Schools Matter: Understanding KIPP Model Charter Schools, Part 4

Schools Matter: Understanding KIPP Model Charter Schools, Part 4:

Understanding KIPP Model Charter Schools, Part 4

 -->

Offered here is Part 4 of my book, Work Hard, Be Hard: Journeys Through "No Excuses" Teaching.  This chapter sketches the history of "No Excuses."  

See Parts 1-3 here, here, and here.

Chapter 4

Whence No Excuses?

What avail is it to win prescribed amounts of information about geography and history, to win ability to read and write, if in the process the individual loses his own soul: loses his appreciation of things worth while, of the values to which these things are relative . . . –John Dewey (1938/2007)

In a 1993 commentary that attacked Jonathan Kozol and Gerald Bracey for questioning the veracity of the dramatic warnings of A Nation at Risk ten years after its publication, conservative education policymaker, Denis Doyle (1993) was one of the first policymakers to use the term, “No Excuses,” in an educational context:

If they [public schools] begin to benchmark seriously, they will compare themselves to the best of the best, not just in public elementary and secondary schools, but also in high-performance organizations. The power of benchmarking is that it does internally what competition is supposed to do externally: it holds organizations to high standards of performance, measurement, and reporting. It accepts no excuses. It is continuous. There is no finish line (p. 631).

The term, “No Excuses,” was used two years later by policymaker, Anne Lewis (1995), who admonished folks like Denis Doyle for a narrow focus on accountability outcomes at the expense of adequate resource allocation.  Lewis offered a reminder to budget cutters and efficiency seekers that there was no escape from the ultimate responsibility to educate all children, without excuse or failure. Specifically, Lewis took to task the newly-empowered conservative budget hawks in Washington for their efforts to slash federal funding for welfare and education programs.  She warned in pointed terms that as “the culpable may get off the hook temporarily, the responsibility of education to prepare young people for the legitimate economy cannot be passed off. No matter what panaceas are offered by the budget cutters, the bottom line for kids is the classroom. And the work they do there must be demanding, with no failures and no excuses” (p. 660).

Over the next five years, however, the conservative targets of Lewis’s castigation successfully Schools Matter: Understanding KIPP Model Charter Schools, Part 4:

Ain't it a Pity his Ditty is so... - Living in Dialogue

Ain't it a Pity his Ditty is so... - Living in Dialogue:

Ain't it a Pity his Ditty is so...

By John Thompson.

Three cheers for Warren Buffett’s speech at the Democratic National Convention which borrowed from Joe Welch’s challenge to Joe McCarthy. Buffett said, “‘Have you no sense of decency, sir?’ I ask Donald Trump, have you no sense decency, sir?” After all, it is time for Democrats to subordinate our differences in order to unite and fend off the Trump threat.

So, why would a former Obama administration staffer, Peter Cunningham, shamelessly scrape the bottom of the barrel and equate Diane Ravitch with Trumpism?

It’s bad enough that Cunningham accepts the Walton Foundation’s and the Billionaires Boys Club’s money and consistently shares anti-union material with The 74.  His “astroturf” outlet, the Education Post, pits liberals against liberals and civil rights advocates against civil rights advocates in order to promote test-driven, market driven reform. Their competition-driven charters increase segregation as a supposed tool policy for reversing the legacies of segregation.

It’s bad enough that the Ed Post recruits a handful of teachers to spread their corporate spin, emails them suggesting  “What you can blog about this week in education,” (emphasis in the original) and offers to “Help spread the word with this [attached] social graphic!,” and then brazenly pretends that they represent the teaching profession. It’s worse that Cunningham and his funders push the Karl Rove tactic of crippling or killing teachers’ unions in order to kneecap one of the Democratic Party’s key sources of funding and of boots on the ground.

Cunningham has made himself clear, maintaining that schools can’t be improved without what he calls “oversight and accountability.” He seems to believe that teachers – and the voters who pay our salaries – are so craven that the edu-politics of destruction are essential.  Public school educators must be beaten down (apparently so Democrats can look tough) and micromanaged, while charter management organizations run free.  But his assumptions are even more indecent than that.  Adopting the mentality of  “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength,” he choreographs a nonstop tirade of untruths and misleading Ain't it a Pity his Ditty is so... - Living in Dialogue:

THE FUTURE IN THEIR EYES | DCGEducator: Doing The Right Thing

THE FUTURE IN THEIR EYES | DCGEducator: Doing The Right Thing:

THE FUTURE IN THEIR EYES

B. Keller and D. Greene

Rev. Dr. Barbara Austin Lucas often invokes renowned sociologist Sarah Lawrence Lightfoot when she discusses the relationship educators must have with their charges. Lightfoot said, “You can’t educate anyone unless you can see your future in their eyes.”

