Charter school association: Districts have no case

As I have said multiple times before, the argument I have is not against the charter schools, it is the method of approval. My ELECTED board has been overruled. Who does Mr. Roberts answer to? Not me as a voter for sure. I have recourse with the Gwinnett County Board of Education and that is to vote them out if they don’t do what I want (and believe me, I think they are in for a challenge this year). I do not want to see Ivy Prep shut down, it appears they are doing a good job — and they did so before my elected officials were overruled by an appointed board who again does not have to answer to me as a taxpaying, voting citizen of Gwinnett County and the State of Georgia. Two things need to happen here, there needs to be some serious change on the Gwinnett BOE. I heard recently that the longest serving board member in Georgia and Gwinnett has been serving for 37 years. Seriously? So much has changed in Gwinnett in the past 4 decades. How does she keep getting elected, but since her reelection was as close as it was last year, there is hope indeed that some positive change can come to Gwinnett.

To answer Mr. Roberts’ question, “What is best for the children?” The best public schools for each and every one is the answer, but taking away the authority of my elected officials, whether or not I agree with them, is not going to lead to that. We have a system in place and that is government of the people, by the people and for the people. If that sacred truth is changed to government *to* the people as the charter schools commission is (and they are telling us what they think is best for us by overruling the will of the elected BOE), then all hope for our republic may soon be lost.

• Link
• Report this comment

I think that the GCSA CEO’s comments are a slap in the face of parents. I don’t recall voting for him in the last election nor any election for that matter. If parents want to see more charter schools, they are free to elect board members amenable to the idea. This is the legal argument against the state commission and one frankly that I find rather persuasive.

Granted, I could be persuaded to support a state charter commission if they can be answerable to voters (referendum on creating the commission, elections for members) but Roberts doesn’t seem to fully understand the economics of our education model. As a former economist, allow me explain. Public schools, like most government programs, are run under the simple economic rationale that fixed costs (building, transportation, teachers) are high and revenue is variable. As a result, economies of scale generated when students in an area attend a local school allows schools to be run efficiently. When money “follows the students” that essentially means that some schools will then lack the revenue to cover its fixed costs, creating a higher tax burden for everyone in the district. Once you realize this, it is important to see why schools have to be accountable to the taxpayers supporting them.

While we are on this topic, I must point out that the constitution does not define what “adequate” is or is not. We already have NCLB allowing transfers within districts as well as the school choice law. It would be relatively simple to legally resolve whether the state is providing “adequate” educational opportunities (it is). So the burden is for Roberts to demonstrate how his commission legally has the power to affect our tax rates without being elected. Until he clearly demonstrates this, the answer is simple – he does not.

• Link
• Report this comment

In DeKalb the question “shall we force children to continue attending schools that fail them?” is moot. The BOE and the school administration have shown time and again that children are a secondary concern, far behind the primary purpose of DCSS, which is to serve as an employment agency for a select, 6-figure few.

• Link
• Report this comment

d, DeKalb hasn’t don’t a great job of providing choices to the students of DeKalb county; it has done a great job of providing chances. Sure, you can enter a lottery and have a chance to attend the school you would like. It may even feel like a choice to those whose names get drawn in the lottery, but for those of us on the losing side of the lottery there isn’t any choice. With 3 children, I’ve entered school lotteries 13 times over the years, and never been given the opportunity to send my children to the schools I would choose.

• Link
• Report this comment

d, you’re right: parental involvement is the number one way to improve a school. But who from individual schools, from more distant parts of the educracy, or from anywhere else in our state is reaching out to parents to involve them in their children’s schools? Many parents are too timid. Many feel unwelcome. Others don’t know how they could become involved. Who’s REACHING OUT on personal levels to those legions of PARENTS WHO CARE?

• Link
• Report this comment

Oh, let me clarify my comment on AYP — Adequate Yearly Progress, or the performance of the school in achieving 100% of students passing the mandated standardized tests. In 2014, the requirement will be that 100% of students pass or a school will not make “AYP.” But if 100% pass, then what progress can occur after that?

