Sign up for our newsletter

CER Had a Very Busy Summer – and It’s Not Over Yet

Here in Washington, DC, most summers are pretty quiet. Not for the Center for Education Reform.

In May, our CEO Jeanne Allen interviewed Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos at the ASU + GSV Summit. The event took place in Salt Lake City, where hundreds of professionals in the ed-tech community were gathered, and was covered by the Associated Press and many other outlets across the country. Then, to cap things off, our board member Michael Moe, the founder and host of the summit, delivered the summit’s keynote address.

But if you know CER, you know that was just the beginning. When the Supreme Court handed down its verdict in Trinity Lutheran v. Comer, we again were all over the media. Jeanne also penned an op-ed about the case for the Orange County Register.

In the meantime, CER made news about educational opportunity in Illinois (check out our op-ed in National Review), and we turned an invitation to appear on Sunday Night With Megyn Kelly into a speaking slot for our board member David Hardy. (David recently retired as president of the Boys’ Latin Charter in Philadelphia.)

Finally, no recap would be complete without mentioning Randi Weingarten. In July, the longtime boss of the American Federation of Teachers ignited a firestorm by likening advocates of school choice to — wait for it — segregationists. CER wasted no time fighting back: we issued statements, we wrote op-eds, we secured op-eds from concerned parents, we started a hash tag, and we created a webpage that features a variety of voices testifying to the outrageousness and dishonesty of Weingarten’s comments.

Of course, it’s only August, so there’s plenty more summer left. Stay tuned for more. (Hint: it involves the NAACP.)

Update 8-24: 

And as promised, here’s our new NAACP page. Also, since we last checked in, Jeanne has written two op-eds: one, for HuffPost, about a new EdNext poll, and another, for the Wall Street Journal, about our #ResignRandi campaign.

If you can’t wait until our next update, the best way to stay in the know is via our e-newsletter. It’s free, it’s funny, and it comes out every Tuesday. Sign-up here.

Occasional Letter to Friends – Summer 2017

Dear Friends:

Some of you may be old enough to recall that, once upon a time, the Center produced a good, old-fashioned newsletter—THE MONTHLY LETTER TO FRIENDS—written up, laid out, sent to a printer, stuffed, stamped, and delivered to homes and offices all across America via the U.S. Postal Service (a process nearly as archaic today as the notion of a school system that looks like it did more than 160 years ago).

The Letter was the first of its kind, providing updates on state and local efforts, presenting little exposés on the big education blob, looking at research, offering insights into what approaches we might take strategically, tactically and politically, and more. It was a mainstay of CER’s efforts to stay in touch with our many supporters, and for more than a dozen years it went out like clockwork, eight pages long, more than 100 issues in all.

The printed letter eventually gave way to a myriad of electronic communications, with occasional snail-mail deliveries to the Luddites. CER’s Weekly Newswire is now in its 19th year! And we also keep our constituencies informed via regular news alerts, releases, and advisories, as well as the web, Facebook, and Twitter.

But, occasionally, we still write letters, and because it’s been—and continues to be—a very busy year, and on the cusp of the back-to-school season, we decided to put a little ink to paper and fire-up the old postage meter. So without further ado, we present this aptly titled Occasional Letter to Friends reporting on some of our work so far this year, and delivering news and insight that, like over the previous 23 years, you won’t find in this particular way anywhere else!

 

THE AFT FIRESTORM OF 2017

In one of the more offensive rants you’ll ever hear directed at education reformers, American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten resorted to race-baiting in her attempt to discredit parents and other advocates of choice. Speaking before the AFT summer meeting Weingarten said that the word “choice” was used to cloak overt racism by segregationist politicians and that the “real pioneers” of private school choice were the white politicians who resisted school integration.

Given that many of this era’s most notable advocates for education opportunities and choice were, and still are, men and women of color, fighting for the rights of children and families of all colors, Weingarten’s warped view of history would be laughable… were it not such an offensive smear and such an obvious attempt to discredit the work of so many good people and to try to escape blame for the failure of so many urban schools.

All of this is more than a little troubling. We demanded Weingarten apologize and suggested she resign. She engaged with us directly on Twitter, not once but 3 times! Others have since jumped in, taking Weingarten to task, but so far her only response has been to promote the idea that choice equals segregation.

As we said in a follow-up to our original call for her resignation:

“Clearly, she believes staying on message—no matter how insulting that message is to African-Americans and people of color throughout the nation—is more important than honesty, fairness, respect and simple decency. Regardless of whether or not it was an act of insensitive ignorance, or ruthless political calculation, Weingarten should step down as head of the AFT.”

Stay tuned. More to come.

 

FIRESTORM #2: NAACP’S UNFORTUNATE POSITIONS

Hot on the heels of the AFT broadside, came the NAACP Task Force on Quality Education July 2017 Hearing Report which “found” that charter schools were detrimental to minority communities and called for a moratorium on the creation of new ones. This, as you can imagine, set off its own firestorm of controversy, prompting dozens of responses from leading African-Americans, including CER directors David Hardy, founder and Chair of Boys’ Latin Philadelphia Charter School and Donald Hense, founder and chairman of Washington D.C.’s Friendship Public Charter Schools, who argued that,

“The NAACP’s campaign against charter schools is detrimental and disrespectful to all parents who struggle to ensure a quality education for their children. Rather than embrace, and work to expand, the opportunities that charter schools represent to America’s disadvantaged, and to families of color across the nation, the NAACP has chosen to stand as an obstacle, and work to stifle, a movement that, for thousands of children, is the greatest—and only—hope for achieving a quality education.

