Archives for category: Betsy DeVos

Mercedes Schneider has inexhaustible patience as a researcher. She tried to locate the “publications” that Betsy DeVos submitted to the Senate committee reviewing her qualifications. Some were letters to the editor. Some were press releases (did she write them?). Some were unavailable. Some were about her. It is not clear whether she or an aide wrote the opinion columns attributed to her.

 

A scholar she is not. A lobbyist is what she is, with a narrow and unlovely perspective on education.

 

Most of them reflect De Vos’ preference for any type of schooling except public schools. She doesn’t like them. There is no evidence that she ever sullied her shoes by stepping into one.

 

 

Excellent video on DeVos focusing on failure of charter schools in Detroit/Michigan, her support of for-profit charters; privatization agenda. Less than 10 minutes long; well produced; interviews with parents, film clips, etc.

 

Please circulate, especially to people who will call Senators on Health, Education, Labor Committee. DeVos hearing is this Tuesday.

 

Facebook link:

 
YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47OC7wZbwzM&feature=youtu.be

 

 

In listing her political contributions on her financial disclosure for, Betsy DeVos forgot to mention a gift of $125,000 to an anti-union campaign. This is, of course, understandable. When a person is a multi-billionaire and gives millions to right wing causes, you can’t expect to remember every tiny contribution, can you? Besides, what’s with her team of high-priced lawyers and accountants? Where were they?

 

And why should Republicans care, anyway?

Last spring, Salon published an article by Kali Holloway about Campbell Brown and her transition from news anchor to “education reformer” and “charter propagandist.” The article was posted before California’s highest court threw out the Vergara case, whose plaintiffs claimed that teacher tenure was racially discriminatory. It also was posted before a judge in Minnesota tossed out Campbell Brown’s copycat effort to kill teacher tenure in that state.

 

Nonetheless, the article accurately depicts Campbell Brown’s contempt for public schools, teachers unions, and teachers. Facebook announced that it plans to hire her as its face to the news media. It is important to know her low opinion of public education, a basic democratic institution, and the people who work to educate our children. As the article shows, Brown did not want to disclose the funders of her website, The 74, claiming that they might be harassed (as if!).

 

The article says The 74 is funded by: The Dick and Betsy DeVos Family Foundation, Bloomberg Philanthropies, Jonathan Sackler (of OxyContin producer Purdue Pharma) and the Walton Family Foundation.

 

 

Here are Betsy DeVos’s responses to questions from the Office of Government Ethics about potential and real conflicts of interest.

 

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2017/01/see_how_betsy_devos_responded.html

 

She is an artful dodger.

 

Instead of admitting that she pours millions of dollars into advancing the cause of school privatization, she simply says that if any questions should come up, she will refer them to the appropriate ethics official.

 

These answers were written by a lawyer and intended to deceive.

Kate Zernike of the New York Times writes that the DeVos hearing next week on January 17 may be contentious, because she has been unable to clarify her many conflicts of interest. Some are financial: she has investments in online charter schools and other for-profit education ventures. Others are ideological and political: She has given heavily to entities that want to privatize public education.

 

In a sane world, Betsy DeVos would not be a candidate for Secretary of Education. Not because she is rich, but because she has devoted her efforts to destroying the public education sector which is attended by about 85% of all U.S. students.

Jennifer Berkshire (aka EduShyster) recently raised money by crowd-sourcing so she could spend a week in Michigan learning about the DeVos family and its crusade to privatize public education.

 

Her article is brilliant. 

 

She describes Betsy DeVos as “The Red Queen.”

 

It begins like this:

 

By the measures that are supposed to matter, Betsy DeVos’ experiment in disrupting public education in Michigan has been a colossal failure. In its 2016 report on the state of the state’s schools, Education Trust Midwest painted a picture of an education system in freefall. “Michigan is witnessing systematic decline across the K-12 spectrum…White, black, brown, higher-income, low-income—it doesn’t matter who they are or where they live.” But as I heard repeatedly during the week I recently spent crisscrossing the state, speaking with dozens of Michiganders, including state and local officials, the radical experiment that’s playing out here has little to do with education, and even less to do with kids. The real goal of the DeVos family is to crush the state’s teachers unions as a means of undermining the Democratic party, weakening Michigan’s democratic structures along the way. And on this front, our likely next Secretary of Education has enjoyed measurable, even dazzling success….

 

A characteristic DeVos move in Lansing traces a familiar pattern. A piece of legislation suddenly appears courtesy of a family ally. It pops up late in the session, late at night, or better still, during lame duck, when the usual legislative horse trading shifts into overdrive. So it was with a controversial bill that popped up 2013, doubling the limits for campaign contributions—a limit that no one in Michigan was wealthy enough to hit. Well almost no one. The GOP jammed the measure through, Governor Snyder signed it, and it took effect immediately. “The DeVoses then got their whole clan together and held a check writing party,” recalls Jeff Irwin, a democratic state representative from Ann Arbor who was recently term limited out. “It was a love letter to the richest people in Michigan and they delivered with a huge thank you.”

 

I was captivated by the image of the extended DeVos clan gathered on New Year’s Eve 2013, writing check after check to Republican candidates and caucuses to the tune of more than $300,000, an exercise they would repeat just a few months later. Did they sip champagne as they signed? Did their hands grow weary? For the DeVoses, the ability to give even more money means that they can exert even more influence. “When you empower a billionaire family like that, you give them more power,” Michigan Campaign Finance Network director Craig Mauger told me when I stopped by to see him in Lansing. Just blocks from the Capital, his office is in a part of the city that teems with the lobbyists who hold so much sway here. His building is home to not one, but two different for-profit charter operators. “The DeVoses are tilting the field and changing the structures of politics in Michigan.”

