Matt Barnum, writing in Chalkbeat, reports that the U.S. Supreme Court declined today to rule on whether charter schools are public or private.
The case at hand was a charter school in North Carolina that required girls to wear certain types of clothing. If the school were deemed “public,” its rule would be considered discriminatory. If it were deemed “private,” the school could write its own rules about student dress.
So the question remains open, and the Court of Appeals ruling that the school could not discriminate remains in place.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to hear a case that hinged on whether charter schools are considered public or private.
The decision to punt indicates the highest court won’t offer an early hint on the validity of religious charter schools. It also leaves in place a patchwork of rulings on whether charter schools are considered private or public for legal purposes.
But the legal debates are not over.
“The issue will percolate and the Supreme Court will eventually hear a case,” predicted Preston Green, a professor of educational leadership and law at the University of Connecticut.
The case, Charter Day School. v. Peltier, focused on a dispute over a charter school’s dress code. The “classical” school in southeastern North Carolina had barred girls from wearing pants, as a part of an effort to promote “chivalry,” according to its founder.
Backed by the American Civil Liberties Union, some parents sued over this policy. They argued that the dress code amounted to sex-based discrimination and is illegal under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The school countered that it is not a government-run institution so is not bound by the Constitution, which does not apply to private organizations. (Charter Day also maintains that the dress code is not sexist.)
Last year, a divided circuit court sided with the parents. The majority ruled that charter schools, at least in North Carolina, are bound by the Constitution and that the dress code amounted to illegal discrimination.
The charter school appealed to the Supreme Court. Attorneys for the Biden administration argued that the lower court decision was correct and urged the court to accept that ruling. A string of conservative writers and groups had urged the court to take on the case.
On Monday, though, the Supreme Court declined to grant a hearing, leaving the circuit court decision in place. This indicates that there were not four justices who wanted to take on the case. As is typical, the court did not issue any further comment.
The case turned on whether Charter Day School is a private entity or a public “state actor.” This issue is also crucial for the brewing legal dispute over religious charter schools. If charter schools are state actors then they likely cannot be religious. If they are private, though, religious entities would have a stronger case for running charter schools. These debates will likely be tested in Oklahoma, which recently approved what could be the country’s first religious charter school. Ultimately, this may end up being sorted out via years of litigation — which could end up back at the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, the court’s decision to pass on the case is a win for the parents who sought to change the North Carolina charter school’s dress codes.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
That’s because neither existed in the 14th century.
LikeLike
I’ve said this here about 50 times over the last dozen or so years, and always ignored, but what the hell, I’ll say it again.
There’s never been any confusion about whether charter schools are public or private. They are, for the most part, privately managed corporations authorized to operate within public school districts with certain restrictions. They are “public” in the sense that the public library is public, i.e. they are open to all students who apply, free of charge, subject to residency requirements and availability.
Lawsuits like this one don’t concern whether a charter school is “private” or “public.” (Again, with very limited exceptions, charter schools are PRIVATE corporations that operate within the public school system and which bear certain characteristics in common with what we consider “public” entities.). What they concern is whether charter schools are “state actors” for purposes of various laws.
When a charter school says it is a “public” school, it is referring to those features like being free of charge and open to all within the geographic boundary. That representation is not an admission that the charter school is a “state actor.” Nor does it change, or contradict, the fact that charter schools are private corporations.
LikeLike
Never any confusion? You comment is a basket of confusion. I contend, among other things, that it is not consistent to claim status as a “public” school and then claim to not be a “public actor.” If a charter school is a private corporation, then it should not be permitted to claim “public” status and receive any of the advantages that accrue to that status. Just be private, tuition or gift funded and feel free to operate in discriminatory ways with impunity.
LikeLike
Sign. Well, I can’t say I didn’t try.
Is the New York Public Library public or private? Is it a state actor? Do the answers to this seem obvious to you?
LikeLike
That’s “sigh” not “sign”
LikeLike
FLERP!,
When the NY Public library gets public funding and decides it will only issue a limited number of library cards and can pick and choose which people it wants to serve, then you can make that comparison to charters.
