Behind-the-scenes maneuvers on parental reforms
A new year, same old power plays.
There likely will be action today in the Assembly on compromise Race to the Top legislation, as scheduled. But instead of one big bill, two reforms opposed by the school boards association and the state teachers union will be shoved into a separate bill, which the lobbies hope to kill. At least that’s the word I got late last night, after a day of intense negotiations.
Both reforms would give more power to families in chronically failing schools. So Democrats in the Assembly will find themselves having to choose between the interests of the union and that of parents.
When last we left it, before Christmas, SBX5-4 has passed the Senate and was awaiting action in the Assembly. It still is. The bill would put California on firmer ground in competing for a piece of the Obama administration’s $4.3 billion school reform grant program.
The two parent empowerment reforms are backed by Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, and Gov. Schwarzenegger. The open enrollment provision would give parents in the bottom 10 percent of low-achieving schools the right to choose a better school in another district, assuming there is space available. However, in response to serious questions raised at the Senate hearing about how the program would work, the bill needed to be fleshed out in detail over the Christmas break.
The parent “trigger” provision is the creation of Parent Revolution, an activist group behind the big school reform movement in Los Angeles Unified. If 50 percent of parents of students in a school – or 50 percent of parents in feeder schools, in the case of a high school – signed a petition calling for change, school trustees would have to take decisive action: turning the school over to a charter school operator, replacing the principal and majority of the staff, or taking other serious turn-around strategies. In its latest form, the provision would be restricted to the first 75 successful petitions in schools that had failed to meet federal No Child Left Behind targets for six or more straight years. (Update, Jan. 5: Under the final wording of the bill, the trigger provision would apply to schools in Year 3 or greater of Program Improvement. Schools in this category have failed to meet federal NCLB targets for four or more years . There currently are 651 schools in Years 3 and 4 and 1075 schools in Year 5 and longer of School Improvement. The parent petition could be imposed on a maximum of 75 schools — 4 percent of the total.)
Under current law, a vote by 50 percent or more of tenured teachers in a school can force the conversion of a district school into a charter school. So the California Teachers Assn. is doing verbal gymnastics opposing a bill that would grant parents the same right that teachers have. But self-interest doesn’t require logic.
The CTA argues that the parent “trigger” is extraneous to the Race to the Top competition. It is true that the final rules don’t specifically award points for adopting this reform. However, this strategy for parental involvement is the kind of innovation that would grab the feds’ attention in judging states’ proposals.
10 Comments
Trackbacks
- Parent Empowerment or Parent Manipulation? « InterACT
- Parents reject Compton’s demand | Thoughts on Public Education
"Darn, I wish I had read that over again before I hit send.” Don’t let this be your lament. To promote a civil dialogue, please be considerate, respectful and mindful of your tone. We encourage you to use your real name, but if you must use a nom de plume, stick with it. Anonymous postings will be removed.
 |
Featured Video |
Did You Know?
Just the Facts
Other Sites to Watch
View More >>
SVEF is the education foundation advocating for the needs of school districts across Silicon Valley. SVEF seeks to improve public education through establishing partnerships with the private sector and the education community ..
I’d like to know more about Parent Revolution. My understanding is that it is not a grassroots parent organization, but was initiated, staff and funded by Green Dot Charter schools. If that is the case, the leverage they have gained in the past few weeks through Romero’s advocacy raises an eyebrow.
I’m interested in a parent trigger, but concerned about how these proposals have been vetted and who are the true beneficiaries.
Given that the parent trigger is not essential to RTTT legislation, it seems prudent to just stick to what is required for now.
Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity
“…failed to meet federal No Child Left Behind targets for six or more straight years.”
How many school meet that criteria?
Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity
Jeff: Let me correct what I said earlier. At the hearing on Race to the Top today, those who had seen the bill referred to the trigger provision applying to all schools in Year 3 and above in School Improvement. So the provision would potentially apply to an additional 675 schools (schools with over 800 API would be exempt) in Years 3 and 4 on top of the 1075 in Year 5. It’s unclear whether the worst schools, based on API scores, would be given priority, or whether it would be the first 75 schools in which parents successfully did a petition campaign.
Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity
Jeff: According to the latest state report — http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ay/tistatesum09.asp — there are 1075 schools in Year 5 of School Improvement, which means they missed the targtet at least six years in a row. There is no Year 6 of School Improvement. Many schools have been in Year 5 for several years.
Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity
Suz: You’re right. Parent Revolution was initiated by Green Dot founder Steve Barr and has other charter organizations affiliated with it, but it appears to have grown into a bigger effort that has enlisted the support of other community organizations. My understanding is that it is no longer directly tied to Green Dot.
Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity
Suz, you’re right — I’ve e-mailed with Ben Austin — head honcho of Parent Revolution. It’s Astroturf, not a grassroots parent organization. The organization was created by a coalition of corporate-funded charter school operators, led by Green Dot, with Austin as the paid pseudo-activist.
There are also rumors flying of Parent Revolution’s paying for those parent signatures on those calls to take over schools — here’s film of one comment about that:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNLkAjTLFoY
That’s not proof, but if it’s even rumored that Parent Revolution is paying for the signatures, that calls the notion that they’re empowering parents or doing anything but building more power for the charter operators who established the group into serious question.
Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity
Parent Revolution stands for one simple premise – fixing our schools by giving parents power. The idea that parents could have real control over their local schools is clearly something that scares a lot of people – one prominent organized interest even referred to the concept as a “lynch mob.” Others have circulated flyers telling parents they will be deported if they sign a charter petition. These are facts, not baseless allegations made by one person in a YouTube video. Only someone who knew nothing about Los Angeles schools would think it was necessary to pay parents to sign a petition claiming that their local school is not serving their child well and it needs radical improvements.
Just like during our recent presidential campaign, we see that when defenders of the status quo have run out of logical arguments, they turn to deception, distraction, and scare tactics in a desperate attempt to change the subject. But just like President Obama declared in Philadelphia, we will not let these tactics divide us any longer. Not this time. This moment is too important to fall victim to petty politics.
The status quo is fundamentally failing our children. We think empowered parents will successfully demand better. Clearly many disagree with this notion, which is fine. But lets keep the debate about schools, parents, and their children, and stop the childish smear tactics which serve no one.
Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity
I am a Community Member, a LAUSD Parent and Parent Revolution Supporter. I spoke in Sacramento on
behalf of SBX5-4.
I dare anyone to criticize me for my efforts to help my 13 year Program Improvement Failing Middle School.
We, as Community Parents got hundreds of signatures to try to send a message to our District, not one signature paid for, no threats, Just desperate parents trying to latch on to the glimmer of hope that the Parent Revolution/Parent Trigger offered us.
Kudos to 2 Grass Roots Parents Mary Najera, and Shirley Ford, for caring enough about their own children and others to start this ball rolling.
There are 4 choices for reform, only one of them is Charter School. This is not what it’s about.
Ben Austin was hired to help Empower Parents.
We approached him for help, after begging the District for years. I am Proud to be a fighter for parents across the state , and hopefully, the whole country. Parents have been ignored long enough!
Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity