Archives for category: Privatization

They’re baaaaccckkk!

The zombies called vouchers will be introduced again in the Texas State Senate, once again under the fraudulent claim that they are intended for children with disabilities.

Governor Greg Abbott is calling a special session, holding new state funding hostage in exchange for vouchers. Once again, we pray, the Texas House of Representatives will stop the voucher proposal. The House has saner and wiser people than the State Senate.

Texas’s very own version of Rush Limbaugh, the former rightwing talk-show host and current Lt. Governor Dan Patrick, will once again promote his favorite obsession.

The vouchers won’t help many–or any– kids with disabilities, because private and religious schools are not equipped to help them and don’t want them.

One parent of a child with special needs testified against vouchers in the last session. Her child was turned away by 13 private schools.

The National Education Association passed a resolution on charter schools on July 4, 2017, which is appropriate because public schools are the foundation of democracy.

Add this to the resolution passed last year by the NAACP.

And the statement by Black Lives Matter in opposition to privatization of public schools.

And the statement endorsed by the Network for Public Education, saying that charter schools are “a failed experiment” and calling for an immediate moratorium and eventual absorption of them into school districts.

And together, you begin to see the growing backlash against private management of public money in schools that select their students and are exempt from most state laws.

This is the NEA statement:


Adopted by the 2017 Representative Assembly
July 4, 2017

Introduction

Charter schools were initially promoted by educators who sought to innovate within the local public school system to better meet the needs of their students. Over the last quarter of a century, charter schools have grown dramatically to include large numbers of charters that are privately managed, largely unaccountable, and not transparent as to their operations or performance. The explosive growth of charters has been driven, in part, by deliberate and wellfunded efforts to ensure that charters are exempt from the basic safeguards and standards that apply to public schools, which mirror efforts to privatize other public institutions for profit.

Charters have grown the most in school districts that were already struggling to meet students’ needs due to longstanding, systemic and ingrained patterns of institutional neglect, racial and ethnic segregation, inequitable school funding, and disparities in staff, programs and services. The result has been the creation of separate, largely unaccountable, privately managed charter school systems in those districts that undermine support and funding of local public schools. Such separate and unequal education systems are disproportionately located in, and harm, students and communities of color by depriving both of the high quality public education system that should be their right.

As educators we believe that “public education is the cornerstone of our social, economic, and political structure,” NEA Resolution A-1, the very “foundation of good citizenship,” and the fundamental prerequisite to every child’s future success. Brown v. Bd. of Ed. of Topeka, Shawnee Cty., Kan., 347 U.S. 483, 493 (1954). The growth of separate and unequal systems of charter schools that are not subject to the same basic safeguards and standards that apply to public schools threatens our students and our public education system. The purpose of this policy statement is to make plain NEA’s opposition to the failed experiment of largely unaccountable privately managed charter schools while clarifying NEA’s continued support for those public charter schools that are authorized and held accountable by local democratically elected school boards or their equivalent.

I. NEA supports public charter schools that are authorized and held accountable by public school districts. Charter schools serve students and the public interest when they are authorized and held accountable by the same democratically accountable local entity that authorizes other alternative school models in a public school district such as magnet, community, educator-led or other specialized schools. Such charters should be authorized only if they meet the substantive standards set forth in (a) below, and are authorized and held accountable through a democratically controlled procedure as detailed in (b) below.

a. Public charter schools should be authorized by a public school district only if the charter is both necessary to meet the needs of students in the district and will meet those needs in a manner that improves the local public school system. Public charters, like all public schools, must provide students with a free, accessible, non-sectarian, quality education that is delivered subject to the same basic safeguards and standards as every other public school, namely, in compliance with: i) open meetings and public records laws; ii) prohibitions against for-profit operation or profiteering as enforced by conflict of interest, financial disclosure and auditing requirements; and iii) the same civil rights, including federal and state laws and protections for students with disabilities, employment, health, labor, safety, staff qualification and certification requirements as other public schools. When a charter is authorized in a public school district that has an existing collective bargaining agreement with its employees, the authorizer will ensure that the employees will be covered by a collective bargaining agreement. Those basic safeguards and standards protect public education as a public good that is not to be commodified for profit.