Does the NY public library use implicitly racist innuendo to justify not serving a huge percentage of the people they are supposed to be serving? (“We had to revoke library privileges for huge percentages of very poor, non-white 5 year olds because they were so violent and dangerous and those kids must be banned from setting foot in our libraries”???)
Does a library system that claims to find it necessary to ban all library privileges for extraordinarily high percentages of disadvantaged children – claiming those young children are too violent and dangerous to be allowed to set foot in a library – then make ridiculous claims about their librarians being superior to another library system’s librarians because in their libraries, every child allowed to have library privileges reads at or above grade level?
Public libraries don’t look to cherry pick library users. They are there to SERVE library users. If they were “faux public”, like charters, where the goal isn’t serving the public but figuring out how the public can serve their greedy CEOs and make them look good, it would be relatively easy to do if their only oversight was a board of hacks who loved saying students using their library read better because their librarians are better with that board of hacks covering up the extraordinarily high number of students the faux public library deems “unworthy” of using their library.
If REAL public library had to compete with billionaire supported charter libraries for public money, they would struggle to survive because their missions were different. The public library/school mission is to serve the public. The charter school/library mission is to serve those members of the public that make them look good and demonize the rest to hide what they are doing.
Charter schools have nothing in common with public libraries. But if a system of charter libraries was given money from public library budgets to serve only library users who “fit”, then your comparison with libraries would be more accurate.
LikeLike
That’s a swamp of words I won’t wade into, but let me assure you that the answer is this and has always been this: charter schools are private corporations. They are not public in the sense that local district schools are public. They call themselves public schools because they operate within public school districts and provide their services to the public free of charge. Yes that may make charter schools hypocrites and it may make some people angry. No it has no bearing on whether they are state actors.
LikeLike
By your definition all Publicly traded Corporations are “Public” .
Substitute trading on Public-ally regulated markets for “school districts”. Or perhaps any public-ally accessible venue from restaurants to hotels… covered by the 1964 civil rights act. Verses a private club which can exclude who ever it wants to.
Charter schools as long as they are Publicly funded are not private clubs they are State actors and should be treated as such. Applying what ever regulations apply to public schools. Be that on dress codes or First Amendment rights.
I have heard this line before: On a Unions right to be the exclusive bargaining agent for all workers in a workplace after winning the organizing vote.
In fact the comments attached to the rejection asked for further lower court opinions. Before it essentially overturned the central tenant of the NLRA .
“The issue will percolate and the Supreme Court will eventually hear a case,”
Translation this court has already proved itself to be a bunch of out of touch ideologues and needs some breathing room in between its unpopular rulings that upend decades or even centuries of precedent.
LikeLike
As usual I don’t understand what you’re trying to say.
Charter schools (with very limited exceptions) are private corporations. That’s not disputable. End of story. No need for hundreds of words or gnashing of teeth.
LikeLike
“Charter schools (with very limited exceptions) are private corporations. That’s not disputable.”
Exactly, they function like private schools which are ALSO private corporations. That’s not disputable.
Which is why they should NOT be getting taxpayer dollars to run a private school that claims to be a “public school”.
But if they do, then I guess vouchers should be given so more private schools can claim to be faux public when it is convenient, and claim to be private when it isn’t.
LikeLike
If they are Publicly funded they should be publicly regulated to same degree the state regulates Public Schools. iIs that simple enough.
But are you.asserting what the SCOTUS has refused to weigh in on yet. Asserting that being incorporated makes them exempt from the public regulation and laws that apply. to Public Schools
The Appellate Court would seem to disagree with that . If that is what you mean. I can never quite understand what your point is. In any event the 4th Circuit ruled that Charters are “State Actors “ ruled that the dress code by a state actor violated the
equal protection clause of the 14 th Amendment In this case denying girl’s education if they do not comply with a dress code that is different than boys.
And for now they stand as “State Actors “.
