Unions, the NAACP, Race, and the Courts

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/22/nyregion/ruling-against-teachers-union-on-school-closing-plan.html?_r=1&ref=education

In New York City, the district is attempting to close 22 low performing schools and replace them with 15 charter schools (cue debate about charter schools). In response, the United Federation of Teachers filed a lawsuit to prevent the district from moving forward with their plan (cue debate about teachers unions). The UFT claims that the district acted improperly when closing the schools and discriminated against traditional public schools by giving charters more time in the common areas (e.g., cafeteria, gymnasium) than traditional schools. 

This past Thursday, Justice Paul G. Feinman of New York's Supreme Court ruled against the union, declaring that the suit did not meet the standard required for the court to immediately stop the city from closing the schools. Further, he said that the union failed to prove that the city had acted improperly with the closings. However, the suit was not dismissed outright, and the union said they planned on continuing the legal battle.

Complicating the conflict, the preeminent African-American civil rights organization, the N.A.A.C.P., joined the lawsuit on the side of the....teacher's union. They, too, allege that the district unfairly discriminated against the traditional public schools. This lawsuit rose to national attention because of the N.A.A.C.P.'s involvement and their stance against charter schools because charters serve mostly black students. Their involvement got so contentious that one charter school mother accused the leader of the N.A.A.C.P.'s New York branch of "doing the business of slave masters."

This lawsuit raised a number of noteworthy discussion points. First, it is significant that New York City decided to replace their 22 failing schools with 15 charter schools. It appears as though NYC has unabashedly embraced charter schools as a better solution than traditional public schools. Next, it's interesting that the UFT opposed such a move to such an extent as to file a lawsuit and take it all the way to state supreme court-- though not surprising, considering how charters generally want more freedom from union regulations (a la KIPP's skirmish with the AFT here in Baltimore?).

Most interestingly, though, is the N.A.A.C.P.'s involvement and it's perception in the community. What made the N.A.A.C.P. take the side of the teacher's union against charter schools? The article did not say. What's the N.A.A.C.P.'s interest in supporting traditional public schools over the opening of more charter schools? One could only guess, but I speculate that there is a relatively high number of African-Americans in the teacher's union who are politically active. Moreover, why are charter schools associated with necessarily helping African-American students, and traditional public schools with hurting such students, in the eyes of some parents? And to such a strong extent as to make one mother associate any organization supporting traditional public schools as a "slave master." To extend this comparison, that mother, and surely others who share her views, must view the district as a force who purposefully attempts to hurt black students by trying to prevent more charter schools from opening.

Though charter schools have not been proven to conclusively raise student achievement, the fact that some parents appear to swear by them while strongly and actively opposing all groups standing in charters' way makes one wonder about charters' effectiveness and the regulations that keep them from being more commonplace.