It took Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Cara Fitzpatrick five years of extensive research on ‘public education’ to reach a conclusion I could have provided seconds after she began her project: the country is moving away from a public school system to a system of public schools.
And the public, and particularly minority children in failing ‘government’ schools, will be the beneficiaries.
The author of ‘The Death of Public Schools,’ Fitzpatrick, discussed the history of educational options, specifically school choice and charters, during a lecture at Marquette University recently.
Her presentation was sponsored by the Lubar Center and moderated by noted education reporter and Luber senior fellow Alan Borsuk.
The book’s title is misleading in that it doesn’t foretell the demise of ‘government-operated’ schools.
Instead, she surmised, the nation is moving away from the stagnant, one-size-fits-all paradigm that has shortchanged urban and low-income children to a system that provides various educational options.
The steady growth of school choice has forced a reassessment of how we define ‘public.’
I have long maintained that ‘non-government’ schools that receive most of their funds from ‘our’ taxes are public schools.
Fitzpatrick did not cross that line. However, she revealed a majority of Americans—and an overwhelming majority of low-income and African Americans—support vouchers in one form or another.
While she did not elaborate during the Marquette lecture, in another forum, Fitzpatrick touched on the roots of the Democratic Party and teacher union opposition to school choice, a paradigm in which the needs of the students are secondary to that of adults…especially teacher security.
While opponents of school choice have used rhetorical ‘okie doke’ to convince the public that vouchers are rooted in a racist agenda, proponents and stakeholders offer alternative genesis stories that paint an entirely different picture.
She mentioned the efforts of Nobel prize winner Milton Friedman’s proposal for a universal voucher program in 1955 in which parents would be allowed to attend schools of their choice with a voucher.
The nationally recognized economist posited that parents, versus ‘educrats,’ know what’s best for their children.
Fitzpatrick also mentioned the advocacy of Milwaukee Catholic Priest Virgil Blum, founder of the Center for Educational Freedom, who called for a national voucher program during that era.
Fitzpatrick’s revelation conflicts with that of Chicago Teacher Union President Stacy Davis Gates, who has come under criticism recently for sending her son to a private school while lobbying against school choice in that educationally distressed city.
Facing criticism for her blatant hypocrisy, David Gates tried to explain her ‘choice’ by asserting the union opposed school choice because it was conceived by racist southerners following the infamous Brown vs. Board decision of 1954.
She said vouchers were to be used to escape ‘integrated’ schools.
In a recent television interview, David Gates repeatedly justified her opposition to vouchers based solely on their Southern origins to escape the ramifications of the Brown vs Board decision, which paved the way for school desegregation.
The irony of the Chicago union official’s explanation was that the ‘racists’ in question were actually Southern Democrats.
Today, their political descendants have joined teachers’ unions to undermine the program and block the schoolhouse door.
In her presentation, Fitzpatrick opined that the teacher’s unions have largely failed to undermine the school choice program both legally and politically primarily because the majority of Americans—and overwhelming support by Black and low income—support educational options.
Fitzpatrick and I also agree on why the teachers union’s disingenuous and hypocritical opposition has failed to move the public relations needle: Not only have unions been unable to offer mechanisms to improve the quality of education in urban America or close the racial academic achievement gap, they have stood in opposition to every significant reform proposed to address the failing status quo.
The pandemic also put the state and local teachers unions in the hot seat as they refused to open classrooms to in-person schooling long after suburban districts and private schools participated in the choice program.
Parents were outraged, and the virtual education template effectively cost the majority of MPS students a full year of scholarship.
She acknowledged that opposition provided a negative “backlash,” which continues to reverberate today.
While Fitzpatrick’s research provides a comprehensive picture of the origins and benefits of school choice, her presentation lacked a human face.
Equally important, she did not secure an opportunity to interview the late Polly Williams, the author of Milwaukee’s program, which has grown into the largest in the country.
Nor did she include a history of Black Milwaukee’s decades-long conflict with the government school system—Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS).
Had she talked with me or read my book, ‘Not Yet Free at Last,’ she could have more handily responded to Borsuk’s question on why Milwaukee stood out at the vanguard of the school choice movement or how Polly’s Black Nationalistic philosophy provided a launching pad for the program.
Of significant inclusion was how Black frustration over what had been called educational apartheid incited Williams to introduce legislation that would have carved out a separate, autonomous Black school district.
School choice, in many respects, grew out of that campaign.
Fitzpatrick’s lecture comes amid a lawsuit orchestrated by a Democratic operative that will end school choice in Wisconsin, effectively throwing out nearly 60,000 students, primarily low-income and minority.
While prior efforts by Democrats and unions to undermine choice have been unsuccessful, the recent state Supreme Court’s shift to a ‘liberal’ majority could have a devastating effect not only on the children in the program but also on MPS, which would not be able to accommodate upwards of 25,000 new students.
Fitzpatrick’s presentation filled many gaps in the evolution of school choice. She also offered a look into the future.
Hopefully, her next book will not be titled ‘The Death of School Choice.’
Hotep