Sunday, March 3, 2019

Betsy DeVos’s Right Wing School Indoctrination Program by Steven Singer

Originally posted at: https://gadflyonthewallblog.com/2019/03/02/betsy-devoss-right-wing-school-indoctrination-program/?fbclid=IwAR1cSdhJKpUwPfMZ10Z-QAwK80wJpF46ZW_Owy28VCqOdN9X1TcaQ6li9-I

What do you do when thinking people reject your political ideology?
 
You get rid of thinking people.
 
That’s Betsy DeVos’ plan to rejuvenate and renew the Republican Party.
 
The billionaire heiress who bought her position as Donald Trump’s Education Secretary plans to spend $5 billion of your tax dollars on private, religious and parochial schools.
 
This would be federal tax credits to fund scholarships to private and religious institutions – school vouchers in all but name.


It’s a federal child indoctrination program to ensure that the next generation has an increasing number of voters who think science is a lie, white supremacy is heritage and the Bible is history – you know, people just gullible enough to believe a reality show TV star who regularly cheats on his many wives with porn stars is God’s chosen representative on Earth. A measure to make child kidnapping, imprisonment and wrongful death seem like a measured response to backward immigration policy. A measure to make collusion and fraternization with the world’s worst dictators and strongmen seem like global pragmatism.
 
To make matters even more galling, consider the timing of DeVos’ proposal.


In the beginning of February, Donald Trump Jr. criticized “loser teachers” who he said were indoctrinating school children into – gasp – socialism.
 
At the end of that same month, DeVos proposed funding Christian madrasas from sea-to-shinning-sea.
 
Apparently indoctrination is just fine for conservatives so long as it’s the right kind of indoctrination.
 
But even beyond the blatant hypocrisy, this betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the differences between public and private schools.
 
Florida’s GOP Governor Ron DeSantis tweeted that if a school receives public funding – whether it be a charter or voucher institution – it is a public school.
 
To which DeVos tweeted her glowing approval.
 
This makes a few things strikingly clear: either (1) these folks have no idea what happens at authentic public schools or (2) they’re pretending not to know so as to further their political and financial ambitions.
 
They’ll teach what socialism is and how it has functioned historically without commenting on its merits or deficiencies. It’s up to individual students to decide whether it’s a good thing or not.
 
At most, they teach children how to think. They teach media literacy, skepticism and critical thinking skills.


If that leads kids away from Republican orthodoxy, it’s not the fault of the teacher or the child. It’s a problem with your orthodoxy.
 
You can’t proclaim the benefits of a marketplace of ideas and then decry that too many ideas are on display.
 
Nor can you conflate the way a school is funded with what that school actually does and how it teaches.
 
There is a world of difference between authentic public schools and their market based alternatives – especially the parochial and religious variety.
 
It’s the difference between telling students the answer and getting them to think about the answer. It’s the difference between total certainty and doubt, between trite truths and useful skills that can help you arrive at deeper truths.
 
When you ask children to think, you never know what conclusions they’ll draw. When you tell children what to think, you know exactly what conclusions you want them to hold.


Authentic public schools do not indoctrinate. Conservatives graduate from these hallowed halls the same as liberals, moderates and the politically checked out. The difference is that in a world where facts are prized and logic is exercised, conservatism becomes less appealing.


I’m not saying liberalism or progressivism is guaranteed, but they are certainly more fact-based world views than their opposites.
 
They educate kids behind closed doors with little to no transparency for the public about how their money is being spent. But word seeps out of the cracks in the system.
 
We’ve seen the textbooks they use to teach. Their graduates have returned to the public square to tell us about the instruction they received.
 
The American Christian Education (ACE) group provides fundamentalist school curriculum to thousands of religious schools throughout the country. Included in this curriculum is the A Beka Book and Bob Jones University Press textbooks. A Beka publishers, in particular, reported that about 9,000 schools nationwide purchase their textbooks.


