In a recent opinion piece Gail Collins and Bret Stephens discussed the loss of the gifted program in NYC public schools, and the conversation largely danced around the topic of equal opportunity for all.
But here’s the comment that really caught my attention. Arguing for a common ground on education, the authors discussed not letting charter schools become a “haven” for middle class families:
Bret: Perfect. Let’s make the case that Republicans should fund early childhood education as part of a stripped-down package of social spending, and in exchange, Democrats can do more to fund nonprofit charter schools so that parents can have better options for their kids beyond the local public school.
Gail: I’m not an enemy of charter schools. Particularly the ones that specialize in helping low-achieving kids who have great potential.
Bret: We’ve got a deal.
Gail: But we have to be sure they aren’t just being used as a haven for middle-class kids who want to escape the public school system without paying private school tuition. If there’s nobody but low-income kids going to the regular city schools, the city’s going to feel less pressure to make those schools excellent (emphasis mine).
Interesting. Based on the descriptions the authors used here, it’s clear that they already believe that the public schools need to be under a microscope to stay quality places of education. But there’s a bigger picture perspective that’s missing here. Gail seems to argue that if you stop higher income students from going to a charter school or private school, those parents will just throw up their hands and send their kids to the city's underperforming public schools. But is that the case? Not likely.
In fact, they are likely to move out of the community for better options elsewhere. In the end, financially secure families won't send their children to poorly performing public schools, and they won't be participating in the local community outside the schools either. They will be gone. Cutting off school options for middle income families will not fix struggling public schools. It will make neighborhoods assigned to bad public schools worse as property values drop and businesses follow financially secure families.
Here’s another question worth considering - If every family in those school districts could choose their school rather than be assigned to a school, would there still be any students enrolled in those schools? My guess is enrollment would be MUCH lower than it already is. School choice programs create an atmosphere of excellence when they allow anyone who is unhappy with their school the chance to leave. Policy-makers must hold schools to better standards if they want to compete in the market.
And honestly, what is more equal opportunity than giving everyone in the same community the same options? The truth is gifted programs have probably kept some middle class families around in certain neighborhoods with bad school assignments. With the loss of gifted programs, NYC is probably in for an enrollment wake-up call.