Rep. Jones: Proposed constitutional amendment affirms true local control — parents
State Rep. Jan Jones
Among the most influential and dedicated supporters of charter schools is House Speaker Pro-Tempore Jan Jones of Milton, who represents District 46. She is the sponsor of the constitutional amendment that would resurrect the state’s ability to create charter schools, an ability lost in last year’s state Supreme Court decision.
She wrote this essay today to explain why she believes the amendment is vital.
By Jan Jones
Most people agree local school boards play a critical role in Georgia public education. Most people also agree, however, that local school boards should not have exclusive control over public education.
Businesses considering relocating to Georgia place a top priority on an overall educated workforce. Clearly, we have a state education brand to foster and protect in attracting jobs.
Our ability to do so was jeopardized in a controversial 4-3 Georgia Supreme Court decision last May striking down a 2008 state law.
The problem with the state supreme court’s decision is that it explicitly stated that school boards have exclusive control over general k-12 public education. The decision calls into question whether state government has any meaningful role, except, perhaps, for putting a check in the mail.
The broad court decision deviated sharply from the state’s historically significant role in public education, including funding half its costs, establishing graduation standards and providing a teacher pay scale.
Thanks primarily to these state policies, when adjusted for cost of living, Georgia ranks first nationally in teacher salary and benefits.
With that in mind, House Resolution 1162 would re-assert the state’s partnership role in public education through a constitutional amendment. The legislation says, “the General Assembly may…provide for the establishment of education policies for such public education.”
HR 1162 would clarify the Constitution in the way most people thought existed prior to the court’s action.
The headline-grabbing issue, though, is that the court decision also invalidated the state’s general ability to authorize public charter schools, a practice exercised prudently for over 10 years. Since 2008, only 12 state charter schools opened.
The legislation would allow existing charter schools approved and fully funded by the state to continue teaching students.
The state could also approve additional charter schools as do other states. Georgia would have another tool to give students learning opportunities, which sometimes cannot be offered within attendance lines.
For example, a technical college covering several counties, as is typically the case in rural Georgia, could partner with a charter school to offer vocational certification while students are still in high school.
Charter schools, in some instances, could place added focus on science and math, vocational or International Baccalaureate certification, or the arts. They could even offer a longer day and extra tutoring.
Parents, though, would choose whether their children attend optional public charter schools. If HR 1162 passes, the voters of the state can decide to put “local control” where it counts the most – with parents.
History has shown that charter schools are better performing and more apt to grow if school districts are not the sole authorizer allowed by law.
To find a middle ground, the Education Committee omitted from the resolution a narrow reference to charter school funding as lobbyists for school boards and superintendents requested. This allows the Legislature to reconsider a better method to fund charter schools.
HR 1162 recognizes public education policy has been and should be a shared effort by the state and school boards to deliver the best educational opportunities to students.
–From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
123 comments Add your comment
DH
February 7th, 2012
9:58 pm
Science Teacher671, are you letting on that your eyes would have glazed over for a different reason? Like maybe you don’t believe children have differences in learning styles, so no parent input is necessary or welcome? I *thought* it was because I wasn’t signing the paychecks. I *know* that my not doing so means your eyes are free to glaze for whatever reason, and there’s nothing I or any other parent individually can do about it, other than choose differently. Thank you for so brilliantly illustrating my point.
ScienceTeacher671
February 7th, 2012
10:38 pm
Jeff in Roswell, for some reason, DH’s attitude reminded me of a set of parents some years back. Their child would burst into song in the middle of a science lesson. The child did have a beautiful singing voice, but we were in a college preparatory science class.
The parents did not see why it was a problem, and were adamant that their child could learn even while s/he was singing loudly over my teaching. It was their child’s learning style, don’tcha know?
They seriously could not comprehend that their child’s beautiful singing voice might be a distraction for the other 27 children who needed to learn Physical Science, and in their opinion, that didn’t matter at all. Their child was the only one who mattered.
Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s what I thought of when I read DH’s post.
