Hakeem Jeffries is a Democratic Congressman from Brooklyn. He is part of the Democratic leadership team. Some people believe he might be the next Speaker of the House of Representatives, the successor to Nancy Pelosi. He is a favorite of hedge fund managers and the charter school industry. He recently was honored by the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools as an African American charter school leader (why the organization established a racially segregated award is unclear, as it is unclear why Congressman Jeffries would accept it).
It is not “progressive” to support privatization of public services. It is not progressive to support schools staffed by non-union teachers. It is not progressive to support a “movement” that ignores racial segregation and even celebrates it. It is not progressive to support a movement financed by the anti-union Waltons, the DeVos family, the Koch brothers, and ALEC.
Progressives support public schools.
Dorothy Siegel, a longtime activist in the Working Families Party, wrote this comment about Congressman Jeffries:
“I know Hakeem well. I worked very hard to get him elected, first, to the NYS Assembly, and then to Congress, in order to defeat the even worse Democrat Ed Towns. I even raised a bunch of money for him. Then I saw him slip over to the dark side. But, make no mistake, I believe that his embrace of privatization is NOT (as he claims) primarily about wanting poor black and brown kids to get a good education, but about the fact that there is more money and power on that side than on the side of public education. That money, the hedge funders who provide it, and the corporatist establishment Democrats, were the drivers of Hakeem’s political rise. Money and power have totally corrupted him. Hakeem, like Cuomo and Booker, has and will continue to sell out our public schools when they are in the inner sanctum of their party leadership positions. Hakeem’s rise within Congressional Dem leadership is helping him to thwart ALL our efforts to reign in Congressional support for privatization. On education issues, he wis arguably more powerful than all the new progressive congresspeople we will elect in 2018, combined.
“Sad to say, we must recognize that Hakeem is THE ENEMY. He can not be defeated in his very safe Brooklyn seat, so we must all ORGANIZE to EXPOSE him as the corporate shill that he is. We must tell our progressive Congressional friends that it is NOT ok to go along with Dem leadership (Hakeem) on charters and privatization. Believe me, Hakim will have the tools he needs to fight harder for his corporate friends than anyone on our side will have, so we need to be loud and clear. We also have to insist that, for politicians to gain our support, it’s NOT ok to be “progressive” on reproductive choice and Medicare for All, etc, etc, but anything less than TOTALLY AGAINST corporatism and privatization. Time to take a stand!
“BTW, Hakeem was a key supporter of Zellnor Myrie, the victor in one of the races against the IDC traitors we defeated in the NYS Dem primary. We need to watch what Zellnor does in Albany to make sure he doesn’t pay back his mentor by supporting Hakeem’s education agenda. I’m not at all worried about the other five IDC-slayers. They are solidly and deeply pro-public education. Zellnor may be, too, but he will certainly get pressured by Hakeem and that ilk. So we need to let him know that “progressive” means 100% pro-public education.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Hakim Jeffries as speaker would be a gift to the GOP, which would win 300 seats in the US House the following election. He is a lunatic.
Black Agenda Report’s Bruce Dixon has a provocative essay on black unity behind black candidates. He recalls a black pastor demanding black journalists build a black wall of unity by refraining from criticizing Obama.After election that black wall of unity was expected to make no demands. Hence Dixon concludes:
“The pastor pretty much got his wish, and that wall of black unity erected around President Obama proved among his most valuable assets.
But it didn’t protect him against the charter school sugar daddies intent upon privatizing public schools and throwing a hundred thousand qualified black teachers in the street. It didn’t protect President Obama from letting go the too-big-to-fail or jail banksters at a cost of trillions, while allowing 3 million families, an outsize chunk of them black families, to lose their homes.
In the end, the wall of black unity around Barack Obama freed his hand to ignore black demands upon him, if we’d possessed coherent political sense to make any in the first place.”
Read the entire piece here: https://blackagendareport.com/black-unity-behind-black-candidates-helps-whom-us-or-them
In case you missed it…
https://dianeravitch.net/2018/06/06/ed-johnson-an-open-letter-to-obama-about-race-to-the-top/
So now Hakim Jeffries is THE ENEMY? Can we at least wait until Trump is out of office before we start eating our children? There happen to be a good number of progressive, community-oriented charter schools in Mr. Jeffries’ district and he is aware of the excellent work they do. You may paint the entire charter sector with one big paintbrush if you wish but please at least allow others to take a more nuanced position. The fact that Jeffries supported Myrie against the IDC candidate is another indication that he isn’t a single-issue zealot, as the IDC was reliably pro charter.
This piece is rabid. If we declare war against decent, progressive elected representatives who are not in alignment with a totalitarian anti-charter school position then we really are screwed.
Progressives do not support privatization — unless they have been duped by the duplicitous charter industry’s slick sales pitch.
Even Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren support “public charters” and neither of them were willing to support Cynthia Nixon over Cuomo. Sure they both finally came out against the Massachusetts expansion of charter schools, but Warren’s statement opposing that began with over the top praise of the so-called “good” charters. (FYI — “good” usually means “hedge fund billionaires underwrite them”) During the 2016 campaign, Hillary Clinton actually spoke more honestly about charters than Bernie, who obviously did not care.