In their pages you’ll find glowing descriptions of the Ku Klux Klan, how the massacre of Native Americans saved many souls, African slaves had really good lives, homosexuals are no better than rapists and child molesters, and progressive attempts at equal rights such as Brown vs. Board of Education were illegal and misguided. You know – all the greatest Trump campaign hits!
 
We should not be funding the spread of such ignorance.


 
Two years ago, when Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, she wanted to spend $20 billion on the same nonsense. Her party refused to back her.
 
Now with Democrats in control of the House, it seems even more unlikely that her plan will pass.
 
But sadly smaller scale versions of it have been allowed by state legislatures throughout the country – often with full support from Democrats.
 
My own state of Pennsylvania spends $125 million in taxpayer dollars on the Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC) and Opportunity Scholarship Tax Credit (OSTC) programs to send children to private/religious schools. And every year legislators ask for more.


Why any Democrat would support conservative indoctrination programs is beyond me.
 
And this is true even though indoctrination is sometimes unavoidable.
 
To a limited degree, it may even be desirable. You might even say it’s a normal part of growing up.


Even the most fair-minded parents often want their children to hold at least some of the same values as they do. They want to be able to relate to their kids and view them as a continuation of the kinds of lives they lived.
 
But what’s okay for parents is not okay for governments.
 
If Mom and Dad want their kids to have a Biblical education, they should pay for it. The burden should not be shouldered by society since it’s not in society’s interest.
 
Governments have no right taking public money and using it to prop up private interests. And that’s exactly what this is.
 
It is political and religious interest. It is a way to circumvent skepticism and free thought.
 
It’s a way to ensure that in a time where information flows freely and dogmas crumble, people like Donald Trump continue to be elected.



Still can’t get enough Gadfly? I’ve written a book, “Gadfly on the Wall: A Public School Teacher Speaks Out on Racism and Reform,” now available from Garn Press. Ten percent of the proceeds go to the Badass Teachers Association. Check it out!
book-2

Virulent Destroy Public Education Movement Rampaging in Texas by Thomas Ultican

Texas Politicians Promoting Public School Privatization
Originally published at: https://tultican.com/2019/03/03/virulent-destroy-public-education-movement-rampaging-in-texas/?fbclid=IwAR3zamTG8S_A6uq_7wW6Ye4WVqT_48FA6LV8MbogRZSodg4evwzc64R5vok

By T. Ultican 3/2/2019
Top leaders of the Texas Republican Party have joined with the Chamber of Commerce and other wealthy business groups to undermine democratic control of local schools. Eschewing long held conservative principles of liberty from the tyranny of big government and a reverence for democratic local governance, these odd Republicans are joining with like minded Democrats to arrogate power over public schools to themselves. Wielding new legal tools they designed and an old education funding law, politicians are forcing privatization upon the 1025 independent public school districts in Texas.