LikeLike
Sorry, I still don’t follow. I’m just saying that they are private corporations. That’s a fact. Whether they see state actors is a separate legal analysis.
LikeLike
Flerp,
I agree. Some federal courts have ruled that they are not state actors.
LikeLike
Whether they “are,” not “see”
LikeLike
Bob Shepherd
I think we are in total agreement on that. Charter schools are among some of the most profitable non profits in Country.
Non Profit boards with CEOs. (Eva !) earning $755,000 in total compensation. From the venture be that directly or through related enterprises.
Long before Charter schools NYC outsourced the redevelopment of the burnt out outer Boroughs of the 70s. to non Profit Community Development Corporations. They did so to avoid paying prevailing wages. Very profitable for the directors of those “non profits”not so for the workers being exploited by unscrupulous contractors. They since the early 90s dropped the pretense of non profits. The City and State using tax breaks to Billionaire developers for so called affordable housing. Tax breaks that do not show on budgets as expenditures.
LikeLike
FLERP,
My view is that getting public money doesn’t make an organization public. Harvard gets public money but it’s not public. Lockheed Martin gets public money yet it’s not public. Charters have a private board of trustees. In some states, they operate for profit (most charters in Michigan do).
Charters are not open to all students within their geographic district.
LikeLike
Thank you, Diane. Foot down! I’ll add that if I tell all my neighbors they can all come to my backyard for a barbecue and everyone is welcome, it’s still my backyard. It’s not a public barbecue. Ownership is the issue. Always has been, always will be. The rest is legalese word soup.
LikeLike
Certainly merely receiving public funding doesn’t make you public. Where I live, billions of dollars of city funds go to nonprofits. They are private corporations.
LikeLike
Does Harvard receive Public money for its operating budget to be spent as they desire. Or do they receive grants that have to be applied for with specific designs,requirements and for specific purposes. Even the Public money they do receive opens them up to regulation.
Although many corporations may get Public money like banks or auto companies being bailed out. Lockheed Martin is paid for a product or service. That does not make them Public entities anymore than me buying a coffee makes me an owner of Starbucks. However receiving those public contracts also opens them up to various regulations and oversight.
My point with Charters is exactly what the 4th circuit ruled. They are State actors and should be regulated as such. The near universal problem with Charters is the lack of that regulation/ accountability. They claim they are Private when they seek to avoid accountability and Public when they receive funds.
And of course accountability includes many things from attrition rates to as you say being open to all students in the district including those with learning disabilities.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And, ofc, many of them, even when they don’t operate for profit, operate for profit. Here’s how EZ that is:
LikeLike
Corporate welfare is a trillion dollar government program in this country which puts the lie to the whole “America is a capitalist system” claim.
But private entities that don’t submit to the very same rules and regulations as public entities should not get public funding. It’s really as simple as that.
LikeLike
I do not know exactly where I should butt into this conversation which I have written much about. Charter schools, as nonprofits, are private entities. They are not public schools and they are not governed by the principles of democracy. In Pennsylvania, our Commonwealth Court has ruled that a charter is a “license” to operate a school. And that the founder has a “property interest” in that license which can not be taken away without Due Process. A private person can not have a property interest in a public entity.
There are NLRB decisions which hold that for an entity to be a public entity its Board must be elected by the people or appointed by a public official who is elected by the people. In Philadelphia our school board is appointed by the mayor. All other school Districts have elected school boards in Pennsylvania.
There are some state Supreme Courts which have ruled that charter schools are unconstitutional in their states because they do not fit the notions of the “common school” based on democracy.
May I say this again:
If we are going to create the Great American school for all of our children, we must govern and lead them on the same democratic ideals as in our U.S. Constitution. That is the only way to “set the conditions” for Great schools to emerge.
That is the “Imperative of Democracy” for our public schools.
LikeLike
SomeDAM Poet
Absolutely true. The other myth about Capitalism is that of free markets. Some of it’s biggest cheerleaders are Tech and Pharma execs. Execs. whose profits would be a small fraction of what they are, if they were not the recipient of Government granted monopolies,on the design production and sale of their products. Their love of the market does not extend to eliminating these multi decade long public grants.