This means there has to be some connection, some investment, some sense that your future’s success is tied inextricably to the success or failure of the person sitting before you. That is a powerful statement, but more importantly, it is a true statement. You can’t teach “at a distance”. You have to be in the trenches, with your sleeves rolled up, not standing on the sidelines pointing out every mistake or theorizing about what might work. You’ve got to be a problem solver in addition to being the problem finder.

Learned scholars and educational experts contend that a major reason for the lack of academic success of young people today is the failure of others to properly motivate them. Who motivates them to demand the latest (and most expensive) styles? Who motivates them to spend countless hours on video games and texting to girls and guys, but not even 5 minutes on studying or homework? Who motivates them to memorize and learn by rote, (an educational taboo according to the learned educational experts and scholars), the words of meaningless, often disrespectful hip hop or to get up at 5:30 in the morning to stand on line for a pair of basketball shoes that sell for $300 when they cannot find way to get to school on time for a class that starts at 8:30 in the morning?

So who motivates them in class? We expect students to be self motivated, but most need help.

Good teachers and coaches know you have to have trust your students and players. You have to believe they can do what you need done. If you trust them and believe in them, there is nothing they will not do for you. If you don’t trust them and believe in them, you won’t get anything from them at all. If you don’t, they will give you nothing. The New York City DOE and many of the other national reformers do not value, trust, respect or believe in either the teachers or the students who attend their classes.

When reformers say they want to successfully reform education,they really mean teachers and students. But you can’t accomplish that unless unless you THE FUTURE IN THEIR EYES | DCGEducator: Doing The Right Thing:

Who Might Be a Clinton Education Secretary? - Politics K-12 - Education Week

Who Might Be a Clinton Education Secretary? - Politics K-12 - Education Week:

Who Might Be a Clinton Education Secretary?

 Now that Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, and her running mate, Tim Kaine are officially hitting the campaign trail, it's time to start speculating: Who might her education secretary be if she wins the White House?

It's not too early to ask the question. After all, at this point in 2008, a lot of folks were pretty sure that President Barack Obama was going to choose Arne Duncan, his basketball buddy and the superintendent of Chicago public schools, to run the U.S. Department of Education.

But Democrats we spoke to were far less confident this time around about who is on Clinton's short list, or if she even has one yet. However, because this kind of thing is fun, we couldn't help asking some Democrats to give us their very best speculation, anonymously of course.

What did they say? First, some big caveats: It's worth noting right here at the top that none of the Democrats we spoke to are Hillary Clinton, or anyone employed by her campaign. So we would not suggest you bet the bank—or even your latte money—on any of these names. We will probably revisit this question at least one more time before a potential Clinton transition kicks into high gear.

Caveats in place ... let the guessing begin!

Higher Education Focus

Democrats say that, if they take the White House, there's a good chance the next education secretary may buck a long-standing tradition and be more familiar with the higher education world than K-12.

After all, college access—not K-12 policy—has dominated the Democratic presidential primary. The Higher Education Act needs to be reauthorized, while the Every Student Succeeds Act is a done deal.

Oh, and ESSA sought to cut the next education secretary off at the knees on K-12, but the feds still have plenty of running room on college access. 

Bonus: Picking someone from the higher ed world means not having to choose between the so-called two wings of the Democratic party on education (which many folks think of as the teachers' unions vs. the education redesign community.)

So who might a higher ed-friendly education secretary be under a President Hillary Clinton? Folks have thrown out a bunch of names. Among them: Janet Napolitano, the president of the University of California system (and a former Secretary of Homeland Security, and governor of Arizona); Nancy Zimpher, the New York state higher education system system chancellor; Eduardo Padron, the president of Miami Dade Community College; and Freeman A. Hrabowski III, the president of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, who chaired President Barack Obama's Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for African Americans. (Hrabowski's name showed up on this Whiteboard advisors survey, which we'll discuss in more detail below.) But, basically, name a college president who has worked to boost college access outcomes for historically overlooked groups, and chances are, they're on somebody's speculation list, or wish list. 

