Feeling the backlash in a big way, Jeb Bush’s “Chiefs for Change” issued a call to end the “Toxic Rhetoric” about school choice, especially charters.
Chiefs for Change are strong proponents of privatization. Here are the current members. Is your superintendent a “Chief for Change” who wants to divert money from public schools to the Betsy DeVos agenda of school choice?
They say:
Recent attempts to halt or severely limit school choice—including legislative debates over caps or moratoriums for charter schools—are misguided at best. Effective mechanisms of school choice—those that ensure quality, accountability, equitable access, and equitable funding—provide opportunities that our students need and deserve.
Families with financial means in America have always been able to choose the school that is best for their child, by moving to a certain part of town or by sending their children to private schools. But most American families do not have that opportunity. The school in their neighborhood may fall short in meeting their child’s needs in any number of ways—but they’re stuck.
Our nation’s history of redlining to separate both housing and schooling based on race and income, along with local zoning ordinances that restrict and confine affordable housing, alongside the recent wave of “school district secessions” by higher-income neighborhoods, have compounded the problem. Our nation’s children often live in neighborhoods just a short distance from each other but worlds apart in terms of school quality. This is unacceptable. Every child deserves school options where they will learn and thrive.
That is why today we are calling on policymakers across the nation to end the destructive debates over public charter schools. Proposed caps and moratoriums allow policymakers to abdicate their responsibility to thoughtfully regulate new and innovative public school options: like banning cars rather than mandating seatbelts. They are a false solution to a solvable problem.
The backlash against school choice, the demand to halt charter expansion, comes from an outraged public that supports their community public schools.
Only 6% of the students in the U.S. attend charter schools, most of which perform no better than or much worse than public schools. An even smaller number of students use vouchers, even when they are easily available, and the research increasingly converges on the conclusion that students who use vouchers are harmed by attending voucher schools.
The claim that poor kids should get “the same” access to elite private schools as rich kids is absurd. Rich parents pay $40,000-50,000 or more for schools like Lakeside in Seattle or Sidwell Friends in D.C. The typical voucher is worth about $5,000, maybe as much as $7,000, which gets poor kids into religious schools that lack certified teachers, not into Lakeside or Sidwell or their equivalent.
Perhaps Chiefs for Change should advocate for for housing vouchers worth $1 million or more so that poor families can afford to live in the best suburban neighborhoods where “families with financial means” live.
But don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen.
What this press release really means is that the advocates of privatization know that the public is turning against them.
That’s good news.
The public wants to invest its tax dollars in strong, equitable public schools that meet the needs of all students, not in ineffective charters or vouchers that divert money from community public schools.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
LOL at Ed Reformers asking for an end to toxic rhetoric.
Reformers are the masters of toxic rhetoric
Funniest statement of the year, courtesy of Chieftains for Oligarchs,
“Demagoguery about charter schools is deeply unhelpful.”
Unhelpful to lining the pockets of grifters.
“Deeply unhelpful” to racists, too.
Peter “Curmudgucation” Greene nails it.
http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2019/09/chiefs-for-change-would-like-you-to.html
Greene reads between the lines and discovers that the foundational premise of Chiefs for Change’s alleged call for civility is actually …
“We’re right about everything, and anyone who doesn’t believe or won’t accept that needs to STFU! Now!!!”‘
Okay, it’s a little more subtle than that, but that’s definitely the gist.
x x x x x x x x x
PETER GREENE:
*”Their call for an ‘end to toxic rhetoric’ is pretty straightforward. It is not a call for a better conversation that recognizes there are intelligent humans of good will on all sides. No, their argument is that they are right about school choice, and therefore they should get their way without mean people saying things that keep GLOWER from getting its way.
“They oppose ‘attempts to undermine, misrepresent and politicize sound school choice policies and practices.’ They do not acknowledge that all school choice policies have been promoted through political means, or the kind of extra-political means in which political power is used to circumvent the political process. (“Hey, declare mayoral control so that we can get all these other elected officials out of our way.”) Nor do they acknowledge that undermining and misrepresenting public education has been in the school choice playbook since Day One. (“But we must have school choice to rescue students from the terrible public schools and the terrible teachers that are in them!”)
“We could get into a whole discussion of the many many many ways that choice and charters have failed, or the real costs to public schools and those students left in them. But no— after making their case: (they say this)
x x x x x x x x x x x x x
CHIEFS FOR CHANGE’s “Call for an end to toxic rhetoric”:
“That is why today we are calling on policymakers across the nation to end the destructive debates over public charter schools. Proposed caps and moratoriums allow policymakers to abdicate their responsibility to thoughtfully regulate new and innovative public school options: like banning cars rather than mandating seatbelts. They are a false solution to a solvable problem.”
x x x x x x x x x x x x x
PETER GREENE:
“So, it’s not even tone policing.
