War of words escalates in charter school amendment fray between Barge and GOP leadership

There is a lot of back and forth on the announcement earlier in the week by Georgia school chief John Barge that he opposes the GOP-scripted charter schools amendment, starting with an email exchange that I had Wednesday with House Majority Leader Edward Lindsey.

After his strong public rebuke of John Barge, I asked Lindsey this question in an email:

Rep. Lindsey,

Wondering if you have any second thoughts on your  initial response to John Barge?

I plan on writing about this escalating battle of words for the Monday education page. One of my points on criticisms that Barge changed his position: It happens all the time in the Legislature, even to the point of folks changing parties. Candidate Deal himself changed his mind on Race to the Top — in a single day. In the morning, he said he would reject the grant if we won and, later that day, he changed his position.

(I was told that a call from Gov. Perdue was a key factor in Candidate Deal quickly changing his mind on that issue.) In this case, Barge says he is not bowing to political pressure, but to the reality of school funding and the consequences to the 1.6 million Georgia children in public schools.

I could list you a dozen changes of heart by your colleagues that did not result in such strong rebukes. Is that a legitimate criticism given that Barge did not see the financial straits of DOE until he got into the job?

Lindsey’s response to me:

Let’s first start off by placing our respective cards on the table. I was a co-sponsor of the Charter School Constitutional Amendment. As one of your avid readers, I know that you have had deep reservations about the merits of charter schools in general and this measure in particular. Therefore, it should not be surprising that I am dismayed by Superintendent Barge’s 180 % about face and you are heartened by it and wish to justify it.

That said, this is not a situation where policymakers simply disagree. My blunt rebuke and the Governor’s comments were justified and necessary to set the record straight in this situation.

Superintendent Barge was not an education novice who campaigned on an issue he did not fully understand when he ran in 2010. He is an experienced educator who was well versed on the history of the charter school issue and fully understood the arguments for and against — most of which being the same arguments we are hearing today.

Furthermore, this issue came to a boil again shortly after the superintendent took office with the Supreme Court decision in the spring of 2011 striking down much of HB 881. In response, those of us in the legislature and the executive branch worked closely with both advocates and critics of state funded charter schools for a year to answer concerns and fashion a coalition to pass the constitutional amendment in the legislature.

As part of that effort, we worked extensively throughout the process with representatives from Superintendent Barge’s Department of Education for information and guidance. Throughout this long drawn out process, Superintendent Barge never raised opposition to the proposals, voiced fiscal concerns, or otherwise indicated a change of heart.

Therefore, given Superintendent Barge’s extensive history in education before he ran, his documented “strong” support of state charter schools in the 2010 campaign, and his conduct on this issue since his election to the present, my rebuke and the Governor’s more measured comments to him were a well needed clearing of the air.

In this continuing war of words, here is a later email exchange between Barge and Lindsey.

This is how Barge responded to Lindsey’s first statement, the one in which the House leader questioned whether Barge was lying during the campaign or now on how he felt about charter schools:

Dear Rep. Lindsey,

Thank you for your comments on my position on the charter schools amendment. As the state’s top education official, I felt it was important stand up for the 1.6 million students and 111,000 teachers in Georgia’s public schools. I fully support creating high quality charter schools, but I cannot support the constitutional amendment. It would be harmful to the 2,300 public schools in the state that have been cut more than $4 billion since 2008. I am a true conservative who believes in limited government and fiscal responsibility. Establishing a charter school commission would go against both of those principles. First and foremost, we must work to restore school calendars to 180 days and make sure teachers are getting their full annual pay. A new state agency that duplicates the existing work of the state Department of Education and the powers of the State Board of Education – while taking away local control and costing taxpayers millions of dollars – is just plain wrong. If the amendment passes, I will honor the wishes of Georgia voters, but I could not stay silent on an issue so critical to our public schools. I look forward to continuing to work with you on issues relating to education in Georgia.
John Barge
Georgia Department of Education

And here is what Lindsey said in response:

Superintendent Barge:

I appreciate your response e mail and I am copying my GOP caucus and others since they also received my first sharp rebuke to you earlier this week. Quite frankly, however, despite your protestations, you simply cannot match up your present stated position in your email today with your past conduct in this area. I also sharply disagree with the merits of your arguments.

