Choice advocates lure new customers by making false promises, writes Peter Greene in The Progressive.
Archives for category: Education Industry
Valerie Strauss of the Washington Post recently summarized the efforts by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis to destroy public schools in his state.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) has been fighting with the Walt Disney Co. for weeks now since it angered him by criticizing a law he championed that limits discussions of gender issues in public school classrooms. But his attacks on public school districts began just as soon as he took office in 2019.
DeSantis had been governor barely a month when he offered a new definition of public education that eliminated the traditional division between public and private schools. To DeSantis and his allies, “public education” includes any school — including religious ones — that receives public funding through voucher and similar programs. “Look, if it’s public dollars, it’s public education,” he said in February 2019. “In Florida, public education is going to have a meaning that is directed by the parents, where the parents are the drivers because they know what’s best for their kids.”
That was the start of what has evolved into the most aggressive anti-public education battle waged by any governor in the country. In the past year — and especially in recent months — as he has worked to amass more than $100 million for his 2022 reelection campaign, and possibly for a 2024 Republican presidential run, he has quickened the pace of his attacks.
He has, among other things: limited what teachers can say in classrooms about race, gender and other topics and appointed anti-public education figures to his administration, including a QAnon supporter, and, as education commissioner, an employee of a charter school management organization. He has also legally empowered parents to sue school districts as part of his “parental rights” initiative and micromanaged and limited the power of local school districts.
In what his critics say is a revealing move about their educational intentions, DeSantis and Florida legislators routinely exempt charter and private/religious schools from many of the restrictions and actions they take against public school districts. For example, the law that restricts classroom discussions on gender and sex education — known as the Parental Rights in Education law — applies to a state statute dealing with school board powers, according to the Tampa Bay Times. The Florida Department of Education did not respond to a query about this.
DeSantis and his like-minded compatriots make no secret about wanting to privatize public education — arguably the country’s most important civic institution. Their “school choice” movement means expanding alternatives to public school district. They include charter schools — which are publicly funded but privately managed — as well as voucher and similar programs that use taxpayer money to pay for tuition and other costs at private and religious schools. These schools can legally discriminate against LGBTQ and other students and adults.
To these activists, public schools are not the mainstay of America’s democratic system of government that tries to instill civic values to students from different racial, ethnic and religious backgrounds. Rather, as the libertarian Cato Institute says on its website: “Government schooling often forces citizens into political combat. Different families have different priorities on topics ranging from academics and the arts to questions of morality and religion. No single school can possibly reflect the wide range of mutually exclusive views on these fundamental subjects.”
Critics say this mind-set rejects the notion that America is a melting pot that flourishes by the coming together of people from different places, backgrounds, races and religions. They also say that school “choice” efforts to use public funding for private and privately run education take vital resources away from the public districts that enroll the vast majority of the country’s schoolchildren.
They point out that the public has no way to hold private and many charter schools accountable, because their operations are not transparent. There is irony, they say, in the fact that the people pushing the “parental rights” movement seeking transparency in public school districts don’t demand it of nonpublic schools that they want funded with public funds.
Last year, DeSantis visited a Catholic school in Hialeah to sign a bill that greatly expanded voucher programs while reducing public oversight. Originally intended for students from low-income families, DeSantis’s administration now also allows vouchers to go to a family of four earning nearly $100,000.
He has also played a leading role in the right-wing movement to restrict what teachers can and can’t say in the classroom about subjects including race, racism, gender and sex education. On April 22, he signed into law the “Stop WOKE Act,” which limits how race-related topics can be discussed in public school classrooms and workplace training, while essentially accusing public school teachers of trying to indoctrinate students.
About three weeks earlier, on March 28, he signed what critics dubbed the “don’t say gay” bill that limits teachers from discussing sexual orientation or gender identity. While numerous similar bills have been considered in legislatures in years past, it was DeSantis who pushed through the first one to become law.
On April 15, his administration announced that it had rejected publisher-submitted math textbooks books for including passages his administration doesn’t like, including those it says are about critical race theory and social-emotional learning.
DeSantis’s appointments to his administration reveal his attitude about public education. On April 21, he nominated state Sen. Manny Diaz (R) — who works at an affiliate of Academica, a for-profit Miami-based charter school management firm — as the state’s new education commissioner. Diaz will almost certainly be approved by the Florida Board of Education.
Diaz — who is chief operating officer of Doral College, a private college owned by Academica — has been instrumental in the legislature in expanding charter school growth. Florida, where charter schools have virtually no oversight, has seen a raft of financial scandals related to the industry.
Ten days before appointing Diaz, DeSantis’s administration appointed Esther Byrd, an office manager at her husband’s law firm, to the Board of Education. Byrd has on social media expressed sympathy with QAnon beliefs and offered a defense of those “peacefully protesting” the confirmation of the 2020 presidential election on Jan. 6, 2021, when the U.S. Capitol was overrun by a pro-Trump mob. She has alluded to “coming civil wars.” According to the Florida Times-Union, she and her husband, state Rep. Cord Byrd (R), flew a QAnon flag on their boat.
DeSantis also appointed to the Board of Education radiologist Grazie Pozo Christie, a senior fellow for the Catholic Association who wrote an article a few years ago saying the best thing parents can do for their children is to take them out of public schools.
Last October, while discussing “parental rights” in education and touting mask-optional policies at a news conference, DeSantis invited Quisha King, a leader of the right-wing Moms for Liberty group, to join him. King has called for “a mass exodus from the public school system.”
During the pandemic, DeSantis became a leader among governors of the anti-mask movement when he issued a ban on mask mandates in public schools — and then proceeded to penalize districts that required masks in compliance with federal government recommendations. His administration withheld the salaries of some superintendents and school board members that defied him — prompting the Biden administration to promise to make up for the deficit. He has also backed a plan to withhold a total of $200 million in different funding from districts that angered him.
His wrath at local school boards that don’t do his bidding has blown apart the Republican Party’s traditional stance that local education is the business of local issues. In March, one of the bills he signed into law included a provision that limits local school board terms to 12 years — without asking local voters if that’s what they wanted.
He also established a charter school commissioner office inside the Florida Department of Education, which has the power to approve or reject applications for charter schools without local school district input. Even the National Association of Charter School Authorizers thought it was a bad idea, writing on its website:
“Once a school is approved, the Commission would have no other authorizing responsibilities and the local district would be required to do all other authorizing duties. This goes against national best practice. … This is a bad idea since research shows that an authorizer’s commitment and capacity are essential to strong charter schools.
Last June, the DeSantis administration intervened in a local decision by the Hillsborough County School Board, which met to discuss a dozen proposals to open charter schools or extend the operating agreements on others. After it voted to close four existing charters, it received a letter from the Florida Department of Education saying that unless it kept those schools open, it would lose millions of dollars in state funding.
