Jan Resseger always comments thoughtfully about important issues. In this post, she weighs in on the debate about whether it matters who controls public schools by reviewing a much-discussed article by David Labaree, historian of education at Stanford. Open her posts to see the links.
She begins:
There has recently been a debate among guest writers in Valerie Strauss’s “Answer Sheet” column in the Washington Post. The Network for Public Education’s Carol Burris and Diane Ravitch published a defense of public governance of public schools, a column which critiqued a new report from the Learning Policy Institute. The Learning Policy Institute’s Linda Darling-Hammond responded with a defense of the Learning Policy Institute’s report, which defends school choice including privately governed and operated charter schools. Finally Diane Ravitch and Carol Burris responded to Darling-Hammond’s response. This blog weighed in here last week.
As it happens, Stanford University emeritus professor of education, David Labaree enhances this conversation with a new column on the public purpose of public education at Phi Delta Kappan: “We Americans tend to talk about public schooling as though we know what that term means. But in the complex educational landscape of the 21st century… it’s becoming less and less obvious….”
A spoiler: There is no equivocation in Labaree’s analysis. He is a strong supporter of public education, and he worries that by prizing the personal and individualistic benefit of education, our society may have lost sight of our schools’ public purpose: “A public good is one that benefits all members of the community, whether or not they contribute to its upkeep or make use of it personally. In contrast, private goods benefit individuals, serving only those people who take advantage of them. Thus, schooling is a public good to the extent that it helps everyone (including people who don’t have children in school). And schooling is a private good to the extent that it provides individuals with knowledge, skills, and credentials they can use to distinguish themselves from other people and get ahead in life.”
Labaree traces the history of public education through the 19th and early 20th centuries, but he believes more recently: “Over the subsequent decades… growing numbers of Americans came to view schooling mainly as a private good, producing credentials that allow individuals to get ahead, or stay ahead, in the competition for money and social status. All but gone is the assumption that the purpose of schooling is to benefit the community at large. Less and less often do Americans conceive of education as a cooperative effort in nation-building or collective investment in workforce development.”
There should be no “debate” on who controls public schools. If it isn’t obvious that “public” schools should be controlled by the public through compketely transparent and democratic means, it should be obvious.
The mere fact that there is a (faux) debate means the public has accepted the framing of the issue by the privatizers.
Amen! Agree.
Love your comment someDam Poet.
I think we really need to stop debating with people who are basically a bunch of liars and schemers bent on profiting off our children.
Their motives are NOT sincere and NOT good.
They should be shown the door and told to take a long hike off a short pier.
I quoted you when I posted the article. https://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/More-on-the-Public-Purpose-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Education_Public-Education_Public-Education_Public-Good-181116-678.html#comment717008
I posted Jan’s piece at https://dianeravitch.net/2018/11/16/jan-resseger-on-the-debate-about-who-governs-public-schools/#respond
We have observed the consequences of privatization of public schools, and the results are harmful to many students and communities. Worst of all the disruption has failed to deliver improved outcomes for students. We should not be sending public money to private entities that undermine the quality of education for the schools that 85 to 90% of students attend. Privatization also increases isolation and segregation. Our country is diverse, and we need to encourage different types of people to respect each other and learn to get along. As a result we should be trying to improve, not destroy, our common schools that are democratically operated and promote a civil society.
“disruption has failed to deliver improved outcomes for students”
What a surprise (and understatement 🙂
The sad — indeed pathetic — thing is that there are actually people who believe that disruption is good for education.
I know there are people who enjoy disrupting other people’s lives.
I don’t know anyone who wants to be disrupted
If more people understood public education as valuable to democratic society as opposed to just being valuable to individual industry, public education would still be owned and operated by the public. The distinction is fundamental to our cause.