1  

School  of  Thought  An  Examination  of  the  American  Education  System  And  Inquiry  Into  the  Nature  of  Effective  Schooling  

 

There  is  a  plethora  of  opinions,  articles,  and  studies  that  endeavor  to  supply  

an  answer  to  the  question,  “What  is  the  state  of  the  American  education  system.”  In  

fact,  there  are  so  many  different,  and  oftentimes  opposing,  outlooks,  that  it  becomes  

possible  to  simply  select  a  small  portion  and  come  away  with  an  extensive  perceived  

understanding  of  the  issue.  For  example,  there  are  numerous  proponents  of  our  

current  system;  those  who  site  shining  examples  of  existing  public  schools  updating  

their  methods,  attaining  more  funds,  and  excelling.  Conversely,  there  are  many  that  

are  convinced  the  system  is  doomed,  looking  to  disheartening  competency  statistics,  

deteriorating  facilities,  and  inferior  teachers.    Some  call  the  charter  school  

movement  the  solution,  and  talk  of  the  unprecedented  academic  success  that  some  

charter  schools  have  met  with  in  the  most  impoverished  areas.  Others  condemn  the  

charter  school  movement  as  becoming  a  tool  for  corporate  corruption  and  point  to  

studies  that,  in  general,  say  charter  schools  have  met  with  no  more  success  than  

their  public  counterparts.  And  there  is  data  to  support  nearly  every  claim;  

educators,  legislators,  parents,  students,  scholars,  analysts,  and  scientists  have  all  

provided  their  distinct  and  assured  viewpoints.  It  seems  impossible  to  discern  an  

objective  answer  amidst  the  cacophony  of  positions.  The  only  consensus  is  that  the  

system  is  failing.  This  paper  attempts  to  provide  an  unprejudiced  look  at  this  issue,  

free  from  any  agenda  or  motive.  Most  voices  in  the  educational  community  have  

aligned  themselves  with  either  public  schools  or  charter  schools,  but  this  duelist  

attitude  leaves  no  room  for  coexistence,  and  thus  is  a  flawed  way  of  looking  at  the  

  2  

issue.  My  interest  in  education  emanates  from  my  own  unique,  alternative  

education,  which  has  inspired  me  to  look  at  the  world  in  a  wholly  unique  way.  I  

emphatically  believe  that  education,  especially  early  education,  shapes  ones  

perception  of  the  world  and  with  exceptional  education  will  come  an  exceptional  

population.    

 

A  Philosophical  History  of  Education  in  America  

Along  with  their  culture,  religion,  and  government,  the  first  European  settlers  

to  inhabit  the  shores  of  North  America  brought  yet  another  institution  that  would  go  

on  to  shape  the  development  of  a  nation:  education.  Like  its  European  progenitor,  

the  education  system  of  early  colonial  America  was  deeply  entrenched  in  religion.    

Owing  to  the  fact  that  English  Puritans,  driven  from  their  country  due  to  religious  

extremism,  made  up  the  majority  of  these  first  settlers,  the  distinction  between  

religious  and  secular  life  was  virtually  nonexistent.  Education  in  America  began  as  a  

means  to  encourage  the  young  to  embrace  the  frequent  hardships  faced  by  early  

settlers  (Cohen  and  Gelbrich).    

The  concept  of  education  as  a  means  to  improve  the  human  condition  finds  

its  roots  in  ancient  times,  when  the  schools  of  philosophy  that  gave  rise  to  

intellectual  thought  were  born.  The  classic  philosophers  Socrates,  Plato,  and  

Aristotle  all  taught  that  an  individual’s  most  important  duty  to  society  is  to  strive  

toward  bettering  humankind,  and  that  education  serves  as  a  vehicle  for  this  end  

(Dhawan  219).    Each  of  these  philosophers  had  a  profound  impact  on  education  that  

has  endured  throughout  history  and  continues  to  influence  teaching  methodology  

  3  

today.  The  contributions  of  Socrates,  Plato,  and  Aristotle  constitute  the  ancient  

foundation  of  structured  education.    

Socrates  developed  and  popularized  a  way  of  teaching  by  which  the  

instructor  leads  the  student  to  a  conclusion  by  asking  a  series  of  questions.  

Commonly  referred  to  as  the  Socratic  method,  this  technique  is  based  upon  

achieving  an  earnest  dialogue  between  student  and  teacher  and  remains  widely  

used  in  modern  educational  practice.  Plato,  who  was  a  student  of  Socrates,  

originated  a  philosophical  approach  that  grew  to  become  a  fundamental  pillar  of  

global  philosophy,  idealism.  Plato  believed  that  there  exists,  distinct  from  the  world  

in  which  humans  live,  a  reality  composed  of  everything  in  its  ideal  form.  The  basis  of  

idealism  is  that  reality,  as  we  know  it,  is  a  mental  construct  and  is,  in  actuality,  

immaterial.  Idealism  in  education  focuses  on  emphasizing  the  students  mind.  

Intuition  and  self-­‐examination  are  used  to  bring  to  the  consciousness  concepts  that  

are  believed  to  exist  innately  within  a  latent  area  of  the  mind.  Plato  also  

distinguishes  himself  as  a  pioneer  in  the  field  of  education  as  being  the  founder  of  

the  world’s  first  university,  the  Academy.  The  third  and  final  ancient  Grecian  

philosopher  to  majorly  contribute  to  the  evolution  of  education  is  Aristotle  and  the  

branch  of  philosophy  that  stems  from  his  theories,  Realism.  As  a  pupil  of  Plato’s,  

their  ideologies  could  not  be  more  disparate.  Whereas  Plato  considered  the  truest  

form  of  reality  to  be  composed  of  abstract  ideas,  Aristotle  believed  that  the  physical  

world  was  the  ultimate  reality  and  that  knowledge  exits  independently.  Aristotelian  

philosophy  accentuates  the  importance  of  logic  and  structure.  The  scientific  method  

is  derived  from  Aristotle’s  views  on  evidence  through  observation.  In  education,  a  

  4  

Realist  curriculum  prominently  features  mathematics  and  the  sciences  and  adheres  

to  a  disciplined  structure  based  in  tangible  fact.    

