Christian Mitchell's Education forum at Bouchet Elementary School gives the Illinois 'Democratic' State Rep's corporate views on charter schools, corporate 'reform,' and Opt Out...
Christian Mitchell, the 26th District Illinois State Representative, hosted a town hall meeting at Bouchet Elementary School auditorium on April 27, 2015. For me, it was my first time to hear his views on the Rauner austerity budget, his proposals for education, and the search for new revenue. The sparse audience of 30 people were taking notes and ready with questions, especially on education.
Illinois State Rep Christian Mitchell at the April 27 forum at Bouchet Elementary School. Mitchell, a "Democrat," told the audience he supports charter schools, among other things that most voters in Chicago now oppose. Substance photo by David Vance.On two key pieces of legislation, Christian Mitchell is sticking with the charter school investors and the big testing corporate plans.
Before I spoke someone already asked him about his no vote on SB 397 that would return power to the local school board of granting permits to the charter school operator. SB 397 would limit a charter school operator who is denied a permit to open to make an appeal to the Illinois Charter School Commission. With one exception the Commission has always given a green light to the Charter school demand to open. Lately, Chicago Board of Education members have been playing a word game about the charter school authorization. At the April 22 Board of Education meeting, Andrea Zopp said that it's difficult for the Board to vote against a charter school authorization because the state commission would just approve it anyway, over the heads of the local Board members.
Christian Mitchell doesn't have a problem with that, as the forum showed.
Mitchell understands clearly that the charter operator can go around the local school district to get a permit. The denial of the charter school permit at the local level means nothing. This means the local school districts in Illinois (1,000 in total) cannot easily stop any charter operator buy a democratic vote.
Instead of abolishing the powers of the Commission, Christian Mitchell proposes what he calls a "performance bill." HB809 would close charter schools if the data and performance shows low achievement and low growth. That means that any charter could open in any Illinois district, but that some kind of audit -- later -- might be able to close down that charter. Later.
So clearly his bill HB809 would never refuse a charter operator from opening, even if the local school board votes a moratorium on more charter openings.
His bill says nothing about the high expulsion rate that charter schools have so they are able to claim what a high performing school they have. His bill says nothing about how charter schools disrupt the neighborhood schools especially when they demand space in a functioning local neighborhood school building. They call this co-sharing. When I spoke I asked him if he was aware of the Raise Your Hand study that showed 13,000 empty classroom chairs in the Chicago charter schools? I asked him if he was aware that CPS on Friday April 24 announced a proposal for 20 more charters and 12 more to be alternative schools?
I stated the need for a moratorium charter school expansion. We are watching him and other state officials. We are losing public education money to the charter takeovers.
My second point was to ask again why he doesn�t support the child�s right to opt out? Children belong to their parents not the state. I stated, weather he supports HB306 students are going to opt out of the PARCC tests. He responded that he wants a limit on test preps of 40 to 45 hours (like Florida) and a limit on the number of standardized tests. But, he drew the line on allowing students the right to opt out. He wants to make standardized tests more mandatory not less. And, quickly at the end he added that he did not want Illinois to lose federal money.
There was another important question on education; the elected school board that was on the ballot in 37 of 50 wards in Chicago and passed by nearly 90% yes vote. He evaded a clear answer by saying another representative was taking up the issue.
Last but not least, Christian Mitchell has no plans to stop the Bruce Rauner budget cuts. The attack on public service workers by some estimates will affect at least 100,000 employees throughout the state.
Just by saying he wants more revenue to come from the rich multimillionaires/billionaires in Illinois is not enough. Christian Mitchell has several talking points on the Progressive Income Tax, the Financial Services Tax, the Millionaire�s Tax and the Financial Transaction Tax.
But, when the cuts come he will stand with Rahm Emanuel on stage and say there was nothing they could do. Mitchell and Mayor Rahm Emanuel will both claim that no one wants the austerity budget from Rauner, but there was nothing they could do.
And one more thing Christian Mitchell never mentioned is the labor movement and what it can do to stop the Rauner austerity plan. Mitchell doesn�t want to fight back, just go along is my opinion. But, a multi-union fight back is being organized to stop the budget cuts. It may take strikes to stop the cuts and demand the millionaires pay their fair share.
It is evident to me that Christian Mitchell is not going to march with us on the picket line.