“The association’s recently released report is intentionally skewed to further a union-driven, anti-charter school agenda, and its ‘model legislation’ effort is an outrageous political scheme to further support the union’s agenda by undermining the voice and will of parents who are fighting for options for their children’s education and for the right and freedom to choose.

“The NAACP has a long history of fighting for justice and for individual rights that further opportunities, hopes and human dignity. These efforts are the antithesis of that long fight, putting the association sadly, and uncharacteristically, on the wrong side of history.”

More to come on this, too.

 

BUREAUCRACY: EVERYTHING OLD IS NEW AGAIN

Bureaucracy. Remember when it was everywhere in education, pervading every level of educational instruction and delivery? Then came charter schools, contractual arrangements, which, as Ted Kolderie argued at their inception, would provide unique opportunities for educators to start schools, and parents to enjoin them on behalf of their children, unfettered by most traditional rules and regulations.

It went pretty well…for a while. Of the 13 strongest charter laws, 12 were passed between 1991 and 1999—and these 12 states alone account for over 56 percent of today’s charter schools. In short, there was more progress made in the first nine years of the charter movement than the next 15.

We have diagnosed why, and talked about it for the past few years. We warned this would occur if we started trusting government to do the work that charters intended for parents and teachers. And now we have our own charter blob.

Consider what Betsy DeVos recently said, invoking our work (and, actually, quoting our Manifesto):

“…somewhere along the way…we’ve taken the colorful collage of charters and drawn our own set of lines around it to box others out, to mitigate risk, to play it safe. This is not what we set out to do, and, more importantly, it doesn’t help kids.

“No one has a monopoly on innovation. No one has a monopoly on creativity. No one has a monopoly on knowing how every child learns.”

“I thought it was a tough but fair criticism when a friend recently wrote in an article that many who call themselves ‘reformers’ have instead become just another breed of bureaucrats—a new education establishment.”

We have hundreds of data points, anecdotes and stories we have shared with legislators and researchers, advocates and media. Some of it sticks; most of it seems to fall on deaf ears.

And so, following the release of our Manifesto—A Movement at Risk in June 2016, our convening of CER’s EdReform: Revived Conference in November 2016, and dozens of state meetings and studies, we have just published a thorough research review of why everything old is new again—what, and why, overregulation has now taken hold in the very environment where it was not intended to be.

It’s titled Charting a New Course, The Case for Freedom, Flexibility & Opportunity Through Charter Schools. It’s an important work, because the problems it addresses are hurting kids, and because it’s time for everyone to pay full attention to the fact that, for the most part, well-intentioned advocates have put government ahead of parents, again.

As we argue, thanks to co-editors Cara Candal of CER and Max Eden of the Manhattan Institute, we are at a critical inflection point:

“The charter school debate will look very different in the years to come. For the first quarter century, the question was simple: you’re either for charter schools or against them. But now that the sector has matured, taken root, and gained broader public acceptance, the debate is shifting from whether to expand charter schools to how.

“The way we see it, there are two camps within the school choice and charter school movements:

“System-centered reformers want to arrive at higher quality educational options by expertise-driven management. They believe that bureaucrats and politicians should have ample authority to decide what schools may open and what schools must close using standardized test-scores to make data-driven decisions.

“Parent-centered reformers trust parents more than bureaucrats when it comes to determining school quality. They want to see a more open and dynamic system, where educational entrepreneurs are freer to open new schools and parents decide which schools should close and which should expand based on whether they want to send their children there.

“Right now, the system-centered reformers have the upper hand when it comes to financial support and organizational infrastructure… System-centered reformers make the simpler argument, and it is predicated on the assumption that the goal of charter schools is to raise standardized test scores.

“But we believe that parent-centered reformers make a better case for quality schools. Parents and the public intuitively know that academic outcomes matter but there is more to academic outcomes and to education than test scores.

“We stand with parent-centered reformers more because of our optimism than our concerns. We believe that parents (who see their child come home from school every day) are better able than bureaucrats (who see mostly standardized tests scores) to judge the quality of the school they’ve chosen. We believe that if offered more freedom, educational entrepreneurs will embrace a variety of different approaches and offer parents a diverse range of options. We accept that more freedom might mean that more schools fail than would in a more regulated environment, but we believe that failure is necessary for success. We are optimistic that, over time, the net result of giving educators autonomy and empowering parents to judge schools will drive the creation of a higher quality sector.”

