Education: Why does it have to be either/or?

I was casually listening to the Dallas City Council debate this morning on a proposal that would create a mechanism allowing an outfit called Uplift Schools to sell low interest bonds to finance the construction of charter schools in Dallas. It seemed that some members of the council, most notably Carolyn Davis, argued approving the item would be a betrayal to the Dallas Independent School District.

Admittedly, I’m not an expert on charter schools. What I know about them is that they receive public money but are not subjected to many of the rules and regulations that govern other public schools. In return, they create "a charter" outlining the results they will achieve and are then held accountable to that charter. They are not allowed to charge tuition and are considered non-profit institutions. That’s about the extent of my knowledge.

If anyone has seen that wonderful documentary film about public education Waiting for Superman, then you know that charter schools were seen as a remedy for what’s ailing traditional schools. And, as we all know, the DISD is ailing. Mayor Mike appears to be passionately supportive of charter schools, especially those run by Uplift. In fact, at first I was siding with Davis on this issue until MM said that only 12 percent of DISD graduates are prepared to enter college whereas 100 percent of the Uplift graduates attend college. That’s amazing, especially when you consider charter schools can’t "cherry-pick" their enrollees. They are not allowed to admit only the best and the brightest. Entrance is strictly on a lottery basis from all the students in the neighborhood who would rather attend a charter school instead of a DISD institution.

That 100 percent announcement jerked my head around quickly. That’s when I started wondering why this had to be an either/or argument. Why can’t we help charter schools like Uplift and Dallas Can Academy and also continue to do what can be done to improve DISD. Why can’t this be a pro-education issue?

In fact, DISD can learn from Uplift. It is seeking these low interest bonds because the lower interest payments will save Uplift $300,000, money it will use on educating students instead of on interest payments to bond holders. The DISD should have been following this example years ago — instead of issuing bonds and paying the interest rates on those bonds to fund the construction of new schools, it should have focused on using whatever resources were at its disposal (and money is a major resource) to providing a higher standard of education to its students.

So now the schedule is that the council will be briefed on this issue a week from today and then the item that was deferred on today’s agenda will re-appear two weeks from today. Until someone has a sound argument to counter that 100% percent statistic, the item should be approved. After that, let’s examine what the city can do about the DISD.