• Link
• Report this comment

I would like to see how Ivy Prep students are doing on nationally normed tests rather than just CRCT also before passing final judgment. Dr. Spinks…. parents need to step up and be parents, timidness is no excuse for not doing your job. What choice…. my question to you is what have you done about it? What solutions are being brought to the table? As I said, I really don’t have a problem with the charter school commission except for lack of accountability. I think, in concept, it could work but I want a say on who’s on that board. Until then, they need to keep out of the affairs of my elected officials.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jeff, you’re missing my point. They may be the most qualified people to hold the job that they are holding, but as government officials, they need to be accountable to the voters, and they are not. Since you mention Barnes, I hardly consider someone blaming teachers for all the woes of the educational system to be an “education governor.” I am not saying there are bad teachers there, and the “union” as you call it (really a professional association, just look at the name) has told teachers that they are in the wrong line of work. I’ve seen it. I’ve seen one of those teachers come back and try to cause strife in the organization as well. I’ve seen the organization avoid the bad teachers because they don’t want them to be part of their professional organization. The education system is not as broke as people make it out to be, until too many people try to get their hands into it. Let’s get the hands out and let the boards of education do their job — but maybe we need to set some qualifications for being on a BOE such as those you mentioned for the charter school commission. A home builder is the chair of Gwinnett County…. conflict of interest? I might think so. I know Barnes is trying to make nice with GAE, I don’t think it will work in the long run. Here’s my thought…. let’s get the Constitution amended so we can elect the state board and work to get these people on the state BOE if they are indeed as qualified as you say.

• Link
• Report this comment

[...] from:  Charter school association: Districts have no case | Get Schooled By admin | category: best schools | tags: answer, authority, away-the-authority, elected, [...]

• Link
• Report this comment

Jeff, understand that I am not against charter schools in general but the implementation of a state run charter commission. You make the point that I can vote my for representatives who pass these laws except I would argue that the alternative I presented (referendum on state run commission; subsequent election of commission members) is superior because the link between my rights as a taxpayer and legislation is more direct. There are many reasons I vote for a candidate for state legislature and it could be very likely that a candidate who I disagree with on educational issues shares my views on other issues. As a result, when voters have the opportunity to directly impact their local schools (via a board of education), I question the necessity of state legislators being involved in the process as this actually dilutes my representation rights (since my vote is spread across even more issues). That more charters aren’t being created is a reflection of apathy in local school board elections rather than flaws in the process to begin with.

The issue of failing schools is a good point to bring up in favor of charters but I still don’t see the link between the positive benefits of charters and having a state-run charter commission which is the point of this lawsuit. Again, we have to keep in mind that money isn’t as simple as money following a student. Given the fixed cost model, students leaving a school WILL have an impact on the remaining students in that school that don’t move if/when the school revenue falls below its fixed cost base. If three students leave a school and that school is forced to fire a teacher or two (impacting potentially hundreds other students, who is being served “adequately”?) My opinion is that local school boards, not distant political bureaucrats are in the best position to weigh the pros and cons of authorizing charter schools. This is why I have a very hard time supporting a state run charter commission that I have minimal say on.

• Link
• Report this comment

[...] CBS Channel 13) D.C. — Rhee is right — summer learning is vital (Washington Post) Ga. — Charter school association: Districts have no case (Atlanta Journal Constitution) Ind. — Who’s minding the charters? (Fort Wayne Journal Gazette) [...]

• Link
• Report this comment

The Friedman Foundation
For Educational Choice

Why School Choice?

The origins of public schools lie in the belief that they bring learning and opportunity to all and ensure a stable democracy.

If this were true, then there might not be a need for school choice.

But it’s not. Public schools are as segregated as ever. Children, particularly children in urban areas, are dropping out in record numbers and are getting a quality of education that depends more on where they live than on what they can learn. Parents, unless they can move or pay private school tuition, have little choice about the kind of education their children receive.

Public schooling is simply a monopoly that doesn’t fulfill the ideals of our founding fathers. The tragic irony is that the dream envisioned by the founders of our public education system is actually increasing the stratification of society and failing to provide equal educational opportunity.

In 1955, a forward-thinking Milton Friedman foresaw the result of this monopoly and encouraged a return to liberty through the introduction of school choice. He argued that it would be much better and more equitable if the government would “give each child, through his parents, a specified sum [voucher] to be used solely in paying for his general education.”

The benefits of this idea, which has come to be known as school choice, are numerous. Studies show that school choice leads to better test scores for all students and higher graduation rates. They show that parents are more satisfied and involved with their child’s school, and that school choice saves taxpayers millions of dollars. And they show that public schools respond positively to competition.

But beyond the theory, what lies at the heart of school choice is a family’s freedom to choose. It is about the child in the back of the classroom who is not getting what he needs in his assigned public school. It is about the student who just doesn’t feel comfortable at her current school. It is about the family that simply wants a different option.

In the end, the goal of education is to ensure learning and guarantee a free society and stable democracy. These goals are better met when all parents are free to choose the school that works best for their child.