To receive a print copy of Charting a New Course, call us at (202) 750-0016, or download a PDF version: www.staging.edreform.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/charting-a-new-course.pdf

 

THE NEW POWER IN WASHINGTON

We happen to think that the still-new ecosystem in Washington may just help us roll back the charter blob from whence it came. “How?” you ask? Well, there’s The Bully Pulpit, which always helps get (and keep) the ball rolling. And there’s the potential for the roll-back of regulatory and non-regulatory guidance that has evolved from Congressional action and administrative rulemaking, along with real aggressive action we are pushing Congress to take on everything from freeing states up to be truly innovative and enacting meaningful tax reform that includes the potential for tax credits.

We at CER are obsessed with regulatory creep in the charter sector. Americans know all too well the slippery slope of government action. So we’ve embarked on an effort to help the U.S. Department of Ed and Congressional leadership accomplish a bold but cost effective ways to free and enable America’s schools, educators and citizens to be innovative for our kids. There are four major themes in The First 100 Days: The path to going bold on education innovation and opportunity, including how to focus on:

  • Spending, so that innovation and flexibility can thrive in schools
  • Teaching, and what Washington can do to accelerate the creation of a new pipeline of qualified people joining the noble profession;
  • Higher education, and the unique opportunity to rethink how the federal government defines it and supports it; and last but not least,
  • Educational Choice, and the path that is possible when the federal government permits money to follow kids,stimulates new thinking around old programs, and ensures they follow state efforts, not mandate their conduct.

 

BEYOND THE FIRST 100 DAYS — LET FREEDOM RING!

Just in time to celebrate Independence Day, CER issued Beyond the First 100 Days: Transforming government’s role in education, which reviewed progress of our recommendations to date, and a reiteration of our January 2017 recommendations to the Trump Administration. As we say in the introduction, we prefer a model that achieves competency over just measuring time on task.

The agenda we laid out remains an important guide, offering ideas for action that will result in making personalized learning a reality for millions, ensuring quality teaching, access to innovative and relevant higher education opportunities, and new choices throughout the nation.

All of this made the pre-4th of July release date especially fitting, helping everyone remember that the freedoms our Founders fought for are just as critical in education as they are in our day-to-day lives. It’s our call to “Let Freedom Ring” for all learners, at all levels.

 

MEANWHILE ON CAPITOL HILL AND ELSEWHERE

As is always the case, Congress is abuzz with ideas, issues, hearings, proposals and counterproposals on bushels of issues. So, to ensure that key education issues don’t evaporate, or never materialize at all, we’ve been making regular sojourns to the Hill and, in our best school-teacher voice, delivering the message: LET’S FOCUS PEOPLE! Key issues to which we are continually drawing the attention of Congressional leaders: Personalized Learning, Higher Ed, Educational Choice, Innovation, Rural Education, and Tax Credit Scholarships.

And speaking of meetings…

In April, we were asked to organize, and proud to participate in, a White House event hosted by Vice President Pence, extolling the virtues of DC scholarships, specifically, and tax credits, generally. It was nice to have one of our long-time issues receive a boost from the VEEP (and from POTUS) and nicer still for all the kids who got to participate in a rather august gathering.

Which reminds us that…

In March, CER led a diverse bi-partisan delegation of charter leaders to the Department of Education to meet with Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos to share the challenges that all schools face with the imposition of more and more regulations, funding inequity and lack of air and ground cover.

 

NOTA EST

A grab bag of a few newsworthy, noteworthy and otherwise interesting items from the first half of the year:

  • CER released Just the Facts: Success, Innovation, and Opportunity in Charter Schools, debunking charter school misinformation with the most valid and reliable data to date.
  • We were thrilled to be published in The National Review about the AFT president’s reprehensible comments.
  • Education Week published our commentary, Regulations Are Strangling Charter Schools.
  • CER contributed to passage of the Kentucky charter school law, albeit far weaker than we would have liked, and to do so we even provided them with the most expert constitutional law expert and former Solicitor General of the United States Paul Clement, to validate the constitutionality of multiple charter authorizers.
  • In a big win for kids in DC, the city’s Opportunity Scholarship Program, which was threatened with elimination at the end of 2016, was re-authorized by Congress, and not just for a year, but through FY 2022!
  • CER released its 17th annual National Charter School Law Ranking & Scorecard, providing guidance and feedback to policymakers on the relative strengths and weakness of charter school policies and their effectiveness in fulfilling the true meaning of the words “charter school law.”
  • The 8th annual ASU + GSV Summit was held in Salt Lake City. CER was again a sponsor and hosted several key discussions with school leaders, policymakers and business leaders. This must-attend annual event led by Ed revolutionaries Michael Moe (CER’s Vice Chair) and Deborah Quazzo again drew thousands who gathered who opened up their minds and committed to expanding the breadth and depth of what we mean by “education.”
  • In an historic win for kids, Florida Gov. Rick Scott signed HB 7069, directing that more federal funds go to where students choose to attend school. Prior to this, the spending of federal funds was largely at the discretion of school districts, even if students were attending other charter schools.
  • The National Charter Schools Conference brought several thousand members of the charter school community to Washington, DC, with several hundred of them coming together at CER’s Salute to Charter Schools VIP reception which featured remarks by Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, Congressman Paul Mitchell (R-MI), and Jimmy Kemp, President of the Jack Kemp Foundation.