Just saying that I WISH progressives would not support charter schools but most of them refuse to take a strong stance against them.
Among the few politicians standing strong against charters are the non-progressives Tim Kaine and Ralph Northam (whom Bernie worked very hard to defeat so a pro-charter “progressive” could win).
So either beloved progressive leaders are not progressive (and I believe they are), or too many progressive should be listening to moderates like Ralph Northam when it comes to supporting public schools instead of trying to remove him and replace him with a pro-charter politician.
Hakim Jeffries is a total and complete sell-out when it comes to charters. He is good on some other issues, but when it comes to charters, his very favorite charter chain is Success Academy and he is never challenged on that because the media gives him a pass. If Jeffries was asked whether he agrees with Eva Moskowitz that suspending 18% of the 5 year olds at one of her charters with virtually no white students is due to their violent nature, and if he was asked what he believes should be done about all those African-American parents sending their violent 5 year olds to Success Academy and what he would tell those African-American parents whose kids Moskowitz claims are so violent about how top make their children less violent, Jeffries might be at a loss for words.
Oh Lord, the politician whose name I will never again speak or write trotted charter school students — no, marched — charter school students across the stage of the Democratic National Convention Moskowitz style — military fashion — lost, showed her affection for Wall Street, and lost the election because she couldn’t rally the base, let alone independents. Neoliberal FAIL. Give me half-hearted, ignorant support for charters over charter gushing over any day.
There were charter school kids marched across the stage of the Democratic National Convention in 2016? I absolutely missed that and would have been appalled. I tried to google it just to see how bad it was and could find no mention — any idea what day of the convention this happened?
I was responding to your comment “progressives don’t support privatization”. Some progressives like Tom Perriello — DFER politician of the month and recipient of ed reform money — do. At least they do when it comes to supporting charter schools.
Give me someone who stands firmly against charters like Tim Kaine and Ralph Northam over a progressive who keeps insisting that the ‘good public charters’ should be praised. I’d rather have Ralph Northam actually standing up and PROTECTING public schools than a progressive who offers “half-hearted, ignorant support for charters” and repeats the talking points of the reform movement to give it progressive credibility.
However, I have no bone to pick over someone who prefers a pro-charter progressive over a pro-public education mainstream Dem. We all make choices about what issues are most important to us. I know people who voted for Cuomo because of his anti-fracking stance and they could care less that he throws public schools under the bus. I know people who voted for Perriello despite his pro-charter stance because they liked more of his other positions.
As long as there is no “holier than thou” pretense that somehow Perriello is on the side of the angels because he is anointed a “progressive” (despite his pro-charter values) while Northam is on the side of the devil because he isn’t a true progressive but happens to actually stand up for public schools, I can accept the choices and values other people make. We should all be up front about the choices instead of making sweeping and untrue statements like progressives support public schools and mainstream Dems support charters. I wish it was that easy. I wish the progressive movement was standing behind the NAACP’s moratorium on charters because if Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren were coming on strong about a moratorium, it would sure be harder for Hakeen Jeffries to support charters so strongly because he’d feel far more political pushback.
See the convention schedule: Eagle Academy principal and (all male, all black, all in uniform, synchronized moving and choral chanting) students, DNC, Tuesday, July 26, 2018. While you’re at it, look up some more of your favorite disgraced political family’s history founding and fostering the charter infestation of today. You can start with the Charter School Expansion Act of 1998. Or you can look up their decades long close relationship with Eli Broad.
Oops! That DNC Convention date was July, 2016 not ’18, obviously.
I’m not done yet. It’s good to get this off my chest. The Eagle Academy students marched onstage in military lockstep, and stood at full “attention”. Then, they recited the poem that the school recites at the start of each day, “Invictus” if memory serves. The thing is, though, it wasn’t really a recitation; it was a shouting. They said the poem with the same intonation as Marines use when chanting “This is my rifle. There are many others like it but this one is mine. My rifle is my best friend…” In other words, they had been taught to mangle the poem. Then they marched off — in military lockstep. July 26, 2016.
LeftCoastTeacher,
If you are talking about Eagle Academy in NYC, that is a REAL public school, under the auspices of the DOE, and not a charter.
You may not like how it is run or its philosophy. But it is PUBLIC. Not a privately operated charter over which the DOE has no control. It is a choice school and in NYC there are many choice public schools run with various philosophies that students apply to for middle and high school.
Think about your assumptions because they are often wrong. You seem determined to see only the most evil intentions with certain people and willfully ignore the full on embrace of charters when it is a so-called “progressive” who is embracing them.
So, to repeat, there was not a privately run charter school marching its kids across the DNC stage. There was a public choice school overseen by the DOE whose students participated.
Does that mean that the DNC convention was rabidly pro-public school? Wasn’t that what you were implying? That by having a charter school there the DNC was signaling that it was rabidly pro-charter?
Hmm. You know New York better than I do, but when I looked up Eagle Academy in 2016 I thought it was a charter.
But she’s still neoliberal.