 

To understand why the DeVoses exert so much influence, and more importantly, why their power has only increased in recent years, a quick session in civics is required. Today’s topic: term limits. Approved in 1992 by voters in a “throw out the bums” state of mind, term limits have radically reordered the state’s political landscape. Legislators here can serve no more than three two-year terms in the House, and two four-year terms in the state Senate—the strictest limits in the country. “They’re in office for such a short time that it doesn’t pay off for them to build a strong base of support in their own districts,” Steve Norton, the head of the public education advocacy group Michigan Parents for Schools, explained to me. Instead, legislators are highly dependent on the party machinery, down to being told which way to vote. “They salute and follow caucus orders,” says Norton. As both the funders of the GOP machine, and its de facto operators, that means that the DeVoses essentially control the legislature these days. “They are the 800 lb gorilla.”

 

In Michigan, no one says no to the DeVos family. They have bought the legislature. They defeat legislators who dare to say no. They own the state. Is that too strong a statement? Read this blistering, frightening article.

 

The DeVos family use their money strategically to achieve their goals. They are not just a threat to public education. They are a threat to our democracy.

 

 

Randi Weingarten, president of the  AFT, gave the following speech at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., on January 9:

 

 

 

Eight years ago, I spoke at the Press Club as the newly elected AFT President. At that time, President Obama was inheriting the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. America was losing 750,000 jobs a month. Next week, President-elect Trump will inherit a different economy, one that has added an average of 200,000 jobs every month for a record 75 straight months. While we still have a long way to go to combat social and economic inequality—and to address the effects of deindustrialization, globalization and automation, it’s wrong not to acknowledge the real progress of the last eight years.

 

Today we face a very different crisis. Voters have lost confidence in our institutions, and that confidence is lowered still by the distorted reality created by fake news. Our country is intensely polarized. And for the second time this century, more Americans – nearly 3 million more, in the case of Secretary Clinton—voted for a candidate who will not be their president.

 

So what can we do to address, head on, the deep anger and distrust so many Americans feel?

 

I believe–

 

whether one wants a less polarized environment…

…whether one wants a skilled workforce and more middle class jobs…

…whether one wants pluralism and democracy…

…whether one wants diversity and tolerance…

…or whether one just wants children to thrive and be joyful…

 

—the answer always starts with a powerful, purposeful public education.

 

The End of the Education Wars

 

And we have the opportunity to provide that education. After years of education being a battleground; after No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top and the tyranny of testing; Congress and the country, Republicans and Democrats alike, took on and moved past the education wars.

 

I was in the Senate gallery in December 2015 listening to Senator Lamar Alexander and Senator Patty Murray, two folks who don’t often agree, agree about what was needed: pass the Every Student Succeeds Act, or ESSA. Senator Alexander, who marveled at the remarkable consensus around ESSA, said at the time: “We have created an environment that I believe will unleash a flood of excellence in student achievement, state by state and community by community.”

 

Eighty-five senators, 359 Representatives, the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, the School Superintendents Association, civil rights groups, many parents across the country including the PTA, our brothers and sisters in the NEA, and the people I represent in the AFT, cheered what President Obama called a Christmas miracle.

 

So, despite the extraordinary political divisions in the country, and after the damaging failures of policies like NCLB, we finally reached a strong bipartisan consensus on a way forward to improve public education in America.   The AFT worked hard to shift the focus away from testing back to teaching, to push school decision-making back to states and communities, and to direct federal funds to the public schools that educate the kids who need the most.

 

That consensus- that fundamental reform of education policy is why K-12 education—as important as it is—wasn’t a major issue in the presidential campaign, the subject of not one debate question.

 

Well, it’s becoming an issue now.  On Wednesday, the Senate Education Committee will hold its first hearing to consider Betsy DeVos’ nomination.

 

Instead of nominating an education secretary who sees her mission as strengthening public schools and implementing the blueprint Democrats and Republicans crafted and cheered, Donald Trump has decided to ignore the will of the people and has chosen the most anti-public education nominee in the history of the department.  Betsy DeVos lacks the qualifications and experience to serve as secretary of education. Her drive to privatize education is demonstrably destructive to public schools and to the educational success of all of our children.

 

If DeVos is confirmed; if she shatters this hard-won consensus; if she reignites the education wars it will demonstrate, that her ultimate goal is to undermine public schools. The schools that 90 percent of American children attend. It should come as no surprise that we are steadfast in opposing her nomination, and equally steadfast in our continuing work to advance reforms that will make a positive difference in the lives and success of children.

 

The Purpose of Public Education

 

Obviously, not all schools work as well as we’d like. Many “failing” schools have themselves been failed—by flawed policies, budget cuts, and a tacit acceptance of inequality. When parents send their children somewhere other than the local public school, it’s not because they believe the private market is the best way to deliver education or that their child will benefit from a longer bus ride. It’s most often because their local school is underresourced, is not safe enough or is otherwise struggling.

 

It’s our obligation, as a society, to provide all families with access to great neighborhood public schools—in every neighborhood in America. This must be a viable choice.

 

So how do we accomplish this?

 

In a world with more bullying and less tolerance, it starts by providing a safe, welcoming environment. This is not just a nice sentiment—there is a growing body of research showing the connection between a supportive school environment and student achievement.

