On Thursday, July 14, Governor of Georgia Nathan Deal unilaterally decided to provide funding for a group of public charter schools, promising them 10 million dollars this year -- 10 million dollars that is thus far nowhere to be found in the state budget. I venture to say that had Governor Deal decided, without legislative approval, to provide 10 million dollars for the state’s Indigent Defense Fund, I well imagine that there would be effigies of him burning in town squares throughout the state. But in this case not a peep -- no hue and cry about excessive executive authority. No, no....because in this case it’s what the majority in Georgia wants. And thus begins another chapter in what I see as the privatization of public education in the state of Georgia.
Using state funds, the governor has decided to support a group of charter schools whose existence had been jeopardized after losing their funding from the local districts they had previously been “attached” to by the state’s Charter School Commission. Remember, following the recent Georgia Supreme Court case the 2008 law creating the Georgia Charter School Commission was deemed unconstitutional -- the court ruling that local districts therefore did not have to provide local monies to those schools which the commission had approved. Before the court’s ruling, a charter school -- such as Ivy Prep Academy in Gwinnett -- could be approved by this commission without any input from the local district. Also, the local district was mandated to provide funding for this chartered school from its local school budget, despite the district having no authority for the structure, governance, or pedagogy of the charter school. Thus the lawsuit, which the local districts won. The issue, however, did not die there. There’s always, it seems, a way around pesky judicial rulings.
So now the governor’s office (apparently with the tacit approval of the majority in the state legislature) has agreed to fund these public charter schools with state money. The current legislative leadership of the state, as well as the state superintendent for schools, are apparently intent by any means necessary to implement a network of charter schools throughout the state. Interestingly enough, in an issue where one continuously hears calls for “local control,” the state has actually first tried to circumvent the local control of school districts, and is now just trying to undermine the local districts altogether. This type of big government is okay, evidently, as long as its the right kind of big government. The momentum of this growth in public charter schools, it appears, must be maintained at all cost. But why?? I, for one, think charter schools is just the camel’s nose under the tent.
First of all -- What is a Public Charter School?
Public charter schools are an interesting creation. They are funded with taxpayer money -- both federal and state -- just like ordinary public schools, but they set themselves apart by having a special focus, the nature of which allows them to operate outside the scope of regular public school, and thus they are accorded a separate, or even self-directed governance. For instance, GCPS set up the Gwinnett School of Math, Science, and Technology, which draws students from all across the county. It is a charter school because the district recognizes that it is a completely atypical institution unlike an ordinary Gwinnett public high school attached to a cluster. Thus the need for the special charter. Another charter school might be set up, say, specifically for the needs of autistic students or students with critical needs, and these schools can be set up through petition by private individuals. The founder of Ivy Prep, for instance, petitioned to set up a specific style of school just for girls, but she didn’t want it to be a private school. Of the many public charter schools not operated by local school districts, some are independently run, while others are actually operated by large education companies.
To my mind, though, many of these state public charter schools -- at least many of the ones not set up by local school districts -- are really just private schools masquerading as public schools. Before the 1990s, these schools would have been told they had to be private and that they just needed to find their own funding. But in Georgia, the state has given them a way to receive the majority of their funding from the state and the federal government (there’s the public component). Interestingly enough, though, the state seems then willing to cede the governance of these schools over to private entities or corporations (there’s the private component). Of particular note are schools operated by Charter Schools USA, Inc and the National Heritage Academies (visionary offspring of The Foundation for Educational Choice), the two largest charter education school companies in the United States. From these two companies stem much of the publicity and legislation driving the charter school and “school choice” movement. Some might argue that there is a very distinct and overarching political mindset to these organizations, one that intends to totally reshape public education in the state and even the nation.
Just how do we want our public educational system set up?
It is interesting to note that most of these corporate-run charter schools espouse a philosophy of “local control through self-governance at the school level.” I fail to see how any schools operated by national private education companies can call themselves locally controlled and self-governed. Ultimately, won’t these schools have to toe the line set by the corporations that manage them? That’s why they call it management.