In addition, charter schools may be authorized or expanded only after a district has assessed the impact of the proposed charter school on local public school resources, programs and services, including the district’s operating and capital expenses, appropriate facility availability, the likelihood that the charter will prompt cutbacks or closures in local public schools, and consideration of whether other improvements in either educational program or school management (ranging from reduced class sizes to community or magnet schools) would better serve the district’s needs. The district must also consider the impact of the charter on the racial, ethnic and socio-economic composition of schools and neighborhoods and on equitable access to quality services for all district students, including students with special needs and English language learners. The impact analysis must be independent, developed with community input, and be written and publicly available.

b. Public charter schools should only be authorized by the same local, democratically accountable entity that oversees all district schools such as a locally elected school board or, if there is no school board, a community-based charter authorizer accountable to the local community.

Maintaining local democratic control over decisions as to whether to authorize charters at all, and if so, under what conditions, safeguards community engagement in local public schools. A single local authorizing entity also ensures comprehensive consideration of whether each option, and the mix of options offered in a district, meets the needs of students and the community as a whole given the resources and facilities in the district. A single entity also permits effective integrated oversight of all schools, including charter schools, and a central mechanism for identifying and sharing successful innovations throughout local public schools.

The overall goal of the authorization and review process must be to improve the education offered to all students. That goal cannot be accomplished with a diffuse authorization system, comprised of multiple different entities, with differing partial views of the students served by a district and the overall scope of its educational offerings.

The local authorizer also must ensure that parents are provided with the same information about charters that is provided to parents about other district schools, as well as information about any significant respects in which the charter departs from district norms in its operations including the actual charter of the school.

The state’s role in charter authorization and oversight should be limited to ensuring that local school districts only authorize charters that meet the criteria in (a) above and do so by way of a procedure that complies with (b). To that end, the state should both monitor the performance of districts as charter authorizers and hold districts accountable for providing effective oversight and reporting regarding the quality, finances and performance of any charters authorized by the district. In addition, the state must provide adequate resources and training to support high quality district charter authorization practices and compliance work, and to share best authorization practices across a state. States should entertain appeals from approvals or denials of charters only on the narrow grounds that the local process for approving a charter was not properly followed or that the approval or denial of a charter was arbitrary or illegal.

c. Unless both the basic safeguards and process detailed above are met, no charter school should be authorized and NEA will support state and local moratoriums on further charter authorizations in the school district.
II. NEA opposes as a failed and damaging experiment unaccountable privately managed charters. Charters that do not comply with the basic safeguards and standards detailed above and that are not authorized by the local school board (or its equivalent) necessarily undermine local public schools and harm the public education system.

The theory that charter competition will improve public schools has been conclusively refuted. Charters have a substantial track record that has been assessed in numerous research studies. Those studies document that charters, on average, do no better than public schools in terms of student learning, growth or development. And those charters that do perform better are not incorporated into district-wide school improvement efforts.

In fact, at their worst, charters inflict significant harms on both students and communities. Of the charter schools that opened in 2000, a full fifth had closed within five years of opening and a full third had closed by 2010. Because the very opening of charters often prompts cutbacks and/or closures in local public schools, these alarmingly high charter closure rates subject students and communities to cycles of damaging disruption. Such disruption can leave students stranded mid-year. Even closures that occur at the year’s end disrupt students’ education and unmoors communities that previously had been anchored by the local public school.

Charters that are not subject to the basic safeguards and standards detailed above also open up the local public schools to profiteers. Such charters operate without any effective oversight, draining public school resources and thereby further harming local public schools and the students and communities they serve.

Finally, one particular form of unaccountable privately managed charters deserves specific discussion. Fully virtual or online charter schools cannot, by their nature, provide students with a well-rounded, complete educational experience, including optimal kinesthetic, physical, social and emotional development. Accordingly, they should not be authorized as charter schools.

