Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents, speakers press board to reject outside privatizers invited to policy committee
Summary
Public commenters told trustees the policy committee’s recent guests have histories tied to charter expansion and school closures; speakers urged cancellation of outside legal/consulting contracts and a return to transparent, community-led policymaking.
Several public speakers used the hearing-of-the-public time on Feb. 23 to press the Cincinnati Public Schools board to withdraw support for outside advisers they described as “privatizers” and to stop using single test scores in report-card decisions.
Michelle Dunn and Brad Smith criticized the policy committee for bringing presenters they said were associated with school-privatization strategies in other cities. Dunn said the committee’s proposal to incorporate “a single point in time standardized test score” on district report cards was celebrated by a national conservative think tank and risked enabling school closures in the name of accountability. Smith named two presenters he identified as former operators of charter models whose record he said showed low proficiency and graduation rates in other cities.
President Sers, who spoke outside the two-minute public-comment time constraint, urged the board to defend democratically governed public schools, maintain local control, protect educators’ professional voice and prevent policy that would accelerate charter expansion in the district.
Board members did not take a formal motion that night to ban any group, but several trustees said the policy committee had promised follow-up and that policy committee leadership would address the concerns. The policy-chair confirmed that the committee was continuing to review model policies and invited additional model documents for consideration; committee members asked the public to submit alternative policy templates if they wanted a different approach.
What trustees asked for: the board asked policy staff to continue review work, seek additional model policies from other organizations (OSBA and others were noted), and provide a public record of committee discussions so community members could compare alternatives.
Reporting note: the public speakers referenced well-known debates about whether certain model policies and consultants promote school closures and charter expansion; those claims are matters of public policy debate and remain disputed within the boardroom and among community groups.
