What Does it Mean to “Dismantle” Public Education? Redirecting Funds, Charter Schools and Vouchers

Estimated Read Time: 10 minutes

The national extremist agenda to dismantle public education has been all over national news as it takes a stronghold in school districts across the country. Here in Douglas County, public education advocates have been fighting it since the first reformers took office on the school board in 2009, and we are facing it again today. 

As far back as the 1920s, the United States has a long history of attacking public education. Some of the more blatant include educational gag orders and government attempts to limit teaching and learning, which we covered in our blog, “Book Banning and Educational Gag Orders,” as well as segregated schools and voucher programs. 

So why attack public education? What is the goal? 

• Privatize education by eroding the financial support for public schools

• Use public tax dollars to promote Christianity in schools

• Keep school districts racially, and socio-economically segregated

• Inhibit civic discourse by creating a narrative about the United States that sanitizes our complex and nuanced history

Attacking our public education system harms our children, our communities and our entire nation. As you read through this series, please ask yourself a few questions: Who benefits from dismantling public education? Who is the most harmed by dismantling our public education system? And what can you do to support public education on a local, state, and national level?

In this first piece, we examine financial reallocation at the state level and the relationship of charter schools and vouchers in public school systems.

Redirecting of Funds

The largest pool of a state’s budget is often allotted to public education. This isn’t saying that public education is well-funded, but acknowledging that educating the nation’s children is an expensive endeavor. The largest pool of money is also the first on the chopping block in a financial crunch. For example, here in Colorado, to support the struggling state budget during the Great Recession, Colorado legislators, in 2009, created the State Budget Stabilization Factor. This Factor takes away money from school districts in the state budget, and it’s still happening today. At this time, the state budget is healthier than when this Factor was implemented so less money is removed than before, but nonetheless it illustrates how one of the first places the state goes to find money, when it’s needed, is public education. 

In Oklahoma, Tulsa Public Schools Superintendent Deborah Gist is claiming that the Governor took $18 million that the U.S, Department of Education sent to help families with education during the pandemic and then neglected to oversee its spending, therefore wasting money intended for students.

“Once they sent the check to the company, they provided inadequate (one could argue nonexistent) oversight for the use of the funds. As a result, significant amounts of money have been called out for misuse and for federal investigation.”

Arizona has faced a teacher shortage for many years, and a report finds the state has the lowest teacher salaries in the country. Yet Arizona boasts a $5B budget surplus. This appears to be an intentional decision to direct funds away from public education even when funding is available.

When critical funding is removed from the public education system, the result is larger class sizes, fewer extracurriculars and career and technical opportunities, and underfunded teacher salaries. All of this makes the profession even less desirable, which in the midst of a national teacher shortage, makes it even worse. ALL of these amplify the far-right narrative that public schools are failing and open the door to outsourcing (privatizing) education for profit.

The Charter School Dilemma

Charter schools, defined by the Colorado Department of Education as public schools funded by public taxes, made their debut in our state in 1993.

“A charter school generally has more flexibility than traditional public schools as regards curriculum, fiscal management, and overall school operations, and may offer an education program that is more innovative than traditional public schools.”

Charter schools play an important role in DCSD. For example, when our district was rapidly growing, charter schools relieved the pressure of overflowing enrollment. In addition, the autonomy, varied curriculum and, sometimes, smaller class sizes of charter schools are large draws for families. On a micro-community basis, charters can also play a cultural role where diversity is seen in higher numbers than traditional public schools, such as STEM Highlands Ranch, where 41% percent of students are students of color, contrasting with DCSD neighborhood schools of 18% percent students of color. 

A common criticism of charter schools in DCSD is their lack of support for students with disabilities, although charter schools do pay into the district's special education services as part of their charter contract. Either they don’t have qualified staff to support the needs of the student or they fail in providing adequate assistance. There is definitely some controversy within our district, state and country on the role of charter schools, but for DCSD they are part of choice schooling. 