Do we want our schools organized and led at the local, district level by entities such as GCPS, which have a certain level of local autonomy but are indeed expected to operate within guidelines set by the state dept. of education. Remember also that the state dept. of education is ultimately led by someone who is elected by the people, and the state dept. of education is ultimately governed by the full plural bodies of the elected representatives of the Georgia legislature. So in the end, the people of Georgia are still, for now the ultimate authority on how the schools are organized and run.
Or, do we want our schools to be led at some corporate level, where local schools really have no autonomy but are instead expected to maintain standards set by the business entity operating them. Yes, these charter schools do have local governing boards which set goals to maintain local “mission, vision, and values.” But other than that, the corporate management team is in control. The governance boards are essentially set up or approved by the management arm, which in the end is responsible for developing and implementing the ongoing operational procedures. Is this really local control?? I’m sure that if a local board became disenchanted with the operational level of the management company, they could go off the reservation and break their contract with the company, but what are the odds of that happening when the management company has itself been instrumental in getting the governance boards manned and organized?
Do we really want to do away with “public” (remember, publius means people) education and turn it into a commercial enterprise? Governance of corporate-owned charter schools appears at the surface to be “public” and local, but it’s actually just like a corporation. For example, with a Charter Schools USA school, there are local governing board which “oversee” the work done by the management company at each school. The relationship appears to work like this: The Georgia Charter Educational Foundation Board of Directors has contracted with a professional education management organization, Charter Schools USA, to provide all necessary management and professional expertise. Charter Schools USA assists in developing, planning, and marketing the School, as well as finance, human resources, curricula and school operations. Is the management company there to actually do the bidding of the local foundation board (which was, after all, groomed and instituted by the management company), or is the foundation board there to simply rubber stamp whatever the management company tells it that it needs to rubber stamp? Remember, these boards are voluntary, and someone has to pick and approve the board members -- and yes, that someone works for the management company.
Do these boards have any teeth, or are they ultimately responsible to the managers that put them in place? To me, a charter school board is more like corporate boards of trustees -- ostensibly there to set guidelines and vision, to provide oversight of corporate management, but usually there to rubber stamp whatever the corporate CEO wants them to say yes to. In a corporate system, even when the entire body of stockholders votes there is usually a recommended slate of board members -- a slate recommended by, you guessed it, management.
Is “local control” really local control??
Similarly, I liken this relationship between these “self-governing” schools and their education management companies to the relationship of the small, independent poultry farmer who has contracted with Tyson, Inc. to raise chickens for Tyson. Yes, he’s designed his business plan for the ideal size and scope he would like his operation to be, and he gets to be a local businessman with strong ties to the local community. But he has to follow some rules and benchmarks set up for him by Tyson -- type of grain to use, inoculations to use, target delivery dates, and (importantly) accept recommendations by Tyson inspectors. Yes, if he doesn’t like how Tyson micromanages his affairs, he can break his contract with them (and get sued) or wait until his contract is up and raise chickens for competitor ConAgra, Inc., or go totally independent and hope he can find someone to buy the chickens he raises. But if the poultry farmer starts just willy-nilly doing things his own way -- refuses hormone protocol, refuses to feed marigold petals) -- then Tyson can simply dissolve its partnership with him, and he is left to totally fend for himself with no support. Likewise, in a lot of cases these supposedly local and independent education boards may be more answerable to the distant management team than they would actually like to let on.
Charter Schools and an ultimate drift towards vouchers
Again, I see the evolution of these public charter schools as being the camel’s nose under the tent. Eventually, I feel the conversation will turn from the method of governance to the method of funding -- and here developments would have another set of implications. I think that with the further development of charter schools, public schools will ultimately be faced with competition for funding in the form of vouchers for education.
