Join the conversation

A recent article in the Kappan, a publication of Phi Delta Kappa International, a member organization of the Learning First Alliance (LFA), chronicles the efforts of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) to create and support passage of “model legislation” for states that advocates increasing what they refer to as “choice” and “scholarships” (read vouchers) in public schooling.  Authors Julie Underwood and Julie F. Mead, both on faculty at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, make a strong case that ALEC is behind the recent legislative efforts in Midwestern states to strip public employees of their bargaining rights and modify school funding provisions to allow greater shares of public funds to go to for-profit education provider; companies specifically mentioned are K-12 and Connections Academy.

I have a long-held belief that market forces as they relate to access to quality education have no place in American public schooling, and I believe that as long as we fund our public schools primarily with local tax dollars, local communities should have a strong say in how those school are operated.  However, I do think there’s a role for the for-profit community in designing and developing quality online materials, courses, and opportunities that local school districts and state departments of education lack the resources to develop and maintain.  Commercial interests have been working in school districts for years:  food services, transportation providers, textbook publishers to name a few.

However, what is not OK in our democratic society are laws affecting public education that are crafted with the interests of commercial businesses at their heart.  And, many of the initiatives crafted and supported by ALEC and its members result in public funds going to satisfy private providers rather than contributing to the increased opportunity and quality of the educational experience for all our students.  Vouchers for private schools funnel precious resources away from public schools; support for increasing the number of charter schools does nothing to address district challenges; and crippling collective bargaining for teachers marginalizes their effectiveness and ability to participate as full partners in public education decision-making. These policies do nothing to positively impact (in fact, in some instances, they negatively impact) the education of the vast majority of children in a given state, district or school.

The Kappan article’s ending is powerful and sums up the importance of our collective will to commit to the public in public education:

“Certain public institutions—courts, legislatures, fire protection, police departments, and, yes, schools---must remain public to serve a democratic society.  Through public education we have expressed and expanded our shared public values…..

What happens to our democracy when we return to an educational system where access is defined by corporate interest and divided by class, language, ability, race, and religion?  In a push to free-market education, who pays in the end?”

What I know to be true:  in public education when competition is the basis for decision-making, the losers are always children.