Finally, whatever the governor’s reason, Florida was the last state to tell the U.S. Education Department how it intended to use $2.3 billion in federal American Rescue Plan funds, which had been approved by Congress to help public schools recover from the pandemic. The deadline for states to apply for the money was in June 2021. Months later, on Oct. 4, Ian Rosenblum, then deputy assistant secretary for policy and programs in the U.S. Education Department, sent a letter to the DeSantis administration noting that Florida’s delay in applying for the funding was creating “unnecessary uncertainty” for school districts that needed the cash. Florida filed it a few days later.
DeSantis’s star power in the school “choice” movement is such that one of its longtime leading figures, former education secretary Betsy DeVos — who has called public education a “dead end” — solicited DeSantis’s help to promote a petition in her home state of Michigan to establish a voucherlike program. She and her family have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to DeSantis.
NPR released a new poll showing that, despite the loud mouths attacking public schools, most parents like their public schools and teachers.
They like their schools despite the hundreds of millions, if not billions, invested in promoting school choice, charter schools, vouchers, and privatization.
This poll suggests that Democrats should go after people like Ron DeSantis and other politicians trying to harm a civic institution that most Americans, both Democrats and Republicans, appreciate.
The vice principal of an IDEA charter school in San Antonio was arrested for punching a 5-year-old child.
Betsy DeVos, when U.S .Secretary of Education, gave the IDEA chain more than $200 million from the federal Charter Schools Program to expand.
SAN ANTONIO – An area elementary school vice principal is in custody and charged with assault after she “lost control” and attacked a 5-year-old student in her office, according to Sheriff Javier Salazar.
The incident happened April 22 at an IDEA elementary school in the 10100 block of Kriewald Road, but the sheriff’s office wasn’t made aware of the situation until Wednesday, April 27.
According to Salazar, a mother told deputies that her five-year-old son, who attends the school, was assaulted by the school’s vice principal, 53-year-old Tara Coleman Hunter in her office..
The child admitted that he became “unruly” while in Hunter’s office and struck her. However, the situation escalated further when Hunter “lost control” and attacked the child, Salazar said.
“This was handled way inappropriately,” the sheriff said during a news conference Thursday.
Hunter punched the child in the face or head and pushed him into a file cabinet, according to the sheriff. This caused the child to develop a bump on his head and bruising.
The child was out of control, but the adult should know how to deal with an unruly child without resorting to physical assault.
I received the following statement by hundreds of Swedish teachers, protesting against the odious effects of privatization in education. They signed this post.
We teachers do not want to have it like this anymore
Published 28 Apr 2022 at 06.00
Filippa Mannerheim, high school teacher, Stockholm.
HP Tran, primary school teacher, Gothenburg.
Sara Persson, primary school teacher, Västervik.Photo: Sara Winsnes
Marcus Erhagen, high school teacher, Örebro.
Per Edberg, preschool teacher, Umeå.
We teachers demand a change. We demand that you politicians make sure to fix the institutionalized, corruption-promoting defects you yourself have built into the school system so that we teachers can focus on teaching Sweden’s children, 285 teachers write in a call against the marketized school.
This is a debate article. It is the writer who stands for the opinions in the text.
DEBATE. We who write this article do so even though we do not really have the time or energy. We write it even though it is not our job. We write it even though it should not have been needed and had not been needed in any other country than Sweden.
But as things stand now, we feel we have no choice.
We in Sweden today have large, commercial school groups that expand at the expense of the municipal school and make a profit through lower teacher density, fewer qualified teachers, fewer costly students and lower teacher salaries than municipal schools. Group schools receive permission from the Swedish Schools Inspectorate to start in municipalities even though the municipalities themselves say no and there is no need.
We do not want it like this.
Today, through the free right of establishment and the unregulated offer, a school can be opened anywhere and look any way. A teaching position can be anything for anyone. Nothing on the school grounds is regulated. Nothing is planned based on society’s needs.
We do not want it this way.
In the past, independent schools had lower school fees because the municipality must ensure that all students can go to a school close to home. The municipality can not choose the organization that is cheapest, it can independent schools. The municipality can not put students in line, it can independent schools. The municipality can not profile its schools so that some students feel that the school is not suitable for them, independent schools can. The municipality’s assignments are larger and more expensive, but the tuition fees are just as large. A majority of the Riksdag’s parties refuse to change this.
We do not want it this way.
The revolving doors between politicians and independent school companies are freshly blown and the close ties that exist between politicians, lobbyists and the business community are becoming increasingly tighter when former politicians take seats in school management or continue their careers as lobbyists.
It’s time to listen to the voters. It’s time to listen to us teachers. It is time to climb out of the school market swamp and act as elected politicians again.
Public opinion in Sweden is clearly against the private gains made in welfare and school. Nevertheless, this is not reflected in the Riksdag decisions that are made.
We do not want it this way.
School companies and large real estate companies today buy school properties so that the companies can make money at school even if politicians decide on a profit ban. They want to be able to move money from profits in school to profits in real estate companies. Instead of hiring teachers, the school fees are used for the real estate companies’ return requirements.
We do not want it this way.
We have politicians who drum up “freedom of choice” as a mantra as soon as criticism is directed at the system, but the free choice they defend is in fact the school groups, which through targeted marketing to parents with high-performing children, have the choice to only give school to the “cheapest The students. Everything is as it should be in the best of worlds, the majority of our parliamentary parties believe.
But we do not want it this way.
The Swedish school once made class trips possible. The school was good at getting the majority of students to succeed – even children without a study background. Today, Sweden has the most unequal school of all the Nordic countries. Swedish school torn apart.
Instead of a cohesive compensatory school, we now have listed company schools, groups with fake coats of arms, schools that call themselves international and that have teaching in a language other than Swedish. We have religious schools with dubious values.
We teachers do not want it like this anymore. We demand a change. We demand that you politicians make sure to remedy the institutionalized, corruption-promoting defects you yourself have built into the school system so that we teachers can focus on teaching Sweden’s children. And avoid writing articles like this in the future.
It’s time to listen to the voters. It’s time to listen to us teachers. It is time to climb out of the school market swamp and act as elected politicians again.
We teachers do not want it like this anymore.
Rolf Wallander, subject teacher years 4-6, Haninge
Miranda Chang, F-6 teacher, Gislaved
HP Tran, primary school teacher, Gothenburg
Helena Tarras-Wahlberg, teacher, Ängelholm
Anna Bränström, high school teacher, Sundbyberg municipality
Maria Karlsson, high school teacher, Knivsta
Jonas Linderoth, Professor of Pedagogy University of Gothenburg
Pia Ennemuist, elementary school teacher, leisure educator, Värmdö
Therese Wikström, high school teacher, Ale
Erik Winerö, high school teacher / doctoral student educational science, Lerum
Alexander Nilsson, high school teacher, Trelleborg
Marie Pettersson, special educator, Skövde
Therese Andersson, elementary school teacher, Örebro
teacher , Stockholm
Magnus Svensson, university lecturer, teacher educator, Eskilstuna.
