When Mayor Bill DeBlasio was on the Democratic debate stage, he lashed out at the charter industry and vowed to fight the privatizers.
But as mayor, he is protecting them.
As Leonie Haimson explains, DeBlasio’s Department of Education routinely hands over the lists of public school students to the charters, despite the protests of parents.
No other city, she says, voluntarily gives charters the names and addresses of public school students.
Now he says parents may ask to remove their names, but that is not good enough.
This is the official statement from DeBlasio’s Department of Education. If you want to take your child’s name off the charter mailing list, it is your responsibility to ask to remove his or her name. If you do nothing, your child’s name and address will be handed over to vendors working for the charter industry.
What happened to the charter school wait lists? Do they exist?
Haimson writes:
After vehement parent protests and a FERPA privacy complaint submitted to the US Department of Education, the DOE announced they will allow parents to opt out of charter mailings in the future, as the Daily News reported today. This is NOT good enough, either from a policy or privacy standpoint.
Best practice to ensure student privacy would require parental consent, as the US Department of Education notes – especially as many parents will not notice the opt out forms in backpack mail or their children may forget to share it with them.
Best practice from the standpoint of good policy would be for the DOE not to allow charter schools to buy access to this information at all – which only helps them market their schools and expand their enrollment.
NYC is the ONLY district in the entire country that voluntarily helps charter schools expand in this manner; even ostensibly pro-charter districts like Chicago don’t make this information available to charter schools.
At the recent NEA forum for presidential candidates, Mayor de Blasio aggressively postured about how he opposed charter schools:
“I’m going to be blunt with you, I am angry about the state of public education in America…“I am angry about the privatizers. I am sick and tired of these efforts to privatize a precious thing we need — public education. I know we’re not supposed to be saying ‘hate’ — our teachers taught us not to — I hate the privatizers and I want to stop them,” he said.
Charter schools already drain more than $2.1 billion from the DOE budget as well as take up valuable space in our overcrowded public school buildings. Too bad that the Mayor continues to favor the privatizers in his actions, if not his words.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Your line, Mr. Rains …
“At the recent NEA forum for presidential candidates, Mayor de Blasio aggressively postured about how he opposed charter schools”
Why? The NEA supports charters. Odd.
Is the city getting money for this or is it free?
And how did the charter schools know which students were special ed or not? The mom in the complaint said her regular ed daughter got a charter postcard but her special ed daughter did not.
There is a company called Vanguard. The DOE provides children’s names to Vanguard, and charters — and other organizations! — are able to pay Vanguard to do mass mailings for them.
The e-mail from the DOE said that Vanguard would be banned from doing any paid mailings until mid-October so that parents can opt out.
I wonder if parents can opt out of all DOE mailings! I wonder who else they sell the lists to, and why
KEY question there…
DeBlasio is attempting to close down gifted/talented schools in NYC, as part of his “war on excellence” see
https://nypost.com/2019/08/28/killing-gifted-talented-programs-is-de-blasios-next-step-in-war-on-excellence-in-education/
Yes, it is really odd that Mayor de Blasio would try to “shut down” the program that (a small but vocal number of) white and Asian parents like, and at the same time change Bloomberg’s policy of giving ALL names to charters into a policy in which parents can opt out instead of asking them to opt in if they want to receive mailings that let them know about charters. Clearly de Blasio is anti-white, anti-Asian and simply a shill for African-Americans. He must be pro-African-American and “anti-excellence”.
By the way, if you define “excellence” by “how well does my prepped and overprivileged white child do on a test when he is 4 years old and if he does well enough at age 4, that means his pure EXCELLENCE means that he must be separated into classes so that he has no children who are average or below average anywhere near him — and certainly not sitting in the very same class! during his Kindergarten, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th grade education experience”, then what can I say?
You are absolutely right that de Blasio does not define “excellence” by how well a 4 year old — many of them prepped!!! — does on a test that has never shown any validity at all. He does not agree that such “excellent” children should be separated so that they never have to be anywhere near those “not excellent” children.
