Charter school amendment debate far from over: Next up in the Georgia Legislature, redefining “public” schools.
Here is a guest column by Lee Raudonis, former executive director of the Georgia Republican Party. He also worked for Paul Coverdell in the Georgia Senate, state GOP and U.S. Peace Corps. A former private school teacher, Raudonis is now a communications consultant and writer whose clients include political candidates, public officials and the Professional Association of Georgia Educators.
By Lee Raudonis
Be forewarned: the recent referendum on Constitutional Amendment 1 related to state-approved charter schools is being viewed by its authors and key supporters as much more than an endorsement for increasing the number of charter schools and — they have promised us — improving academic achievement. They view it as an endorsement for drastically altering public education as most Americans define it.
To better understand what I mean, think about the terms “public housing,” “public hospital,” and “public school.” For most people, the term “public housing” conjures up images of low cost, government-subsidized housing for people with little or no income who cannot afford to buy or rent their own homes. Similarly, the term “public hospital” is commonly used to refer to publicly funded hospitals that primarily serve those members of society who have little or no income or private health insurance.
Unlike the previous terms, the term “public school” does not normally conjure up images of places where only “poor people” attend school. Rather, for most of our nation’s history, the term has most commonly been thought of as the place where American children of all descriptions attend school. It is the place where children from the lowest income level to some in the highest income level, and the vast majority in between, come to learn how to read, write, and calculate, as well as countless other lessons, such as how to be good citizens. It is the place that America as a whole is educated.
This is the concept of public education that many of those who pushed the charter amendment apparently wish to change. Some would very much like to see the day when most American children attend schools other than what we currently define as “public schools.” They would prefer that parents place their children either in charter schools or, even better, receive vouchers from the government and send the children to private schools of their choice. Traditional public schools (schools for children of all types) would be replaced with a new type of public school — one for those children whose parents were not motivated enough to move them into a charter or private school or for whom there were none available. In other words, public schools will come to be viewed similarly to public housing and public hospitals, as places for children whose parents, for whatever reasons, cannot find a better alternative.
The charter amendment debate is not over, because the debate was never about charter schools. It was about the nature of public education. It will reappear again and again as the “conservatives” (people who want to conserve and protect the traditional American concept of public schools) and the “neo-radicals” (those who wish to drastically change the nature of public education) debate the numerous measures that the “neo-rads” will put forth each and every legislative session in the name of “providing greater school choice” for Georgia’s parents.
The time has come for the neo-radicals to reveal their true intent for each new “school choice” initiative they bring forward. It is only fair that members of the public understand that each neo-rad measure passed takes them one step closer to their goal of redefining public education.
Clearly, there is much about public education and our public schools that needs to be changed. There is always room for improvement. The question that the neo-rads don’t want the public asking, however, is where all of the neo-rad changes, if enacted, will eventually lead. They want the public to believe that each new proposal provides just one little way to increase parental choice. They do not want the public to know that all of the proposals, taken as a whole, could lead to the creation of a new public welfare program called “public schools.” And, they undoubtedly do not want the public asking pesky questions such as how well these new neo-rad public schools will be funded when the majority of the neo-rad constituents no longer have children in the “public schools.”
In the 2013 session of the General Assembly, the neo-radicals are certain to introduce several “school choice” initiatives. The public needs to be aware that these measures, like the charter school amendment, are about much more than their stated intentions. They are about redefining the nature of public education in our state.
–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
117 comments Add your comment
Really amazed
November 29th, 2012
12:34 pm
How many still believe that your child/children are receiving an excellent education via the public school your child/children attend?? I hear all kinds of things. Would love to hear your thoughts!
DeKalb Inside Out
November 29th, 2012
1:15 pm
Georgia Coach,
Please be more specific as to what you are referring:
What efforts?
What money?
What power?
Thanks!
Dekalb Teacher
November 29th, 2012
7:16 pm
Look folks, it’s quite simple. Give more power to the teachers and principal to discipline behavior issues properly. None of this 4th, 5th, 6th etc chances. Classes are constantly being disrupted by these kinds of students who have attitude problem and really don’t care about anyone but themselves. I have a new student who came to our school yesterday and is only 6 years old and I had to stop my class several times to deal with his bad behavior. That was only in 50 minutes! There are no separate gifted or high achievers classes in elementary school and that’s where all the problems begin. All it takes is one bad egg to disrupt the class learning and before you know it, you have more discipline problems in that class because the other students join in. There’s only so many times you can write discipline referrals or give a bad conduct grade. Most of the parents don’t even want to come in for a conference. How can you fix anything with that attitude?
