Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
 V93 N6 kappanmagazine.org 51 Thinkstock/Digital Vision
A
 
legislative contagion seemed to sweep across the Midwest during the early monthso 2011. First, Wisconsin legislators wanted to strip public employees o the rightto bargain. Then, Indiana legislators got into the act. Then, it was Ohio. In eachcase, Republican governors and Republican-controlled state legislatures had in-troduced substantially similar bills that sought sweeping changes to each state’s collectivebargaining statutes and various school unding provisions.
A smart ALECthreatens publiceducation
Coordinated efforts to introduce model legislation aimed at defundingand dismantling public schools is the signature work of this conservativeorganization.
By Julie Underwood and Julie F. Mead
JULIE UNDERWOOD
(junderwood@education.wisc.edu) is proessor and dean o the School o Education at the University o Wisconsin-Madison. She previously served as general counsel o the National School Boards Association.
JULIE F. MEAD
is pro-essor and chair o the Department o Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis at the University o Wisconsin-Madison. The viewsexpressed here are those o the authors and do not necessarily refect those o the University o Wisconsin.
Comments? Like
Kappan
at www.acebook.com/pdkintl
 
52 Kappan March 2012
agree — granting considerable power to the corpo-rate side. Elected ocials then take the model billsback to their states to introduce them as their own.Only legislators who are members may access themodel legislation (http://www.alec.org/wp-content/uploads/2011_legislative_brochure.pd). It is a very ecient mechanism or corporations to exercise po-litical power — and they have.
ALEC in Tennessee
Recent legislation in Tennessee provides a vividexample. ALEC created and provided members itsmodel Virtual Public Schools Act. Two large or-protcorporate providers o virtual education, Connections Academy and K-12 Inc., had heavy involvement withthe model bill’s creation. Mickey Revenaugh, a lob-byist or Connections Academy, was the corporatechair o ALEC’s Education Task Force and Lisa Gil-lis, with K-12 Inc., chaired its special needs educationsubcommittee that created the bill. Tennessee’s StateRep. Harry Brooks and State Sen. Dolores Gresham,both ALEC Education Task Force members, intro-duced the bill to their respective houses nearly ver-batim, even using the same title. For example, theollowing passage orms the preamble o the adoptedstatute. Underlined portions were taken directly rom ALEC’s model. WHEREAS, meeting the educational needso children in our state’s schools is o thegreatest importance to the uture welare o  Tennessee; and WHEREAS, closing the achievement gap be-tween high-perorming students, includingthe gap between minority and nonminority stu-dents and between economically disadvantagedstudents and their more advantaged peers, is asignicant and present challenge; and WHEREAS, providing a broader range o edu-cational options to parents and utilizing exist-ing resources, along with technology, may helpstudents in our state improve their academicachievement; and WHEREAS, many o our school districts cur-rently lack the capacity to provide other publicschool choices or students whose schools arelow perorming; now, thereore The purpose o this part is to provide an LEA  with an alternative choice to oer additionaleducational resources in an eort to improveacademic achievement. (Virtual Public Schools Act, 2011). The bill passed both houses on a party-line vote What was going on? How could elected ocialsin multiple states suddenly introduce essentially thesame legislation? The answer: The American Legislative ExchangeCouncil (ALEC). Its sel-described legislative ap-proach to education reads:
 Across the country or the past two decades, educationreorm eorts have popped up in legislatures at di-erent times in dierent places. As a result, teachers’unions have been playing something akin to “whack-a-mole” — you know the game — striking down asmany education reorm eorts as possible. Many times, the unions successully “whack” the “mole,”i.e., the reorm legislation. Sometimes, however, they miss. I all the moles pop up at once, there is no way the person with the mallet can get them all. Introducecomprehensive reorm packages. (Ladner, LeFevre,& Lips, 2010, p. 108)
 ALEC’s own “whack-a-mole” strategy also revealsthe group’s ultimate goal. Every gardener who hasever had to deal with a mole knows that the animalsundermine and ultimately destroy a garden. ALEC’spositions on various education issues make it clearthat the organization seeks to undermine public edu-cation by systematically deunding and ultimately destroying public education as we know it.
What is ALEC?
 Technically, ALEC (www.alec.org) is a nonprotorganization based in Washington, D.C. It describesitsel as a nonpartisan membership organization orthose who share a common belie in “limited govern-ment, ree markets, ederalism, and individual lib-erty” (www.alec.org/about-alec). More than 2,000state lawmakers pay ALEC $100 or a two-yearmembership. While listed as nonpartisan, ALEC’smembers denitely skew to the conservative end o the political spectrum. For example, o the 114 listedmembers o the group’s Education Task Force, 108are Republicans, and only six are Democrats.Corporations, oundations, and “think tanks” can join ALEC, too. They pay up to $25,000 in yearly dues and can spend more to sponsor the council’smeetings. Corporate members can also donate toeach state’s scholarship und, which reimburses leg-islators who travel to meetings. The scholarships canexceed the amount o a legislator’s dues. Corporatemembers also can pay rom $3,000 to $10,000 or aseat on a task orce. ALEC operates through nine task orces, eachcochaired by a corporate member and a legislativemember. Task orces are divided by subject and bringtogether conservative policy makers with corporateleaders to develop model legislation. In order ora proposal to become model legislation, both thepublic and private sides o the committee must
 
