Right, For Most Of The Wrong Reasons

The Strib editorial board came out against the cap on charter schools (which we’ve discussed here and here). 

The idea had me scratching my head; the Strib and the anti-charter Minnesota Federation of Teachers are co-bedfellows of the DFL, which is carrying the MFT’s water on this issue.

I figured there had to be a whammy in there somewhere.

Let’s look, shall we?

But limiting charters is not the best way to assure adequate state support for traditional public schools. The larger issue is funding public education programs well enough to allow both traditionals and charters to thrive.

Perhaps a more recent Senate action will make that possible. Although the full Senate adopted a low-ball $496 million increase for education a week ago, it is now debating an income tax increase that would pump in another $400 million.

Well, we could see that coming, right? 

We’ll come back to that.

Still, there are some senators itching to put the brakes on charter expansion, worried that the new schools are hurting regular public school enrollment. They point to a state finance report that identifies charters as one of the state’s fastest-growing expenses.

Which is, of course, rubbish.  Publicly-financed schools of all types – traditional or charter – get paid a certain amount of money for every day every child is in school.  Except that charter schools get a little less of it; charter schools don’t get their parent districts’ supplemental appropriation proceeds, for example.  So keeping a kid in a charter school for a given day – or year – costs the state the state’s taxpayers less than keeping the kid in a traditional public school.

It is true that growth has been rapid; the number of charter students has risen from 10,000 in 2001 to 23,700 today. But that growth has been driven by interest and demand.

Let me digress a moment here; that is a very curious turn of phrase.  Of course the growth is triggered by interest and demand! 

The big question – why is there such “interest” and “demand”?  

And why does the DFL feel the need to choke that “interest and demand” off? 

For 20 years, Minnesota has been a pioneer in offering public school choice, acknowledging that today’s students have a variety of learning styles and needs.

In fact, charters are just part of the menu of educational choices. Out of 800,000 public school students, more than 100,000 attend some type of alternative, contract or charter program — all under the public school umbrella.

Clearly, a significant number of students and families believe in school options.

Again – why do you suppose that is?

But given that it’s the Strib editorial board, I should accept good news where I find it.  For example, they put the numbers in context:

As for cost, stopping the expansion of charters is estimated to save the state about $6 million over two years out of a $13.5 billion education budget.

In other words, one-twentieth of one percent. 

Moratorium supporters do raise questions worth considering. Some school officials worry that programs have been set up just so organizers can go after state startup funds.

But then, there are laws against fraud.  No? 

 A handful of rural groups have said they’ll start charters to stave off much-needed district consolidations.

Let’s stop right there.

Consolidating rural districts is the dumbest thing this state has ever done for education.  In fact, consolidating smaller schools into big, factory-model schools is the dumbest thing this nation has ever done when it comes to schooling.  The simple fact is, rural schools do, statistically, a better job of teaching kids to read, write, do math, learn science and history than big, factory-model schools.  The smaller, in many cases, the better.

Consolidation has nothing to do with educating children, let alone educating them better.  It’s about making the system work better for the system’s sake.

And if the Strib editorial board believes – as they seem to – that an urban parent’s choice is worth protecting (thanks, Strib!), why not that of a parent in a small, rural town who is blanching at the thought of his kids being on a bus for over an hour each way, morning and night – for the dubious privilege of attending a big, prison-like, factory-model school that won’t do as good a job of educating them as the small, rural school they’re losing?  Which the proposed charter school will replicate? 

Indeed, the best way to “save” the public school system – I believe the only way to save it, if indeed “saving” is possible – is to deconsolidate schools, rural and urban.  Dismantle the huge, factory-model schools, with their need for Orwellian security and the chuzzlewitted addiction to “policy” and bureaucracy that do nothing but teach kids that authority is not only uncaring, but stupid (not that it’s not a valuable lesson).  Move the schools out into the neighborhoods.  Make them small – no more than the number of names the principal can remember, ideally.  Move them into the neighborhoods they serve.  Quit segregating by grade level; let older kids teach younger kids.  Live lean.  Focus on the mission – teaching reading, writing, math, science and history. 