Another perfect example is our Labor laws which if they were instituted to level the playing field between owners and workers no longer do so. They are easily avoided by deep pocketed corporations while tying the hands of workers. As one court decision after the next for multiple decades and the inability to pass new labor legislation decimates unions.
No better example of the (not) free market than Union leaders not being able to tell their workers to withhold their labor in support of other workers even in the same industry.
LikeLike
Joel and SomeDam One of the biggest brand-scams going is the idea that corporations are participants and supporters of competition and free markets. “Free” means “We are free to power-grab and take over while everyone else fights for the scraps under the table.”
It’s corporate tribalism, zero-sum-game, plain and simple. And neo-liberalism is code for “nobody regulates us, even us.” CBK
LikeLike
The more I see and try to avoid it, but it’s not always possible, the more I’m convinced FLERP! has not read one of Diane’s books or articles that has not been posted here. Which makes me wonder what drew him here in the first place.
LikeLike
Greg, it’s sad that you can’t follow an argument this simple.
To repeat for the 100th time, for your benefit alone, here are the irrefutable facts:
The overwhelming majority of charter schools are private corporations. Some are non-profit, some are for-profit. But the overwhelming majority are private corporations.
Charter schools have features that are similar to “public” schools, as as open to the public without admissions screens (subject to some geographic limitations and seat availability).
When charter schools say they are “public schools,” it may make you angry, and it may be technically incorrect (given that most are private corporations), but whether a charter school holds itself out as a “public school” has absolutely no bearing on the legal question of whether it is a state actor.
Nod if you understand.
Finally, as I’ve told you before — although it has slipped through your sieve-like head — I’ve read several of Diane’s books. Here’s one that I have in my office!
https://imgur.com/a/WGD5NcF
LikeLike
FLERP,
Did you read THE DEATH AND LIFE OF THE GREAT AMERICAN SCHOOL SYSTEM? REIGN OF ERROR?
LikeLike
I read the former when it came out. (2010 or so? Feels like a long time ago.) Skimmed the latter.
LikeLike
Skimming Ravitch is like only sniffing a fine Burgundy.,For shame!
LikeLike
If charter schools are private , then I should be able to refuse funding them with my tax dollars.
LikeLike
Doesn’t work like that. Just like a taxpayer can’t refuse to fund homeless services provided by nonprofit corporations with city or state money, or Medicare or Medicaid payments made to private doctors.
LikeLike
To understand SCOTUS’ conservative Catholic majority jurists, we can read, Idaho State Journal (Aug. 26, 2022, “What Alito and the Supreme Court are up to.”) An Initiative at Notre Dame paid for Alito to go to Rome for a Summit after Roe was overturned. The Journal article tells us what he said to the assembled audience.
The Journal does not connect the dots to religious schools. I will. Alito claims religion makes for domestic tranquility. The proposed banning of Handmaids Tale by some in the right wing shows that they don’t want their authoritarian agenda exposed. It is to return to a patriarchal social structure where women are pregnant and silent. The schools of the religious right indoctrinate students. Already, at some Catholic schools, the US Pledge of Allegiance that is recited by students has been altered to include, Catholic doctrine about abortion.
Every American should read, “The new contents of sex education in Mexico: laicism in the crosshairs,” at the Scielo site.
Those who think the gifts of Paul Singer and Harlan Crow are more of a threat than the Notre Dame initiative, are wrong. Neal McCluskey’s Public Schooling Battles Map at the Koch Cato site is one indicator of the pervasive impact of those whose religion is front and center.
For men who mistakenly believe they don’t have a dog in the race, take a 2nd look at your futures.
LikeLike
Extreme Court saves totally trashing public education for its big end-of-term (and of democracy) party!
As SDP or Greg B or some other wag said on this blog: Gonna party like its 1399.