 

And instead of fixating on tests—we must fixate on the whole child. Educating the whole child is not based on sanctions—it’s rooted in joy. And while technology is important, the goal of education is not digital, it’s personal. It’s not for-profit—it’s equitably funded. And it’s not one-size-fits-all—it meets students’ individual needs and aspirations.

 

Just as we came together to transform federal education policy, it’s time–guided by our innovation, our experience and our collective wisdom of what works, to work together to build that system of great neighborhood public schools. That rests on four pillars: promoting children’s well-being, supporting powerful learning, building teacher capacity, and fostering cultures of collaboration.

Promoting Children’s Well-Being

 

Let’s start with children’s well-being. We need to meet kids where they are, and that means recognizing that fully half of all public-school students live in poverty. The many effects of poverty—hunger, toxic stress, and untreated medical conditions are terrible in and of themselves, but they also hurt children’s ability to learn and thrive. Poverty is not an excuse for low expectations; it is a reality that must be acknowledged and confronted.

 

Educators and community partners are taking steps to meaningfully address the effects of poverty.

 

Community schools, like the Community Health Academy of the Heights, or CHAH, help meet students’ physical, emotional and social needs—needs that left unmet, are barriers to learning. CHAH is located in northern Manhattan. Nearly all of its 650 students live in poverty. Nearly one-third are English language learners.

 

CHAH provides vision screening for every student and free glasses to the nearly 200 who need them. Think about that. Kids were struggling to learn because they had headaches, or couldn’t see the board. What they needed were glasses.

 

CHAH stays open until 9:30 at night to offer adults GED and ESL classes, as well physical fitness and health classes. CHAH has a food pantry and a parent resource center. And it offers a full-service community clinic, with more than 6,000 enrolled members.

 

All 245 middle schoolers receive annual mental health screenings. Students also have access to social workers and a full-time psychologist.

 

All of this bolsters student achievement. CHAH reduced the number students reading at level 1, the lowest level, by 37 percent between 2013 and 2016. During that same period, the percentage of students reading at the highest levels rose 24 percent.

 

CHAH proves that great results are possible when you focus on the well-being of the child, the child’s family and the child’s community. And this is not an isolated example; schools in Austin, Cincinnati and dozens of other communities have taken similar approaches with similar results. And that allows teachers and their kids to focus on the second pillar: powerful learning.

 

Engaging in Powerful Learning

 

We set high expectations for our public schools, as we should—to develop students academically, prepare young people for work, equip them to be good citizens, and enable them to lead fulfilling lives. None of this is accomplished by requiring students to memorize information and regurgitate it on standardized tests.

 

It’s about powerful learning; learning that engages students and inspires them to tackle complex concepts and difficult material. Students learn when they collaborate in teams on innovative projects. They learn when they are interested and excited, when they are exposed to music and art, theater and robotics. They learn in environments that are safe and welcoming, with restorative justice practices that encourage responsibility and reduce discriminatory discipline. They learn in environments that cultivate critical thinking, collaboration, creativity, and joy. They learn when class sizes are small enough to do all this.

 

The effects of powerful learning aren’t revealed by a test score. They’re evident in student engagement and confidence. They’re evident in the skills and knowledge students demonstrate on real-world assessments. They’re evident in how well students are prepared to thrive in a challenging, changing world.

 

Powerful learning is achievable and sustainable. One way is through project-based instruction. That’s when kids take on a long-term, real-life problem. They investigate. They strategize. They share responsibility. And they build resilience, initiative, and agility.

 

That’s also what happens in David Sherrin’s international law class at Harvest Collegiate High School, in New York City. Students don’t just memorize facts. They select defendants, choose witnesses, write affidavits and create exhibits. And the grand finale: they go to a Brooklyn courthouse and hold a mock trial of a perpetrator of the Rwandan genocide. That’s powerful learning.

 

Another area where we see such powerful learning is in career and technical education, or CTE.

 

While campaigning, Donald Trump said, “vocational training is a great thing—we don’t do it anymore!”[i]

 

Actually, Donald, we do.

 

And we’ve been fighting for over a decade to do even more.

 

Take the Toledo Technology Academy, in Ohio, where students are offered a chance to develop their STEM skills with local businesses, including a little outfit called General Motors. The director of manufacturing at GM said of TTA students, “they do as well as interns we bring in from places like Purdue and the University of Michigan.”

 

The AFT has devoted resources to incubate even more CTE programs across the country. Whether it’s connecting students with Peoria businesses to secure internships or partnering with Pittsburgh’s fire, police and EMS services to train high school students, CTE is part of the DNA of the AFT.

 

We’re glad the president-elect shares our desire to expand this work.

 

Building Capacity

 

Focusing on well-being and powerful learning gives our kids what they need most. But we can’t achieve powerful learning without a powerful conduit—their teacher.

 

We know how much teachers do to help children reach their potential. But what about helping teachers reach their full potential? That’s why building capacity is our third pillar.

 

Becoming an accomplished teacher takes time and support. And dignity and respect. Building teachers’ capacity begins long before they take charge of their own classrooms, and it should never end.

 

Take the San Francisco Teacher Residency program. Teachers in San Francisco’s highest- need schools start with a year-long residency alongside an accomplished teacher. The program has led to higher teacher retention and a diverse teaching corps reflective of the community it serves.

