By Tom
I’m pretty sure my house needs a new roof. It’s not leaking right now, but it looks like it might. There’s moss here and there, and the shingles look old and limp, like they’re about ready to give up.
But the trouble with getting a new roof is that there’s nothing “new” or “flashy” to show off. You just have a roof that’s new. No one stands out in their front yard, admiring their new roof, like they would with a new patio. People don’t comment on it.
But if we don’t replace our roof in a timely manner, we stand to compromise our entire house. No matter how much we’d like to put in a new patio out front, we need to stay focused on taking care of the roof. Being a grownup means setting priorities.
Washington State, like every other state, is flat broke. Not only that, the State Supreme Court recently ruled that the Washington Legislature is shamefully underfunding its schools, ordered them to take care of the problem.
That‘s what you might call a “priority.”
The Legislature needs to focus right now on just one thing: fully funding education. Period. Nothing should be allowed to distract their attention or divert their funds.
Two bills were introduced this month that do nothing to fully fund education and do everything to distract lawmakers from doing what the court just ordered them to do.
These bills would introduce charter schools to Washington State. Personally, I’m rather intrigued by charter schools. Where I was once dead-set against them, after visiting several successful charters in New York City, I’ve come to appreciate what they do with the populations they serve, and I think they may be useful in certain areas here.
But not now.
Right now the Legislature has a huge, overwhelming priority: fully fund education. Nothing should divert their attention or our limited funds.
Charter schools would do just that. Passing this legislation in a state that soundly rejected charters three times would take an enormous amount of time and energy that would better be spent solving the main problem: fully funding education.
More importantly, this legislation would divert funds away from solving that very problem. Not only would it cost millions to set up and staff the Charter Authority to oversee these schools, but local districts would see a drop in enrollment – and funds – just when they least need it.
Charter schools are the flashy new patios that certain Washington legislators would love to show off to the neighbors. But right now we’ve got a roof over our heads that’s in disrepair. It’s in such lousy shape that the Supreme Court just ordered them to fix it.
A new patio would be nice, but right now we need to fix the roof.
I’m a parent who can’t afford private school for my child. I’m also someone who happened, for no other reason than I was sentimentally attached to running around Greenlake, to buy a home near a great local school.
Yes, not great timing, but in 16 years I don’t think the budget’s ever been comfortable enough for great timing.
Education’s perpetually underfunded, but I don’t think that’s a good reason to keep doing what we’re doing if it’s not working as well as it should. I am in total agreement with you that all the models we need to look to are there – we could learn from the successful charters in other states, so why haven’t we? So little has changed.
Maybe those who put this bill together thought now was as good a time as any.
Kristin, I agree with you 100 percent that it would be a good idea to try something new in those pockets of poor education that you describe. I really, truly do.
But if I may be so bold as to second guess career politicians like Rodney Tom and Eric Pettigrew, their timing is atrocious. They’re picking a fight with charter school opponents at a time when those opponents merely have to point at the bankrupt education budget and then point at the recent court decision and ask, “Where’s the money?”
Charter opponents could advance the exact same argument I used in my post and not even worry about all the arguments against charter schools based on principle.
Their timing is so bad that it borders on self-destruction.
I don’t know, Mark.
I also don’t know if Washington, should 1053 be overturned so that the legislature can raise taxes, I don’t know that 1) that money would go to education (instead of a stadium, maybe) or 2) that a flood tide of money would improve a disadvantaged kid’s shot at a great education.
Our schools are doing a great job with some kids. We’ve got some areas doing better than others. But we still have these pockets where the school is really struggling to serve its troubled kids. I think a different type of school might do a better job.
Would a few charter schools really fix all that?
No, Tom. We’re saying it. I’m hearing it all over the place.
The Supreme Court has, to all intents and purposes, not said it. Me standing on the corner of 1st and Pike and saying, “We need a subway” is about as emphatic as the Supreme Court’s decision that we need to “fund education…in six years.” I am rarely cynical, but their decision will change nothing. We need to do more with what we have (and successful charters are very good at that) and we need to allow the legislature to raise revenue.
The kids who are dropping out, the kids who are being shuffled off under the rug because their skills are low and their skin is dark and their parents aren’t making a lot of noise, these kids can’t wait for the state to fully fund education because that day will never come. New York is not fully funding education. California is not fully funding education. No one is. Maybe the mythical Finland. But Finland has extremely high taxes, and no American would put up with them. The best we can do is provide a few schools that break the mold and serve a need. A few charter schools in Washington state, in the right neighborhoods, would do that. At least, I think so.
Is is money we don’t have? Maybe. Is it money we should spend to prevent spending more later? Definitely.
We cannot afford to let more poverty-challenged students enter adulthood without an adequate education. We are burdening our children with a population that will require public services and won’t be prepared to contribute. We can’t afford to NOT change in order to serve the underserved. 30 Million? I’m in. Spend it. Tax us. It’s far less than the cost of a new stadium, and we seem to find the means to pay for that.
