The Charter Dilemma

There is a saying during the legislative session that it isn't over until its over. That stated, signs do point to the fact that current voucher proposals don't appear to have enough support in the Iowa House to advance. That seems to square with public sentiment. The majority of Iowans feel the same way, at least according to the recent Iowa poll which found that more Iowans oppose public funds [being used] to pay for private education. 

However, the fate of an expansion to Iowa's charter school law remains uncertain at this point. There has no doubt been a heavy focus on education during this legislative session. The pandemic has shined a light on the importance of having schools open and in session, not only for the educational role that we play but for those secondary and tertiary benefits that during normal times we take for granted. The frustration some parents had with decisions made by schools that led to them not reopening in a timely manner, and their feelings of being trapped are understandable. Frankly, I was disappointed that some of my colleagues felt state law didn't apply to them. Unfortunately this has given our legislators all the permission they needed to focus a lot of attention on choice schemes that would do nothing but undercut the good work that is going on in our public schools around the state. 

So while I have cautious optimism the voucher bill has been stymied (at least for now), the charter expansion does not yet garner that same amount of confidence. Here is what you should know about this bill. First, it is important to note that Iowa currently has a charter school law on the books. That's right, a mechanism already exists for charter schools in Iowa. Granted, there aren't very many of them. Proponents of the expansion would argue the current law is too onerous and cumbersome to set up a charter. I might counter that point with the thought that when dealing with multi-million dollar organizations (which deal with taxpayer money); having a bit of oversight and accountability might be a good thing. 

What this current proposal would do is eliminate a lot of that accountability. In fact, this charter bill would permit an out of state corporation to set up a charter school in a community and completely circumvent the locally elected public school board. These folks who run the charter school would be accountable to their shareholders, and not even live in our communities. If the parents who sent their kids to the charter school had a complaint, they wouldn't have the option of airing their grievances with the local superintendent or having an opportunity to speak at the next school board meeting. The Board of Directors won't be elected by the local community and may be two states over. 

The arguments that I have made countless times against the privatization of public schools over the years remain the same, whether we are talking about voucher programs or charter school expansion. Public money needs to remain with public schools where there is proper oversight and accountability from the local community and locally elected school board. 

The latest installment of Jamie Vollmer's 'Schools Cannot Do it Alone' network video is 'The Privatization Game'. In this video, he rightly states that public money should be reserved for public schools. He goes on to state there is no higher return on our investment than public schools: 7:1!

Mission Creep

Early on in the school year, we were invited to participate in Jamie Vollmer's 'Schools Can't Do it Alone Network'. As part of this network, I have been passing along videos that Jamie has shared to all of you. If you are unfamiliar with Jamie's work and background, I encourage you to check out his website here. Jamie has long been engaged with public schools and was first invited to participate in reform efforts by viewing our system through his lens as a business owner. In the beginning, he was one of our harshest critics and suggested that if schools would simply operate as businesses we could fix all that ails us. However, after he really studied the public school system and discovered the tremendous success they have, he became one of their fiercest advocates. 

Today I am going to share with you two of the latest installments from the video series. Both of these very short videos (running about 4:00 each) speak about the growth of mandates in our schools over the last 120 years. The first addresses those that have been added from the period of 1900-1960 and the second talks about all the mandates that were added from 1960-2000. The list is staggering! Yet they are so interwoven into the fabric of our system that most think they have always been there. (We'll have a brief primer of the original function of public schools and their primary goal in a post after spring break.) That is not to say they are neither good nor bad, they just are. A couple of examples would include school meal programs or the introduction of kindergarten; (first half day then full day) which at one time were not ubiquitous with our system of schools. Good mandates, right? Mandates nonetheless, they are the responsibility of our public school system. Truth be told, it's no wonder schools are used as the vehicle to address the problems that plague our society. We are after all the largest governmental organization in our communities with logistical operations that can’t be matched by other agencies. Can you think of any other organization with the logistical structure and manpower that would have been able to pull off operating a comprehensive meal program during a pandemic? And we have a captive audience. But, how do these mandates come to pass? Legislation of course. 

Each year as the legislative session begins I post a series of blog articles that discuss legislative priorities that are endorsed by the board. By their very nature they form a legislative platform of sorts. They are the framework upon which our advocacy efforts are built. One of the standing items included in our annual agenda is that of unfunded mandates. That is because inevitably, each year public schools are asked to add one more item to our list of growing responsibilities-and without the resources we need to execute that daunting list of 'to do's'. 

Nevertheless, the one immovable variable that we seem unable to tackle is time. We continue to cram things into our annual list of school mandates all while nothing ever seems to go away. In fact, it would seem that we continue to reinforce the notion that schools can in fact do it all: and do it in roughly 180 days a year. Recently, our legislature introduced a bill that would have required schools to teach cursive writing. The bill didn't survive the funnel so it is a dead issue for now. Granted, we can have a debate about the pros and cons of cursive writing (perhaps we even should?!). For certain it can help develop fine motor skills and there are correlations between the tactile act of putting 'pencil on the paper' and brain development. But let's be honest: when was the last time you wrote something substantive in cursive? Or is a requirement your job? Be honest.

Perhaps we could all come to agreement that yes, in fact cursive is an important skill that needs to be included in our curriculum. But then our next question should maybe be: what are we willing to give up in order to make that happen? We only have 180 days. Choose wisely.