Along  with  idealism  and  realism,  there  are  two  other,  considerably  more  

contemporary,  general  philosophies  from  which  specific  educational  philosophies  

arise.  The  first  of  these  is  Pragmatism.  Pragmatists  accept  direct  experience  as  the  

only  reliable  means  to  discern  what  is  real.  From  a  pragmatist  perspective,  reality  is  

constantly  changing,  the  world  continuously  evolving.  Unlike  both  Idealism  and  

Realism,  Pragmatism  does  not  assume  that  there  is  an  absolute  and  permanent  

truth.  Knowledge  should  result  in  action,  not  remain  in  the  mind  for  contemplation.  

Pragmatists  teaching  methods  concentrate  on  hands-­‐on  problem  solving  and  the  

application  of  knowledge  to  real  life  situations.  In  stark  contrast  to  Pragmatism,  

there  is  Existentialism.  The  main  principle  of  Existentialism  is  the  individual.  It  is  

left  to  the  individuals  to  define  themselves;  adherence  to  a  philosophical  ideal  does  

not  create  an  authentic  character.  One  is  not  defined  by  their  mere  existence,  but  

instead  by  the  choices  they  make.  Existentialist  teaching  encourages  the  student  to  

determine  how  they  will  best  learn.  In  an  existentialist  classroom,  learning  occurs  

from  the  student  out;  there  is  no  predetermined  curriculum  and  no  formula  used.    

  Each  of  these  epistemological1  belief  systems  concentrates  on  the  nature  of  

knowledge  and  how  it  is  come  by.  Within  the  philosophical  framework  provided  by  

                                                                                                               1  The  term  epistemology  refers  to,  in  its  narrowest  definition,  the  nature  of  knowledge  and  how  it  is  acquired.  Each  of  these  philosophies  can  also  be  applied  to  education  through  other  philosophical  classifications.  Both  Metaphysics  and  Axiology  are  both  areas  of  philosophy  that  are  important  in  the  realm  of  education.  Metaphysics  is  a  particularly  difficult  concept  to  define;  it  focuses  on  the  overall  question  “What  is  real?”  and  all  subsequent  queries  that  arise.  Axiology  is  concerned  with  values,  specifically  which  ethical  and  aesthetic  principles  constitute  a  “good”  individual.    

  5  

these  four  general  schools  of  thought,  there  are  four  major  educational  philosophies.  

The  first  of  these  philosophies  is  called  Perennialism.  At  the  core  of  Perennialism  is  

the  acquisition  of  unchanging,  everlasting  knowledge.  Perennialists  believe  that  the  

optimal  education  is  composed  of  studying  ancient  texts  in  order  to  achieve  an  

understanding  of  enduring  truths.  Because,  on  its  most  basic  level,  the  natural  world  

does  not  change,  education  should  also  instill  perennial  principles.  A  Perennialist  

education  teaches  that  with  an  understanding  of  the  great  ideas  that  define  Western  

civilization,  a  student  is  well  equipped  to  confront  any  problem  in  any  era.  The  

academically  vigorous  curriculum  consists  of  grammar,  logic,  rhetoric,  writing,  

history,  mathematics,  language,  and  above  all,  study  of  classical  texts.  Through  these  

subjects,  the  student  is  taught  respect  for  timeless  values  such  as  happiness,  honor,  

courage,  duty,  and  responsibility.  Perennialism  was  the  dominant  educational  

philosophy  in  the  American  education  system  from  colonial  times  through  the  19th  

century.  However,  because  Perennialism  borrows  many  of  its  standards  from  the  

ideas  of  theologian  Thomas  Aquinas,  it  has  deep  Christian  influences.  As  education  

and  society  parted  from  their  deeply  faith-­‐based  origins,  Perennialism  was  largely  

cast  aside  for  more  secular  educational  means.2    

  Following  Perennialism,  Progressivism  arose  as  the  prevalent  educational  

approach  in  America  from  the  1920s  to  the  mid  1950s.  While  the  central  point  of  

Perennialism  is  a  stationary  curriculum  formed  on  established  material,  proponents  

                                                                                                               2  One  of  the  most  propagated  arguments  against  Perennialism  is  that  it  is  highly  elitist.  This  claim  is  backed  by  the  fact  that  Perennialists  advocate  the  same  curriculum,  made  up  of  high  minded,  classical  concepts,  for  every  student,  regardless  of  their  socioeconomic  background  and  future  plans.    Critics  have  even  gone  so  far  as  to  say  that  Perennialism  is  a  threat  to  democracy.    

  6  

of  Progressivism  believe  that  learning  must  be  adapted  to  each  individual  learner.  

The  focus  of  progressivism  is  neither  on  the  teacher,  nor  on  a  specific  curriculum  

but  instead  on  the  needs  of  the  student.  Instead  of  looking  at  eternal  values  and  

enduring  truths,  Progressive  educational  ideology  examines  the  constantly  changing  

nature  of  reality  and  maintains  that  education  too  should  be  mutable.  A  progressive  

education  begins  with  the  student;  once  the  teacher  is  able  to  ascertain  the  student’s  

specific  interests,  difficulties,  and  concerns,  they  proceed  to  develop  a  strategy  that  

relates  to  the  particular  student.  In  doing  this,  learning  is  accomplished  by  the  

questions  and  experiences  of  each  individual  pupil  as  well  as  increased  motivation.  