Governors

Another strong possibility: Clinton picks a governor, or a former governor. After all, it worked really well for her husband, whose choice, former South Carolina Gov. Richard W. Riley, had generally good relationships with folks from across the education spectrum.

A good list of governors to consider first are the ones that spoke at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia last month. (Speaking at a convention is a pretty good indication of close ties to a campaign). Former governors might be especially good bets, because they wouldn't have to leave their current gigs. Three former governors spoke at the DNC: former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley.

O'Malley ran against Clinton in the primary, which probably doesn't help his case. Dean though, ran against the No Child Left Behind Act and on his record of expanding early education as a presidential candidate in the 2004 cycle—two pretty good positions to take these days. And Granholm worked toward "free college"—a goal Clinton has embraced—as Michigan's governor.

There could be some current governors in the mix too, including Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, who also spoke at the convention. And other observers—including Morning Education—have suggested Delaware Gov. Jack Markell, who helped propel his state to a winning Race to the Top bid. (Does Markell's work on Race to the Top help, or make him too "reformey" for the education organization crowd?)

K-12 People

So, say it's not a higher ed person, and not a governor. Who in the K-12 world could it be?

A lot of folks are betting that Clinton would want to pick someone of color, a woman, or both, in part to help reach out to historically disadvantaged groups of kids and their communities. (U.S. Secretary of Education John King, who is black and Puerto Rican, has spoken a lot about his own background,  as a child who was orphaned early, in explaining department policies aimed at educational equity.)

One K-12 leader to keep your eye on: Montana Superintendent Denise Juneau, a former teacher, who has earned respect for her efforts to serve rural students, including on Native American reservations. She'd bring a range of perspectives to the job as the first openly gay secretary of education and the first American Indian. 

Even though she's a Democrat, Juneau wasn't afraid to buck the Obama administration on K-12 policy, which might actually be a selling point for her with educators who are worry Clinton will be too much like Obama on education policy. Under Juneau, Montana didn't apply for a waiver from provisions of the NCLB law, in part because leaders there weren't thrilled with the idea of tying teacher evaluations to tests. And when the department called for states to write plans for improving equitable teacher distribution, Juneau noted in her initial application that states have limited say in the matter, since personnel decisions tend to be local. 

To be sure, Juneau is currently in the market for another job: She's running for Montana's sole congressional seat. But the race is firmly in the "Likely Republican" column, according to this respected ranking of races, so she may end up being available for the education secretary gig. Bonus: Her congressional run may mean that Democrats will owe her for making Montana's House race even a teensy bit competitive. 

Another suggestion: Kaya Henderson, who recently stepped down as  chancellor of the District of Columbia's public schools. She helped carry forward an agenda started by her controversial predecessor, Michelle Rhee, including performance pay, school closures, and nurturing the city's charter sector. But she did it while maintaining good relations with the community and boosting student outcomes. Unions may not be super-enthused with her as a pick, though, given her connection to Rhee. And their support has been really key for Clinton. 

Of course, there's always the possibility Clinton would keep King on. He's gotten great reviews from the education redesign wing of the party, but he's also made waves with funding regulations for ESSA, which could make that retaining him tougher. 

And earlier this year, two names that came up on a Whiteboard Advisors monthly survey, which often makes smart predictions: Linda Darling-Hammond, a noted researcher who recently left Stanford University, and Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers. Some folks are putting their money on one of them, and they could right.  

My own guess, though, for what it's worth? Probably not either of those two. Darling-Hammond, who has done deep thinking about the kind of broad-based accountability systems many states are seeking to create under ESSA, recently started her own think tank. She seems more apt to be tapped for another top, more policy-oriented job at the department, or, even more likely, to continue to be a key outside influencer, perhaps with even more sway, depending on the policy direction Clinton were to take.

I asked Weingarten about the education secretary gig way back in . And she made it very clear she likes her current job. But that doesn't mean she wouldn't have a voice in policymaking—Clinton has already promised both national teachers' unions a seat at the table, and Weingarten and Clinton have a personal relationship of their own. 

Why didn't we do this with Clinton's GOP opponent, Donald Trump? We will give it a shot, at some point. But right now, given that Trump's education policy is kind of nebulous it's been hard for folks usually in the know to hazard a guess beyond Dr. Ben Carson, who was one of Trump's primary opponents. The Republican nominee said during a debate that he looks to Carson for advice on K-12 issues.