Ann-Christine Norman, upper secondary school teacher, Boden
Daniel Runhage, primary school teacher, Malmö
Per Edberg, preschool teacher, Umeå
Filippa Mannerheim, upper secondary school teacher, Stockholm
Anton Ek, primary school teacher. Falun
Felix Björk, music teacher student, Stockholm
Aron Ihse Trägårdh, elementary teacher student, Malmö
Anthon Brunzell, subject teacher student, Lund
Björn Dahlman, teacher, Ekerö
Terese Crona Lindström, teacher in after-school center, Ängelholm
Simon Kvassman, subject teacher and teacher student, Örebro
Birch Petter
MagnusBäcklund, teacher Hörby
Jenny Winberg, teacher, Västerås
Edvin Jensen, high school teacher, Linköping
Maria Olsson, retired high school teacher, Ale
Martin Ahlstedt, high school teacher, Gothenburg
Pernilla Wallgren, elementary school teacher, Stockholm
Lena Karlsson Saranpää, elementary school teacher, Motala
Maja Anselius, Special educator
, , primary school teacher, Stockholm
Erika Tidblom, teacher, Norrköping
Magnus Dahlström, high school teacher, Malmö
Tilde Jansson, high school teacher, Stockholm
Lena Danelius, high school teacher, Lund
Daniel Lund, high school teacher, Norrköping
Rasmus Hardeström, teacher, Linköping
Maria Hals, high school teacher, Danderyd
Joel Larsson, High school, Danderyd
Maria Jarlsdotte r former principal, Ängelholm
Per Johansson, high school teacher, Ängelholm
Karl Engqvist, primary school teacher, Arvika.
Olof Persson, High school teacher, Strömsund
Lotta Lindvall, preschool teacher in preschool class, Motala
Birgitta Hultkrantz, Municipal adult teacher Stockholm
Jonas Hemström, deputy principal, Stockholm
Andreas Olofsson, high school teacher, Ljungby
Petter Cronberg, teacher, Nyhamnsläge
, elementary school teacher, elementary school
NyborgDanderyd
Kristina Lundin, high school teacher, Köping
Ulla Åkerström, leg. teachers who left school, Gothenburg
Johanna Verme, high school teacher student, Lerum
Jesper Berglund, high school teacher, Gothenburg
Lisa Göland, high school teacher, Linköping
Petra Särnhammar, school librarian and high school teacher, Linköping
Linda Odén, high school teacher, Gråbo
Lars Ljunggren, high school teacher, Falun
Åsa Tadell, high school teacher
Maria Gustavson, teacher, Västerås
Fredrik Sandström, teacher, Arboga
Tom Bergström, vocational teacher, Sala
Petra Lindström, teacher, Gnesta
Pontus Bierich, Teacher, Kungälv
Linnea Argårds, teacher, Örebro
Martin Viklund, teacher, Hudiksvall
Gunnar Wike, primary school teacher, Västerås
Anders Törnlund , teacher, Huddinge
Jan Kjellin, preschool teacher, Falun
Fredrik Björkman, high school teacher, Malmö
Elisabeth Ahrent, teacher Simrishamn
Johan Carlsson, high school teacher, Upplands Väsby
Fredrik Törnqvist, high school teacher, Stockholm
Magnus Almström, high school teacher, Borås
Helena Edvardsson, elementary school teacher, Gothenburg
Christoffer Eriksson, high school teacher , Uppsala
Kari Nilsson, teacher, Malmö
Elin Persson, after-school center teacher, Danderyd
Anna Östman, primary school teacher, Huddinge
Rickard Himre, upper secondary school teacher, Stockholm
Fredrik Clausson, upper secondary school teacher, Lund
Nils Rickdorff Lahrin, upper secondary school teacher, Uppsala
Björn Johannesson, primary school teacher, Gothenburg
Maryna Grip, primary school teacher, Söderhamn
Jan Magnusson,
Lotta Gedik-Cederberg, primary school teacher, Malmö
Jenny Vide, primary school teacher, Uppsala
Mathias Israelsson, primary school teacher, Gothenburg
Lilian Birath, high school teacher, Svedala
Anna Heimer, preschool teacher, Partille
Patrik Unné, special educator
Margareta Melin, primary school teacher, Kungälv
Jonas Fried, Gothenburg primary school
teacher , elementary school teacher, Ryd
Sara Persson, elementary school teacher, Västervik
Maria Himre, high school teacher, Stockholm
Marie Karlsson, elementary school teacher, Svedala
Olof Loklint, elementary school teacher, Västerås
Niclas Djupström, high school teacher, Skövde
Gunnel Alm, high school teacher, Norrköping
Bodil Ejwertz, teacher, Tylyl
, teacher , Sundbyberg
Helen a Svanängen, university lecturer, Jönköping
Isabella Åkerlund, teacher, Karlstad
Maria Hilber, preschool teacher, Huddinge
Isabella Verner, high school teacher, Stockholm
Malin Ahlgren, high school teacher, Stockholm
Elinor Löfstaf, teacher, Västerås
Peter Sjöde IDH teacher Jönköping
Svensson Gothenburg
MånsPettersson, high school teacher, Stockholm
Anders Lindborg, high school teacher Varberg
Karin Berg, high school teacher, Gothenburg
Peter Alm, high school teacher, Uppsala
Marina Nordin, teacher, Stockholm
Calle Andén, primary school teacher, Gotland
Niclas Ländin, deputy principal, Sollentuna
Hedvig Bolmgren, special teacher / special educator,
Östhammar Rosenberg, primary school teacher, Klippan
Fredrik Hornegård, teacher, Stockholm
EwaLiz Larsson, primary school teacher, Karlskrona
Tobias Nilsson, special teacher, Lund
Anna Nylander, high school teacher, Lysekil.
Marika Lindholm, teacher, former. principal, Stockholm
Emma Sjödin, high school teacher, Stockholm
Shpetim Ademi, high school teacher, Kristianstad.