In  a  progressive  classroom,  process  is  the  most  important  component.  Hands  on  

experimentation  is  promoted,  the  scientific  method  is  employed  to  study  events  

directly.  Unlike  other  educational  philosophies,  Progressivism  does  not  adhere  to  

any  fundamental  core  of  knowledge;  no  certain  knowledge  is  held  as  more  

important  than  another.  This  applies  to  the  subjects  that  are  taught  in  the  classroom  

as  well,  because  effective  education  is  subjective,  so  too  are  the  subjects  that  will  

produce  a  well  rounded  student.  Emphasis  is  placed  not  on  what  the  student  should  

think,  but  rather  how  they  should  think  about  it.3  

  As  a  reaction  to  the  loosely  defined  structure  of  Progressivism,  a  third  

educational  philosophy  emerged  in  America,  Essentialism.  Beginning  in  the  1930s,  

Essentialism  recalled  some  of  the  ideas  seen  earlier  in  Perennialism.  Essentialism,  

like  Perennialism,  asserts  that  there  is  a  common  core  of  knowledge  that  is  vital  to  

                                                                                                               3  The  concepts  behind  Progressivism  were  drawn  from  Rousseau’s  treatise  on  education,  Émile  ou  De  l’éducation  and  from  the  works  of  John  Dewey.    Dewey  is  largely  considered  the  most  influential  figure  in  the  evolution  of  American  educational  ideology.    

  7  

an  effective  education.  However,  unlike  Perennialists,  Essentialists  acknowledge  

that  this  base  of  “essential”  information  must  change  in  response  to  the  passage  of  

time  as  well  as  cultural  and  societal  shifts.  The  fundamental  question  in  Essentialist  

educational  theory  is,  “what  is  required  to  equip  students  with  the  necessary  skills  

for  the  future?”  From  this  question,  a  curriculum  based  on  optimally  beneficial  

information  is  derived.  Essentialist  schooling  is  ruled  by  practicality.  A  systematic,  

disciplined  method  that  presents  knowledge  in  an  orderly  and  logical  manner  is  

evident  in  an  Essentialist  classroom.  Essentialism  is  often  referred  to  as  a  “back  to  

the  basics”  approach  to  education  because  of  the  relatively  traditional  values  it  

strives  to  instill  in  students.  The  specific  process  by  which  this  information  is  to  be  

imparted  on  the  students  is  not  specifically  outlined;  the  focus  of  essentialism  is  not  

on  the  process  but  on  the  results.4  

  The  final  major  educational  philosophy  consists  of  two  subcategories  that  

share  many  ideals  and  are  nearly  congruent  in  principle.  Social  Reconstructionism  

and  Critical  Theory  are  each  the  direct  product  of  cultural  context  and  reaction  to  a  

tumultuous  political  climate.  Social  Reconstructionism  appeared  during  the  mid  20th  

century  in  the  aftermath  of  World  War  II,  when  much  of  the  globe  suffered  from  the  

widespread  devastation  that  the  war  brought.  This  philosophy  is  centered  on  the  

concept  of  social  reform  as  the  aim  of  education.  Reconstructionist  educators  

believe  that  an  emphasis  on  social  questions  stimulates  a  determination  to  create  a  

better  and  more  just  society.  Education  is  considered  to  be  a  means  of  preparation  

                                                                                                               4  Notable  Essentialists  include  William  Bagley,  a  professor  at  Columbia  university;  E.D  Hirsh,  architect  of  the  well  known  Core  Knowledge  Curriculum;  and  James  Bryan  Conant,  who  was  an  influential  figure  in  the  establishment  of  the  SAT.  

  8  

for  the  installment  of  a  new  social  order.    Similarly,  Critical  Theorists  see  education  

as  a  vehicle  for  social  change.  They  believe  schooling  functions  as  a  way  in  which  to  

escape  oppression  and  cultivate  an  informed  society.  For  both  Social  

Reconstructionists  and  Critical  Theorists,  curriculum  concentrates  on  eliciting  

students  into  students  taking  action  against  real  world  problems  such  as  violence,  

hunger,  and  inequality.  Both  philosophies  revolve  around  education  as  a  way  to  

better  the  human  condition,  as  a  conduit  for  social  transformation  and  as  a  manner  

by  which  to  rise  above  persecution.  Community  based  learning  and  activities  that  

assimilate  the  world  into  the  classroom  are  basic  features  dominant  in  a  Social  

Reconstructionist  or  Critical  Theory  classroom.  Though  Perennialism,  

Progressivism,  Essentialism  and  Social  Reconstructionism/Critical  Theory  are  the  

predominant  methods  employed  in  classrooms  throughout  the  country  today,  there  

are  a  multitude  of  alternative  approaches  that  are  either  no  longer  or  seldom  

practiced.5  

 

 

 

                                                                                                               5    Two  examples  of  educational  philosophies  that  have,  for  the  most  part,  become  obsolete  today  are  educational  Romanticism  and  exclusive  Behaviorism.  Romanticism  in  education  is  based  on  the  belief  that  academic  ability  is  a  product  of  the  opportunities  a  student  is  presented  with  and  has  little  to  do  with  innate  intelligence.  Proponents  of  this  principle  believe  that  students  who  struggle  academically  are  wholly  the  product  of  ineffective  teaching  methods  and  that  all  children  are  capable  of  learning  on  the  same  level.  Behaviorists  assert  that  humans  are  shaped  entirely  by  external  factors.  If  their  environment  is  altered,  thoughts,  feelings  and  behaviors  will  also  be  affected.  When  positive  reinforcement  is  provided  to  students  for  favorable  behaviors,  they  will  learn  to  perform  the  behavior  independently.    This  approach  was  criticized  for  being  teacher-­‐oriented  and  disparaging  to  students.  