The bigger question is why do you define excellence that way?
“many of them prepped”, does that exclude the Felicity Huffman approach to admittance?
Ha! I don’t know if you live in NYC, but Mayor Bloomberg instituted a policy in which parents of 4 year olds in NYC can have their child take a one on one “test” to determine exactly how “gifted” he or she is, and the results of that test will allow that child to be in a classroom from Kindergarten through 5th grade that specifically excludes any child who has not proven their “giftedness” through that very same test.
And sometimes just being in a classroom in which those “not gifted” children are not allowed is not enough! The most popular programs make sure that the child is in an entirely separate school that keeps their children separate from Kindergarten all the way through 8th grade. Because that test that the child took at age 4 determined their “excellence” and therefore it is of vital importance that no “ungifted” children be in their classroom
And children get prepped for that test! I mean, there is an entire industry of expensive tutors who will come and prep your 4 year old child so that their innate “giftedness” can show through!
And some of the parents who don’t prep say “I only went over the review materials with my 4 year old a few times, so he is clearly gifted!”
Anyway, the DOE is considering (has not even decided yet) doing away with that program and you would not believe the outcry. William is an example. Remember, de Blasio is “waging a war on excellence” according to William.
I know I will be attacked for saying this, but as I see it, de Blasio is walking a very fine line and he is always attacked for being both “anti-excellence” and “pro-charter” and “anti-charter” at the same time.
This post is a good example. Some parents wanted de Blasio to dump a program that Mayor Bloomberg started as a boon to charters. But other parents want it. So de Blasio changed the program so that parents could opt out. The people who don’t like the program wanted to make it an “opt in” program instead. Of course, they tend to be the most active and I suspect de Blasio knows that in a city where 70% of the students are severely disadvantaged, a good number of those parents will have no knowledge that they have to opt in. And some of them do want the mailings.
No matter what de Blasio does, he gets attacked. I actually thinks that leads to him trying to do what is best, not what will please one group or another. I find it laughable that anyone believes he is a charter shill but what can I say? I just feel depressed that progressives who are actually friends of public education get thrown into the same heap as Corey Booker and we end up with nothing.
I believe that de Blasio is more anti-charter than Bernie Sanders. Calling for a “moratorium” is nice, but Bernie’s proposals leave a lot of leeway and I wish someone would ask him if he believes that SUNY Charter Institute (which oversees NY state charters) is his idea of the perfect oversight agency. Because I suspect he does.
SICK!
Wonder who are the scumbags giving him $$$$$$ and perks to do their dastardly deeds?
The Plantation Model is well and alive in these United States.
A little off-topic… Chester Finn and Mike Petrilli got theirs from the richest 0.!% and now they want everybody else forced to queue up for handouts from the donor class?
NYC is the only district I know of that voluntarily allows charter schools to buy access to their mailing list. Other districts like Boston and TN do this b/c their state law requires it.
Let’s all recall what happened the last time de Blasio took the tiniest action against a policy that Mayor Bloomberg had enacted that was not “state law”.
Mayor Bloomberg’s policy was to give charters free space in public schools, which was a lot more significant than allowing them to pay Vanguard to do mailings.
Since there was absolutely no law that required Bloomberg to give charters free space, Mayor de Blasio decided not to give a few charters free space. You’d think it was a no-brainer since that “free space” that the charters were getting was going to force severely disabled children out of their school!
And the result was that the state enacted a law that simply forced de Blasio to do what Bloomberg had done simply because he wanted to.
And did progressive have de Blasio’s back? Nope. “Oh what an idiot to take on this fight.” “He did it the wrong way”. “He should have known that this would just give the charters even more than they originally had”. “Why doesn’t de Blasio know he should pick his battles and it is all his fault for going up against the charters that way when he should have done it a different way?” “Oh look what de Blasio did — he made charters look like victims by doing away with a Bloomberg policy when he should have done it a different way.”