“It’s not … ‘You’d do better if you didn’t use such harsh language.’
“It’s … ‘You people are wrong so you should just shut up and let us have our way.’
“No room to debate or disagree. And no willingness to consider the possibility that, as with their previous failed support for the Common Core, the public has finally figured out that their great idea is not so great. After all — a cynical politician may be a lousy leader, but he still makes a great weathervane.
“They admit that some choice systems haven’t worked out, with (such damaging results as) no accountability, lack of oversight, and increased segregation. How that is supposed to come to light if critics of choice never speak up … (that) is not clear. Perhaps we’re just to assume that the chiefs have all the bugs worked out and we can trust them. And they do note some of the contributing factors like red-lining and the separation of high-income neighborhoods from poorer neighborhoods. But they aren’t interested in fixing those issues.
“In fact, chiefs stick with the old ‘opportunity’ dodge. The argument that we should provide every child with the ‘opportunity’ to attend a great school.
“Well, no.
“We should provide every child ‘with a great school.’ Talking about ‘opportunity’ and ‘access’ is a dodge. If we put out food for twelve people, it’s meaningless to argue that we gave a thousand people the opportunity to eat (that amount of food that feeds only twelve… JACK).
“This is the problem with so much of modern ed reform — solutions that don’t actually solve anything. School choice is the daylight savings time of education policy; you can move the clock around and change your measurement of time, but the sunlight in a day only lasts as long as it lasts. If you have a small blanket for a big bed, you can get a bigger blanket, or you can have long frustrating conversations about who gets to be covered by the blanket.
“And if the conversation gets really frustrating, you can accuse the people who disagree with you of being ‘toxic,’ and demand that they shut up while you charge (money from) the folks in the bed to have you cover them with a scrap of blanket.”
Yes, and Jeffrey Epstein really wishes you would knock off the toxic rhetoric about sex trafficking. Can’t we all just get along?
“Chiefs for Change” is alliterative so it must be credible.
LOL!!!
Chiefs for Change said they’ve been “turning around underperforming campuses.” They’ve been turning around campuses with “quality seats”. They took seats made of metal and turned them to plastic? What, cup holders? How did they improve the campuses? They have better drywall? More paint? Silly Chiefs.
War lords for change.
Money is a physical commodity. The PR talk of Chieftains aligns. Taking away local dollars intended for education, taking away the democratic governance of a common good, is what barbarians do for a living.
Bush’s comments will fall on lots of deaf ears. “Choice” has been the primary agenda of the past twenty years. The backlash is the result of this failed policy now that people have experienced the impact of this reckless agenda. The zip code argument is tired and fake. All of the so-called choice fails to deliver superior education. Choice does not provide equity and equal access. It does the opposite. It allows schools to do the choosing, not the students. All this “choice” may result in few students going to selective schools while many are rejected or discarded in under funded public schools. Every country dumb enough to pursue privatization gets the same dismal result. Mass disruption, increased segregation are products of so-called choice.
As far as toxic rhetoric, the First Amendment protects those that want to speak their mind. Nobody has endured more toxic rhetoric than teachers in public schools. Not only have they endured vicious attacks on their commitment and expertise, they have lived with meager salaries and eroded benefits. They have first hand experience with the disinvestment in public education as they spend their own money to provide materials for students.
If Bush is interested in opportunity, equity and fair access, he should support public education that serve all students. Bush started the undermining of public education in Florida, and this misguided approach continues today. Education in the state is considered a model of “school choice.” It is a model of chaos, waste, fraud and crooked real estate deals.
Isn’t the Bush family known for waste- especially if the money is that of others? The WMD war for example.
Ed reformers could change direction and actually provide some positive effort towards the public schools and public school students they ignore, but they have chosen not to, so I’m not sure why public school supporters are somehow obligated to hire them.
The “movement” chose to go all-in on their ideologically-preferred systems, which are privatized. Public school supporters are permitted to insist that the public employees they’re paying work on behalf of their schools and students.
We’re allowed to have actual advocates. I don’t see how it’s my fault these folks chose o set themselves as the opponents of 90% of students and schools and I don’t know that I owe them a job.
Try something new! Actually contribute something of value to any public school, anywhere! Give our students something other than droning lists of how they’re all failing, budget cuts, tests, and cheap ed tech gimmicks.
Why are passionate and zealous charter and voucher supporters lauded yet no one is permitted to actually advocate on behalf of the unfashionable public schools? How is that fair to public school students?
Probably wasn’t wise to throw every public school student under the ed reform bus in order to privatize the system.
Jeb Bush could start with his own rhetoric. Slamming public schools as “government schools” that don’t deserve effort or investment is a choice he made.
