I recently had the pleasure of speaking to the North Texas School Boards Association by Zoom. Right now, Texas is ground zero for the charter industry. This is astonishing because the public schools in Texas far outperform the charter schools. The charter school lobby markets themselves as “saviors” of children, but they are far more likely to fail than public schools. This is a summary of what I told my friends in Texas:
I am a graduate of the Houston public schools. My father, who grew up in Savannah, never finished high school; my mother, who was born in Bessarabia, was very proud of her high school diploma from the Houston public schools.
I believe that all of us, whether or not we have children, whether or not we have children in public school, have a civic obligation to support public schools, just as we must support other public services, like police, firefighting, public roads, public parks, and public libraries. Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society, and no investment is more precious than investing in the education of our children. They are our future.
Texas, like every other state, guarantees a free public education to everyone. The clause in the state constitution says:
A general diffusion of knowledge being essential to the preservation of the liberties and rights of the people, it shall be the duty of the Legislature of the State to establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools.
As constitutional scholar Derek Black shows in his book Schoolhouse Burning, the founding fathers of this nation wanted every state to provide free public education. They didn’t have it in their own time, but they saw it as essential to the future of the nation. In the Northwest Ordinance of 1785, the Founders said that any territory that wanted to become a state had to set aside one lot in each town for a tax-supported public school. Not a private academy supported by tax funds, but a tax-supported public school.
The leadership of Texas doesn’t care about the state constitution. Every time the legislature is in session, someone offers a bill to send public funds to religious schools, which are not public schools. Thus far, a coalition of urban Democrats and rural Republicans and the dedicated leadership of Pastors for Texas Children has defeated vouchers.
The Republicans who control the state have substituted charters for vouchers in their eagerness to provide alternatives to the right guaranteed by the state constitution. And they have not given up on vouchers.
Texas now has more than 800 charter schools. These are schools under private management, paid for with tax dollars. Contrary to their marketing strategy, they are not public schools. Some of those charters are part of big corporations, like KIPP or IDEA. Some are nonprofit schools that are managed by for-profit corporations. The GOP leadership wants more of them, even though the existing public schools are underfunded and have not recovered from a devastating budget cut of more than $5 billion in 2011.
When the idea of charter schools first emerged in the early 1990s, I was enthusiastic about their promise. I was in Washington, DC, working as Assistant Secretary of Education for Research in the first Bush administration. We heard from their sponsors that charter schools would be more innovative, would cost less than public schools because of their lack of bureaucracy, would be more successful, and would be more accountable than public schools because they were free of most regulations.
Three decades later, this is what have we learned:
a). Charter schools are not more innovative than public schools. The only innovation associated with charters is harsh disciplinary practices called “No excuses,” where children are punished for minor infractions of strict rules. The largest charter chain in Chicago, the Noble Network, recently announced that it was getting rid of “no excuses” because it is a racist policy, meant to force black children to adopt white middle-class values.
b) Charter schools are not more accountable than public schools. In most states, the charter associations fight any effort to impose accountability or transparency. They don’t want to be audited by independent auditors. The only time they are accountable is when they close their doors because of low enrollment or abject academic failure.
c) Charter schools do not cost less than public schools. They typically demand the same public funding as public schools, even though the public schools pick up some of their costs, like transportation, and even though they have fewer high-need students than public schools. In some states, like Texas, charter schools get more public money than public schools.
d) Charter schools are less effective than public schools. Those that have high test scores choose their students and families carefully and push out those they don’t want. On average they don’t outperform public schools, and they spend more money on administration than public schools. In some states, like Ohio, the majority of charter schools are rated D or F.
Charters are unstable. They open and close like day lilies. Sometimes in mid-semester, leaving their students stranded.
The worst charter schools are the virtual schools.
The state pays the cybercharters full tuition to provide nothing more than a computer, a remote teacher, and some textbooks. They charge double or triple their actual costs.
Virtual charter schools have high attrition rates, low graduation rates, and low test scores.
There have been huge scandals associated with virtual charter schools.