III. Organizing Communities for Quality Public Education
NEA stands for our students wherever they are educated. Relegating students and communities to unaccountable privately managed schools that do not comply with the basic safeguards and standards detailed above has created separate systems of charters that are inherently unequal. To counter the threat to public education of such charters, NEA supports both communities organizing for quality public education and educators working together to improve charter schools.

a. NEA supports communities that are working to hold charters accountable whether that work takes the form of state legislative initiatives, local school board resolutions and actions, or efforts to raise local awareness of the need for charters to comply with the basic safeguards and standards detailed above. NEA also will support state and local efforts to preserve public school funding and services by eliminating such funding and services from unaccountable privately managed charters that do not comply with those basic safeguards and standards.

b. NEA believes that all educators deserve the right to collective voice and representation, and that an organized workforce is a better guardian of quality standards for students and educators alike. For that reason, state affiliates that seek to organize charter schools may continue to seek NEA’s assistance in those organizing efforts.

This article is an excellent analysis by civil rights lawyer Wendy Lecker of the deliberate destruction of public education in black and Latino neighborhoods in Chicago.

Chicago has purposely sacrificed the needs of black and Latino students while protecting and enhancing the needs of white students. We have to bear in mind what Rahm Emanuel told CTU leader Karen Lewis when he was first elected: about a quarter of these kids are uneducable. Everything else flows from that assumption.

Open the article to read the links. The most astonishing point noted here is that Chicago’s public schools OUTPERFORM its charter schools!

Lecker writes:

“Chicago is this nation’s third largest city, and among its most segregated. Recently, several unrelated reports were released about education policy in Chicago that, together, provide a vivid picture of the divergent views policymakers of have of public education; depending on who is served.
As reported by researchers at Roosevelt University, between 2009-2015, Chicago permanently closed 125 neighborhood schools, ostensibly because of low enrollment or poor performance.

“The standard Chicago used for low enrollment was 30 students to one elementary classroom — an excessively large class size, especially for disadvantaged children.

“The school closures occurred disproportionately in neighborhoods serving African-American, Latino and economically disadvantaged students. Professors Jin Lee and Christopher Lubienski found that Chicago’s school closures had a markedly negative effect on accessibility to educational opportunities for these vulnerable populations. Students had to travel longer distances to new schools; often through more dangerous areas.

“School closures harm entire communities. As Georgia State Law Professor Courtney Anderson found, where neighborhood schools were a hub for community activities, vacant schools become magnets for illegal activity. Moreover, buildings in disuse pose health and environmental dangers to the community. Vacant buildings depress the value of homes and businesses around them, increase insurance premiums and insurance policy cancellations. In addition, the school district must pay for maintenance of vacant buildings.

“Although Chicago claimed to close schools to save money, the savings were minimal — at great cost to the communities affected.

“At the same time Chicago leaders closed 125 neighborhood schools, they opened 41 selective public schools and 108 charter schools; more than they closed. Chicago charter schools underserve English Language Learners and students with disabilities, and have suspension and expulsion rates ten times greater than Chicago’s public schools. Even more astounding, despite the self-selecting and exclusive nature of charters, researcher Myron Orfield found that Chicago’s public schools outperform charters on standardized test passing and growth rates in both reading and math, and high school graduation rates.

“The Roosevelt University researchers found that the expansion of Chicago charter schools devastated the public school budget, contributing to massive cuts of basic educational resources in Chicago’s public schools. Moreover, many of these new charters have remained open despite falling below the “ideal enrollment” standard used to close neighborhood public schools.

“The education policies of Chicago’s leaders force its poor children and children of color to attend under-resourced schools, often at a great distance from their neighborhoods, on a pretext of under-enrollment and poor performance. Officials fail to consider the devastating effects school closures have on educational opportunities or on the health of entire communities.

“Chicago promised to use the proceeds of the sales of vacant schools to improve those neighborhoods. Yet, city leaders instead used those funds for school capital projects. A WBEZ investigation found that Chicago’s new school construction and additions disproportionately benefit schools that serve white, middle class students, even though white students are far less likely to suffer overcrowded schools than Latino students, whose schools do not see the benefit of capital spending.”

Nancy Bailey dedicates her post to the late, beloved Joan Kramer.

