Denis Smith, a former advisor to the Ohio State Department of Education, explains the important role that public schools play in a diverse, democratic society.
He writes in the Ohio Capital Journal:
In 2011, on the 150th anniversary of the outbreak of the Civil War, the New York Times initiated a series of essays entitled “Disunion“ about a conflict the newspaper described as the time when “Americans went to war with themselves.” The series ran periodically for four years as an attempt to mirror what the paper characterized as “America’s most perilous period.”
Those who pay attention to prevailing norms and the constitutional health of our society might update those two phrases to serve as a warning for describing the present.
If Ohio residents have read the opinions of Republicans ranging from state Senators Matt Huffman and Sandra O’Brien about educational vouchers, that ominous word disunion might inevitably come to mind. In the campaign to destroy our public education system by using public funds to finance private and religious schools through vouchers, these politicians disingenuously throw out such terms as “choice” and “freedom,” seemingly innocuous words that instead have the potential to fracture our national unity.
Yet when the subject is choice and freedom, however disingenuously those words might be used, we don’t need to look any further for guidance in identifying the glue that keeps us in a state of union rather than the disunion a profligate use of public funds will bring if educational voucher legislation is approved.
That glue is the public school, whose importance is enshrined in the language of Article VI, Section 2 of the Ohio Constitution:
The General Assembly shall … secure a thorough and efficient system of common schools throughout the state; but no religious or other sect, or sects, shall ever have any exclusive right to, or control of, any part of the school funds . …
Lest we be confused by politicians spouting their favorite hyperbolic buzzwords like choice and freedom, our constitution contains clear language, including the use of the singular form: a system of common schools, not systems. It is one educational system that the state is mandated to support, not thousands of private and religious schools that clearly aren’t eligible for public support through vouchers or other means.
Such a scheme to support private and religious schools with public funds might also be construed as socialism, as another Ohio senator, Andrew Brenner, disingenuously described public education in 2014, a classic statement that gained him national attention – and notoriety.
More than twenty years ago, one observer described the dangers of fragmenting the delivery of education in a society, as a universal educational voucher scheme would achieve. Dr. Kenneth Conklin, a professor of philosophy and educational theory, provided this warning that should be heeded by Republicans like Hoffman, O’Brien, and Brenner:
If an educational system is altered, its transmission of culture will be distorted. The easiest way to break apart a society long-term without using violence is to establish separate educational systems for the groups to be broken apart.
Note the use of the plural: systems.
Conklin provides some additional advice for us to consider as Ohio and other red states make plans to fracture the public school system, satisfy their ideological yen and garner a twofer by also destroying public employee unions in the process. He also considers the importance of culture in providing societal cohesion:
A society’s culture can survive far longer than the lifespan of any of its members, because its educational system passes down the folkways and knowledge of one generation to subsequent generations. A culture changes over time, but has a recognizable continuity of basic values and behavioral patterns that distinguishes it from other cultures. That continuity is provided by the educational system.
Note the use of the singular: system.
Make no mistake. The educational voucher scheme, fueled by dark money groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which itself helps to fuel astroturf groups nationwide that are intent on undermining public education, has enabled the pro-voucher and school privatization movement to achieve critical mass in the last few years. Currently, at least 15 states have some type of voucher program in place, and the number is expected to rise dramatically in the next few months as red state legislatures also bundle together other extreme measures, including abortion bans and voting restrictions, to further erode democracy and one of its symbols, our neighborhood public school.
If we are to continue as one society (note again the singular form), we must have one publicly funded educational system, and not thousands of other types of schools similarly funded. After all, this nation’s motto is e pluribus unum – from many, one. The Republican voucher scheme violates that very motto, in addition to not ensuring oversight and accountability for how scare public funds are spent in the task of investing in the future. Common civic values and traditions ensure the continuity of this republic as one people, with a common heritage provided by the common school.
In an essay, Senator O’Brien asks: “Why can’t parents spend their tax dollars at the school they choose for their children?”
Really? The answer is quite simple.
It’s about the constitution. It’s about the meaning of a “system” of common schools,” of e pluribus unum. It’s about democracy, where we elect our neighbors to oversee our public schools and ensure that public funds are spent for public, and not for individual, private purposes, as vouchers are purposely designed to accomplish.