LikeLike
The Lumen Christie Institute (Nebraska’s Republican Senator is on the board) posted revisionism about the Inquisition of medieval times. The takeaway, the good guys were the Catholic Church. “The Inquisition: What Really Happened.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s reminiscent of the conservative publisher and Hillsdale’s conservative Catholic historians (a revisionist accounting of the Trail of Tears and Andrew Jackson).
LikeLike
LikeLike
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_at_B%C3%A9ziers
LikeLike
Bob “The Massacre at Béziers occurred on 22 July 1209” at the behest of the Catholic Pope at the time? Ha ha ha ha! Too bad Elon Musk, Jerry Fallwell, MTG and (fill in the blank) weren’t around at the time.
(Thanks for the laugh.) Ha ha ha ha! CBK
LikeLike
Ah, the good old days when the Church had its own armies.
LikeLike
What’s old ’bout that? The Church of God’s Kingdom of the United States has a pretty big army.
LikeLike
Steve Nelson (Sigh . . . . ) CBK
LikeLike
Bob I know Pope Francis just PINES to have a well-equipped army so he can take over the world because he’s not going to die. I cannot stop laughing over that one. I do wish Linda would study European and/or world history and not only just to support her anti-Catholic bias. Hahahahaha. Again, thanks for the laugh. CBK
LikeLiked by 1 person
He’s a good man, Francis.
LikeLike
Bob
Thanks for the link. A few views from Lumen Christi at the University of Chicago about the Inquisitions- “Many mathematicians and natural philosophers were able to advance their scholarship through the Church’s iInquisitional networks.” The Church navigated with grace the problem of “how to save Catholic bodies without the works of a protestant author (medical advances). Btw- I presume it’s a bit like the embryo stem cell research of today only less nuanced. Inquisition punishments only impacted “scores” of people. The most common punishment for heretics was to recite hail Mary’s or to sit through boring lectures. The Church didn’t have the authority to execute, only the state did. (Btw- the Church recommended who to execute.) Executions were rare because they were so expensive. The goal of 12th century France was to ensure purity and veracity of doctrine. The “myths” about the Inquisition were spread by protestants.
The final paragraph of the “What Really Happened,” takes the cake.
One of the University of Chicago scholars cited was with the Steven G. Stevanovich Institute at the University of Chicago. The Institute’s goal is “to educate a new generation.” Axios wrote about Steven G. Stevanovich,
“The University of Chicago’s Bogus Billionaire.”
The connection between free market economics and politicized right wing Catholics in the US today, is no more accidental than the changed view of the Inquisition. Fits like a glove.
LikeLike
Private religious schools-
Nikole Hannah Jones, “admitted that much of her Notre Dame experience had not been very happy.” She described in an interview (National Catholic Reporter, 3-19-2022), a “deeply wounding experience” on campus. She was called the n-word by a passing car of football players. At graduation, she owed the university money that she couldn’t pay and she didn’t receive a diploma.
LikeLike
Notre Dame Law school has its oily fingerprints all over recent Supreme Court rulings.
Alito and Coney-Barret are their puppets on the Court.
LikeLike
Agree.
The “oily fingerprints” of conservatives and Koch fronts originating at Georgetown and Catholic University of America spread out from D.C. to influence states west, south and north of D.C.
LikeLike
“supreme court declines to rule on whether charter schools are public or private”
If only they had declined a year ago to rule on whether women’s uteruses are private or public.
LikeLike
To give the Supreme Court majority the benefit of the doubt: maybe there was simply a typo in the case briefs and the majority thought they were actually tasked with deciding whether uteruses are “pubic”.
LikeLike
And of course, given the choice of ruling uteruses either “private” or “pubic”, the majority would have rightly figured, “six of one, a half dozen of the other”
LikeLike
Who says “typos are unimportant”?
LikeLike
Justice Thomas had already encountered the same confusion (in the reverse) in his confirmation hearing when his perfectly reasonable question to Anita Hill “Who has put public hair on my coke can” was misheard and misconstrued by Ms. Hill
LikeLike
SomeDAM Don’t you love history . . . especially about coke cans . . . good one. CBK
LikeLike
I could be wrong, but I think I have now probably gone far enough down that rabbit hole.