“On this 4th of July, when we celebrate America’s freedoms, it’s a perfect time to discuss our free public schools, and where we are with them when it comes to school reform. It’s important to understand that our public schools have a new threat, as I will explain below.

“Public schools, with all their faults, are the only truly democratic institution we own “together” as a country. Our public schools open their doors to all children.

“Teachers take on the challenge of working with the oppressed, the poor, immigrants, and even those with the most severe disabilities. Collectively, such care of our children will lead to the greater good of our country and the world.

“Local school boards, elected by the people, give all of us a voice as to how our schools are run. This is a democratic process threatened with extinction because of school privatization forces.

“If you don’t like what your public school is doing, you can go to the school board meeting and make your voice heard. If you don’t know how to help your public schools, you can sign up to be a volunteer.

“A public school not only reflects the community that surrounds it, it is an anchor to bring people together.

“Efforts for us to hold onto our public schools are in jeopardy today, and they have been in jeopardy for many years. Business has staked a claim on our public schools. There’s money to be made using our tax dollars.”

Bill Phillis retired years ago as a Deputy Commission of Education in Ohio. He is passionate about equitable funding for the public schools. He has been relentless in exposing the raids on the state treasury by private profiteers like ECOT and for-profit charters. He founded an organization called Ohio Coalition for Equity and Adequacy. If you live in Ohio, you should join his work.

Bill Phillis is a tireless warrior for public schools. Like almost everyone who fights for Democratic public schools, he is unpaid. He fights because of his convictions, not his wallet. The reverse is true for corporate reformers. Take away the hundreds of millions behind their malevolent privatization movement, and it would collapse.

I name Bill Phillis to the honor roll of this blog. He is a hero of public education.

He said this about the recent Supreme Court decision, which will divert more money from public schools to religious schools:

“U.S. Supreme Court rules Trinity Lutheran Church in Missouri is entitled to public funds for non-religious purposes

“The June 26 ruling in the Missouri case probably will not affect how Ohio does business with churches and parochial schools, but it does provide another wrecking ball to help knock down the wall of separation between church and state. Although it is a narrow decision, it paves the way for further mischief.

“Ohio provides several tax-funded perks for parochial schools-auxiliary services, administrative cost reimbursement, transportation and vouchers. Ohio already is at the very top of the nation in tax support for private parochial schools. The state provides more tax dollars per student to private schools than many public schools receive.

“Companion bills (SB 85 and HB 200), pending in the legislature, would greatly accelerate public support for a parochial education.

“The nation’s founders had good reason for erecting a wall between church and state. Many of them had firsthand knowledge and experience regarding the mischief inherent in mixing the two. Both church and state lose when the two become intertwined. Public support of one’s faith trivializes it. The dominate faith community tends to have undue influence on government. Iran is a good example of a country with no wall between church and state.

“The wall in the United States need repairs, not further demolition.”

William L. Phillis | Ohio Coalition for Equity & Adequacy of School Funding | 614.228.6540 | ohioeanda@sbcglobal.net| http://www.ohiocoalition.org

Ohio E & A, 100 S. 3rd Street, Columbus, OH 43215
ohioeanda@sbcglobal.net

There is one super-smart columnist writing in Esquire, and his name is Charles P. Pierce.

He gets it.

Unlike the editorial boards of the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Washington Post, he understands that schools don’t get “better” by competing.

He understands that what is called “reform” these days is a massive failure.

He knows that charter schools, despite the boasting, despite the hundreds of millions squandered on them, don’t get better results than public schools and usually get worse results.

He has been paying attention.

In district after district, public schools are outperforming charter schools.

Will someone tell the Walton Family?

Will someone tell Eli Broad and Reed Hastings?

Will the editorial writers wake up anytime soon?

At the NEA representative Assembly in Boston, President Lily Eskelsen Garcia brought some 8,000 delegates to their feet as she denounced Betsy DeVos and Donald Trump for their abandonment of America’s most vulnerable children and public education.

““This is not a drill,” NEA President Lily Eskelsen García told the 2017 NEA Representative Assembly. “We stand in a dangerous place. We stand between a profiteer and his profits. We have a president who resides at the dangerous intersection of arrogance and ignorance and travels with a moral compass that always points to his own self-interest.”