  9  

 

 

 

The  Evolution  of  Education  in  America  

While  the  philosophical  background  of  the  public  American  education  system  

reaches  all  the  way  back  to  the  classical  period,  it’s  practical  application  has  much  

more  contemporary  origins.  Up  until  the  early  17th  century,  education  in  America  

was  predominately  a  privilege  reserved  for  those  who  could  afford  to  either  hire  a  

private  tutor  or  send  their  children  to  a  private  school.  The  prevailing  school  format  

of  early  colonial  America  was  the  “Dame”  school.  Dame  schools  were  often  

established  by  women  and  conducted  in  their  home.  Students  were  charged  a  

moderate  fee  for  basic  instruction  in  reading,  writing,  and  mathematics.  Far  from  

consistent,  these  schools  were  largely  dependent  on  weather  conditions  and  family  

responsibilities;  attendance  at  dame  schools  was  erratic  and  fragmented  at  best.  The  

evolution  of  Education,  specifically  public  education,  in  America  can  be  divided  into  

four  distinct  periods:  the  permissive  era,  the  encouraging  era,  the  compulsory  era  

and  the  school  choice  era.    

The  permissive  era  was  initiated  in  1642  with  the  passing  of  the  first  

education  law;  imposed  in  Massachusetts,  this  law  required  that  all  parents  provide  

their  children  with  fundamental  reading6  skills  and  a  basic  understanding  of  

government.  During  the  permissive  era,  private  institutions  dominated  the  

                                                                                                               6  This  legislation  specifically  required  that  children  be  able  to  read  the  Bible  and  did  not  define  the  manner  or  environment  in  which  this  material  was  to  be  taught.  No  state  sponsored  educational  facilities  accompanied  this  statute.    

  10  

education  landscape.  The  mid  17th  century  saw  the  establishment  of  a  few  scattered  

locally  sponsored  schools,  but  education  in  America  remained  generally  

disorganized  and  dominated  by  private  institutions  until  the  19th  century.  The  

government  allowed  the  organization  of  these  small  public  schools,  provided  that  

they  won  the  approval  of  local  voters.  In  1821  the  first  full  scale,  successful  

government  owned  and  operated  school  was  established  in  Boston,  precipitating  

the  encouraging  era.    

This  phase  of  education  is  characterized  by  the  government’s  explicit  support  

of  public  education;  throughout  this  period,  additional  taxes  and  laws  were  

introduced  to  aid  the  formation  of  public  school  districts.  However,  while  the  

government  allocated  funds  to  the  newly  formed  districts,  it  was  not  required  that  

that  these  funds  were  used  to  create  new  schools  and  they  often  went  to  assisting  

students  in  attending  preexisting  private  schools.  In  1827  Massachusetts  was  again  

a  pioneer7  in  education  legislation  by  enacting  the  first  law  requiring  public  high  

schools.  Over  the  course  of  the  encouraging  era,  public  schools  grew  in  popularity  

and  gathered  support;  soon  they  began  to  emerge  as  the  prevailing  mode  of  primary  

and  secondary  education.  Though  the  government  supported  public  educational  

institutions,  parents  were  not  compelled  to  send  their  children  to  public  schools.  

  The  conception  of  a  system  completely  prescribed  by  government,  in  which  

nearly  every  aspect  of  education  is  compelled,  was  introduced  during  the  following  

era,  the  compulsory  era.  One  of  the  main  distinctions  of  this  stage  was  the  rapid                                                                                                                  7  Massachusetts’s  consistent  educational  innovation  was,  for  the  most  part,  due  to  state  senator  Horace  Mann.  Mann  was  a  vehement  supporter  of  public  education,  and  through  his  efforts  Massachusetts  became  an  educational  model  for  the  rest  of  the  country.  

  11  

decline  in  parental  authority.  In  the  past,  the  parent  had  complete  jurisdiction  over  

how,  or  even  if,  their  child  received  a  formal  education,  now,  however,  children  of  a  

certain  age  were  forced  to  attend  school  by  law.  During  the  compulsory  era  it  

became  the  duty  of  the  state  to  educate  children;  the  foundation  of  the  National  

Education  Association  in  1857  and  the  American  Federal  of  Teachers  in  1916  

further  espoused  the  idea  that  the  school  institution,  and  teacher,  was  a  superior  

authority  to  the  parent  in  a  child’s  life.  Between  the  years  1852  and  1913,  all  fifty  

states  passed  laws  that  mandated  school  attendance.  In  1965  congress  passed  the  

Elementary  and  Secondary  Education  act,  which  provided  federal  funds  for  local  

public  schools,  bringing  us  to  the  school  choice  era  and  contemporary  educational  

practices  and  policies.    

With  “school  choice”  began  an  era  of  education  defined  by  the  abundant  

options  presented  to  students  and  parents.  Here,  the  government-­‐imposed  system  

began  to  lose  its  absolute  grip  on  families  unable  to  afford  private  school  tuition.    

The  parental  authority  that  had  been  severely  diminished  during  the  compulsory  

era  began  to  resurface  as  alternative  schooling  possibilities  expanded.    Along  with  

this  renewed  influence  came  a  growing  discontent  with  the  condition  of  America’s  

public  schools.  At  its  inception,  the  American  education  system  served  primarily  to  

prepare  students  for  an  either  an  agrarian  or  assembly-­‐line  oriented  profession,  

only  the  privileged  elite  went  on  to  pursue  a  higher  level  of  education.  However,  

with  the  turn  of  the  century  came  a  sweeping  technological  advancement  that  

permeated  every  facet  of  society,  allowing  for  an  exponential  increase  in  

opportunities  presented  to  the  American  working  force.  With  these  new  professions  

  12  

the  necessity  of  a  more  comprehensive  and  specialized  education  became  apparent.  