In Ohio, the Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow collected close to a billion dollars over 18 years. It was started by a businessman, who made generous contributions to political leaders. It had one of the lowest high school graduation rates in the nation. In 2017, ECOT was audited by the state and found to have collected tuition for phantom students. Rather than pay the state $80 million, ECOT declared bankruptcy in 2018. No one was fined, no one went to prison, no one was held accountable.
The biggest scandal in charter history was the A3 virtual charter chain. It had a massive scheme to enroll fake students. Eleven people were indicted. Eventualy, the leaders of A3 agreed to repay the state $215 million.
The largest of the virtual charters is K12 Inc; it is registered on NY Stock Exchange. Its results are familiar: high attrition, low test scores, low graduation rates. Their top executives are paid millions of dollars each. K12 is are operating in dozens of states.
Poor academic performance is not punished; financial fraud is not punished. There is no accountability.
IDEA in Texas is in a class of its own when it comes to luxuries. They get hundreds of millions of tax-payer dollars, but they decided they needed to lease a private jet for their executives. When the story got into the newspapers, they dropped that idea. The media also reported that IDEA bought season tickets for special seating at San Antonio Spurs games. When the CEO decided to retire, he received a $1 million golden parachute. How many school superintendents do you know who got such a generous going-away present?
Charter schools claim that they “save poor kids from failing schools.”
That’s not true. There are currently some 356,000 students in charter schools in Texas. Three-quarters of them are enrolled in charter schools in A or B school districts. The charter school students are being drawn away from successful schools in successful districts.
The charter lobby claims that there are long waiting lists. Don’t believe it. The so-called wait lists are manufactured. They are never audited. In Los Angeles, at least 80% of the existing charters have empty seats, yet still the lobbyists talk about wait lists. In New York City, charters buy advertising on city buses. When you have a waiting list, you don’t buy advertising.
The charter industry in Texas has a number of charter expansions already approved and expects to grow by 50,000 students every year. Unless the legislature plans to increase spending on education, charter growth will mean budget cuts for public schools. Charters in Texas currently divert $3 billion a year from public schools. Since they started, they have diverted more than $20 billion that should have gone to the state’s public schools.
Charter schools in Texas are not more successful than public schools. Texas researcher William Gumbert reported that 86% of public school districts are rated either A or B by the state, compared to 58.6% of charter schools. Only 2.6% of public school districts were rated D or F, compared to 17.7% of charter schools.
Texas Public Radio reported that graduation rates at charter schools were 30 points lower than the rates at public high schools.
Two economists—Will Dobbie and Roland Fryer—studied the outcomes of charter schools in Texas. They concluded that charter schools have “no impact on test scores and a negative impact on earnings.”
William Gumbert, an independent analyst in Texas, has calculated that graduates of charter schools enter college less well prepared and are less likely to perform well in college, compared to students who went to public schools. He reported that the 2019 state ratings showed nearly 40% of charters approved by the state have been closed.
The charters claim that they can close historic achievement gaps between children of different racial and ethnic backgrounds. This is not true. According to careful research by analyst Gumbert, public schools do a better job of narrowing the achievement gaps between black and white students and between Hispanic and white students than charters in the same districts.
Again, using state records, Gumbert found that graduates of public schools were more successful in college than graduates of charter schools. Public school graduates were more likely to have a higher grade-point average in freshman year than charter school graduates. First-year grade-point average has been shown to predict college graduation.
Now the charter industry is lobbying for a vast expansion in Texas. They don’t want to have to deal with elected school boards or other elected officials. Democracy is a nuisance, an obstacle. So they are promoting SB 28, which would remove any elected school boards or elected municipal officials from the charter approval process. The state board of education could veto a charter application only with a supermajority. Only one appointed state official—the State Commissioner, appointed by the Governor– would decide whether charters may invade your district, recruit the students they want and locate the charter school wherever they want. That is a major blow to local control of schools.
Why are state officials in Texas, why is the Legislature, opposed to local control of schools?
After three decades of experience, we have learned about the policies and practices of charter corporations.
First, many charter schools are run by non-educators. They see a business opportunity and they compete for market share.
Second, they market charter schools by making extravagant claims. They promise that their students will be successful in school and will go to college even before they open their doors. As we have seen, this is usually false.