 

As I write, we’re gearing up for Congress’ return to Washington where a lot of work—and opportunities to foster reform—awaits. As always, we’re also gearing up to lend our expertise, resources and voice to those efforts, and to efforts to achieve substantive education reform throughout the country

Thank you for your support. If we can be of any help to you, let us know. And please consider contributing to our work by using the enclosed envelope. We can’t do it without you!

All the best,

Jeanne Allen, Founder & CEO

Randi Weingarten’s Hypocrisy

Randi Weingarten

She’s the new George Wallace.

By Steve Schuck

Let me get this straight: According to Randi Weingarten, those of us committed to providing low-income parents the resources to choose the schools they think are best for their children are racists. At the same time, we’re to believe those who oppose emancipating their kids imprisoned in America’s worst-performing schools are in their corner. Maybe the only lesson to be learned here is that hypocrisy and chutzpah are alive and well.

Weingarten has made a career out of protecting those teachers who are failing kids. Unions like hers cannot tolerate empowered parents holding members accountable. Unions like hers prefer to protect their members with tenure rather than hold them accountable — just like every other profession — to the judgments of their customers.

What are the results of the unions’ actions? Half the children in America’s public schools cannot read, write, add, and subtract at grade level, and half the black and brown kids entering ninth grade do not graduate. This, despite the fact that America has spent more money on public education every successive year for decades. Clearly what we’re doing ain’t working for too many kids.

Weingarten’s loyalty is to the system, the blob — ours is to the kids. Her view is that parents exist to serve the interests of schools — ours is the exact opposite. Too many public schools have become employment centers for adults, “warehousing” students rather than educating them. It is no coincidence that the worst-performing schools throughout our country are in the lowest socioeconomic neighborhoods, be they urban or rural, thus perpetuating a tragic cycle of poverty. If justice is to be served, low-income parents should have the means to choose schools that they think are best for their children, just as affluent parents do. Weingarten would close that door of opportunity rather than help us open it wider.

How do we incentivize better results? Easy answer — break the public-school monopoly. Transfer power from providers (the system) to consumers (parents), thus establishing a marketplace in which the former must compete for the business of the latter.

Some say that competition will not work in education, but let’s take a look. Free-market higher education in America is the best in the world, while closed-market K-12 education ranks 20th or 25th. Higher education vouchers (the G.I. Bill) which can be used at Notre Dame, Yeshiva, and S.M.U. forces all universities and colleges to compete even harder to attract students. Charter schools have proven that urban, rural, and minority kids, despite living in difficult circumstances, can be successfully educated; their parents, voting with their feet, choose those that best meet the needs of their children.

Why would anyone of conscience oppose empowering low-income parents with the same school choices their more affluent counterparts currently enjoy? One answer is self-interest. In the case of teachers’ unions, their highest priority is protecting the jobs of too many of those responsible for this unjust disparity in access and opportunity. Those wanting to imprison children in failing schools should be asked if they would volunteer to send their children to the very schools they would prevent others from escaping. Put me down on the side of educational freedom and choice for all.

In our own community, Colorado Springs, several hundred private citizen-champions of choice have voluntarily joined together to support, with their own dollars, Parents Challenge, a unique program that, for 18 years, has been providing information and various levels of financial support to low income parents so they can choose the school they think is best for their children, be it traditional public, charter public, private, or home. Parents attend monthly empowerment sessions, mandatory for Parents Challenge beneficiaries but open to the public, during which they are mentored in subjects they have identified as important to their becoming more informed education consumers and better educators of their own children. Because it’s the only program in the country that (like an education-savings account) funds the full menu of choices and the aforementioned empowerment sessions, Parents Challenge is in the process of becoming available to others around the country.

While it’s time to hold those responsible for this apartheid education system to account, it’s even more important and urgent to focus on helping the kids whose futures, as well as that of our country, depend upon them being taught basic academics, Western values, a work ethic, personal and societal responsibility, and how to pursue a life worth living. Demagogues like Weingarten and her fellow-traveler unionists put their self-interests ahead of the very children who most need hope and access to the American dream. George Wallace disgracefully stood in schoolhouse doors 50 years ago blocking black children from entering. Weingarten is today’s Wallace, standing in the doorways of failing schools preventing children from escaping.

In the words of the old Negro spiritual, “Let my people go!”

Steve Schuck, a real-estate developer in Colorado Springs, is a longtime advocate for school choice.

Newswire August 1st, 2017

FIRESTORM. AFRICAN AMERICAN LEADERS SPEAK OUT AGAINST NAACP’S EDUCATION QUALITY HEARING REPORT. The NAACP’s recent report on education quality, which challenges the value of charter schools for minority families has African American ed reform leaders in an uproar. Two of the most prominent to speak out: CER directors David Hardy, founder and Chair of Boys’ Latin Philadelphia Charter School, and Donald Hense, founder and chairman of Washington D.C.’s Friendship Public Charter Schools. In a statement released through CER, these long-time advocates for options for disadvantaged youth describe the NAACP’s campaign against charter schools as an obstacle to opportunity that only serves to stifle a movement, that for thousands of children, is the greatest – and only – hope for achieving a quality education.  Read their full statement here: https://staging.edreform.com/2017/07/african-american-education-leaders-speak-out-against-naacp-actions/

WHAT A GREAT QUESTION!  Would Martin Luther King Have Supported Charter Schools? That’s the question pondered by the man who served as the civil rights legend’s chief of staff in the 1960’s, Dr. Wyatt Tee Walker.  According to Dr. Walker, the question is easily answered with a resounding “yes!”  Check out “A Light Shines in Harlem”, an award winning, must-read about Dr. Walker’s founding of The Sisulu-Walker School, New York City’s first charter school.