 

In Meriden, Connecticut, support never stops. They’ve got everything, from a New Teacher Induction Program for the rookies to the Meriden Teachers Sharing Success program for veterans.

Students benefit from this investment in their teachers. The district has seen a 62 percent decline in suspensions and an 89 percent decline in expulsions. And Meriden beats Connecticut’s average growth on the state English and math tests.

 

Building capacity is a shared responsibility. And unions are a crucial partner. AFT locals use their advocacy and collective bargaining to help teachers continuously hone their craft and build our profession. And a recent study found that highly-unionized districts have more rigorous and robust tenure processes.[ii]

 

Speaking of tenure, the AFT has worked with willing partners to ensure it is neither a cloak for incompetence nor an excuse for principals not to manage—but a guarantee of fairness and due process. With the recent surge in bigotry and hate, a teachers’ ability to stand up for her students and herself is more important than ever.
Far from being against evaluations, the AFT has fought for evaluation systems that support both teacher growth and student learning. With our Innovation Fund and a federal grant, 11 AFT locals and their districts took a hard look at evaluation. We learned that evaluation systems built through labor-management partnerships, that center on growth and improvement instead of punishment, consistently benefit students. That’s why we fought for ESSA to end federally-mandated, test-driven evaluation. And that’s why we support locally-driven evaluations with multiple, meaningful measures.

 

Fostering Collaboration and Community Collaboration

 

And the glue that binds everything else together is the fourth pillar: collaboration.

 

Rather than fix and fund struggling schools, too often in the last two decades, the response has been to privatize, to pauperize, to disrupt. Let’s be clear: In the wealthiest country in the world, 23 states still spend less on K12 education than they did before the 2008 recession. “Disruption” may be in vogue in business schools, but disrupting—rather than fixing– struggling schools has come to mean mass firings, school closures, and district or state takeovers.

 

These approaches are disruptive alright, but they are not effective–especially when it comes to improving student outcomes. As the president of a teachers union and the former president of the largest local union in the world, I can attest that, in education, if you set out looking for a fight, you’ll find one. But you probably won’t find a solution.

 

You don’t hear as much about the many quiet successes that result from educators and administrators working together to improve student achievement and well-being.

 

In the southern suburbs of Los Angeles, the ABC Unified School District and its teacher union have an intentional and purposeful collaboration to improve their schools. District personnel are paired with a union counterpart. They meet frequently, attend trainings together and hold an annual retreat. When there is a decision to be made—they make it collaboratively.

 

The results speak for themselves. ABC Unified performed better than the state as a whole, with Latino students, African-American students and students from low-income families performing much better than their counterparts in the state. Again, this is not isolated. A 2015 study of more than 300 Miami-Dade public schools found that high-quality teacher collaboration—giving teachers the time and space to work with each other—increased student achievement.[iii]

 

And we need to collaborate more broadly: the entire school community: with teachers, paraprofessionals, school counselors, bus drivers, school nurses and administrators; schools with parents; schools with community partners. Parents and students must see neighborhood public schools as their schools. That means creating environments that respect and value their voice and input rather than discourage them.

 

A great example is Chicago’s Parent Mentor Program, through which parents are trained to help out in overcrowded classrooms to work with struggling students one-on-one. Parents learn how to help not only their child but all the children in the community.

 

So too are parent-teacher home visit programs, such as those in Baltimore and St. Paul. Teachers visit students’ families at the beginning of the school year and again later on, to talk about the family’s hopes and dreams for their child, and share any concerns or questions. Results include increased parent involvement in school life, more positive behavioral outcomes, and increased student achievement. And teachers report greater job satisfaction.

 

Encouraging this kind of partnership is why the Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools—AROS—was formed. AROS is a national alliance of parents, young people, community and labor organizations including the AFT and many of our locals, fighting to reclaim the promise of public education as the gateway to a strong democracy and racial and economic justice.

 

On January 19, AROS will mobilize tens of thousands of people in hundreds of communities to protect our students from the bigotry and hatred that have been unleashed in this incendiary period. We will stand up for our Dreamers and other youth fearful of deportation. And we will stand up for strong public schools and the very institution of public education.

 

 

ESSA: The New Education Federalism

 

When you see a neighborhood public school that’s working anywhere in the country, you see these four pillars I’ve described. They’re not one-size-fits-all; they’re tailored to different communities and needs. And they’re not a magic elixir—they need to be funded and supported. One thing they don’t need is a change in federal law—that already happened with ESSA. ESSA creates the potential to put these pillars in place, although it doesn’t guarantee it.

 

The frontier in education has moved from Washington to state capitols, districts and school communities. This doesn’t mean that the federal government has no role. We still need it to promote equity by funding schools that serve disadvantaged children and protecting the civil rights of all children, still vitally important 60 years after the landmark Brown decision.

 

But ESSA quelled the education wars, and enabled our shared attention to turn to what works… collaboration… and capacity building… and powerful learning… and the well-being of all children. Practical concepts that are scalable and sustainable. That Republicans and Democrats can support. And that red states and blue states, rural, suburban, and urban schools can implement with the right investment and management.

 

One speech cannot encompass everything we need to do for children, families and communities. We need to fight for a living wage, for retirement security, for affordable and accessible healthcare and college, and for universal preK, to name a few. And you can be sure we’ll continue to fight for those.

 

But the passage of ESSA has created a moment of opportunity to use these four pillars to help make every neighborhood public school a place that parents would want to send their kids, educators want to work and kids want to be.