Third, the few that get high test scores do so by cherry-picking their students or by setting the standards so high that only high-scoring students choose to enroll. BASIS is an example of that. Students have to pass a certain number of AP exams to graduate, so average students need not apply. In Arizona, where most of the state’s students are Hispanic or Native American, the BASIS schools enroll mostly white and Asian students.
Fourth, some charter schools raise test scores by pushing out students who get low scores. That means excluding students with disabilities and students who don’t speak or read English. It also means counseling out or finding creative ways to discourage the kids who are discipline problems or the kids who perform poorly on tests. The most successful charter chain in NYC accepts kids by lottery in kindergarten. Then they begin weeding out those they don’t want, and after third grade, no new students are accepted. By senior year, most of the students who started in K or first grade have disappeared.
Fifth, charter schools typically hire young and inexperienced teachers who cost less than older experienced teachers. The turnover is high—sometimes as much as half the staff leaves every year and is replaced by newcomers to teaching.
Sixth, the true secret of charter expansion is the money behind them. They are supported by a long list of billionaires who want to eliminate public schools. They mock our community schools as “government schools,” but they might as well mock our community police officers as “government security agents.” Our community public schools belong to “we, the people.” We pay for them with our taxes. They reflect our community history. They have the trophies that our parents, our cousins, our aunts and uncles won at football, basketball, baseball, volleyball, chess, and debate tournaments. They are audited and overseen by our neighbors. We elect the school board, and if we don’t agree with their decisions, we elect another one.
Don’t give your public dollars to entrepreneurs and corporations to educate your children.
Don’t replace your public schools with a free market where schools compete for customers. Markets produce winners and losers, not equality of educational opportunity. Use your tax dollars to make your public schools the best they can be for all the children.
Whatever your political views are, these schools belong to you, not to Wall Street or libertarian billionaires or opportunists. Tell your legislators to support your public schools.
School choice means that the schools choose.
Public schools must take everyone.
School choice is a hoax.
Don’t fund failure.
At a time when there are so many divisions in our society, we need our public schools to teach appreciation for our common heritage as Americans and as Texans.
I especially appeal to those with conservative values: Conservative conserve. Conservatives don’t blow up traditional institutions. People who want to blow up community institutions are anarchists, not conservatives.
Preserve and improve your community public schools for future generations.
It seems that the charter industry has quite a few Ground Zeroes. It’s worth keeping in mind that no matter how many zeroes you add up, the sum is zero.
🙂
Parents in Texas should also be aware that due to a complex funding formula, charters schools receive over $1,000 more dollars per student than public schools in Texas. Instead of providing more opportunities for students, the state creates opportunities for investors to make money at the expense of public school students in the state. https://www.raiseyourhandtexas.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Charters-One-Pager.pdf
I love the conclusive nature of the ed reform “research”
“This enrollment trend is not new in our city, so having it persist through this challenging year should prove even more that families value having high-quality school options that meet their children’s needs. In 2019, Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) showed that students in Indianapolis’ charter schools gained the equivalent of 77 days’ additional growth in reading and 100 more days’ in math than their peers in district-run schools. Because of this success, today more than 56 percent of students who attend public school within the IPS boundaries now attend either a charter or Innovation Network School.”
It’s because of the “77 days” (not 76 or 78, but “77”) days of learning.
It’s not because there’s a huge deep pocketed ed reform charter marketing group that has taken over governance of Indianapolis schools. No, it’s definitely due to the “77 days” of learning.
Science! It’s all VERY scientific. Don’t let the fact that it all reads like advertising, endless cheerleading of the charter and voucher ed reformers prefer ideologically and endless bashing of the public schools they oppose, with thousands of full time, paid lobbyists and cheerleaders.
There’s nothing intrinsically “wrong” with the ed reform goal of privatizing public education. It’s an ideological preference and it’s been with us since Barry Goldwater. Why not admit it and defend THAT instead of this elaborate game where they pretend to be “agnostics” but work every day to promote and market their own schools and bash ours?
Would they put someone who was opposed to the existence of Catholic schools in charge of Catholic schools? No, of course not. Yet somehow public schools ended up with a huge cadre of anti-public school people running our schools.
I insist we hire people who support public education to run public school policy. I don’t think this is an unreasonable demand.