Republicans: it should not be about disunion. But your promotion of educational vouchers and the erosion of the common school, the symbol and glue that brings together each community, will have that effect.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
It was not always so. There was a time when public and private schools worked together for the good of the community. I know. I attended a traditional private school. There was competition between local public schools and the private school, but the adults in both institutions recognized the importance of both. When it came to school bond issues, the private school people were the first to campaign for better public schools.
The division we see now is a direct result of the post-civil rights movement. The first wave of new private schools were what we called integration academy. Don’t want my kids going to school with those people. Then there was the prayer in the schools academy. After a Nation at Risk, …well, you know that story.
I studied Richard Wright, Langston Hughes, James Baldwin, and more in that private school. I woke up to the fact of my own prejudices. I also missed some pretty good instructors where I eventually taught for 34 years.
The point is, there does not have to be this public and private antagonism. It exists for the purposes of an extreme philosophy. Privatization of public services is a means to an end.
Public education is a community investment in the community itself. Strong public schools are community assets that enhance local communities. Privatization is a disinvestment in local community as it sends unaccountable public funds to private interests at the expense of community. Privatization often leads to the destabilization of local communities by draining the funds required to maintain and build strong local ties.
The targeting of poor Black and Brown communities is a way to undermine and dissolve those communities when those students are moved into separate and unequal schools. Public schools are a civic responsibility, and the commodification of education is the antithesis of civic duty.
The commodification of education weakens communities and perverts the obligation of the state to offer free, democratic public education to all. A private service is not the equivalent to a public service.
Why do we keep calling the Republican Party by its old name? I think it is time to call the GOP (G as in Gross, not Grand) what it really is The Fascist MAGA Party.
There is considerable irony in this essay. The author argues that an altered educational system distorts the culture, and that “(t)he easiest way to break apart a society long-term without using violence is to establish separate educational systems for the groups to be broken apart.” Can anyone look at public schools today and not see the broken culture it has created?
In many ways the author makes strong arguments in favor of freedom of educational choice. An educational system that “passes down the folkways and knowledge of one generation to subsequent generations” and “a recognizable continuity of basic values and behavioral patterns that distinguish is form other cultures” would be good for the society, however, the traditional public educational system no longer does that. It deliberately distorts ‘folkways and knowledge’ and ‘basic values and behavioral patters’ in ways that promote division so much that parents are demanding choice and demanding the dollars the government have coercively taken from them.
The author notes that 15 states have some type of voucher program and that many more states are expected to offer them. Parents (of all ethnicities and races and economic classes) want what is best for their children. Clearly many feel the public schools are not that. The primary measure for student and school success is student performance on standardized tests. That is a terrible measure, but if it what is used. Based on that measure, public schools are at best producing mediocre success, especially when compared to other nations. Performance gaps between racial groups continue with little change in decades. Data on student performance is available here: NDE Core Web (nationsreportcard.gov), Including the performance gaps between public and private schools. Recent data indicates that about 85.2% of high school students graduate nationally. This means 1 in 6 do not. Is that acceptable? Would be go to a doctor who killed one in six patients? Would be buy a car that exploded in flames one is six times it is driven?
Choice schools are certainly not immune to these problems. There are bad choice schools in every city, but a parent is not coercively forced to send their child to that school through a financial taking of their income. Even if choice schools are not considerably better than traditional public schools (the data is not conclusive one way or the other), to argue that traditional schools today are promoting a continuation of ‘basic values and behavioral patterns’ ignores reality of contemporary public education. If that were true, thousands of parents would not be protesting school board meetings, seeking to replace school board members, and taking their children out of the public schools.
Many (not all) public schools are promoting cultural division, not culturally agreed upon values. Teachers are caught in the middle of these battles. They are not at fault. Weak school boards and weak administrators have created this problem. As they continue to give in to the loudest in the crowd, despite the message they are shouting, and schools continue to produce a mediocre product, parents will continue to flee the public schools, as they should.
Vouchers are not popular. There have been 20 state referenda re vouchers, and all have failed. Voucher advocates know the public opposes vouchers so they usually give them a different name: “education scholarships,” “tuition tax credits,” “education savings accounts,” etc.