The Legal Heist

Legal Privatization Incentives.
Legal Framework Forcing Privatization of Public Education in Texas
In 1989 the Texas Supreme Court ruled that public education was inequitable and ordered the state to remedy the situation. A new school finance system, commonly referred to as ‘Robin Hood,’ required property wealthy districts to help equalize funding with property poor districts. The wealthy districts that provide money are known as Chapter 41 school districts, which is the chapter in the Texas education code where the law exists. The mechanism for taking the money is called “recapture.”
In 1993 there were 34 Chapter 41 school districts sending $130 million recapture dollars. The State has quit providing its share of school funding which caused the number of schools subject to Robin Hood to increase dramatically. Today, more than 371 school districts qualify as Chapter 41 school districts.
Lori Kirkpatrick a Dallas area school board candidate in 2017 writes an informative blog focused on Texas public education policies. She writes hereabout charter school funding and recapture,
“I reached out to Chandra Villanueva, school finance expert at the Center for Public Policy Priorities, and here’s what she had to say when I asked about the recapture dollar amount for the state of Texas ($2.8 billion) being eerily similar to the charter school budget ($2.7 billion). (Emphasis added)
[Villanueva said] “‘Statute says all the dollars collected by the state through recapture may be used only for foundation school purposes – it does not say anything about property-poor districts. A lot of people believe that recapture doesn’t go to education because it supplants rather than supplements education funding. So I like to point out the connection between recapture and charters for two reasons.
“‘1.       Charter school operations are 100% state funded – and like you pointed out, the funding for charter schools is just slightly under what is collected in recapture, this makes it easy to draw a line to which schools exactly are getting most of those dollars.’ (Emphasis added)
“‘2.       This is probably the most important point, recapture is determined by wealth per student. When a student leaves a traditional ISD for a charter school, the home districts wealth per student goes up – if this happens enough times a district can be pushed into recapture. This is exactly what happened in Houston – charters drained the student population, making the wealth per student of the district fall into recapture territory. If all the charter students were still enrolled in HISD, the district would be entitled to more funding than it is currently paying in recapture. So if you live in a recapture district that has charters you can think of your tax dollars being sent directly to the charter.’” (Emphasis added)
Lori noted that Dallas has 35,000 students in charter schools. The property tax per public school student has increased. Under recapture, money is taken out of the public system and transferred to the privatized system. When this happens, taxpayers lose their democratic control over the schools they are financing.
In 2015, the Texas House of Representatives introduced and passed HB 1842, which is the school district “death penalty” bill. Governor Abbott signed the bill into law that same year. It mandates “intervention in and sanction of a public school that has received an academically unsuccessful performance rating for at least two consecutive school years ….” (Emphasis added)
The law says that if a district does not implement an approved plan to turn the school around “the commissioner shall [may] order:
  • appointment of a board of managers to govern the district ….;
  • alternative management of the campus under this section; or
  • closure of the campus.”
Districts that present an approved turnaround plan are designated an “innovation district.” If after five consecutive years of bad test scores at any district campus an “innovation district” would lose its designation and be subject to the above sanctions.
HB 1842 passed by large margins; 26-5 in the senate and 125-18 in the house. Governor Abbott signed this bipartisan legislation requiring districts to be taken over by the state if just one school in the district is labeled “failing” as measured by State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STARR) testing.
It has been known for some time that even good standardized tests are NOT capable of measuring either school or teacher quality. (See evidence here, here, here, here and here.) In 2012, when the current version of the STAAR tests came out, Texas A & M researchers said the reading tests were testing at a level two grades above the students. In 2016, researchers at University of Mary Hardin-Baylor, in Belton, Texas confirmed the A & M study. The headline in February’s Texas Monthly asks the obvious, “Are Texas Kids Failing? Or Are the Tests Rigged?”
In 2017, Senate Bill 1882 incentivized privatizing schools predominantly in minority neighborhoods. Sarah Becker a Houston parent and school psychologist explains,
“In the spring of 2017, just months before the sanctions of HB1842 were slated to go into effect; the legislature passed Texas Senate Bill 1882, which gave school boards another option for these so-called failing schools. SB1882 encouraged school districts to hand over control of these neighborhood schools to charter operators (referred to as “partnerships”) the year before schools would get ratings for the fifth year. In exchange, the school and its board would get a reprieve from Representative Dutton’s death penalty for two years and, as a bonus, would receive extra funding for every student enrolled in one of these charter-controlled schools.
“With one law the death penalty (1842) and the other law the price of clemency (1882), these two laws now work together to coerce local school boards to be the hand of privatizing their own neighborhood schools.”