Steve, you may laud Hakeem Jeffries for his support of “progressive,community-oriented charter schools” and their “excellent work.” Whatever one might think about these charters, you should be aware that his award from the National Alliance of Public Charter Schools specifically cited his support for Success charters instead. “Congressman Jeffries is a faithful supporter of New York’s Success Academy, New York City’s largest network of charter schools. Congressman Jeffries participated in a Success Academy event that raised $9.3 million to fund six new schools and serve 3,000 local children in charter schools.” https://info.publiccharters.org/-temporary-slug-9446bdd9-0654-4ffa-8759-348060ec72fd?utm_medium=social&utm_source=email
I agree with this absolutely.
Unfortunately, I strongly believe that the so-called “progressive, community-oriented charter schools” are used to give cover for Success Academy. They are terrified of speaking out against the bad practices because of the unspoken deal that Moskowitz won’t compare her results directly with theirs and talk about how lousy they are, and they will allow her to do anything she wants — from embracing Betsy DeVos to going on a media blitz to explain how violent the 5 and 6 year olds in her charters (only the ones with virtually no white students) are to argue that Mayor de Blasio’s attempt to limit suspensions in K-2nd grade is abhorrent and will let so many violent children run rampant.
Not one of the progressive charters said “we aren’t getting violent children winning our lotteries so we find it odd that Moskowitz claims that 18% or 20% of the Kindergarten and first grade students who go to Success Academy may act out violently. Instead those charters remain silent and complicit.
“eating our children”? He is no child of ours.
“a totalitarian anti-charter school position”? No comment, it’ll only get me in trouble.
It’s odd that these black men have a sort of discrimination against people of their own color. I don’t know what to call it? Cory Booker, Ben Carson, Kanye West, Hakim Jeffries. It’s almost like they are mocking. A “look at me, I made it!” kind of statement. A “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” kind of philosophy on life. It started with Jackson and Sharpton, but it has evolved into something very peculiar. Yes, it’s greed, but it’s also something else that I just can’t name.
Please step back for a second and look at what you’re doing. Are you really conflating Cory Booker, Ben Carson, Kayne West, Hakim Jeffries, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson? Why not throw in Louis Armstrong, Jackie Robinson and Barack Obama? Do black Americans think Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren discriminate against white people or conflate them with Mitch McConnell and Ted Nugent?
Obama belongs at the head of the list.
Jackie Robinson didn’t support charter schools.
The Koch brothers, the Waltons, DeVos and ALEC do.
I HAVE stepped back to take a look and this all seems very odd to me. Why do these black politicians support Charter schools when the NAACP has come out against them? Why does someone like Ben Carson sit at the helm of his department and make life difficult for the many black/brown skinned people needing assistance? Why the remark from Kanye West that slavery was a “choice”?They made it to the top and the only way to stay there is to keep the others down. That’s the way I see it! Unless one of them decides to come forward and do some explaining, this is the only explanation. And yes….I will add in there that Obama was a weird part of this, too.
Malcolm X had a term for that type: House negro.
Duane, I’ve heard another term that describes people like that: Oreo, black on the outside and white on the inside.
“The List”
Barack Obama
Cory Booker
Ben Carson
Kayne West
Hakim (or Hakeem) Jeffries
Al Sharpton
Jesse Jackson
Michael Lomax
Andrew Young
Potential additions?
Any Obama-endorsed Democrat (explore LittleSis.org, a countermeasure to BigBro)
“It’s odd that these black men have a sort of discrimination against people of their own color.”
Perhaps some of them do although I suspect they are more like everybody else. We don’t say white people are discriminating against their own race if they take a stand in favor of minority rights. Some are taking positions because it furthers their careers or it is prudent to do so if they want to get ahead. Some have a sincere belief in a “bootstraps” philosophy and the myth of rugged individualism. Obama hardly had a background/upbringing that would lead one to believe he would be steeped in black culture, not that he didn’t work to promote the rights of black people. I’m not so sure we should be surprised that he showed no interest in promoting public education, given his own private school upbringing. Color and ethnicity provide handy ways to divide people into groups and skin color has certainly played a huge role in how people have navigated this society. That fact can be used very handily to manipulate a debate, but it is unfair to assume that any of us have the right to judge anyone else’s actions because of their skin color and our preconceived notion of how they should act. That doesn’t mean we can’t use our particular labels to promote ourselves or be used by others as tokens, but I hope more of us are moving past identifying friends and acquaintances by their racial or ethnic background as the first touch point.
With assistance and encouragement from journalist John Merrow and educator Deborah Meier, progressive educators, students and families from more than 30 states have founded a new coalition. The group is promoting and encouraging, among other things:
* multiple forms of measurement
* clear transparency accountability for use of tax funds by public schools
* collaboration among various forms of public schools
* Use of service learning and other experiential forms of education
The group will be governed by parents, students and educators from independent chartered public schools. More information is here:
https://www.indiecharters.org/
How is this organization being funded? Is it going to be the Ivanka Trump where they pretend to be moderate and don’t personally embrace bad practices, but refuse to ever criticize the charters that their own funders also like? If the organization just provides cover for the supposedly “high performing” charters, then you are complicit.
^^I checked the link and there was nothing about how this organization is being funded.
I did notice that businesses that provide services to charters can donate to be affiliate members.