AFT OFF BASE AND OUT OF TOUCH. In another firestorm that won’t go out, CER’s Jeanne Allen renewed the call for AFT president Randi Weingarten to step down. As you’ll recall, the union boss smeared choice advocates, ed reform pioneers, and basically all parents who embrace options for their children by likening them to racists and segregationists. Weingarten hasn’t backed away from her statement and is standing behind the “truth” of her assertion, prompting this from Allen: “Randi Weingarten’s smug obstinacy in refusing to accept responsibility for her slur against reformers is disturbing. Clearly, she believes staying on message—no matter how insulting that message is to African-Americans and people of color throughout the nation—is more important than honesty, fairness, respect and simple decency.”

A RISING TIDE LIFTS BOTH BOATS. Charter school opponents like to claim that the presence of a charter school in a community results in less funding being directed to neighboring traditional public schools (TPS). But a new study of NYC public schools now says otherwise. The Temple University study reveals that having a charter school in the neighborhood spurs competition and consequently generates more per-pupil funding for the traditional public school with an increase of 9% when the charter and TPS are in the same building and 2% when they are physically further apart. So there goes that argument.

SPACE, THE FINAL FRONTIER.  NASA is making efforts to encourage more girls and women to study STEM and prepare for careers in aerospace and other sciences. To give credit where credit is due, NASA’s move is in response to President Trump’s Inspire Women Act, which he signed into law back in February. NASA is also creating other programs to advance STEM studies, including NASA GIRLS & BOYS, a program that provides middle school students with a virtual mentorship with NASA employees.

WELL THAT’S INTERESTING: suburban kids pay tuition to attend DC public schools. While choice opponents like to argue that educational choice is all about taking money away from public schools so that students can attend private or parochial schools, public schools like the DC based Duke Ellington School of the Arts are turning that supposed paradigm on its head. 45 suburban families are currently plunking out $11,000 a year in tuition to send their children to the Northwest DC school. And if it were not for a 10% cap on out-of-district students, that enrollment statistic would be even higher.

National Review: A New Blue-State Experiment with School Reform

This op-ed written by CER Founder and CEO Jeanne Allen appeared in National Review on July 28th.

Education opportunity should be the price Illinois governor Bruce Rauner demands in return for Chicago getting its pension bailout.

Unless Governor Rauner and the Democratic leadership in control of Illinois’s house and senate agree to a new education-funding system soon, many schools won’t open their doors next month. That’s because the budget that passed last month calls for a new “evidence-based” funding formula to distribute state money to schools.

Fortunately, a bipartisan school-funding-reform commission has been working to come up with a replacement for the byzantine system that has controlled funding for state schools for years. While Democrats and Republicans agree on much of the bill, in its current form it amounts to a taxpayer bailout of the Chicago Public Schools system, which has skipped most payments into its teacher pension funds for more than a decade and failed to deliver even an adequate education to most of its students for decades.

However, Governor Rauner has an opportunity to craft a compromise solution that provides the key to better education for all kids and ensures that schools open on time. The grand bargain would be simple: He agrees to Democrats’ demands if they include a tax-credit scholarship program in the education-funding-formula legislation. It would not only unite parents and children who have been clamoring for better learning opportunities, but set the city on a course to economic solvency. And with a balanced economy, all have the opportunity to participate in the American dream.

A number of other states have already shown the way. Many, including Florida, Arizona, and Indiana, along with the District of Columbia, have created an educational and economic renaissance in communities where Opportunity Scholarship Programs are available. It’s a model that has endured for affluent Americans whose choice of schools invests them in their communities and improves the lot for all children. If Democrats in the state truly believe that the quality of a child’s education should not depend on his zip code — one of the key talking points used to promote education-funding reform — they should accept this compromise.

The concept is fairly simple: Individuals or businesses can claim a credit against their tax bill for donations made to authorized organizations that in turn use those donations to fund tuition scholarships for eligible students to attend a school of their choice. In other words, if an individual donates $1,000 to a nonprofit that provides scholarships, his or her tax bill is reduced by $1,000. The nonprofit then gives the money to families who use it to pay tuition at private schools.

These programs are hugely popular with parents and children. Florida’s Tax Credit Scholarship Program began in 2001 and has grown dramatically. In its first year, there were 12,500 applications for 750 scholarships. This year, 98,000 FTC students attend 1,712 private schools throughout Florida. The results were impressive: A study by Northwestern University’s Institute for Policy Research found that students who received scholarships scored higher than their similar demographic peers in both reading and math. Lawmakers in the Florida legislature have continued to build their program on a broadly bipartisan basis.