Johanna Andersson, high school teacher, Malmö
Bernt Andersson, leg. teacher of music and English, SiS in Lidköping
Magnus Karlberg Teacher / leisure educator Stockholm
Ellinor Brantås, elementary school teacher, Järfälla
Johanna Ramstedt, elementary school teacher, Stockholm
Linda Bäckström, high school teacher, Gothenburg
Niklas Aronsson, high school teacher Gothenburg
Hjalmar Holgersson, high school teacher, Gothenburg
Pelle Flemark, high school
Eva Söderberg, certified teacher of handicrafts / Swedish, Gothenburg
Kedikova, high school teacher, Norrköping
Anna Lundin, music teacher, Västerås
Helene Johansson, elementary / high school teacher, Uddevalla
Jakob Winnberg, high school teacher, Växjö
Solveig Ivarsson, elementary school teacher, Svenljunga
Jan Gustavsson, Norrman Lotman,
Zumi, elementary school teacher, Ulricehamn
Anna Klingström, high school teacher, Sala
Fredrik Månsson, high school teacher, Norrköping
Christina W. Källström, high school teacher, Katrineholm
Emma Solum Holst, high school teacher, Borlänge
Alexandra Georgieva, elementary school teacher, Gothenburg
Carina Lindström, music teacher in elementary school,
Södertarje high school Lina teacher, Stockholm
Helena Wessel, school secretary former high school teacher, Stockholm
Katarina Hjärpe, school librarian, Malmö
Mattias Forsberg, high school teacher, Arvika
Henrik Estvik, high school teacher, Stockholm
Maria Ruukel, elementary school teacher, Valdemarsvik
Åsa Andersson, elementary school teacher, Västerås
Jonathan Wikström, elementary school teacher,
L primary school teacher, Stockholm
Staffan Lindström, music teacher in primary school, Södertälje
Carin Hammarström, teacher, Malmö
Hans-Uno Karlsson, retired primary school teacher, Hajom
Jennie Gudmundsson, leg. teacher ma / bi 7–9, Ängelholm
Ragnar Suneson retired language teacher 7–9, Tranås
Cecilia Ekdahl Schewenius, subject teacher / assistant professor, Kungshamn
Jan Wärmegård, primary school teacher, Stockholm
Cecilia F. Kroon, teacher, Staffanstorp
Gunilla Martinsson, teacher Falkenberg
Maria Henriksson, language teacher Mora
Anna Liljekvist, teacher, Nacka
Cecilia Svensson, teacher F-3, Sundsvall
Inga-Lill Lagerlöf, retired teacher, Tierp
Hanna Wallinder, teacher, Malmö
Helén Enqvist, language teacher years 6–9, Botkyrka
Annette Säterberg, high school teacher, Kungsbacka
Ingemar Abrahamsson, handicraft teacher, Gothenburg
Lotta Carlson, subject teacher Ma / No, Kungsbacka
Carola Svensson, adult teacher, Norrköping
Marie Wislander, teacher, Tjörn
Maria Jansson, special teacher, Stockholm
Jonny Wester, music teacher, Hylte
Miriam Järlebark, teacher SFI, Örebro
Film Katja
Roselli Åsell, teacher, Hofors
Jan Gustavsson, Municipal adult teacher, Norrköping
Helen Egardt, high school teacher, Lidingö
Thomas Bergström, high school teacher Ludvika
Mikael Winblad, teacher e, Strängnäs
Ann-Sofie Johansson, high school teacher, Västerås
Pia Brodersen, special educator, Stockholm
Ulla Sunden, teacher, Gothenburg
Mirjam Cameron Sedwall, teacher, Stockholm
Linda Söderberg, teacher, Timrå
Robert Warrebäck, teacher, Stockholm
Jenny Vad-Schütt, teacher, Täby
Johan Thorssell, high school teacher, Gothenburg
Cecilia Rosenqvist, subject teacher, Simrishamn
Rebecka Beijer, high school teacher, Eskilstuna
Jaana Vilén, special teacher, Karlskoga
Carola Sjöstrand, teacher, Jönköping
Elisabeth Broman, former elementary school teacher, Österåker
Sabina Granstrand, teacher Frida, Samstad
4-6 Gothenburg
Louise Halldin, high school teacher, Gothenburg
Birgitta Jensen, deputy principal, Emmaboda
Pia Thomasson, 7 – 9 teachers, Ängelholm
Sanna Dabolins, high school teacher, Gothenburg
Linda Gunnarsson, teacher, Härryda
Bengt Johansson, teacher, Nacka
Malin Hökby, high school teacher, Nacka
Anna Näslund War, primary school teacher 4–6, Karlskrona
Ingela Bursjöö, teacher, Gothenburg
Hasse Annerbo, primary school teacher 1–7 Falun
Åsa Hartzell, upper secondary school teacher, Stockholm
Jessica Andersson Sjöstrand, upper secondary school teacher, Växjö
Marie Rehnström, middle school teacher, Härryda
Johanna Stigmark, SFI teacher, Södertälje
Maria Knutsson-Torvaldsen, primary school teacher, Ockelbo
Frida Lotfi, upper secondary school teacher, Danderyd
Kenneth Pilström, retired teacher, Kil
Anders teacher, Norrköping
Cecilia Rehnqvist, teacher, Malmö
Petter Träff, high school teacher, Malmö
Maria Trulsson, teacher, Gothenburg
Kristina Broberg, elementary school teacher, Uddevalla
Nilla Wikberg, special educator, Uppsala
Elin Jonasson, teacher student, Mönsterås
Robert Alexandersson, middle school teacher, Kristinehamn
high school teacher Micke Hjalmarsson Motala
David Reljanovic, high school teacher, Borås
Edith Marelli, high school teacher, Malmö
Sophia Ivanovic, teacher Nässjö
Robert Svensson, teacher Trollhättan
Sara Berggren, teacher, Sundsvall
Nicklas Ivarsson, teacher, Trelleborg
Per Olov Nordin, philosophy Master, retired, Söderhamn
Susanne Lindgren, speci Luleå
Anna Svensson, high school e-teacher, Skara
Magdalena Gyllenlood, high school teacher, Nacka
Marie Sandström, high school teacher, Vara
Maria Sköld, teacher, Haninge
Amanda Terlevic, high school teacher, Gothenburg
Kerstin Meurling, teacher, Kulturskolan, Sundsvall
Maria L. Persson, teacher, Varberg
Susanne Lärkeryd, teacher,
Skellefte Utter, upper secondary school teacher, Gothenburg
Elin Bergström, leisure teacher, Sundsvall
Nicolas Micic, teacher, Huddinge
Jennie Frisk, primary school teacher, Uppsala
Åsa Fondin, special teacher, Landskrona
Stina Carlsson, primary school teacher ma / NO 1-7, Dalsed
Johanna Leinås, teacher, Täby
Christer Hällkvist, high school teacher, Linköping
Susan Persson-Payne, teacher, Eskilstuna
Jenny Svensson, high school teacher, Halmstad
Johan Fransson, high school teacher, Linköping
Staffan Melin, primary school teacher, Gothenburg
Karin Wilsson, principal, Mark municipality
Majlis Seppänen, teacher, Boden
Niclas Skott, teacher, Gothenburg
Anton Svensson , teacher, Växjö
Klas Holmgren, teacher, Borlänge
My Landberg, teacher, Järfälla
Joakim Lindström, teacher, Huddinge
Josefine Forsberg, primary school teacher, Umeå
Kerstin Rödén, special educator, Östersund
Helena Eidenson, primary school teacher, Sigtuna
Rolf Back, mathematics teacher, Falun
Lars Persson, technology teacher, Sölvesborg
Ola Lindholm, teacher, Karlstad
Marcus Erhagen, high school teacher, Örebro
Göteborg Hjertén, teacher
Finnhigh school teacher, Uppsala
Jenny Dahlin, high school teacher, Mark municipality
Eva Almestad, preschool teacher, Sundsvall
Olof Dahl, fil. dr, high school teacher, Mölndal
Åsa Marmebro, teacher, Kungälv
Ulrihca Malmberg, high school teacher, Stockholm
Sara Fransson, high school teacher, Huddinge
Debora Påhlsson, teacher, Båstad
Birgitta Olsson, teacher, Karlskrona
Karin Linderyd, high school teacher, Motala
In case you wondered, Peter Greene is not a fan of SEL (social-emotional learning). Just because the loathsome Florida Governor Ron DeSantis doesn’t like it is no reason to embrace it. He feels the way about SEL that I always felt about character education. Character education should not be a course or a program; it should implicitly permeate everything you do in teaching honesty, integrity. responsibility, and helpfulness. It must be modeled, expected, reinforced by example, not turned into lessons.