Have you attended NY school board or superintendent association meetings? Did you notice that groups selling services to schools provide $ to make these meetings possible?
I’d attended such meetings in more than a dozen states and seen this at every meeting. Are you working to prevent this from happening?
No one cares whether vendors make profits. They are businesses. That’s what businesses do.
Schools are not supposed to make profits. They are schools. The money is for instruction, not profits.
Principals and superintendents are not paid $600,000.
Only in charter schools are there profits and outrageous administrative overhead.
Actually, some people do care about what businesses do who sell to schools. Some of us as educators have challenged questionable texts materials which had what we consider racist or sexist assertions.
Perhaps the organization you helped started will look into the profits that companies make on bonds districts sell.
Distract, distract, distract. I wrote a book about textbooks. Of course, the publishers make a profit. That is not comparable to the grifters in the charter industry collecting millions in real estate deals on their charter scam.
Sadly, there are LOTS of thieves and charlatans who’ve made money from public education. Some are noted here, some ignored.
The charter industry is unregulated and rife with corruption. Your failure to call for a house cleaning makes you complicit, as a leader in this nefarious effort to undermine, defund, and privatize our public schools.
Be sure to thank Betsy DeVos for the millions she just gave to the highly segregated charter schools of Minneapolis.
Actually, the new organization and I both have called for financial accountability (and we’ve worked hard and successfully to correct a lot of mistakes here). This is one of the central principles of the new group.
The organization is being funded by the schools who are members, and others who support its principles of collaboration, multiple measures of assessment, experiential education and other ideas.
It’s being governed by parents, students and educators.
funded by “others who support its principles of collaboration, multiple measures of assessment, experiential education and other ideas.”
And who are those others? Who are your biggest funders? It is the kind of thing that is often on the website of groups like yours which is why I asked.
Calling for transparency when you refuse to specifically call out the most powerful charter operators who fight transparency reminds me a lot of Ivanka Trump talking about how she supports women’s issues or talking about how she is “against” children being torn from their parents and detained while making sure never to criticize anyone who is responsible for those policies.
Ivanka’s statements “supporting” women’s issues are meaningless pablum because she won’t ever do anything to endanger her very privileged position. She is complicit. I’m guessing your organization will never do anything to endanger their privileged position (or their funders). Lots of Ivanka-like pablum about how you “support” transparency just as much as she supports women’s issues. That’s just being complicit.
And I’d be happy to be proven wrong about this. If your organization starts doing more than mouthing Ivanka-like pablum and actually pointing out who is responsible for the things you profess so much concern about, than good for you. I won’t hold my breath. I’m not holding it for Ivanka, either.
Major funders of the group at this point are independent public school charters.
“* multiple forms of measurement”
Well, that’s a bad start right there.
Perhaps they mean “multiple forms of assessment and evaluation of programs”?
and
“* collaboration among various forms of public schools”
Various forms? What does that mean, Joe?
And as far as Merrow is concerned. . .
Sorry but, I’ve not seen hardly anything from him that shows he even begins to understand what the teaching and learning process is about. He’s just another non-teacher who has made a living telling teachers what to do. He’s been wrong about so many things educational in the past, present and now trying to worm his way into the future. I don’t buy snakeoil!
Duane,
I share your point about non-teachers telling teachers who to do. I am a non-teacher. I never tell teachers what to do because I have no idea. I am a historian of education. I have worked in the federal government. I am well informed about policy. One reason I respect teachers is that I can’t do what they do every day.
So Diane, if educators decide they want to create a chartered public school, that’s ok with you?
In many cases, independent chartered public schools have been created by educators who spent years working in district public schools.
For those interested in hearing from a variety of educators about why they decided to help create and/or work in chartered public schools, here’s a good source:
http://educationpost.org/
Education Post is funded by billionaires. It is not a credible source.
Charter schools are not public schools. They are neither accountable nor transparent.
That’s why both the national NAACP and Black Lives Matter called for a moratorium on ALL new charters.
Must be cool to be in the same boat with the Koch brothers, Betsy DeVos, and the Waltons.
Many educators, including some current and former district educators, write for Education Post. Some parents also for Education Post.
I think it’s valuable to listen to and learn from a variety of educators, parents and others who are trying to help many more students discover and develop their gifts, and reach their potential.
Edication Post is funded by the zwaltons, Bloomberg, and Eli Broad.
It’s writers are paid.
No one pays me or Mercedes Schneider or Gary Rubinstein or Tom Ultican or Steven Singer.
If the money dried up, Education Post and The 74 would disappear.
Some of the people who post on Ed Post are paid, some are not. Some of the people who post on your blog are paid by various groups for their advocacy, some are not. I’m one of the people who posts in both places and is not paid to do so.
But being paid does not, imho disqualify what a person says.
I’d encourage interested people to take a look at Ed Post and at the independent charter group.
As for “guilt by association, I think you’ll find many people in alternative and chartered public schools have long time involvement in civil and human rights efforts. Many of us strongly disagree with vouchers and most of the right wing agenda.
From the indiecharter.org site (what a hip name eh, indie-where’s my sarcasm font)
“Equity
We reaffirm that charter schools are public schools. All public schools should receive equitable funding.