So, why school choice? In a word, liberty.

http://www.friedmanfoundation.org/schoolchoice/why.jsp

• Link
• Report this comment

You have to wonder why they have taken the route they have when the charter schools are suceeding. Personally I think the School Supers should be elected, the board in Cobb doesn’t stand by their promises that get them elected. I understand the constitutional arguments, but I believe the money should follow the child. Then maybe the public schools would work harder to meet the needs of the child instead of dismissing parents involvement other than writing of checks to the school.

• Link
• Report this comment

Tony, I don’t think you read the entirety of my arguments. I would certainly NOT consider myself part of the educational establishment and I actually have a very favorable view of charter schools. My goal is apply a logical sensible approach that protects the taxpayers’ rights to accountability while permitting well run charters to be established. I would hope that any court that hears these cases follows the same standard as well. You are right, non-elected officials are entitled to their opinions and I support your right to publicize your opinions. The 3 part answer to your first question is 1. No, I am not an elected official. 2. Yes, I have the right to voice my opinion. 3. No, I do not have the right to unilaterally pass legislation that would impact the tax burden of my neighbors. So, let’s move on the constitutional issues, which is important because that is the point of the lawsuits.

I introduced several ideas in my original argument (referendum on a state run charter commission, subsequent elections of commission members) which would essentially achieve what you want plus the added accountability from voters. What are your thoughts on my ideas? Also, I never advocated huge classes and huge schools – that’s not the gist of the fixed cost model. The main point was that it’s not as simple as “money following the students” because schools, no matter how large or how small, don’t scale in a way that is conducive to huge swings in enrollment in either direction. Like you said, unfortunately, some schools are still failing and their students do deserve better choices. Do you think a state run commission that is appointed or an elected commission is in a better position to weight the pros and cons of implementing a charter?

I can understand your passion/drive to fix our schools. But for me and many others, how we go about fixing it is just as important as the end goal. And I’m certainly open to ideas that would address the constitutional issue and create a favorable environment for charters. For example, I read your post and I’m still confused as to why my argument is “well-worn”? If you mean that I am hesitant to rush to a solution that is not properly considered in the context of all the community participants (taxpayers, students, teachers, etc.), then yes, it may be well-worn. But I like to think that these arguments are ones that a court will have to consider and that most swing voters are thinking through.

• Link
• Report this comment

I have to admit, I am hugely on the fence on this one. I have to agree though, that ATLNative brings up some very well constructed points that make sense to me. I like the idea of accountability and I do think that the fact that board members aren’t responsive to community concerns is an indictment on the electorate rather than something fundamentally wrong with the concept of local control.
Tony, a few questions. Is there any reason the charter commission has to be appointed by the governor rather than elected? I have to think that yes, our governor and reps are elected, but they are not the ones calling the shots after they appoint these people. Even our supreme court justices, after they are appointed have to run for reelection every few years. Honestly, the idea of appointed members not responsive to voters is rather scary for me. Maybe a similar structure could be followed with such a commission. And if we want to ensure some local accountability we could make the commission members representatives of different regions in Georgia. My mindset is that schools do take a certain amount of money to run well and ATLNative, I understand where your fixed cost model fits into the picture (hence the interest in promoting taxpayer accountability). I was thinking if it might be possible to create a stipulation that charters that reach a certain size would receive full funding (having been determined to be viable) whereas charters that are not should restructure. I have no idea if this will work but I can see how a school might be very well run and not economical (a school with a couple million dollar budget with small class sizes because of few students). It does concern me as a taxpayer and it’s a problem I’m looking for answers for before committing one way or another.

• Link
• Report this comment

The Georgia School Boards Association – which did NOT testify during the hearings for the bill that eventually established the Georgia Charter Schools Commission – has been circulating a resolution opposing the Commission and supporting the lawsuit, and GSBA has been encouraging school boards statewide to pass the resolution in public votes, whether or not they have students in Commission-authorized schools.

The status quo is circling its wagons. It appears that “change” is only good for one party in one national election.

Also of interest, to underline a point made by CEO Roberts: for its August 1 deadline for new charter applications, the Georgia Charter Schools Commission received 35 charter applications. The other state-level authorizer (the State Board of Education) received only 14. Charter applicants are seemingly coming out of the woodwork, and the establishment is acting like it sees a tidal wave.

So now it’s a crisis. The school boards had their chance during the hearings to be heard for free, or for only the fairly modest fee they all pay their association to represent them. They chose not to, and now five of them are using the same local dollars they use to pay teachers to sue the state instead.

If they had wanted to nip this in the bud, school boards could have tried a little harder two years ago…

• Link
• Report this comment

With all due respect, ATLNative, I can see why you are a “former” economist. You don’t need an MBA or even an undergrad degree in economics to see that in the state financing of education, i.e. public education, THE MONEY FOLLOWS THE CHILD! No need for you or anyone else to try to make it more difficult than it is.