You were not an education novice who campaigned in 2010 by actively seeking out support from charter school advocates and indicated “strong support for state created charter schools. You are an experienced educator who was well versed on the history of the state supported charter school issue and fully understood at that time the arguments for and against — most of which being the same arguments we are hearing today.

Furthermore, this issue returned to a boil again shortly after you took office with the Supreme Court decision in the spring of 2011 striking down much of HB 881. In response, those of us in the Legislature and the executive branch worked closely with both advocates and critics of state funded charter schools for a year to answer concerns and fashion a coalition to pass the constitutional amendment in the Legislature. We also worked to maintain funding of existing state created charter schools with the help of your department.

As part of that effort, we also worked extensively throughout the process with representatives from your Department of Education for information and guidance. Throughout this long drawn-out process, you never raised opposition to the proposals, voiced fiscal concerns, opposed the continued funding of existing state funded charter schools, or otherwise indicated a change of heart. This history is what led to my blunt rebuke of your actions earlier this week.

Turning to the merits of your newly minted position, I share your stated concerns for the 1.6 million public school students in this state and the 111,000 public school teachers. Let me start of by reminding you that charter schools are public schools, charter school students are public school students, and charter school teachers are public school teachers.

Regrettably, there have been cuts in state spending on education since the beginning of the Great Recession in 2008 – as with every other state in this country. Nevertheless, education has seen some of the smallest cuts of any area in our state budget. Our teachers are still the highest paid in the Southeast and after adjusting for cost of living among the highest paid in the nation. Overall funding per pupil in Georgia is also the second highest in the Southeast.

The status quo on education in Georgia is unacceptable. The overall graduation rate in Georgia hovers in the mid 60% range and half of the students who come from low income households drop out before graduating high school. In my household, if my children brought home success records like this from school it would be time for serious changes. It should be same for the Georgia’s education system.

Charter schools are not a silver bullet – there is no one silver bullet – but they are a critically needed tool in the tool box for education reform.  Confining children to low performing traditional schools with no hope of an alternative or choice is morally wrong in the 21st century, and under Georgia’s existing state constitution we already have a duty to provide a quality education for every child in Georgia.

I chaired the Charter School Study Committee in 2007 and studied charter schools in Georgia and around the country. Georgia’s present system has left us far behind other states in progress toward true education reform by virtue of many systems’ refusal to even consider charter schools or by other systems literally fiscally starving them to death.

Our charter school proposal provides a simple pressure relief valve – not a fire hose – by giving parents an alternative path for consideration of a charter school application. They must still meet rigorous standards for consideration and, if they fail to perform as promised, they can be shut down. (Let me know the last time a traditional public school was shut down for poor performance.)

You speak of local control. I believe the ultimate local control should rest with the parents and the students. Therefore, I will let you stand with the status quo education bureaucracy. I stand with the students and their parents who deserve better.

In closing, let me also add that I will work with you on other education issues in the future despite my deep disappointment in your reversal on this matter.

State Representative Edward Lindsey (R-Atlanta)

From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog

262 comments Add your comment

Maureen Downey

August 21st, 2012
11:07 am

@DeKalb, The DeKalb school board approved the transition of Peachtree Hope, a charter that fell apart last year, to an Ivy Prep school. It is on Memorial Drive. Have you looked at it?
Maureen

CharterStarter, Too

August 21st, 2012
11:14 am

@ ME – And I am quite sure you think YOU know the mind of Jefferson. Sheesh. You and I both live in the 21st century and have no real clue the ramifications of political and social factors that shaped the late 1700 and early 1800s…even reading it in a book.

Your quote –

“That does not mean that Jefferson did not want equality for blacks and women over the course of history. He dealt with his present, while also setting the foundations of egalitarianism for all for the future.”

