Jersey Jazzman, aka teacher Mark Weber, reviews the blossoming of choice-choice-choice this summer.
Behind it, he says, is a failure of honesty and will.
In recent weeks, we have been besieged with testimonials and heartening stories about choice.
“The clever thing about this construction is that anyone who challenges the narrative is immediately put on the defensive: Why are you against helping people get a better education? Why don’t you care about these children? It must be that you care about your own interests more than theirs…
“There is little evidence that the fraction of “choice” schools that appear to get better results do so because they are “innovative” in their educational practices. But the “choice” schools that do get gains all seem to have structural advantages, starting with resource advantages — gained through a variety of strategies — that allow them to offer things like longer days, longer years, smaller student:staff ratios, and extended educational programming.
“By all appearances, we seem to be able to adequately fund our schools in the affluent, leafy ‘burbs, even as we shrug our shoulders at the prospect of doing the same for urban centers enrolling many students who are in economic disadvantage. Millburn has what it needs; Newark does not. Gross Point has plenty; Detroit doesn’t. New Trier is fine; Chicago is not. Lower Merion thrives; Philadelphia withers.
“It’s a story that plays out across the nation. Somehow these affluent communities manage to scrape together enough to provide adequate educations for their children, even when burdened with unionized teachers and step contracts and democratically elected school boards. Somehow they manage to get their schools what they need without giving up transparency and governmental accountability and agency for all of their citizens through the democratic process.
“School “choice” is the result of a failure of honesty and will.
“The failure of honesty comes from failing to fully acknowledge that structural inequities — inequality, chronic poverty, racism, inadequate school funding — lead to unequal educational outcomes. It also comes from failing to acknowledge that the advantages a select few “choice” schools have accrued to themselves are directly responsible for their outcome gains.
“The failure of will results from a failure to act collectively in ways that would move adequate resources to all schools where they are lacking, without giving up democratic governmental control.
“Neither Kristof nor Lemmon nor Hardy nor anyone else has given us any reason to believe that the only way to get more resources into schools that need them is to abandon governmental control. There is, however, plenty of reason to believe shifting school control to private entities will reduce transparency, student and family rights, and efficiency — both here and abroad.
“When children live lives free of want and attend well-resourced, government-controlled schools they do very well. Certainly, there are problems and room for improvement. But communities don’t need to give up control of their schools if the pre-conditions for success are in place.
“Instead of upending the entire system, why don’t we try that?”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Of course Mark is spot on, but the leafy suburbs are under attack in different ways. Keep your eyes on Lower Merion, PA, which is literally divided from Philadelphia by one road.
Most residents have no idea that reformers are eyeing their school tax dollars and high spending per student (likely hoping to bring charters and vouchers to home sweet home). A local attorney/resident with ties to the Lenfest family (of The Lenfest foundation, which supports KIPP), sued Lower Merion School District and won on a legal technicality. While this community is distracted, their schools are under attack and they haven’t a clue. This November’s school board election will be the start of the battle, as local Republicans have been hosting wine parties to “teach” residents about the “benefits” of vouchers and charters.
All the while, insiders in the schools see the district implementing initiatives straight out of The Nellie May Foundation and ALEC.
http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2016/09/pa-judge-cuts-school-funding.html
http://www.philly.com/philly/education/Lower-Merion-School-District-tax-appeal-tossed-out.html
https://emilytalmage.com/2016/03/30/who-is-nellie-mae/
https://www.alec.org/tag/digital-learning/
LikeLike
Well resourced schools are “choice” schools in the same sense that tenderloin is a choice cut of beef.
They are not choice schools because people choose them. People choose them because they are “choice” schools.
“Choice School and School Choice”
“Choice” schools aren’t “choice”
Because the parents choose
Instead, because a voice
Says “That, I can’t refuse!”
Because the schools are
LikeLike
Divide and conquer.
“Choice” is really a code word for segregation. Not by race but segregating the children that have from the children who do not have.
One school for those that do not have motivated and caring parents that can be underfunded, and a “choice” school for those who do.
One “choice” school for those who do not have any learning issues beyond what can be addressed by the cheapest inexperienced teachers, and another school for expensive students who are considered less than worthy and despicably attacked by charter CEOs as “violent” at age 5. And those immoral charter CEOs claims of so many violent children are believed by the racists who oversee them because they are always referring to non-white kindergarten children that their supporters — the same rich billionaires who support Trump — agree are very very violent.
One “choice” school given the same amount per pupil (or often more) to teach the cheapest students and drum out the rest, and another school for all the students the unethical charter school CEOs “choose” not to teach.
Abandon all the vulnerable children and appeal to the self-interest of the parents of the others and greedy people can get their way. It worked with the Republican Party and it is working with the charter folks. Because their supporters always believe they will never be one of the abandoned.
Choice has become another word for selfishness. It would be possible to offer choice within a public system but that would not allow the greediest and most unethical people to flourish and we must accommodate their needs because their supporters own the rest of the unethical charters who are terrified to speak out. the rest are like the “good” Germans willing to look the other way because they are not yet the targets.
LikeLike
You are correct. Segregation by class is what assures the shortage of money in the inner city and the rural districts as well. Big Burb schools have plenty. Rural districts fight over the funds to build and repair.
LikeLike
Disadvantaged students often face inequities in both public schools and “choice” systems. In fact, charters or vouchers in which the schools do the choosing add to the inequities rather than addressing the issue. Charters are more segregated than public schools, and they are often riddled with waste and fraud. Weber’s apple bar graph illustrates that there are more bad apples than good ones in the charter industry. Even Weber’s good apple Kipp schools use questionable methods to achieve results including cherry picking, no excuses discipline and high attrition rates.
While some charters may have resource advantages, public schools have some advantages as well. Public schools are generally very efficient. They move resources to where they are needed, and they can consolidate resources when necessary. Public schools are a public service, and the public has a voice in local decisions. Public schools generally offer trained, professional teachers, and there is no profit motive that guides decisions. They are transparent and subject to review from independent outside auditors. Most comprehensive public schools offer more “choice” than charters or vouchers including programs in the arts, science, technology, sports as well as special services from trained teachers.
When public schools were first established and the funding was determined by property taxes, there was far more economic equality than there is now. Today we have pockets of extreme wealth and extreme poverty so we must revisit the issue of how we fund public education to reduce the inherent inequities of funding through property taxes. “Choice” systems have failed to deliver any meaningful solutions, and they often have created additional problems. We should not be focused for education profit for a few at the expense of many. What students need should be the focus of education, not profit.
LikeLike
Terrific essay by Mark Weber. Somehow in just a few paragraphs he hits every key point in the choice vs public argument.
LikeLike
Great essay. But you one topic you seem to leave out is parental convenience. Charters have provided middle class families – too often white – the ability to say “I don’t like our public school”, and walk over to the charter and enroll their children at no cost to them. It’s the “convenience” of having private school environments, without the obligation to pay for said choice – everyone else pays though, resulting in public schools dying the death of a thousand cuts all eloquently cited above.
LikeLike