We all know that the QBE formula is this nebulous, almost mystical system for public school financing. Be that as it may, it still comes down to the simple premise that THE MONEY FOLLOWS THE CHILD.

People move freely from one county to another (sometimes from one STATE to another), and thereby one school system to another, all the time in order to pursue what they consider to be a better public education for their child/children. And the state dollar amount for educating that child/children goes with them to their new school and school district.

The only difference here is that, potentially, families are not forced to pick up and move to another county/school district, if there is a charter school — Commission approved or otherwise — within their county/district. Charter schools and the State Charter Commission are providing families and communities throughout Georgia with public school choice.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hmmmmm….so much food for thought. d, let me understand you…you’re saying that a school board member who is supposed to REPRESENT their constituency should have the right to ignore the clear and compelling support of local, tax paying parents (who they respresent) who want to open or attend a charter school? Come on. Charter schools can only open if there is a market established – and clearly for the 2 schools involved in this lawsuit, a market is present.

That does not mean that EVERY charter should be opened. Local schools board should have a rigorous process for authorizing high quality charter schools. No one argues that point. Everyone involved in the charter movement is dedicated to ensuring that the schools are high quality institutions – because if they aren’t, then 1) they’ll be closed down and 2) it tears down the whole movement. The problem is that some of the districts refuse to provide a fair and equitable review process. This was evident a few of years ago when 100% of the petitions were denied. 100%! (which is how the Commission came into existence). It’s also evident through the “rallying of the troops” with the GSBAon joining the lawsuit. It’s all about the money leaving the district and the “authority”. Let me say this plainly. The money DOES NOT BELONG TO THE DISTRICT! The board members are stewards of the money. And let me add that it’s not about authority, it’s about what works for kids!

To the economist, please. Economies of scale? As a charter school founder and operator, I get it when it comes to economy of scale. Charters do end up paying higher rates for facilities and some services that districts due to their size. Contrary to your expert economist theories, charters operate with less funding…without economies of scale…and overall have better academic results. How in the world can you argue about “economy of scale” being a benefit when return on the investment is so poor? Again, it’s not about the money, it’s about the kids and their achievment!

Someone was asking for data about charters. There was an interesting study in Illinois about the economic impact of charter schools in communities…here’s the big picture of the impact of a high quality charter school: Community Impacts
Increased real estate value
Reduction of high school dropouts
Increased college attendees and graduates
Includes social service savings: lower healthcare, unemployment, and incarceration expenses
Expansion of public education funding
District Impacts
District revenue losses
Increased state transition aid
Reduced marginal student expenses
Reduced per pupil education expenses
Reduced class sizes at district schools
Reduced facilities needs and costs
Reduced teacher pension and benefits costs
Reduced district operational costs
And if you’re looking for cold hard figures, the study reported:
The annual financial benefit to the community of turning one high school drop-out into one college graduate is enormous, ranging from $38,400 to $42,000 per graduate per year*
In the community studied, 5-year Community Economic Benefit:
$9,384,619
Impact to the school district in the community studied: 5-year District Impact:
(decrease in funds controlled)
$(2,963,486)
So, as you can see, the return on the investment to the community clearly outweighs the cost to the district. And this doesn’t even count the social costs saved (prisons, welfare, etc.) Mind you, this is in Illinios; however, the point is well taken that charters ADD VALUE to communities.

Related to the Commission….all the Commission does is allows a fair and non-political process for charter review and authorization. The folks appointed have nothing to gain by approving or denying petitions….and they do have a heavy obligation to only approve quality schools. And contrary to what was posted, they DO have oversight – by the State BOE who ALSO has to authorize the charters after the Commission.

You know, this is not a matter of consitutionality. The law has been passed and was reviewed many times by constitutional attorneys before it was passed. It’s the law and the districts should be following it.

Charters have such great potential to creating a rising tide of academic achievement across our state – they aren’t the only answer, but it’s certainly a part of the solution. Why not partner with the charters in a collaborative manner and use the opportunities the charter law provides to further the success of the district? We should all be supporting whatever it takes to raise achievement in our state!

• Link
• Report this comment

Marie, thanks for posting that – I share your views. Actually, I thought that Jeff, d, and atlnative’s posts all made very strong arguments. What I don’t understand is why in the haste to create charters, proponents of the state commission do not address the voting issue – the point of charters is to give taxpayers more say and what better way to do that than through voting?

• Link
• Report this comment

It is pretty clear to me having read both sides that the districts do have a case and a very good one.

• Link
• Report this comment

CharterStarter, can you link to that study? Did the authors of the study have a vested interest in promoting one side or the other and what were the circumstances surrounding that study?

