The historical impetus for education reform was to provide extraordinary support for students on the ‘losing’ side of the achievement gap, and the idea of ‘charter’ schools came from expert educators within the public education system itself.
Today some reformers at least appear to ground their efforts in this view. Here’s a photo and quote from the Education section of The Broad Foundations’ 2011-12 annual report:
“America’s public schools determine the strength of our democracy, the health of our economy and the ability of our middle class to thrive. Yet with one-third of students dropping out and many of those who graduate from high school unable to succeed in college, our public schools are failing our nation.”
Here’s another synopsis of the historical justification for ‘education reform’ and charters:
- High quality taxpayer-funded education is vital for the current and future success of our democracy and our economy and all students deserve equal access to it.
- Some children struggle more than others in school, and family history and socio-economic status are the most predictive of student academic achievement.
- We must do all we can to help low-achieving and under-privileged students be successful in school so that they become prosperous, contributing citizens.
- If the standard academic program available to students fails to adequately prepare them for a successful future, an alternate program should be available to them.
- By liberalizing rules of the public education system, school administrators, staff and parents can create alternative programs that meet the needs of struggling students.
- The ‘charter school’ idea was originally conceived by expert educators as a novel remedy to help close the pernicious achievement gap.
The acid test of whether a reformer or charter school is legitimately aligned with the movement’s historic intent is if they offer and advocate for an admissions preference for students achieving below the mean in their school or district, for students on the ‘losing’ side of the achievement gap.
Any purported reformer of public education advocating for charters and privatization that serves students already on the ‘winning’ side of the achievement gap should be exposed as a fraud. Especially when they’re able to force their ‘reforms’ onto thriving and high-performing public school districts against majority will of the community and a democratically elected Board of Trustees.
In the words of the late Milton Friedman, “One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.” When the results of an ‘education reform’ initiative are a widening of the achievement gap and re-emergence of racial and socio-economic segregation and discrimination in public education founded on equity, we’re rightly judged to have made a great mistake indeed.