 

 

Betsy DeVos and the Attack on Public Education

 

So as Republicans and Democrats, parents and teachers, all came together around ESSA, where was Betsy DeVos?

 

She was working in Michigan to undermine public schools and to divide communities. And now—she’s poised to swing her Michigan wrecking ball all across America.

 

If Donald Trump wanted an ideologue, he found one. DeVos’ involvement in education has been to bankroll efforts to destabilize, defund and privatize public schools. She hasn’t taught in a public school. She hasn’t served on a school board. She never attended public school—nor did she send her kids to one. She’s a lobbyist—but she is not an educator.

 

One wonders why she was nominated. Well, like a lot of Donald Trump’s cabinet choices, she’s a billionaire with an agenda. As she herself boasted: “my family is the single biggest contributor to the Republican National Committee—we expect a return on our investment.” By the way, those investments do not exempt her from the ethics disclosures required of all cabinet nominees. Frankly, her failure to disclose should delay her hearing.

 

In 2000, DeVos and her husband bankrolled a multimillion-dollar ballot initiative to create private school vouchers in Michigan. Voters rejected it by more than a 2-to-1 margin. No surprise, as the evidence over a quarter century shows that vouchers have failed to improve student achievement significantly or consistently.

 

That’s when she shifted her focus to diverting tax-payer dollars from neighborhood public schools to for-profit charter schools.

 

And give her her due. Over the last 15 years, Michigan has become America’s Wild Wild West of for-profit charter schools. Eighty percent of Michigan’s charter schools are for-profit.

 

Yes, give her her due… but don’t give her responsibility. Here’s why:

 

When the option was to bolster underfunded public schools—she fought instead for a tax cut for the rich.

 

When the option was to support neighborhood public schools—she disparaged public education and fought to divert taxpayer dollars to for-profit charters.

 

When the option was to strengthen charter schools with real accountability—she fought for NO accountability. No accountability even in cases like the Detroit charter schools that closed just days after the deadline to get state funding—leaving students scrambling to find a new school, but the charter operators still profiting.

 

She’s devoted millions to elect her friends and punish her enemies, and, at every critical moment, she has tried to take the public out of public education.

 

What is the result of all this? Student performance has declined across Michigan. Nearly half of all its charter schools ranked among the bottom of American schools.

 

Just look at the yearlong investigation by the Detroit Free Press which revealed rampant problems in the state’s for-profit charter schools—corruption, cronyism, poor performance and lack of accountability.

 

That’s Ms. DeVos’ legacy.

 

Walk the Walk

 

Back when I taught Tamika and her classmates at Clara Barton High School in Brooklyn, they would say, “You can’t just talk the talk; you’ve got to walk the walk.” For a secretary of education, that means doing all you can to strengthen and improve public education. To do that, you have to first experience it… and be willing to walk the walk.

 

To that end, I extend both a challenge and an invitation to Ms. DeVos. Spend some time in public schools. There is no substitute for seeing firsthand what works in our public schools, or for seeing the indefensible conditions too many students and teachers endure.

 

Come to some of the places AFT members are working their hearts out for our students. Come to rural McDowell County, West Virginia, a county where many voted for Donald Trump. A county where the AFT is leading a public-private partnership to improve the public schools and health outcomes in this county that is the eighth-poorest in the country. Join me at Harvest or CHAH, or Toledo Technology Academy or in Meriden, Corpus Christi, ABC or Miami. Spend a day or two in a class for severely disabled students. Before you try to do what you did in Michigan to the rest of the country, see firsthand the potential and promise of public education.

 

The Trump administration can follow the will of the people, and walk the path laid out by Congress a year ago.

 

Or they can follow the destructive dogmas of the past, and reignite the education wars.

 

Let’s be clear, if they do the latter, communities across this country, will stand up and defend their public schools and our children. Like hundreds of thousands have done so far in open letters and petitions. Like AROS will on January 19.

 

Whatever this new administration does, we will be walking the walk for great neighborhood schools by investing and supporting the four pillars I’ve described today.

Using the AFT Innovation Fund to kick-start community school projects and investments in CTE literally from coast-to-coast.

 

Building the capacity of educators through AFT’s Share My Lesson, the largest free website of teaching resources in America with more than one million users.

 

Fostering collaboration through collective bargaining and labor-management partnerships, and working with parents, civil rights and community groups.

We are walking the walk. Across America, we are living our values and protecting our kids.

[i] http://www.slate.com/articles/life/schooled/2016/12/the_damage_donald_trump_could_do_to_public_education.html

[ii] https://ourfuture.org/20151208/study-finds-unions-improve-teacher-quality-high-school-dropout-rates

[iii] https://learningforward.org/docs/default-source/jsd-october-2015/high-quality-collaboration-benefits-teachers-and-students.pdf

People for the American Way has released a well-documented statement about the danger that Betsy DeVos and the Trump agenda poses to American public education. Her nomination, says PFAW, is “a new high-water mark in Right-Wing’s Long War on Public Education.” The one positive consequence of DeVos’s nomination is that it has awakened the nation’s leading civil rights and civil liberties organizations to the war on public schools that has been waged quietly since the passage of No Child Left Behind in 2001, and some might say since Ronald Reagan’s “A Nation at Risk” in 1983.

 

The PFAW document is an excellent analysis of the attack on the nation’s public schools. It is a must-read!