ScienceTeacher671
February 7th, 2012
10:47 pm
DH, most of the “research” on “learning styles” has been pretty well rebutted, and that’s why my eyes would have glazed over.
Actually, I’d have probably tried to explain the the research base to you. Would I have had a chance at success, or are you pretty tied to the idea that your children have specific, special “learning styles”?
Downunda
February 7th, 2012
10:53 pm
@Tony Ur a joke! Stae has groslly underfunded public education. States should NOT be funding school districts – that districts taxpayers should be paying for their children to be educated. Right their ur are being over payed and lavish benefits if u can’t educated a child with the STATE FUNDS!!!
Tearchers/adminstrators employees should reflect the realities of their communities, not live outside of them and cetainly NOT DEMAND to live ABOVE those who fund the premiums “THE TAXPAYER” We can no longer pay for affluent lifestyles – so get over it. WE WANT CHOICE, we want out of be forced to send our child to a particular school that has lost the reason they are even teaching!! WE WANT CHOICE vouchers,charter anything but this current Public school system that is FAILING!!!
DH
February 7th, 2012
10:58 pm
(And all I ever tried to tell a teacher was, “Do not accept late work from my child. If you do so even once, you won’t get another assignment out of her on time; it’ll make both you AND me crazy.” I was cheerfully ignored. My bad.)
I’m sorry you’ve ascribed “attitude” to me because I remind you of people you don’t like. I applaud your daily struggles in your classroom. All this distracts from the issue at hand, to wit, that HR 1162 may be a flawed bill, but something has to be done. This legislation, first of all, puts the question on a ballot, where all of us can address it as we see fit. Second, in my view, instead of it being about allowing the state to usurp control from local boards, it’s about allowing parents who are willing to take the responsibility for their children’s education to have the resources to do that.
I'm a teacher
February 8th, 2012
12:35 am
The problem with “putting it on the ballot” is that, as has happened so often in the past, a very sketchy bill is put on the ballot and made to sound good – then when it is voted on the details come out and the end result is nothing like what was presented but it was “voted on”. It should not be allowed on the ballot until all the details are listed up front and in language that is easy to understand by non-lawyers.
ScienceTeacher671
February 8th, 2012
6:29 am
DH, I apologize. I would applaud a parent with your “attitude” on late work.
And I agree that this is a distraction.
I do not agree that 1162 would be an overall benefit for the state, because I don’t agree that most charters are better.
d
February 8th, 2012
6:44 am
@Downunda – you have choice. If you want to send your child to a different school, work hard, save up, make sacrifices and pay for that school. Don’t ask for a government handout in the form of a voucher!
Business owner
February 8th, 2012
8:34 am
@3schoolkids
Your first statement answered your own question about implementing “proven measures”…there are none (which is why the return rate is so high). There is no research supporting superior outcomes at charters for anyone but the ED 4 Profit business owners and investors (use your Google machine…)
@Jeff in Roswell
How rude and offensive for you to suggest your child should be given “filet” while others get “hamburger helper”…did you pay more for your filet? No, you didn’t. I notice that the people barking the loudest about “socialism” and “redistribution of wealth” are the first ones to belly up for more than their fair share of public resources. Pigs at the trough, indeed.
I agree with the poster who predicted what will happen when everyone (even the riff raff!) receive vouchers. I have the benefit of living through this experiment in other places…amusing doesn’t begin to cover it! At least we’ll have the Jeff’s of the world to amuse us as they wail and gnash their teeth in shock and dismay.
As a matter of fact, now that I consider it, Jeff (in Roswell) is likely one of the Fulton Science Academy parents who wants schools to “run like business” yet can’t understand why they’re held to the same charter term as those with whom they chose to partner in business.
C Jae of EAV
February 8th, 2012
9:00 am
@ScienceTeacher671 – It would seem that your ignoring my point entirely. Without any further public policy changes individual schools and entire districts have the power to free themselves from the regulations by petitioning to convert themselves to the public charter designation. True the legislature could pass a law to effectively create that de-facto circumstance across the board, however IMHO it would be a redundant action. Further, I would argue if the regulations in question are the real obstacle to greater academic achievement then why have local districts not thrown their considerable legislative lobbying weight behind getting them removed from the books. In short, I think this particular facet of the issue while somewhat impactful is abit of a red herring.
