I’m Voting For The Opportunity School District
It’s a time for choosing for Georgia voters. Four constitutional amendments are on the ballot awaiting the popular consent of Georgia’s governed. One of those constitutional amendments seeks to help alleviate struggling students in some of Georgia’s failing schools. There is a lot of opposition to it from school teachers, to Democrats and Republicans, to teachers unions, and other organizations. Frankly, the big reason to oppose it is because of a supposed removal of local control. Okay, but as Kyle Wingfield pointed out, the state charter school system amendment was opposed by similar reasons: lack of local control, taking money away from schools, a huge state bureaucracy. Overall, the gloom-and-doom predictions by detractors of charter schools largely didn’t come true.
Over the course of the past few months, opposition to the Opportunity School District amendment has been growing with arguments playing on people’s fears rather than facts. Those arguments are playing on people’s fears of ceding authority to a state entity. That’s understandable since we Republicans generally believe that a government that governs the closest governs the best. Unfortunately, sometimes those local school districts are unable to sustain successful schools and need help in order to fulfill the constitutional mandate that children in Georgia receive a quality education. I believe this amendment will help with that.
The good news is that the intervention by the state OSD isn’t forever, in fact, the OSD is limited to the number of schools that it can intervene. The purpose is to rehabilitate the school and then turn the school back over to the local school board for (hopefully better) management. Plus, the OSD doesn’t exclude local teachers and parents from consulting on how to get the school back to a path of success. It’s not a system where people from an ivory tower come to dictate on how things will be and to hell with what teachers and parents think. It’s a partnership (similar to what should be occurring now at the local level) rather than a radical government takeover of local public schools as some Facebook scholars and pundits pontificate.
I know a lot of my Republican and (L)libertarian friends that I respect will vote no on the amendment, and that’s okay. We’ll agree to disagree and still be friends. I just choose to stand against the status-quo. I don’t want to stay with the status-quo while we pursue a chase for a golden unicorn and keep students in failing schools for another 2, 4, or 8 years. A Recovery School District is implemented in Louisiana and have show some promise. I hope that we have stellar results in turning failing schools around with the OSD. Let’s try it and see how it works.
About Author
nsmith
Father. IT Geek. Former 14th District GOP Chairman (2015-2017). Former Walker GOP Chairman (2009-2013). Resident of Chamblee. American. Georgian. Conservative.
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I’m with you Nathan. Throwing more money at the problem hasn’t worked and its time to try a different approach. Plus this provides another incentive for those failing schools to get off the list and avoid all the purported evils of the OSD.
The different approach to money being the state taking control of local education tax dollars.
I am against it because of the same old unanswered questions. For instance, what happens to the current school administration once the OSD group takes a school? What methods does the OSD group use to improve student performance and where does our state school superintendent stand on OSD?
Also important to note post-Katrina New Orleans is a different population from the population of our poor performing schools. It’s also interesting that today’s AJC says that the Deal’s daughter-in-law runs a consulting firm that raises money for a pro OSD group.
I’m voting no. I favor efforts to improve failing schools but there’s already a whole state department dedicated to that job. Instead, under OSD we’ll have duplicate bureaucracy headed by a new superintendent who is responsible only to the governor. Call that approach what you will but locally controlled it’s not.
I’m not anti-charter but their record is mixed. People like Wingfield who think charter schools are the greatest thing since canned beer are just cheerleaders.
Anyone who is disturbed by the notion of throwing money at problems should understand that OSD will result in failing districts receiving more state monies than ever.
“The good news is that the intervention by the state OSD isn’t forever”. Perhaps technically true, but in practice not true at all. Once the OSD converts a school to a charter it can stay that way forever.
“The purpose is to rehabilitate the school and then turn the school back over to the local school board for (hopefully better) management.” This is highly unlikely. If Louisiana is going to be an example, every single school they took over was either closed or turned over to a charter company (I’m not clear if this refers to New Orleans or statewide). So even though they are now dismantling their Recovery School District one can see why- there isn’t anything to manage anymore.
http://www.nola.com/education/index.ssf/2016/05/new_orleans_schools_reunify.html
This all looks like a disguised way to more widely implement for-profit charter schools, but I wish they would just say that so people knew what they were voting for.
This is an interesting article which advocates for charter schools, but lists what the charter schools do that enhances their chances for success. So my question would be- why do we need charter schools to do this? Why don’t we just empower the system we have now with these same criteria?
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/knowledge-bank/2015/06/30/lousianas-recovery-school-district-is-a-model-for-school-turnarounds
Nathan In this case I agree with you and Irishpat and I will be voting yes. After listening to the “No” side on this the one thing that strikes me as typical is they offer no solutions, not even one save throw more money at it. It has been the same fear mongering which is, they will take away local control, you’ll be giving money to a “FOR PROFIT” corporation, and getting a bloated unaccountable state run bureaucracy. To that I say if a local board can’t fix a failing school within 3 years what make anyone think they will be successful within the next 3? It’s a classic example if you keep doing the same thing and expect different results is the definition of insanity. What is wrong with giving money to a for profit corporation if they can deliver results? Last if they are so against a bloated state run bureaucracy then why aren’t they screaming to throw out QBE? QBE what the largest takeover of the public school system ever. QBE was passed under Joe Frank Harris as governor for god sakes.
It looks to me if the other sides argument is to help the kids they would be offering other solutions rather than empty talking points.
I can only imagine the response if a Democrat had proposed something like this. Oh my Lawd the commotion we’d see!
I am all for local control, but the OSD seems like a good idea when the local control fails. Without some sort of intervention, it seems unlikely that failing schools will right themselves.
It does bother me that about 50% of the currently failing schools are in Atlanta, Fulton, and DeKalb, with most others in metro areas. Does OSD support metro malfeasance at the expense of the rest of the state? I don’t know, but I am voting for this amendment (which means it will probably fail).
Playing on fear of government is a raison d’être for the modern GOP, so enjoy them chickens.
So I have some questions.
Assuming this is an avenue to implement charter schools, how is it that charter schools work? What is it that is perceived to make them better?
Can charter schools have different hiring/firing practices?
Can charter schools more easily suspend students?
Can charter schools have more flexibility regarding curriculum?
Can charter schools have some selectivity regarding its students?