who s who in a growing education reform movement
who s who in a growing education reform movement
It s no coincidence that as reform organizations proliferate the movement accelerates: the mission of such organizations is to build and mobilize a constituency for change. 3
History of the Advocacy Sector A CIVIC VOICE IN THE STATEHOUSE A Nation At Risk richard s founders recognized that a constituency made up of leading citizens was essential to sustain any commitment to reform over time. 4
THE NEXT GENERATION EMERGES A MOVEMENT TAKES HOLD They brought fresh thinking to the reform movement, adopting strategies such as voter engagement and mobilizations tactics employed by more sophisticated advocacy sectors. 5
6
In states where we are seeing the biggest wins, a coalition of groups has been a crucial factor. 7
8
Distinguishing Characteristics of Advocacy FIGURE 1 DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS OF ADVOCACY
Distinctions in Form and Function FOCUS FORM ASSETS ROLE ------ -------- ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - FIGURE 2 FORM AND FUNCTION 10
There are many strategic reasons a state s leading advocacy group will call on help from friends and allies 11
FIGURE 3 Organizations maintaining a permanent, full-time presence in a state to advance and defend reform 1 Non- partisan organizations committed to regular collaboration through the IE Network Single State Organizations State Alabama A Alabama coming soon Alaska Arizona Arkansas California EdVoice CBEE Education Trust West Arizona Stand Colorado Colorado Succeeds Colorado Stand Connecticut D.C. Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho ConnCAN DC School Reform Now Rodel Foundation of Delaware GEE Foundation for Florida s Future Illinois Advance Illinois Illinois Stand Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland richard Committee coming soon MarylandCAN Indiana Stand Louisiana Stand Massachusetts MBAE Massachusetts Stand Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York Mississippi First MinnCAN coming soon NYCAN North Carolina NC ublic School Forum coming soon CarolinaCAN North Dakota Ohio Fordham Institute Kids Ohio! Oklahoma OBEC Education Trust Midwest Oregon Chalkboard roject Oregon Stand ennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota enncan Tennessee SCORE Tennessee Stand Texas Educate Texas! TIER Texas Stand Utah Vermont Virginia Washington artnership for Learning League of Education Voters Washington Stand West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming C3s with civic or philanthropic boards Business leader boards Independent C4 voter engagement organizations RI-CAN 50CAN Education Trust Stand for Children Affiliated Branches Democrats for Education Reform StudentsFirst
FIGURE 4 Advise and assist, single or multi-issue focus 2 Commitment from policy leaders Keys coming soon staff and/or board in place but not fully engaged in the policy making process. State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut D.C. Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon ennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Education Trust Democrats for Education Reform Foundation for Excellence in Education (Excel in Ed) L / L / StudentsFirst C L / v C C V C L / / C C C L / / C L L / / C L / L / / C V C L / V C L / C L / V C / C / C C L / V C L / L / / C V C V C Excel in Ed s Race To The Top winners Chiefs for Change Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 shaded states lack full-time advocacy group L full-time contract lobbyist committed to the full policymaking cycle covering multiple issues provide policy, research, other assistance to advance one or more issues V (voice) gave testimony or other presentations to build support C provided political backing for reform candidates Notes 1. The organizations in Figure 3 are committed to multi-issue reform agendas, have in-state staff, and boards solely committed to education reform. 2. These organizations played a role in the state for the entire 2012 legislative session, moving a particular issue through testimony or supporting candidates. 13
More About This Report who s who working where? 14
Who s Who in Their Own Words 50CAN LEGAL STATUS DISTINGUISHING STRATEGIES America Succeeds LEGAL STATUS DISTINGUISHING STRATEGIES 15
ConnCAN LEGAL STATUS LEADING ISSUES Democrats for Education Reform (DFER) LEGAL STATUS DISTINGUISHING STRATEGIES 16
Education Trust: The Education Trust LEGAL STATUS DISTINGUISHING STRATEGIES LEADING ISSUES IN 2012 Foundation for Excellence in Education: Excel in Ed DISTINGUISHING STRATEGIES LEADING ISSUES 17
League of Education Voters DISTINGUISHING ISSUES DISTINGUISHING STRATEGIES The IE Network LEGAL STATUS DISTINGUISHING STRATEGIES LEADING ISSUES 18
Stand for Children LEGAL STATUS DISTINGUISHING STRATEGIES StudentsFirst LEGAL STATUS DISTINGUISHING STRATEGIES DISTINGUISHING ISSUES 19