Jobs  requiring  higher  thinking  were  no  longer  reserved  for  the  upper  class  and  

general  dissatisfaction  with  the  public  schooling  system  became  more  and  more  

prevalent.  Faced  with  declining  standards,  those  invested  in  education  embarked  on  

a  course  of  reform.    

 

The  State  of  our  Public  Schools  

The  disenchantment  with  America’s  public  schools  was  further  incited  by  

President  Ronald  Reagan’s  pessimistic  1983  report  on  American  education.  Titled  A  

Nation  at  Risk:  The  Imperative  for  Educational  Reform,  the  report  addressed  the  low  

level  of  proficiency  that  American  students  were  showing  on  a  global  level.  A  Nation  

at  Risk  claimed  that  American  students  had  consistently  ranked  lowest,  or  near  to,  in  

a  variety  of  international  comparisons.  It  went  on  to  provide  statistical  evidence  that  

American  students  were  on  a  steady  and  steep  decline  in  literacy  and  mathematics  

proficiency  that  could  only  be  remedied  by  immediate  and  drastic  action.  The  

reaction  to  this  report  was  an  inundation  of  educational  reform  initiatives  that  

sought  to  fix  the  broken  system  that  was  swallowing  up  the  potential  of  American  

children  in  a  downward  spiral  of  mediocrity.    

At  the  end  of  the  19th  century  the  American  education  system  had  become  a  

regimented  structure;  students  came  in,  followed  an  obsolete  curriculum,  similar  to  

the  one  their  parents  had  years  earlier,  and  left  unprepared  for  the  competitive  

reality  of  the  real  world.  The  system  was  focused  entirely  on  compliance  with  the  

prescribed  process,  and  little  attention  was  paid  to  the  actual  results.    Many  of  the  

  13  

problems  facing  public  schools  today  share  the  same  themes  and  concerns  that  have  

dominated  public  education  for  over  fifty  years.  This  has  made  the  task  of  

educational  reformers  a  formidable  one;  with  no  chance  of  an  educational  

renaissance,  they  must  rely  on  untried  theories  and  completely  original  ideas.    

As  awareness  of  the  failings  prevalent  throughout  public  education  grew,  

many  turned  to  the  seemingly  obvious  cause,  the  teachers.  In  the  past,  teachers  

were  generally  not  required  to  know  much  more  than  the  fundamental  concepts  of  

the  subject  they  taught;  it  was  more  about  knowing  the  curriculum  then  the  topic.  

Now,  however,  there  was  a  need  for  knowledgeable,  skilled  teachers  and  there  was  

a  definite  lack  of  teachers  who  possessed  the  necessary  skills  and  an  abundance  of  

minimally  trained  teachers.  These  two  factors  have  proved  to  be  an  exceedingly  

difficult  obstacle  to  overcome.  Today,  many  public  schools  must  contend  with  

inadequate  salaries  for  adept  teachers  and  poorly  qualified  teachers  who  are  

protected  by  union  contracts.    

Teachers  unions  constitute  some  of  the  most  powerful  political  entities  in  the  

US  and  their  grip  on  the  public  education  system  is  very  well  established.  The  

majority  of  public  school  teachers  today  are  members  of  large  teachers  unions  such  

as  the  NEA  and  the  AFT;  these  unions  require  certain  protective  provisions  in  the  

employment  contracts  of  their  members.  For  example,  many  teachers,  after  teaching  

for  a  “probationary”  period,  are  granted  tenure.  In  other  words;  they  are  guaranteed  

permanent  employment,  regardless  of  performance.  Tenure  has  made  it  extremely  

difficult  to  eliminate  substandard  teachers  within  the  system  and  replace  them  with  

newly  trained  teachers.  In  many  cases  these  contracts  have  put,  and  kept,  lackluster  

  14  

teachers  in  the  classroom.  Once  granted  tenure,  teachers  need  to  do  little  more  than  

show  up  for  work  in  order  to  retain  their  job.  This  has  allowed  for  undedicated,  unfit  

teachers  to  remain  in  their  positions.  Teachers  are  simultaneously  one  of  the  largest  

impediments  faced  by  educational  reformers  and  essential  to  the  success  of  

educational  reform.    

Educational  reformers  have  long  pointed  the  finger  at  bad  teachers  for  being  

the  explanation  for  the  failings  of  the  American  education  system.  Many  stand  

behind  the  tenet  that  a  child’s  success  in  school  is  wholly  contingent  on  their  

teacher;  bad  teachers  equal  bad  schools  and  therefore  good  teachers  will  equal  good  

schools.  While  teacher  quality  may  indeed  be  a  major  contributor  to  the  widespread  

underperformance  of  today’s  public  schools,  there  undoubtedly  are  number  of  other  

factors  involved.  Foremost  among  these  is  the  problem  of  overcrowding.  According  

to  a  study  done  in  2010,  nearly  30%  of  America’s  primary  and  secondary  schools  

have  exceeded  the  maximum  capacity  of  students.  Causes  behind  this  mass  influx  of  

public  schools  students  are  increased  immigration  and  an  overwhelming  migration  

of  private  schools  students  to  public  schools  in  the  wake  of  the  recession.  