Greene writes:
Social and Emotional Learning is the new target of the GOP attempt to set multiple education brushfires in hopes of stampeding voters towards a Republican victory (as well as one more way for the authoritarian crowd to hammer home their central point of “Trust nobody except Beloved Leader”). The attacks range from overblown to intellectually dishonest to giant piles of bovine fecal matter to the odious, evil charges that the teaching profession is simply a haven for groomers.
And there is irony in these attacks from the right, because SEL is just the latest packaging of what we used to call “soft skills,” and some of the greatest push for getting these into schools has come from the business community (“Hey schools! Fix my meat widgets so they communicate and cooperate better!!”)
All that said, I’m not going to be the one to defend SEL in the classroom.
Perhaps I should say “formal SEL instruction.” SEL has always been in the classroom and always will be, because it’s impossible for an adult teacher to lead a roomful of young humans through learning and education and all the bumps and interactions that come by putting so many human beings in one room–well, you can’t navigate any of that without including SEL. “Don’t interrupt” and “keep your hands to yourself” and every group project ever are part SEL. Everything a teacher imparts, directly or indirectly, about how to work with, talk to, and get along with other humans is SEL. 95% of all the “this teacher changed my life” stories are about SEL and not actual subject content. So it is impossible to remove SEL from a classroom.
But formal SEL is another thing.
As soon as we try to formalize SEL instruction, we run into all sorts of problems. Are we doing it to help people get a better job and better grades or to be a better human being? And if it’s the latter, as it should be, who the heck is going to define what a better human being looks like? And is there just one definition? And if not (as is true), then exactly what sort of assessment are we going to use to measure the “effectiveness” of the program or the social and emotional learnedness of the students? And can you promise me that you aren’t going to record all that data to build some sort of digital social and emotional swellness file on each student? Also, will the program require every teacher to have a trained counselor level of expertise? Every single one of these questions ought to stop the march toward formalized SEL instruction dead in its tracks. But it hasn’t-not any of the times SEL, under various monikers has come trundling down the tracks…
If you spend an hour a week talking about how to be a decent person, and the rest of the week behaving like a lousy person, you’re wasting that hour. And if you spend the week being decent people, what do you need that hour of class for?
And, I would add now, you don’t model character for young humans by engaging in lying and slander to score political points. If 2022 is, as some activists are promising, the year that SEL takes over for CRT as the object of panic du jour, good luck to us all. But just because you call out the throwing of poo, that doesn’t mean you have to support the thing the poo’s being thrown.
We agree.
I wrote this article that was published in the New York Daily News. It could be subtitled: “Lies that the Charter Lobby Says to Protect Its Money Pit.”
Fix this wasteful federal charter-school fund
By Diane Ravitch
New York Daily News
April 28, 2022 at 5:00 am
The federal Charter School Programs (CSP) began in 1995 as a modest program intended to jump-start new, independent, publicly funded schools free of most regulations. The idea was to free educators from bureaucracy and enable them to create laboratories of innovative practices that could be used to improve district schools. At the time, there were only about 100 charter schools in the nation. It was a bold idea. Having worked in the George H.W. Bush administration, I supported it.
Soon, however, entrepreneurs with no background in education at all realized that the new funding stream could present a profit-making opportunity.
Businessman Ron Packard, with experience at McKinsey and Goldman Sachs, saw a chance to use federal funds to help build the highly profitable K12 Inc. online charter chain (now called Stride), which gets dismal academic results but paid him $19 million during a four-year period.
J.C. Huizenga, the Waste Management heir, used federal CSP dollars to launch his for-profit National Heritage Academies, which helped him amass a real estate empire.
Marcus May, now serving time in prison for massive fraud, got substantial funding from the feds for his New Point Education Partner charter schools, some of which he used to buy a yacht and enjoy extravagant vacations.
Marcus May, the CEO of charter school management company Newpoint Education Partners, was found guilty of racketeering and fraud. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison and fined $5 million.
The program that began with only $6 million has grown into a $440 million fund rife with fraud, waste and abuse. Now there are more than 7,000 charters. The Network for Public Education, an organization I lead, prepared a report called “Still Asleep at the Wheel,” which used data from the U.S. Department of Education to show that 12% of the schools that got federal tax dollars never even opened and another 25% closed within a few years, but the federal money often landed in the entrepreneurs’ bank accounts.
Almost three decades later, the Biden administration has proposed modest reforms to restore the program’s original purposes, such as barring for-profit charter operators. The charter industry has reacted to his effort to regulate the program with outrage, falsely claiming that he is trying to shut down charter schools. Rather than supporting reform, commentators from the Washington Post to the far-right-wing Newsmax have pummeled the proposed regulations.
Opinion pieces defending the status quo sound as if they were written by the charter industry’s lobbyists. Their lies have become so bold that the chair of the House Appropriations Committee, Rosa DeLauro, issued a scathing condemnation, lambasting the “unserious efforts and false claims” advanced by the “national trade organization of low-quality for-profit companies,” arguments that according to DeLauro are intended to “shift outrage and attention away from the risky, low-quality for-profit charter schools they represent.”
What these proposed regulations will do is make sure that federal funds do not flow to charter schools operated by for-profit corporations. The for-profit operators can still open schools if their state allows them, but they won’t get federal dollars to do it.
The regulations would give a few bonus (priority) points to charter schools that try to be good neighbors with local public schools and find ways to share ideas and services. Is it a requirement? No. But remember, cooperation between charters and publics was one of the original purposes of the program. It makes sense that both sectors should share best practices.
Contrary to the critics’ claims, the local public schools would not have to be over-enrolled for a charter school to get a grant. The proposed regulations are clear. Over-enrollment is only one of many ways that a new charter school can demonstrate that it is needed.
Some critics claim that the regulations will force new charters to be diverse, but this is not true. Under the changes, charter schools in areas where there is no racial diversity would still be able to get CSP funds. And if you are in a diverse community and you want to open a white-flight charter school you can still do it, but not with federal start-up funds. CSP money should not be used to fund white-flight charters.
Finally, the regulations would require states to supervise how the money is being spent — something that has been sorely lacking. That would be a big improvement over the status quo, which has wasted a billion dollars since 1995 on schools that never opened or opened and eventually closed.
Conservatives always prided themselves on being good stewards of tax dollars. There is nothing conservative about refusing to regulate a federal program that hands over $440 million a year to entrepreneurs and grifters without oversight.
Ravitch is president of the Network for Public Education, a nonprofit nonpartisan organization that exists to support and improve public schools. An education historian recently retired from New York University, she served as assistant secretary of education for research under U.S. Secretary of Education Lamar Alexander.