We need to be on a 3 strikes and you are out. And by out I mean suspended. If it continues again, the student needs to be expelled. Why should the rest of the class suffer because of one or a handful of students? Thank goodness my kids are in gifted and don’t have to deal with continuous bad behavior except in connections & PE.
Private Citizen
November 29th, 2012
11:41 pm
Snarkysnake, I think you should over to Japan and look up Hirohito’s kids and ask them, and then come back and report what they said. But you to hear it yourself from them. Don’t worry, though, you’ll have a good trip but it is kind of a long plane ride (20 hrs).
Pride and Joy
November 30th, 2012
7:50 am
Dekalb Teacher, isn’t it possible that the “new student” is having difficulty adjusting as any healthy child would?
I got moved around and shoved around in schools a great deal. My family moved a lot. It was hard for me. At times, the accents were so different from my own that I couldn’t even understand what the other kids were saying to me.
And here’s another thing — why don’t you advocate for classrooms that are leveled for the childrens’ abilities? YOu admit that your gifted child doesn’t have to suffer because your child is in a class with kids who have the same abilities but instead you advocate just throwing the kid aaway after “three strikes.”
You want to THROW A SIX YEAR OLD OUT OF SCHOOL!
Let it sink in.
If you are that angry, you need to get out of the classroom and push some paper around instead of ruining the life of a child.
Dr. Monica Henson
November 30th, 2012
4:54 pm
disappointed posted, “These [charter] schools have the ability to develop a charter that adopts prayer as part of their school”: Absolutely not true. Charter schools are public schools. No public school in the United States is permitted to institutionalize prayer of any sort.
This does NOT mean, however, that no one can pray in a public school. Any student or group of students who wish to pray, as long as they don’t disrupt the academic environment, are legally protected to do just that.
What is not legal is for school employees to lead them in prayer. Those who bemoan that “they took prayer out of the schools” don’t understand that what actually was done by the U. S. Supreme Court was to protect the right of students to pray the way they want to, or choose not to pray at all, without school officials telling them how and when to pray.
It’s been said that as long as there are math tests, there’ll always be prayer in the schools.
Dr. Monica Henson
November 30th, 2012
5:01 pm
“if the state continues to reduce public school funding (as it has for nearly a decade) while increasing the number of competitors that do not play by the same rules (transportation, testing, etc.), it obviously puts public schools at a disadvantage.”
Mr. Raudonis, how is it that you see charter schools not “playing by the same rules” with regard to testing? Every charter school in Georgia is required to administer the CRCT, the EOCT, and the GHSWT and GHSGT (for those who haven’t aged out of the GHSGT cohorts). Your charge that charter schools don’t play by the same testing rules is patently false–and you know it.
The anti-choice, anti-charter defenders of the education establishment don’t hesitate to throw out bald-faced lies in order to try to bolster their indefensible position: that the public school monopoly deserves more and more funding even when it has proved that it does not work for all of the students it is supposed to educate.
Pride and Joy
November 30th, 2012
7:41 pm
Dr. Monica…Very well said…AGAIN.
thanks!
Ron F.
November 30th, 2012
9:08 pm
Well Dr. H, he does have you one point. Charter schools do not offer transportation at the same level as public schools are required, by LAW, to offer. It’s expensive, and considering the current funding options available, is a major challenge for charter schools. But if we are to see them as being equal competitors in terms of test performance, then they must be open to the same pool of children. Transportation is a necessity for some, and charter schools lock out those kids in many cases. Those kids are also generally poor, and without buses to get them there, simply cannot access the full range of options available. Mr. Raudonis makes a good point, and the “defenders of the education establishment” are concerned. At this point, it seems very possible that all we’ll have in the end is a dual system where “public” school becomes something on the level of housing projects and welfare.
Ron F.
November 30th, 2012
9:13 pm
“How many still believe that your child/children are receiving an excellent education via the public school your child/children attend??”
