Choice and Charter Schools are Inefficient and Immoral

Here we go again, or perhaps I should say we are still going.  Public school choice.  The most irrational, illogical, immoral notion to come along in a long time is not only still with us, it has advanced to the level of presidential support and secretary of education support.  These emperors are naked and someone must grab the American public and wake them up.  “Choice” sounds so democratic, so American.  But in the context of schools it is worse than inefficient.  Choice and charter schools are immoral.

Let’s talk about the word choice.  We use it as a basis for our consumerism.  People buy stuff, and as long as there is choice there are market forces to keep production going and prices low.  I stand in the grocery store on the cereal aisle and I have choices.  Lots and lots of choices.  That is a good thing.  I need gas for my car and I have choice, well some, and that is a good thing.  I want a soft drink other than water and I have lots of choices.  Such market choice drives free enterprise.  The theory is it improves the quality of production and regulates price.  Though I am somewhat a skeptic of that notion, let’s just say for now (but not always) that the theory is sound and that it works in the private sector.  (I will simply ask the obvious question:  if choice is so fundamental to the notion of free enterprise then why do producers continue to merge in an effort to eliminate such choice?)

Applying the same notion to the public sector, however, is absolutely ridiculous.  It may sound “American” but it is not.  What are public sector services?  Law enforcement, fire fighters, drinking water, testing the water we drink, sewage treatment, streets, highways, forest rangers, public libraries, public museums, and public schools.  Each of these entities and a host of others provide services to citizens funded by tax dollars.  We all pay in, and the service is there if we need it or want it.  No one ever argues that when you dial 9-1-1 you should have choice.  You just want someone to come quickly.  No one ever argues that they will not travel our highways because there is no choice:  all roads are built by one government or another.  No one argues that when they flush they should have choices regarding where it goes.  Clearly, when providing the same service to a given population having a single server makes great sense.  It is efficient.  It can be monitored.  In such a case, “choice” becomes ludicrous and inefficient.  In fact it would be stupid.  Why would we run an additional set of water lines, sewer lines, police forces, fire fighters, libraries, highways, etc., etc?  Makes no sense.  It would be very inefficient to provide choice in the areas of tax-supported public services.

Public schools are the same.  Buildings are built with tax dollars to house the number of kids in a given geographical area.  If only 1,000 kids live in a given area then buildings will be built to house those kids, the courses they will take and the teachers to teach those courses.  There is no need to duplicate that construction.  That would be wasteful and inefficient.  There would be no need to hire a second team of teachers to teach these children.  That would be redundant and inefficient.  In fact, if money was taken from the existing school buildings and teachers to fund the duplicate school buildings and teachers that would not only be inefficient.  It would be immoral.  And that is exactly what charter schools do. 

Everywhere there is a charter school there is a public school system that has existed all along.  The public schools already had the buildings and staff to teach the kids that live in that area.  Once the charter came in they were superimposed over the public school and had to create duplicate facilities and faculties.  Education is expensive enough, but if one begins to duplicate it everywhere it will become ridiculous. Kids leave the public schools to attend the charter school.  When they do so, they take their per-pupil funding with them.  The public school loses tax revenue.  The charter school gets tax revenue.  They both serve kids in the same geographic location.  Does that sound like good business to you?  Of course not. 

But it gets even worse.  Public school employees are paid a salary that is posted on their website.  Public school employees are governed by a local Board of Trustees who hold public meetings, post the budget, propose a tax rate, etc.  Charter schools do not do any of that.  They are governed privately.  One may not even know when their board meets, much less what is on the agenda.  Administrators in charter schools make much more money than public school administrators.  The reason is the charter is not required by law to offer many of the courses required of the public schools, transparency as required of public schools, and/or accountability as required of public schools.  All the while they get the same funding as the public school. 

There is a false notion that private sector characteristics would improve public services.  At the heart of that false notion is the notion of competition and choice.  Neither notion makes sense in public schools.  In fact, such notions are immoral as far as I am concerned.  Let’s say that as a teacher I develop a strategy that dramatically improves the success of students with learning disabilities.  In a competitive world I would patent such a notion and become the sole provider requiring entities to pay me to use my strategy.  That would be immoral in education because if there is a way to help students with special needs and we refrain from sharing so that a teacher earns a profit we are acting in unethical ways.  To withhold successful strategies for kids is immoral.  In fact what really happens is that the teacher who develops such a strategy writes about it, conducts staff development on it, presents it at professional conferences, etc.  We share!  Why do we share?  Because to keep anything secret in the effort to improve the success of kids becomes immoral.  It harms kids.  By definition, if kids are intentionally harmed such action is abusive and immoral.  The core argument of charter schools is that the developers of such schools should be paid tax dollars that deprive the vast majority of students served by public schools.  Reduce the funding of public schools and the likely success of students declines.  Reducing public school funding so that charter school developers can make money is, therefore, immoral.  It hurts kids.

Even worse is the fact that study after study demonstrates that charter schools are not more effective than public schools, and when we account for demographics, public schools are better.  Why in the world would we cut the funding of the vast majority of pupils so that private sector operators can make a profit off tax payer dollars and by doing so they duplicate efforts, create massive inefficiencies, perform at or below the public schools, and harm public school students?  That is immoral and it must stop.

In fact, to measure the efficacy of charter schools we should not look at just charter school students.  If this is a program to help in the education of children then we must look at the results for all children, not just those in charter schools.  These results are clear in a number of ways.  Schools that spend the most money per pupil have the most success.  Redirecting per-pupil funding from public schools to private sector operators is therefore harmful to public school students.  The creation of charter schools provides for entrepreneurs to grow wealthy on tax dollars while harming public school students.  In no other area of public service do we argue that entrepreneurs should have the right to receive tax dollars to duplicate services that lowers the outcomes desired of the public service.  An elected official proposing such a notion would have little chance of getting elected.  And yet somehow we have been sold snake oil that says choice in public education is a good thing.  It is not.  It is not a good thing for kids.  It is not a good thing for education.  It is inefficient.  It exists solely to enrich entrepreneurs.

Stop supporting charter schools.  Stop supporting politicians who support charter schools and choice.  Tell our new Secretary of Education Betsy De Voss that she made her billions on charter schools and that makes her income immoral because she got rich by taking money away from public school students.  Tell the Texas Legislature that increasing the number of charter schools is the promotion of inefficiency and unethical educational practices. 

Until we see charter schools for what they really are, we will continue to fall for the notion that choice in public service is a good thing.  It is not.  It is inefficient and immoral.