Sort of like…well, charter schools.

[Rejection] should befall the charter moratorium when the Senate and House bills land in conference committee. The door should remain open to create innovative schools for Minnesota students.

Well, we ended up in the same place, anyway. 

6 thoughts on “Right, For Most Of The Wrong Reasons

  1. The fundamental question here, and you have hit on it, is why, if there is so much “demand” for better schools, why the legislature seems determined to deny parents that fundamental freedom?

  2. I saw this disingenious, self-serving, back handed demand for MORE money too.

    All I can say is heh..you poor, poor, deluded prisoners of Public Schools (Inc.); you really don’t know what has hit you do you?

  3. I seem to remember reading of a study once that had found that the only factor that they could find that had a strong correllation to student performance was school district size.

    Not classroom size, or school size, but school district size. The smaller the district, the better the kids did.

  4. Oh amen Mitch! A wonderful little country school was closed around here recently and had to consolidate with the bigger town (Roseau, MN). The school had excellent records, the kids and parents loved it. They did everything they could to save it-tried to go the Charter Route and all failed…it didn’t matter one damn bit what the parents wanted-it would save money…and not very much…here’s an excerpt from one article:

    School Showdown

    By Bakken, Ryan

    “MALUNG, Minn. – The end may be near for the so-called “country schools” of Roseau County.

    If it happens, it won’t be without a battle, however. The parents of students at the Malung and Wannaska, Minn., country schools already have done that several times. Their last chance to present their case to the Roseau School Board is Wednesday at the Roseau School.

    By a 4-2 vote May 18, the board adopted a budget reduction plan that included closing the Malung School, which had 75 students in grades 4-6 last school year. State law requires a hearing for the closing of any school.

    They will need to sway at least one vote to prevent the closing of Malung, located seven miles south of Roseau. The board vote is June 28.

    Their argument has taken several approaches. It’s been emotional, saying a setting and learning environment such as Malung’s is worth preserving. It’s been financial, saying any savings would be minimal. It’s been practical, pointing to the high achievement of its students.

    It’s been hardball, too, threatening that if it closes, a charter school may replace it. A charter school would take away students – and the state aid that goes with them – making the School District’s financial woes worst. ”

    Well, cry me a flippin river.

    Complete article:
    http://www.redorbit.com/news/education/584818/school_showdown/index.html

  5. Whenever you read about the state of Minnesota needing more money, remember that the state budget has tripled in the last twenty years, while the population has increased about 20%:

    Historical General Fund Spending
    In the last twenty years, the state general fund budget has almost tripled – going from
    $9.808 billion in FY 1984-85 to the current $27.955 billion in FY 2004-05.
    Biennium Dollars (thousands) Change % Change
    1984-85 $9,807,814 $1,571,426 19.1
    1986-87 10,289,740 481,927 4.9
    1988-89 11,524,013 1,234,273 12.0
    1990-91 13,635,374 2,111,361 18.3
    1992-93 14,496,834 861,460 6.3
    1994-95 16,739,762 2,242,928 15.5
    1996-97 18,629,098 1,889,336 11.3
    1998-99 21,193,108 2,564,010 13.8
    2000-01 24,179,031 2,985,923 14.1
    2002-03 26,648,114 2,469,083 10.2
    2004-05 27,954,532 1,306,418 4.9

    http://www.budget.state.mn.us/budget/budget_glance.pdf

  6. I can never get anybody to even ASK the reasonable question of educrats claiming they need more money, which is, “What did you do with the LAST Billion dollars we gave you?” They keep saying they need more money to improve education, so where is the improvement?

    That’s nearly 6% ANNUAL growth rate in spending, and we know education spending has increased more, to take a higher percentage of the budget. When, oh when, are the public schools going to be held accountable?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.