Why am I paying 10,000 public employees at the USDOE to bash my local public school? Are they incapable of providing any value to 90% of students? Then let’s replace them with people who will.
Can anyone point to any actual contribution any of these people have made to an existing public school or public school student this calendar year?
They’re public employees. They’ve just determined they no longer serve the students in the ideologically incorrect public sector schools? Did they clear that with the public?
No one hired them to run their ideological privatization mission out of public offices and no one should pay them for it. We could find and hire some people who actually intend to benefit students in public schools. That’s possible.
As usual in ed reform, the entire article is about charter schools. Who works for public schools? Can we get a list?
I know none of these folks attended public schools or use public schools, but read that article from the perspective of a public school parent or supporter.
There’s nothing in there for our schools. There never is in ed reform. They offer public school families absolutely nothing and we’re supposed to continue to hire and pay them?
Why would we do that?
Our schools and students do not exist in this “movement”. It’s such an echo chamber they don’t even see it. Nada. Nothing. You know what ed reform provided public school students in Florida when they passed the last charter/voucher bill? A little more than 300 dollars a student, tacked on at the end. For this I’m supposed to pay thousands of them? Why would I?
Public school students deserve real advocates. If this “movement” is too ideological to provide them, then we’ll hire elsewhere.
Yes, we are supposed to hire them and continue to pay them WITH PUBLIC MONEY.
Surely, private schools are not looking to fundamentally change the demographics of their student bodies. Are they under-enrolled and looking for a subsidy to fill a few empty seats at public expense? Or is this just about killing public sector unions? Or is anything public anathema to these free-market ideologues? All of the above?
Good private schools do not have empty seats. Bad private schools do.
“Good private schools” (e.g. MIT, USC, harvard, Stanford) have seats filled with the entitled and faculty and administrators scurrying for pellets from billionaires.
People think I’m exaggerating when I say ed reformers offer ONLY negative rhetoric about public schools and public school students, but read them.
Here’s their federal leader:
“Well, a very recent study by folks at Stanford and Harvard tells a grim story. The study looks at the past 50 years of attempts to fix education. It confirms that all the additional spending did nothing to improve the gulf in student achievement between those with freedom and those without.
We are still a nation at risk. In fact, we are a nation at greater risk.
More government is clearly not the solution to this problem. Again, it is the problem. Yet, like a broken record, sycophants of “the system” insist otherwise.
Well, our strategy is this: students win, they lose.
Students win with freedom.”
She’s comparing your neighborhood public school to communism. This is absolutely ordinary in ed reform. It’s standard. We’re paying tens of thousands of public employees to attack our students and schools. That’s insane and we should stop doing it.
You’re permitted to insist that the public employees you’re paying work for your schools and students. That’s allowed. They contribute absolutely nothing of value to 90% of schools. That’s not acceptable.
https://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/prepared-remarks-secretary-devos-young-americas-foundation-reagan-ranch-center
Chiara,
Stop criticizing all federal employees at the US Department of Education for Betsy DeVos words and actions.
She and Trump and Pence appointed the thin layer of political hires. The vast majority are career civil servants. They do their job no matter who is Secretary.
SETDA (state level) reflects a deeper layer than a “thin politically appointed” staff.
No one should work in the government who doesn’t further a goal of a government of the people, by the people and for the people.
You shouldn’t be surprised they return no actual value to public schools or public school students!
This is what they think of them:
“It’s time to challenge the 13,000-plus government-run, politicized monopolies we call school districts that focus too much on the economic interest of the adults and not enough on student learning. Education politics should not be about protecting an antiquated system. This should be about empowering parents and students to be able to achieve earned success. Empowering parents with choice, particularly low-income parents, improves the quality of all education options.”
Jeb Bush hasn’t delivered anything to public schools other than a sales pitch for them to buy cheap, garbage ed tech, which they’re all dumping after spending billions on it at the urging of his lobbying outfit. Public school students deserve public employees who work on their behalf and you are permitted to insist on it. You really don’t have to pay people whose goal is to weaken, defund and smear your kid’s school and replace it with their ideological vision. You could hire better people who actually intend to contribute something.
This is the extent of the thought and effort the DeVos USDOE puts toward public school students:
“While it is true that about 83 percent of students today are enrolled in traditional public schools, it’s also true that 60 percent of their families say they would prefer something different… if only they had the freedom to choose.”
They’re barely mentioned in the enthusiasm over the ideological project to eradicate their schools. They’re going under the ol ed reform bus. Your kids. Dismissed as “archaic” and determined to be without value.
Is it any wonder public schools have fared so poorly with these folks in charge? How we lose every time they get together and capture a statehouse? They don’t support our schools and students. They refuse to do even the minimum of the job description.
