By now, you’ve likely heard that the anti-reform establishment will be marching the streets of D.C. this weekend in an effort to “Save Our Schools.” The participating groups want to restore parent and student influence in education.

There’s only one problem with that – they don’t.

The National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers – two unions that have done everything in their power from distorting the truth and lying to intimidation and lawsuits to stop any reform that takes their control and gives it to parents – are driving this rally.

These groups fight charter school openings across the country. For example they are currently stumping against a Mandarin immersion charter in Milburn, New Jersey.

They’ve sued multiple times to stop or delay school choice bills from taking effect. The teachers association now has a lawsuit in Indiana to stop low-income students in failing schools from using a voucher to attend a different school of their parent’s choice.

They are even fighting the “Parent Trigger” law that was passed in California and allows parents to initiate changes to a school, like converting it to a charter, if a majority of parents agree and sign a petition.

It’s the same coalition of the past 35 years that just wants the status quo. Reform to them is about money, control and no high-stakes tests or accountability.

In each case above, and the dozens of ones not mentioned, these groups are eliminating the influence parents and students have, not moving it forward.

Dear Dennis,

You have been working overtime to ensure a permanent end to the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program, a program offering 1,700 children in Washington, DC a chance to escape their failing schools and receive a world-class education. Your staff has visited Congress, written letters and threatened future political support. You have ignored the tangible success of the program. Why? How do the choices of 1,700 students undermine what education is supposed to do for kids in the U.S.?

Ed Reform

Dear Dennis,

Have you ever thought that by building up the profession of teaching you would be building up your individual members as well? You are vehemently opposed to performance pay for teachers based on student performance or evaluation and recently argued against President Obama’s proposal that the government fund a merit pay program, suggesting instead that the money be tied to professional development and focused on “the practice of teaching”.  Wouldn’t a student achievement-based evaluation be an ideal way to reward “the practice of teaching”, as the successful education of a student is exactly that? Why don’t you focus on treating teachers well, as professionals, rather than fighting for systems that will only lead to more failure - of your members, of their students - in the end?

Ed Reformer

Dear Dennis,

You must be exhausted after all of your hard fought battles to block quality public school choices for children all across the country. You seemed to be everywhere at once this past year. In Rhode Island and Tennessee you scrapped with state legislators to place even more obstacles in the way of charter school growth. In Oregon you helped ensure that virtual schooling would not be an option for more parents by asking your friends to place a moratorium on this wildly popular alternative for families. And in Maine you helped legislators see the error of their ever thinking that charters should be allowed to enter the landscape. All of this even after you convinced the President and Secretary Duncan that you are open to reform? How does your rhetoric line up with your actions? Why are you so worried about the decisions parents will make when given a choice? Perhaps the Secretary will take the opportunity to bring some of this up when he addresses your union leadership this morning.

Ed Reformer

More of the Same at Twice the Price

The National Education Association has prepared a vital tool for anyone interested in assessing the potential impact of the economic stimulus bill on education in the U.S. As major media figures have pointed out in the last several days, the stimulus bill is nothing more than additional funding for the education programs and structures that already exist, regardless of efficacy. And the NEA’s drawn up the charts to prove it. (Notice that reform efforts currently implemented at national and state levels, like charter schools and No Child Left Behind, are completely bypassed.)

Both Senate and House versions nearly double funding of all major programs, such as Title 1 – funding which flows to school districts, where it subsidizes existing staffs and programs. While this may help state and local administrators avoid laying off teachers, it is not tied to student achievement, ensuring that all monies spent simply prop up schools that exist, rather than boosting schools that succeed (NCLB links funding to results, but this pay out comes before the next meaningful achievement assessment, and thus is not tied to accountability). The same is true for the multi-billion dollar school modernization program, for special education and for myriad other program increases.

Also not lost on the status quo supporters of this bill is the fact that there are administrative set-asides at the federal, state and local level. What’s 1 percent of $100 billion? That’s right — government will grow by $1 billion, at the minimum, thanks to this effort. That doesn’t even take into account higher education stimulus funds, another $40 billion or so of which is included in this bill.

There’s also LOTS of money for researchers – the National Science Foundation gets several million more, as does the Institute for Education Sciences. Some discretionary funds (we call it play money) – about $340 million – are also in place for the Secretary to spend as he sees fit on “innovative” programs. But shouldn’t innovative or successful new programs simply draw funds equitably and directly from all federal appropriations (rather than being shunted through the federal-state-local system, with a little – or a lot - being siphoned off at each bureaucratic stop)? Why must “innovation” be separately accounted for in a slush fund, when such reforms are mainly responsible for all the achievement gains of the last decade? And as a result of a decade of reforms, the nation already knows how to succeed in educating children – we simply lack the political resolve to make the hard choices. So why more research in this time of economic crisis? Oh, that’s right. It’s about the jobs of adults, not the education of children.

Consideration of whether or not our current education programs work is missing from the creation of this bill altogether – when it should be the central concern. For years Washington’s representatives fought accountability. NCLB began to shed light in that dark corner. Subsequently ignoring the vetting of programs’ effectiveness before shelling out hard-earned taxpayer dollars is not the way to bring about change and fix failing schools. Which, not incidentally, is the long-haul, big-picture solution to getting – and keeping - our economy back on track for good.

Check out the NEA analysis yourself. We’re glad to finally make use of the taxpayer dollars we give them through mandatory dues payments to see where it’s all going – if the status quo has its way.