LikeLike
I lied
Public or Private?
Our pubic warts
Are private parts
And public courts
Should hold their torts
LikeLike
Supreme Confusion
Supremes are confused
‘Twixt public and pubic
And private and pirate
And citizen and denizen
And Justice and “just us”
And country is abused
By muddle of Supremes
LikeLike
“Meddling of Supremes” would probably be better
LikeLike
Rabbit Holes
Rabbit holes were meant
For thorough exploration
Until you’re simply spent
And need some ventilation
LikeLike
Public or Private?
“Your uterus is public”
Alito said to lady
“it’s owned by the Republic”
“And so’s your unborn baby”
LikeLike
“Your uterus is mine”
Said Justice Special K
“Your uterus is fine”
“I’ll take it any day”
LikeLike
I like beer .. and I like uterus
LikeLike
LikeLike
Though there is no single spokesperson for families, students or educators involved with charter public schools, Nina Rees, President and CEO of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, which is a major organization in the charter world issued this statement:
Nina Rees, President and CEO of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, released a statement on the U.S. Supreme Court declining to hear the Peltier v. Charter Day School case.
“We are pleased that the Supreme Court has declined to hear the case, allowing the Fourth Circuit’s decision to stand. Charter schools are public schools and are, in fact, state actors for the purposes of protecting students’ federal constitutional rights.
“We are pleased to put this matter behind us and move forward with the critically important work of ensuring every child in this nation has access to a high-quality public education. The actions of the high court affirm that as public school students, charter school students are entitled to the same federal protections as their counterparts who attend district schools.”
https://www.publiccharters.org/latest-news/2023/06/26/national-alliance-pleased-us-supreme-court-denial-peltier-v-charter-day#:~:text=%E2%80%9CWe%20are%20pleased%20that%20the,protecting%20students'%20federal%20constitutional%20rights.
When the US Court of Appeals issue its ruling (declaring that charters are “state actors” and students are protected by the constitution, Rees and Rhonda Dillingham, exec director of the North Carolina Association for Public Charter Schools, issued this joint statement:
In a joint statement, Nina Rees, president and CEO of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools — which filed a brief in support of the plaintiffs — and Rhonda Dillingham, executive director of the North Carolina Association for Public Charter Schools, said the ruling gives charter schools clarity over their status and obligations to protect students’ civil rights.
“The North Carolina charter statute not only compels this outcome but the statute mirrors the substantive provisions in charter statutes around the country,” they said, adding that the “decision crosses state lines — inside and beyond the 4th Circuit.”
https://www.the74million.org/article/attorneys-consider-asking-scotus-to-weigh-in-on-public-status-of-charter-schools/
Across the country, there are a variety of public schools not controlled by locally elected city boards. These include the public schools several large cities (including NYC and Boston). They also include statewide schools serving particular populations, such as students who with special needs or special interests/talents.
LikeLike
As an attorney in Pennsylvania who is admitted to practice law in federal courts, it is my legal opinion that the decision does not cross state lines. It is not a “mandatory precedent” in Pennsylvania or any other jurisdiction. That is not how jurisdiction works. It may be used as a “persuasive precedent” in a case with similar facts, but it is not binding on that specific court. I have not read the opinion yet. It may be limited to the facts of that case. Finally, just because the court ruled that charter schools are state actors, it does not mean that charter schools are public schools.
Again, the BS of the charter school brigade turns my stomach in their intellectual dishonesty and charter school propaganda.
What I say is not against charter schools per se. It is my view that i a local school board with an elected school board, may choose to contract with an entity to operate a school if that would be in the best interests of its children, their parents and the local community.
The sole discretion whether to have charter schools or not should vest with the democratically elected school board.
We live in a Democracy, my friends.
LikeLike
Rich, thanks for sharing your opinion.
