Philadelphians: Don’t Let School Issues Halt Your Student’s Education

It is no mystery to those who pay attention that education is under attack in America. I am not talking about teachers being attacked (although they are), or schools being attacked (although they are), or administrators being attacked (although they are). I am talking about the value of education -- the actual priority that Americans place on teaching and learning. Sure, Americans say they value education. We say that the future “belongs to young people with an education” (Obama) and that we support a “cradle-to-career” education agenda (Duncan). Across the board, education politicians call for higher expectations, increased standardization, rigorous reformation, and superior teacher quality, stating that they value quality education for every child.

Who can legitimately argue with these calls? To argue would be to say that we want lower expectations, less standardization, lack of rigor, and inferior teachers. Like arguing with “No Child Left Behind”, we would be stating that we want to leave children behind. The pundits have placed true reformers in a zero-sum game: argue with their calls and you will be publicly chastised as anti-American, anti-Education, anti-Future, and anti-Young People -- claims that reformers cannot recover from easily.

At the heart of this game is the value of education itself. We want to say that we value education, and in our hearts I believe we do. But, in actuality, we simply do not. This is most clear when trends in government’s education funding (secondary and post-secondary) are examined. On the federal level, the government allocates about 2% of the budget to education spending approximately $71.2 billion (cbpp.org). Compared to Defense, Entitlements, Safety Net Programs, Veterans Affairs, Small Business Incubation, and Interest on Debt, this is meager at best (see the White House’s budget office).

Recent haggling around student loans and the rising student debt problem, along with skyrocketing college costs, further emphasizes the lack of value placed on education. By increasing the interest on student loans, the federal government is not only forcing students to spend more money over the long-run, but also making a strong statement that post-secondary education is costly and of questionable financial benefit to one’s future. Sure, as a college graduate, your salary will increase over 5%, but if you are simply spend your additional income on student loan payments, then the increase is a wash. Additionally, this statement alienates key populations of unemployed blue-collar workers who need to further their education to re-employ themselves, as well as lower-class college-bound students who need to take significant loans out to make further schooling a reality. One more devaluing step.

In the business world, major corporations allocate funding to the areas they most value. In a merchandising company, the supply-chain managers will allocate their resources to produce the highest quality products at the most efficient rate. Value-driven companies such as Patagonia, Salesforce, Zappos, and Honda take this simple product-to-profit idea one step further by placing emphasis on high quality customer service, superior products, philanthropy, and environmental conservation. These companies support their values with strong fiscal preferences and by doing so make a statement regarding their company’s investment in the future of society.

Our federal government’s fiscal preferences make its values very clear: we have only a 2% interest in investing in our country’s future.

Many education reformers have attempted to challenge the government’s value statement, and place education at the fore of their concern. Some micro-reformers have succeeded. Strong movements by school networks such as Big Picture Learning, EdVisions Schools, and Diploma Plus have established a track record of successful education reform, despite fiscal devaluation. By courting foundations, providing variance in their funding streams, and tapping into the charter school movement, these networks have made significant gains to reclaim schools as valuable assets to our society’s future.

While these small networks have courted success, many larger districts have experienced less success. For these districts, the fiscal devaluation of education has made the high stakes testing/evaluations/standards/etc. nearly insurmountable. At the heart of this struggle are districts such as Philadelphia’s. Serving nearly 140,000 students, the School District of Philadelphia is in the top 15 largest school districts in the country. Its plight comes on the heels of a $304 million budget shortfall for the coming school year. The results: 3,783 employee layoffs, 24 school closings, and 10,000 displaced students.

But, unlike other school district officials, Philadelphia Superintendent William Hite -- barely over a year into his tenure -- is standing strong in his commitment to ensuring the city’s schools do not become glorified daycare centers. In a statement issued on August 8, 2013, Hite states:

I am in the unfortunate position today of having to announce that if we do not receive at least $50 million by Friday, August 16, the School District of Philadelphia will be forced to consider alternatives to starting the 2013-14 school year on Monday, September 9. This means that we may not be able to open any schools on September 9, that we may only be able to open a few, or that we might be open for a half-day. We will not be able to open all 212 schools for a full-day program. Without the funds to restore crucial staff members, we cannot open functional schools, run them responsibly or provide a quality education to students. (School District of Philadelphia)

Admittedly, Hite’s stance is hardline. Many would argue that the notion of not opening schools because of political fiscal issues is a disastrous precedent and that it is more valuable for students to be sitting-in-seats than it is for them to be at home. But at a time when education funding continues to be relegated to last priority, this kind of stance is exactly what is necessary. In fact, if paired with constructive conversations at home about the value of education, this opportunity can indeed be extraordinary.

At this critical juncture, education professionals and families must work together to talk to students about why their schools are closing. We must ask (and listen to) our young people about what school would be like without gym, art, music, or extra help in their math or science classes. We must think, and encourage our young people to think, about why Superintendent Hite is taking the steps he is, reflecting on the fact that his actions are a necessity if we want to even begin to change the path we are currently on.

Yes, starting the school year late will be inconvenient, but just because our students are not sitting in their respective seats does not mean that their education should not still be our priority.