Legislatures are not responding to demands from parents for private choices.
In 2018, Arizona voters defeated the expansion of vouchers by 2-1, but the legislature ignored the voters.
The academic results of vouchers are very poor. Google Josh Cowen and vouchers.
75-80% of vouchers are claimed by students already enrolled in private and religious schools. This is a nice subsidy for them, but it’s money withdrawn from the public schools that enroll the overwhelming majority of children.
The public school kids who take vouchers end up in lesser-quality private schools that charge as little as the amount of the voucher. The top schools charge ($15,000-$75,000). The research shows that these kids lose ground and many return to public school, in need of remediation.
There is no good argument for vouchers.
@Michael
Thank you! You speak the truth. I and many of the parents at my son’s private HS were/are from the public system. Many of the teachers in the private system are former public school teachers fleeing the deforms so that they can actually teach and be respected within the school community.
Parents got tired of protesting nicely for “change” and being ignored or told to just shut up and comply(Arne Duncan!). I understand the anger of paying twice (taxes and then tuition). I don’t mind paying taxes for public schools because they are necessary to educate a large population of children, but it angers me that the public system has become so abysmal and mentally detrimental for the students AND the teachers.
I will continue to say this!…….The voucher discussions will end if/when the public school systems ditch the standardized testing and its evil twin the Common Bore and return the act of actual education over to trained/certified teachers. Trump promised it….change didn’t happen but we got DeVos the voucher queen! We voted for Biden (campaign promises) and Cardona has delivered on diddly squat. Both R and D love the deform movement because neither side wants to mess with the free hand of the market in education and tech/the status quo. Meanwhile, the kids aren’t happy, the parents see this and they get angry, the teachers take the brunt of the abuse and they aren’t happy. The only way for change to happen is when parents finally say “NO MORE!”.
Lisa: I feel like you have the chronology backwards. The things you do not like about public schools are things the privatization advocates use to destroy public schools so parents will want to desert public schools. That is why the charters are against testing in charters, but all for it in public schools.
If you want parents to cry “no more,” you need to get parents to vote for political leaders that will support public education. I understand why individual parents have to leave public schools. Parents make decisions based on what their own child needs. I get that. As a teacher who retired last year, I can assure you that teachers have criticism of the institutions to which they have dedicated their professional life. But you can both support and criticize something to which you are dedicated.
Roy
When LisaM doesn’t like an argument, she falls back to the insult that the commenter wouldn’t be fun at a party- just a heads up.
I don’t know if, on occasion, she is impaired when she writes and possibly, not at other times.
I read this comment three times. With the exception of the second sentence, every other one is loaded with assumptions, innuendo, acceptance of very debatable notions and dubious ideas as facts. I don’t think this commentator would object to the “loudest [voices] in the crowd” if they yelled what he wanted them to and got their way. This entire straw man is built to blame the victim, which is public education. Blame with incomplete, baseless conjecture. Every one of which has been proven to be false, in large part because of Diane’s objective scholarship and advocacy.
I call BS on you! You just don’t like it when facts are stated even though you know better. You’re basically a “mansplainer” on education! What is baseless conjecture?….. the over testing madness? the stupid CC standards? the over collection of data? the months of test prep as curriculum? the dismissal of the need for the arts/music/PE? the degradation of the teaching profession? You know how it is in every school system yet you can’t stand to hear it from someone else. Greg the All-Knowing Almighty….you are a disgusting person.
The point is Lisa, as Ray pointed out, that all your criticisms can be attributed to the privatization crowd. I am fortunate to live in an area that can support its public schools generously and does not have a bunch of charter and voucher schemes sucking money out of an already burdened system. Unfortunately, as Diane has documented over and over again, charters and voucher schemes more often than not are not only detrimental to the public school’ financial picture but also to the student who ends up in a substandard school. You may have ended up in one of the minority of charter schools that do a decent job of educating students. If you bothered to follow the research, you would know those schools are few and far between.
Lisa, take a breath. Again, EVERY sentence is filled with assumptions and even those don’t make sense. Let’s look at one part. “The primary measure for student and school success is student performance on standardized tests. That is a terrible measure, but if it what is used. Based on that measure, public schools are at best producing mediocre success, especially when compared to other nations. Performance gaps between racial groups continue with little change in decades.”
