Describe Educational Privatization and School Choice

EDUCATIONAL PRIVATIZATION AND SCHOOL CHOICEByInstitution
Table of Contents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u Executive Summary PAGEREF _Toc476957469 \h 3Introduction PAGEREF _Toc476957470 \h 4Educational Privatization in the United States PAGEREF _Toc476957471 \h 5Charter Schools and Reason for their Establishment PAGEREF _Toc476957472 \h 7Comparing Charter Schools with Private and Other Public Schools PAGEREF _Toc476957473 \h 9The Pros and Cons of Charter Schools PAGEREF _Toc476957474 \h 13Pros of Charter Schools PAGEREF _Toc476957475 \h 13Cons of Charter Schools PAGEREF _Toc476957476 \h 16Performance of Charter Schools PAGEREF _Toc476957477 \h 18Comparison of Performance Index between Charter and Public Schools PAGEREF _Toc476957478 \h 19Florida State Comparisons PAGEREF _Toc476957479 \h 20Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc476957480 \h 23References PAGEREF _Toc476957481 \h 25
Executive Summary
The privatization of the education sector in the United States has been on the upward trend since the ‘90s, with several programs in existence to finance the development of private and public schools. Charter schools emanated from public asset privatization and the need for alternative education. Charter schools are mostly public owned though some remain in the hands of the private sectors where parents and teachers make vital decisions concerning their administration. This study provides the reasons for the establishment of these charter schools, identified their differences with public and private schools and provided their advantages and disadvantages. The study provides expert analyses of the performance between public and the charter schools in the state of Florida and highlights the reasons for these differences.
Introduction
The beginning of the 21st century has seen an increasing involvement by both the federal and state governments in the affairs of educational development in the country. This has been especially due to the dwindling levels of the academic levels in the country compared to countries like UK, Finland, Switzerland, and France, which continue to create programs and legislations geared at producing the best workforce and competitive citizens globally. A highly educated society provides workers with high productivity, able to easily absorb contemporary technologies and contribute positively to economic growth (Barro & Lee, 2013). The many local governments are solving the increasing financial burden for offsetting educational needs in the states, mainly through privatization of the education sector. State governments provide funding for several educational programs aimed at increasing school enrollment and improving performance, mainly targeting the poor and underprivileged members of the society.
Charter schools emanated as an idea made to counter the negative effects of racism, social discrimination, poor quality of education, and inequality that marred the society in the early ‘80s (Rodosky, 2015). This was among several programs introduced in the public education domain aimed to restructure the education sector and provide more alternatives to students and parents. The charters began as small engaging educational settings serving the immigrant children, people of color, poverty-stricken families, and low-income families as a quest to provide them with education, nurture, and care (Fabricant & Fine, 2015). There have been great comparisons between the efficiency of charter schools in addressing the educational needs of the students as compared to public schools. Therefore, a comparison of the two educational entities would be imperative in understanding their efficiency, in terms of function, method of administration and academic performance of students in both setups.
Educational Privatization in the United States
There is a high contention between the group that supported and those that oppose the privatization of the education sector in the United States. From the beginning of the year 2000, the government has been gradually reducing funding to public schools while encouraging the private administration and ownership of schools (Snell, 2011). Privatization of the education sector has seen the introduction of management and administrative culture of the private sector into the academic domains. According to Johnstone (2017), these operational norms take the student as a client and learning as a product, with attention placed on competition, image, market niches, pricing, and aggressive marketing.
There is a high adoption of management practices associated with private companies such as auditing, profitability in each unit (department), outsourcing of services and use of top down management plans among others (Johnstone, 2017). The privatization of the education sector works with the government handing over the management of public schools to private entities while continuing funding the schools with taxpayer money. The main aim of this move is to improve performance of students in schools and allow parents to have a choice of selecting a school for their children.
Several state governments have initiated programs and scholarship aiming at funding the education of children from needy backgrounds, by allowing their parents to select for them a school of choice. Snell (2011), in a privatization report, states how several states had selected 20 private schools to receive tax credit programs and vouchers in order to allow students and their parents to choose for themselves institutions whose settings tailor their preference. These programs by the state governments mainly target special needs children and those from poor backgrounds to cover their fees for all the time they will be in the school.
Some state governments like Indiana created tax credit programs aiming at sourcing for funds from donors, philanthropists and private sponsors in exchange of 50% tax credit for involvement in the program (Snell, 2011). Although such programs aid in raising funds for the education of needy and disadvantaged children, other members of the society continue to hassle their way through the education system as the state governments continue to cut their funding to schools.