There is striking evidence that scholarship tax credits improve public-school performance. There is also striking evidence that scholarship tax credits improve public-school performance. The same Northwestern study found that Florida’s program has helped traditional schools improve because, for the first time, they faced competition from other schools, charter and private alike. Schools in the state felt the competitive pressure and saw modest improvements in student test scores. It’s a healthy dynamic that improves overall performance in each.

Educational choice makes other efforts to improve schools more powerful, too. Senate Bill 7 — a reform bill passed in 2011 aimed at stopping teachers from striking and at improving teacher performance — has lacked teeth precisely because Chicago’s lowest-income families have no recourse when their child is placed with a poor-quality teacher. That’s how principals can get away with ranking over three-quarters of teachers as good or excellent, and the unions can claim it is truly a reflection of their members’ quality, even when only a fraction of the city’s graduating seniors are college-ready.

Of course, just down the road from Illinois there are several very successful programs that can be used as models. Indiana’s Choice Scholarship Program was launched six years ago and is now one of the largest and fastest-growing programs in the nation, with more than 34,000 students at over 300 schools. And Wisconsin, which has been a pioneer in educational choice for a quarter century, has both a statewide parental-choice program, and local programs in Milwaukee and Racine.

The governor has a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to improve education for families in Illinois. He should take advantage of it and ensure that students across the state have access to the quality educational options they need and deserve. — Jeanne Allen is the founder and CEO of the Center for Education Reform in Washington, D.C., the nation’s leading advocate for innovation and opportunity in education.

Orange County Register: How a U.S. Supreme Court case may help turn the tide for educational choice

This op-ed written by Jeanne Allen, the founder and CEO of the Center for Education Reform appeared in the Orange County Register on July 28th.  

A Supreme Court decision that could change the balance of power in schools from system power to parent power is well-known in policy circles but not by the general public. Yet anyone with an interest in great education should be aware of its importance. The case is Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer, decided on the last day of the court’s term in June. It’s the latest in a series of cases that have gradually pushed aside barriers to the broadest possible approach to school opportunity and innovation.

Officials in Missouri argued that the state’s Blaine Amendment, added to the state constitution in an 1870 ballot referendum, to suppress Catholic education and now applied to all religious entities, required them to turn down a request by Trinity Lutheran church for funds from a state program that provides new rubber surfaces for children’s playgrounds. But the nation’s high court unequivocally ruled otherwise: “The exclusion of Trinity Lutheran from a public benefit for which it is otherwise qualified, solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution.”

On the surface, it looked to observers like it was just about putting a new surface on a children’s playground. But what it really does is get us much closer to putting children at the center of our education priorities, and recognizing the fact that our 150-year-old approach to public schooling need not be, and should not be, our default option.

Blaine Amendments are the last line of defense for education choice opponents — the unions, the school districts and hundreds more who earn a living in the employ of traditional public schooling and thousands of related parties. They fight to block any proposal or program that permits parents the discretion to direct the dollars allocated for their children’s education. The Supreme Court decided 15 years ago that the U.S. Constitution allows a well-designed school choice program (Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 2002). Only those discriminatory Blaine Amendments embedded in 38 state constitutions stand in the way of the public’s want and the needs of students to find the best fit for their education, and not have to settle for a school into which they are zoned by zip code for lack of money or options.

Missouri argued that an absolutist notion of separation of church and state takes priority over the best interests of the children when they attend a church-owned and operated school. That’s another way of saying that the well-being of the children comes last, not first. A remarkable seven-vote majority of the Supreme Court saw it differently.

In a very interesting twist, Justice Sotomayor went to great lengths to argue that the court majority has, in effect, concluded that “Article I, §7, [the Missouri Blaine amendment] cannot withstand strict scrutiny.”

The reasoning behind the Supreme Court’s ruling in Trinity Lutheran applies just as forcefully to school choice as it does to a rubberized playground. “The State in this case expressly requires Trinity Lutheran to renounce its religious character in order to participate in an otherwise generally available public benefit program for which it is fully qualified,” the court declared in striking it down. The same logic applies to a choice plan that excludes church-sponsored schools from a state school choice plan because of their religious character.

Today, 17 states allow an allocation of state funds or tax credits to be used to fund education choice scholarships for an estimated 400,000 students across the nation. Many of the scholarships help the most vulnerable among us. But tens of thousands more children remain stuck in failing schools that do not meet their most basic needs. Annual battles for parental choice in state capitals too often find lawmakers ignoring majority support and siding instead with intensely focused teacher unions. A popular scare tactic is to argue that educational choice violates a state’s Blaine amendment. Raising the specter of court challenges is often enough to discourage legislatures from acting.

This decision has the potential to change all that. Now all we need are lawmakers willing to put that premise to the test. With a nation where only 35 percent of all students are proficient in core subjects, we don’t have time to waste.

AFRICAN-AMERICAN EDUCATION LEADERS SPEAK OUT AGAINST NAACP ACTIONS

The following statement was issued today by CER directors David Hardy, founder and Chair of Boys’ Latin Philadelphia Charter School and Donald Hense, founder and chairman of Washington D.C.’s Friendship Public Charter Schools, in response to the NAACP Task Force on Education Quality July 2017 Hearing Report. 