So what happens when de Blasio tries to limit what charters get “a different way”??
“Oh that’s not the way we meant. de Blasio should have taken a strong stand and simply done away with all the mailings because he isn’t obligate by state law to do it.”
Hindsight is 20/20. In early 2014, de Blasio didn’t realize that if he changed a Bloomberg era policy it would cause the state to force him to give the charters even more. He got attacked and criticized for not realizing that he personally was responsible for making charters victims and if he had not picked that battle, it would have been better.
In 2019, de Blasio decides on a change policy to something that charters don’t like, but not enough so that they can play victim and use their massive resources and the hatred that all people who matter 9white and asian) feel for de Blasio to get even more than they had.
It is absolutely impossible for a charter to turn “we are letting parents opt out” into a PR campaign of: “you are hurting poor and disadvantaged African-American and Latinx students so we will force you do stop hurting them”. And that’s the kind of PR campaign charters always have success with to grab more resources.
It is just as likely that the result of ending these mailings would be that the state makes it a law, just like they did with the space.
If you read any of the pro-charter newspapers (i.e., every major NYC newspaper) and saw their coverage of this, you will see that already the charter rhetoric that “deBlasio wants to keep poor African-American and Latinx parents from learning about their options and keep them stuck in their failing public schools” was repeated over and over again.
I think this was a reasonable move by de Blasio. And while I understand that you believe he does everything to please the charter industry and this was just another move he made to keep them happy, I disagree.
I respect the work you do and I sincerely thank you for it. I am grateful beyond what I can express here.
However, I don’t understand how every action de Blasio takes is always characterized in the worst way. I think de Blasio has been braver than most politicians — taking on the toughest issues like integration that are the third rail of politics because there is absolutely no way that a huge swath of voters won’t be angry with the change.
And his 6 years have made a huge difference. We have integration efforts starting in districts that are larger than most cities. He has hugely expanded the Discovery program that will help bring more diversity to specialized high schools. Is it enough? No, but it is 1,000,000x more than any other NYC politician has ever done or has even suggested with their “both sides have a point” responses that don’t offer a single solution themselves.
de Blasio is willing to be hated. And any politician who tries to address real issues with charters and integration is going to be hated.
I’m be glad if the next Mayor turns out to be better on public school issues than de Blasio but I doubt they will. To get change you need a Mayor willing to take risks.
Ending stop and frisk was a huge risk. So are all de Blasio’s efforts to make public schools better. I’m glad he was willing to take those risks because most politicians want to have it both ways.
^^To be clear, when I said “all people who matter” I was ironically referring to all the people who “matter” to the media and the politicians. Mayor de Blasio still has strong support in the African-American and Latinx community, but if you read the news — and all the journalists who just do not understand why such a clown could ever have been elected Mayor — you would assume he is despised by 99% of NYC residents. Because the voices that matter to the media only seem to belong to the people who hate de Blasio and the communities where he has support are invisible to them.
The online DOE form for parents to opt out of charter mailings is here: https://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/5180260/Charter-School-Mailings-Removal-Notice-and-Form
On another linked DOE page, the favoritism towards charters schools is further revealed:
“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. ” https://www.schools.nyc.gov/enrollment/enroll-in-charter-schools/learn-about-charter-schools
I notice the parent cannot actually opt-out without the student’s OSIS number, something they are not likely to have on them, and may not even have handy at home. This means they have to call their school, during school hours, to obtain it.
This little inconvenience could really discourage a lot of parents from opting out, but even bigger will be the type of notification parents receive from the DOE explaining their rights and where to find the form.
Here is what parents are told:
“The NYC Department of Education (DOE) respects your privacy while also ensuring that you have access to important information about City schools.
The DOE currently shares your mailing address, zip code, the grade level, child and parent name with vendors hired to conduct promotional mailings for charter schools.
Vendors are not allowed to sell your information, give it to others, or use it for other purposes. This information is not directly shared with a charter school or charter organization.