Say this for Jeb Bush: he is not dissuaded by failure. No matter how many studies show the failure of vouchers, he doesn’t care. No matter how many studies show that charter schools do not get better results than public schools, he doesn’t care. No matter how many grifters have drained millions through privatization of schools, he doesn’t care. No matter how little evidence he has for any of his proposals, he still pushes them.
His ideas are old and tired and incoherent. But count on him to package them as fresh and innovative, which they are not.
He is the male counterpart to Betsy DeVos.
He just cares about destroying public schools.
He wrote recently in The Miami Herald:
Last month marked two years since the pandemic swept across the country, causing the largest disruption to our nation’s education system in modern history. But at last, this spring brings an academic revival of sorts. Schools are remaining open, mask mandates are disappearing and plexiglass dividers between students in their classrooms are coming down.
In the rush to return to normal, we owe it to our nation’s children to emerge from this pandemic transformed, not by going backwards, but ready to forge a better future for them with all we’ve learned.
Our starting point is challenging. Prior to the pandemic, America’s public schools were struggling to serve the needs of students, and since the pandemic, a study by McKinsey found students have fallen months behind as a result of school closures and disruptions. There were severe impacts on student mental health, too. Pew Charitable Trusts found students are reporting significantly increased levels of grief, anxiety and depression.
It’s also no surprise that there’s a growing distrust in public education. A survey by Ipsos found trust in teachers declined during the pandemic, and there’s been a subsequent decrease in the number of students enrolling in public school.
Those are serious setbacks, but there are reasons for optimism. The pandemic put a spotlight on a myriad of possibilities for the future of education. Notably, it illustrated a desperate need by families for a broadened ecosystem of options for their children, with funding flexibility to create more equity in choice. And it elevated the power of parents to blaze new educational pathways for their children.
The Associated Press recently reported that homeschooling remains a popular choice for parents, despite schools reopening. And, private schools and public charter schools have witnessed increased enrollment. But choice, in and of itself, isn’t enough. Policymakers must continue to seek new ways to unbundle education systems, transforming old approaches into new and better learning options.
In Indiana, lawmakers, led by House Speaker Todd Huston, took the first step toward creating the nation’s first “parent-teacher compact” law. This innovative policy would allow parents to directly hire teachers. Educators would continue to be paid by the state and receive their health and retirement benefits, but this policy would enable parents and educators to enter into a peer-to-peer relationship to benefit individual students, without the hurdle of a district middleman. This individualized approach to education would give educators more freedom, families more flexibility and individual students the personalized experience they may need.
As we unbundle education, we need to reimagine all aspects of how education is delivered to students. One approach is enacting new part-time enrollment policies. Right now, students are defined by the school in which they’re enrolled.
Lawmakers can improve the education experience by allowing students to have more flexibility, whereby a student can enroll in their local public school and easily access a portion of their education funding to also enroll part-time in a private school, with an online provider, or engage in another learning experience that benefits the child’s education.
Another approach that complements unbundling is rethinking education transportation options. Last year, Gov. Doug Ducey awarded $18 million in grants to modernize Arizona’s K-12 transportation system, including direct-to-family grants to help close transportation gaps. In Oklahoma this year, Gov. Kevin Stitt proposed changing Oklahoma’s school transportation funding formula to expand how public school buses can serve students. And Florida’s Legislature recently passed legislation to create a new $15 million transportation grant program that encourages districts to create innovate approaches to school transportation, including carpooling and ride sharing apps, for both school-of-choice families and traditional school students.
Those are just a few examples, and we must continually look for more ways to unbundle and reimagine education. The pandemic saw an explosion of families, in all communities and from all demographics, embrace micro schools, homeschooling and customized learning pods. Rather than trying to limit these families, we should give them access to direct funds to further personalize and benefit their child’s out-of-school learning experience.
That’s what Gov. Brad Little has championed in Idaho. In response to school closures in 2020, Little used federal emergency COVID relief funds to provide direct grants to families to support students who were no longer learning in school. And this year, Little signed the Empowering Parents Grant Program into law, giving qualifying families up to $3,000 to use for tutoring, educational material, digital devices or internet connectivity….
Transforming our nation’s education system and ensuring students receive the individualized experience to unlock potential and lifelong success require continual forward momentum, especially after two years of disruptions. We have to keep moving, keep reimagining, keep transforming. This commitment to excellence is a point of pride for Florida.
Last year, Florida’s Legislature passed some of the most significant improvements and expansions to the state’s school-choice programs. And this year, lawmakers strengthened the charter school law, expanded the Florida Empowerment scholarship program, created a new financial literacy requirement for high school graduates and ensured parents are better informed of their child’s progress through online diagnostic progress monitoring and end-of-year summative tests.
This Pied Piper plays a tune meant to deceive. Ignore him.
Gloria Nolan is a parent of children enrolled in St. Louis public schools. She recently joined the board of the Network for Public Education.
She wrote the following article, which was published in the St.Louis Post-Dispatch.
She begins:
For about three years I worked for an organization that was invested in growing the charter school movement locally and around the country. Thankfully, I moved on, and now I fully support charter school reform, such as the reforms included in the new regulations for the federal charter school program proposed by Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona. Here is why.
I fully began to realize what I was a part of during lunch when I had a chance to talk to the chief executive of The Opportunity Trust, Eric Scroggins. I rattled off a list of ideas I had for turning the public schools in the St. Louis district around.
That wouldn’t work, he responded. He said the objective was to burn the system down.
For Opportunity Trust and so-called reform movements like it, the key to school improvement is to replace public schools with charter schools, or public schools that act like charter schools. That is when I lost all faith in what charter proponents were selling.
And where do these charter schools go to get start-up and expansion funds? The federal Charter School Program…
The same special interest groups that promote organizations like The Opportunity Trust are fighting the very reasonable rules that [Secretary Miguel] Cardona has proposed to help clean up the mess. With a campaign of misinformation, the charter lobby led by the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools promotes the extreme right’s support for stopping the proposed regulations.
As a Black woman, I find it hard to believe any news outlet that promotes fearmongering about critical race theory and features an op-ed that criticizes the regulations because their frequent use of the words “diversity” and “racial” has the best interests of my children at heart…
The one regulation that the charter lobby objects to the most is the requirement to do an impact analysis to see if the school is needed or wanted by the community. Given that more than 40% of charter schools close within their first 10 years, an impact sounds like common sense to me. This particular regulation is also in line with the implementation of the City-Wide Planning Committee and its call for a moratorium on the opening of new schools. The guidelines here locally were met with strong opposition from The Opportunity Trust and its supporters.
I have been on the inside of the reform/charter school movement. Its ultimate objective is to destroy our public school system by replacing it with a system of charter and voucher schools. These new regulations will not stop that. I wish they were stronger. But at the very least they could help ensure that our federal tax dollars will be given to charter schools that have better intentions than many of the schools that are receiving Charter School Program grants now.
Please read the letter from the Network for Public Education to the U.S. Department of Zeducation, supporting its proposed regulations for federal funding of charter schools.
The letter was signed by 96 organizations.
