Oh gosh. I’m “outdated”.

I think that means I’m old. (Or was it a statement about my clothes??)

Wait a minute. Was it an anti-woman comment?? How many times does a man get called outdated? Maybe I need to call the National Organization for Women. I’ve never felt discriminated against before, but wow, maybe this is what the feminist fuss is all about!

Let me explain. I’ve been focused on the education field for more than 25 years. Exclusively. In other words, for 25 years I’ve woken up every day (and also many a time never went to bed until the light was out) and did nothing but read, study, write and manage education reform outcomes. That is, besides raising my kids. I know. Boring, right? It’s true. Just ask my kids, who say I have to move my chin from my computer to look in their eyes when they talk! (I thank God for kids like that, who have helped me keep a bigger focus on them!)

The organization I founded has been around 16 of those 25 years. And one of the group’s main accomplishments has been not just the advocacy, but the creation of a majority of the nation’s charter school laws. From that exercise we’ve learned what works and what doesn’t. From that exercise we’ve interviewed, studied, and communicated with literally tens of thousand of people engaged in the process who have shown us first hand how policy effects people and process, how policy works (and how it doesn’t). And from all these activities, we’ve created and sustained a darn good ranking system of the nation’s charter laws that has informed and galvanized thousands more in pursuit of great charter laws - laws that put control and accountability back into the hands of people who are most closely affected by our schools. That’s why, more than just charters, CER focuses on engaging and enlightening parents, policymakers and the media to appreciate and advance all education reforms.

We have colleagues who do exceptional work in these fields and in the charter arena; the fairly new National Alliance for Public Charter Schools services a wide variety of charter interest at the state and national level. Their “members” are state associations. They’ve put out a model law and now a new law ranking based on a difference of philosophy about what makes good charter schools. At the core of that philosophy is the notion that authorizing can’t be left to strong groups - like the State University of New York or even the DC Charter School Board, without additional oversight from a new state entity. There are other differences, about funding, equity and so forth. But I’ve always been struck that the notion of having additional actors manage the charter stage with firm accountability requirements but less government oversight is a good thing and in fact, is necessary because governments don’t “do” schooling well, focusing more on paper and process than anything else. Which is why we’re even talking about charters to begin with.

The data in the Center for Education Reform’s Charter School Laws Across the States: Ranking and Scorecard actually proves the point. Strong laws, with high standards but lots of flexibility, yield the best charter schools. Laws where government is a bigger actor - at the state or local level - create numerous barriers to reform and deter all but the most “corporate” of organizations, which means moms and dads, and Boys and Girls Club leaders, the urban league leader and rank and file educators - the very people the charter idea was meant to engage - are closed out of the process.

Apparently, that view, according to the National Alliance, is “outdated.”

Ouch.

Outdated? Not with it? Old school, maybe? Irrelevant?

Nah, not so much.

It’s actually called experience.

But thanks for the compliment!