Scott Goldstein: Don’t be confused — corporate education reform isn’t ‘progressive’

With an unprecedented amount of money being poured into DC’s upcoming State Board of Education elections, it’s a good time to reflect on the competing forces working to shape education policy in DC more than a decade into controversial reform efforts. As has been reported, the vast majority of this money is coming from a group known as Democrats for Education Reform. DFER has raised four times more money than any other independent expenditure committee in DC has — far eclipsing Realtors, unions and many others. When groups such as these spend on local elections, they’re looking for a return on investment. In other words, they expect to profit from their donations. But our schools are for our children, not for profit, so we can’t allow DC voters to be confused. The word “Democrat” doesn’t make this brand of reform progressive or equitable.

The version of educational “equity” promoted by some reformers is centered on choice — that every parent should be able to choose what’s right for their child. That’s a compelling political message, but let’s not confuse it for a progressive one. When national Republicans argue for corporate autonomy free of environmental, labor or other regulations, Democrats and certainly progressives stand up against it because our “personal” decisions have a broader social impact. Progressives don’t think employers should be able to decide who gets birth control coverage and who does not. That’s choice, but it’s not responsible choice. And Democrats have spent the better part of the last decade arguing that mandating health coverage is a good thing — because although healthy individuals might love the choice to go without insurance, the rest of us pay a price for that.

Likewise, when individual choice in education runs amok, we have predictable consequences: increased segregation in our schools, a lack of accountability (see last year’s graduation and attendance scandals), and a lack of transparency. As it stands, the city’s public charter schools aren’t subject to the Open Meetings Act or the Freedom of Information Act — which means that fully half the city’s public schools are able to spend money out of the public’s view, while often paying teachers considerably less than the DC Public Schools system does.

This doesn’t mean I’m against charter schools; rather, unlike some diehard backers who bristle at any controls, I see a need for nuance in an incredibly complex area of education policy. I believe strongly that charters play a critical role in serving populations that are not served by the traditional system through offerings such as adult education centers. We do have to rethink school models, and charters have played a welcome role in pushing innovation forward. I also believe they’ve moved our system toward greater school-level autonomy, which has definite upsides: Our schools must be free to experiment to solve long-stagnant achievement and opportunity gaps. There is common ground to be found here. But when we begin to argue that transparency hurts innovation or that accountability efforts damage progress, then we adopt the arguments used by conservatives to advance goals they cast as “progressive.”

Equity is precisely what we need in our education system, but that work starts with ensuring that all families, no matter where in DC they live, have access to a high-quality neighborhood school. Charter choices can build on top of that, but they should not replace it. Equity starts with a serious commitment to diversity and desegregation in our schools. It starts with a serious commitment to restorative, not punitive, discipline. These reformers and their critics don’t disagree about some priority issues, but you simply cannot criticize President Donald Trump out of one side of your mouth and simultaneously espouse Republican talking points that undermine public institutions on the other — all while calling yourself “Democrats” when it comes to local politics. Here’s the truth: In DC you have to be a Democrat (or a progressive independent) to win elected office, so virtually all politicians — left, right or center — adopt the label. But the “D” next to your name doesn’t make it so; your values and your actions do.

Progressives believe in transparency. We believe in diversity. Perhaps more than anything else, we believe in protecting our most vulnerable populations against the influence of big corporate power and corruption. Groups like Democrats for Education Reform are the very representation of that amassed power working against the interests of ordinary citizens who advocate for better schools. If you believe in progressive values, you cannot isolate your values to national politics and simultaneously support a war on progressive values within the eight wards we call home.

Democrats for Education Reform has endorsed a slate of candidates; but so have true progressive allies like Jews United for Justice, DC for Democracy, the Washington Teachers’ Union, Democracy for America. Voters would do well to do some research before heading to the polls and think about whether your local politicians really align with your progressive values, regardless of the letter next to their names. The school board races on the Nov. 6 ballot — along with the upcoming nomination of a new DC Public Schools chancellor — are a great place to start defending a true progressive agenda for our city. It’s time to vote.

Scott Goldstein, a Ward 4 resident, is executive director of the DC teacher leadership organization EmpowerEd and a former 10-year teacher at public charter and traditional public schools. The views expressed are his own and not those of EmpowerEd.