Proponents of privatization argue that it helps in it helps in proper utilization of resources; it reduces the reliance on the government for funding, removes units and activities not attractive to students, and provides the culture of service to the student (Johnstone, 2017). According to Buras (2015), most schools, especially charter schools, are not carrying the initial intention of the founders of such institution; which was to experiment with alternative curriculum and new teaching methods by breaking away from the traditional educational norms. Most private schools are entities run by companies or individuals geared to profit themselves by soliciting for funds from the students or parents.
Those against the privatization of the educational sector have decried the dwindling nature of the education levels in the country, citing unethical and non-academic practices that affect both the teachers and the students. Most private schools arguably encourage competition between students and among teachers, with teachers posing lower grades among their students facing the possible threat of contract termination (Gronberg, 2011). They believe competition promotes better outcome from both teachers and students. Most private schools also prevent their teachers from joining teachers’ unions, therefore having all the possibilities of infringing on their rights. Privatization of the education sector allows companies and private entities to run schools at a profit, imposing their will to the society and deciding methods of evaluating students.
Many experts claim that there is no great difference between the performance of private schools and public schools. They also calm that the quest for profits affects the quality of education as privatization of education makes schools concentrate more on profits rather than quality outcomes of their students. Many schools are also becoming expensive, requiring students to pay more for their education as compared to public schools (Karp, 2013). Although the government may foresee some benefits in the privatization of several sectors, many experts view privatization of the educational sector as a threat to the country’s workforce pool.
Charter Schools and Reason for their Establishment
The American Federation of Teachers under the leadership of Albert Shanker and other progressive educators started developing charters in the 1980’s (Fabricant & Fine, 2015). This was after Ray Budde, an educator from New England in the 1970’s, advocated for schools to give teachers charters or contracts to explore new educational frontiers. The charter school system came as a brainchild of educators to create alternative educational settings in the community and poor neighborhoods, to provide an educational experience that was different from that offered at traditional public schools (Rodosky, 2015).
The idea behind the development of charter schools was to have an autonomous public institution without any financial or legal dependence on any entity, and would be free from the control of any state or district laws. The schools center on students’ outcomes and operate much like private entities (Karp, 2013). Although charter schools have no educational or legal obligations to any entity, there is a high expectation for them to create optimum students` motivation, good relationships, discipline, and academic rigor. The schools also have to create a culture that tolerates all personalities including students with disabilities, from poor backgrounds and persons of color (Karp, 2013). Due to the emphasis on students’ achievement, enrollment in charter schools requires students to have higher grades. This means that everyone requires charter schools to provide better performance in students’ grades than public schools, due to the enhanced academic environment and innovative teaching methods and approach to education.
Despite undergoing many challenges, including protests from teachers’ unions and accusations of creating lesser access to different populations, many state governments enacted laws in the 1990s, which led to the adoption of the charter school system. Many state governments passed laws to allow for the formation of charter schools, as a reform initiative and as a motive to form parallel institutions that accept students from all backgrounds (Karp, 2013). The formation of charter schools is an educator-initiated program that required the consent of teachers, parents, community committees, local educational commissions, and state officials (Karp, 2013). They were to provide the modalities through which the institution will run and pursue specific educational objectives.
The institutions have autonomy over their budget, personnel, and curriculum (Bonastia, 20150. However, the charter schools have an obligation of meeting their agreed upon objectives and constantly undergo review to ensure they meet them. Failure to meet the performance goals may lead to closure of the schools (NCSRC, 2017). There have been cases of closure of several charter schools in the country due to low performance, which the state’s education departments seem not to tolerate. Charter schools also have to adhere to stringent federal laws on discrimination and equal access. Charter schools, mainly operate through public funding and therefore, do not charge tuition fees, and students do not have to meet special entrance requirements. Enrolment into a charter school depends on availability of space, and if there are many applicants, their selection goes through a lottery process (NCSRC, 2017).
The development of charter schools has seen massive evolution, from education-initiated programs to fully private run initiatives. Educational funds contribute to a lion share of most state budgets. In order to cut on expenses, most states developed programs that allowed the private sectors to fund the education programs in charter and public schools in exchange for tax credits. As stated by Karp (2013), this created a high influx of educational management companies, investors, and foundations who wanted to control and create a more privatized entity. This led to the creation of different charter schools across the country like rural charter schools, large urban schools, online charter schools, and others tailored for the natives (NCSRC, 2017).Most charter schools differ in various aspects with some prohibiting their teachers from joining teachers’ unions while others allow them among other things. However, they are all common in funding and the requirement for students` achievement.