 

The right wing’s long-term campaign to undermine public education is a battle being waged on multiple fronts. Public education’s enemies include religious conservatives who want public tax dollars to support schools that teach religious dogma, ideological opponents of government and public sector unions, and sectors of corporate America who see profits to be skimmed or scammed from the flow of tax dollars devoted to education. Billionaire Betsy DeVos, Donald Trump’s nominee to be U.S. Secretary of Education, has been actively engaged on all these fronts. DeVos, who like Trump celebrates being “politically incorrect,” has harsh words for the education establishment, declaring in a 2015 speech at an education conference, “Government really sucks.”

 

DeVos has been, in the words of Mother Jones’s Kristina Rizga, “trying to gut public schools for years.” Indeed, as the New York Times noted, it is “hard to find anyone more passionate about the idea of steering public dollars away from traditional public schools.” In addition to these ideological concerns, DeVos is simply unqualified for the job: she has never been a teacher, school administrator, or even state-level education policy bureaucrat. She did not attend public schools and neither did her children.

 

With the DeVos nomination, Religious Right activists have drawn a step closer to achieving the anti-public-education dream that the late Jerry Falwell did not live to see fully implemented: “I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won’t have any public schools,” Falwell wrote in 1979. “The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be!”

 

At the same time, if DeVos is confirmed, anti-government and anti-union ideologues will have taken a major step toward the late Milton Friedman’s vision of completely privatizing public education. Friedman, intellectual godfather of the voucher movement, said “Vouchers are not an end in themselves; they are a means to make a transition from a government to a free-market system.”

 

There is some ideological overlap between the libertarian and Christianist designs on public education. Many Religious Right leaders have embraced the teaching of Christian Reconstructionists that the Bible does not give the government any role in education; hard-core limited government “constitutional conservatives” believe there is no legitimate federal role in education. Milton Friedman, an intellectual godfather of the privatization movement, told a 2006 meeting of the American Legislative Exchange Council that it would be “ideal” to “abolish the public school system and eliminate all the taxes that pay for it,” but since that wasn’t politically feasible, money spent on education should be converted into vouchers.

 

The DeVos Family Has Played a Key Role in Building Right-Wing Anti-Public-Education Infrastructure
Betsy DeVos is the daughter of a wealthy industrialist, Edgar Prince, and married the son of a wealthy businessman, Richard DeVos; the families have been major funders of the Republican Party and right-wing think tanks and advocacy organizations. For example, the Family Research Council’s Washington, D.C. headquarters and distribution center in Michigan were built with millions from the DeVos and Prince clans. DeVos also served for a decade on the board of the Acton Institute, which provides religious rationales for right-wing economic policies. The DeVos family has promoted anti-LGBT policies and its anti-union lobbying helped turn Michigan into a so-called “Right to Work” state.

 

Betsy DeVos and her extraordinarily wealthy family have helped to build the Religious Right’s political and policy infrastructure; lobbied for legislation to expand charter schools programs and protect them from regulation and oversight; promoted vouchers and related tax schemes to steer money away from public schools; and poured money into political attacks on elected officials, including Republicans, who resist their plans for the privatization of education. Putting DeVos in charge of the Department of Education is not just having the fox guard the henhouse, says writer Jay Michaelson, it is giving the job to the slaughterer.

 

An April 2016 report from Media Matters on the “tangled network of advocacy, research, media, and profiteering that’s taking over public education” highlighted some of the many organizations DeVos has been involved in:

 

Betsy DeVos is also the co-founder and current chair of the boards at the anti-teachers-union state advocacy groups Alliance for School Choice and American Federation for Children (AFC) and a close friend of teachers union opponent Campbell Brown, who also serves on AFC’s board. DeVos also sits on the board of the Foundation for Excellence in Education. Through the DeVos Family Foundation, the DeVoses have given millions to anti-teachers union and pro-privatization education groups; recent tax filings show donations to the Alliance for School Choice, the American Enterprise Institute, the Black Alliance for Educational Options, the Foundation for Excellence in Education, the Heritage Foundation, the Hispanic Council for Reform and Educational Options, and the Institute for Justice. The foundation is listed as a supporter of Campbell Brown’s The 74 education website. Betsy DeVos’ American Federation for Children further connects the DeVos family to right-wing corporate reform groups; it is listed as an education partner of the right-wing-fueled National School Choice Week campaign and counts at least 19 additional groups in this guide as national allied organizations, and its affiliated Alliance for School Choice group is an associate member of the State Policy Network of conservative think tanks.

As the New Yorker’s Jane Mayer has noted, Trump’s chief strategist Steve Bannon mocked “the donor class” during the presidential campaign, but “it would be hard to find a better representative of the ‘donor class’ than DeVos.”

 

School Choice as P.R. Campaign vs. School Choice in Reality
Among the many efforts supported by DeVos and her organizations is a national “School Choice Week” held every year in January. It’s all about putting a shiny happy face on school privatization efforts, complete with bright yellow scarves for kids, an “official” dance to be performed at local events, and national publicity support for what organizers say will be more than 20,000 events this January 22-28 – more than 2,000 of them held by homeschooling groups. The President of National School Choice Week, Andrew Campanella, used to work at the Alliance for School Choice, whose board is chaired by Betsy DeVos.

 

School Choice Week is intentionally designed to blur the very real and significant differences between policies that fall under the broad banner of “school choice.” There’s a huge difference between a school district offering magnet schools and the diversion of funds away from school districts to for-profit cyberschools, but National School Choice Week treats them all the same, with a “collective messaging” approach that hides the anti-public-education agendas of some education “reformers” by wrapping them all together in the language of parental empowerment and student opportunity.

