Families who benefit from expanded school choice options – charter schools, virtual schools, vouchers, tax credit scholarships – are increasingly being portrayed as pawns in a coordinated campaign to privatize public schools. That’s especially troubling given that the voices of those families are so rarely included in the conversation.

The latest example: Statements from a movement to end high-stakes, standardized testing.

United Opt Out National, which led an effort over the weekend to “occupy” the U.S. Department of Education in Washington, D.C., says it wants to “end Wall Street Occupation of Education.” Among its goals: An end to "the use of public education funds to enact school 'choice' measures influenced and supported by the corporate agenda."

This story in The Florida Independent about the group’s efforts (a Miami-Dade teacher/parent is among the group’s leaders) focused most specifically on its concerns about for-profit charter schools. But by referencing vouchers and tax credit scholarships, the story suggested those options were also part of a plot to undermine public schools.

That kind of characterization about school choice is happening more and more as newspapers and TV stations echo the emotional story line that gets repeated the most. (more…)

Editor's note: Corporate greed! Profits! Privatization! Shout the same, alarming buzz words enough - as critics of education reform are doing - and it defines the debate. But as Doug Tuthill, a former teachers union president, argues in this post, businesses benefit more from the status quo in education than they will from expanded parental choice.

Public education would not exist without the products and services provided by for-profit corporations. Every year, for-profit corporations receive billions of tax dollars from school districts to build schools and supply them with desks, books, computers, pens, pencils, paper, calculators, buses, crayons, and power to turn on the lights. And yet school choice critics continue to assert that giving parents more schooling options is a plot by for-profit corporations to make more money.

I don’t buy it.

The profit margins of businesses providing goods and services to public education are greater under the current command-and-control system because the costs of sales and servicing contracts are lower when the customers are large, centrally controlled organizations.  My friend Jean Clements, who is the teachers union president in Hillsborough County, Florida, was the first person to explain this to me.

Four years ago, I asked Jean why her union refused to sell union memberships to private school teachers. Her answer? She would lose money. Jean said the membership revenue she would receive from teachers in small, non-district schools would not cover the costs of negotiating and servicing their collective bargaining contracts.

Large school districts allow teachers unions to spread their costs across a large number of members, which is why large districts are their preferred market. It’s also why unions are so opposed to public education occurring in schools not owned and managed by school districts.

I suspect the same economy-of-scale issues influencing Jean’s business decisions are also relevant for Dell, Pearson and Apple. (more…)