What do you think about other parts of public education that are not controlled by democratically elected school boards – for example, the public schools in NYC and Boston, or public schools serving students with some form of disability, such as the Pennsylvania Schools for the Deaf and Blind, or dual credit programs such as Washington State’s Running Start or Minnesota’s Post Secondary Enrollment Options program?
Aren’t these also part of public education?
In a number of states, both Democratic and Republic legislators have decided that public education is broader, and that families should have options beyond what’s available from local district public schools.
LikeLike
Joe,
You are an architect of the very first charter school law. Why didn’t you put in safeguards for accountability and transparency. Al Shanker was deceived into thinking that charter schools would be run by educators and they would be unionized. As you know, he turned against charters as being no different from vouchers. For the past thirty years, we have seen the charter movement funded by rightwingers like Koch, Walton, and DeVos. We have seen the emergence of huge chains that replaced community public schools. We have seen charters run by entrepreneurs and grifters. We have seen the theft of hundreds of millions of dollars by charter thieves.
Now we see the emergence and rapid multiplication of religious-themed charter schools, like the so-called “classical” schools run by Hillsdale College. See NPE’s latest report: “A Sharp Turn Right.”
Charters were the first step towards vouchers and the destruction of public education.
And you have the chutzpah to criticize defenders of public schools owned by and accountable to the public.
Now that the charter industry has shown its true colors as the first step towards the privatization of public education: Have you at last no shame?
LikeLike
As has been previously noted, civil rights hero Kenneth Clark was one of the first to urge (Harvard Ed Review, 1968, Alternative Public School Systems) that new public schools be created outside the control of local public schools.
Click to access Alternative-Public-School-Systems-Kenneth-Clark.pdf
There actually was a long tradition of Blacks creating schools shortly after the civil war.
What Shanker proposed was already happening in New York City and a number of other cities – and he knew it. Groups of teachers were allowed subject to permission from school boards and unions to create new options. However, those alternative schools were often killed off in a few years, despite in some cases, doing great work with kids. A number of the people involved in chartered public schools are people who worked in district alternatives that were destroyed.
The first step imho toward vouchers (which I opposed) was when suburbs that in New York were created that were allowed to keep out undesirables which included BIPOC families. The question then and now is now who has choice among public schools.
The first charter law, and most charter laws around the country, require that schools be open to all (unlike many magnets including those in NYC and Boston that are allowed to use standardized tests to screen out students).
One of the reasons that some BIPOC educators and families have selected and support charters is that they are NOT allowed to use these tests to screen out people. Some urban BIPOC families see huge sums spent to create magnets in their neighborhood that use standardized tests to screen out their children.
Built into most charter laws are requirements that charters have clear goals and that there be a review.
Some charters have been closed because they did not achieve their goals. Others have been closed because they engaged in illegal financial dealings. I completely agree that there are examples of this, and have worked with others to strengthen and improve those laws (as I’ve worked hard with educators and unions to help create strong district options).
Chartering has received support across the political spectrum, including both Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton as well as conservatives such as you named.
When will the Network for Public Education join with others in opposing magnet schools that use admission tests? When will the Network for Public Education write reports criticizing massive corruption and overspending in some traditional districts?
LikeLike
The Network for Public Education has a mission: to protect, preserve, and strengthen for future generations of children. The public schools belong to the public but as you well know, the privatization forces led by Rightwingers like DeVos, Koch, and red state governors are defunding public schools and opening more charters.
State attorney generals and the media cover public school scandals because public schools must operate in public.
No public school scandal comes close to the money sucked out by ECOT in Ohio, A3 in California, and the appallingly bad schooling offered by all online charters.
Did you see the latest charter scandal?
St Louis.
$600,000 collected by leaders before the school opened.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/education/st-louis-charter-school-founders-double-dipped-from-public-school-tax-dollars/article_701caa26-16ab-11ee-b876-e375ac5e03e9.html#tracking-source=home-top-story
Will you ever apologize for the damage you have done to public schools by unleashing the free market of school choice?
