Charter Schools: Distinction made by Barge not a trivial one
August 17, 2012 12:00 AM | 2728 views | 7 7 comments | 16 16 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Georgia’s superintendent of education is no doubt getting a boost of support from public school educators, administrators and school boards today. Whether he can hang on to enough support from fellow Republicans in Georgia government to keep his job is another matter.

John Barge bucked the party line on a law for which Gov. Nathan Deal, among others, has actively lobbied, and announced that he does not support the proposed constitutional amendment giving the state authority to establish charter schools. “I could not stand by,” Barge said Tuesday, “without voicing my opposition to sending any money anywhere else until our children are in schools 180 days and our teachers are at full pay.”

Barge said more than 4,000 teachers have lost their jobs since 2008 (not counting teacher furloughs) despite a rise in public school enrollment; and 121 of the 180 public school systems in the state have fewer than 180 days of classes. In addition to his concern about state charters siphoning off scarce funds from already struggling public school systems, Barge also pointed to the loss of local control as a reason for his opposition.

The latter issue has already made its way through the Georgia Supreme Court, which ruled that the state constitution explicitly gives control of public K-12 education to local school boards. This amendment, if approved in November, would alter that provision to allow the state to charter and operate publicly funded but privately run schools.

The governor, not surprisingly, took exception to Barge’s defection. Deal’s office issued a statement that said the governor “will uphold the promises I made when I ran for office: Parents and students should have public school options; this is true local control.”

The part about keeping a campaign promise is commendable. With all due respect for the governor, whom we have supported on many issues, the part about state authority constituting “true local control” is a painfully parsed bit of reasoning. Barge said Deal is confusing “support for quality charter schools with support for this charter amendment” — an important distinction that gets close to the heart of the matter.

We have long supported locally conceived and funded charter schools: Anything that brings creativity, innovation and independent thinking to public education deserves taxpayer support. If a local school board is an obstacle to progress, voters should elect a new one that isn’t.

This is not about the value of charter schools. It’s about whether already shrinking public education budgets should shrink even more at the local level so the state can charter privately run schools over which local taxpayers will have no say. That no less a figure than the state superintendent is wary of the idea should tell us something.

Comments
(7)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
jenelaw
|
August 23, 2012
Thank you Dr. Barge for being the voice of reason. The vast majority of public educators are NOT against charter schools. What we are against is taking funds from already struggling systems to open charter schools. I haven't had a raise in 5 years and I work harder now than I ever have because we are short clerical staff and teaching staff. That isn't right! I too have a family to feed and the idea that good teachers are going to hang around indefinitely while be paid less each year for MORE work each year is ludicrous. AGAIN thank you Dr. Barge for being the voice of reason. I am all about innovation and creativity, but you can't throw the baby out with the bath water in order to make changes.
GAPublicSchools
|
August 19, 2012
Way to go John Barge! I cannot agree with you more. Thanks for standing up to what is true and being fiscally responsible. It is refreshing to have a politician who actually stands up for what is right! I will be voting NO to the Charter School Amendment in November.
Maureen Wingfield
|
August 18, 2012
Has anyone considered verifying the data presented by Barge? We all just take for granite that it's accurate and true. What he has done is summarized and put it out there as factual.

Why don't we break apart, note by note, what he says and the "data" he attaches and see if it holds water. I got started on that and found problems with his claim regarding academic achievement and financial status of the schools (and looked at the DOE's own documentation and found the errors very quickly!)

I think Mr. Barge is going to be mighty embarrassed when his errors are discovered. I'll await the day.
A Dad
|
August 23, 2012
Data can be construed or miscontrued however one sees fit. If I were to tell you that 1/3 of a certain student population failed an area on the CRCT, that would sound disastrous, but if there were only three students in that subgroup it would be clear that one student failed. Should our children go where their educational needs are best met? Yes! My impression is that Mr. Barge's primary concern is fiscal responsibility and for that reason if no other I agree with him.
JR in Mableton
|
August 17, 2012
The ultimate local control is parental control.......give parents school vouchers and let us decide where to educate OUR children.
Kennesaw Resident
|
August 17, 2012
Good for Dr. Barge! I will vote "NO" for the amendment and I hope others are paying attention to this important issue.

The problem as I see it, is that the state wants to remove more and more local control so that they can allocate tax dollars as they see fit. We need to vote "NO" and do our best to keep local control of tax dollars.

I will also vote for John Barge again.
Pay off
|
August 18, 2012
There should be a lawsuit over the wording of the amendment. A total misrepresentation. I guess if you pay off the legislators you can get anything you want. No wonder the state is in such a mess!
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, spam, and links to outside websites will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides