t liberal ed reformers support public schools?
Public school advocates don’t oppose DeVos because she supports a charter school in Minneapolis. They oppose her because she doesn’t support any public school, anywhere.
This is exactly the problem- ed reform has reduced “public schools” to the schools they support, which are charter schools. That they still don’t see this and seem incapable of coming at this from the perspective of a public school supporter is remarkable to me, and a real indication of an echo chamber.
Read how that is written- he writes that the Obama Administration supported charter schools (first priority) and then also did some stuff for public schools which was helpful to liberal ed reformers not because any public schools were actually benefited under Obama but because it served ed reform’s goals- growth of charter schools with no political repercussions.
Public school advocates are ordered to support charter schools but there is no such requirement for charter school advocates.
There are no ADVOCATES for public schools in DC and many state legislatures. This is a problem in a country where 90% of children and families attend public schools.
Why would public school supporters accept such lousy representation, where we’re offered either nothing at all (Democrats) or actual harm (Republicans)? We can do better than that. We could have lawmakers and public employees who value and actually do some work on behalf of our schools.
LikeLike
Another ed reform argument that completely ignores public schools, while demanding that public school advocates support charter schools.
I’ll make a deal with them. I’ll start supporting the schools they prefer the day they offer anything of value to any public school, anywhere.
Ed reformers took public schools for granted for 20 years. The assumption was they didn’t have to offer public school families anything of value because we’d all be flocking to charter and private schools anyway, if their agenda succeeded.
This was a bad assumption.
LikeLike
This is the moment for Progressives to force the national-level Democratic Party to abandon its fascination with corporate education reform–disavow charters, vouchers, and choice, and get back to full-throated support for unions and public education. The uncomfortable truth for us liberals is that both parties have supported–and benefitted from–corporate education reform at the national level, while local and state-level Democrats have been largely holding to their support for public schools, teachers, and students.
Pols like Booker need to be confronted on their support of vouchers and charters, and either modify their positions or be primaried.
LikeLike
Democrats like Booker that support non-union, segregated charters over venerable public education are fundamentally dishonest. The corporate Democrats have tried to have it both way for too long. Booker should understand the value of a quality public school as he was fortunate enough to have attended one. Democrats cannot afford to take the votes of the working class and union employees for granted. They should have learned this lesson from the outcome of the last election. Democrats should earn their votes by supporting issues working people support like public education.
LikeLike
Booker took, and probably still takes, neo-con money. That’s why he makes his bed with the charter crowd. It’s shocking how much they have infiltrated the Democratic party.
LikeLike
The Democratic Party also took public school support for granted. The Obama Administration didn’t even speak to public school families. None of their political initiatives were directed to us or our schools, unless they were scolding us about our duty to administer standardized tests or pushing some crackpot teacher measuring scheme.
Political professionals in DC believed a wholly negative agenda for public schools was fine- that none of the supporters of those schools would ever object to such lousy representation. When DeVos doubled down, it boiled over. Which was inevitable.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here’s the sum total DC contribution to Ohio public schools since Trump was elected:
drug abuse prevention
school shooting prevention
The absolute best these people can offer is “committees” on how public schools can maybe avoid a disaster?
Public school families can and should demand more from the public officials they’re paying. They can and should demand a positive agenda for public schools that doesn’t treat our kids and schools like a problem to be “solved”.
We could hire people who actually value our schools and kids- who don’t consider them budding drug addicts and school shooters.
LikeLike
Among the problems of charter schools– as if draining funds from public education, increasing segregation, and lack of democratic governance were not enough– is that even with the best of intentions they are an individual surface solution to a deeply rooted systemic problem.