We want you to know that you can stop your information from being shared for these promotional mailings. If you wish to receive these mailings, you do not need to do anything. If you do not wish to receive mail from vendors as described above, please fill out and submit the survey below. You may also complete a form in person at your school.”
I really think it should be made clear that the DOE isn’t providing any student names directly to charters.
I would like to know how and why a parent of a special needs student was not included in a mailing and it would certainly be worth a lawsuit to subpoena Vanguard’s mailing files for those mailings to see if charters ordered a mailing that left off special needs kids (although how would Vanguard know that they were special needs?)
I think the Charter Industry in New York City has Kompromat on DeBlasio and they are blackmailing him to support them.
Maybe that Komprmat is a video showing he attended several or many of Jeffery Epstein’s rape parties of underage girls.
“…they are blackmailing him to support them.”
Is your theory that they are blackmailing de Blasio to say he opposes all charters at debates, and that’s all approved by the “Charter Industry” because they know de Blasio is so despised that his saying he opposes charters will actually make people like charters more because anything de Blasio says he opposes must be a really great thing?
Maybe the sole reason that de Blasio has tried to integrate specialized high schools by changing admissions to something other than a single day’s exam is secretly all a plot to drive top students to charters. Same with getting rid of the g&t program based on deciding whether a child is gifted or not at age 4. It could all be a charter-approved plot to drive the white and Asian parents into charters by – what I keep hearing in the media – is always characterized as “destroying” good public schools.
I think it is possible to look at every de Blasio action and see some way that the charter industry is secretly directing that action because they know it will benefit them.
I really have never heard any politician who criticizes charters publicly but is secretly a rabid supporter (maybe because he is blackmailed). I guess there is always a first.
Well … what jail did Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged suicide take place in?
As long as I’m alleging kompromat, I might as well go all the way and add an assassination made to look like suicide to make sure Epstein never talked.
Stretching my allegaTIONS further, Imagine all the Koch brother’s libertarian billionaires that belong to ALEC that donated money to hire a top-notch assassin through the darknet.
I don’t believe that Mayor de Blasio has any oversight of the federal jail where Jeffrey Epstein got murdered. It is a federal prison overseen by the US Bureau of Prisons. Believe, the media hates de Blasio so much that if they could have found a way to make him responsible for this (if only because he didn’t make sure there was proper oversight) they would have. And Trump would have blamed him, too.
Furthermore, I don’t think you understand exactly how despised de Blasio is by NYC law enforcement. There is almost no chance whatsoever that they would all conspire to murder Epstein because they blame de Blasio for not allowing the NYC police to treat African-American citizens as if they are all potential threats to NYC police. He is “anti-police”. All the law enforcement agencies despise him with a passion that is almost unmatched anywhere. de Blasio is the devil to NYC law enforcement. Of course, that hasn’t stopped progressives from saying de Blasio “protects” bad cops just like he “protects” charters.
By the way, I actually think there was something very fishy about Epstein’s death, and your theory about an assassin is not that far fetched. But the idea that de Blasio had something to do with it is (at least to me).
Through the dark web, another inmate could have been hired to do the job.
Nice work, Leonie Haimson. In related news, the Business Roundtable recently made a statement that lashed out at increasing shareholder value at all costs and vowed to fight for all stakeholders instead. Just words. The new aristocracy of capital says one thing, does another. DeBlasio will continue to speak from both sides of his mouth and will only protect New Yorkers from charter company marketing poachers if he is forced to do so. Follow the money.
Like Bill Gates pseudo philanthropy
Exactly.
*sigh
Follow what money??
Yes, sigh.
Isn’t that what Woodward and Bernstein said, “Follow what money?!? Let’s just assume everything is on the up and up as long as it’s the elected political party. What of lobbying? What of campaign finance? Vote for someone and then forget about it. U.S.A.! U.S.A.! Yea team!”
I did not think that Woodward and Bernstein said “follow the money”. I think their source told them to follow the money and they acted like real journalists (a rare thing these days!) and did just that and connected the money to the slush fund, etc.
