The View of School Choice from Out Here

On the way to dinner yesterday, we drove by an electronic billboard advertising a nearby school district looking to encourage people to make those schools their schools of choice. Is this really what schools have to spend money on now? It's not the first time I've asked this question. I ask it every time the six page, full color mailer from the district I live in comes quarterly to us as well as people in surrounding districts (including the one I teach in). I ask it when I see a full page ad in the Sunday paper. I ask it when I hear a radio spot.  I ask it when I go to the movies and there's a school district's commercial before the trailers. Why aren't the people who are so concerned with how schools choose to spend their money concerned about the thousands and thousands of dollars being wasted on school of choice ads? Because they're often the ones who think school choice is what's going to make our schools better.

Please don't misunderstand, I do not blame those districts for advertising (though the time the neighboring Goliath rented our David district's one and only tiny "hall" to hold an informational meeting was fairly dirty). They are simply adapting to the world that's been created in education. Due to Michigan's decreasing population and birth rates, we're all fighting for the same kids because no matter what schools do, most districts are losing students.

Many policy makers think this is all wonderful because schools have to work harder to compete with each other, which in turn makes them work harder for their kids. To a degree, that may be true. Here's the problem with competition though, it produces losers. That's great for sports and keeping cable prices down. It's not great for schools though, because the losers in this situation are students with little say in the matter.

Those who like this business model for schools say "Don't like your school? Go somewhere else. The bad schools will close up and the kids benefit." Except that's not how things work. As in many things, it comes down to money. Some families can afford to transport their children to other districts on their own. They have the time, transportation, and resources to where this is not a problem. But what about those students left behind? As each student leaves, funding for that district goes down. The students whose families cannot take them elsewhere are now left in a school with far fewer resources, which must now make even more cutbacks and offer less and less.

Even more sad is that the schools that kids are leaving aren't necessarily bad ones. I taught in a rural district of about 600 kids. They well for being so small, and offer more than you'd think we can. But in all honesty, there are just some things that they cannot offer or compete with due to our size.   Unfortunately, they're surrounded by larger districts who can offer more, and it's hurting already small enrollment numbers.

"Then consolidate! Close up and send your students to the 'bigger and better' districts!" many would say. It would save so much of the taxpayers' money if we didn't have to pay for all those extra schools. There may be some places where this could be a long-term benefit. But schools who aren't in a large metropolitan area are often flat out ignored in this discussion. Policy makers seem to forget that there are schools in places other than major cities. There are a lot of direct and indirect consequences in these situations.

Those families who couldn't afford to send their kids to other schools probably can't afford to move either. Kids in more rural areas would be putting in 10+ hour days when you include their bus rides. There are a number of families who chose smaller districts like ours because their kids struggled in a larger settings. Now those kids would be thrown back into a bigger place that they were trying to avoid in the first place.

Additionally, the district I taught in is the largest employer in that community. I'm not talking about the teachers either, though a few of them do live in district. I'm talking about the secretaries, custodians, para-professionals, cooks, bus drivers, media center specialists, lunch/recess aides, and substitute teachers who live there. Along with decimating the heart of the community and closing up a district that has been around over 130 years, dozens will be left jobless. Instead of tax money going to support a local school, it will pay for unemployment.

A better solution needs to be found for our students.  Schools shouldn't have to try and poach kids from surrounding areas to stay open and functioning at their highest level.  Every student, no matter where they are located, deserves an excellent education in a place that fits their needs.