Who else might be good for Trump? And who did we miss for Clinton? There are probably a lot of potential secretaries whose names weren't in this post. Email us at aklein@epe.org oraujifusa@epe.org and tell us whose name should be in the mix. 

Photo Credit: Denna Del Ciello for Education Week (top two), Associated Press.

---

Don't miss another Politics K-12 post. Sign up here to get news alerts in your email inbox.

Follow us on Twitter at @PoliticsK12. Who Might Be a Clinton Education Secretary? - Politics K-12 - Education Week:

Failing Still to Address Poverty Directly: Growth Mindset as Deficit Ideology | the becoming radical

Failing Still to Address Poverty Directly: Growth Mindset as Deficit Ideology | the becoming radical:

Failing Still to Address Poverty Directly: Growth Mindset as Deficit Ideology

Reporting in Education Week, Evie Blad explains:

Having a growth mindset may help buffer students from low-income families from the effects of poverty on academic achievement, researchers found in a first-of-its kind, large-scale study of 168,000 10th grade students in Chile.

But poor students in the study were also less likely to have a growth mindset than their higher-income peers, researchers found.

Similar to the popularity of “grit” and “no excuses” policies, growth mindset has gained a great deal of momentum as a school-based inoculation for the negative impact of poverty on children.

The binaries of growth and fixed mindsets are often grounded in the work of Carol Dwek, and others, who defines each as follows:

According to Dweck, “In a fixed mindset, people believe their basic qualities, like their intelligence or talent, are simply fixed traits. They spend their time documenting their intelligence or talent instead of developing them. They also believe that talent alone creates success—without effort.”…

Alternatively, “In a growth mindset, people believe that their most basic abilities can be developed through dedication and hard work—brains and talent are just the starting point. This view creates a love of learning and a resilience that is essential for great accomplishment,” writes Dweck.

However, the media, the public, and educators often fail to acknowledge two significant flaws with growth mindset: (1) the essential deficit ideology that focuses all of the blame (and thus the need for a cure) in the individual child, and (2) the larger failure to see the need to address poverty directly instead of indirectlythrough formal education.

First, then, let’s consider deficit ideology [1], as examined by Paul Gorksi:

Briefly, deficit ideology is a worldview that explains and justifies outcome inequalities— standardized test scores or levels of educational attainment, for example—by pointing to supposed deficiencies within disenfranchised individuals and communities (Brandon, 2003; Valencia, 1997a; Weiner, 2003; Yosso, 2005). Simultaneously, and of equal importance, deficit ideology discounts sociopolitical context, such as the systemic conditions (racism, economic injustice, and so on) that grant some people greater social, political, and economic access, such as that to high-quality schooling, than others (Brandon, 2003; Dudley-Marling, 2007; Gorski, 2008a; Hamovitch, 1996). The function of deficit ideology, as I will describe in greater detail later, is to justify existing social conditions by identifying the problem of inequality as located within, rather than as pressing upon, disenfranchised communities so that efforts to redress inequalities focus on “fixing” disenfranchised people rather than the conditions which disenfranchise them (Weiner, 2003; Yosso, 2005).

Any person’s success or failure can be traced to a number of factors, but in the U.S., our blind faith in the Failing Still to Address Poverty Directly: Growth Mindset as Deficit Ideology | the becoming radical:

Say "thank you" to the NAACP (and more) - Network For Public Education

Say "thank you" to the NAACP (and more) - Network For Public Education:

Say “thank you” to the NAACP (and more)

The delegates to the NAACP take strong a stand to protect communities from charter abuses and to put a moratorium on charter growth.

 During the annual NAACP convention in Cincinnati, the delegates stood up to the charter school lobby and the billionaires that support it. Delegates passed a resolution to put a moratorium on the expansion of privately managed charter schools.  They also passed resolutions against the excessive disciplinary practices, waste, fraud, and sorting and selecting of students in admissions associated with charters.

Read why it occurred, and why it is important here.

As expected, corporate reformers were outraged, with some individuals attacking the organization ‘as out of touch’ and worse. No doubt the leadership will be under enormous pressure to undo the resolutions in the fall.

Show your support for the NAACP!

Call (410) 580-5777 and say “thank you” for the moratorium.

Send a “thank you” email. We make it easy. Just click here.

Post the link below to the “thank you” letter on social media.

https://actionnetwork.org/letters/say-thank-you-to-the-naacp?clear_id=true

You can become a member of the NAACP and/or sign up for the NAACP newsletters here.

