Carol Burris notes that charter-friendly Democrats have been put in a jam since Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have announced their intention to eliminate federal funding for charter schools, which is currently $440 million a year and used by Betsy DeVos primarily to expand big corporate chains.
She writes:
Since Elizabeth Warren joined Bernie Sanders in calling for an end to the U.S. Department of Education’s Charter Schools Program (CSP), the charter school establishment has been frantically trying through editorials, postings and back channels to get Warren to change her mind.
One of the latest and more subtle attempts has been made by the Center for American Progress (CAP), that serves as the “think tank” for the least progressive arm of the Democratic Party, at least when it comes to education policy.
Readers may remember CAP as the cheerleaders for the Common Core during the Obama years. It embraced all of the failed policies of Race to the Top, including evaluating teachers by test scores and the collection of big data on student performance to drive “data driven” reform.
In a recent posting, no doubt in response to Warren’s call to shut down CSP, they issued a call for CSP “modernization” that you can find here.
Since it began in 1995, the CSP has spent $4.1 billion on starting and expanding charter schools in nearly every state. Rather than addressing the big problems of the program—the funding of unauthorized charters that never open, the program’s history of sending hundreds of millions to charter schools that open and shut down, and the flow of money that goes to for-profit operators via “non-profit” schools, it tinkers around the edges with rules and suggestions for even more programs.
One suggested “reform” calls for communities to analyze the need for more schools, presumably charter schools, via the grants. That call does not follow up with the recommendation that CSP funds be given only to applicants in communities that find need. All CAP is calling for, therefore, is one more CSP program that would do nothing to address the problem of charter school saturation, which is overwhelming public school systems by draining the insufficient resources they have.
They also call for funding to develop “unified enrollment systems.” Such systems, favored by the proponents of portfolio districts, are designed to expand the footprint of charter schools,while being disguised as an equity reform. One of the favored private vendors for unified enrollment is a company called SchoolMint. SchoolMint is presently being used in Camden, New Jersey, San Antonio, Texas, Denver, Colorado and other choice-driven districts.
SchoolMint makes it mission clear when it comes to charter schools— “your growth is our game plan.” In this blog on the company’s website it shows how school districts can steer low-income families to certain schools, because after all, the program knows best especially when it comes to low-income families. SchoolMint can easily be used to steer parents away from what would be their first choice, their local public schoolto a charter school. Public school advocates on the ground in Camden have told NPE that is exactly what is happening.
Another recommendation of CAP is for funding to create additional charter networks. However, cities are already overwhelmed by the giant CMOs like IDEA, KIPP, Great Hearts and the Gulen-affiliated CMOs that actively recruit and pull the most motivated students from the public schools, as well as fromthe independent charters that are attempting to realize the charter ideal of teacher and parent led schools formed for innovation.
In short, the CAP call for reform ignores the serious issues that we brought to light in our NPE report, Asleep at the Wheel. I believe it is designed to give candidates an alternative to the promises of Sanders and Warren to shut down the federal charter funding supplied by the CSP.
Like the silly stand of “I’m against for-profit charters”, even though there are only a handful of for-profit charter schools in the nation, the CAP “reforms” are just one more attempt by neo-liberals to give Democratic candidates the appearance of actively supporting charter reform, while still supporting the status quo.
CAP’s latest report serves as a reminder that the Democrats who share the DeVos agenda have not disappeared, even though none of the Democratic candidates is willing to admit in public that they do.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
CAP’s agenda is not a surprise to anyone. Since many members of CAP are hedge fund managers and others from Wall Street, whatever they suggest will likely be a manipulative strategy. Their attempt to “modernize” sounds like an attempt to further blur the lines between public and private education. Shared enrollments would likely benefit charter schools to the detriment of public schools.