And by the way, historians trace the origins of school choice not to Dr. Kenneth Clark but to the segregationist response to the Brown Decision, when southern state legislatures funded white flight academies (charter schools) and vouchers (so white kids could escape from sitting next to Black kids).
Read Steve Suitts “Overturning Brown” and Derek Black “Schoolhouse Burning.”
LikeLike
Diane “Will you ever apologize for the damage you have done to public schools by unleashing the free market of school choice?
The problem is they don’t think they “damaged” anything. On the contrary.
Another good read for understanding southern Virginia’s reaction to Brown vs Bd of Education is “They Closed Their Schools: Prince Edward County, Virginia, 195-19645” (Bob Smith, 1996. Published by Martha E. Forrester, Council of Women, Farmville Virginia). CBK
LikeLike
Just to be clear, the word “undesirables” was one of the terms used to keep BIPOC families and students out of a number of NYC suburbs. Here’s some of that history, cited by Newsday newspaper in this 2019 article.
“The current demographics of Levittown reflect its history, residents said. The developers of Levittown prohibited people of color from moving in through contract clauses, a common practice at the time. Restrictive racial covenants were recommended by the Federal Housing Administration to create homogenous communities. The U.S. Supreme Court struck them down in 1948, but William Levitt kept them.
Levittown’s restrictive racial covenant read: “The tenant agrees not to permit the premises to be used or occupied by any person other than members of the Caucasian race. But the employment and maintenance of other than Caucasian domestic servants shall be permitted.”
https://projects.newsday.com/long-island/levittown-demographics-real-estate/
LikeLike
So it looks like the answer to two questions I asked what the Network for Public Education is “No.”
“No” we won’t criticize district public school financial scandals.
“No” we won’t criticize district magnet schools that use admissions tests to screen out students.
As to the history of school choice – historians differ. Some cite early examples of publicly funded school choice as programs starting in the 1800’s in the Northeast United States such as Vermont and Maine, where towns that did not have their own schools gave families living in them the option to select among various schools. Some cite the suburbs mentioned above which explicitly provided new educational options for white families and excluded BIPOC families. Some cited programs in the south created in response to Brown v. Board of Education.
Some differentiate between various forms of tax supported school choice – like those that expanded options within districts (alternative schools, magnets and schools within schools), those that expanded opportunities for students to take free courses on college campuses, cross district public school choice programs, statewide schools serving students with different interests (ie schools for talented math, science or art, schools for students with specific characteristics (ie schools for students who are hearing or sight impaired) etc. etc.
One last point. Since fall, 1989 I’ve written more than 2,000 columns published by a variety of urban, suburban and rural newspapers. More than 70% of them praise district and charter public school educators, students and projects.
The most recent example is the SOAR program at St. Louis Park (district) public high school in Mn – a program in which students are actively challenging racism. People reading this page are welcome to read and comment on them. The most recent column on SOAR is found here: https://centerforschoolchange.org/2023/06/soar-is-the-right-word-for-these-students/
Other columns are found here: https://centerforschoolchange.org/category/columns/2021-2023-columns-and-other-publications/
Happy July 4th Holiday – a holiday celebrating freedom, opportunity and the need for all of us to find ways to continue working for this country to achieve its ideals.
LikeLike
Joe Nathan,
I assume you will never apologize for writing the first charter school law and omitting any reference to accountability, transparency, or teachers’ rights to join a union.
I assume you will never admit that you played a direct role in carrying forward the libertarian , anti-public goals of rightwing billionaires like DeVos and the Waltons (I recall you accepted funding in the past from the virulently anti-union Waltons).
You will never acknowledge that charters were a decisive step towards vouchers and the destruction of public schools.
You are putty in the hands of rightwing billionaires. Moms 4 Liberty should give you an honor for leadership in the fight against public schools.
At long last, Joe, it’s clear you feel no shame.
When I was wrong, I said so. I won’t hold my breath waiting for you to admit that you have caused grievous harm to the public schools that enroll 85-90% of American students.
LikeLiked by 1 person