Overcrowding  in  schools  has  been  linked  to  increased  instances  of  school  violence  

as  well  as  higher  dropout  rates.  The  rampant  in-­‐school  violence  and  crime  present  

in  American  public  schools  today  provides  another  significant  issue  facing  schools  

across  the  country.  In  2010,  85%  of  American  public  schools  reported  that  there  had  

been  at  least  one  act  of  violence,  or  other  criminal  offense,  on  school  property,  

including  33  deaths.  Many  schools  have  instituted  increased  school  security  to  

combat  growing  crime  rates;  these  measures  have  proved  successful  in  some  cases,  

  15  

and  ineffectual  in  others.  The  inferior  conditions  of  public  schools  in  America  has  

lead  to  an  unprecedented  number  of  students  that  drop  out  of  school  before  

receiving  a  high  school  diploma.  It  is  estimated  that  70%  of  American  public  school  

students  graduate  annually,  meaning  that  over  1.2  million  students  dropout  per  

year.  Dropout  rates  in  America  are  at  a  historic  high;  in  some  states8  barely  half  of  

students  make  it  to  graduation  day.  While  students’  individual  reasons  for  dropping  

out  can  vary  greatly,  the  majority  of  dropouts  site  work  being  too  difficult,  or  too  

boring,  as  the  cause.  Some  students,  especially  those  from  low-­‐income  areas,  are  

forced  to  leave  school  and  begin  working  due  to  the  financial  needs  of  their  families.  

The  aforementioned  problems  facing  American  public  schools  barely  broach  the  

matter  of  what  has  caused  our  public  education  system  to  descend  into  such  a  state  

of  ruin;  there  are  many  additional  components  that  are  specific  to  the  state,  district,  

or  school9.      

Putting  aside  difficulties  contingent  on  the  social  conditions  of  public  schools,  

recent  studies  done  on  student  proficiency  in  a  number  of  subjects  have  shown  

deplorable  results.  Studies  done  by  the  Program  for  International  Student  

Assessments  have  shown  that,  on  an  international  level,  American  students  rank  

within  the  bottom  third  in  reading,  math,  and  science.  Since  1985,  the  number  of  

students  taking  advanced  science  courses  has  doubled  and  the  number  of  students  

exceeding  Algebra  II  has  nearly  tripled.  Despite  this,  test  scores  have  continued  to  

                                                                                                               8  Five  lowest  graduation  rates  in  America:  Nevada-­‐  50.7%,  South  Carolina-­‐  52.1%,  54.1%,  Florida-­‐  55%,  and  Mississippi-­‐  60.3%.    9  Other  factors  that  are  negatively  impacting  public  schools  today  are  federal  budget  cuts,  poverty,  outdated  facilities,  increasingly  negative  student  attitudes,  bullying,  too  little  or  too  much  parent  involvement,  and  student  health.    

  16  

decrease.  Among  thirty  developed  countries,  the  United  States  came  in  twenty-­‐first  

in  science  and  twenty-­‐fifth  in  math.  A  stunning  70%  of  eighth  graders  in  America  

cannot  read  proficiently,  and  the  majority  of  these  students  will  never  catch  up.  

Since  1990,  over  10  million  students  reached  the  12th  grade  without  basic  reading  

skills,  20  million  without  the  tests  college  ready  basic  math  skills,  and  25  million  

without  having  learned  the  essentials  of  history.  Scores  on  standardized  tests  such  

as  the  SAT  and  the  ACT  have  been  dropping  consistently  since  2005.  In  2010,  only  

24%  of  high  school  seniors  taking  the  ACT  met  the  tests  college-­‐ready  benchmark.  If  

the  statistical  trends  prevalent  in  American  education  continue,  America  will  not  

long  be  able  to  remain  a  global  competitor  in  the  increasingly  aggressive  global  

climate.  The  paramount  importance,  and  necessity,  of  extensive  educational  reform  

has  never  been  as  plainly  evident.    

The  history  of  American  educational  reform  is  inherent  to  the  history  of  the  

American  education  system.  Since  the  early  20th  century,  political  and  social  leaders  

have  advocated  the  need  for  changes  in  our  schools,  though  their  efforts  have  often  

proved  fruitless  in  terms  of  actual  student  improvement.    In  the  late  1990’s,  as  a  

result  of  A  Nation  at  Risk,  the  impetus  for  educational  reform  was  amplified  by  the  

widespread  perception  that  the  economical  hardships  the  country  faced,  where,  in  

part,  a  product  of  the  shortcomings  of  the  education  system  and  its  inability  to  

produce  competent  adults.  This  marks  the  true  birth  of  the  educational  reform  

movement,  the  ongoing  effort  to  find  a  fix  for  our  schools.  A  Nation  at  Risk  not  only  

outlined  the  problem,  but  also  proposed  a  series  of  measures  that  would  remedy  the  

situation.  The  recommendations  of  the  report  included  the  introduction  of  a  

  17  

standardized  curriculum  composed  of  five  specified  subjects,  heightened  academic  

rigor,  an  extended  school  year,  teacher  training,  and  increased  accountability  for  

student  performance.  Other  reports  soon  followed;  scholars,  legislators,  boards,  

forums,  and  organizations  all  had  input  regarding  the  tragic  state  of  America’s  

education  system  and  what  could  be  done  to  rectify  it.  In  response,  schools  adjusted  

their  curriculums  to  represent  broadened  academic  standards  and  graduation  

requirements  were  increased.  The  higher  standards  demonstrated  in  many  of  the  

nations  public  schools  led  to  a  reaffirmed  belief  in  America’s  public  schools;  

students  now  graduated  with  a  background  in  science,  math,  literature,  and  foreign  

language  and  advanced  placement  courses  where  introduced  so  that  students  could  

begin  earning  college  credits  before  graduating  from  high  school.    This  confidence,  

however,  was  short  lived.  As  these  new  “improvements”  were  instituted  all  over  the  

country,  it  became  clear  that  while  these  new  measures  benefited  a  number  of  

students,  the  majority  where  still  seeing  few  learning  gains.    Less  motivated  

students  where  put  into  watered-­‐down  courses  taught  by  teachers  with  little  or  no  

training  in  the  subject.  Many  students  ended  up  graduating  with  an  even  shallower  

education.    