We are committed to transparency in our practice and accountability to our students, parents, government authorizers, and the public at-large.
As public institutions, our charter schools are open, welcoming, and responsive to our many stakeholders.”
Well of course private charter schools want to call themselves public schools. Hell, they’ve managed to get a couple state’s to put that into the charter school legislation. But, yes, but the courts and NLRB have sided with the private charter schools in determining that, in fact, they are private entities. LIE #1
One would think that when pontificating on “equity” that speaking of equity in terms of the students would be a priority. I guess not, eh! But trying to steal public monies for private interests is “equity” in the minds of the private charter supporters at the ever so hip “indiecharter”.
LIE #2 No, private charter schools are not “committed to transparency. . . ” I wish I could lie as boldly as that.
LIE #3 “As public institutions. . .open, welcoming, and. . . ” No, they are not. They are responsive to the owners and no one else. Private charter schools are not “open and welcoming” to all as a true public school is.
Ay ay ay ay ay!
Someone else help me out with taking apart the bullshit that is on that site, I can’t stomach any more.
Privately managed charter schools are not public schools, no matter what the state legislature said.
So ruled the Washington State Supreme Court. It said that the state constitution defines a “common school” as one with an elected board, accountable to the people. Charter schools do not have elected boards. They are not “common schools” and thus not public schools.
The federal courts have ruled on at least two separate occasions, as has the NLRB, that charter schools are “not state actors.” They are private corporations, and therefore not subject to state laws governing employment, and other issues.
If the definition of a public school is that is governed by a locally elected board, how does one classify the NY and Chicago “public schools”? They are not run by locally elected boards.
Many states have publicly funded schools for certain students (such as blind or hearing impaired, or in some cases), that are not controlled by locally elected boards.
Washington state law permits state funds to follow students to public colleges and universities that are not controlled by local school boards. Local boards are not allowed to block students from participating.
Four former Washington State attorneys general pointed to this as one of several reasons that the Supreme Court ruled incorrectly
https://www.washingtonpolicy.org/publications/detail/four-former-state-attorneys-general-call-on-supreme-court-to-reverse-charter-school-ruling
I personally am opposed to unfettered mayoral control. But the board is appointed by an elected official.
Please name a charter school governed by a board appointed by an elected official.
I can’t think of one.
Who appointed the board of Success Academy charter chain? Who appointed the board of KIPP? Imagine? Achievement First? National Heritage Academy?
Who appoints the boards of the Gulen schools? How does it happen that most board members are Turkish? Who picked them? Did you?
So your definition of public schools has changed? Public schools are not just those elected by local boards?
Some chartered schools were created by locally elected boards. According to the National Association of Charter School Authorizers, the following states permit local districts boards to be authorizers: Alaska, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming
https://www.qualitycharters.org/state-policy/multiple-authorizers/list-of-charter-school-authorizers-by-state/
The list is wrong. The only charter authorizer sin New York are the SUNY board, appointed by Cuomo (the hedge fund managers’s guy) and the Board of Regents. No elected board in the state authorizes charters.
In Virginia, only elected school boards authorizes charters. There are exactly 9 in the state. That sounds good to me.
Diane, here’s a link to the NYC Dept of Education website. It says there are 3 groups that can authorize charters in NY – one of which is the NYC Dept of Education:
https://www.schools.nyc.gov/enrollment/enroll-in-charter-schools/learn-about-charter-schools
“Are charter schools New York City public schools?
As charter schools are public schools, charter schools are part of the New York City Department of Education’s strategy for providing families with an increased number of high-quality school options. Charter schools have a range of academic and staffing models, mission, goals, and policies. Individual charter schools provide information about schedules, grading, discipline, promotion criteria, open house dates, and the names of staff and Board of Trustees members.
When did this happen?
Charter schools became part of NY State’s public education offerings with the passing of the NY State Charter Schools Act of 1998(Open external link). Charter schools in New York are authorized by three groups:
New York City Department of Education (DOE)
New York State Department of Education (NYSED)
The State University of New York Charter Schools Institute (SUNY)”
Part of public education all over the country are schools not controlled by locally elected boards.. As noted earlier, that includes schools have established for various students (like blind or hearing impaired students, or in some cases, students with special talents in math or art.
Sorry, Joe. The law was changed. The NYC department of Education no longer has the authority to authorize charters.
Duane, you accuse fellow educators of telling lies. That’s disappointing but of course you along with everyone else have free speech.
You can read about the educators, many of them veterans of public education, parents, and civil rights advocates who created the new organization, here:
https://www.indiecharters.org/coordinating-committee
The conference discussions where independent charter educators, parents and students adopted the principles discussed is on line. You, or anyone else interested can listen to their discussions.
Joe, I accuse fellow educators of being GAGA Good German implementers of educational malpractices that harm all students. I accuse administrators of being adminimals for their lack of critical thinking, their animalistic herd behavior in implementing all the lastest snake oil schemes that some other adminimal has implemented and their inability to stand up for what is right and just by/for the students.
