Beware: Opponents of Elizabeth Warren’s Education Plan Have a Vested Interest in Expanding School Privatization

In October, Elizabeth Warren released an exemplary plan for public education. As she campaigns across the country to be chosen as the Democratic candidate for President in 2020, I hope she will continue to advocate for the important principles in her public education plan.

In the past decade public schools in many places have been beleaguered by dropping state revenue in the 2008 recession and politicians further cutting taxes. And over several decades, a new philosophy of education has been acted into law by ideologues who promote corporate accountability driven by evaluating schools and teachers by students’ standardized test scores and punishing schools that fall behind in a system based on competition. Because aggregate test scores in any school have been shown by a half century of research to correlate with the family income of the students in the school, and because our society has become highly segregated by income, this system has shut down public schools in the poorest neighborhoods, produced state takeover of struggling big city schools and school districts, and prescribed school privatization—more charter schools and vouchers—as though it is a solution.

Warren’s plan turns away from corporate, test-and-punish school reform and calls for strengthening America’s public schools.  The plan demands that Congress quadruple the federal investment in Title I, the 1965 Great Society program to support public schools serving concentrations of children in poverty. Warren’s plan calls on Congress fully to fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, a federal program which mandates that schools provide specialized services for disabled students. In 1975, Congress promised to fund 40 percent of IDEA’s cost, but last year Congress continued years of underfunding when it chose to fund only 15 percent of the IDEA’s mandated programming.  Warren calls for adding 25,000 Community Schools, making these public schools into neighborhood centers for families in impoverished neighborhoods—with schools housing wraparound health, social service, and after school and summer programs right in the school building.  Warren calls for strengthening English language education for students whose primary language is not English, and she insists that the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights be strengthened after four years of Betsy DeVos’s weakening civil rights enforcement.

Warren also calls for reining in out-of-control diversion of public school funds to privatized charter schools and vouchers.  Warren would not only ban for-profit charter schools but she would also ban the lucrative arrangements by which states now permit nonprofit charter schools to be operated by for-profit management companies, which reap massive profits from our tax dollars.

Finally, Warren advocates ending the federal Charter Schools Program (CSP), a stream of federal grant money used by states authorizing charter schools and charter management organizations to start-up new charter schools. In a scathing report, Asleep at the Wheel, released last March, the Network for Public Education found that the federal Charter Schools Program, launched in 1994, has awarded $4 billion in federal tax dollars to start up or expand charter schools across 44 states and the District of Columbia.  This program has provided some of the funding for 40 percent of the charter schools across the country, but, as the Network for Public Education has shown, at least a third of the schools receiving CSP dollars either never opened or opened and then quickly shut down due to financial or academic problems. The findings by the Network for Public Education are mirrored in a series of  biennial investigations, beginning in 2012 by the U.S. Department of Education’s own Office of Inspector General, which has repeatedly condemned this program for lack of record keeping and the utter absence of oversight of states’ and charter management organizations’ use of the funds.

It shouldn’t be surprising that supporters of the rapid expansion of charter schools have begun condemning Warren’s education plan. Warren makes a solid case for curtailing the publicly funded expansion of privatized alternatives to public schools.  Advocates for  public education, however, strongly endorse Warren’s plan and dispute the arguments of the charter school supporters who are criticizing it.

Three weeks ago, in the Washington Post, Carol Burris published a column to refute arguments being made against Warren’s education plan by charter school supporters.  Burris, was one of the authors of the Network for Public Education’s Asleep at the Wheel report.  In her column, Burris points out that in 2018, under U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, the federal Charter Schools Program was expanded to include a new funding stream, the National Dissemination Grants Program, under which DeVos began awarding federal grants from the CSP to charter school advocacy organizations themselves. In 2018, for example, under the new National Dissemination Grants Program, the National Alliance of Public Charter Schools received a federal grant of $2,385,960.  Burris explains: “The new National Dissemination Grants Program has… been a financial windfall for charter advocacy groups … Grants to private organizations totaled $16 million in 2018, federal records show.  Joining the National Alliance were the National Association of Charter School Authorizers and the California Charter Schools Association….”

Burris describes strong condemnation of Warren’s plan, for example, by Nina Rees, the president and CEO of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, who responded to the release of Warren’s plan in a fundraising letter: “Today Presidential candidate and Senator Elizabeth Warren called to end federal funding for the expansion of charter schools… Please contribute to the Charter Schools Action PAC today.”

