One of the reasons that charter schools are not a cost neutral proposition even though, as charter supporters repeat, “the money follows the student,” is that schools are economies of scale. What does that mean? According to a basic economist’s definition, ”economies of scale lower the average cost per unit… since fixed costs are shared over an increased number of goods.” Change the words “unit” and “goods” to “student” and you have an idea of how school budgets operate.

Schools and districts have high fixed costs, meaning things they have to pay for no matter how many students are in the building, such as utilities, custodial staff, building and grounds maintenance, transportation, safety. Some of the money coming with each enrolled student goes to help cover these costs; the more students, the smaller the proportion of each student’s allocation that must go to fixed costs. This leaves more money for things like librarians, teaching assistants, mental health, college and career counselors, family outreach, extra-curricular activities, full-day kindergarten and a greater variety of courses outside of the most basic curriculum such as foreign languages, computer science, economics, and AP classes among many others.

Obviously, the reverse is true; with fewer students a greater proportion of each child’s funding must be taken for fixed costs. From the Times, “If you want to offer Spanish but you only have 80 kids taking Spanish, then your cost per pupil” is larger than if you have 500 in Spanish classes, said Jonathan Travers, director at Education Resource Strategies, a nonprofit consulting group that helps school systems adjust to changes in enrollment.” Already many such “extras” are being cut at alarming rates in school districts across the country.

But it’s not just the price of fixed costs that grow for schools losing enrollment. As we know and the Times article reports, “students left behind in some of these large districts are increasingly children with disabilities, in poverty or learning English as a second language.” These students are not only more difficult to educate (which – let’s be very clear – is not the same thing as saying they cannot learn!), they are more expensive to educate. These children need learning specialists, intensive counseling, English language support, smaller classes, physical therapy, one-on-one tutoring. The public schools left with large concentrations of the most challenging and costly students are the same schools whose resources are dwindling as a result of declining enrollment.

Naturally, these schools become less and less attractive to parents concerned about putting their child in large classes with many high-needs students. These parents look for other schools – schools in different neighborhoods or suburbs and, more than ever, charter schools. In this context, a perverse feedback loop begins where charter schools look ever more appealing because, as is well documented, they enroll far fewer special needs and ELL  students than traditional public schools (for reasons ranging from “cherry picking” to “counseling out” to expulsion to simply not providing the necessary services). Thus, as charter enrollments grow, public school enrollments fall and, according to Jeffrey Mirel, education historian at the University of Michigan, “… a vicious cycle will set in. Some of the largest public school systems in the country are in danger of becoming “the schools that nobody wants.”

So, charter schools, rather than lifting all boats by providing effective pedagogical models and creating “healthy competition” as charter advocates argue they do, instead help put traditional public schools – especially in large urban areas like Seattle – on a possibly irreversible downward spiral.

This is one of the reasons to vote no on the charter schools intiative, I-1240, and keep Washington state charter-free. Washington’s public school students need our attention; they need funding, healing and community support and the introduction of charters will only make it harder for them to get what they need. In the end, charter schools just might give to a few, but they are certain to take from the many.

*     *     *

Some of the resources used in this post:

http://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/2011/06/03/the-offensively-defensive-ideology-of-charter-schooling/

http://losaltos.patch.com/articles/lasd-says-bullis-skims-affluent-students

http://www.ctmirror.org/story/15613/are-charter-schools-cherry-picking-their-students

http://democrats.edworkforce.house.gov/sites/democrats.edworkforce.house.gov/files/documents/112/pdf/letters/Charter%20School%20SWD%20full%20report_%20June%202012.pdf

ALEC is an organization that partners with very wealthy individuals and corporations to write legislation on their behalf. They then offer these pre-written bills to legislators – mostly conservative – who often introduce them verbatim. (Go here for more about ALEC)

ALEC is deeply involved in crafting education policy that favors privatization of and profit from our public schools. You can see a list of some of the bills they’ve written in the video. ALEC fervently promotes and writes legislation for establishing, expanding, and allowing exorbitant private profit from charter schools.

ALEC works with some of our legislators in Washington. When backers of the charter school initiative, I-1240, tell you that this initiative only allows a small amount of the very best non-profit charters into our state, in addition to questioning how they can possibly guarantee this, ask them what’s going to happen to their law when ALEC starts going to work on it. How will they keep the lobbyists hands off their initiative? Answer: they can’t. Thus, the initiative’s language about profits, limits and quality is simply meaningless.

