iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Ben Austin

GET UPDATES FROM Ben Austin
 

Diane Ravitch: Proving Why Parents Need a Revolution

Posted: 10/18/11 11:31 PM ET

At the beginning of October, Dr. Diane Ravitch launched a broadside against Parent Trigger and the parent empowerment movement, calling it a "stealth assault" and a "deceptive scheme" to undermine public education. She employed a series of personal attacks, half-truths and conspiracy theories that have come to characterize the other side's desperate attempt to defend an indefensible status quo.

The Parent Trigger is a simple, yet potentially transformational law that gives parents real power over the educational destiny of their own children. This law empowers the majority of parents at any failing school to either bring in new leadership and new staff or transform their school into a high-performing charter school. The California law was first passed in January 2010, and has since spread to two additional states -- Texas and Mississippi -- meaning that over 22 percent of public school parents in America are now empowered to transform their child's failing school through community organizing.

Unfortunately, it has become clear over the past two years that those who currently hold power view parent empowerment as a threat and, therefore, will do whatever they can to stop it. Before the ink was dry on California's historic first Parent Trigger law, the California Federation of Teachers had already dubbed it the "lynch mob" law. And as recently as last August, the American Federation of Teachers accidentally released their secret plan to "kill" Parent Trigger, a PowerPoint presentation of lessons learned after defeating a grassroots parent empowerment movement in Connecticut. In this step-by-step plan -- which AFT subsequently apologized for -- they articulated with troubling clarity their strategy to deploy a stable of high-priced lobbyists to "kill" Parent Trigger. When that failed, they created committees with fancy names but no substantive parent power to trick parents into thinking they have power when they actually do not.

And this, of course, pales in comparison to the tactics seen when parents try to actually USE the Parent Trigger law to help their children and transform their failing schools. During the historic first campaign in Compton, the school district employed such drastic measures in their campaign to stymie parent organizing that two L.A. Superior Court Judges literally issued a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction against the entire Compton Unified school district for violating the constitutional rights of their own parents.

Unfortunately, Ravitch has apparently decided to join this chorus of cynics and detractors, opposing the basic idea of parent power while also spreading a series of falsehoods and conspiracy theories.

She begins with the distorted premise that Parent Trigger remedies are somehow "punitive." But punitive for whom? The Parent Trigger only applies to systemically failing schools -- schools that have been failing to meet academic benchmarks for four or more years. The children at McKinley Elementary -- the first school to employ the Parent Trigger --have a 1.5 percent chance of going to college. That's not good enough for my kids, Ravitch's grandkids or anyone else's kids. Ravitch may view the Parent Trigger as "punitive" for the adults working at failing schools, but the status quo is punitive for the children trapped in them.

Ravitch doesn't ultimately believe that parents and kids trapped in these schools should have much of a voice at all in turning them around. She argues that parents should have no more a stake in the governance of their school than should a random person strolling through Central Park have a stake in the governance of that park. The absurdly obvious difference, of course, is that parents are not casual users of their school. They entrust the future of their children to that school every single day. And they cannot afford to let it fail.

As for Ravitch's conspiracy theories, most center around two issues: charter schools and funding.

As it relates to charter schools, she accuses Parent Revolution of "pretending to be representative of ordinary parents, but actually promoting a charter agenda." What she conveniently fails to mention is that as a member of the California State Board of Education, I drafted the first regulations in the history of the State Board to shut down bad charter schools, because failing charter schools are just as bad for kids as failing district schools. Ravitch also conveniently fails to mention that last month, Parent Revolution endorsed legislation that further tightens charter accountability, transparency and disclosure requirements. And if Ravitch had even bothered to read last month's New York Times or http://lat.ms/rpczO6 stories on Parent Trigger, she would know that many of the parents currently organizing around Parent Trigger are organizing around in-district reform options, not charter.

Ravitch then attacks Parent Revolution by falsely claiming that we currently receive funding from multiple "charter school operators," and by accurately noting that we receive funding from foundations that frequently support education reforms. She insinuates that since some of our funders support high quality charter schools, then we must have a secret agenda to brainwash parents into supporting charter schools. We are proud of our funders and disclose all of them on our website, www.parentrevolution.org. One of our largest funders is the Gates Foundation, which has, incidentally, granted more funding to teachers unions than to us. Ravitch herself has accepted tens of thousands of dollars from those very same teachers unions for whom she advocates.

With the future of millions of children on the line, both sides could pass the time manufacturing conspiracy theories about charter schools and teachers unions; or obsessing about the fact that we are funded by the Gates Foundation (as are the teachers unions) or that teachers unions in California outspend Parent Revolution by a factor of hundreds to one. Or we can all choose to grow up, interact like adults, and focus on forging common ground and finding common solutions that work for kids.

It is critical to remember that parents and teachers have a lot in common when it comes to a kids-first agenda. We agree that it's good for kids if teachers are paid a lot more money, and we agree that we ultimately need to raise taxes to do it. We agree that it's good for kids if teachers are respected, empowered and not micromanaged by a bureaucrat who's never met their kids or set foot in their classroom. We agree that it's good for kids if teachers are unionized and have basic workplace protections. In fact, AFT President Randi Weingarten has negotiated progressive contracts and supported progressive policies in districts across the country that I'd love to have for my own daughters right here in Los Angeles.

Let's also stipulate that everyone on all sides of this issue are good people who care about kids. Diane Ravitch is a talented academic who has devoted her life to this issue. She clearly cares about kids and the future of public education in America.