Burris also describes resistance from Tom Torkelson, the leader of one of the nation’s largest chains of charter schools, IDEA Charter Schools. Burris explains: “Torkelson, the CEO of the IDEA charter chain has a… vested interest in the preservation of the Federal Charter Schools Program.  IDEA Charter Schools has received $225,000,000 from the Charter Schools Program since 2010. In 2018, IDEA had nearly $900 million in assets. That year, Torkelson earned over $550,000 from the charter chain and its related organization….” When Elizabeth Warren released her education plan, Torkelson sent this to his allies: “Senator Warren has proposed to cut the entire charter schools federal program. We need your help today.”

Finally Burris quotes Richard Barth, CEO of the KIPP Foundation and one of the founders of the huge Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) charter school chain.  Barth condemned Warren’s education plan in a fund raising plea from the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools PAC. He wrote: “Friends, We can’t let Senator Warren’s plan of cutting charter school funding become reality.”  Burris adds that in 2010, KIPP charters received $218,457,063 from the federal CSP.

In a second column last week, Burris responds once again to charter school advocates’ attacks on Elizabeth Warren’s education plan.  In her recent column, Burris is joined by Kevin Welner, director of the National Education Policy Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder and a professor of education policy.  The Washington Post’s Valerie Strauss published the column from Burris and Wener, and she adds that Welner, “was among the researchers consulted by Warren’s policy team as they drew up her education plan—but they (NEPC researchers) had no involvement in, or awareness of, this commentary” by Burris and Welner.

Burris and Welner confront charter school operators who have said they would lose essential dollars if the federal Charter Schools Program were eliminated. Burris and Welner note that because charter schools, like traditional public schools, receive federal Title I dollars and IDEA dollars, charter schools would gain more from Warren’s plan than they would lose from the elimination of the federal CSP: “Consider two… elements of Warren’s education plan.  First, she proposes quadrupling Title I funding so that it rises to levels that have long been pledged by Washington politicians but never actually reached. Secondly, and similarly, she would more than double federal funding for students with special needs served under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)—again aiming for levels long promised but never fulfilled.”

Burris and Welner criticize charter schools for serving fewer English language learners, fewer students with disabilities, fewer homeless students, and fewer students eligible for subsidized lunch than the traditional public schools in their neighborhoods.

Burris and Welner add that federal Charter Schools Program grants have disproportionately been awarded to the enormous chains of charter schools which enrich their operators with huge salaries: “(A) greatly disproportionate amount of the funding has been funneled to large Charter Management Organizations.  The Success Academy charter chain in New York City, for example, has received $47,540,399 from CSP, even as it paid its CEO nearly $800,000 in 2016.”

Last week, charter advocates gathered in a public demonstration against Warren’s education plan.  As Warren addressed an audience at Clark Atlanta University, a crowd of charter school advocates in matched t-shirts showed up to challenge her proposal to cut support for charter schools.  It turns out that this was not a spontaneous grassroots protest; instead the crowd was recruited by charter school support organizations from across the country and led by Howard Fuller, the charter school advocate who also led organizing for the Milwaukee voucher program twenty years ago.  Chalkbeat‘s Matt Barnum reports: “Fuller, former Milwaukee schools chief and advocate for private school vouchers, told Warren that her language is helping anti-charter efforts across the country. A number of states, including California, Illinois, and Michigan, have recently moved to limit charter schools or cut their funding.”

Who were the people at the Clark Atlanta University protest? Barnum reports: “Fuller told Chalkbeat that roughly 200 people from a number of overlapping groups took part in the protest. That included the Freedom Coalition for Charter Schools, a group that Fuller started with Connecticut charter school leader Steve Perry. They (protest organizers) worked with the Powerful Parent Network—a collection of groups in Atlanta, Nashville, Memphis, and elsewhere… They were funded by an online campaign, which has raised over $16,000 from a mix of small donations and several anonymous $1,000 contributions.”  One of the participating groups, Memphis Lift, “has received $1.5 million from the Walton Family Foundation since 2015.”  Another participating group was the Oakland Reach: “(M)ost of the staff of the Oakland Reach, a parent group, was in Atlanta for the protest.  The Oakland Reach is funded by local and national foundations, including Walton and The City Fund, which is backed by John Arnold and Read Hastings… Bryan Morton, who leads a Camden group supported by The City Fund, was also present.”