When I read something that doesn’t ring true, I’ll call it out. And the above quoted material doesn’t ring true to me, hence I wrote what I wrote. Yeah, I don’t make friends doing so. So be it. I call it how I perceive it and I perceive a rat in that organization from the little that I quoted.
I don’t doubt that there may be good intentions by those who put the organization together. But good intentions don’t suffice. I look at results/outcomes, in this case their own descriptions of themselves and I see dissemination and lies.
So far, the organization has given voice and attention to a variety of students and educators rural and urban, They’ve shared successes and challenges.
Videos of their Oct 2017 meeting and a national webinar featuring student, educator and parent presentations last week demonstrate that they are modeling behaviors of openness, honesty, learning and respect. Imho, that’s a good way to start.
The proof will be in the pudding, eh. Having seen good intentions and wonderful statements from groups only to find out that there is an unspoken agenda behind the group has left me quite suspicious of damn near everything when it comes to education, but especially anything to do with “reform”. Time will tell, but I won’t bet on this organization being anything more than more of the same private charter nonsense that has dominated that sector almost since its inception.
“they are modeling behaviors of openness, honesty, learning and respect. Imho, that’s a good way to start.”
Say what? That sounds like something every public school my kid has ever attended does. Are you saying they are “modeling behaviors” to the very rich and powerful charter networks that don’t have those values in the hopes that they will embrace them?
I just don’t get how modeling behaviors of respect and openness and honesty does anything since that is what most public schools do. How will that change the corruption in the charter industry who don’t find it profitable to follow your modeling correct behaviors to them?
I’ve visited district and charter public schools all over the US. Some model those behaviors. Others are dreary places.
Does anyone think that the Dems can re-gain a majority in the House of Representatives, with Ms. Pelosi in the leadership? There are grumblings that she is (at least part) of the reason, that the Dems are in the political wilderness.
Perhaps a shake-up in the leadership, might give the Dems a better chance.
BTW- Watch the race in Virginia’s 10th district. The incumbent, Barbara Comstock (R), is in a bitter fight, and may lose re-election.
Yes
Yes Charles, I do think that the Democrats will regain the majority in the House with Pelosi in the leadership and that she will be the next Speaker. I have yet to see a realistic opponent to her and from every indication she was an excellent speaker and deserves to be again. See Paul Krugman on this here: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/13/opinion/nancy-pelosi-midterms-democrats-republicans.html
What leads you to believe that the Dems will gain a majority in the House, this November? Technically all 435 seats are up for re-election. But with gerrymandering, and the huge advantages of incumbency, very few are truly competitive.
In the district where I live, the incumbent is a Dem. His seat is so safe, that the Repubs are not even mounting a serious challenge, and is providing virtually no financing.
The party in power, traditionally loses some seats in the mid-terms. The Repubs will probably drop a few.
It always astounds me, how the congress has an approval rating lower than Charles Manson, but the people re-elect the same congresspersons 90% of the time.
I’ve read a lot of critical crap in the media about Pellosi. What that tells me is that she probably an Alt-Right woman hating target because she is a Democrat and a woman.
If you want to know who the real Nancy Pellosi is, I suggest you stay away from Fox News. In fact, avoid most if not all of the corporate owned media. The more negative the corporate media is of Pellosi, the more I tend to trust her.
To learn about the real Nancyh Pellosi, I suggest you and anyone else that badmouths her because they drank the corporate media’s Kool aide, start with Vote Smart.
If you look carefully at her positions on issues based on her voting record, you will discover she does not support the Alt-Right’s efforts to destroy the social safety net and the public sector.
https://votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/26732/nancy-pelosi/#.W6fCG2NReUk
Do not, I repeat, do not judge her on where her campaign funaciaing comes from. Focus on how she votes on the issues.
Every vote Pelosi has made in Congress is listed on Vote Smart, but do not single out a few. If you want to honesty judge her, you must include every vote she has made on every issue for a complete picture instead of one that is cherry picked.
https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/26732/nancy-pelosi#.W6fC3WNReUk
NYC Kids PAC endorsed Zellnor Myrie, in part because of his excellent responses to our survey which is posted here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3i9wiacg401T0xLaWJZNllQVW1Pd1MyUHNId2tpNnBibHFN/view In it, he opposed raising the cap on charters in NY, supported repealing the state law giving preferences to space for new and expanding NYC charters at city expense, and a number of other important proposals to strengthen the accountability and transparency of charter schools, when it comes to student attrition, suspensions etc. Obviously we have to keep an eye on him but so far I have no reason to expect that he will adopt Hakeem Jeffries POV on these issues. In fact, the entire anti-IDC contingent who were won their primaries seem to be truly progressive on the issues of privatization and supporting our public schools (knock on wood.)
Thank you for your work getting the ICD “Dems” out of office! I am absolutely knocking on wood!
What are ICD Dems? Thanks!
Duane,
my error — I meant IDC. That’s short for Independent Democratic Conference. They run as Democrats in the NY State Senate but (with the blessing and support of Andrew Cuomo) actually caucus with the Republicans so that instead of the Democrats controlling the Senate the Republicans do!