If the primary measure is terrible, how can one conclude that using it will “at best produce mediocre success”? Based on your own logic, success (which is another issue entirely) cannot be measured. So how can one draw that conclusion and claim is it authoritative. “Based on that measure” and then accepting its conclusions is exactly what privatizers want people to do. And the last sentence is pure race-based determinism, also known as bigotry. Just how does one conclude “performance gaps between racial groups” will “continue with little change”? I think the basis for the “logic” this person implies is disgusting. Not mansplaining. Explaining. There’s a difference. But your entrenched anger will not allow you to see it. The desperation to find anything that might agree with this narrow view calls for some anger management.
“Can anyone look at public schools today and not see the broken culture it has created?”
Perhaps the schools are evidence of broken culture, but how can it be seriously suggested that they are creators of it?
If Michael reported back to the blog, after the state Catholic Conferences and billionaires refrained from promoting and funding school choice, we’d see how little support the “movement” has.
If Michael and his ilk want the, “culturally agreed upon values,” of the conservative Catholic Taliban, instead of modernism, they should be willing to front the costs of the Christian indoctrination academies.
umm.. excuse me??? Where in my post did I refer to religious school or ‘conservative Catholic Taliban.” Your religious bigotry seems to be impacting your perception of what you read.
Because you didn’t announce it via your comment, it’s not happening? (I see your point. Why shouldn’t the strategy work repeatedly after it proved successful during the cover up of priest pedophilia.)
Btw- In at least two states, Indiana and Florida, conservative Catholics are publicly given credit for the initiation and passage of school choice legislation. State Catholic Conferences co-hosted with the Koch’s AFP, school choice rallies in states. The Executive Director of the
Colorado Catholic Conference was formerly with the Koch network. The VP of EdChoice in Kentucky was identified by media, as also the associate director of the Kentucky Catholic Conference. Georgetown Law hired Ilya Shapiro for a top administrative position (Constitutional Law). He was formerly with the Koch network.
Mary Jo McConahay has opened the door to scrutiny in her book, “Playing God….”
IMO, there’s a Pulitzer for the journalist who exposes a major player in the campaign against public schools.
I presume you’ll trot out the
bogus arguments and well- worn insults
so popular in the defense of the Church.
Linda, you make a great many assumptions with no clue what you are talking about. You have no idea about my individual religious beliefs. To make assumptions about them and then to trash them demonstrates your motivation in posting here. You do much to prove my point regarding the loudest in the room.
As far as your attack on conservative Catholics and other religious organizations… so what?? Like any other organization in the United States, they are free to practice their first amendment rights. It seems you would prefer to gag free speech either directly, or through shame of anyone who disagrees with you.
Michael,
I am very loud, as are others, in opposition to the Catholic Church taking away the rights of women and people who are gay. More Americans should be loud about being forced to pay for Catholic organizations that have usurped government function.
I didn’t write that I knew your religious beliefs. You made the bogus assumption that you knew which cultural values society had agreed upon.
That “mediocre product” is responsible for the GDP growth in the nation. In order to do so, they have to overcome the abysmal product, Wall Street, which is a 2% drag on the economy.
At the bottom of this thread, I’ve asked you a couple of questions.
Michael,
Your free speech is different than the free speech of organizations. You as an individual can’t afford lobbyists and your income isn’t tax exempt. You pay the taxes required to live in a civilized society while religious organizations free load.
also, the commentary referred to in the original posting appeared in the Ohio Capital Journal, not the Ohio Business Journal.
Thank you.
Thanks for pointing out my error. I noticed I also forgot the link. Both fixed now.
It’s easy to do. I only found it while searching for the original article.
Thus further evidence that Republicans act to divide and conquer. Unity is not one of their goals.
I think that Michael and LisaM are being way too hard and too critical of the real public schools, as opposed to charter schools and private schools. The public schools of a given district take in all the kids without lotteries or other filtering processes (except for the residency requirement). The public schools do all the heavy lifting and don’t dump off the problem kids or low achievers. Yes, too many public schools have large class sizes to deal with while many private schools have class sizes of 12 or 15 kids. All things considered, overall and on average, the public schools are doing a good job. Let’s leave the public school bashing to the Waltons, Kochs, Duncans, Rhees and the school reform mafia. Constructive criticism is OK but putting the public schools in a trash can and declaring them hopelessly broken and defunct is overdone.