Comparing Charter Schools with Private and Traditional Public Schools
Charter schools are actually public schools operating under a charter provided by the authorizing agency. As compared with public schools whose authorizer is the state or district government, charter schools emanate from institutions requesting for a charter from the authorizing agency, with an aim of achieving certain academic, social, and economic goals (Gronberg, Jansen & Taylor, 2012). Charter schools are different from other public schools in that they aim at academic excellence of their students. They come with several requirements such as teacher and student evaluation, evaluation of the performance of the students, and constant tracking of the overall school performance (Preston et al. 2012). Therefore, charter schools have to live to their billing as academically advanced as compared to public schools. This comes with more responsibility and accountability to the resources endowed to the institutions by the state and federal governments and sponsors.
Charter schools enjoy exceedingly great autonomy when it comes to decision making. They are free from some state and district educational laws and regulations, but must follow all federal laws designated for public schools. The schools have the freedom to choose their own curriculum, design their own budget and expenditure for all the finances they receive (Preston, et al. 2012). The autonomy allows charter schools to be innovative in a bid to create value for the students and enhance the educational settings according to the sponsors’ preference. Charter schools receive their funding depending on enrollment or the number of students it has (Toma & Zimmer, 2011). The district and state government funds the schools depending on this criterion. Private schools are for profit and actively seek for funds from parents through grants, tuition, endowments, and donations (Pascual, 2016). They may also get money from businesses, religious groups, community organizations, and alumni.
The demography of charter schools is similar to that in traditional public schools, although they contain more pupils and students from the minority groups and the disabled more than the other public schools. This is because of the federal government laws requiring charter schools to provide equal opportunity for all, as they are choice schools. Students and parents have the freedom to choose any charter school of their choice despite the demography or geographical location (Toma & Zimmer, 2011). Admission into a private school is usually difficult and depends on many factors. The application process requires extensive interviews, tests and essays, and other factors such as religion, gender, ethnicity, and economic status.
Non-charter public schools generally accept children from their district, but that does not necessarily mean every child can get in. High-performing public schools may only accept children after meeting some grades, and some schools may not accept students whenever they have some limited resources such as those to do with students with disabilities (Pascual, 2016). Although public schools are free, they can be very selective on certain entities.
The management of non-charter public schools is mainly through the faculty who develop ideas and decisions for the running of the schools. The faculty has to comply with certain legal requirements and regulations from the state and district governments. The state and district governments provide guidelines on method of student teaching and evaluation (Pascual, 2016). Because both traditional public and charter schools receive government funding, they are liable to fund cuts and must comply with government regulations in order to receive such funds. Private schools are not subject to federal and state laws and regulations apart from the need to inculcate ethical practice in their activities. They are flexible on their faculty and may not have to create an ample environment for supporting children with special needs.
Charter Management Organizations (CMOs) are agencies, which receive contracts from charter schools in order to provide management services to the schools. These services include professional development, curriculum development, system implementation, facility services, assessment design, teacher recruitment, and back-office services (NCSRC, 2017). The CMOs are also responsible for advocating for more charter schools countrywide and for the development of laws that are more favorable to charter schools. CMOs are important to charter schools as they are able to help the schools source for private funding, which may be difficult for normal school principals (Goodman, 2013).This gives charter schools an edge over the traditional public schools and private schools due to the possibility of finding a permanent wealthy donor.
Teachers in public schools are usually highly qualified and most hold a bachelor’s degree and certifications from the state (Goldring, Gray, & Bitterman, 2013). The teachers must therefore meet certain standards set by the states, which may include coursework and student teaching. However, charter schoolteachers enjoy some flexibility in their certification by the state government. Teachers in public schools have to follow certain teaching guidelines, testing procedures set by the state governments and acting as quality control over some subjects. The low amount of funding received by public and charter schools has forced several schools to enforce cutbacks on the number of teachers and classes that fall outside the state-funded curricula (Pascual, 2016). Private schools on the other hand are more flexible on their fraternity qualification. Teachers here are usually more specialized in their subject areas.
In terms of the population, public schools have higher student to teacher ratio as compared to private schools. However, the number keeps on varying from district to district. There huge nature allows them to accommodate many students per class. Charter schools are smaller schools and usually have smaller classes with lower student to teacher ratio. Racial diversity in traditional public schools is higher when compared to charter schools (Bonastia, 2015).
Most students of color prefer studying in charter schools that address mostly their race as compared to students at public schools. The creation of magnet schools aided in reducing racial segregation by accepting students from different racial groups and levels of income and provided them wi...