I know there are some Democrats in the US Senate who are very conservative, but even Democrats like Tester or Manchin would not vote for a Republican leader of the Senate over their own party. Imagine if the Senate was 51 Democrats and 49 Republicans (the opposite of now) and Joe Manchin called himself a Democrat but voted for Mitch McConnell as Senate leader to make sure that Republicans controlled all committees and could prevent Merrick Garland from even coming up for a vote. Even the most conservative Dems in the US Senate have never done that. But in NY, the IDC Dems have done just that.
In NY – with the support of Andrew Cuomo – you have a group of Democrats who caucus with the Republicans so that instead of the Democrats controlling the Senate and committees, they actually vote for the Republicans to be in control! I don’t even understand how they call themselves Democrats and many of them were rightly ousted in this primary. It is to Hakeem Jeffries credit that he endorsed the REAL Democrat in the primary and not the incumbent IDC Democrat. Andrew Cuomo loves all the IDC Democrats and one of his biggest beefs with de Blasio is that de Blasio decided to use his profile to raise money for progressive challengers to them 4 years ago. de Blasio’s calling out the wrongs of charter school CEOs and trying to defeat IDC Democrats made him Cuomo’s sworn enemy.
Seeing the NY State IDC Democrats at work makes you understand the difference between real turncoat Democrats and conservative Democrats like Tester and Manchin who vote to have Democratic leaders control the agenda instead of Republicans. In politics, that is very, very important.
Thanks, NYCpsp, had no clue as to what ICD meant, not being from New York. What’s the saying? With friends like that who needs enemies!
For Duane and others who are interested in ways other than standardized tests to measure what’s happening with students and schools, here’s a link to a report, offering examples from both district and chartered public schools:
Click to access What-Should-We-Do-Report.pdf
The district examples include Central Park East, founded by Deborah Meier, and St. Paul (Mn) Open School, founded by a group of mothers who convinced the St Paul, Mn school board to create a k-12 option that began in fall, 1971. There also are examples from some chartered public schools.
an
Examples include
* portfolio approach to graduation
* criteria used to measure student progress in making public presentations
* surveys of graduates
and many other ideas.
The report also contains 5 vital and 3 valuable features that every school can consider using. Those suggestions came from a variety of national experts, including the then president of the American Education Research Association, Lauren Resnick, James Ysseldyke, one of the nation’s leading authorities on measuring progress of students with some form of disability, and Ed DeAvila, who specialized in measuring progress of students who do not speak English as a first language.
One of the founding principles of the charter movement in Mn (and in many other states) was a believe that we need much broader ways to determine what’s happening with students. This booklet, supported by Richard Riley, then US Secretary of Education, was an example of district/charter collaboration to carry out that idea.
Deborah Meier opposes privately managed charter schools. She is a great believer in social responsibility.
Deborah Meier is a huge fan of site governed public schools. That applies to some district and some chartered public schools.
Joe,
Thanks for the link! I understand the intent behind the report and suggestions and know that those intentions are right and good. (Unfortunately, the privateers have bastardized the charter school concept into something very different than what you all had proposed). At the same time, you have to know this critique would be forthcoming from me, eh! (LOL)
From the Executive Summary:
The vital components are:
• Clear, measurable outcomes for each school;
• Goals that are understood and supported by families, students and educators;
• Multiple measures, including standardized tests and performance measures;
• Measurement of all studentsí academic work;
• Assessments which measure growth of students who donít speak English at home;
and
• Use of assessment information to inform school improvement efforts.
The valuable features are:
• Using a person or persons outside the school to help assess student work;
• Measuring experiences and attitudes of school graduates; and
• Creating a parent/educator/community committee to supervise assessment efforts.
What I find to be THE MOST substantial problem is the almost complete reliance on metrics, metrics that aren’t valid or that literally can’t be done with any sense of accuracy. I understand the perceived need to buy into the quantitative means of evaluating/assessing schools, especially at the time of the report. But by now we should all understand that reliance on output “measures” is a false means of attempting to accurately describe/assess/judge a teacher’s and by extension a school’s effectiveness. We have seen the horrendous results of the implementation of that reliance on the quantification of human activities that defy quantification. And it is the students that are most harmed in the process due to that standards and testing metrification of the teaching and learning process.
What is sorely needed is to assess and evaluate the inputs that are needed for each and every individual student to prosper and learn to the best of their abilities/capabilities and desires. Until we get away from the focus on outputs and rightly focus on inputs (which include everything involved from physical infrastructure to staff to curriculum to etc. . . ) we will be playing into the hands of those who seek to privatize and plunder the public schools for their own personal monetary gain.
Thanks for your indepth response, Duane. I agree that we need to discuss inputs. A number of us here in Minnesota were part of a successful effort to convince legislators that additional funds should be given to schools – district & charter – that have high percentages of low income and limited English speaking students. These schools now receiver MORE per pupil dollars from the state than many schools serving mostly affluent districts.
And as mentioned, my mother was the first Head Start director in Kansas. I’ve been a long time advocate of early childhood programs for low income students (which was included in the 1985 National Governors Association report, Time For Results, for which I was staff director.
These are just two examples. We agree that more attention to inputs is vital.
Having said that, I think we also need to be clear about what we are trying to achieve. Central Park East, Urban Academy and a number of other terrific public schools have developed the portfolio approach to graduation. The report I mentioned includes these and other examples.
