Martin Levine has become one of my favorite writers on education. He writes for NonProfit Quarterly (free online) and other publications. He really understands that privatization is about “me first, to hell with the rest of you.”
Here is his commentary on the recent Gordon Lafer study of the fiscal impact of charters on the public schools they leave behind.
Oakland is a textbook example of a district that is being systematically hollowed out by the proliferation of charter schools. Oakland has lurched from deficit to deficit, while controlled for years by Broadie superintendents, who encouraged the destruction of the district by charters.
He writes:
A recent look at public education in Oakland raises important questions about whether maximizing choice comes at the cost of equity.
Choice advocates have said all students would benefit from maximizing a parent’s ability to choose their child’s school. The introduction of independent charter schools, they believe, harnesses market forces to reward better schools and ultimately force poor schools to close. Following this logic, we will be left with better schools. But while charter schools can focus only on the students who choose their programs, traditional school districts remain responsible for all of the children in their districts. When funding follows each student to their school of choice, those choosing to remain in public schools are finding themselves resource-starved. Overall, educational equity and school choice may not be able to coexist.
Charter schools are about what is best for “me.” Public schools are about what is best for all.
In the age of Trump, individualism trumps the common good.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I don’t believe for one minute that the people who are pushing the lie that “all students would benefit from maximizing a parent’s ability to choose their child’s school” do not know that they are lying.
The students who benefit from choice are the ones who are cheapest to teach. The ones who do not benefit from choice are the ones who are most expensive to teach.
I doubt very much there is a single scholar in England, France, Germany, Israel or any other country where so-called think tanks and academics aren’t for sale where the shoddy research “proving” that “choice” benefits the most expensive to teach students would be published.
I have no doubt that “choice” benefits SOME kids and it does so at the expense of other kids whose costs are higher and are left to rot.
But the people pushing choice pretend that they are actually doing it out of the goodness of their hearts. Which is about as true as the lie that Eva Moskowitz says which is that she worked so hard to make sure Betsy DeVos was confirmed in order to help all kids.
They work so hard to push choice to help themselves. Period. And they would happily lie if it benefits their own bank accounts and careers.
LikeLike
One of the country’s premier school choice plans was developed in East Harlem. It was a model for many other communities. Was that developed just “to help themselves” (ie the educators)?
LikeLike
To readers who may agree with my viewpoint:
There are NOT people in business who would take any action to achieve the benefit for all. Period! It could be for their OWN-selves, for their OWN family members,and FOR THEIR OWN PROFITS, advantages over others in the name of patriotism and the unfortunates (=truly themselves in their reincarnated lives)
That mantra should be taught as a life lesson TO ALL LEARNERS from kindergarten to PhD level as being critical thinking skills. This alone lesson can awaken all greedy souls.
Back2basic.
LikeLike
I located a 2016 demographics page….77% white, 19 % hispanic, .07 black. that distribution did not happen by accident. I would not hold my breath waiting for an usual amount of complaint regarding the NRA. There should be some….
LikeLike
Ah, yes, the CCSA once again putting the blame on those evil, credentialed, experienced teachers who only want the pension promised to them in lieu of better pay. How dare they? And how dare districts keep extra classrooms to themselves? So glad that the CCSA is looking out for Oakland’s district finances by suggesting we save ourselves from our budget woes by closing district schools. So…charters can have them. Genius!
LikeLike
The amount of partiality towards charters is pathetic. Let’s allow the “choice” of some diminish funding, opportunity and equity for everyone else. Privatization is anti-democratic.
LikeLike
Yes, “Privatization is anti-democratic.”
LikeLike
May 18. See also the writing of Sarah M. Stitzlein quoted by Martin Levine.
How to Define Public Schooling in the Age of Choice?
Five responsibilities schools must meet to truly be called “public” September 5, 2017
https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2017/09/06/how-to-define-public-schooling-in-the.html
She is writing for a general audience in addition to doing first-rate scholarship for peer reviewed publications.
LikeLike
I’m not so sure that I can agree with her five responsibilities.
“In this changing terrain, there are five responsibilities schools should have in order to truly be defined as “public”:
• Public schools should be open to the public, meaning all children are not only permitted but are also welcomed and equitably supported, even if their education may be more costly than average, such as that of students with disabilities or English-language learners.
• They should serve the public, meaning they meet societal needs like preparing active citizens to maintain the government and economy or to serve in the military or on juries, while also preparing graduates to critique and revise those needs.
• They should be responsive to the public, enabling comunity members to vote out school officials or change school policies through meaningful and viable avenues like elections, referendums, and open school meetings.
• They should be creators of the public, meaning that they cultivate citizens who know how to exchange ideas and respond to the ideas of others, while tolerating and working across differences.
• They should sustain democracy by developing skills and dispositions within children for participating and enacting freedom-oriented decisionmaking.”
Not even all well and good. There is no doubt in my mind that my Catholic K-12 did all five of those things, except for the open enrollment. Except for the open enrollment, all the charter, religious and private schools would more likely than not consider themselves “public”. Beware the Trojan Horse.
What is missing in this picture?
No financial accountability on the part of her supposed “public” schools. Nothing about these supposed “public” schools following ethical, legal, financial standards in operations. And to truly be public, those things must truly be adhered to, for without that type of accountability we have the multitude of self-serving marketers/owners of private schools pretending to be public.
LikeLike
“They should be responsive to the public, enabling comunity members to vote out school officials or change school policies through meaningful and viable avenues like elections, referendums, and open school meetings.”
Not exactly a feature of charters.
LikeLike