Bipartisan Attack on Public Education


Governor Greg Abbott is the first paraplegic governor since George Wallace of Alabama. A tree fell on the then 26-years old future Governor damaging his spinal column. Abbott is a white anti-abortion Catholic married to an educator of Mexican descent.
He was appointed to the Texas Supreme court by former Governor, George W. Bush. After leaving the court he was elected state Attorney General, a position he held for 13-years. He famously or infamously – depending on your position on the separation of church and state – successfully protected the right of Texas to keep its 6 foot tall 3 feet wide granite 10-commandments monument in front of the state capital. The court split 5-4 in Abbott’s favor.
As Attorney General, Abbott brought over 30 suits against the Obama administration. In a 2013 Texas Monthly article he was quoted, “I go into the office in the morning, I sue Barack Obama, and then I go home.” The article reported, “… he has gleefully battled perceived federal overreach in matters of environmental regulation, redistricting, and voter ID.”
A Houston Chronicle editorial noted, “Although Texas Governor Greg Abbott hasn’t issued any public statements on the withdrawal from the Paris agreement, but he led the charge against Obama-era climate regulations.” Abbott also filed suit against the Affordable Care Act (Obama Care).
The Governor believes that state’s rights are being abused by both the federal executive and legislative branches of government plus the Supreme Court. In 2016, he called for a convention of U.S. states to adopt nine new amendments to the U.S. Constitution limiting the powers of the federal government.
It is shocking that a conservative republican with Abbott’s credentials would sign and champion legislation like HB 1842 taking away the democratic rights of Texas residents to govern their own schools. His Trumpian Tweet sent in January reeks of “Big Brother,”
“What a joke. HISD leadership is a disaster. Their self-centered ineptitude has failed the children they are supposed to educate. If ever there was a school board that needs to be taken over and reformed it’s HISD. Their students & parents deserve change.” [HISD is Houston Independent School District]
Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick grew up in Maryland with the given name Dan Goeb. He changed his name to Dan Patrick when he moved to Houston. His career as a bomb throwing talk radio personality provided him with the required name recognition to become a successful conservative politician.  Patrick founded the Tea Party caucus. He calls Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump the two greatest Presidents of his lifetime. He opposes abortion rights for women.
Patrick has a knack for alienating his fellow legislators. He accused Republican State Senator John Corona of spreading rumors about his marriage. Corona responded,
“Though I have heard rumors regarding your marital status and sexual preferences for a while now, at no time have I told anyone that you are either separated, divorced or gay. As you know, if you truly believed I had said something unflattering, you could have simply asked. I’ve never been shy about sharing my dislike and distrust of you. Put bluntly, I believe you are a snake oil salesman, a narcissist that would say anything to draw attention to himself.”
One of Patrick’s first acts as a State Senator was to introduce legislation lifting the Texas charter school cap. Patrick also champions school vouchers which he calls “the civil rights issue of our time” and he encourages the teaching of creationism. These are radical positions that deliver harm. They violate the establishment clause the US constitution, would force taxpayers to pay for religious schools and will financially devastate public school districts. When did being a radical become a conservative principle?
Commissioner of Education Mike Morath was a Dallas Independent School District (DISD) Trustee when picked to be Commissioner by Governor Abbott. Morath’s only education experience is as a substitute teacher in one class for part of one year. When he ran for school board in 2011, he was the first of a new wave of business community PAC supported candidates who now dominate the DISD board. While on the board, Morath discovered a never used Texas law that made privatizing a school district possible and he led a failed effort to do just that in Dallas.
Morath continues a fifteen year period in which Texas has not had an experienced education professional leading its schools. Billionaire businessmen like Eli Broad discount the value of education leaders having deep education knowledge and experience. Broad who established the un-accredited Broad Superintendents academy claims that education leaders without education experience can hire consultants for that.
Morath’s primary agenda is a statewide effort to institute the portfolio school district management model using his System of Great Schools Network program. The portfolio model promotes disruption as a virtue and posits no value for stable neighborhood schools. Under this model, as schools are closed or reconstituted because of poor standardized testing results, the replacement schools are controlled by private concerns. Local citizens’ have their democratic rights purloined in favor of private companies.
Jimmy Don Aycock Republican State Representative from Killen joined with Harold Dutton Democratic State Representative from Houston to create and pass HB 1842, the state school district death penalty law signed by Governor Abbott in 2015.
Paul Bettencourt Republican State Senator from Houston and Jose Menendez Democratic State Senator from San Antonio wrote and passed SB 1882 the “Partnerships” law. Menendez was the lead author. Governor Abbott signed it into law in 2017.