But that’s not what he SAID. And he clearly SAID that education should be based on class. How do you refute that?

And, based on his quote (because that’s all you really have, too)…Is it just possible that the charter movement is taking what we presently have (now a traditional system that is weakened and needs strengthening that is failing students….especially minority students) and working towards establishing a more egalitarian provision of education for all?

Here is my question to you. IF the traditional school districts have for the last 20 years not improved educational outcomes at all, regardless of levels of funding, what makes you so sure they either CAN or WILL?

CharterStarter, Too

August 21st, 2012
11:21 am

@ ME:

Another Founding Father’s wise words:

“Power must never be trusted without a check.”
― John Adams

MAY

August 21st, 2012
11:21 am

Charter schools represent bold education reform. It’s what our state and country need and the average citizen craves for his/her family. Today, because of the virtual charter schools, 96% of Georgia’s school systems have a charter school student residing within their boundaries. Take away the virtual schools and only 11% of Georgia’s districts give families an option outside their zip code school.

DeKalb Teacher

August 21st, 2012
11:25 am

Hi Maureen!
Ivy Prep seems to be doing some GREAT things with charter schools. I wish I could go to the state approved Ivy Prep up Peachtree Industrial in Norcross.

I’m not so enthusiastic about Peachtree Hope. Bad public schools need to fail and go away. This might be one of them.

Maureen Downey

August 21st, 2012
11:27 am

@DeKalb. Peachtree Hope did go away and Ivy Prep is now operating at that location, for both girls and boys.

http://int.ivyprepacademy.org/kirkwood/

Mary Elizabeth

August 21st, 2012
1:17 pm

CS2,

Instead of simply quoting a line or two of Jefferson’s, I will refer you to Saul K. Padover’s book, entitled “Jefferson” to read in full. I am not a Jefferson expert, but I do believe I understand how his mind worked. If you read Padover’s book in full, I believe, you will understand Jefferson, more fully.

Here are a few lines from that book, pages 82 – 83:

“The process of ‘leveling’ begun by Jefferson could not be halted, and the ultlimate result was as Jefferson had foreseen and planned: a breaking-up of the power and the estates of the aristocracy. . .
Bitterness was generated by Jefferson’s reforms. The squire of Monticello was accused of being a traitor to his kind, of stirring up class against class, of destroying the sacred foundations of society. Gradually, he was becoming an object of animosity, for not only did he lead the democratic forces successfully, he also supplied them with arguments, which are in the long run the deadliest kind of ammunition. But the common people of Virginia, and ultimately all all America, had at last a champion in Tom Jefferson. To him they rallied, for he knew how to articulate the groping aspirations of humble folk in language that haunted the imagination.”

Jefferson’s words regarding Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury, on page 206 of Padover’s book:

“His (Hamilton’s) system flowed from principles adverse to liberty, and was calculated to undemine and demolish the republic, by creating an influence of his department over the members of the legislature. I saw this influence actually produced. . .the very persons. . .having swallowed his bait were laying themselves out to profit by his plans. . . .deserters from the rights and interests of the people.”
——————————————————
From Jefferson’s words on public education in his “Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XIV”:

“Another object of the revisal is to diffuse knowledge more generally through the mass of the people. This bill proposes to lay off every county into small districts of five or six miles square, called hundreds, and in each of them to establish a school for teaching reading, writing, and arithmetic.”
————————————————————

Notice the words “mass of the people” and “every county into small districts”. . . “to establish a school” to teach ALL of the children in his day. Sounds remarkably like public education by school districts, does it not?
————————————————————-

Public education can and will improve. There have been huge societal changes within the past 50 years and these changes in society (for the better overall) have, nevertheless, effected public education. Public charter schools can help to the end of improving public education, but they must work in harmony with traditional public schools and be guided by local Boards of Education. This state does not need another level of special charter schools – as proposed in HR 1162 which is now Georgia’s Constitutional Amendment. This amendment will hinder traditional public education overall, not help it.