I’ve taught for over twenty years and currently have my two sons in my school system (rural, Title I district). I left the metro area ten years ago for a smaller, MUCH poorer system with my young sons in tow. I can tell you, even with the challenges faced by smaller systems with less funding, I wouldn’t have my sons anywhere else. They have teachers who truly care and work very hard to teach them with the same intensity and quality of any teacher I’ve ever met. They choose to be there working in a poorer district with kids who come from all sorts of families. Give me that kind of school and system any day!
Dr. Monica Henson
December 1st, 2012
5:01 pm
Ron, transportation to any public school is not required by state or federal law, except in the case of special education. Federal law mandates that if transportation is listed in a special education IEP as a “related service,” then the school is obligated legally to provide it door-to-door from the student’s home to the school building.
Other than that, public school transportation is not mandated legally. However, if a district “opts in” to provide it, then there are several rules and regulations governing buses, drivers, safety, etc.
It’s a common misconception, but no public school is legally required to transport students to and from, except in very narrowly defined special ed situations. That’s why school administrators can remove students from buses when they misbehave without having to go through due process.
I agree that charter schools should offer transportation and not to do so erects a barrier to families who can’t provide their own. My school provides MARTA cards in the metro Atlanta region to students attending the Magic Johnson Bridgescape learning center whose families meet income qualification guidelines. We will do the same with public transportation services in Macon, Savannah, and Augusta when we open our centers in those cities. Most of our students study from home and don’t need transportation for school.
Private Citizen
December 2nd, 2012
8:38 am
My school provides MARTA cards in the metro Atlanta region to students attending the Magic Johnson Bridgescape learning center whose families meet income qualification guidelines.
Hey. that’s a great idea and a benefit to to a city / metro area. Just using the public bus system is an education in itself! Timing, location, socio-interaction and the weird comfort aspect of the bus is always going to be coming over the hill and into sight at some point! And with the bus card the sense that you can go anywhere you want to go, it’s just up to you.
Dr. Monica Henson
December 2nd, 2012
11:11 am
I don’t understand why more metropolitan school systems don’t create an arrangement with the public transit authority for discounted bus & train passes for high school students who live in the areas served by public transit, rather than running school buses. It’s a needless duplication of services, in my opinion.
Dr. Monica Henson
December 2nd, 2012
11:23 am
We don’t provide unlimited-ride MARTA cards, by the way. Ours are reloadable and only provide a limited number of transfers Monday through Friday, so that students use them for school only so they don’t run out of transfers before the weekend. MARTA allows us to purchase them in volume at a discount.
Ron F.
December 3rd, 2012
2:20 am
Marta cards are great, but what about the kids outside the Marta service area? Kids in Clayton county for instance, as close to the metro area as it is, are out of luck. Public schools sytems, while perhaps not required to offer transporation, are doing so in every system I’ve seen. How many don’t? This is a limiting factor charter schools will have to deal with in order to reach out to more families in need. If not, the general progression to what Mr. Raudonis describes is already under way.
Are Public Schools Analogous to Public Housing? « Network Schools – Wayne Gersen
December 10th, 2012
9:57 am
[...] An article written by Lee Raudonis, former executive director of the Georgia Republican Party, was posted Sunday on the Atlanta Journal Constitution’s blog and cross-posted by Diane Ravitch. In this blog post Raudonis asserts that the ultimate goal of the authors of Constitutional Amendment 1, which was approved by the Georgia voters in November, is to re-define public schools in a way that equates them in the minds of the public with “public housing”. He writes: To better understand (the effect of this change in the public’s mindset), think about the terms “public housing,” “public hospital,” and “public school.” For most people, the term “public housing” conjures up images of low cost, government-subsidized housing for people with little or no income who cannot afford to buy or rent their own homes. Similarly, the term “public hospital” is commonly used to refer to publicly funded hospitals that primarily serve those members of society who have little or no income or private health insurance. [...]
Marvin C Gentz
December 16th, 2012
7:32 pm
Just for the record, for many years, reliable evaluators have concluded that if you hold poverty variables constant, public school education achievement scores are higher than students of any other country in the world. The fact is that we have more students of poverty per capita than any western country in the world.
In addition, a very reliable and respected study by Stanford University concluded that charter schools do not achieve higher than existing Public Schools and most achieve worse.
The concluding data about home schooling is abysmal and students with vouchers cannot find reasonable schools to attend.
Private or parochial schools do not outperform public schools.