Wealthy Texans and Billionaire Outsiders Finance the Destroy Public Education Agenda

In 2013, the Texas Observer published “Meet the New Money Behind School Reform in Texas.” Author Patrick Michels reported on the launch of Texas for Education Reform (TER) with deep-pocketed donors “like Dick Weekley, Ray Hunt and Doug Foshee who helped the education group raise nearly $1 million for its new political action committee.”
By 2016, TER was spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on individual state representative and senate seats to defeat pro-public education candidates and replace them with candidates that will vote to cut spending on education. For example, the Texas State Teachers Association reported in January 2016, that public education supporters Democratic Representative Mary Gonzalez in House District 75 and Republican Representative Gary VanDeaver in House District 1 were targeted. The report said, “So far, TER has contributed almost $300,000 in advertising and other services to Gonzalez’s opponent, former Rep. Chente Quintanilla, and more than $100,000 to VanDeaver’s challenger, former Rep. George Lavender.”
Billionaire John Arnold the former Enron trader from Houston is spending heavily to promote the “portfolio model” of education governance. Billionaire Michael Dell Austin is spending heavily promoting charter schools and education technology. He has also sent $9 million to Arnold’s “portfolio model” agenda. These examples go on and on.
This is not altruistic philanthropic spending. These people are opening new lucrative markets while they reduce their own tax burdens. They are destroying public schools because it is worth billions to them.
This article wraps up a series of articles over the last seven months about the Destroy Public Education movement in Texas. Here are links to the other five posts:
A Texas Sized Destroy Public Education IDEA: The large profits and big dollars behind selling a subpar school to destroy public education.
Big Spending on Privatizing Public Schools in San Antonio: How a local business woman and an Eli Broad/Arne Duncan trained superintendent are speeding the privatization of public schools in that city.
Texas Public Schools in Portfolio District Crosshairs: Details about how Texas Education Commissioner Mike Morath is driving the privatization of all of the state’s schools.
Texas Hangs Sword of Damocles Over Houston Schools: Describes how the state’s new legal powers are being used to force Houston to privatize schools in minority zip codes.
Dallas Chamber of Commerce Disrupts Dallas Schools: Provides details about how Dallas’s country-club set is driving the privatization of public schools in that city almost exclusively in minority neighborhoods.

Saturday, March 2, 2019

I Used to be a Reporter. Now I’m a Teacher. I’ve Become What I Used to Observe by Steven Singer

Originally posted at: https://gadflyonthewallblog.com/2019/02/28/i-used-to-be-a-reporter-now-im-a-teacher-ive-become-what-i-used-to-observe/?fbclid=IwAR1Ktz58sEwzvZ-IqiU8GApNf_fX1-gA2q4cRbpE7AFh2zRzAxgwEST2fqA