The  call  for  educational  reform  was  heard  even  in  the  Whitehouse,  and  

President  George  Bush  responded  by  convening  the  National  Governors  Association  

for  an  education  summit  in  1989.  President  Bush  and  the  governors  established  a  

list  of  measureable  goals  for  education  reform  entitled  Goals  2000.  The  aim  of  these  

goals  was  to  improve  the  American  education  system  through  a  comprehensive  plan  

involving  teachers,  parents,  school  board  members,  local  administrators,  elected  

  18  

officials,  and  businesses.  In  1994,  President  Clinton  signed  into  Goals  2000  and  

contributed  an  additional  two  goals.  The  Goals  2000  is  considered  to  be  the  

precursor  to  President  George  W.  Bush’s  No  Child  Left  Behind  Act  of  2001.    

The  controversial  No  Child  Left  Behind  Act  was  a  revision  to  the  original  

Elementary  and  Secondary  Education  Act  of  1965,  which  was  enacted  to  assure  that  

federal  funds  distributed  to  states  went  to  insure  that  children  from  low-­‐income  

households  received  quality  education.  The  NCLB  is  based  on  the  premise  that  by  

setting  higher  standards  for  students  and  regularly  measuring  their  performance,  

individual  outcomes  in  education  could  be  improved  and  the  perceived  

“achievement  gap”  between  upper  and  middle  class  students  and  low  income,  

minority  students.  The  act  specified  that  states  must  institute  assessments  to  be  

given  to  students  at  select  grade  levels  in  order  to  receive  public  funding.  This  

strategy  met  harsh  criticisms.  Many  claim  standardized  testing  is  a  poor  way  of  

measuring  student  proficiency  because  oftentimes  students’  test  scores  do  not  

accurately  represent  their  knowledge,  and  instead  measure  test-­‐taking  ability.  In  

addition,  it  can  create  a  classroom  environment  that  is  completely  geared  towards  

achieving  good  scores  on  such  standardized  tests  and  thusly  compromise  the  actual  

material  covered.  Some  of  the  most  vehement  criticisms  concerning  NCLB  are  

targeted  at  the  funding  system  that  was  implemented  along  with  the  act.  When  

school  funding  is  based  on  test  performance,  it  adds  even  more  pressure  to  test  well.  

This  has  resulted  in  students  who  may  perform  badly,  such  developmentally  

disabled  and  English  as  a  Second  Language  students,  from  being  excluded  to  ensue  

better  scores.  Regardless  of  the  attempts  to  evade  cuts,  countless  school  districts  

  19  

suffered  decreased  budgets  and  were  unable  to  maintain  facilities  and  provide  

supplies.  Because  the  NCLB  only  set  accountability  standards  for  reading,  writing,  

and  mathematics,  in  some  cases,  programs  that  not  included  in  NCLB  were  cut  to  

accommodate  the  curtailed  budgets.  Since  2007,  nearly  71%  of  public  schools  have  

been  forced  to  eliminate  some  level  on  instruction  in  history,  language,  the  arts,  and  

music.  Insufficient  funding  has  also  served  to  deter  capable  teachers  from  entering  

the  public  schooling  system  due  to  lowered  salaries  because  of  lowered  salaries  and  

the  lack  of  basic  necessities.    

As  lawmakers  struggled  to  remedy  the  deteriorating  public  education  

system,  parents,  educators,  and  activists  began  to  search  elsewhere  for  quality  

education.  Homeschooling  became  a  popular  solution  for  those  dissatisfied  with  

public  schools;  by  the  mid  90’s  all  states  had  modified  compulsory  attendance  laws  

to  permit  home  instruction.  Homeschooling,  however,  was  largely  impractical  for  

working  class  families;  most  parents  lacked  the  time,  let  alone  the  knowledge,  to  

provide  a  complete  education  for  their  children.  In  the  mid  1970’s,  Ray  Budde10,  a  

professor  of  educational  administration  at  the  University  of  Massachusetts  came  up  

with  a  novel  idea;  one  that  seemingly  combined  the  advantages  of  both  private  

schools  and  public  schools  into  one  idyllic  educational  concept;  the  charter  school.                                                                                                                      10  Budde  was  fascinated  by  what  constituted  a  successful  or  failing  organization,  especially  in  the  realm  of  education.  In  1974  his  interests  led  him  to  write  a  paper  titled  “Education  by  Charter”.  When  he  presented  the  paper  to  his  colleagues,  they  generally  dismissed  the  idea  as  being  altogether  unnecessary.  However,  in  1983  came  the  highly  influential  and  ominous  report  on  American  education,  A  Nation  at  Risk.  Following  the  reports  appearance,  Budde  hastened  to  publish  his  charter  proposal.  His  idea  was  picked  up  and  supported  by  some  of  the  most  important  figures  in  the  education  world.        

  20  

 

Charter  Schools  

In  1988  Budde  published  a  paper  outlining  the  basic  structure  of  a  charter  

school.  The  idea  was  quickly  picked  up  and  championed  by  Albert  Shanker,  the  

president  of  the  American  Federation  of  Teachers.    The  first  charter  school  

legislation  was  passed  in  Minnesota  in  1991,  as  product  of  the  efforts  of  Democratic  

legislators  Sen.  Ember  Reichgott  and  Sen.  Becky  Kelso.  The  first  charter  school  was  

opened  the  following  year  in  Saint  Paul,  Minnesota.    By  1993  seven  more  states  had  

passed  charter  laws  and  the  charter  school  movement  was  picking  up  national  

momentum.    