Admittedly, there is a large section of American society that feels public education, in its current form, should not just be reformed but pretty much done away with -- and replaced with a privatized system where schools, managed by education companies, would compete for students. And to keep the impression that these would be “public” schools, students would receive vouchers (basically an allotment of money to attend school) somewhat equivalent to the per pupil expenditure which the state uses to formulate its annual education budget (currently around 9,500 dollars in Georgia). Indeed, I foresee the day when an ever-growing network of charter schools will ultimately force implementation of a voucher system to enable a system of market driven school choice.
Over time, more and more students will enter these charter schools, and some of these schools will gain traction and enrollment, while others may remain relatively small. It will be very hard for the state to manage an equitable level of funding for all of these different types of schools with their different levels of enrollment. Parents will eventually demand vouchers from the state so that an individual packet of state funding for education can be targeted to each individual student, rather than provided to the systems of schools as it is now. What one hears today is that Money for education should follow the student, and let the parents decide what school is best for their child And from a strictly fiscal viewpoint, this makes pretty good sense. But from a philosophical standpoint, is this good for society as a whole?? This is certainly a debatable point.
Sadly, and perhaps a little cynically, I see the rise of such publicly-funded charter schools as a definite drift towards the total eradication of today’s public school system -- at least in how we’re used to seeing public schools organized, governed, and funded. This drift, very politically conservative in its nature, is not so much to reform our current pluralistic model but rather to do away completely with the current model and replace it with a market-driven model run like businesses and guided by carefully selected corporate boards rather than by elected representatives of the people. This drift is taking place not just in Georgia, but across the country in states like Florida, Ohio, and Wisconsin. My question is this: will this question of school organization and funding ever even come up for debate?? Or will the powers that be seize the political moment and opportunistically let charter schools and vouchers become the norm for public education.
For the greater good, or every man for himself? The Issue of Educational Equity In today’s public education sphere, states and districts attempt as much as possible to have schools that provide fairly equivalent services and standards for instructional and behavioral management. Yes, it’s fairly cookie cutter. In GCPS, a middle school in Dacula is going to be pretty much like a middle school in Norcross or Suwanee or Lilburn. Now, is that to say that some cookies don’t turn out better than others? No, some cookies may be smaller than other and some may end up a little too crispy around the edges. Other cookies turn out great, baked in just the perfect spot in the oven. But the overall intent is to provide a fairly uniform and, ultimately, equitable level of education for the greatest number of students -- for, hopefully, the greater good. Is it always perfect? No. But are we willing to let the struggle for equity in Public Education cease, simply because it is a daunting challenge. Do we do what is right? Or do we do what is easy?
With an increase in charter schools, I foresee our schools becoming little more than a widely disparate collection of separate entities --- some independent, and some part of large companies -- very similar to what we have today with daycare centers. Every daycare center in Georgia operates as a business. Some are individual and stand alone, while some are franchised from larger “childcare development” companies. The state of Georgia “governs” these providers through some regulation and licensing so that the providers maintain a basic minimum level of safety and service. But not all day care centers are created equally: some market themselves with a Cadillac level of service and features...some are middle of the road.....and some are strictly budget-oriented. They’re just like cars or hotels, and you can get whatever you can afford. This is what our school system will look like if we allow charter schools to become the norm
What this means for our society
Ultimately, I feel, it’s not really about choice: it’s about money and an implicit desire to compartmentalize society. The wealthy students will be able to go to the Cadillac charter schools where the families pay a fairly luxurious add-on fee to augment the tuition amount that the state voucher does not cover. Middle of the road families will go to the middle of the road schools, and the poor will go to the schools that provide the lowest level of quality and service as allowable under state licensing and minimum performance standards. A market-driven school system will be nicely segmented between the luxurious, the haves, and the have-nots.
Once our educational system is re-formed into a completely market driven system, our society will be impacted by this balkanization. We will have removed from our society that one great institution which we could heretofore proudly display as a common, equitable service from The People to her people. Gone will be one of American society’s last means for providing at least an attempt at a level playing field. The rich will thrive with the rich....the middle class will muddle through with the middle class.....and the poor will struggle with the poor. No more will these groups have a place where they can go and experience each other, live with each other, and learn from each other. And our great society will be diminished because of it.
MM