• Link
• Report this comment

@Marie
I don’t feel the poster’s are attempting to obscure ATLNative’s arguments. My position is the State of GA legislature along with our govenor (after I’m sure several constitutional law experts) looked over the benefits of forming this commission and the power they mandated over to them. If we as constituents of this state have a problem with the law passed by our elected officials we have the right and an obligation to not re-elect them. Suing the charter schools that followed the rules established by the GA BOE and the State of GA doesn’t seem to be reasonable at all. It seems spiteful.

• Link
• Report this comment

The research was conducted by Public Impact. Public Impact is a national education policy and management consulting firm based in Chapel Hill, N.C. The research group is non-partisan and focused on improving existing public schools and opening high quality new ones.

• Link
• Report this comment

This debate underscores exactly why government shouldn’t be involved in education at all. Parents that have to pay tuition for their children’s education will be more vested in their children’s education. I say get rid of school taxes, public schools and switch to a private school only model. We don’t need this back and forth about which government schools are better than other government schools every day. In the end all it amounts to is people not paying their fair share – the average cost to educate a child is 7-10k a year; how much property tax does the average homeowner pay every year???

• Link
• Report this comment

There is also a strong constitutional argument that by prohibiting choice for the students of failing schools, the boards of education are violating the state constitution’s requirement that “The provision of an adequate public education for the citizens shall be a primary obligation of the state of Georgia.” If you don’t want a charter commission, the legislature could directly remove funds from boards of education that were putting roadblocks to charter school establishment. That would solve your voting concerns, but would make each determination a political minefield and would not serve the students of Georgia well.

• Link
• Report this comment

Georgia Charter Schools Rally at the State Capitol.

Atlanta, GA
Nov 6, 2009, 10:00am – 12:00pm

A rally in support of charter public schools and the quality options these schools of choice are providing the families and communities of Georgia will be held on Friday, November 6th from 10:00-12:00 on the front steps of the Georgia State Capitol.

The rally will allow you to hear from legislative, charter school and education leaders from Georgia and from around the nation. As this event will draw local and national media attention, you are strongly encouraged to bring students, parents, family members and others to participate in this rally, showing all of Georgia that public school options through chartering is wanted and needed throughout our state.

Front Steps of Georgia State Capitol
Atlanta, GA

• Link
• Report this comment

It’s that simple,
Actually I do vote for sheriff every election and he is the police chief in my county. And my city has voted out mayors and council members before and probably will again. Of course if won’t be easy – to win an election, you have to have strong candidates with strong arguments, not straw houses that can be blown down with a simple rebuttal.

Nobody said the constitution gave sole responsibility to local districts – if you actually read the arguments, many on here have pointed out that the school commission could go through a statewide referendum. Are you so afraid of losing an election that you are willing to deny voters the choice in order to ram through your ideal version of an education system? Sure sounds like it to me.

• Link
• Report this comment

When did we lose the capacity to disagree with one another but find a way to remain respectful? Why must we draw lines in the sand rather than find common ground? Why is it so difficult for adults to hammer out a fair and equitable solution for all parties involved? Our children on both sides of this issue are watching us. We hear reqularly from employers that our young people are NOT graduating with the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary for our country to regain it’s stature on the world stage. Instead of arguing about who gets the money and how much money we should applaud what works and make the necessary changes NOW. Our children which are the future need us to make those choices on their behalf now. What will happen to our country in the next 10, 20, or 50 years if we don’t make changes?

• Link
• Report this comment

Wow, quite a few comments since I last commented! Let me start off by saying that I agree with Discourse: we need to be professional in putting forth our arguments and not resort to ad hominem attacks when we disagree. It’s simple, I don’t know why your first point is to imply that I’m a former economist because of a lack of ability on my part, but if you’re curious, it’s because I’m retired…

For the most part, other posters on here have adequately defended my viewpoints and I don’t think I need to elaborate once again. Marie, your post captures the essence of my viewpoint, which is that charter schools have to implemented in a way that is responsible and considerate of the impact it has on the rest of the school district. We can focus on the 1% of the student body that attends charter schools but I believe that we can’t overlook the effect (of which there are several) charter schools have on the other 99% of the student population.

I have indicated a willingness to compromise of which few, if any proponents of the state run charter commission have even acknowledged. A referendum could certainly be done in relative short time span and while I have my doubts it would pass, I would respect a decision by voters to approve a state run charter commission. It’s Simple, by ignoring this point, I question your seriousness in reaching a consensus on the issue. The it’s my way or the highway attitude is simply not going to win this debate when many, if not most people are sitting on the sidelines with both hope for all the possibilities that charters have (for student achievement) and concerns for all that charters might become (a drain on public education resources).

