Despite our state’s belief in the importance of public education, we find, sadly, that not all public education is equal.
Many of our state’s largest cities have schools that do not measure up when compared to counterparts in suburban or rural communities. Whether the yardstick is facilities or course offerings or MCAS scores, there is and always has been a disparity between the education one community can provide and what their neighbors can.
Parents looking for alternatives have some options. Private and religious schools have existed in Massachusetts for centuries. But cost or affiliation have been barriers. Public school choice has existed in Massachusetts for a couple decades now. School districts can open classroom seats to children from other communities. Several districts in Franklin County have embraced this mechanism — most notably the Mohawk Trail Regional School District, which actually sends a bus to Greenfield’s Big Y Plaza every school day to make it easier for out-of-towners to opt in. In a state where the money follows the student, School Choice can mean a big influx of capital (or a loss, depending on the district).
But another player is on the field. Charter schools, governed by unelected boards of trustees and enrolled through lottery, have changed the educational landscape in Massachusetts, many say for the better. Charter schools are funded with our tax dollars. Whatever it costs the home district to educate that child flows over to the charter school.
Sounds great, right?
But here’s the rub: Under the state’s education umbrella, they don’t play by the same rules that traditional public schools do. These schools can be designed around different teaching and learning environments, or around a particular set of social standards rather than a geographic boundary. They have greater freedom when it comes to curriculum, self-governance and personnel. Charter schools do not have to hire licensed teachers, and often, those teachers are not unionized.
Doesn’t that sound like a private school?
In Tuesday’s election, Massachusetts voters will consider Question 2, which would allow for the creation or expansion of up to 12 charter schools a year in the state. A viable choice — with a serious catch. The bill does nothing to help the schools these children are leaving nor the students left behind. Most of Franklin County’s municipal and school officials fear the drain on their funding will cripple their schools that still have to maintain core facilities, faculty and offerings even as some of their funding is drawn down.
This is one reason The Recorder recommends a “No” vote on Question 2.
Voters should recognize that our scarce resources are at risk, even though we may seem miles away from the struggle over charter schools that is being fought most vigorously in urban areas, and have just one charter in Franklin County, Four Rivers Charter Public School.
Remember, state law requires the money to follow the student. Consider that in Massachusetts, traditional public schools are likely to see $451 million leave as students enroll in charter schools. Mohawk Trail Regional School District pays out more than $800,000 a year to charters, and the Gill-Montague Regional School district pays out roughly $856,000, for example.
And while the state provides some money in return to districts losing students, it isn’t a wash. Districts are supposed to receive a reimbursement of 100 percent of the cost in the first year, then 25 percent for each of the next five years. The state, however, hasn’t fully funded this formula since 2012. This fiscal year, the state is paying only 63 percent of the theoretical reimbursement, which itself is insufficient.
But the drain isn’t found in the financial ledger alone. Charter schools are taking away students and families who not only add to the fabric of life in their schools but in their community.
For state government, charter school expansion is an easy way out. It allows the state to pass the cash and responsibility for fixing troubled schools. If the state would fully fund Chapter 70 education aid, and fully reimburse rural districts like Mohawk for its transportation costs, the hit might not be so bad.
Empower existing schools to innovate. That was the original purpose of charter schools in Massachusetts — to be incubators for new ideas and new teaching methods, not to become a new class of public schools. The goal was for those new schools to share their best practices with the traditional public schools. By all accounts, that has not happened. The state needs to dedicate the financial resources to allow for smaller classes in our traditional public schools and to live up to its obligation to provide a quality education to all students.
Funding inequities have long been a burr under the state education saddle. Question 2 doesn’t provide an answer to that problem. We call on voters to reject raising the charter school cap.