The obscenely wealthy of this country are seeking to return the USA to a country of lords and nobles from which our founders fled.
The fabric of democracy is becoming increasingly threadbare with each bow to their money-accompanied requests of our state legislatures to appease another of their grossly profitable whims, the privatization of public education being so far the most damaging.
I view the loathsome bastards as curtained traitors to the country under whose waterfall of manipulated profits enrich them.
enriches, enriches
Diane, you are the best! The statement below from IDEA Public Schools documents the charter movement is directed by private interests and private dollars – not what is best for students, families, and communities.
“Any new regional expansions are the result of community-supported education reform groups soliciting and inviting IDEA to open in their region and offering substantial startup and operational grant funding…”- IDEA Public Schools bond documents.
Best summary ever of the problems with charter schools.
*best summary ever of schools
This whole piece is just propogandist trash. All these problems are the same problems with public schools. Projection flows easiest.
I do not know what “projection flows easiest” means. But my wording was poor: “the problems with charter schools” was my shorthand for the problems inherent in running two sets of publicly-funded schools competing for the same enrollment.
“Propaganda” implies a political bias. To me, this isn’t politics, it’s dollars and cents, and taxation with representation. The pool of money for public schooling is not elastic; running two systems costs more just considering duplication of admin/ facilities, let alone spending extra due to for-profit management and advertising, let alone running one of the systems without input from local taxpayers who bear 60+% of its costs. Hence robbing Peter to pay Paul is baked in.
Perhaps but there’s no way to stop free will, is there? There’s no legal or constitutional way to force parents to accept sending their kids to just one school. There are recognized fundamental rights for reasons of violence reduction. Are you willing to be responsible for the inevitable violence you’d cause?
Violence has no place in the discussion. Charters educate only 6% of the population (vouchers another 2%); people are not rioting in the streets for ‘school choice’: there is no fundamental right guaranteeing public funding of any school you want to attend.
Education is a public project, which pools public funds, with a mission to deliver decent-quality ed to the public’s K12-aged kids. The only way to determine how much the public is willing to spend & how it wants to spend it is via democracy— publicly-elected school boards. Annual budgets are set; delivery of ed is by the most efficient means possible; personal preferences of the majority (as expressed through testimony to publicly-elected Bd of Ed) is accommodated to the degree possible, limited by the amount the public is willing to spend.
Free will [recognized fundamental rights] stops at the end of your fist before it collides with someone else’s nose. When you set up a second (or third!) tier of schools that is not subject to the same stds/ rules, that can be located within the district yet not run by the district, without voter input on how it’s run (or even whether it is needed/ should be located there)—in many states without even being required to make its financial set-up transparent to voters, even tho they’re footing the bill– that’s colliding with somebody’s nose.
How could violence not be a part of the discussion when it’s the topic in the op? Trying to force people to have only one choice is taking all their choices away from them. Thats altogether: completley unnatural, unconstitutional, completely unamerican, and completely violence. When you deny someone their natural right of way, you’ve inflicted your violence. I see no reason to entertain a delusion otherwise.
Does your surname truly begin with a lower-case letter?
Trying to legistlate a monopoly and offering only the delusion of choice, is completley unamerican.
The spin in your rhetoric denotes the weakness of your points.
What makes you think it’s my sir name or that i respect the person it belonged to?
Do you teach a limp wristed ad hom class?
No to your question. Nor do I disrespect Dr. Ravitch by leaving homophobic slurs on her blog.
“Sir name”?
*collective subjectivist delusion etc
Great article, but missing the schemes used to make money either via hedge fund managers, no-bid contracts, real estate maneuvers using tax credits, and other tax incentives… Having billionaires lobby so hard for charters begs the question, “Why?’ It’s to make more money, off the backs of our kids and taxpayers, that’s why.
Choices other than failing, indoctrinating public schools are becoming more popular. We spend more money per capita per student in the U.S. than the top five countries in the world on education and we can’t even crack the top 15 list.
Charter schools can’t be any more “failing” than public schools and there’s less baggage not related to educational outcome.
Great article, Does anyone know of organizations that are actively against charter schools in Texas? I do support public schools and want to see more funding for them, NOT for charter schools. Thanks
estrom73@gmail.com