Woodward and Bernstein did not just write “follow the money, Nixon is guilty”.
I am all for following the money, but you seem to be implying that Bill de Blasio is somehow getting secretly funded by the privatizers to do their bidding by informing NYC parents that they have the absolute right to opt out of charter school mailings instead of saying that no one will get any charter mailing unless the parent informs the DOE that they want one.
What “money” should I follow?
I really find it odd that you are so anti-de Blasio when he is one of the most progressive politicians out there. It is funny that half the people are sure he is the second coming of Daniel Ortega and the other half think he is owned by the neocon billionaires and does their bidding. The right wing has really done a successful number on him and most white and Asian folks are convinced he is anti-white and anti-Asian.
Interesting that de Blasio’s support these days lies almost exclusively in the African-American and Latinx community. I guess if you think they are fools who are too stupid to recognize the guy who they like is really taking money from the oligarchs who want to keep them down, you would definitely say “follow the money”. But it probably says more about you than them.
But he’s giving people’s personal information to charter marketing companies. That’s okay?
In related news, I teach my students to be succinct in their writing.
“he’s giving people’s personal information to charter marketing companies”
Vanguard isn’t a “charter marketing company”. It is a mailing house that does mailings and charters can pay them to do mailings as apparently can other entities, possibly including the DOE itself. Vanguard does not make up the materials for any organization as far as I can tell. The mailings are designed and printed and sent to Vanguard to mail. Vanguard is absolutely forbidden to give any personal information about students directly to any charter marketing companies.
This was begun by Mayor Bloomberg and was a policy to help charters that Mayor de Blasio inherited. The last time de Blasio tried to change a bad policy that he inherited from Mayor Bloomberg, it completely backfired, charters ended up getting even more than they had under Bloomberg because the public felt terribly sorry for charters because de Blasio was being so mean and harming poor children. The result was that what had been simply a policy decision was enshrined into law so that the city would be forever obligated to provide more than they had before de Blasio tried to change the policy — free space forever to charters!
So it doesn’t surprise me that de Blasio isn’t jumping to take action that would probably backfire and result in charters having permanent access to all names with no ability for any family to opt out permanently enshrined into law. de Blasio is making it extremely easy for parents to opt out instead. It’s actually rather brilliant because public school parents can now run a campaign to get parents to opt out, but the charters have no way to portray themselves — and poor African-American and Latinx children — as “victims” because de Blasio is trying to prevent charters from telling them about their options. How can a family who specifically has opted out of receiving charter mailings be a “victim” because charters want to force them to get mailings? No one is harmed and it takes away charters ability to use their “victimization” by de Blasio to get even more than they originally had.
I’m sure that is much too wordy for you and I am absolutely guilty of writing with too much detail. On the other hand, I respect you too much to offer some snarky pithy reply that provides no information about why I believe as I do. Snarky replies, however short, don’t convince me that someone has any real reason for their beliefs, and I assume the same is true for others. If I am wrong, well then you have no obligation to read this or any of my comments. Feel free to ignore them, you won’t hurt my feelings at all.
Maybe I should have written this: de Blasio can’t just wave a wand without a lot of blowback that ends up doing more harm than good. It isn’t “okay” that Sen. Warren is not coming out strongly against charters but Leonie just praised her in a tweet for something else she did say that was less than perfect but also “okay”. Would it really have been better if she just focused on all that is “not okay” about what Sen. Warren does not do when it comes to making it clear that charters of any kind should not exist, period?
However you parse it, it looks like the school system is still releasing student data to a 3rd party vendor which is using it to make money. Of course, 3rd party vendors always keep their promises and never get hacked, but who is harmed and who is liable when they don’t and they do, respectively?
Then shouldn’t Leonie’s issue be that no third party vendor should ever have that information, period? I assume that vendor also sends out mailings for organizations informing parents of things that Leonie and you might approve of. I’m surprised that isn’t the issue then. Why make it specifically about charter schools being able to pay for mailings when you seem to be saying that no one should. Maybe that’s a good idea and maybe lots of good organizations will be harmed. I don’t know whether those lists at the DOE are any less hackable.