 

The Failures of Market Fundamentalism
Advocates for school choice tend to promote “magic of the marketplace thinking,” believing that deregulation, competition and limited government oversight will automatically produce better results than “government schools.” But while DeVos and her fellow “revolutionaries” posture as champions for children against an indifferent “blob” of self-interested teachers and bureaucrats, the “reformers” don’t have a convincing track record when it comes to improving student accomplishment overall. Indeed, as Tulane University’s Douglas Harris argues, “The DeVos nomination is a triumph of ideology over evidence that should worry anyone who wants to improve results for children.”

 

CHARTER SCHOOLS AND MICHIGAN’S MESS
Advocates for various forms of “school choice” can point to mixed results from programs that they have put in place. Some charter schools, for example, do a good job, but many do not. And the biggest cautionary tale for those who want to expand such programs is, interestingly enough, precisely the place where DeVos has played the biggest role. As The New York Times reported:

 

Michigan is one of the nation’s biggest school choice laboratories, especially with charter schools. The Detroit, Flint and Grand Rapids school districts have among the nation’s 10 largest shares of students in charters, and the state sends $1 billion in education funding to charters annually. Of those schools, 80 percent are run by for-profit organizations, a far higher share than anywhere else in the nation…

 

But if Michigan is a center of school choice, it is also among the worst places to argue that choice has made schools better. As the state embraced and then expanded charters over the past two decades, its rank has fallen on national reading and math tests. Most charter schools perform below the state average.

 

And a federal review in 2015 found “an unreasonably high” percentage of charter schools on the list of the state’s lowest-performing schools. The number of charter schools on that list had doubled since 2010, after the passage of a law a group financed by Ms. DeVos pushed to expand the schools. The group blocked a provision in that law that would have prevented failing schools from expanding or replicating.

 

An earlier New York Times story reported, “Michigan leapt at the promise of charter schools 23 years ago, betting big that choice and competition would improve public schools. It got competition, and chaos…”

 

While the idea was to foster academic competition, the unchecked growth of charters has created a glut of schools competing for some of the nation’s poorest students, enticing them to enroll with cash bonuses, laptops, raffle tickets for iPads and bicycles. Leaders of charter and traditional schools alike say they are being cannibalized, fighting so hard over students and the limited public dollars that follow them that no one thrives.

 

Politico has also turned a skeptical eye toward the DeVos-backed experiment in Michigan:

 

Critics say Michigan’s laissez-faire attitude about charter-school regulation has led to marginal and, in some cases, terrible schools in the state’s poorest communities as part of a system dominated by for-profit operators. Charter-school growth has also weakened the finances and enrollment of traditional public-school districts like Detroit’s, at a time when many communities are still recovering from the economic downturn that hit Michigan’s auto industry particularly hard.

 

The results in Michigan are so disappointing that even some supporters of school choice are critical of the state’s policies.

 

Education “revolutionaries” like DeVos argue that expanding charter school operations will boost public schools through competition. But a November 2016 report by the Economic Policy Institute on the consequences of charter school expansion in America’s cities found that charter expansions put increased stress on public schools. It also documented problems with conflicts of interest and financial malfeasance among private managers and charter management firms.

 

Corruption in the charter school industry has also been identified as a problem by education historian Diane Ravitch. “There are all kinds of deals,” she says. “And the biggest and sleaziest deal of all is the charter operators, the for-profit operators, in particular, who buy a piece of property and then rent it to themselves at a rental that’s three, four, five, 10 times the market rate, and they make tons of money, not on the school, but on the leasing.” In a 2014 exposé on charter schools’ lack of accountability, the Detroit Free Press reported, among other things, that one charter school had spent $1 million on swampland.

 

The EPI report found another major problem:

 

Expansion of charter schooling is exacerbating inequities across schools and children because children are being increasingly segregated by economic status, race, language, and disabilities and further, because charter schools are raising and spending vastly different amounts, without regard for differences in student needs. Often, the charter schools serving the least needy populations also have the greatest resource advantages.

 

The report’s authors concluded:

 

To the extent that charter expansion or any policy alternative increases inequity, introduces inefficiencies and redundancies, compromises financial stability, or introduces other objectionable distortions to the system, those costs must be weighed against expected benefits.

 

The American Federation of Teachers’ Randy Weingarten describes DeVos as “a principal cheerleader of the practice of using the exponential growth of unregulated and unaccountable charters to destabilize, defund, decimate and privatize public education.” Adds Weingarten, “These consequences are why the NAACP and Black Lives Matter have called for a moratorium on charter schools and why the mayor of Detroit worked to establish some commonsense oversight of this sector. They’re also why voters rejected charter expansion initiatives in Georgia and Massachusetts this November.”

 

There is more. DeVos is the “four-star general of the voucher movement.” Vouchers would “gut” public education while providing no benefit to anyone.

 

Ultimately, what is at stake is the future of public education as a core democratic institution that has provided generations of Americans, including immigrants, with the means to become full participants in American society. Several years ago, educator Stan Karp argued that what is ultimately at stake in school reform debates is “whether the right to a free public education for all children is going to survive as a fundamental democratic promise in our society, and whether the schools and districts needed to provide it are going to survive as public institutions, collectively owned and democratically managed — however imperfectly— by all of us as citizens. Or will they be privatized and commercialized by the corporate interests that increasingly dominate all aspects of our society?”