On behalf of the undersigned organizations, we submit the following response to the Department of Education’s request for comments related to the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria of the Charter Schools Program (CSP). We commend the Department for proposing thoughtful and well-reasoned regulations that will end funding to start or expand charter schools managed in whole or substantially by for-profit organizations, provide greater supervision to the program, ensure that the charter school does not increase segregation and via impact analysis, demonstrate that the charter school is truly needed.
The Charter Schools Program (CSP) is a statutorily established grant program that began in 1994 with the purpose of expanding high-quality charter schools when charter schools were experimental and intended to supplement, not supplant, public schools. Since its modest beginnings, the program has expanded as has the charter school sector. The CSP has been responsible, in great part, for the expansion of the charter sector and therefore indirectly responsible for problems in the charter sector that include the frequent closures of charter schools, the drain on public school funding, and the fraud and mismanagement that is frequently reported in the press. We believe that your proposed regulations are a good first step in addressing those problems.
We the undersigned further believe that all charter schools, like public schools, must provide their students with a free education that guards students’ civil rights, provides a rich educational opportunity and protects their health and safety. Further, we believe that any school that is financed by the public must ensure that tax dollars are judiciously spent in compliance with the law. That means we support compliance with open meetings and public records laws; prohibitions against profiteering as enforced by conflict of interest, financial disclosure, and auditing requirements. We believe that all students deserve to be taught by teachers who have met state certification requirements in a classroom where they have an opportunity to engage with their teacher and their peers. We do not support virtual charter schools which are ineffective in meeting the academic and socio-emotional needs of students.
Eliminating CSP Funding to Charter Schools Managed by For-profit Corporations
We strongly support the proposed regulations to ensure that charter schools operated by for-profit corporations do not receive CSP grants.
The federal definition of a public school under IDEA and ESEA is “a nonprofit institutional day or residential school, including a public elementary charter school, that provides elementary education, as determined under State law.” 20 U. S.C. §§ 1401(6) (IDEA), 7801(18) (ESEA) Similarly, the statutes define a “secondary school” as “a nonprofit institutional day or residential school, including a public secondary charter school, that provides secondary education, as determined under State law․” 20 U.S.C. §§ 1401(27) (IDEA), 7801(38) (ESEA).
Former for-profit entities have created non-profit facades that allow the for-profit and its related organizations to run and profit from the charter school, following the judgment of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Arizona State Bd. For Charter Schools v. U.S. Dept. of Educ. in 2006 (464 F.3d 1003).[i]
Ineffective provisions undermine the present regulations against the disbursement of funds from the federal Charter Schools Program (CSP) to charter schools operated by for-profit entities. We identified over 440 charter schools operated for profit that received grants totaling approximately $158 million between 2006 and 2017, including CSP grants to schools managed with for-profit sweeps contracts.[ii]
The relationship between a for-profit charter school management organization, commonly referred to as an EMO, is quite different from the relationship between a vendor who provides a single service. A school can sever a bus contract and still have a building, desks, curriculum, and teachers. However, in cases where charter schools have attempted to fire the for-profit operator, they find it impossible to do without destroying the schools in the process.
Many for-profit organizations operate by steering business to their for-profit-related entities. They are often located at the same address, and the owner of the management company or a member of the immediate family is the owner of the related entity. Therefore, it is recommended that wherever references to for-profit organizations appear, the phrase “and its related entities” is added.
Recommendations:
(a) Each charter school receiving CSP funding must provide an assurance that it has not and will not enter into a contract with a for-profit management organization, including a non-profit management organization operated by or on behalf of a for-profit entity, under which the management organization and its related entities exercise(s) full or substantial administrative control over the charter school and, thereby, the CSP project.
Quality Control of Awards and the Importance of Meeting Community Need via Impact Analysis
We strongly support the proposed regulations that seek to bring greater transparency and better judgment to the process of awarding CSP grants. We especially support the inclusion of a community impact analysis.
We are pleased that “the community impact analysis must describe how the plan for the proposed charter school take into account the student demographics of the schools from which students are, or would be, drawn to attend the charter school,” and provide “evidence that demonstrates that the number of charter schools proposed to be opened, replicated, or expanded under the grant does not exceed the number of public schools needed to accommodate the demand in the community.”
More than one in four charter schools close by the end of year five.[iii] A foremost reason for both public school and charter closure and the disruption such closures bring to the lives of children is low enrollment, as seen this past month in Oakland.[iv] In New Orleans, school closures have resulted in children being forced to attend multiple schools during their elementary school years, often traveling long distances. Between 1999 and 2017, nearly one million children were displaced due to the closure of their schools, yet only nine states have significant caps to regulate charter growth.[v]
We applaud language that states, “The community impact analysis must also describe the steps the charter school has taken or will take to ensure that the proposed charter school would not hamper, delay, or in any manner negatively affect any desegregation efforts in the public school districts from which students are, or would be, drawn or in which the charter school is or would be located, including efforts to comply with a court order, statutory obligation, or voluntary efforts to create and maintain desegregated public schools…”
In some states, charter schools have been magnets for white flight from integrated schools.[vi] Other charter schools have attracted high achieving students while discouraging students with special needs from attending.[vii] And, as you know from the letter you received in June of 2021 from 67 public education advocacy and civil rights groups, the North Carolina SE CSP sub-grants were awarded to charter schools that actively exacerbated segregation, serving in some cases, as white flight academies[viii] The information requested by the Department is reasonable and will help reviewers make sound decisions.
In addition to our support for the proposed regulations, we have two additional recommendations to strengthen the impact analysis proposal.
Recommendations: (1) That impact analysis requirements include a profile of the students with disabilities and English Language Learners in the community along with an assurance that the applicant will provide the full range of services that meet the needs of students with disabilities and English Language Learners. (2) That applicants include a signed affidavit provided by district or state education department officials attesting to the accuracy of the information provided.
Regarding proposed rules regarding transparency, we note that in the past, schools were awarded grants without providing even one letter of support[ix], or provided false information indicating support that did not exist.[x]
We also strongly support the requirement state entities provide additional supervision of grants. The Department should require a forensic audit for any charter school applying for CSP consideration. Furthermore, any charter school that does not operate as a classroom-based entity or is operated by a for-profit entity should be barred from being awarded grant money under the CSP. We also believe these requirements can be strengthened by requiring review teams to include at least one reviewer representative from the district public school community and that applications be posted and easily accessible for the public to review and comment upon for a period of no less than 60 days before awarding decisions.
L
Proposed Selection Criterion for CMO Grants
ESSA places the following restriction on grants awarded to State Entities: No State entity may receive a grant under this section for use in a State in which a State entity is currently using a grant received under this section. However, ESSA is silent regarding the awarding of grants to CMOs. This has resulted in CMOs having several active grants at the same time, with new grants being issued without proper inspection of the efficacy of former grants. For example, it has resulted in the IDEA charter CMO receiving six grants in a ten-year period totaling nearly $300 million.[xi] These grants occurred under a leadership structure that engaged in questionable practices, including the attempted yearly lease of a private jet,[xii] related-party transactions, and the rental of a luxury box at San Antonio Spurs games.[xiii]
IDEA received two awards, in 2019 and 2020, totaling more than $188 million even as the 2019 audit of the Inspector General found that IDEA submitted incomplete and inaccurate reports on three prior grants. The IG report also looked at a randomly selected sample of expenses and found that IDEA’s charges to the grants did not always include only allowable and adequately documented non-personnel expenses.