And one final point on elections of publicly accountable officials. There actually is a pretty simple way to remove an elected sheriff (and thank you fairtax for pointing out that sheriffs are indeed elected in most localities in metro ATL)- you can recall him/her just like California recalled their governor a few years ago. It’s not supposed to be easy to kick out elected officials but it is supposed to be possible and doable which is my point. Having an appointed commission with no recourse for the public to weigh in is not only bad educational policy, it’s downright terrible for accountability and voter choice.

• Link
• Report this comment

After reading the above posts, I have to change my mind. We are doing such a wonderful job of preparing our children for college and the workforce, we do not need alternatives within public K12. I love being in the bottom 10% of the nation. I love our graduation rate. I love the fact that we enslave generation after generation in a system which keeps the poor, uneducated and poor. I have been wrong all along. I am so very sorry I ever thought we ahould change all that is right and good in our state. But why stop here. Let’s bring back the days of Jim Crow laws so we can really keep people downtrodden.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doesn’t school choice drain resources from public schools?

Absolutely not! No state or city with school choice has seen its public school budgets go down. When Milwaukee’s school choice program was founded in 1990-91, its public schools spent $6,316 per student; by 2003-04 that had risen to $10,375. Cleveland’s public school spending rose from $6,616 in 1996-97, when its choice program began, to $10,420 in 2003-04. And these figures include only the portion of school budgets known as “current expenditures”; figures for total education spending would be even higher.

Why have cities with school choice seen such large increases in per-student spending? Believe it or not, school choice is one of the reasons. The claim that choice drains money may sound plausible; schools are funded on a per student basis, so fewer students means less money. But a growing body of research finds exactly the opposite: school choice programs actually improve public school financing. School choice gives the public school system more money to educate each student. That’s the fundamental reason school choice saves money—private schools do a better job at about half the cost.

The amount of money spent on the voucher or scholarship for each participant in a school choice program is less than what would have been spent on that student if he or she had remained in public schools. That means states save money that can be plowed back into their education budgets and spent on the students who remain in public schools. While the average public school spends about $10,000 per student, the average private school charges about $6,000 in tuition. That’s the fundamental reason school choice saves money—private schools do a better job at about half the cost.

The amount of money spent on the voucher or scholarship for each participant in a school choice program is less than what would have been spent on that student if he or she had remained in public schools. That means states save money that can be plowed back into their education budgets and spent on the students who remain in public schools. While the average public school spends about $10,000 per student, the average private school charges about $6,000 in tuition. That’s the fundamental reason school choice saves money—private schools do a better job at about half the cost.

A 2007 study by Friedman Foundation Senior Fellow Susan Aud confirms that school choice saves money for both state budgets and public schools. She found that from 1990 to 2006, all existing school choice programs together saved a net total of $22 million for state budgets $422 million for local public school districts. Every program was at least fiscally neutral.

Facing numbers like this, the teacher unions usually retort that they don’t account for fixed costs. If a student leaves a public school, that school still has to spend some of the money it did before to cover costs that don’t vary much with enrollment levels, such as building maintenance. But studies that examine schools’ fixed costs find that they aren’t big enough to offset the huge savings from school choice:

• A 2005 Clemson University study finds that, even after accounting for fixed costs, a proposed voucher program for South Carolina (offering $4,000 to $4,600, compared to public spending of $8,300) would save $594 million over its first five years.

• A 2004 Utah State University study finds that a proposed school choice program in Utah would save between $26 million and $144 million every year, even after schools’ fixed costs were taken into account.

• A 2005 Friedman Foundation study finds that tax-funded scholarships in New Mexico would save $63 million over 10 years.

• A 2004 joint Friedman Foundation/Josiah Bartlett Center study finds that a proposed voucher program in New Hampshire would save $9 million annually.
Conclusion: School choice programs do not drain money from public schools. Actually, they leave more money behind to educate fewer students. No state or city with school choice has seen its public school budgets go down.

http://www.friedmanfoundation.org/newsroom/ShowFaq.do#faq_10

• Link
• Report this comment

Andrew, I’m a Princeton alum myself and I have no opinion on this issue. But, I do want to point out that your comparison is not really fair because Harvard, Yale and the other schools are private, meaning that they don’t take taxpayer money. The comparison thus really doesn’t support your point because we do have private schools in metro Atlanta that have very very high standards (think Westminster, Pace, etc.) that parents can choose. A public university wouldn’t/couldn’t relocate to Georgia because they are publicly founded by their home state’s taxpayers, meaning that if they relocated to Georgia, well… that state’s voters would be quite unhappy and probably demand an end to the public funding of that school. You could make an argument that school districts are similar in their relationship with charters (although I won’t make that argument because I haven’t thought through this issue enough).

