It’s not news that around the country, public education is
under attack. In some areas, the fight is about high-stakes testing and teacher
evaluations – topics well worth debating. But in cities, the attack is much
more basic, with very serious implications. And I wonder whether the folks
involved – the ones launching the attacks and the ones on the receiving end –
realize where this is heading.
Many political leaders, business leaders, and ordinary
citizens have given up on city school districts, putting their faith in charter
schools, private schools, and parochial schools. The day may not be far off
when the public considers those schools the preferred providers of education
for city children.
Look at what’s happening:
• Most states now have charter schools, and the number of charters
is growing. So is support by governors and state legislators. President Obama
himself has been a vocal advocate.
• In New York State, which currently has a cap of 460 charter
schools, Governor Cuomo and Senate Republicans want to raise or eliminate it.
In Massachusetts, charter-school advocates have been pushing the state to do
away with its cap.
• Last year, despite opposition by New York City Mayor Bill de
Blasio, Cuomo successfully pushed for legislation
that would help charter schools get space in public school buildings.
• In this year’s state budget, Cuomo is tying school aid to
education reforms that he wants. Cuomo and Senate Republicans also want to give
New Yorkers and corporations tax credits not only for donations to public
schools but also for donations to scholarship funds for poor and middle-income
students at private and parochial schools.
We all know why this is happening. Many, many children are
failing in traditional public schools. And while that tragedy isn’t limited to
cities, it’s in cities – cities with high populations of poor, non-white
children – that the situation is the worst. Not coincidentally, that’s where most
of the charter schools are developing.
I’ve abandoned my opposition to charter schools because many
inner-city parents are demanding an alternative for their children. It’s hard
to justify forcing them to choose from a list of traditional public schools
where the poverty rate is near 100 percent and the achievement level is
abysmal.
Charter school opponents argue that nationally, charter
schools don’t seem to be performing a lot better than public schools. You can
find studies arguing both side of that issue, though.
But charter schools are hurting traditional public schools
in two ways. They’re siphoning off money from public districts. And the
families who seek out charter schools tend to be the ones who are most
motivated, most engaged in education. (The same is true with the public
urban-suburban program, which is now expanding.) The Rochester school district
needs the presence of those children and their families.
The children left behind are likely to be those with the
greatest needs. And the resources for their schools will have been slashed.
And soon, through an education tax credit, private and
parochial schools may increase the competition.
If children in most public schools were doing well, we
wouldn’t have this problem. And for that, there’s plenty of blame to go around:
teachers, administrators, superintendents, school boards, and yes, the parents
who aren’t involved enough in their children’s education, who don’t insist on
good behavior. And I’m growing increasingly exasperated that all of those
parties keep blaming everybody else rather than focusing first on the obvious
improvements needed in themselves and their peers.
But tragically, hardly anybody with the power to really
bring about change is willing to face our biggest problem: the concentrated
poverty of the nation’s inner cities. Instead, we look for easier, sexier
solutions: charter schools, education tax credits, teacher pay tied to test
scores.
I know: I keep harping on the concentrated-poverty issue.
But its importance dwarfs that of everything else. And by obsessing about
everything else, the plain fact is this: We’re destroying the public education
system in the nation’s cities.
Is that really what we want to do?
This article appears in Mar 25-31, 2015.
As is usually the case, the article at the link below contains numerous distortions, and half-baked ideas. See a couple of outstanding examples — to which I have added language — in order to make the distorted, half-baked ideas more complete:
“If children in most [PREDOMINANTLY BLACK AND BROWN URBAN] public schools were doing well, we wouldn’t have this problem. And for that, there’s plenty of blame to go around: teachers, administrators, superintendents, school boards [WHO DON’T INSIST ON ACCOUNTABILITY] , and yes, the parents who aren’t involved enough in their children’s education, who don’t insist on good behavior.”
“But tragically, hardly anybody with the power to really bring about change is willing to face our biggest problem: the [HISTORIC AND ONGOING POLICIES, PRACTICES, PROCEDURES, RULES, REGULATIONS, LAWS AND TRADITIONS THAT HAVE LED TO GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATE LEVELS OF ABJECT] concentrated poverty of the nation’s inner cities.”
“And by obsessing about everything else, the plain fact is this: We’re destroying [WHAT’S LEFT OF THE LARGELY DECREPIT, INEFFECTIVE, THOROUGHLY RACIST] public education system in the nation’s cities.”
WITH REGARD TO THE LATTER POINT — THE AUTHOR ASKED: “Is that really what we want to do?” THERE WAS A TIME WHEN I WOULD HAVE ANSWERED “NO” WITHOUT HESITATION. TODAY — I’M NOT SO SURE. IT MAY IN FACT BE NECESSARY TO “destroy [WHAT’S LEFT OF THE LARGELY DECREPIT, INEFFECTIVE, THOROUGHLY RACIST] public education system in the nation’s cities” — IN ORDER TO CREATE A BRAND NEW REALITY.
I’m glad to know you’ve “abandoned” your opposition to charter schools, but when you argue that charter schools hurt traditional government schools, that’s just looking at the issue from one myopic side. Families and their students that strive, succeed in spite of poverty. That there are so many bureaucratic & legislative obstacles to true innovation is a testament to the failure of bloated government at every level, bloated with mandates for every conceivable concern & imagined concern, burdened with testing before the test that tests, and so much more. That little 4-yr-old that recently brought drugs to school and was found to live in a gun-infested drug house is ill-prepared for scholarly success. Who’s fault is that? And why is never a word heard about simply significantly reducing the size of the beehive on Broad Street. Perhaps we need to stop depending on federal and state monies and just do what our highly trained teachers and principals know needs doing.
It’s always so fun to read one of Howard’s mindless “The public school systems are racist against blacks!” rants.
Guess someone forgot to tell African immigrants that they’re supposed to fail because of their skin color?
http://www.examiner.com/article/african-im…
@ Eric Maloney -African immigrants didn’t have the “luxury ” of having the amazing African American experience. With slavery, Jim Crow, black Wall Street massacre. Systemic dehumanization that immigrants now benefit from-? Extremely offensive Mr. Maloney. I don’t always agree with Mr. Eagle, but I recognize his passion. What is interesting to me as how quick we call Eagle crazy but we stand behind a crazy failing system that has done very little for people of color. I see publishing companies, politicians, six figure salaried folk benefiting- I also see kids going to school for years and can’t read. This sounds very familiar to me. A segment of people benefiting on the backs of others. Check yourself.
African immigrants (and why aren’t they considered African-Americans by the way, like, say, Asians who immigrate are considered Asian-Americans?) have not had the “amazing African-American” experience, but they have certainly had the “African” experience. In the large majority of parts of Africa, that experience has to be at least as trying as what African-Americans who have been here for generations have experienced.