Absolutely NO! We parents gave constructive criticism during the Obama years and we got shut down EVERY SINGLE TIME (Arne Duncan/John King). We Refused the tests/Opted out, stood with BATS, wrote letters, went to meetings and acted civilly and our children suffered consequences from school admin and we parents got bullied and threatened. The reason you have the push for vouchers and the angry school board meetings is because parents are fed up with the deforms. Get rid of the CRAP deforms and all the other problems will fall into place….even with over crowded classrooms!
I’m really tired of the retired teachers on this blog defending things they know nothing about anymore….maybe your “expiration date” has come due? It really IS as bad we say in lots of areas….but I guess you’ll just refer to me as some right wing GOP/troll/nut and continue with your “defense” for/of the public system. I wish it were different and that I didn’t have to spend the $$$$ for a private school education for my child (and I’m not alone!). It shouldn’t be this way, but our government will NOT release control over something they should have no control over anyway….except for making sure schools are funded properly and kids are treated well.
The ANGRIEST parents were the right wing ones who didn’t even go to public schools and wanted to control what public school students could learn.
If your public school bullied you and your child because you spoke out against testing, I wish you would identify it, because that is completely unacceptable, and for you to immediately assume that you know for a fact it happens at lots of public schools is ridiculous. No doubt your private school welcomes parents demanding that the administration cater to their specific wishes?
I know something about private schools, and it does not surprise me that some parents whose kids didn’t thrive in public schools blame the school. Are you really so small-minded that you don’t realize that happens with parents who LEAVE private schools, too? (I’ve even heard parents badmouthing a private school they left when they are switching to a different private school.) That’s been the case as long as I have been alive.
Most good schools don’t focus on tests. Most parents who don’t want their kid to take AP courses don’t have them take them! It’s usually not a big deal.
Lisa
Is your kid’s private school, Catholic?
The right wing uses the Russian disinformation playbook. LisaM has used more than one of the tactics. In the thread to this post, she and Michael use the, “categorize extremist groups as representative of a broader swath of people than they are,” play.
Yep.
With “friends” like that, who trash the public schools that just happen to have to take all the kids the private schools won’t teach even if their parents CAN pay the tuition (“counseling out” is real), who needs enemies?
If you read LisaM, you would assume that parents and teachers in affluent suburbs all over America were running away from their terrible suburban schools. I haven’t seen that at all. They like their suburban schools, except some parents have kids who need special attention which has ALWAYS been the case, and that kid will not do well in an excellent public school where other students thrive. There is nothing wrong with it. But it is outrageous to act as if that is not the case for ALL schools – including strict parochial schools that are not good for other high-achieving kids who do not fit the mold. That doesn’t give the parents of kids who leave parochial schools the right to bash them as hopelessly broken.
Private schools can ALSO be detrimental to the mental health of kids who don’t fit, with bullying, favoritism, and parents who complain being told it is the school’s way or the highway if the needs of another more favored student come into conflict.
My kids got a great education in public schools despite the testing because like most parents lucky enough to have access to a good public school, the public school offered so many amazing opportunities and strong teachers. The real problem is obvious — the schools that teach the most economically disadvantaged kids are suffering. And public schools now teach a much higher percentage of disadvantaged kids than they did in the past.
But pretending that private schools that EXCLUDE the kids from the most problematic public schools are superior to the public schools that – because of zoning or selective admissions – ALSO exclude those students, is nonsense. Even with testing, good public schools are like good private schools. Most kids will thrive, and some kids because of their unique needs will not.
No, suburban parents are not running away form suburban public school, Suburban parents have run away form the cities partially because of the city public schools.
Actually, more families have been staying in the cities and using public schools.
But glad you are agreeing with my pointing out that LisaM’s rant against public schools doesn’t hold true.
You didn’t address my main point, which is that there are public schools everywhere that teach a very small percentage of disadvantaged students, and parents don’t go running from them, whether they are in the city or the suburbs.