Elizabeth Warren’s education plan is radical, ironically, simply because it supports America’s traditional system of public schools. While advocates for charter schools imagine using public tax dollars to create escapes for a small percentage of students from public schools into an unregulated education sector which has, incidentally, become saturated with corruption and academic failure, Warren’s plan aims instead to ensure well funded, high quality public schools in every school district.  Warren is suggesting the kind of adequate funding, for example, that public school teachers, on strike in Chicago, bargained for last month when they won a promise for an additional $35 million every year to restore reasonable class sizes across the district’s schools. The size of that increase alone for class size reduction is the clearest indication I have observed of how totally out-of-kilter funding for education has become in many states. Similarly, a central demand by striking teachers in Los Angeles was for the most basic level of staffing in every public school—including a school nurse, a certified librarian, a social worker, and an adequate number of guidance counselors.

Whatever happens with Warren’s candidacy in the Democratic primary election season, I hope she won’t back off her plan to demand justice for the public schools which serve nearly 50 million children and adolescents across the United States.

Elizabeth Warren Releases Strong, Comprehensive Public Education Plan

The education plan Elizabeth Warren released on Monday is urgently important. Today, I am not going to focus on the math—whether Warren’s plan can be funded by the wealth tax she has also proposed. Neither am I going to speculate about whether, politically, she might be able to get Congress—and in the case of some of her proposals, the fifty state legislatures—to enact her ideas.

The paper she published on Monday matters, I believe, for a very different reason. Warren articulates a set of principles that turn away from three decades of neoliberal, corporate school reform—the idea, according to The American Prospect‘s Robert Kuttner, that “free markets really do work best… that government is inherently incompetent… and an intrusion on the efficiency of the market.”  Competition is at the heart of the system, all based on high-stakes tests, and punishments for the schools whose scores fall behind.

In her education plan, Warren endorses the civic and democratic principles which, from the nineteenth century until the late 1980s, defined our nation’s commitment to a comprehensive system of public education. Her plan incorporates the idea that while public schools are not perfect, they are the optimal way for our complex society to balance the needs of each particular child and family with a system that secures, by law, the rights and addresses the needs of all children. And she acknowledges the massive scale of the public commitment required to maintain an equitable education system that fairly serves approximately 50 million children and adolescents across cities and towns and sparsely populated rural areas.

I urge you to read Elizabeth Warren’s education plan.  Here I will highlight what I believe are her most important suggestions for overcoming the bipartisan, neoliberal, corporate reform agenda, formalized in 2002 in the No Child Left Behind Act, but dominating policy for more than a decade before that. Corporate education reform has driven federal policy in education during five recent administrations—Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump.

Warren emphatically demands that school privatization and the corruption that has accompanied the expansion of vouchers and charters be stopped.  This is an improvement from the position Warren advocated fifteen years ago. The NY TimesDana Goldstein reminds readers that in a book she published in 2003, Warren suggested a universal voucher program to expand choices for parents, but in recent years, Goldstein points out, Warren seems to have paid more attention to the impact on public schools of the expansion of school choice: “(I)n 2016, Ms. Warren, then in her first term as a senator from Massachusetts, spoke out against a ballot referendum that would have raised the cap on the number of charters that could open each year in her home state.”

In the plan she released on Monday, Warren begins the section on school privatization by condemning the ways charter schools and vouchers damage public schools: “To keep our traditional public school systems strong, we must resist efforts to divert public funds out of traditional public schools. Efforts to expand the footprint of charter schools, often without even ensuring that charters are subject to the same transparency requirements and safeguards as traditional public schools, strain the resources of school districts and leave students behind, primarily students of color… More than half the states allow public schools to be run by for-profit companies, and corporations are leveraging their market power and schools’ desire to keep pace with rapidly changing technology to extract profits at the expense of vulnerable students. This is wrong. We have a responsibility to provide great neighborhood schools for every student. We should stop the diversion of public dollars from traditional public schools through vouchers or tuition tax credits—which are vouchers by another name. We should fight back against the privatization, corporatization, and profiteering in our nation’s schools.”

Warren names the reforms needed to rein in school privatization:

  • She is the only candidate so far who explicitly advocates ending the federal Charter Schools Program, which has used tax dollars as a sort of venture capital fund to stimulate the expansion of charter schools with grants to states and charter management companies. Her declaration is emphatic: “End federal funding for the expansion of charter schools: The Federal Charter Schools Program (CSP), a series of federal grants established to promote new charter schools, has been an abject failure… As President, I would eliminate this charter school program and end federal funding for the expansion of charter schools.”
  • Like other candidates, Warren proposes to ban for-profit charter schools, but she goes farther by opposing all the arrangements by which nonprofit charter schools are now, quite legally, managed by huge for-profit ventures: “Ban for-profit charter schools: Our public schools should benefit students, not the financial or ideological interests of wealthy patrons like the DeVos and Walton families. I will fight to ban for-profit charter schools and charter schools that outsource their operations to for-profit companies… Many so-called nonprofit schools—including charter schools—operate alongside closely held, for-profit service providers. Others are run by for-profit companies that siphon off profits from students and taxpayers… (M)y plan would ban self-dealing in nonprofit schools to prevent founders and administrators from funneling resources to service providers owned or managed by their family members.”