Text me…. maybe?

During our recent survey, over one third of respondents said that they would like to receive text alerts from NPE. Texts would be sent to alert members of actions, events and important information, only.  We will not share your cell phone number with anyone, nor will we call you.

Sign up here. Be sure to enter your name and cell phone number.

AARP turns away from ALEC

The AARP cut off its ties with ALEC due to protests and calls from advocates like you. NPE supporters were a part of that effort. You can read that story here. When you take the few moments to participate in an action alert, you can make a difference.

Good news from TennesseeSay "thank you" to the NAACP (and more) - Network For Public Education: 

The High-Stakes Testing Scam Revealed At Last – Exceptional Delaware

The High-Stakes Testing Scam Revealed At Last – Exceptional Delaware:

The High-Stakes Testing Scam Revealed At Last

What if I told you the high-stakes testing American children have been going through is a complete and utter scam? Many would say they already knew that, but would they be able to tell you how they knew this? Probably not. At least not at the levels our state Department of Educations developed with the many testing companies such as American Institutes for Research, Pearson, and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium.

The Delaware Department of Education put out a Request for Proposal for our new Social Studies State Assessment. The actual RFP is a treasure trove of testing information. For starters, the Delaware Department of Education is flat-out lying in their RFP. Last year, the Delaware DOE put out their “Delaware School Success Framework”. This is essentially Delaware’s report card for schools. Included in this horrible accountability testing machine are participation rate penalties for schools that go under 95% participation rate on the state assessments. The Delaware DOE and State Board of Education tried passing an updated version of Delaware’s regulation regarding school accountability, but many parents and education organizations balked and successfully blocked the State Board of Education from passing it. As a result, even though the Delaware State Board of Education eventually passed the Delaware School Success Framework, there is no regulatory power behind it. But that didn’t stop the Delaware DOE from making it look like it is perfectly legal in their RFP for the new Social Studies state assessment.

One of the first things the DOE calls for from a potential vendor for this test is understanding of and the ability to put the Rasch Scoring Methodology into the test. What is this Rasch the Delaware DOE has? It is an all-consuming itch to trip up kids and schools and parents. This is part of the underbelly of state testing that no one talks about. The website appropriately titled Rasch-Analysis.com explains the Rasch Scoring Methodology as this:

What is a Rasch Analysis? The Rasch model, where the total score summarizes completely a person’s standing on a variable, arises from a more fundamental requirement: that the comparison of two people is independent of which items may be used within the set of items assessing the same variable. Thus the Rasch model is taken as a criterion for the structure of the responses, rather than a mere statistical description of the responses. For example, the comparison of the performance of two students’ work marked by different graders should be independent of the graders.

In this case it is considered that the researcher is deliberately developing items The High-Stakes Testing Scam Revealed At Last – Exceptional Delaware:

We Are All Chicago Schools – More Layoffs, Less Help for Other People’s Kids | gadflyonthewallblog

We Are All Chicago Schools – More Layoffs, Less Help for Other People’s Kids | gadflyonthewallblog:

We Are All Chicago Schools – More Layoffs, Less Help for Other People’s Kids

“Fuck those kids.”

Mayor Rahm Emanuel couldn’t have been clearer if he’d said the above.

Chicago Schools Chief Executive Forrest Claypool couldn’t have made his priorities clearer if he’d given Chicago’s parents the bird and told them to “Kiss my ass.”

The Chicago Board of Education – made up of members all of whom are appointed by the mayor – decided to layoff 1,000 teachers and staff at the city’s public schools just a month before opening day. Sure, some may keep their jobs through reassignment, but hundreds will be unemployed.

This after a recent history of closing more than 80 schools and slashing thousands of jobs. Just last February, the district laid off 62 employees, including 17 teachers. In January, it laid off 227 staff members.

This begs several questions: How many teachers and support staff can Chicago Public Schools afford to lose? What exactly is this doing to its students? How is it affecting 

 

A Tale Of Two (Or Three) Davids: The ECOT Goliath And Ohio’s Charter School Debacle

A Tale Of Two (Or Three) Davids:  The ECOT Goliath And Ohio’s Charter School Debacle:

A Tale Of Two (Or Three) Davids:  The ECOT Goliath And Ohio’s Charter School Debacle

Drip, drip, drip.

