For
more than two decades many in North Carolina fought the wrong-headed
notion that the free market is the ideal tool for education reform.
Those in the state that battled advocates of charter schools and
vouchers were able to turn back the tide that flooded other states
like Minnesota and cities like Washington, D.C. and Chicago. So you
would think the battle was won, with volumes of research data now available of such
programs in the United States and abroad proving that charter schools
at best provide no better academic performance than their public
school counterparts and at worse set their students back, often
failing financially in the process.
Why
is it then that we find ourselves staring down what is arguably one
of the most aggressive pro-charter schools legislative agendas not only in North Carolina's history but the nation? Senate
Bill 337
would, among other things, create a separate governing board
for charter schools, eliminate the requirement that all teachers be
licensed and maybe the most unbelievable, eliminate background checks
for charter school employees. Oh, and if your public school district
has a building it isn't using, the school board would be required to
lease it to a charter school for a buck.
The
Senate Education Committee will take the bill up today and if
approved it will head off to Appropriations.
The
bill is being championed by Sen.
Jerry Tillman
of Archdale and backed by Senate Majority Leader Phil
Berger,
who represents our fair community as well as his home district of
Rockingham County. So be sure to click their links for contact info
to share your thoughts.
There
is a ton of info already out there about what the bill would do and
why those elements are a terrible idea. From the Charlottee
Observer
and Raleigh
News & Observer. You
can also read
here
about how Tillman is also winning the fight to create a separate
state school board to govern charters.
What
we need to think about is this free market idea. Here's what Tillman
told the News
& Observer
last week about why the bill works.
"...the
market only works where you have choice. If you don't have anywhere
else to go, you have no choice and the marketplace can't work,"
Tillman said.
This
idea that market economics can be applied to public education shows a
complete misunderstanding of both education and economics, which is
scary considering Tillman retired from the public school district. Marc
Tucker
is a national leader in standards-driven education reform and
president of the National Center on Education and the Economy which
does a wonderful job of dispelling the myth of free market education
reform in this Washington
Post
piece from late last year.
Tucker
notes that, among other major factors, the free market theory doesn't
work because at its core is the assumption that parents will choose
to send their child to a school with the best academic record. This
isn't the case. Academic performance falls behind safety, proximity
to the family's home and even how well the school's athletic teams
perform, according to Tucker.
“If
[parents] have met teachers at that school that seem to really care
about their children, take a personal interest in them and seem to be
decent people, they are likely to place more value on those things
than on district league tables of academic performance based on
standardized tests of basic skills, especially if they perceive that
school to be safe and it is close to home,” Tucker explains.
And
what about academic performance? Education reform, after all, is
supposed to be about ensuring that every child receives the highest
quality education possible.
Tucker
notes that studies show that students who perform well continue to
perform well in charter schools, average student performance is
unchanged but most disconcerting is that students who are low
performing do even worse in charter schools. Charter schools
widen rather than close the performance gap, the exact opposite of
what public education reform is meant to do.
In
that same News & Observer interview Tillman goes on to say,
“Public schools, for the main, are doing a super-good job,”
noting that dropout rates across the state are at record lows. But,
he continues, there are still places where progress isn't being made.
There
is no doubt that shifts in our economy and culture has played a role
in lowering the dropout rate. Those factors are nothing compared to
the monumental effort public school districts put into addressing the
problem. An effort, importantly, backed with resources from the
state; this could change with the state cutting resources.
If
you read Tucker's piece, and you absolutely should, you'll see he
outlines common qualities among nations with public school systems
that produce high academic achievement, including Singapore, Finland,
Australia and Canada. Here are a few that should be highlighted:
- They have much less poverty among their children.
- They have much more equitable systems of school finance.
- They pay their teachers much better than we do.
- They insist teachers are well prepared both in the subject they will teach and the craft of teaching.
Guilford
Education Alliance does not oppose charter schools, but it does
believe that a safe public school, whose oversight and governance are
transparent and regulated and that is staffed with qualified
educators is the best choice any child can have. Because unlike
charter schools operating in a free market, failure isn't an option
for our public schools.
