Corporate reformers love the idea of creative disruption. They think that closing schools and opening schools is a bold, innovative stroke.

It’s never their own children who lose their school.

It’s never their own community.

They never ask those involved, because when they do, the people say a loud “No.”

People have many reasons to care about a community school, not just its test scores.

But corporate reformers would like everyone to shop for their school the way they shop for shoes, with no loyalty, no ties, no community.

They think that’s progress. But not for their children. For other people’s children.

A reader writes:

I think one way to counter the fast march to privatization might be to talk about stability.One thing that is important to parents and students, I would think, is stability. People move to certain neighborhoods because they like the schools. If those schools are subject to impulsive decision making processes, instability and even interruption of education could follow. I think our traditional system has been successful in providing some stability for communities. Starting in the 1920s or even before, we built large attractive buildings that were like temples of education. People are loathe to tear down some of these buildings and closing a school is often a heart-wrenching event. Part of what bothers me about charter school businesses is that they can be here today and gone tomorrow. Then a community has build a school from the ground up. Either that or charters take kids from all over a city tearing apart communities, leaving building vulnerable to sale. Getting rid of our education infrastructure seems a grave mistake. Even in our highly mobile society, the presence of schools that are not located in malls and that are run by elected officials and regulated by states can provide a common experience for kids.