• Link
• Report this comment

I could support either side in this debate but one thing that I always look for is how the supporters of each side manages to present their arguments in a rational manner. Leave your emotions outside of this debate. Yes, I get that education is a hugely important and consequential issue but honestly I have to wonder if some of you posters could ever implement policy without rushing to judgment. And this applies to both sides.

ATLNative, I gotta give you kudos for having some of the most coherent, straightforward points that I have read and it really looks like you’re interested in finding solutions rather than forcing a certain mindset through. It’s Simple, I don’t want to say this but your condescending tone is a huge turn-off. This Ivy, CharterStarter, too – I like your arguments as well, keep it up! I enjoy reading solid cases on both sides and these posters are examples are what we should all try to follow.

• Link
• Report this comment

I agree that we should all be concerned about the children – that’s the bottom line. The problem is, I feel like the state charter commission supporters are choosing to ignore 99% of the students that won’t be in charter schools in favor of a select group. As so many other posters have pointed out, charter schools do draw away resources from the rest of the district, hurting the other children. As a mother of four, I believe in supporting all our children, not just the ones with parents involved enough to send them to charters.

• Link
• Report this comment

The real questions we should be asking are: How is the lack of adequate public education affecting Georgia’s economy and future growth? and What can be done to improve public education?
My husband and I have many public school teachers in our families and strongly support public education. After years of trying to work with our North Fulton public schools, we have been forced to accept the following realities:
1. Georgia public schools are underperforming well below national average. Even the schools in the top counties consistently underperform their counterparts in the metropolitan areas of other cities. Many of the top performing students rely on outside tutoring and parental support. For example, my family has already spent more than $25,000 (yes, thousand) on math tutoring, as well as home schooling in the summers to fill the huge gaps. Not all parents have the means or abilities to do this.
2. Georgia children are bright and capable of so much more. There are also plenty of good and dedicated teachers.
3. There are no mechanisms in the public school systems that will allow change. Change agents are not tolerated. Therefore, no change will occur.
• Parents who even dare to ask questions are treated by administrators (and those teachers who hope to be promoted) with open hostility, as are their children.
• School systems use no metrics. Changes, including curriculum changes, are implemented on feel good rationale without any measurement tools. Yes, children take all sorts of standardized tests, but no one does anything with the data other than crow about it if it happens to slightly increase in a given subject in a given year. Data is not systematically collected and analyzed. Data is not tracked from year to year. Data is not even analyzed before and after curriculum changes are implemented.
• The PTA in Georgia is predominantly a fund raising organization. In top performing school systems elsewhere, the PTA represents the interests of the community (including the larger business community) and also serves as a watchdog organization.
• There is no business leadership, other than local small businesses looking for direct sales to children and their parents. Again, in other top performing counties, it is the business leadership that works with the PTA to insure that the schools provide quality education that meets their communities’ needs. Good schools are one of the biggest factors in attracting and retaining highly paid employees, including knowledge workers, sales and marketing forces, and skilled trades.
• Georgia politicians won’t touch any issue dealing with education. Not sure why: do they lack the foresight or the guts or both?
As parents, our only choices are to transfer out of Georgia, move to private schools, or support charter schools. And yes, the county school boards (including Fulton County) are actively trying to close charter schools. Afterall, the charter schools are showing up the local school system by having the same student base outperform the neighboring schools. Closing down the comparison is so much easier than actually improving the public schools.
What is the cost to Georgia’s economy and future growth? The inadequate public schools carry a high hidden cost to employers, including higher pay for employees, higher transfer rates back out of Georgia, a lack of employee commitment to the regional offices in Georgia, lack of employee support for establishing or enlarging regional offices and facilities in Georgia, higher training costs (or the cost of moving) for highly skilled trades , …. When we transferred here, our employer gave us a very large cost of living increase (times 2 employees) even though the actual cost of living is much lower than in the northeast. Many of our friends and neighbors who work for large corporations are actively looking for transfers before their kids reach middle school. How can the slight tax incentives offered to corporations to move here outweigh these concerns? And as the region ceases to grow, valuable employees are less and less likely to move here for fear that they will be stuck here.

• Link
• Report this comment

Many of the arguments here are quite persuasive however I would like to know how/where “Larry” came up with the figures he quoted so that I may do further research myself. Rather than jump on anyone’s bandwagon in this forum point me in the direction where this information is located (on both sides of the issue) so that I may make a more informed decision. There are several posters that quoted information and where this information was culled from. I would hope the organizations/schools/think tanks that performed these studies were non-partisan and weren’t skewing information in their favor. In other words they didn’t have a dog in the fight. Public school education for the masses that are unable to afford private school for their children has never had to deal with competition. Has anyone that truly cares about finding solutions to what ails our educational system wondered why the growth of charter schools across our great country has exploded? We can all agree to disagree but don’t shut down a school that is achieving wonderful results.