Dear NYC (sorta like?) public school parent,
I remember FERPA being pretty strict about student data.
I think we should go back to that.
P.S. Like my Mom used to say: Two leaks don’t make a bucket.
Jon Awbrey,
I suspect that Mayor de Blasio would welcome a court decision that stated that it was against the law to provide those names to charters. Unfortunately, the courts have not yet made that determination. I wish they would.
If there was a court decision saying that it was illegal to provide those names, the charter would have to run its propaganda efforts against a court of law and the Constitution. That’s a lot harder. Running a campaign about how they were victimized by de Blasio is much easier since everyone hates him anyway.
Why hasn’t there been such a court decision? I thought parents were suing so why hasn’t the Court made a determination that it is illegal?
What does “NYC (sorta like?) public school parent” mean?
DeBlasio could stop giving the names and addresses of public school students to the charters if he wanted to. He doesn’t want to. He is a first-class hypocrite.
Well he could, but it means a guaranteed expensive lawsuit that he would probably lose with a possible result that the situation would be even worse because parents could not even opt out anymore. And charters would probably get to expand because everyone in Albany felt so sorry for them being so victimized by de Blasio.
That’s what happened when he tried to end the last Bloomberg giveaway that he should have been able to easily do – stop giving charters free space. Except it backfired and it ended up making things much worse for public schools instead of better.
Instead of allowing charters to portray themselves and their poor African-American and Latinx students as “victims” being deprived of important information, de Blasio is making it easy for parents to opt out, which is in direct response to parents’ concerns. When this was first raised in media reports because the DOE was considering it, the charters threatened a lawsuit but now he has made it much harder for them to show any harm.
You really think he is pro-charter?
I know you see a different de Blasio than I do and respect your opinion. I certainly don’t think he is the best politician ever, but he is done some brave and good things for this city and his many efforts to do good things for public schools — from universal pre-k, to his absolutely failed efforts in the Renewal program, to his limiting suspensions, to his pilot integration programs and expansion of Discovery program and efforts to end SHSAT-only admissions. He has also done some good and brave things for this city like ending stop and frisk which white people do not really appreciate but probably explains why he still has lots of support in the African-American community who do not all see him as a “hypocrite”.
I still hope someone here knows why a court hasn’t ordered de Blasio to stop giving out names if it is an invasion of privacy.
If DeBlasio stopped helping charters recruit students by handing over the names and addresses of public school students, why would there be a lawsuit? No other city does it voluntarily. So what if there is a lawsuit? The city has an army of lawyers. Stop making excuses for his hypocrisy. .
I don’t understand why you use the word “hypocrisy” in regards to de Blasio so often.
He is a hypocrite because he changed DOE policy so that parents could opt out of those mailing lists (which was one of the biggest concerns since parents did NOT have the option to opt out previously)? He gave the group of parents one of the main changes they wanted, but he did not stop the policy altogether so he’s a hypocrite?
By those standards, it is easy to bash every one of the candidates running for President as a hypocrite. Bernie Sanders didn’t call for a ban on all charters in his education proposal, he called for a moratorium until there was “more accountability”. But there was nothing stopping Bernie from saying he supports an end to the charter movement, period. It’s possible to call that being a hypocrite.
de Blasio is clearly not especially likable and he doesn’t really care what people think (which is why he keeps going to his Brooklyn gym even though the media loves to act as if it demonstrates some huge character flaw or corruption). But “hypocrite” is the word that destroys every Democrat. It implies they are dishonest and you shouldn’t trust a word they say. Those kinds of character attacks on Dems have won countless elections for Republicans.
de Blasio isn’t a hypocrite. He is a politician and he makes governing choices. Allowing parents to opt out of these mailings instead of opting in is a reasonable choice to make given the circumstances even if it is not exactly the choice that I would prefer. That is the case with many of his policies. Entirely scrapping the SHSAT is a reasonable choice even if that is not exactly the choice I would prefer. Starting pilot programs in integrating districts is a reasonable choice, even if some would want integration efforts that go even further. But reducing a politician who is genuinely trying to make things better in NYC public schools as a “hypocrite” just seems inaccurate.