The NAACP’s campaign against charter schools is detrimental and disrespectful to all parents who struggle to ensure a quality education for their children.

Rather than embrace, and work to expand, the opportunities that charter schools represent to America’s disadvantaged, and to families of color across the nation, the NAACP has chosen to stand as an obstacle, and work to stifle, a movement that, for thousands of children, is the greatest – and only – hope for achieving a quality education.

The association’s recently released report is intentionally skewed to further a union-driven, anti-charter school agenda, and its “model legislation” effort is an outrageous political scheme to further support the union’s agenda by undermining the voice and will of parents who are fighting for options for their children’s education and for the right and freedom to choose.

The NAACP has a long history of fighting for justice and for individual rights that further opportunities, hopes and human dignity.

These efforts are the antithesis of that long fight, putting the association sadly, and uncharacteristically, on the wrong side of history.

About the Center for Education Reform

Founded in 1993, the Center for Education Reform aims to expand educational opportunities that lead to improved economic outcomes for all Americans — particularly our youth — ensuring that the conditions are ripe for innovation, freedom and flexibility throughout U.S. education. As a non-partisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to great opportunities for all children, students and families, The Center for Education Reform does not endorse candidates or take political positions, but will always recognize and applaud those who advance sound education policies.

 

STATEMENT: Allen Renews Call for Union Leader to Step Down

Statement from the Center for Education Reform: 

Randi Weingarten’s smug obstinacy in refusing to accept responsibility for her slur against reformers is disturbing. [U.S. News & World Report, July 24, 2017]Clearly, she believes staying on message—no matter how insulting that message is to African-Americans and people of color throughout the nation—is more important than honesty, fairness, respect and simple decency.

“She knows that the modern-era education reform movement has its origins in efforts led by such amazing people as Fannie Lewis, an African-American Cleveland City Councilwoman and grandmother who fought for the Cleveland Scholarship Program enacted in 1995, and Wisconsin State Rep. Polly Williams  who, in 1990, did the same in Milwaukee. Neither had any connection whatsoever with segregationists from the past. Weingarten knows it, yet she refuses to amend her remarks, and continues to impugn the reputations and accomplishments of these women, and to discredit the hopes, dreams and work of school choice parents everywhere by insulting them and their motives.

“Weingarten may have been taken aback by the reaction her hate speech generated but even now, after it has been made abundantly clear that her words were offensive, she is not apologetic or even chastened. Her only reaction is to reiterate the ‘truth’ of her noxious statement, as she and her political advisors choose to carefully spin it, and to blame ideological enemies and shadowy conspirators for the criticism she’s receiving.

“It is also possible that she was not at all surprised by the reaction and that it was her intention to use race-baiting to blow-up the school choice discussion.

“Regardless of whether or not it was an act of insensitive ignorance, or ruthless political calculation, Weingarten should step down as head of the AFT.”

About the Center for Education Reform

Founded in 1993, the Center for Education Reform aims to expand educational opportunities that lead to improved economic outcomes for all Americans — particularly our youth — ensuring that the conditions are ripe for innovation, freedom and flexibility throughout U.S. education.

As a non-partisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to great opportunities for all children, students and families, The Center for Education Reform does not endorse candidates or take political positions, but will always recognize and applaud those who advance sound education policies.

Newswire July 25th, 2017

THE GREATEST HITS OF 2017 SO FAR…

…but before we get to that, a couple of late-breaking notes from a mid-summer swirl of ed-related news

SMART ALEC.  It was great to attend the 44th ALEC Annual Meeting that went off in Denver last week. The program featured Education and Workforce Development Task Force meetings on K-12 and Higher Education and a workshop on the data and trends on school choice. Model policies were presented, covering education savings accounts, scholarship tax credits, and the protection of free speech in higher education.  And there was a policy discussion and debate between representatives from the American Federation of Children and the Heritage Foundation the federal role in advancing school choice. (Included in the discussion from Heritage: an option to repurpose a federal Impact aid program into student-centered, parent-controlled education savings accounts that would provide active-duty military families with education choice. Hmmm.)

BLOWIN’ UP ON TWITTER.  As you may have heard AFT president Randi Weingarten went all in on race baiting at the union’s annual summer meeting calling tuition tax credits and the like “only slightly more polite cousins of segregation.” Some took exception to her insulting, hateful insinuation and said she should resign. She took exception to the exception. In all seriousness, Weingarten’s warped opinions on this matter are abhorrent and, we hope, in no way reflect the views of union members. This isn’t just a kerfuffle; it’s a thing.  Weingarten needs to go.

We’re waiting for her next blow up.  The Lone Star State’s Senate Education Committee passed two key bills last Friday, including one that would create a scholarship program for students looking to enroll in private school. We’re awaiting Randi Weingarten’s statement calling all who voted for the measures racists.