In northwest Florida the Okaloosa school district just voted for a separate charter high school in the city of Destin. Residents of Destin had been complaining about the lengthy travel time that students make to get to their high school in Fort Walton Beach. The solution for them was to create Destin, Inc, buy a church facility and start their own high school. Destin is generally an affluent most white area. Okaloosa County welcomes the new high school to its “family.” Blurring lines between public and private seems to be the way charter schools intend to expand into white areas. There is no mention of governance, although I imagine it will be Destin, Inc. https://weartv.com/news/local/okaloosa-county-school-board-unanimously-approves-destin-high-school-charter-contract
I wish someone with ties to Barack or Michelle Obama — maybe someone in Chicago — could reach out and see if they agree with people at CAP that low-income African-American students need high suspending charters that punish 5 year olds who can’t sit quietly with hands clasped at all times. I wish someone would ask Barack Obama if he agrees with the people at CAP that African-American students in Chicago would not thrive in the kind of small classes private school he went to but instead need to be frequently suspended and punished for their many “infractions” beginning in Kindergarten in order for them to learn anything at all.
I wish someone would ask Barack Obama if he read the NAACP’s report on charters, especially the testimony of parents whose young children were targeted the first week of school because the charter school decided their 5 or 6 year old was too much bother to teach. I wish someone would ask Barack Obama if he agrees with CAP that the charters that target those children for removal are working miracles, or if he understands that those charters are just cherry picking stronger students who would also thrive if they had a loving small class size private school like Obama and his children did. Does Obama believe those children who are allowed to remain at high performing charters are not good enough for the kind of education he and his daughters had because they can only learn with harsh discipline and “no excuses”?
I suspect that – put on the spot – Obama would not defend charters and say the NAACP is a tool of the union. But he should be put on the spot again and again.
Because the one thing that would stop the propaganda in its tracks is if Barack Obama did what Diane Ravitch did a long time ago and admitted he was wrong. If Barack Obama stated publicly that he does not agree with CAP (and people like Pondiscio) that young African-American children need to be frequently suspended and treated harshly beginning in Kindergarten in order to learn, that lie would lose all of its power and CAP would look like the promoter of racist propaganda that it is.
Arne Duncan was vocal about bashing public schools but Obama was not. I wonder what Obama would say if put on the spot as to whether he supported the NAACP’s position or if he agrees with CAP that the NAACP is a corrupt tool of the teachers union.
Obama and Duncan sent their children to the University of Chicago Lab School, which has small classes and a unionized faculty.
When he was president, Obama’s children went to Sidwell Friends in D.C., which has small classes, and the best of everything.
Yes. That’s why I would like to see Obama asked directly whether he agrees with CAP and Duncan that the NAACP is a tool of the teachers unions and if Obama says that he is fine with all the reprehensible actions that the NAACP documented to get students out of charters.
A simple question would be: Do low-income African-American children deserve schools like Chicago Lab School, or do you agree with CAP that the low-income African-American students in public schools need harsh discipline and no-excuses suspension policies in Kindergarten and they would be failures in schools like the Chicago Lab School?
I’m pretty sure Obama has never really been put on the spot with questions and follow-up questions. I have not seen any charter supporter who is able to answer follow-up questions without demonstrating that their points fall apart under even the lightest questioning.
Duncan is still out on the lecture trail, promoting charters, sounding just like Betsy DeVos.
They should take their road show to Detroit and Milwaukee, which has had full-blown choice for many years with nothing to show for it
so long as anyone will pay him to say what he says, he’ll say it. He is such a willing mouthpiece
I agree about Duncan.
But where does Obama stand on this? No one has spoken with Obama about education policy lately as far as I know. And I wonder if he read the NAACP’s report and if he thinks the NAACP’s report is garbage as the reformers claim, or if he believes it was an honest attempt to note down problems with the charter movement.
Bernie and Warren changed their minds. I would not be surprised if Obama did, too. At least, I sure wish someone would ask him and make him defend his position if he rejects the NAACP’s findings.
DFER has been described as CAP’s sister organization. The hedge funds’ spokesperson, Shavar Jeffries, disparaged Warren’s education plan, as did the arch conservative, prosperity Catholic League where Robert George and Larry Kudlow sit on the board.