What we will not back down from is our fundamental belief that the status quo in public education is broken in large part because the interests of adults too often trump the interest of children, and that empowered parents are the key to systemically ending that dynamic.

This movement is growing. Ravitch's brand of rhetoric doesn't hurt us, it helps us. Every time opponents resort to personal attacks, half-truths and conspiracy theories to defend the status quo, they expose themselves as being devoid of any new ideas to save parents and children trapped in failing schools. Every time they fabricate facts because the reality on the ground does not support their position, they make our argument for us better than we ever could for why parents need power over the education of their own children. Parents know that the losers in this war of sound bites are not the reformers or the teachers unions. The losers are their own children.

The late Senator Pat Moynihan once said, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."

So let's debate. But let's stick to the facts. Let's cut the name calling and conspiracy theories. Let's agree that it's time for the adults to start acting like grown-ups. And most important, let's hold ourselves accountable to making every single decision about school policy and union contracts as if that decision would directly impact our own children.

 

Follow Ben Austin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@parentrev

At the beginning of October, Dr. Diane Ravitch launched a broadside against Parent Trigger and the parent empowerment movement, calling it a "stealth assault" and a "deceptive scheme" to undermine pub...
At the beginning of October, Dr. Diane Ravitch launched a broadside against Parent Trigger and the parent empowerment movement, calling it a "stealth assault" and a "deceptive scheme" to undermine pub...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 8
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cjaco
03:06 PM on 10/22/2011
BS alert. Gates money funds Parent Rev, not teachers unions. This astroturf parent org is a shill for private corporate charters feasting at the tax payer teat. Deceptive petition processes, lies to parents to get them to take their schools over - only to find out that corporate charter school has been picked FOR them, and their boards eliminate their voices altogether. http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/8098
The only real (and notable) grass roots parent organization is Parents Across America - but Parent Rev is threatened by them (because the speak the truth and use facts) and is doing what they can to discredit them. http://parentsacrossamerica.org/
09:45 AM on 10/21/2011
Anything Gates touches rots including teachers unions. Now he has his sites on community colleges. We all can't live in Beverly Hills and afford private colleges.

Yes, schools need reform. But not the trigger law. Let teachers (not unions) be allowed in the decision-making process instead of just foot soldiers and you will see schools improve.
08:50 AM on 10/21/2011
Ben Nelson accuses Diane Ravitch of personal attacks & fabrications, but she never called him out by name the way he does (14 times!). The term Parent Trigger is misleading because it doesn't actually empower parents, it empowers charter schools. There is no evidence that charter schools can do a better job. The most exhaustive study in existence on charter school quality (which comes from the pro-charter Fordham Institute) found that only 17% of charter schools have higher test scores and that 35% of them are ranked much lower. Charter schools have less accountability to parents than public schools. They can and do choose not to admit students with behavioral and/or learning disabilities (like Maureen Joy & Voyager Academy in NC), kick students out when they are not getting high enough test scores (which happened to an entire class of students in the Harlem Children's Zone), or even kick students out when their parents choose to opt their child out of standardized testing due to medical concerns (which just happened at the SC Virtual Charter School). The Charter School movement is nothing more than an attempt to privatize public education, redirecting taxpayer money away from public schools and into the hands of corporations & hedge fund managers who care more about the bottom line than the success of children. The Parent Trigger is just one more distortion, coming from a class of people who have never known poverty and never taught a class of children who live it every day.
04:41 PM on 10/20/2011
Why would you design something with the word trigger- an obvious weapon reference- when supposedly creating promising new options for children and families?
Parent, ready , aim shoot...shoot who what and who really benefits here!.
03:47 PM on 10/20/2011
VIVA teachers, www.vivateachers.org are all for greater parent involvement. In fact, in their initial report, delivered to Sec. Arne Duncan last year, they outline extensive programs to engage parents in schools. The VIVA New York teachers called for parent input into their annual evaluations. So, we too agree that parents need to be a strong voice in our public schools. The caveat we'd add is that parents need much more support in understanding not just what's a bad school but what the ingredients are for a great school. VIVA teachers know that this requires substantially more dialogue between parents and teachers. The parent trigger law is a good 1st step, but it's not the full recipe.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
raggedhand
05:21 PM on 10/19/2011
Parents already have a mechanism for changing local schools and holding public school accountable to them. It's called a "school board".
08:06 AM on 10/19/2011
I'm curious to know if any conclusive results have been observed from the changes in law made thus far. On the surface, it sounds good, but there are two points that worry me. 1) This kind of measure gives a tremendous amount of power to a group of people who definitely deserve a say, but who mostly will have very little knowledge or experience in education; I can't help wondering if the changes they would make are likely to be actual improvements. 2) This: "transform their school into a high-performing charter school". The implication here is that charter schools are generally high-performing, while the available data shows that the vast majority are not... and many have produced worse results than comparable public schools.

I'm all for parents having more power to make change; I just wonder if there's a more effective way to ensure that changes made will make things better, and not just different. It'll be interesting to watch.
02:54 AM on 10/19/2011
Last week I published my own rebuttal to the arguments advanced in "The Trouble With the Parent Trigger", to which I will now provide a link: http://principalfoundations.blogspot.com/2011/10/on-parents-and-school-governance.html
There are multiple interests at stake in these debates over school management and governance, each with legitimate points of view. But it is important that no one party in the debate become so powerful as to crush all others, and parents in poor communities have for too long been the least empowered, except for their children.