Schools reflect the communities in which they reside more often than not.
I can’t see any justification for creating a new level of bureaucracy required with the inclusion of charter schools when the current gamut of public schools are not fully funded.
Plus, the charter school bill requires a non-profit to start the charter, but it can be handed off later to (or serviced by) a for-profit entity. This is an obvious open door for corporate America to invade our public school system.
This bill does nothing to solve the issues in the state and has the distinct possibility (probability?) of exacerbating them.
“We have to stop saying,’pour more money into schools and they’ll do better.'”
We’re not saying it, Kristin, the Supreme Court’s saying it. Sorry, but the legislature has to start fully funding schools. It’s official.
Perhaps some of these students trapped “in neighborhoods where the public school option is awful” wouldn’t feel that way if schools weren’t so underfunded. Perhaps not.
Jason, the fact of the matter is, The Legislature was ordered by the court to fund basic education, as defined two years ago by that same legislature.
In other words, they ordered the meal, ate it, and have now balked at the check.
And now they’re eyeing the dessert menu.
The Washington State School Directors Association, in opposition to the charter bill, estimated that the cost would be over $30 million. While not a huge amount, it’s $30 million we most definitely don’t have.
I’ve got 29 third graders in a class that should hold 24. I have less para support than I’ve ever had. We’re talking about closing school for a week. We’re talking about de-funding school transportation. My own children are taking geometry tests run off on quarter-sheets of paper. I could go on and on, but you get the point: we need to fully fund education.
Like I said, I’m not opposed to charter schools per se, but I’m opposed to funding them right now.
I wouldn’t want to overestimate the distraction effect while underestimating the political leverage.
If I were in Washington State and an advocate for education, I’d be for including a big fat influx of funds to come alongside those charter schools. Washington should expand the pot of money out there, and then throw in the ability to open a charter school in areas with failing systems. This way, the new funds have to be earned by allocating them properly to move toward improving the system. If these failed schools don’t use the additional funds properly and aren’t able to successfully improve, they’ll lose students to charter schools and the money that goes along with those students.
Ultimately, this is a win for kids everywhere because wherever they sit there will be more funds supporting their education and there is a new mechanism to enforce quality through competition.
As you know, I’m a fan of the home-improvement analogies. But if I were a mother who had no other option but enrolling her children in the local school and my local school was horrible, a school that could do better would be as important as a new roof, not a luxury like a new patio. You might see charters as a luxury, but for families who are totally unserved by their local school, a quality education for their child isn’t a patio.
And I know, I know – most teachers are good, most schools are pretty successful, most teachers care. I know. I agree, and I appreciate that you remind me. But I know many families in Seattle, in certain neighborhoods, who are not willing to put their children in the local school. And they have tried. They sacrified their first child, put in the time, volunteered, waged war against the system in an effort to get rid of an abusive teacher, and they failed. It’s not every teacher, but parents aren’t willing to run the gauntlet and make their child suffer “that” teacher, the one every parent hopes their child won’t have. I know families who are homeschooling, for God’s sake, because they can’t afford any other option but what’s available.
I’m a parent who can’t afford private school for my child. I’m also someone who happened, for no other reason than I was sentimentally attached to running around Greenlake, to buy a home near a great local school. Near a bunch of great local schools, actually. I’m lucky. I’m privileged, educated, and know how to stay informed about the system so that my children are served by their school. And they are served. There’s not a teacher at their school that I don’t respect.
But a lot of parents who want as much for their children as you and I d, see their children shuffled through the system in schools that aren’t working.
First, if people want the state to adequately fund education then they can get off their rear ends, write to their legislators, and start giving the legislature the power to raise taxes. We cannot continue to gnash our teeth that education’s not being funded when, thanks to Tim Eyman and 1053, the legislature cannot raise taxes. We cannot continue to expect public services without paying for them. My local library has reduced hours. Librarians take furlough weeks, for crying out loud. Public beaches and parks have been closed. Services for the poor have been reducing every year for years. Our state has turned its back on far more than education.
Secondly, our conventional public schools are no longer meeting the needs of our disadvantaged poor – and by disadvantaged I mean families who are undereducated, stressed by the effort to survive, and ignorant of the many ways to work the system so that it serves them. We have to stop saying, “pour more money into schools and they’ll do better.” I do not think they will. They will do more of the same, with newer textbooks (my history textbook stops with Clinton – before the dress scandal, no less), and fancier technology.
Tom, I need you to know that though I speak strongly, I couldn’t have more respect for the things you say and the way in which you say them. Particularly, I appreciate that you take me to task when I hit “post” before I’ve carefully evaluated my choice of phrasing.
So know that, while I think providing families with a better option is a roof, not a patio, I hear you when you say now is not the time.