Another layer to this already controversial topic is for-profit corporations running charter schools, effectively funneling public monies into private corporations. This is big business in many states and illegal in many others. In fact, DCSD’s Leman Academy is listed as a non-profit entity run by a for-profit corporation. America’s children have a right to public education, and this should not be at the expense of corporate greed. There are a multitude of ways people have and can financially benefit from our public dollars. When you remove money from the public schools into the pockets of the wealthy, you widen the financial gap in the country, erode the financial support from public schools and weaken the ability to provide an education to children of all socio-economic backgrounds therefore widening achievement gaps and increasing segregation. 

As it’s easy to see, charter schools have the amazing ability to augment districts and enhance curriculum offerings. But the devil is in the details, and at times, instead of being a value-add to the district, sometimes charter schools retract funds, lower resources and discriminate in enrollment.

A common concern when reform school board directors are elected is that they will automatically approve more charter schools than the district needs or can handle – it’s part of DCSD’s history when a reformer school board was in control 2009-2017.  When this happens, neighborhood school enrollment plummets and the district neighborhood schools lose funding (remember, the money follows the students in DCSD). The buildings and infrastructure for a district still need to be maintained whether there are 12,000 students enrolled or 25,000 students enrolled. Districts then begin to compensate for the lost funds by cutting elective offerings, increasing class sizes and selling off infrastructure. Too many charter schools stress the system of neighborhood schools where, currently 70% of students are enrolled nationwide. Balance makes public education work financially for ALL students.

The Supreme Court’s decision about the ability of religious private schools to use public funds (discussed in more detail below) also opens the door for religious charter schools. If vouchers can be used for religious private schools in Maine for public education, what’s to stop them from being used for religious charter schools? This is likely the next topic of discussion in many states and it calls into question the complication of separation of church and state with The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. The case seems clear to some, but these contradictions pave the way for interpretation by the land's highest court. The Every Child Succeeds Act, specifically calls for sectarian public schools to be funded by public money. Either way, since the debate has started, this topic should be watched closely by defenders of public education for ALL students.

Vouchers

The case for and against vouchers is complex. Those who promote vouchers believe that the public money allotted for their students’ education belongs to their students and should be transferred wherever the students are enrolled. In DCSD, charter schools already function in this manner. It’s the middle ground between traditional public education and private education as a hybrid education that has more flexibility with curriculum and teacher qualifications but still is funded by public money. 

Vouchers would take this a step further by allowing students to take their public education dollars out of the public school districts and move them to private schools, which are, in most cases, secular. This would result in even more funding being removed from traditional public education. And, the most controversial part, would result in using public money for religious purposes, in direct contrast to the U.S. Constitution that specifically calls for a separation of church and state. 

Many contend that when public funds are used to pay for public education, it creates a unifying understanding in our communities of what is important and serves as a blueprint for our students to become active, educated and productive citizens when they leave the public education system. Without this, we create larger divides and echo chambers, and in essence, reduce natural built-in uses for civics. This could have long-term consequences for our democracy if students are left without learning ways to model, exiting public education without the skills gained by civil discourse and discussion.

The irony of the national extremists promoting vouchers as their students’ money is a common rationale for supporting them. What is really interesting is that the more you dig into public education funding here in Colorado, it’s clear that vouchers would also be an education subsidy if passed because the state adds money into the district’s public education bucket. Therefore if you promote vouchers, you are also agreeing that subsidizing education is a good idea, which is a principle that is typically in direct conflict with national extremist ideology. To understand more how this works in Colorado, read more here.

Recently, the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional for Maine to offer vouchers for rural students to only secular charters. This opens the door in other states for religious schools to be recipients of public education funds. This was a specific arrangement made for rural students, and few states have similar legislation, but the opportunity is there for both litigation and legislation in the rest of the country. Religious private schools are able to discriminate on their enrollment practices, and this goes directly against what public money is designed to support.

“While purporting to protect against discrimination of one kind, the Court requires Maine to fund what many of its citizens believe to be discrimination of other kinds,” wrote Justice Sonia Sotomayor in another dissent.

The dissenting justices point out that schools “children attend or would like to attend have policies that bar gay teachers and students.”

What’s Next

Charter schools can supplement and even complement educational opportunities within the public education system, but they can also cannibalize already scarce resources when not implemented strategically. 

We also recognize the possibility that recent Supreme Court decisions and the growing far-right national movement to question the integrity of our educators and the curriculum is laying the groundwork towards privatization of the public education system.