CharterStarter, Too

August 21st, 2012
1:35 pm

@ Mary Elizabeth – I’m sorry, but it is pretty patronizing to speak of the “common people” as if they are stupid and can’t reason for themselves. That in and of itself is classist, but I do understand it was the thought of that day. But thank you for the book reference. I am an avid reader and will commit to reading it.

You know, charters WANT to work with districts and always have. Consider that the Commission did not have to come into existence at all IF there was fair ball being played in authorization and funding…IF districts could take the best of the charters instead of refusing to think there was something to learn and replicate. The districts hold, in their hands, the ability to ensure no state charter school ever is authorized SIMPLY by being fair and using charters to good purpose within their own districts.

I keep saying this, but I just still cannot understand why districts and those opposed to the amendment are so afraid to have a Commission if they are SO sure that the districts always make fair, impartial, and accurate decisions. Opponents are basically saying “We KNOW we are unfair sometimes and can make mistakes, but that doesn’t matter….parents should still not have due process in their desire under the law to open a high quality school.” I mean, Dr. Barge, in his statement and accompanying “data” basically assumed that at least 7 times a year, the districts would either be unfair or wrong in their decision. That doesn’t show too much confidence in our districts’ decision making abilities.

Wouldn’t it be better for opponents to leave this thing alone and just be fair and impartial going forward and contain the Commission’s authority to just these 16 schools? The argument is just nonsensical to me.

Ron F.

August 21st, 2012
7:20 pm

“Wouldn’t it be better for opponents to leave this thing alone and just be fair and impartial going forward and contain the Commission’s authority to just these 16 schools?”

I seriously doubt there’s much fair and impartial in any of this CS2. And the fact that the state legislature is in the middle of all this doesn’t exactly bolster any hope for impartiality either. Dr. Barge, as the state school superintendent and a Republican chose to break from his party for what he believed was a worthy reason. Seems his fellow Republicans don’t like when that happens, thus proving they have no idea what being impartial means. There are strong opinions and worthy arguments on both sides of this and the majority will rule.

Ron F.

August 21st, 2012
7:23 pm

And when you realize that the vast majority of charter schools currently running in the state have local approval (better than 80%), that doesn’t make the case for the amendment any stronger. We’re about to recreate a state level beauracracy that will, in one way or another, cost money the state doesn’t have, all the while listening to pundits rage about “smaller government”. I have little faith in the altruism of the state legislature in this, and there’s just not much out there to help change that.

CharterStarter, Too

August 22nd, 2012
12:03 am

@ Ron – only 16 out of 56 schools were approved over 2 years by the Commission. Why would a Commission be any less impartial than the State Board?

The legislature is involved because they had to pass the amendment to get on the ballot. There are some pretty passionate Repubs and Dems both for this amendment. The Supt. didn’t just break party lines, he compromised his responsibility to represent ALL public school children. And he sat back throughout the entire debate last legislative session and did not utter a word of concern. The gentleman is just another superintendent protecting his own.

Actually, we only have about 70 independent start up charters (the rest are run by school districts).

Ron F.

August 23rd, 2012
10:50 pm

CS2- I’ve said before it’s all about timing. A good idea at a bad time doesn’t get much impartial examination from those of us weighing the issue. While there are supporters on both sides of this (I can’t imagine anyone from either party associated with APS opposing it), it’s hard to be fair when the budget mess is what it is and everyone is feeling the pinch. The biggest challenge for me has been to try to get past how much money I’ve lost personally while trying to give this careful thought. I’m trying, though, but it isn’t easy. And that is the challenge Barge stated. Regardless of what one might read into it or behind it, he’s got a point about money at a time when every agency in state government is cutting budgets.

Last question for this thread from me (statistical question). How would you say the independent charters are performing versus the system run schools? Is there a noticeable difference in outcomes comparing similar demographics? I’m wondering if district sanctioned charters, because they have more financial support and perhaps more scrutiny from districts are able to do more or less. Thanks for putting up with my curiosity run amok!