 V93 N6 kappanmagazine.org 53
LeFevre, & Lips, 2010, p. 82) to be carried outthrough model legislation such as AlternativeCertication Act, Great Teachers and Lead-ers Act, National Teacher Certication Fair-ness Act, Public School Union Release Time Act, School Collective Bargaining AgreementSunshine Act, and Teacher Choice Compensa-tion Act. There’s also a set o proposals (Pub-lic School Financial Transparency Act; SchoolBoard Freedom to Contract Act) that encour-age school districts to outsource their auxiliary services.
Privatize education through vouchers, char-ters, and tax incentives
(Ladner, LeFevre, &Lips, 2010, p. 87) to be carried out through modellegislation such as Foster Child ScholarshipProgram Act, Great Schools Tax Credit, Mili-tary Family Scholarship Program Act, ParentalChoice Scholarship Accountability Act, Paren-tal Choice Scholarship Program Act (means-tested eligibility), Parental Choice ScholarshipProgram Act (universal eligibility), ParentalChoice Scholarship Program Act (universaleligibility, means-tested scholarship amount),Parental Choice Scholarship Tax Credit Ac-countability Act, Education Enterprise Zone Act, Smart Start Scholarship Program, SpecialNeeds Scholarship Program Act, Family Educa-tion Savings Account Act, Parental Rights Act,Resolution Supporting Private Scholarship TaxCredits, Autism Scholarship Program Act, andFamily Education Tax Credit Program Act.
Increase student testing and reporting 
(Lad-ner, LeFevre, & Lips, 2010, p. 93) to be carriedout through model legislation such as Resolu-tion Supporting the Principles o No Child LetBehind Act, Student Right to Learn Act, Educa-tion Accountability Act, Longitudinal StudentGrowth Act, One to One Reading Improvement Act, and Resolution on Nonveried ScienceCurriculum Funding.
Reduce the inuence of or eliminate localschool districts and school boards
(Ladner,LeFevre, & Lips, 2010, p. 96) to be carriedout through model legislation such as CharterSchools Act, Innovation Schools and SchoolDistricts Act, Open Enrollment Act, VirtualPublic Schools Act, and Next Generation Char-ter Schools Act.
ALEC’s special interest in privatization
 While ALEC’s orays into education policy arebroad, privatization o public education has beena long-standing ALEC objective. As early as 1985,on June 16, 2011. Shortly thereater, K-12 Inc. —one o the creators o the model legislation — won ano-bid contract rom Union County School Districtto create the Tennessee Virtual Academy and will re-ceive about $5,300 per student rom the state or the2011-12 school year (Humphrey, 2011). Connec-tions Academy does not yet oer a virtual school in Tennessee, but its web site reports that it “is actively  working with parent groups, education ocials, andothers to launch a school in this state.”The
Chattanooga Times Free Press 
(Sept. 2, 2011)reported that about 2,000 students applied or en-rollment in the Tennessee Virtual Academy or all2011. Recent reports raise concerns that the pro-gram’s popularity with home schoolers may “draintaxpayer unds” while enriching the corporation ac-tively and aggressively recruiting students to enroll(Locker, 2011). Locker also reports that “K-12 Inc.compensated its CEO more than $2.6 million last year, its chie nancial ocer more than $1.7 million,and other top executives several hundred thousanddollars each, according to its latest annual report toshareholders.”
ALEC on education
 ALEC’s success in Tennessee is by no means itsonly incursion into state education policy. ALEC’sinterest in education is ambitious and multiaceted,and includes promoting dozens o model acts toits legislative members (Ladner, LeFevre, & Lips,2010). Proposed bills seek to infuence teacher cer-tication, teacher evaluation, collective bargaining,curriculum, unding, special education, student as-sessment, and numerous other education and edu-cation-related issues. Common throughout the billsare proposals to decrease local control o schools by democratically elected school boards while increas-ing access to all acets o education by private enti-ties and corporations. ALEC’s outlined agenda is to:
Introduce market factors into schools, par-ticularly the teaching profession 
(Ladner,
Common throughout the bills are proposalsto decrease local control of schools bydemocratically elected school boards whileincreasing access to all facets of educationto private entities and corporations.
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.
    • Notes
    Load more