…And now, back to our previously scheduled programming

A NOTICE FROM SCOTUS.  One of the bigger deals leading up the Summer of 2017 was the Supreme Court’s Trinity Lutheran Decision. Trinity Lutheran had been denied funding from the state of Missouri for a playground surface solely because its school is a religious one. The lower court had relied on the Blaine Amendment that dates back to the 1800’s which prohibits the use of public funds at sectarian institutions. The decision that Trinity Lutheran’s “exclusion from a public benefit is “odious to our Constitution” and “a clear infringement on free exercise” has ramifications for the future of educational choice, further opening the door for parents to decide the best educational opportunities for their children, be they private, religious or public in nature.

CALIFORNIA DREAMIN’.  A big deal in California, too, when the makeup of the LA School Board flipped to a majority of charter supporters for first time ever. The election included victories for charter school proponents Nick Melvoin—in District 4 in the West San Fernando Valley, over incumbent School Board President Steve Zimmer who was supported by public service employee unions—and Kelly Gonez in District 6, East San Fernando Valley.

BLUEGRASS MUSIC TO OUR EARS.  Back in March, Kentucky became the 44th state to allow charter schools. Great news, albeit tempered by the fact that the law could have, and should have, been stronger. Still, half a loaf is better than none. The bill allows both local school districts and the mayors of Lexington and Louisville to authorize an unlimited number of charter schools, most of which are not likely to open until 2018-2019.

SPRING THAW. In April, Minnesota passed an Opportunity Scholarship Tax Credit program. The program enables students to receive $7500 opportunity scholarships, creating more choice for low income and working-class families.

BIG FUN DOWN ON THE BAYOU. In May, Louisiana’s Senate Education Committee defeated legislation that sought to weaken the Louisiana Scholarship Program (LSP). Senate Bill 13 would have placed restrictions on the eligibility of Kindergarten students entering the LSP. As every student in the program comes from a low-income family with 89% minority representation, the scholarship creates opportunities for Louisiana’s most vulnerable students.

MEANWHILE IN THE HEARTLAND. May also was when the Nebraska School Choice Bill moved forward. The bill, which is expected to go to a vote in January would allow up to $2 million in tax credits in its first year, creating more educational opportunities for more of the Heartland’s children.

SAY “CHEESE.”  In June Wisconsin Badgers were all smiles when the State Assembly followed the Senate’s lead by passing (in bi-partisan fashion mind you) a bill that increases accountability and enhances efficiencies in the state‘s school choice programs. The bill calls for greater financial accountability and also revises the financing formula so that special needs scholarship students receive more funding.

DIAMONDBACK DEALINGS.  In April Arizona Governor Doug Ducey signed SB1431 within hours of the legislation passing both the House and Senate yesterday. Now all Arizona children will, over the course of four years, become eligible to apply for the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program that allows education dollars to follow each individual child to the school or learning environment they need.

TOMORROW IS HERE.  In May, Teachers of Tomorrow was approved as alternative route to certification in SC. The program is helping the Palmetto state to address its teacher shortage with a new pipeline of enthusiastic educators.

TO INFINITY AND BEYOND!  To give direction to, and spur action by, the new administration, back in January CER issued “The First Hundred Days: The path to going bold on education innovation & opportunity.” Of course, as with Rome, reform wasn’t accomplished in such a short time so, to hold everyone’s feet to the fire, in June CER presented a scorecard on actions to date, and re-issued its call to action in Beyond the First 100 Days: Transforming government’s role in education. There is a HUGE opportunity to finally achieve substantive education reform at the federal level…if we don’t lose our way. 100 Days is a roadmap that can keep everyone on track.

REDISCOVERING REFORM.  Also in June CER issued Charting a New Coursechallenging the education reform movement to refocus on the real core principle of reform: the right of parents.  The collection of essays explores how school choice and the charter school movements have evolved, or mutated, and now consist of two camps: one that relies on bureaucracies and officialdom to decide what educational options are best for kids, and one that relies on innovators and parents. As previously noted, the former sounds A LOT like the status-quo-education-establishment arguments that have been reform’s bane from the beginning; while the latter sounds like, well, one of the core principles on which reform was founded. Read it here.

Union leader’s attack on parents and others who support school choice is hateful and should not stand

STATEMENT BY JEANNE ALLEN, FOUNDER AND CEO

“AFT president Randi Weingarten’s characterization of education reform parents and advocates as racists akin to the southern segregationists of the past, is not just ill-advised hyperbole, it is a deeply offensive, highly inflammatory insult to all the parents and people – of all races, backgrounds, and regions – who have worked to bring options, opportunities, and reforms to an education system that has failed them for generations.

 “Weingarten’s allies should disavow these comments, and America’s teachers should look into their hearts, consider whether this is the type of language and leadership they want as being representative of their views and voice, and consider inviting Weingarten’s resignation.”

(as reported July 20, 2017 in USA Today)

About the Center for Education Reform

Founded in 1993, the Center for Education Reform aims to expand educational opportunities that lead to improved economic outcomes for all Americans — particularly our youth — ensuring that the conditions are ripe for innovation, freedom and flexibility throughout U.S. education.

As a non-partisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to great opportunities for all children, students and families, The Center for Education Reform does not endorse candidates or take political positions, but will always recognize and applaud those who advance sound education policies.