The steady stream of critical stories about the charter school Goliath named ECOT now is approaching a critical level, ready to create a flood in the GOP Statehouse and in the offices of the mega-giant’s lobbyists well before this year’s elections. If a Richard Nixon-type was somehow in command at this stage of the game and dealing with the proliferating ECOT mess, he would have called in the Plumbers and the renowned Haldeman and Erlichman firm to deal with the debacle.

No, the ECOT flood is not attributable to global warming, which Republicans don’t believe in, but nevertheless the water level around the Goliath is rising. Rapidly.

But wait. If there is a Goliath-type creature on the loose, doesn’t John Q. Public need a David to slay this foraging creature that feasts on more than $100 million from the state treasury, in addition to the other low-performing, politically connected charters that siphon off additional hundreds of millions annually in scarce public funds?

Interestingly enough, Ohio has not one but two public servants named David who could have made a difference in wounding the menacing ECOT, exposing other low-performing charters and their sponsors (or is the better word choice enablers) and otherwise protecting citizens from further harm.

It’s been a year since we saw the first David, Hansen by surname, who directed the Ohio Department of Education’s charter school office, leave under fire for data rigging. In administering his department, Hansen was responsible for generating the legally required sponsor evaluation system, but neglected to include all of the performance data of certain failing charter schools.

Even the right-wing Breitbart blog had some stinging observations about Hansen and his conflicted background as the head of the Office of Quality School Choice:

“Hansen, whose position was created in 2013 by (Gov. John) Kasich to oversee the expansion of charter schools in the state, told the Associated Press that the state law pertaining to the evaluation of Ohio’s charter schools was “not a model of clarity.”

 The controversy came at a time when Ohio’s charter schools were under significant scrutiny, with problems of attendance and accountability surrounding the schools that were billed as an alternative to public schools.

 And Hansen himself was not new to data rigging.

As Ohio Political blog Plunderbund reported, in 2009 — while Hansen was president of the Buckeye Institute — he was also caught manipulating data regarding Ohio’s charter schools, yet was still chosen to be school choice director in 2013. Many of the schools involved were owned and operated by for-profit company White Hat Management, which itself is owned by David Brennan, a big donor — through his family’s foundation — to the Buckeye Institute, to the Republican Party, and to Kasich’s campaign in Ohio.”

So the first David failed to protect the public from charter Goliaths and was apparently conflicted by his relationship to long-time benefactors in the charter industry. In addition, there is the matter of his wife, Beth Hansen, who served as Kasich’s chief-of-staff and campaign manager when the governor thought he could be a viable candidate for president. Could David Hansen’s problems be A Tale Of Two (Or Three) Davids:  The ECOT Goliath And Ohio’s Charter School Debacle:

 

It’s back to court for charter schools in Washington State | Seattle Education

It’s back to court for charter schools in Washington State | Seattle Education:

It’s back to court for charter schools in Washington State

The Washington State Supreme Court deemed charter schools unconstitutional in 2015 and yet the charter schools remained open on the promise of private money supporting them. The $14M never materialized and instead the State Superintendent funneled money surreptitiously into charter schools by way of a small school district in a corner of the state, the Mary Walker School District.

In the meantime, legislators who ignored the consequence of not adequately funding public schools forged ahead with great hubris in what they thought would be a way around using public funds to keep the charter schools open by using state lottery money. This was called the Charter School Act.

There are many holes in the new law and recent developments are pertinent to the new lawsuit.

The plaintiffs are:

League of Women Voters, Washington State

El Centro de la Raza

Washington Education Association

Washington Association of School Administrators

International Union of Operating Engineers 609

Aerospace Machinists Union DL 751

Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO

United Food and Commercial Workers Union

Washington Federation of State Employees

American Federation of Teachers, Washington

Teamsters Joint Council No. 28

Pat Braman, on her own behalf

Donna Boyer, on her own behalf and on behalf of her minor children

Sarah Lucas, on her own behalf and on behalf of her minor children

The defendant is:

State of Washington

These are the basics:

After the Charter School Act was approved by the state legislators, it went to Governor Inslee’s desk to be signed. The Governor did not sign the bill but allowed it to pass into law. This is rare and the last time it happened was in 1981.

The Charter School Act went into effect on April 3, 2016.

On May 27, 2016, the Plaintiff’s made a demand that the State Attorney General Bob Ferguson, who is considering a run for Governor, investigate the constitutionality of the It’s back to court for charter schools in Washington State | Seattle Education: