The problem of educational inequity and school failure is much bigger than teachers and schools: It has to do with access to health care, healthy food, steady employment and a reliable income, early-childhood education, and clean water and air, among other factors. Given this amalgamation of social issues, increasing the number of charter schools will not solve any of Philadelphia’s problems.
In a just world, public schools would provide a free, excellent, equitable, and holistic educational environment for all children. In Philadelphia, it is more important that we use our resources to achieve this goal, rather than develop more charters to compete with public schools. Therefore, the School Reform Commission should not approve more charter schools at this time.
As former SRC member Joseph Dworetzky has noted, the district loses $5,500 per student for each transfer to a charter from public school, and $10,000 per student for each transfer from a parochial or independent school. At a time when the district is already operating with a severe budget deficit, it cannot risk losing more money or resources.
Data about the benefits of attending a charter vs. a traditional public school are inconclusive, as are data about charter transfer or dropout rates, according to a recent report by Public Citizens for Children and Youth (PCCY). Also, as to the organizations that have applied to open charters, PCCY reports that these groups’ current charters do not reflect the demographics of traditional public schools – there are fewer minority, low-income, and English-language learners on their rosters.
Nationally, a recent Stanford study reported that in reading, 56 percent of students in charter schools showed no significant difference in academic growth between 2010 and 2011. And while 25 percent did significantly better, 19 percent did significantly worse. In math, 40 percent showed no difference compared with the scores of their counterparts in traditional public schools. Though 29 percent did significantly better, 31 percent did significantly worse.
Philadelphia is our nation’s poorest big city, with at least 80 percent of our students classified as low-income. Given the needs of this population, and with data about charters so inconclusive, it would seem that only a problematic ideology of experimentation could undergird the district’s willingness to consider increasing the number of charters. That’s wrong. It is ethically unacceptable to experiment with the education or future of any child, especially those who may come from more challenging circumstances.
Indeed, charter schools across the country have become vehicles not only for experimentation, but for privatization and the advancement of corporate interests. This is a sad distortion of the vision of teacher union leader Albert Shanker. He conceived of charters as independent, non-faith-based public schools. They could be started by special-interest groups that worked alongside traditional public schools to best meet the needs of a diverse population of students, and to maximize the expertise of teachers and administrators.
Not knowing whether charter schools operate in the best interests of Philadelphia’s children, the city doesn’t need more. Instead, we need a commitment to strengthen our existing schools. We need the state to fund all schools fully and equitably. Finally, we need a vision that will help us pull city schools from the wreckage brought by severe underfunding to a new phase that allows us to meet all student needs and aspirations.
Let’s fulfill the promise of public education and provide quality schools to all of the city’s students.
Philly.Com – February 18, 2015 – Read article online