The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights issued a strong statement in opposition to the nomination of Betsy DeVos for Secretary of Education. While the so-called “reformers” like to claim that they are fighting for minority kids and civil rights, the actual civil rights organizations know that DeVos and Trump want to weaken and destroy public schools, which are open to all students. They also are aware that the origins of school choice were in the racial segregation movement of the 1950s, when the most racist governors and senators in the South rallied around the idea of school choice to protect the status quo.

 

The Leadership Conference issued this statement:

 

 

Dear Senator,

 

On behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a coalition of more than 200 national organizations committed to promote and protect the civil and human rights of all persons in the United States, we are writing to express our strong opposition to the confirmation of Betsy DeVos to be the next U.S. Secretary of Education. All parents and students in this country – a majority of whom are of color or are low-income[i] – want the best education, support and dignity for their own children. We stand with them and cannot support a nominee who has demonstrated that she seeks to undermine bedrock American principles of equal opportunity, nondiscrimination and public education itself.

 

DeVos argues her opposition to public education serves students, especially students who are the most vulnerable.[ii] We reject the notion that children are well served by the dismantling of a public school system that serves 90 percent of all American students[iii] or by the elimination of civil rights protections that require the federal government to intervene when students are discriminated against.[iv]. The civil rights community has served as agitator and critic of schools and school systems that failed to meet the needs of students of color and low income students since long before Thurgood Marshall successfully argued the Brown v. Board of Education decision.

 

Opportunity and achievement gaps that demonstrate longstanding bias against students of color, English learners, Native Americans, girls, students with disabilities, low-income students and other marginalized students are indefensible and unacceptable and we have fought at the federal, state, local and classroom level to ensure every student the quality education to which they are entitled by law and birth. Rather than joining with us in support of accountability, oversight and intervention, DeVos instead argues for an unaccountable education system which serves only to exacerbate inequality of opportunity.[v]

 

While parent frustration with schools failing to meet their child’s need is real and parents have waited far too long for meaningful action by policymakers, the result of anti-public education agendas such as DeVos’ has often, as in Louisiana[vi], been worse outcomes for vulnerable students. The Michigan example, where DeVos’ impact on education policy and the proliferation of unregulated and for-profit charter schools is considerable, demonstrates clearly that this agenda does not result in the improved outcomes students, parents and communities deserve.[vii]

 

Equal access to education is a cornerstone of the civil rights movement. The Secretary of Education’s role as the enforcer of education and civil rights laws[viii] is central to advancing our shared vision of an inclusive and diverse system of high-quality public education that enables every student to live up to their potential. DeVos has demonstrated no previous commitment to ensuring equal educational opportunity in schools.

 

While she is entitled to her personal views as a private citizen, government officials are charged with enforcing our laws equally. DeVos’ connections to anti-LGBTQ organizations including those that promote dangerous and discredited ’conversion therapy,’[ix] groups that seek to limit a woman’s right to health care[x] and civil rights protections for survivors of violence,[xi] and her opposition to affirmative action policies[xii] demonstrate a lack of respect and appreciation for the diversity of our nation’s classrooms and fail to recognize a long and pernicious history of discrimination against groups of students. While we have heard little of DeVos’ record with regard to the rights and interests of English learners, immigrant students, students with disabilities and religious minorities, we are deeply troubled by the unacceptable rhetoric of the President-elect during his campaign and the absence of a record of DeVos’ support for these students.

 

When compared with Secretaries of Education through the history of the department, DeVos’ lack of experience stands out.[xiii] She has never been an educator or worked directly with children and families in public schools. She has never led a school, district or state agency tasked with educating students. She has never been a public school parent or a public school student. This lack of experience makes her uniquely unfamiliar with the challenges and opportunities facing the nation’s students, families, educators and schools.

 

The U.S. Department of Education is responsible for implementing and enforcing laws protecting students from discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex and disability and those laws that provide for educational opportunity from early childhood through graduate school. The person responsible for leading that department must absolutely be committed to respecting, valuing and protecting every single student in this country – without regard to LGBTQI status, family income, race, home language, gender, religion, disability or immigration status. Our nation’s laws, economy, future and children deserve no less.

 

Sincerely,

 

Wade Henderson
President & CEO

 

Nancy Zirkin
Executive Vice President

 

[i] See: http://www.southerneducation.org/Our-Strategies/Research-and-Publications/New-Majority-Diverse-Majority-Report-Series/A-New-Majority-2015-Update-Low-Income-Students-Now

[ii] See: http://www.federationforchildren.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Betsy-SXSWedu-speech-final-remarks.pdf?e40fe9

[iii] See: https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372

[iv] See: http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.copaa.org/resource/resmgr/2016_Conference/COPAA_Voucher_paper_final_R6.pdf

[v] See: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/betsy-devos-michigan-school-experiment-232399

[vi] See: http://www.nber.org/papers/w21839

[vii] See: http://bridgemi.com/2016/12/betsy-devoss-michigan-legacy/

[viii] Department of Education Organization Act (Public Law 96-88)

[ix] See: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/betsy-devos-education-secretary-civil-rights-gay-transgender-students-231837

[x] See: https://rewire.news/article/2016/03/21/devos-family-promoting-christian-orthodoxy-political-donations/

[xi] See: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/11/28/betsy-devos-trumps-choice-education-secretary-has-unclear-higher-ed-priorities

[xii] See: http://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2016/3/1/school-choice-but-much-more-making-sense-of-devos-family-phi.html

[xiii] See: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2016/12/betsy_devos_would_be_first_ed_.html