“In her keynote address on Sunday, Eskelsen García laid out in stark terms the dangers posed by the agenda of President Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, but reminded the 8,000 delegates gathered in the Boston Convention Center that “we can win. We have the power, and they know it.”

“Eskelsen Garcia recalled how she had to turn down an invitation from DeVos to meet because the new Education Secretary failed to answer simple questions about her commitment to accountability and transparency for charter schools and to protecting our most vulnerable students.

“We have have already seen some of Devos’ answers. She has made it clear that the Education Department under her leadership will pursue the most egregious school privatization agenda in the form of charter school and voucher expansion, and will not protect our most vulnerable students. The Trump/DeVos administration rescinded the Office of Civil Rights letter that the Obama administration sent to districts clearly stating that they were legally responsible for protecting transgendered students from discrimination.

“I will not allow the National Education Association to be used by Donald Trump or Betsy DeVos,” Eskelsen García told the delegates to resounding applause. “I do not trust their motives. I do not believe their alternative facts. I see no reason to assume they will do what is best for our students and their families. There will be no photo-op!”

Thank you, dear Poet. I blush. And I laughed out loud.

“The Midnight Blog of Diane Ravitch” (apologies to Henry Wadsworth Longfellow)

Hear ye, my teachers, of techy wares
The “teaching” inventions of billionaires
Of testing and Cores
Political whores
And a blogger with passion who really cares

She said to her friends, “If the billionaires roll
By software or hard, from your towns tonight
Hang a lantern aloft from the tall flag-pole
At the public school, as a signal light —
One if by Gates and two if by Broad
And I, on the opposite side of the road,
Ready to blog and spread the alarm
Through every American village and farm
For the parents and kids to march arm in arm

Then she said “good night” and with a blogger’s adieu
Warned to “Be watchful of ‘privatize’ clue’”
Just as the wealthy were meeting with pols
And paying the think-tanks and internet trolls
For “proof” that their methods were “tried and true” —
The Common Core and the testing too —
That only THEY know what to do
A propaganda that was magnified
By billions of dollars, far and wide

Meanwhile, her friends, through blogging and tweet
Wander and watch with eagle eyes
Till they read of the program to “personalize”
The learning, by students with tech, for sure
The smell of a hardware and software cheat
By usual folks, with their usual lies
Peddling wares at the techy store

They hoisted the lanterns up the poles
At the public schools, throughout the land
To the top of the masts, hand over hand
Unbeknownst to the blogger trolls
On the internet sites (paid as planned
By billionaires, who worshipped Rand)
Up the flag-pole, so steep and tall
The highest flagpole of them all
They raised the lanterns above the trees
Where Diane Ravitch saw with ease
And moved to action from the call

A flurry of blogs and a trumpet of tweet
A shape in the moonlight, a bulk in the dark
And beneath from her fingers, in passing a spark
Struck out by a blogger both fearless and fleet
That was all! And yet through the gloom and the light
The fate of a Nation was riding that night
And the spark stuck by the blogger in flight
Kindled the Land into flame with it’s heat

You know the rest. In the books you have read
How the brutish billionaires tired and fled–
How the parents gave them piece of mind
(And not of the peaceful restful kind)
Chasing the billionaires down the lane
Then crossing the field to emerge again
Under the trees at the edge of the school
To banish forever the billionaire rule

So through the night, she persevered
And so through the night went her cry of alarm
Through every American village and farm
A cry of defiance and not of fear
A voice in the darkness a knock at the door
And a word that shall echo forevermore!
For borne on the night wind of the Past
Through all our history to the last
In the hour of darkness and peril and need
The people will waken and listen to hear
Of the ominous danger of billionaire greed
Threat to democracy that we hold dear

Shannon Williams is proud to be a graduate of the Indianapolis Public Schools. She now writes for the Indianapolis Recorder, where she published this article about the current plan to shrink the district.

She writes:

There are countless emotions tied to Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS), and even more emotions now associated with the district due to the proposal to close or repurpose three of its high schools.

It is a lot to analyze — even for the most astute. Nonetheless, IPS is a major issue, and quite honestly has been a major issue for many years.