$2 million spent to gather signatures for charter school initiative http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2018664459_charter12.html

Charter-school initiative added to November ballot Seattle Times letter to the editor Edith Ruby http://www.seattletimes.com/html/northwestvoices/2018659145_charterschoolslet12.html

*     *     *

At the end of May, PAA-S put on a forum at Rainier Beach High School with a panel of educators and parents to talk about what is working in our schools and what schools really need to do better. We wanted our audience to hear from real educators and involved parents – people who actually work with kids in classrooms day after day.

We hear far too much from non-educators – education researchers, policy analysts, politicians and very wealthy, self-annointed education “experts” – most of whom have spent very little time in public schools; they don’t teach in them, their children don’t attend them, and very likely, they didn’t attend them either. Yet theirs are the voices that have dictated public school policy over the last decade. Their ideas are the ones being implemented in our children’s schools today. These people spend a lot of time talking to each other, but they don’t talk to teachers or parents. Or, more accurately, they don’t listen.

But we know that it is educators and parents who have the most knowledge and the best ideas for how to improve the schools they work in and send their children to. Yet they’ve been shut out of this debate, dismissed and vilified. Respect for the art of teaching has been replaced by an unwavering belief that the business model is the solution to all problems, especially, regrettably, in the area of public education.

The business model prizes efficiency, standardization, top-down management and so-called “creative destruction” (that is, if you don’t succeed, you go out of business). We, in contrast, believe the business model is antithetical to education. Our schools teem with millions of unique souls, each with his or her own talents, struggles and passions; each with his or her own story, family background, neighborhood and community, lucky breaks and traumas. How do you standardize them? How do you cultivate human beings “efficiently?” How do you dictate absolute procedures in an environment as complex and fluid as a school or school system full of the greatest possible diversity of children? How do you countenance letting schools “go out of business?”

Over and over again, our panelists spoke of the central importance of relationships: relationships between parents and teachers, between parents and students, and, most importantly, between students and teachers. Building relationships takes time. It requires small classes and smaller schools. It requires teachers who are trained to understand vast cultural diversity and to relate to students who might have very difficult lives. Authentic relationships are based on respect. They can never be based on the belief that someone is a “product,” a data point, a measurable unit. As long that kind of thinking dominates education reform we will not get the kinds of schools parents want for their children, nor the kinds of schools that educators know are best for their students.

*     *     *

In the next post I will write about some of the highlights of the evening and some of the central points that came out of our discussion.

LWVWA opposes I-1240, Public Charter Schools, for the following reasons:

• Private boards selected by non-profit corporations rather than publicly elected by citizens will govern charter schools.

• Charter schools will be exempt from state statutes and rules applicable to school districts and boards, creating a separate and unequal school system even though Article IX of the Washington state Constitution requires a general and uniform system of common schools.

• The Initiative would create additional administrative functions and costs for the State Board of Education, the Superintendent of Public Instruction and School Districts at a time when the Supreme Court has ruled in McCleary v. State that Washington is failing to provide ample funding for the basic education required by the Legislature (HB 2261).

• Although proponents of the Initiative promise “at risk” students and those from low-performing schools will be served by charter schools, nothing in the Initiative requires it.

• There are many successful innovative and alternative schools as part of the public school system in Washington state. Let’s encourage them and work toward full funding for all students in all schools rather than be distracted by charter schools that would only serve a few students chosen by lottery.

Diane Ravitch talks about the importance of parent activists, specifically PAA and its affiliates. From her blog Diane Ravitch’s blog.

Calling All Parents!

February 22, 2012

Do millionaire charter backers really care about public school children, or do they just want to make sure they don’t have to pay the taxes that would actually help our kids?

Note: I’ll never forget a discussion among PTA members about the WSPTA support of charters. When the opposing sides of the argument tried to find something we could all agree on, someone suggested an income tax to raise revenue for schools. The most vocal pro-charter members immediately replied with such comments as “count me out!” I was naive enough then to be surprised.

Here are more details about the charter-funders from the Slog.

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/05/22/charter-schools-initiative-coalition-says-it-has-pledges-to-pay-for-last-minute-campaign

Big Money Pledged for Charter Schools Initiative

Posted by Dominic Holden on Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:43 PM