A long time ago, in a newsroom far, far away; your humble narrator was a respected journalist.
Today I am a beloved school teacher in a suburban middle school.
Okay. That may be laying it on a bit thick.
Like any human being whose job it is to get children to do their best and learn something, I’m beloved by some and beloathed by others. And if I’m honest, when I was a reporter, I was never all that respected. But I did win several state journalism awards.
The point I’m trying to make is that like a caterpillar into a butterfly or a tadpole into a frog, I made a startling transformation in career paths that flies somewhat in the face of popular wisdom.
F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote, “There are no second acts in American Lives.” Well, I’m on my third or fourth act and nowhere near ready for the curtain to come down yet.
It’s shocking how far I’ve come, though there’s a surprising amount of overlap between my two professions. In fact, the biggest difference is one of orientation.
I used to get up at 4 a.m., weave into the newsroom and type away for a few hours about the previous night’s school board or city council meeting before my deadline came down, the presses rolled and the morning edition went on sale.
Now I get up at 5 a.m., hobble into the classroom and go to meetings, grade papers or otherwise get ready for a 7-hour invasion by 12- and 13-year-olds, followed by more meetings and papers and planning.
I used to go into the classroom to interview teachers and students about special lessons, state and federal programs or standardized tests.
Now I’m in the classroom questioning myself about my students and what works best to help them learn, trying to navigate the state and federal programs so they get the best return and bang my head against the wall about the constant standardized tests.
I used to independently bebop all over my coverage area, asking questions, doing research, discovering things that many people would rather remain secret.
Now I independently plan my lessons, ask my students questions, do research on best practices and discover things about my children and their lives that many people would rather remain secret.
You’ve heard the old chestnut about education being a career for those unable to act. I’m living proof that it’s a lie.
As a journalist, I reported on. As a teacher, I do.
In my former job, I told. In my current one I show.
I’m not surprised. I can’t say I didn’t know that that door was always open. But it’s peculiar.
In the newsroom, we all heard the stories about grizzled newspapermen and women with shelves stuffed full of awards and prized Rolodexes bursting with hard-earned sources who gave it all up for a 9-5 desk job writing the very press releases we disdained.
There is no scorn, no disgust, no derision to match that of a journalist for a corporate sellout, and that’s because in our hearts we all secretly wondered if it wasn’t the better deal.
Every good reporter – like every good teacher – is a radical at heart.
You don’t get into either field to support the status quo. You want to rock the boat. You want to shake things up. You want to change the world for the better – all from the comfort of your swivel chair behind your computer screen or from the well worn tread of your classroom carpet.
Journalists live for the scoop, the big story, the article that shouts off the front page above the fold and which has everyone talking. Teachers live for the student epiphany, the moment the light comes on behind a child’s eyes, the transformation from ignorance to knowledge and – dare I say – wisdom.
You have to give it up – all for the right to have a chance at a life.
I loved being a reporter. It was one of the best things I’ve ever done. I got to do things, see things, talk to people, be there for things that I never would have been able to access otherwise. But I could barely pay my bills.
I was dirt poor in the newsroom. We all were.
We worked 50-60 hours a week, had no time for a second job, no time for a social life, no time for a family or kids, and we wanted more.
So I understand the allure of the steady paycheck and becoming a housebroken professional communicator of someone else’s message.
But being a teacher is different.
You still don’t get paid much. You still work long hours – though maybe not quite as long. But you can get that second job – often in the school, itself, tutoring students or in a summer or after school program.
And you get union protections that I only dreamed about as a reporter. A safe workspace, clean and tidy, no outrageous demands (or at least an upper limit on them), and a schedule you can predict and plan a life around.
Best of all, you still get to keep your idealism intact. Or you can try to keep it as you dodge this directive and that unfunded mandate and that deeply racist policy passed down from above.
Don’t get me wrong. Becoming a teacher was hard work. I didn’t go about it the easy way – no Teach for America, one-foot-in/one-foot-out, cheating for me. I dove in head first.
I went back to college and took an intensive, accelerated masters program designed exactly for people changing careers. To get there, I had to swallow a few prerequisites I’d missed in college the first time. Then they placed me in a high school where I watched and then took over multiple classes – all while enrolled in education courses at night and in the summers.
By the time it was all over, I still had the most important things left to learn – (1) whether I could actually teach a full schedule, and (2) whether I liked doing so.
For me, the answers were unequivocally positive. I took to it like I’d taken to journalism. I needed lots of fine tuning, but the basics came naturally. And I loved every exhausting minute of it.
I regret nothing about becoming a teacher. It’s the best job I’ve ever had and am ever likely to have.
As a journalist, I got to rock whole communities with exposes about corruption. As an educator, I get to impact individuals.
I no longer get to be the talk of the town, but I get to change lives all the same – one person at a time.
And there’s something deeply satisfying about it – to look in another person’s eyes and see the need right there in front of you, and to be able to heal it even a fraction of the way well.
This world is hard. It takes people, chews them up and spits them out. There is so rarely a helping hand, a smile, understanding. But to be able to offer your hand, to be able to share a smile, to attempt to understand – that’s pure magic.
When the day is done, I know it was well spent.
I’ve come a long way from the newsroom. And in doing so, I’ve broken journalism’s number one rule – don’t become the story.
I no longer report on the action.
I participate in it.
What a way to make a living!


