Sign Up For Our Newsletter

There are articles everyday like the one I read today in Pennsylvania’s The Morning Call.  Some district official is interviewed, claiming that traditional public school enrollment has dropped significantly due to students leaving to attend open enrollment charter schools. The official then talks about how rough the district’s financial situation is, and lays the blame on charter schools.

Russ Mayo, Superintendent of Allentown School District, echoed this sentiment on Wednesday.  “If all the charter school students came back…” says Mayo, it would bring the district $17 million more a year.  The charter and cyber schools that have been established in his district are the “biggest drain” on funding.  As the article continues, the superintendent paints a confusing picture of how he has cut staff, he has lowered administrative costs, and he still can’t make ends meet.  The tone then turns into a wishful “If only, if only” while thinking of all of the money charter schools supposedly have in their coffers.

But the superintendent just doesn’t get it.  He doesn’t get the facts about charter school funding, he doesn’t get the fact about choice and demand, and he doesn’t get the logistical flaw of vilifying charter schools. He doesn’t get the fact that 73% of Americans support charter schools.

I will start with charter school funding. Charter schools are public schools, and it follows that they should be funded at the same rate as every other public school…right?  Well, in reality, only 25% of charters schools receive anywhere near the average per pupil funding that the traditional public schools receive according to the Center for Education Reform’s (CER) 2014 Survey of America’s Charter Schools. The Survey also found that overall, charter schools are funded at 64% of their traditional counterparts. The Superintendent may dream of dollars that charter schools have but in states such as Pennsylvania where there is a lack of funding equity, charters often have to make due with less.

The Superintendent doesn’t seem to appreciate school choice and the demand for charter schools. Waitlists for charter schools have increased over the past 3 years to 277 students.  That means that for every charter school in the nation, there are almost 300 students who want to become charter school students but can’t.  Demand is high, and families want to have available schooling options.  Charter school families made that choice for a reason. Parents made a choice for a different and more suitable educational option for their children because for one reason or another, the traditional public schools were not getting the job done.

The logistical flaw in the superintendent’s stance is simple, and I return to the fact that charter schools are public schools.  If we accept that charter schools drain money from public schools and are the biggest threat to traditional school funding, then I would ask this:  Are traditional public schools financial threats to other traditional public schools?  Do public schools drain money from other public schools?  The hypothetical, “If only Anytown Public Elementary didn’t exist, then Anytown Public Middle School would have so much more funding,” just doesn’t make sense.

All too often, articles about district financial troubles are incomplete.  None of these issues were addressed to bring some type of data and balance to the issue.  It is that fact-based balance that we most desperately need.