@Ed Johnson – I’m still perplexed as to what the Status Quo approach is supposed to provide outside of what we’ve all seen manifested within the last 10 years. I’ve read some of your writing outside of this blog and still I don’t quite have a clear picture of what you’re advocating.
C Jae of EAV
February 8th, 2012
9:08 am
@North Fulton Parent – Based on the studies and “editorial” writings I’ve read on the subject, I believe the issues you site as torpedoing the operation of public charters are accurately stated. I counter that the required oversight authority and/or influence to trigger such is already existing. It can be argued that said authority is not effectively enforced. Further there is a strong argument that there are strong adversarial approaches taken by many local districts toward the public charters that operate within their districts (even in cases where the local board authorizes said charter) that serve to drive the circumstances the underlying the points of failure you noted. I would say that public charters are essentially no better or worse run than the average traditional public institution. However both are equal in that public participation in their given structures of governance would give any taxpayer / parent a voice in how things are managed. As has been stated by myself and others in this blog, effective advocacy or any position will ALWAYS win the day. Many who have had the experience would suggest the limited focus of the public charter may provide for the aforementioned voices to have greater influence and impact that would be the case with a local BOE / superintendant.
As for the language of the bill(s) in question, I share your concern about the use of broad language that leaves the door cracked for public education funds to be siphoned off to subsidize private school education. Unfortunately there is a view held by many legislators in this state that laws passed that impact public education NEED TO BE WRITTEN this sort of vague/ambiguous manner to allow for greater local control in application (I’ve actually had a state lawmaker state that to me in response to me asking specifically why public education bills are not written in a more prescriptive manner). On this point we all should be watchful as the use of language suckered many voters into supporting constitutional changes which allowed local BOE’s to continue siphoning off funds collected to support public education toward the support tax allocation districts (TADS) following a successful court challenge to the prevent the practice.
C Jae of EAV
February 8th, 2012
9:14 am
@Voice Of Reason – I agree you have some control. However, I believe you’re attributing a level of influence to the ability of any individual taxpayer/parent to voice opinions regarding how public policy is exercised by a local BOE or how institutions are administered that’s greater than what exists in practice (based on my experience). By my observation, I don’t see the level of influence in question any less in the context of public charter governance. The question becomes to what degree to taxpayers/parents demand the accountability that either a public charter board or the local BOE should be providing relative to their span of responsibility. Just as taxpayers/parents are chided for not attending local BOE meetings or engaging their local BOE rep to participate in the decision making process, the same could be said for taxpayers/parents who fail to do the same relative to public charter institutions operating within their districts. If as most of us claim in blog postings that the aim is to develop a quality PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM then our collective advocacy should be applicable to all types of public institutions. I do believe strongly that public charters can complement the traditional model and that the future landscape of public education will continue to include both. Therefore, we must as concerned stakeholders focus on developing the respective governance structures in such a way that sufficient accountability measures are present. We need to maintain pressure on local BOE’s as partners/stakeholders of equal measure in public charter institutions to exercise the authority / influence they already hold to ensure public charters are operating in a manner to effectively serve the public interest. Overall as I’ve stated in adjoining comments in this thread, there is little to no collaboration due to adversarial postures
Voice of Reason
February 8th, 2012
10:56 am
I could probably type a whole essay on this subject but I’ll try and keep my feelings about charters short and sweet.
First of all, the reason that many charter schools are a success is a no-brainer to me. Charter schools are comprised of nearly 100% of parents that care about their child’s education. When you go to a high-performing public school, what do you see? You see parents actively participating in their child’s educational experience. As I have said in other threads about education, many of the problems with poor performance in public schools can be directly linked to overall culture and society where the school is located. When you have highly-involved parents, you will have better performance. It is a simple equation. However, the bottom line is that studies have shown that many, if not most, charter schools end up functioning on about the same level as the public schools. If they are producing the same or similar results, why are we trying to create more instead of fixing what’s already in place?