The main difference is that those public schools don’t lie and cite their superior CEO and inexperienced teachers as their secret to success.
Being truthful helps ALL students. Lying helps only adults who are in it for their own advancement.
It’s a shame. One can have choice schools without the lie. The lie doesn’t help the kids – it helps the adults promote themselves.
This is why we can’t take self-described conservatives seriously and they really are a cult. His comment is nothing but a slanted diatribe ascribing simplistic conclusions about suburbia. Then it is spewed and the writer will act offended when called out to explain or cite a specific fact or statement upon with all these fallacious ideas are built. Some even resort to trying to call it mansplaining. That’s because an actual response based on facts and a reasonable argument is an act beyond them.
There are lots of reasons to be disgruntled about the current state of public education. Directing anger at public schools is not the answer. Anger should be directed at politicians of both parties that fail to do their duty and serve the best interests of our young people. Instead, politicians from both parties work for billionaires that have no use for public education and would like nothing better than to lower their taxes. The ultra wealthy and special interest groups have outsized influence on policy in this country. Until we can figure out a way to get the money out of politics, it will be business as usual in Washington, DC, and state governments.
“Directing anger at public schools is not the answer.”
Ohioans and others can continue to pretend school choice isn’t the agenda of the religious Taliban.
Sandra O’Brien and Matt Huffman are conservative Catholics. Andrew Brenner is a graduate of Liberty University.
Huffman’s first cousin who is also a state senator lost his job as an emergency room physician over public comments he made about uncleanliness and people who are Black.
The 3 listed believe that if they stand in a garage, they become cars just like if going to church makes them Christians (or, patriots).
Everyone who cares about the fate of public education should learn about Andrew Brenner. Virtually nothing that has happened to mortally wound public education in Ohio in the past decade-plus without his public or tacit support. He is American education’s Reinhard Heydrich to Heinrich Himmler. Heydrich implemented the much of the machinery of the SS, the Final Solution, and the death camps. Brenner desperately wants to play the same role with American public education and will get it if and when republicans take charge. If you want to know what national education policy will look like in the next republican administration gets its hands on the Department of Education, look no further than Ohio to see what will happen. Brenner will either be the Secretary or the advisor in the White House who controls the office.
Greg,
Please write a summary of Brenner so readers have context.
Greg-
I’d like to know more about the politicking of his wife as well.
The Catholic Conference of Ohio site is worth looking at. There’s a staff of 6 at the location, .3 mile from the statehouse. All 10 clergymen board members appear to me to be White ( photo array). I can’t confirm that the Associate Director of Education is a registered lobbyist. One media outlet described him as such.
According to media reporting, in Ohio, lobbyists get special access to public buildings that is denied to the public.
The CCO site posted a job listing for an associate director of education. (Are
efforts expanding?) One of the job duties listed, “…interpret education laws…”
The site (5-4-2023) posted, “Support school choice…ask your Ohio Senator to support SB 11.” Also posted, “Defeat Ohio’s proposed abortion amendment.”
The site lists Ohio’s population, number of Catholics, number of hospitals, colleges, social service operations, including number of population receiving service.
As a reminder to blog readers, taxpayers have made Catholic organizations the nation’s 3rd largest employer.
Get used to living in the United Catholic/Christian States of America.
A new Christian facility operating for similar purposes is opening/ has opened near the statehouse.
The following are two questions for commenter, Michael, who posted above.
Most of the men I’ve met over my life were as competent to hold jobs as women and, as competent to hold leadership roles. But, how many deficits do the Catholic bishops and Christian leaders think men have that would require a tilt to the playing field to make them competitive in the workplace? For example, religious organizations were exempted from civil rights employment law- courtesy of SCOTUS judges. We need only look at top leadership roles in conservative religious organizations to see the bias that tilts the playing field.
And secondly, why do the bishops want to saddle men with kids they may not be able to support financially? It seems like that would make a father devalue himself.
I can provide a clue about the answer to the 2nd question based on the period of the Great Hunger in Ireland. The Catholic church was better able to advantage the social Darwinists, the equivalents of the present day Charles Koch, if the faithful were desperate because of impoverishment.