For example, if we want students to graduate believing that they can and should be involved in efforts to improve the world, we should be checking with students to see what they have done, and what they believe about this. There are ways to measure attitudes toward “civic engagement.’
If we want students to be able to make a public presentation, we can use, for example, the metrics that Alverno College has developed.
So, I think we need greater attention to inputs. And greater attention to results – measured in various ways.
“if we want students to graduate believing that they can and should be involved in efforts to improve the world, we should be checking with students to see what they have done, and what they believe about this.”
I don’t agree with that goal for the students. While it sounds like a noble goal, to me it contradicts the fundamental purpose of public education as I’ve developed in my book by looking at the states’ rationales found in the states’ constitutions:
“The purpose of public education is to promote the welfare of the individual so that each person may savor the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the fruits of their own industry.”
Now, some students may view themselves and their education with the purpose that you have stated. And that is fine. However, not all students would have that interest, but I’d think that probably only a small percentage would have that interest. It should not be the state’s decision to force that mode of being onto a student.
Same with the public presentations. While that can be what a student desires we, public school teachers/the state should not be forcing it upon students. It’s one thing to have students get up in front of class and present something (and I’ve even seen arguments about making students stand and do that, not that I necessarily agree) but the function of public speaking is something fundamentally different. Give the students the opportunity to do so, do not force them to do so.
I have a certain libertarian (small l not capital L political nonsense Livertarianism, oops spelled that wrong) sense about public schooling that serves to put a bit of a brake on demanding certain things, some of which many consider right and proper, such as forcing students to stand and pledge allegiance to the flag, school backed prayer, school uniforms and many other schemes demanded of students in the past.
I hope that my position makes sense to you, not that you have to agree with it, eh! We definitely agree on the need to assess (not measure-LOL) inputs to determine what is needed to provide the services so that all students “may learn to savor the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the fruits of their own industry.”
Thank you for expressing this truth about Hakeem Jeffries. Those of us in the Green Party here in Brooklyn were screaming warnings about Jeffries while he was running for office, but many Democrats lambasted us for our criticism (as they often do). Its astonishing that while Jeffries shills for charter schools, he sent his own children to one of the most progressive public schools in Brooklyn (Brooklyn New School) that supports hands on learning and has one of the highest opt out rates in all of New York State.
Both the Democrats and Republicans operate within and benefit from a completely corrupt electoral and political system. Most Democrats who start out “progressive” end up compromising their principals. Even the “blue wave” candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez capitulated to Cuomo by endorsing him without even the slightest attempt to force his hand on any issues. AOC is not even elected yet and she is already compromising her supposed convictions!
Its not enough to run around like headless chickens begging Democrats to behave themselves. That is a recipe for disaster as we have seen time and time again. We must DEMAND an overhaul of our corrupt system. We need Rank Choice Voting (to eliminate the “spoiler” issue). We need Proportional Representation (with multi-seated districts). We need publicly funded elections with strict rules about equal media and debate time for ALL candidates and parties (all money out of politics!). We need to abolish the electoral college. — These are just some of the answers to many of our problems that the Green Party has been fighting for. Do you see Democrats championing any of these electoral reforms? None!
That is why I am working for The Green Party candidates for Governor and Lt. Governor Howie Hawkins and Jia Lee. Yes, Jia Lee one of our most courageous Opt Out activists and teachers here in NYC is running for Lt. Governor! http://www.howiehawkins.org.
Stop letting Democrats take your vote for granted! Vote for the candidates and the party that will save the planet and bring real social justice! Vote Green!
Like!
Daniella,
Who is the Green Party candidate running against Jeffries? And did that candidate also run in the Democratic primary against Jeffries?
Diane, you wrote (above) “Sorry, Joe. The law was changed. The NYC department of Education no longer has the authority to authorize charters.”
I checked with David Frank, Executive Director of the New York State Department of Education Charter School Office. He said that after the change in the state law to which you referred:
* Both New York City Department of Education and the Buffalo School District continue to authorize charters. In NYC they authorize 41, and in Buffalo they authorize 2.
* Local NY school districts also can authorize district schools that convert to charter status
* Under the 2010 revisions that you mentioned, local districts can not authorize newly created charters, except for conversions mentioned above.
I post this for two reasons. First, because I think it’s important to make sure readers have the facts provided by the relevant NY State Department of Education official.
Secondly, today many people in this nation (and some in other countries) will watch a committee of the US Senate, hoping it will decide an independent investigation of Judge Cavanaugh is VITAL.
Many of us have contacted Senators urging this step is because we believe that facts are not always conclusive in public policy – but they are critical in helping inform decisions.
The NYC department of Education lost its authority to authorize new charters.
It still has charters authorized by Michael Bloomberg and Joel Klein.
As noted, school boards in NY State also can authorize newly created charters if they are (as has happened in some states), conversions of existing district schools. And as noted NYC and Buffalo districts continue to be authorizers of more than 40 charters.
So imho, the facts are more complex than: “The NYC department of Education no longer has the authority to authorize charters.” NYC not only has the authority to authorize charters. It is actively doing so.