Comments:
By: Cassie Creswell, More Than A Score
HB306
HB306 was voted on in the House last Tuesday and passed 64-47-1. The roll call can be found here: http://ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/99/house/09900HB0306_05192015_008000T.pdf
Most Chicago representatives were yes-es with some notable exceptions, including Mitchell, Barbara Flynn Currie and Ken Dunkin. Ed reform groups working for privatizing public education, like Stand for Children and Advance IL lobbied heavily against the bill. And not surprisingly, some of the largest recipients of money from the Stand for Children PAC, like Mitchell (http://bit.ly/1JVxaZf), ended up voting against it.
Opt out of state-mandated testing will continue to happen whether or not this bill passes. (At least 7,000 students in Illinois refused PARCC testing this year.) However, the parents of the most vulnerable students in the state who do not have the capacity to refuse testing themselves deserve to be able to exercise the right to protect their children from overtesting and inappropriate testing too.
The PARCC test is the perfect example of why a parent might wish to have a say in whether their child participates in state testing. The test was 9-15 hours long this year, depending on a child's grade. Neither the PARCC Consortium, Pearson nor the state of Illinois has provided any evidence that PARCC is a valid and reliable measure of the reading and math skills. (And yet, IL spent at least $35 million on PARCC this year as part of a 4-year, $160 million contract signed last June.) The test is an inappropriate use of time and resources in our public schools, and families who refused it deserve to be treated with respect and have parental wishes taken into account.
The bill has now moved to the IL senate where it is still in Assignments. If you are interested in helping get HB306 passed, please call your own state senator. (Find their contact info here: www.elections.il.gov/districtlocator/addressfinder.aspx)
In addition, it is important to call Senate President John Cullerton who has the power to assign the bill to a committee, mostly likely Education: (217) 782-2728
Members of the Senate Education Committee should also be called and asked to vote yes to get HB306 out of committee and vote yes on the Senate floor as well.
William Delgado (217) 782-5652 (thank for support!)
Kimberly Lightford (217) 782-8505
Jennifer Bertino-Tarrant (217) 782-0052
Daniel Biss (217) 782-2119
Melinda Bush (217) 782-7353
Andy Manar (217) 782-0228
Iris Martinez (217) 782-8191(thank for support!)
Julie Morrison (217) 782-3650
Michael Noland (217) 782-7746 (thank for support!)
Steve Stadelman (217) 782-8022
David Luechtefeld (217) 782-8137
Jason Barickman (217) 782-6597
Karen McConnaughay (217) 782-1977
Sue Rezin (217) 782-3840
Chapin Rose (217) 558-1006
By: Rod Estvan
HB 809 as amended
Representative Mitchell's performance bill for charter schools is to say the least ambiguous. HB 809 amendment 3 states in relevant part:
"Before January 1, 2016, authorizers shall develop performance frameworks that allow authorizers to measure the performance of the charter school they authorize and that allow authorizers of multiple charter schools to compare performance
across similarly situated schools using common measures. Such performance frameworks shall use comprehensive academic,financial, and operational performance data to make
merit-based renewal decisions. Such performance frameworks may vary depending on the type of charter school authorized and the
mission of such a school. To guide authorizers in ensuring their performance frameworks are designed to measure charter
school quality across similarly situated schools using common measures, on or before June 30, 2016, the State Board shall
develop model performance frameworks that authorizers may elect to use instead of developing their own performance
frameworks. Authorizers shall incorporate into charter agreements entered into on or after January 1, 2017 either the applicable performance frameworks developed by the State Board or those they have developed. Authorizers may work with charter schools to incorporate such performance frameworks into
contracts entered into before January 1, 2017, provided that the authorizer and charter school mutually agree to the
contract amendment. All renewal decisions after September 1,2017 must be based on the charter contract and, to the extent
applicable, the performance framework. The performance framework must be made available for public viewing on the authorizer's Internet website."
The concept of the performance framework is highly ambiguous because all data contained within this framework is to be measured against "similarly situated schools." Does that mean other schools that having predominately poor children both traditional and charter? Does it mean only similarly situated or equally poor performing charter schools? Does it mean school with a similar racial profile? The concept is not defined in the bill and hence could mean just about anything.
As of today the bill is in the House rules committee and it has not gotten out of the Elementary & Secondary Education: Charter School Policy Committee so at the conclusion of the day it will be a dead bill due to the House of Representatives Committee Deadline Extended-Rule 9(b).
Rod Estvan