It is hypocritical to claim the title of Foe of Privatizers while continuing to turn over names and addresses of public school students to the vendor for the charter industry.
CHARTERS NEED THOSE NAMES BECAUSE THEY DO NOT HAVE WAITING LISTS!
okay, got it. I am sorry as I did not understand why you felt this was so important.
I hadn’t thought of this issue in terms of giving charters another tool to use to convince parents with little interest in charters to sign up so they can claim they have long wait lists.
That being said, at least this change of policy allows activists to address it. Now that parents can opt out, there can be a movement led by public school PTAs to get parents to opt out. Go into public schools everywhere – especially in the neighborhoods where charters are most likely to recruit — with laptops explaining to parents that now they can prevent the DOE from giving all kinds of personal information about their children to outside vendors. Explain to the parents that their child’s privacy is being violated and all they have to do to stop it is to log on right here and remove their child’s name from lists that go out to charter school vendors. It isn’t perfect, but should get many parents who don’t want the mailings not to get them.
But I don’t think that these mailings are really the issue – the issue is that the media allows charters to define wait lists in whatever way they want and will dutifully record whatever numbers are told to them without needing a single bit of evidence. So even without this, charters will just claim the same long wait lists and it won’t matter. Charters can make any claims they want, since the NY education journalists have demonstrated that they believe their role is to be stenographers and they are far too important to do the hard work of researching and evaluating whether the outrageously self-serving claims by charters are true. Why should a self-important NY Times journalist like Eliza Shapiro waste her time doing such tedious work when she can simply write “charters say this, unions say that, and look here at the amazing and extraordinary results and 99% passing rates charters get as they save all the African-American students who would clearly be failures if they were in NYC public schools.”
So many privileged NY Times reporters do not even see the African-American students in public schools who do well — they are invisible to them, even though their numbers dwarf those in charters. Those privileged reporters continue to insist that charters can’t cook the books because there simply aren’t enough high performing African-American and Latinx students to choose from in NYC! Apparently the ones who do well in charter schools owe it all to white charter CEOs. Privilege means never having to learn about statistics and how to evaluate incredibly flawed education studies. Just write “he said, she said and look at the incredible results this small handful of poor children get — it’s a miracle”. That kind of reporting is going to continue no matter how small charter wait lists are. I wish there was a way to get reporters to act like reporters, but they cover charters the way they did Trump in 2016. Reporting two sides as if both are equally valid, even though one is full of exaggerations and lies.
To Left Coast Teacher up there at 8:18 PM: I took notice of your own “succinct” comment.
Would that another do the same (uh, er–take the hint).
If that is directed to me, then your gratuitously snide comment disappoints me. Hope that is “succinct” enough. While you apparently prefer that I be more snarky and dismissive of other people’s opinions instead of taking the time (and words) to explain my own, it isn’t my style.
By the way, Left Coast Teacher has written some long replies in other discussions today but i didn’t do a word count nor did I focus my efforts on criticizing the length of the reply instead of the content.
“…NYC is the ONLY district in the entire country that voluntarily helps charter schools expand in this manner…” I would beg to differ. The Oakland Unified School District voted and upheld a motion to make all student data available to undefined 3rd party entities, unless opted out by a parent, last year mid-year, after the form had been collected in the summer registration. Because of the whole mid-year adoption, most families/parents/guardians did not know that they had to embark on a lengthy and time-consuming effort to get the opt-out version updated manually by a person at the school site. This year, summer registration mostly happened on line. I had to take precautions of printing out all of the documents that showed “opted out”. When verifying on line records, none of them said I had opted out. I had to point it out to counselors and school administrators to make sure the information was updated correctly.