Tuesday, July 24, 2007

A charter for success

About a month ago I had a discussion with my sister and brother-in-law about education choices for our kids that turned into a political debate. My sister is very familiar with (and opposed to) my libertarian views and believes that because I question the legitimacy of government and refuse to be bound by many laws, I shouldn't be allowed to use most public services--even though I'm forced to cough up substantial taxes to support those services.

This is important because my wife, Wendy, and I mentioned that we were considering sending our son, Tony, to a charter school when he gets old enough for formal education. Homeschooling is on the table, too, but it was the charter school option that set off my sister and her husband.

"Charter schools are public schools too," my sister protested. By her logic, we shouldn't be allowed to enroll Tony in one of the charter schools we've been considering.

I'll admit that I was briefly caught flat-footed--not by the seamless logic of my sister's argument that I should be denied access to government services, but by her unquestioned assumption that charter schools are much like any other public schools. Y'see, it used to be my job, back when I worked for the Internet Education Exchange, to make exactly that argument. It was our seemingly uphill task to convince the skeptical public at large that privately managed but publicly funded schools were no threat to the supposed sanctity of government-run education. Four years later, my generally statist sister had unknowingly adopted my argument and turned it around on me.

Who'd have guessed?

I mention this now because the New York Times has an interesting story on the growing success of charter schools in Los Angeles. Steve Barr and his Green Dot Public Schools have seemingly cleared away most of the barriers to establishing and running charter schools in the city. Barr has won his battles by organizing parents to lobby on behalf of reform--but also by buddying up to the politicians and teachers unions who made the traditional schools such a mess to begin with.

Charter schools are undoubtedly becoming more mainstream, but you have to wonder how much of their independent character they're retaining as they win converts and open new facilities. What happens if charter schools become increasingly accepted only by turning into their hide-bound competition?

In the end, by arguing that charter schools really are just another type of public schools, we may have undermined our own case. I'll stay optimistic for now; Green Dot schools are out-performing traditional public schools and my local options are greatly expanded by the existence of charters. But I hope we didn't just fortify the government education monopoly when we thought we were subverting it.

Labels:

1 Comments:

Anonymous Paul said...

I've always thought of "charter schools" as their own entity -- somehow offering everything that public schools cannot. While some charter schools give others bad names, I've long been convinced of their positive role. A charter school isn't a panacea, but I've never thought of it framed against the public school down the road. I suppose I'm a little dumbfounded myself -- in my mind, these schools have always existed outside the borders of public education, yet effectively occupying the same space and breathing the same air. To think of them as nothing more than a permutation of the public school system is disconcerting. Your sister's deceptively simple observation has me questioning what I've long thought to be true.

July 25, 2007 12:56 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home