School choice is one of those policy ideas that just never goes away, and it probably never will. For some people, it is an irresistible way to unlock all those public tax dollars and turn them into private profits. For some people, it's a way to make sure their children don't have to go to school with Those People. And some people have a sincere belief that competition really does create greatness.
I'll save my disagreements with those folks for another day. Because there is a huge fault with school choice that we discuss way too rarely.
School choice disenfranchises the public.
Our public school system is set up to serve the public. All the public. It is not set up to serve just parents or just students. Everybody benefits from a system of roadways in this country-- even people who don't drive cars-- because it allows a hundred other systems of service and commerce to function well.
School choice treats parents as if they are the only stakeholders in education. They are not. We all depend on a society in which people are reasonably well-educated. We all depend on a society in which people have a reasonably good understanding of how things work. We all depends on a society in which people have the basic abilities needed to take care of themselves and the people around them. We all depend on dealing with doctors and plumbers and lawyers and clerks and neighbors who can read and write and figure. We hope for fellow voters who will not elect a politician because he promises to convert straw to gold by using cold fusion. We all depend on a society that can move forward because it is composed of people who Know Things.
This is why everybody votes for school board members-- not just the people who have kids in school. Everybody has a stake in the students who come out of schools, and every taxpayer has a stake in the money spent on schools.
A choice system says no-- you only get a say in how education works if you have a kid.
Reformsters like to make the argument that schools need to be more responsive to what employers and businesses are looking for in graduates, but in a choice system, these folks have even less say. Charter operators and other choice beneficiaries don't have to listen to anybody except the people who affect market share.
This has the potential of serious long-term harm for the choice schools themselves. Most notably, disenfranchising the public literally moves them from the list of stakeholders. It will vastly increase the list of people saying, "Well, I don't have a kid in school. Why do I have to pay taxes, anyway?" The day those people make a large enough group is the day that choice school operators suddenly find the pie shrinking as voters decide they're tired of paying for a system they've been cut out of.
But the biggest damage will come to communities themselves, because choice and charter systems are based on business principles, not education or community principles. And the most basic business principle is, when you aren't making money, close up shop.
There has been a lot of shock and surprise around the country as charter schools just close their doors. People tend to assume that part of being a school means staying open in your community, and they keep being surprised to discover that a charter school is not a school-- it's a business. Charter and choice systems don't just disenfranchise the public in saying how schools in the community should work-- charter and choice systems also take away any choice about whether there are schools in the community or not.
A public school system cannot suddenly just close its doors, even just a few of its doors, without answering to the taxpaying and voting public. But when it comes to decisions about whether to stay open or not, even the parents themselves are disenfranchised. A choice system in your community doesn't only mean that the public has lost the ability to decide what kind of schools they'll have today. A choice system also means they've lost control over how much longer they'll have any schools at all.
That's the trade. A few people get to have a choice about schools today, and in return, nobody gets a choice about what schools, if any, to have in the community tomorrow.
"A choice system says no-- you only get a say in how education works if you have a kid."ReplyDelete
Thanks, Peter! You have totally nailed it here. I've struggled as to how to explain this, so from now on I'll just quote you.
It's only 27 days till "National School Choice Week."ReplyDelete
We need to learn from Frank Luntz and find a better word to call it than "choice." Got any ideas?ReplyDelete
Asking pro-choice reformers if education should be mandatory reveals the "Catch -22" or contradiction, of their position. To believe education should not be mandatory is to contradict a well-informed society is necessary for a pluralistic democracy. To believe education should be a "choice" is to believe the purpose of education is personal advancement without regard if those in your community choose to educate themselves are not.ReplyDelete
To believe education should be mandatory is to contradict "choice" at its core. Believing education should be mandatory (be it homeschooling, private, or public) is to believe in the necessity of a well-informed society for the function of democracy.
What is necessary for the function of democracy cannot be left to private enterprise. It may play a limited role in some instances, but it cannot be entrusted with a fundamental function of democracy.
"Our public school system is set up to serve the public. All the public. It is not set up to serve just parents or just students. Everybody benefits from a system of roadways in this country-- even people who don't drive cars-- because it allows a hundred other systems of service and commerce to function well."ReplyDelete
I think part of the problem we're having is that there are a lot of people in our society who have forgotten this. If they don't have kids, or the kids have already graduated, they don't want to be bothered with public education, either through paying taxes for it, or voting in its best interests.
THANK YOU, Peter Greene! Your article tells it like it is. We will lose ALL voter input into local education if we don't stop charter schools.ReplyDelete
If folks are still giving too much credit to the input of Diane Ravitch, they might want to read here about her questionable letter to TN Sen. Lamar Alexander. Read an explanation by Charlotte Iserbyt and Anita Hoge: http://abcsofdumbdown.blogspot.com/2015/01/ravitchs-conservative-hat.html