With that said, I feel that public schools take an unfair share of the blame for poor performance. While there is most certainly room to improve, there are many factors that are beyond their control. On top of that, we provide them with unfunded mandates and rules. Did you know every public school in the state is required to have a “moment of silence” EVERY school day? Legislators couldn’t force school prayer so now they force a moment of silence that takes a little bit more time out of the instructional day. I could go on for days listing rules and regulations handicapping every teacher and administrator in a public school.
With that, I see “vouchers” and “charter schools” as just a means to “pass the problem” off instead of dealing with it. There are many things that could be done to improve the status of our public schools. However, instead of dealing with the issues, they just choose to move to a different system which will ultimately encounter the same issues and problems once public schools are gutted.
As a parent, I absolutely want and advocate for my child to receive the best education possible. I would be a poor parent if I demanded anything less.
As a taxpayer, I want to FIX public schools so that perhaps we can create more productive members of society and I won’t ultimately have to take care of them on welfare. Transferring the low performers who don’t care about education to a charter school is not going to accomplish that goal. It is only going to make the charter school perform more poorly.
We need to get the federal government OUT of the education business. We need to change highly restrictive regulations that ultimately make high and average achievers suffer. We, as a society, need to understand that while everyone is created equal, we don’t all have equal abilities and talents. We spend a lot of time trying to cater to the lowest performing student and neglecting the higher performers. We need to push EVERY student to their highest potential – even the smart ones.
Again, I could go on and on.. but this charter school thing is putting a bandaid on a problem to be dealt with later instead of just dealing with the problem.
Fled
February 8th, 2012
12:09 pm
@DH: Thank you so much for posting. At the end of a long, rewarding day, I read your posting and remembered how truly awful it was to be a teacher in Georgia. Your kids might be great, but I am eternally grateful that I will never have to deal with you.
Most excellent teachers are going to “glaze over” when you proceed to tell them how they are going to have to completely change everything they are doing to accommodate the unique needs of your one child. There are now 35 or more kids in each of their classes, so please understand that the last thing they need is to deal with your demands after a hard day, even if you somehow somewhere heard something about learning styles (which is a lot a bull anyway).
Of course, you could just take your children and enroll them in private school, if only you could afford it. Good luck in your quest for control.
Had enough yet, teachers?
Give up. Throw in the towel. Flee.
Jeff in Roswell
February 8th, 2012
1:55 pm
@ Business Owner – Your assumptions that my child is at Fulton Science are blatantly false – as well as most of your other asumptions
I’m sorry you took offense to my analogy but it serves very well. In fact Filet is served for less money than Hamburger Helper in this situation. The opportunity is there, why wouldn’t you take it?
Yes, there certainly are issues with Fulton Science Middle School and the missteps the board has taken. Not ALL Charter schools are that way. I just wish people would stop in and see what’s going on in these schools first hand. Do your research before spouting off falsehoods.
Jeff in Roswell
February 8th, 2012
2:06 pm
Funny thing Fled.
The teachers/administrators WANT our input. They make volunteering mandatory. They want to make the teaching experience better for themselves and the children.
Why do people have a problem with that? What’s wrong with that? If there is something that works better for child/parent to get them educated – I say why not?
Educators and parents sending their children to the neighborhood school get all bent out of shape with this issue. Parents need choices and every situation is different. One size does not fit all. Sure, we could deal with our neighborhood school. But if another opportunity is out there that possibly works better for our situation, then I’m going for it.