• Link
• Report this comment

Johnny I do understand that Harvard, Yale and Princeton are private schools that accept limited public funds. My point is that quality competition from a quality schools (public or private) will force our schools to do better. Charters and traditional schools can live in harmony and help each other succeed utilizing best practices and learning from each other.

Ok forget Harvard or Princeton, let say MATCH Charter School, or Hi Tech Hi from San Diego decided to locate in Atlanta. MATCH is the #1 public school in Math in Massachusetts, and Hi Tech Hi is nationally known for supplying more Stanford graduates than any other public school (both are Charter Schools). They are a part of an elite group of top 10 schools in the nation.

Given this type of quality….Why should these types of schools be denied the right to go to the Commission? Would anyone not want this type of quality in their district? Districts board members are human and they do make mistakes. A system of check and balances will ensure we are able to compete with students on a global scale.

As a parent of gifted and talented children, I want the best option. I want that option to be public not private. I cannot afford PACE or Westminster.

In my humble opinion we need these types of schools to challenge the status quo to ensure that we accept no excuses from or public schools.

If you do not believe that the commission holds these schools accountable to higher standards. I suggest that you attend their next meeting. Their meeting schedule is posted on the GADOE website.

I am a tax payer too.

• Link
• Report this comment

Sorry, I meant to say Discourse is 100% correct – my mistake!

• Link
• Report this comment

Whoa – voting is “irrelevant”? Ummm, maybe I didn’t read that correctly, but I think it is HUGELY relevant because that is the fairest way for taxpayers to have a say in where their dollars go. And yes money is an issue but the REAL issue is who gets to decide where that money goes.

Sorry, I’m with the rest of folks who think that voters (which means taxpayers, parents, you, me, etc.) should get the say rather than a state APPOINTED commission. If you think that voting isn’t tied with accountability for taxpayers, you’re the one kidding yourself.

• Link
• Report this comment

As a parent and staff member of one of the schools in question, I am happy to see people interested enough in this issue to be discussing it so passionately. And passion is the key word here. Starting and maintaining a charter school is no small task and requires an amazing amount of passion on the part of the families and staff. The continual obstacles we are presented with are staggering, yet we persevere. And what are we trying to accomplish? We are trying to provide a safe and caring environment in which we strive to treat children as individuals and give them many opportunities to learn and grow into productive citizens. It is exhausting but gratifying. Daily I see evidence of children finding success where previously they experienced failure or alienation. But daily I struggle with outdated technology, substandard classroom furnishings & supplies, and a salary well below the norm. I understand people’s concerns about keeping schools and the commission accountable, but change has to happen somewhere. Instead of relentlessly being tested and confronted about what we are trying to do, it certainly would be nice to be applauded, and even rewarded, for sustaining the effort and commitment it takes to innovate in an extremely rigid field. As far as giving local control to the community, it doesn’t get any more local than the actual residents that are choosing to send their children to our schools.

• Link
• Report this comment

I agree with Curt, I couldn’t believe it when I read that post or the one in which the poster claims voting is “irrelevant”. Seriously, people, what is wrong with our country when people think that elections are not important and that the only elections that should be held are ones where their side will win – that’s just not democracy, that’s authoritarian. It seems to me like many people supporting the state charter commission have authoritarian tendencies and would love to have appointed bureaucrats telling voters what’s best for them. That’s something I cannot support in any shape or form.

• Link
• Report this comment

Georgia General Assembly – HB 881

A BILL to be entitled an Act to amend Chapter 2 of Title 20 of the O.C.G.A., relating to elementary and secondary education, so as to provide for legislative findings and intent; to establish the Georgia Charter Schools Commission; to provide for its powers and duties; to provide for chartering authority for commission charter schools; to provide for approval of cosponsors; to provide for cosponsor agreements; to provide for revocation of approval of cosponsors; to provide for application and review; to provide for applications of existing charter schools; to provide for application of the general laws; to provide for access to information; to provide for an annual report; to provide for duties, powers, and authority of the State Board of Education with respect to the foregoing; to provide for duties of the sponsor; to provide for appeal; to provide for debts of charter schools; to provide for findings; to provide for related matters; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.

House vote:

http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2007_08/votes/hv0521.htm

Senate vote:

http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2007_08/votes/sv0922.htm

• Link
• Report this comment