I wrote this back in 2012, but it still applies:
Bring back systems thinking– https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/why-schools-alone-cant-cure-poverty/2012/09/18/0c18b858-fd08-11e1-a31e-804fccb658f9_blog.html?utm_term=.16cfc58c9a64
LikeLike
The writer interchanges the idea of Progressive politics with “the left.” Meanwhile the New America Foundation is pushing “progressive federalism,” which is a cover for questioning democratic governance, marketing social impact bonds, and much else that brings market thinking into the public sphere. In any case, the writer is just doing a promo for charter schools, one of these singled out as if exemplary.The Hiawatha franchise model is cookie cutter, with expansions from elementary schools into middle schools thence to high school.
LikeLike
Several years ago, I was on the board of the New America Foundation. Its primary purpose then was to support promising young journalists. It relies on major corporate funders. Not long ago, there was a flap when New America ousted its leading scholar of monopolies, especially Google. When Barry Lynn wrote an article about Europe fining Google, Lynn was ousted as a scholar from the New America Foundation. Lesson: don’t bite the hand that feeds the think tank, and pays your salary.
https://www.vox.com/conversations/2017/9/5/16254910/google-controversy-new-america-barry-lynn
LikeLiked by 1 person
Don’t bite the hand that feeds the “thought control” tank?
LikeLike
As the Supreme Court pointed out in 1954, separate is inherently unequal.
LikeLike
Fundamentally dishonest is the foundation of Trump’s world and the world of the corporate reformers of public education.
LikeLike
Segregated schools are inherently unequal because structural racism and inequity in the United States are endemic and mutually reinforcing. In addition, in a society rife with prejudice and forced scarcity, segregation undermines our ability to know and value one another, and struggle together for common needs and goals. Inequality does not cease to exist because it is no longer de jure. Segregation has never occurred naturally. It has always occurred by design, whether through housing and zoning policy, between and within school tracking, school funding through property taxes, or school choice.
Therefore, which school an individual parent decides to send their child to is irrelevant. Which school a teacher or administrator decides to work in is irrelevant. All the matters with respect to policy decisions is what decisions will best bring about equity, democracy, and the common good for everyone.
Charter schools and vouchers fail because at best they are a weak partial solution to a systemic problem for a limited number of children. There is no evidence in any realm that free markets produce equity.
The only viable systemic solution is one that addresses economic inequity, racism, and artificial scarcity simultaneously- that is the only solution that people will struggle for beyond their small subgroup instead of fighting one another.
LikeLike
Progressives can ill afford this kind of sniping. The last thing the left needs right now is a war between teachers unions and liberal charter supporters.”
Given his recent endorsement of Cuomo in the NY primary for governor, I’m sure DNC chair Perez probably feels the same way about Cynthia Nixon’s sniping about teacher evaluations.
Just get into line behind our chosen candidates, like good little boys and girls, and don’t ever question anything we do. Divisive sniping by Cynthia Nixon about silly stuff like teacher evaluations just hurts the party
LikeLike
As I noted in an earlier comment, the DNC and Cuomo are about to be tested by Mayor de Blasio’s proposal to eliminate standardized tests as the sole metric for entry into NYC’s “competitive HSs”…
LikeLike
Thanks, Diane, for the information on funding sources. Mr. Williams made a point of noting that Hiawatha schools were part of a non-profit network… but neglected to mention that they are receiving revenues from corporations who are avoiding the payment of federal, state, and local taxes that underwrite public education by making certain elected politicians retain loopholes and local politicians offer payments-in-lie-of-taxes…
LikeLike
I was heartened by the many comments to that article–including the “Readers’ Picks” (the ones with the most “recommendations”–that make these very points that are being made here. I wondered if many of the commenters I see here on this blog also wrote comments on this story!
I don’t know why the NYT is so in love with charters, but I have been continually disappointed with their education reporting over the years.
OK, I DO know why they love charters . . . but I guess what I REALLY don’t understand how the NYT doesn’t seem to learn from its many readers who point out the flaws in their one-sided reporting, what research tells us about charter schools and student outcomes, and the many places (such as FL) where charters are under-regulated with disastrous results.
LikeLike