Still can’t get enough Gadfly? I’ve written a book, “Gadfly on the Wall: A Public School Teacher Speaks Out on Racism and Reform,” now available from Garn Press. Ten percent of the proceeds go to the Badass Teachers Association. Check it out!
cropped-book-1.jpg

White Privilege and School Choice Critique by Aaron Michael Baker

Originally posted at: https://spoonvision.wordpress.com/2019/02/19/white-privilege-and-school-choice-critique/?fbclid=IwAR3MUXKsS_X09TiHaxM3NH4YV_RR203j6HgLLfRBOFQ-sHMAWqvIdJONkJg


The School Choice Movement undeniably forms the centerpiece legacy of the program of “massive resistance” to school desegregation in the United States in the late 1950s. Any white person advocating for school choice policies today is 1.) ignorant of this history, 2.) acting on implicit and explicit racial bias, 3.) openly taking advantage of the opportunity to profit from public funds, 4.) deeply entrenched in a program of self-preservation at all costs, or 5.) some combination of racial bias and ignorance, profiteering, or self-preservation. White school choice advocates should be treated with suspicion at all times, under all circumstances. At the genesis of virtually every school choice policy there is a white man in a power suit.

The momentum of the School Choice Movement seems to be waning. Take the Oklahoma School Choice Summit, an annual event now in its third year. The inaugural event in 2017 was met with a considerable amount of hype and an equivalent amount of controversy. In 2018, the crowd was half the size. And just recently, on January 24, 2019, most of the crowd consisted of those who organized the event and those responsible for exhibits from various charter and private schools. One thing has been consistent at all three events; a keynote address by an African American man and well-dressed white men lurking in the shadows, trying diligently not to draw attention to the fact that the School Choice Movement has always been driven almost entirely by white interest.
tweet
There are plenty of people of color involved in the School Choice Movement, however, and right wing think tanks like the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs are adept at keeping this reality at the center of their messaging. BIPOC (Black Indigenous People of Color) as well as Latinx people are highly visible in the School Choice Movement. Criticism of this visibility is questionable. To suggest that white reformers are using reformers of color as pawns is to suggest that reformers of color are not worthy of the visibility they are receiving.
Systemic racism and white supremacy is built into the very fabric of the School Choice Movement, but conversely, white privilege is inherent in the critique of school choice. White reformers are often correct when they speak of communities of color advocating for school choice policies in search of greater equity and autonomy. For instance, black families often seek out application schools (charters and magnets) and avoid underserved urban schools for reasons similar to that of white families; better perceived educational opportunities. The difference is that white families avoiding urban underserved neighborhood schools is necessarily an act of racial aggression. Another difference is that the inequity found in urban school districts has 100% resulted from the actions of white America; namely suburban white flight, “choose your neighbors” realty practices, and gentrification.
All charter schools are problematic. This we know. Steven Singer has argued well that “There is Virtually No Difference Between Nonprofit and For-Profit Charter Schools.”But the motivations that create charter schools vary. White public school advocates should give communities of color seeking charter opportunities the benefit of the doubt. The basic assumption, until proven otherwise, should be that white reformers have nefarious purposes and reformers of color have honest intentions. This is not to say that people of color are incapable of being education reform profiteers. This absolutely is happening! White school choice critics should just be slow to call out the names of profiteering reformers of color.
White public school advocates should give communities of color seeking charter opportunities the benefit of the doubt.
When white reformers call public schools racist, public school advocates should call bullshit. When people of color speak about the racism built into the original design of public schools, white school choice critics should listen intently.The NAACP, the oldest civil rights organization in the U.S., has repeatedly called for a moratorium on expanding public charter schools, but this does not give white public school advocates carte blanche permission to disregard all other dissenting voices of color. Among the voices that white school choice critics should be paying close attention to are Ta-Nehisi Coates, author of “Between the World and Me” and Nikole Hannah-Jones, contributing writer at the New York Times Magazine. This Hannah-Jones piece, “Choosing a School for My Daughter in a Segregated City,” is essential reading for all white educators.