Stand for Children: Not about children
Post date: Jul 17, 2011 1:01:35 AM
Stand for Children: Not about children (or collaboration with teachers)
from the Washington Education Association 07/13/11
Teachers and educators across Washington are appalled by the misleading and Machiavellian comments by Stand for Children founder and CEO Jonah Edelman and are calling on Stand's Washington members and partners to reject his remarks.
Speaking at the Aspen Institute in June, Edelman boasted about Stand's expanding national political strategy and vowed to target Washington teachers next. He also highlighted his wealthy hedge fund and venture capitalist funders and seemed to suggest that Washington's public schools are adequately funded, despite billions in state budget cuts and court decisions to the contrary. He also misrepresented the nature of a recent education bill in Illinois and the role of educator unions played in that legislation.
(In a similar vein, Stand's 2010 annual report wrongly takes credit for substantial changes in teacher evaluation and other education policies passed by the Washington Legislature last year. In reality, SB 6696 was a top priority for the Washington Education Association, which was instrumental in drafting and passing it. Stand's Washington chapter publicly criticized the bill. In the same annual report, Stand incorrectly claims credit for the ground-breaking contract negotiated by the Seattle Education Association.)
During the nearly hour-long Aspen session, Edelman rarely mentioned children and made it clear that Stand for Children has no intention of collaborating with Washington educators to improve the quality of our schools.
In Washington earlier this year, Stand unsuccessfully lobbied for regressive changes in education policy and made no attempt to work collaboratively with teachers. Now, the group is trying to influence local education policy in Tacoma, Bellevue, Issaquah and other Washington communities that are working to improve education in the face of enormous state budget cuts.
Based on Edelman's recent remarks, Washington educators urge Stand's local members, Stand's coalition partners and the media to dig deeper into Stand's true agenda and pay close attention to its funders. To many educators, it appears Stand for Children is more interested in pushing the corporate reform agenda -- which is being led by hedge fund managers and investment banks -- than partnering with local parents, teachers and school leaders to fight for what really matters for our kids.
Read how a longtime Stand parent became disillusioned and concerned with Stand's agenda and tactics.
Excerpted JONAH EDELMAN comments at the Aspen Institute, June, 2011:
Page 8
After the election, Advance Illinois and Stand had drafted a very bold proposal we called Performance Counts. It tied tenure and layoffs to performance. It let principals hire who they choose. It streamlined dismissal of ineffective tenured teachers substantially, from 2+ years and $200,000 in legal fees, on average, to three to four months, with very little likelihood of legal recourse, and, most importantly, we called for the reform of collective bargaining throughout the state. Essentially, proposing that school boards would be able to decide any disputed issue at impasse. So a very, very bold proposal for Illinois, and one that six months earlier would have been unthinkable, undiscussable.
Page 18
That being said, you know, our issues poll really well, actually. And that's our theory of action, is to focus on issues that the public strongly agrees with, but special interest politics have prevented from happening. And use, as Jim said, special interest politics on our side.
Our theory of action doesn't work on issues that don't poll well. And so, you know, and again, we don't come with a one size fits all to a state. And we don't come in with our finger pointed, you know, ready to poke people in the eye. We try to build as much political clout in the most unassuming, diplomatic way. Go for bold change, and do it in the most bridge-building possible way. If you see a leader like Audrey Soglin, give her the ability to lead. Give her the space to win. And don't, you know, play win-lose politics.
Unfortunately, Washington, Oregon and California, you got to play win-lose politics because of the way the unions operate. So you can't be shy about that. But it's just operating in a fairly disciplined strategic way at all times, and not saying things just because you want to say them. They feel good to say. But they actually aren't strategic when you're trying to achieve a political result.
Page 20
And we can do that in other states. Yeah, we're already getting going. I mean the thing about the way we work is we're doing this level of work in every state that we're in. And so it's not one person, it's significant organizations, led by stellar executive directors who operate as CEOs.
So in Washington state right now, we've got exactly the same goal, and it's another state that doesn't lack for financial resources, it's about achieving the same kind of reallocation. We could readily outspend the Washington Education Association.
Massachusetts, very similar. It might be a ballot measure in Washington, it might be we have a measure on the ballot, and we use it as a lever in Massachusetts. It'll look a little bit different, but it's essentially the same.
Iowa is another state, you know, Democratic senate, feel like we could do the same. Very, very major reform potential there.
So I don't think there's any question but by the end of this decade we're going to have ended seniority-based decision-making in education in this country. That's not enough to ensure better outcomes but it's certainly something that has been long overdue.
View Edelman's complete remarks (reference to Washington starts at 47:34)