Recommendations:
That department regulations disallow the awarding of grants to any CMO currently using a grant received under the CMO program and that for any grant exceeding $25 million, the Department’s OIG conducts an audit before an additional grant is awarded.
We thank you for the time and thought that went into the proposed regulations.
[i] Arizona State Board for Charter Schools v. Department of Education. No. 05-17349 (9th Cir. 2006)
[ii] Burris, Carol and Darcie Cimarusti. (n.d.) Chartered for Profit: The Hidden World of Charter Schools Operated for Financial Gain. Network for Public Education. Retrieved on March 23, 2022 from https://networkforpubliceducation.org/chartered-for-profit/
[iii] Burris, Carol and Pfleger, Ryan. (n.d.) Broken Promises: An Analysis of Charter School Closures from 1999-2017. Network for Public Education. Retrieved on March 23, 2022, from https://networkforpubliceducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Broken-Promises-PDF.pdf
[iv] McBride, Ashley. (2022, February 9). “Oakland school board votes to close seven schools over the next two years.” The Oaklandside. Retrieved March 23, 2022, from https://oaklandside.org/2022/02/09/oakland-school-board-votes-to-close-seven-schools-over-the-next-two-years/
[v] Burris, Carol and Pfleger, Ryan. (n.d.) Broken Promises: An Analysis of Charter School Closures from 1999-2017. Network for Public Education. Retrieved on March 23, 2022, from https://networkforpubliceducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Broken-Promises-PDF.pdf
[vi] Wilson, Erika K. (2019). “The New White Flight.” HeinOnline. Retrieved on March 23, 2022 from https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/dukpup14&div=8&id=&page=
[vii] Mommandi, Wagma and Kevin Welner. (2021, September 10). School’s Choice: How Charter Schools Control Access and Shape Enrollment. Teachers College Press.
[viii] Letter to Secretary Cardona from 67 education and civil rights advocacy organizations. (2021, June 16). Retrieved on March 23, 2022, from https://networkforpubliceducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Letter-to-Secretary-Cardona-re_-North-Carolina-grant-6.16.pdf.
[ix] Strauss, Valerie. (2020, December 3), How a soccer club won a 126 million dollar grant from Betsy Devos’s education department to open a charter school. The Washington Post. Retrieved March 23, 2022, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2020/12/03/how-soccer-club-won-126-million-grant-devoss-education-department-open-charter-school/
[x] Winerip, Michael. (2012, January, 8). Rejected three times, school may still open soon, and with a grant, too. The New York Times. Retrieved March 24, 2022, from https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/09/education/hebrew-charter-school-in-new-jersey-has-grant-to-go-with-application.html.
[xi] Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (n.d.). “Charter Schools Program Grants to Charter Management Organizations for the Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools (CMO Grants).” U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved on March 23, 2022, from https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/charter-school-programs/charter-schools-program-grants-for-replications-and-expansion-of-high-quality-charter-schools/
[xii] DeMatthews, David and David S. Knight. (2020, February 10). “Commentary: Private jets and Spurs tickets? Texas needs more charter school oversight.” My San Antonio. Retrieved on March 23, 2022, from https://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/commentary/article/Commentary-Charter-school-backlash-shows-why-15045357.php
[xiii] Carpenter, Jacob. (2020, January 30). “After jet backlash, IDEA charter schools curbing more ‘hard to defend” spending.” My San Antonio. Retrieved on March 23, 2022, from https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/education/article/After-jet-backlash-IDEA-charter-schools-curbing-15019295.php
Our Co-Signers
- Network for Public Education
- National Education Association
- Southern Poverty Law Center
- National Black Caucus of State Legislators
- Journey for Justice
- AFSCME
- NCBCP/Black Women’s Roundtable
- National Indian Education Association (NIEA)
- In the Public Interest
- Superintendent’s Roundtable
- Advancement Project National Office
- Education Deans for Justice and Equity (EDJE)
- Education Law Center
- Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance
- Horace Mann League
- Badass Teachers Association
- The Democracy Collaborative
- Advocates for Public Education Policy
- Alliance for Philadelphia Public Schools
- Alliance for Quality Education
- Arizona Educators United
- Arizonans for Charter School Accountability
- California Teachers Association
- Citizens for Public Schools
- Class Size Matters
- Close the Gap
- Coalition for Equity in Public Schools
- Colorado PTA
- Democratic Public Education Caucus of Florida
- Economic Opportunity Network
- Education Voters of PA
- Educators for Democratic Schools
- El Paso Alliance for Just Schools
- Empowering Pacific Islander Communities (EPIC)
- First Focus on Children
- Florida BATs
- Florida Council of Churches
- Frey Evaluation
- Hillsborough Public School Advocates
- Indiana Coalition for Public Education
- Indiana Coalition for Public Education – Monroe County
- Jobs to Move America
- Kentucky NAACP
- Knox DSA
- Long Beach Alliance for Clean Energy
- MI Ed Justice
- Michigan Education Association
- Missouri Jobs with Justice
- Moms and Dads Now Enduring Surrealistic Stupidity (#MADNESS)
- Mon Valley Unemployed Committee
- New Rochelle Federation of United School Employees (FUSE)
- newCAP (New Community Action Pac)
- North Carolina Justice Center
- Northeast Indiana Friends of Public Education
- Northwest Ohio Friends of Public Education
- Oklahoma Parent Legislative Action Committee
- Opt Out Georgia
- Oregon BATs
- Oregon Save Our Schools
- Our Children/Our Schools
- Parents Educating Parents Inc
- Parents for Public Schools, Inc.
- Parents for Public Schools, Milwaukee
- Pastors for Florida Children
- Pastors for Kentucky Children
- Pastors for Tennessee Children
- Pastors for Texas Children
- Paterson Education Fund
- PowerSwitch Action
- Progressive Caucus of the North Carolina Democratic Party
- Public Advocacy for Kids
- Public Education Partners – Ohio
- Public Schools First NC
- Public Trust Alliance
- Richmond for All
- Rochester Coalition for Public Education
- Saphron Initiative
- Save Our Schools NJ (SOSNJ)
- Schools and Communities United
- Stand for Schools
- Step Up Louisiana
- STL Not for Sale
- SUPPORT OUR SCHOOLS
- Support Our Students
- Tennessee BATs
- Texas AFT
- Texas Kids Can’t Wait!
- United for Florida Children
- United Methodist Advocates for Public Schools
- Virginia BATs
- Virginia Educators United
- Virginia Public Education Partners
- WA BATs
- Wake NCAE
- Washington Township Parent Council Network
- Wear Red for Public Ed
- Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club
- Wisconsin Alliance for Public Schools/Wisconsin Public Education Network