Here’s what the 10,000 public employees at the USDOE are doing this week:
“Secretary Betsy DeVos
In honor of the #BackToSchool season, I’m kicking off the #EducationFreedomTour starting today in Wisconsin and Illinois. Stay tuned for updates from the road!”
Headed out on another taxpayer funded tour to bash public schools and promote charters and private schools. This is the “work” you’re paying for.
They could all stop coming to work and there isn’t a single public school student or family who would notice. They offer us absolutely nothing. The BEST we can hope for is they don’t actively harm our students and schools. Talk about “low expectations”.
Why do we employ these people? Anyone know? We needed a federally funded charter and voucher lobbying shop?
Naming names –
Chiefs for Change and Future Chiefs
Louisiana’s John White – New Orleans recently closed its last remaining public school.
Aleesai Johnson -Superintendent of Indianapolis schools, Angelica Infante-Green – Rhode Island Commissioner of Education, Susan Cordova- Denver, Penny Schwann-Tennessee Commissioner of Education, Chad Getson- Phoenix Union High School Superintendent
This is a typical “debate” in statehouses all over the country:
“As lawmakers in Pennsylvania return to Harrisburg this week, it’s stories like these that will fuel what’s expected to be one of the capitols’ biggest debates this fall. Amid a larger push by Gov. Tom Wolf to reform charter school policy, a bipartisan interest has grown to amend the rules and funding methods of cyber charters.”
When do they get around to addressing public schools, you ask? Doing some work? Contributing something to the unfashionable public system most students and families use?
Never. They spend whole legislative sessions that completely exclude any mention of public schools.
This is capture. They simply don’t serve the vast, vast majority of students.
https://whyy.org/articles/a-clash-on-cyber-charters-kicks-off-fall-legislative-session-in-harrisburg/
The entire Ohio state education process was hijacked by charter and voucher lobbyists.
They loosened the regulations on private schools and got huge amounts of new funding for charters. Public school students? Nothing. Nada. They were an afterthought. They tack them on at the end, usually as a bargaining chip to get more goodies for the schools and students they prefer.
They are the dead-last priority of every legislative session dominated by ed reformers. Every year, over and over. Yet we’re told we’re lucky that they have deemed public schools worthy of existence. We’re supposed to re-elect them as a reward for not actively and specifically harming our students to promote their agenda.
We can do better than that.
I sometimes vacillate over whether the ed reform echo chamber pretending public school students and families don’t exist is WORTH IT, because at least then they’re not selling expensive garbage to our schools.
The best we can probably get is “they’re irrelevant to 90% of families”, but in order to get there we’re going to have to persuade public school leaders to stop buying their marketing. Take a pass on the next gimmick or product they’re selling. Your local constituents will love you for it.
And, as expected, here’s Ohio. Another ed reform captured state:
https://www.toledoblade.com/local/education/2019/09/16/ohio-what-has-changed-for-online-schools-since-ecot-scandal/stories/20190802123
After spending the last legislative session exclusively consumed with expanding charters and vouchers, they will now spend the rest of the year reviving CYBER charters.
Because God forbid anyone in “public education” should actually concern themselves with an existing Ohio public school.
You can’t pay these people to do the work! I know, because we are paying them and they produce NOTHING for the ideologically incorrect and unfashionable public schools.
Does the state superintendent have a former association with Fordham? He should explain why Ohioans give Catholic schools so much money in vouchers when Fordham’s own study concluded they don’t work. But, then that explanation might follow a defense of charter grifters.
A person must loathe democracy and hate his fellow citizens if he cashes a public paycheck and delivers for oligarchs.
It should be no surprise that these apply labeled “Chiefs for Change” (another term for dictators and/or autocrats) do not like the 1st Amendment. Powerful people that think like dictators never want the working class to have the freedom to speak out, so they call for censorship (does it matter what language they use) to end any criticism based on facts that have revealed their corrupt, greed-based, power-hungry experiment to privatize the public schools has FAILED!
The calls for accountability are, as Click & Clack used to say, BO-O-O-O-GUS!!!!! Why wasn’t this crocodile tears desired accountability an original, foundational feature of school choice? The lack of accountability is not a bug, it’s one of the main features of the CHARTER SECTOR, which BTW is quite likely the single most corrupt MARKET SECTOR there is. And that’s all it is, a ideologically & financial profit driven market sector. There is absolutely no improvement to education that is made possible by the diversion of the citizens education tax dollars out of THEIR schools and into private coffers that are then used in part to continue to bribe politicians in all the various ways we have seen.
cannibalizing the kids of the middle class and poor because other markets dried up when wealth concentrated- shout out to DFER, Bill Gates, Walton heirs and Charles Koch, whose brother is a new resident in Dante’s circles of hell.