by Thomas W. Carroll

The United Federation of Teacher’s Leo Casey – in two recent blog entries on its edwize.org blog (The Charter Challenge and We Were Born – It Just Wasn’t Yesterday) – tackles the subject of charter schools and what he perceives as “right wing” influence in its ranks.

Leo, although feverish at times, is a nice guy, so I thought I would give his arguments serious thought and offer my response.  Peter Murphy of the New York Charter Schools Association responds elsewhere (Living in Make-Believe – and Malice)

First, in Leo’s two pieces, the “dog that doesn’t bark” is perhaps the most interesting feature.  Leo leaves out that NYSUT and the UFT supported a $50 million cut in expected charter-school funding last year through what was called a “funding freeze.”  This is the only cut in school funding the teachers unions have ever supported, and was an interesting move considering Leo’s stated desire to “organize the unorganized charter school teaching force.”  Some teachers might wonder why they should pay dues to a union that is trying to cut their funding.

While Leo urges charter schools to serve a broader cross-section of students, he leaves out that NYSUT this year blocked giving charter schools the ability to contract with BOCES to provide special-education services, as districts currently are allowed.  No mention either that NYSUT – at this very moment — is attempting to stop a lift in the cap on charter schools (the cap of 200 schools will soon be exhausted) and put in place “hard caps” that limit the number of parents who may choose charter schools in any specific community.

This anti-charter activity runs counter to the teachers unions’ efforts to be viewed as a positive friend of charter schools.

Second, Leo correctly notes “charter schools have become an increasingly important and permanent fixture of American education.”  The UFT is in the vanguard among unions in recognizing this obvious fact.  I am glad we are no longer arguing over this.

Third, Leo overstates his case when he rails about the alleged “right wing” dominance of charter schools.  Most charter schools’ trustees, principals, and faculty members are not remotely conservative or “right wing” and most are likely Democrats or Independents.  Charter-school parents are mostly African-American, Latino, and economically disadvantaged – also not voting blocs normally associated with right-wing politics.  So, Leo’s “right wing” description falls flat.  Now, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a conservative here or there, but, hey, they are people, too – even if Leo finds them distasteful.

Fourth, Leo only applies the “progressive” label to Green Dot charter schools (which in New York only runs UFT-organized schools), teacher-led cooperatives, and “a growing number of unionized charter schools.”  Now, while Leo uses the phrase “right wing” too broadly, he is much too miserly when dispensing the tag “progressive.”  Isn’t it interesting that one needs to be unionized or union friendly to be considered progressive?  I never realized that the terms were synonymous.

Fifth, Leo refers to me as a “charter school luminary.”  Wow, my mom would be proud – although perhaps Leo was being sarcastic.

Lastly, I think Leo’s attempt to tar and feather people who disagree with the UFT on some issues goes a bit overboard, and distracts from what’s really important.

What we all should focus on is finding ways to create enough good schools – district, charter, or private – so that every child in New York State is attending a school of which we all would be proud.  Right now, that isn’t the case.  And, that problem is a much bigger concern, I would argue, than seeing who fits Leo’s litmus test of being a UFT-approved “progressive.”