In her new plan, Warren also addresses the funding crisis in the public schools which serve our nation’s poorest children. She begins by acknowledging the efforts of schoolteachers—on strike this year from West Virginia to Kentucky to Oklahoma to Los Angeles to Oakland and ongoing right now in Chicago—to call attention to their underfunded schools that cannot afford to provide the basics that more privileged American public school students take for granted: “(O)ur country’s educators have taken matters into their own hands—not only in the classroom, but also in the fight for the future of our country. Teachers have been battling for public investment over privatization, and for shared prosperity over concentrated wealth and power. Educators… across the country have carried the #RedforEd movement from the streets to state capitol buildings, striking not just to get the compensation they deserve, but to condemn the diversion of funding from public schools to private ones, to increase funding to reduce class sizes and improve their schools, and to expand services that will make their students’ lives safer and more stable.”

Warren’s proposals for school funding equity are extensive.

  • Warren would quadruple the federal investment in Title I to better support public school serving children in poverty.  And, in contrast to programs like Race to the Top which incentivized the expansion of charter schools, Warren would offer federal funding incentives to states if they would make their own school funding formulas more equitable.
  • She would federally fund 40 percent of the cost for school districts of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Education Act. That is what Congress promised in 1975 when the law was passed. Last year, writes Warren, Congress funded the law at a paltry 15 percent.
  • Warren endorses the goal of making 25,000 public schools into full-service, wraparound Community Schools by 2030. “Community Schools are the hubs of their community. Through school coordinators, they connect students and families with community partners to provide opportunities, support, and services inside and outside the school. These schools center around wraparound services,” incorporate medical and social services, and provide expanded learning time and after school programs.
  • She commits to expanding the capacity of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights to ensure that all students are treated fairly under the law.  She also commits to providing federal funding for the kind of magnet school and transportation programs which three decades ago enabled school districts to voluntarily integrate, both racially and economically.
  • Warren commits to strengthening public school programs for the 10 percent of American students who are English language learners, to ensuring that the needs of immigrant students are fully addressed, and to supporting American Indian students in public schools.

As part of a section of the report devoted to, “providing a warm, safe, and nurturing school climate for all our kids,” Warren buries one of her most important principles: “As President, I’ll push to prohibit the use of standardized testing as a primary or significant factor in closing a school, firing a teacher, or making any other high-stakes decisions, and encourage schools to use authentic assessments that allow students to demonstrate learning in multiple ways.”

It is difficult to imagine how Warren would accomplish this goal, because high-stakes testing as the measure for school quality is, thanks to No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top, embedded to varying degrees in the fifty state laws. It is, however, refreshing to have a Presidential candidate strongly advocate for eliminating high stakes testing as the way we evaluate schools and schoolteachers across the United States. Half a century of academic research, most recently culminating in a new study by Stanford University professor, Sean Reardon, has demonstrated that a school’s or school district’s standardized test scores do not measure the quality of a school or the teachers in a school.  Instead standardized test scores correlate almost perfectly with the median income of families in the school or district. No Child Left Behind mandated that all public school children be tested in grades 3-8 and once in high school, that their scores be used to judge their schools, and that the schools unable quickly to raise scores be punished.  Race to the Top then demanded that states tie teachers’ evaluations to the same test scores. Although the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act, which replaced No Child Left Behind, eased some of this, a test-and-punish regime based on mandated high-stakes testing still drives school accountability across the United States.

Warren is proposing to turn around decades of policy that punishes public schools and the nation’s poorest students and their teachers. None of the other Democratic candidates for President has released such a comprehensive plan. I hope the release of Warren’s new plan will stimulate discussion of these issues among Democrats running for President.  In the debates so far, none of the moderators has asked the candidates about their policies regarding  public education.  It’s time for some serious conversation about the public schools.

(This blog recently named seven important principles candidates for President ought to embrace to address the many ways charter schools damage our public schools.)