I am a proud product of IPS. I wear my time in the district as a badge of honor, not as something I am ashamed of, like many expected of my peers and me at the time, and like some people expect of the current students. Public schools. Even then, so many years ago, there was a stigma associated with the district. That stigma has continued; some years are worse than others, but there has seemingly always been a stigma attached to the district.

In the past, the stigma often came from people outside IPS’ administration and staff. Now, some people wonder if the district’s powers-that-be are actually the ones who look adversely at its student population.

“Arlington High School is located at 46th and Arlington. John Marshall is at 42nd and Post Road. These are areas with primarily Black and Hispanic families — they are impoverished areas. To close schools in some of the city’s most impoverished neighborhoods is a clear (indication) that you don’t care,” James Turner said passionately. Turner spent his entire formative years as an IPS student. He was also so dedicated to the district that he and his wife made the decision to enroll their children in IPS. In addition, Turner worked for the district, first as special needs assistant, then a graduation coach and later as dean of students.

In addition to the elimination of schools in neighborhoods that desperately need them, Turner thinks centralizing Indianapolis high schools to a handful of locations can be a safety hazard for students.

“You have students from Haughville, 42nd and Post Road, Hillside — all these kids will be at the same school. There will be neighborhood beef amongst the students because not all neighborhoods get along; some kids represent the places they live and are willing to fight for their neighborhood. There will be safety hazards — even for the students who are there simply to learn.”

In 2014 Turner ran a compassionate grassroots campaign for a seat on the IPS board of commissioners. He was defeated, but he remains committed to “ensuring the safety and success of our babies” by staying engaged in news impacting IPS’ students.

She wonders why no one like Turner was invited to be part of the Task Force that made these recommendations. She wonders why the Task Force was composed of big business types and big names, with no one from the community.

Good question. No one on the Task Force had an emotional tie to the Indianapolis Public Schools. They looked at them as a business deal. They didn’t understand the value of neighborhood schools. They didn’t care about “legacy” schools, where older siblings and parents went to school. They also don’t care about public education.

The Los Angeles Times editorial board published an editorial today chastising the California Teachers Association for resisting privatization of public education via charters.

I assume that this editorial was in no way influenced by Eli Broad, who subsidizes the Times’ education coverage, which is a blatant conflict of interest.

The editorial board can’t see any critics of charters other than teachers’ unions, who presumably are protecting their jobs by fighting off the agenda that Donald Trump and Betsy DeVos are promoting.

It can’t see why parents and graduates of public schools (like me) think that turning public money over to private and unaccountable boards is a terrible idea.

One would think that the LA Times might express concern about the millions of dollars pumped into the school board race by billionaires like Eli Broad, Reed Hastings, Richard Riordan, and the Waltons. How did it happen that the California Charter Schools Association become the most influential lobby in Sacramento? Isn’t the Times just a little bit curious about the deployment of big money? Have they noticed that the same money has bought the school boards in Denver, Indianapolis, and other cities? Are they aware that Reed Hastings longs for the day when democratically elected school boards are obsolete. Meanwhile, he is willing to spend whatever it takes to buy them.

One would think that a major metropolitan newspaper would worry about the power of big money to buy local school board elections. When did any of these billionaires ever have a child or grandchild in the LAUSD public schools? Why doesn’t the editorial question why they want so badly to buy the school board? What do they want?

One would think that the LA Times might have noticed the numerous scandals associated with charter schools in Los Angeles and throughout California. Is that not a reason to fight for public schools and public accountability for public money?

Does the Los Angeles Times recognize that charter schools skim the students they want and dump the ones they don’t want? Is this not a dire threat to public education, which must take the students the charters don’t want?

This editorial must be a source of joy to Betsy DeVos. The game plan in California looks like the DeVos plan in Michigan: charters, charters, charters, while defunding public schools. Did it help struggling students? No. Did it improve the academic performance of the students of Michigan? No. Michigan’s NAEP scores have plummeted since DeVos launched her charter agenda in the state.

The people of California must stand up for public education, under democratic control and with full accountability and transparency.

Shame on the editorial board of the Los Angeles Times.