d
February 8th, 2012
2:40 pm
@Jeff – As a teacher, I do want parental involvement – frankly when I look at parents that show up for parent conferences, it is the parents with students who have A’s and B’s…. almost never do I see the parents of students who have a grade below 75. Believe me, that data right there is enough for me to see the value of parental input. The only way I get “bent out of shape” when dealing with “educational choice” is when the state decides to take money against the will of the local elected officials and local citizens – and as a taxpaying citizen as well as a teacher, I want to see those decisions made locally. As has been pointed out many times, there are approximately 120 other charter schools in Georgia that the Supreme Court decision last year did not affect. People like Jan Jones are getting bent out of shape because the Constitution says you cannot take local funding without local input – which affected a total of 8 schools. I’ve made clear my disdain of Gwinnett’s position on Ivy Prep and I exercised my rights as a voter in response to that decision. I was outvoted. Obviously the majority of Gwinnettians agreed with the decision of the Gwinnett Board of Education – or change would have been made. What really scares me most about 1162 is the fact that the board that would likely come about if passage occurs would be appointed – and again not answerable to the voters of the local district whose funds they want to hijack. State funds were never at question here – it comes down to the local funding which is why the systems that sued did. They didn’t care about state funding being withheld for students that weren’t there. They were upset about the state taking local funding away.
DH
February 8th, 2012
3:11 pm
@ Fled – I was asked for the input by the teachers themselves, so I gave it. Telling a teacher my kid is the worst procrastinator I have ever seen hardly qualifies as asking them to “completely change everything they are doing to accommodate the unique needs” of a child. it’s funny how it’s coming out that even though teachers ask for this input, you don’t really want to receive any. I guess it’s some silly school system rule that made you have to ask….but there’s no corresponding rule to ensure that you listen to the reply……and then all the anti-charter folks want to say it’s involved parents that really improve a school – but try to be one and you teachers will say that when the class size is 35, all you’re really doing is getting in their way.
Look, I have agonized for teachers who say their students’ parents can’t be bothered to check the homework, come to the conferences, or even feed the children breakfast before they come to school. Parents who couldn’t name the vice-principal, or even tell you if there is one. I agree that at a charter, you have kids whose parents are not those parents – we bothered to make a choice, and it wasn’t the easiest choice, it wasn’t the de facto, “put them on the bus in the morning” and don’t worry about it until they come home, if then. So now you’re telling me I’ve been agonizing over the wrong thing? That I *should* just put that kid on the bus and leave it up to you in your all-encompassing wisdom to educate him or her as you see fit? Fled, I think we are *all* glad you’re gone.
Jeff in Roswell
February 8th, 2012
3:21 pm
@ d – Thanks for an explanation that makes me think.
ScienceTeacher671
February 8th, 2012
8:28 pm
DH, since you’re still on the topic of your child, I don’t understand why the teachers would “glaze over” when you told them not to accept late work from your child the procrastinator.
The high school teachers I know would welcome such a proclamation. We are all too used to parents coming in the last week or two of the semester and begging us to let their child make up work that wasn’t turned in during the first month of school.
DH
February 8th, 2012
9:16 pm
Welcome to my world, ScienceTeacher671. Maybe Fled was her teacher? Wasn’t you, pretty sure of that
. Seriously. I’d get the glaze, get nodded at, and then ignored. Until the year we drew a first year teacher. She listened, and it was a beautiful thing indeed. 
This actually would make a beautiful side thread: a dialog about how much teachers want to hear versus what they don’t. Personally I didn’t think my request was over the top, but I’m finding out that in some circumstances, maybe it was.
Business owner
February 9th, 2012
9:18 am
@jeff
I’ve done plenty of research on charters. They don’t offer the same for less, by any stretch. They offer a select group of kids a different building and teachers-that is all.
In any independent study (those not bought and paid for by corporate ed reformers to suit their political and economic desires) charter schools do not produce higher functioning students, have governance problems ranging from just plain stupid to criminal and (most importantly) do not serve all students. They don’t take kids who are medically fragile, deaf, using wheelchairs, dyslexic…the list goes on…and, on the rare occasion they do accept such a child, nationwide studies show they are “counseled out” within a year. And then they compare the two groups? Do they not teach statistics at these charters?
Don’t even get me started on the actual costs associated with your little experiment.
Campaign for charter school amendment: The heat is on | Get Schooled
February 13th, 2012
8:37 pm
[...] decided to pair a pro charter amendment piece — the one I posted here by the sponsor state Rep. Jan Jones of Milton — with a con by another [...]