What  exactly  is  a  charter  school?  Put  in  simplest  terms,  a  charter  school  is  an  

independently  run,  but  publicly  funded  educational  institution.  While  a  seemingly  

simple  concept,  political,  economical,  and  social  complications  have  made  charter  

schools  a  huge  controversy  in  the  world  of  educational  reform.    The  fundamental  

principle  of  a  charter  school  is  that,  though  receiving  money  from  the  government  to  

operate,  they  are  not  required  to  adhere  to  the  rules,  regulations,  and  statutes  that  

traditional  public  schools  are  indelibly  bound  to.  Instead,  charters  are  held  to  a  

higher  level  of  accountability  for  student  performance.  This  leaves  the  creators  of  

charter  schools  free  to  select  and  determine  their  own  focus,  environment,  

curriculum,  administration  and  procedure.  While  charter  schools  across  the  country  

vary  greatly,  they  share  the  same  key  characteristics:  legal  autonomy,  no  tuition,  and  

student  outcome  accountability.    

  21  

    Charter  schools  are  established  through  an  application  process  in  which  an  

individual  or  a  group  submits  a  comprehensive  proposal  to  the  state  or  another  

sanctioned  authorizer,  such  as  a  region  or  district.  If  approved,  a  charter  is  granted  

to  the  school  for  a  specified  number  of  years  and  it  receives  federal  funding.  Instead  

of  compliance  to  education  regulations,  charter  schools  are  held  responsible  for  

producing  results  consistent  with  the  objectives  outlined  in  the  application  process.  

In  order  for  a  charter  to  be  granted,  the  applicant  must  provide  an  incredibly  

detailed  description  of  the  proposed  curriculum  as  well  as  the  intended  

administrative  approach.  They  must  specify  which  subjects  will  be  taught,  how  

students  will  be  assessed  and  how  disciplinary  actions  will  be  executed;  they  also  

must  have  a  list  of  reputable  board  members  and  thoroughly  outline  the  goals  of  the  

proposed  charter.  Once  a  charter  is  granted,  there  are  regular  visits  and  reports  

conducted  by  the  state  to  assure  that  the  charter  has  upheld  the  provisions  in  the  

original  charter  and  is  making  satisfactory  progress  towards  their  goals.  If  at  any  

time  the  entity  that  granted  the  charter  feels  that  the  school  is  not  meeting  

requirements,  performing  sufficiently,  or  not  abiding  by  the  charter,  the  school  may  

be  shut  down  immediately.    

  The  actual  success  of  the  charter  school  movement  has  been  difficult  to  

measure.  Because  charter  schools  can  adopt  virtually  any  educational  method,  

comparing  respective  school  results  is  often  akin  to  apples  and  oranges.  Both  

advocates  and  critics  have  sited  rates  of  charter  success  to  emphasize  their  opinion.  

With  a  plentitude  of  both  successful  and  failed  charters,  national  charter  school  data  

paints  an  inaccurate  picture  of  how  charter  schools  have  impacted  the  education  

  22  

system  in  America.  In  an  expansive  analytical  study  conducted  by  Stanford  

University’s  Center  for  Educational  Outcomes,  it  was  concluded  that  more  than  half  

of  America’s  charter  schools  provide  learning  opportunities  no  better  than  their  

traditional  public  school  counterpart.  Seventeen  percent  of  charter  schools  showed  

significantly  better  results,  while  the  remaining  37  percent  provide  results  poorer  

than  that  of  a  public  school.  As  a  movement  initiated  to  offer  better  alternatives  to  

public  school,  this  data  points  to  an  unmitigated  failure.  However,  this  is  not  exactly  

the  case.  While  some  charter  schools,  often  operated  for  the  wrong  reasons,  have  

not  supplied  students  with  a  superior  education,  others  have  seen  results  beyond  

anyone’s  expectations.    

As  the  charter  school  movement  has  grown,  issues  unforeseen  by  the  

architects  of  the  charter  concept  began  to  emerge,  leading  to  much  contention.  One  

of  the  first  questions  raised  with  the  growing  popularity  and  numbers  of  charters  

was  posed  by  state  legislators;  does  there  need  to  be  a  limit  to  charter  school  

growth?  The  result  was  the  introduction  of  “caps”  to  the  charter  school  system  in  

1995.  Caps  are  upper  limits  placed  on  the  number  of  charter  schools  that  may  open  

in  a  state.  Today,  26  states  have  caps  that  restrict  the  number  of  new  charters  

permitted  to  open.  The  discussion  of  whether  or  not  these  caps  prevent  the  opening  

of  high  quality  schools  and  if  they  should  be  lifted  continues  to  plague  both  charter  

advocates  and  critics  today.    

While  policy  challenges  have  been  central  in  the  charter  school  debate,  it  is  

the  matter  of  funding  that  has  lead  to  the  most  vehement  criticisms  and  disputes  of  

the  charter  school.  When  the  charter  school  movement  was  asserted  as  a  prevalent  

  23  

mode  of  educational  reform,  concerns  arose  regarding  charters  potentially  taking  

resources  that  otherwise  would  have  gone  to  traditional  public  schools.  Charter  

advocates  responded  to  these  concerns  by  pointing  out  that,  in  fact,  charter  schools  

do  not  leave  public  schools  underfunded.  In  most  states,  the  tax  dollars  follow  the  

child,  if  a  child  decides  to  attend  a  charter  school  instead  of  their  local  public  school,  

the  state  money  allotted  to  that  child  would  go  the  charter  school  as  well.  So,  while  

the  opening  of  a  charter  school  may  result  in  a  nearby  public  school  receiving  less  

funding,  the  amount  is  negligible,  as  it’s  proportionate  to  the  number  of  students  

attending  each  respective  school.  In  actuality,  charter  schools  receive  up  to  78%  less  

per  student  that  a  traditional  public  school,  and  are  rarely  able  to  operate  on  state  

money  alone;  they  often  must  look  to  private  organizations  for  additional  funds.    

Unfortunately,  this  need  for  outside  funding  has  contaminated  the  idealistic  

principles  of  a  charter.  Oftentimes,  a  charter  schools  success  is  based  not  on  the  

innovative  teaching  strategies  they  may  employ,  but  on  the  connections  they  have  to  

wealthy  organizations,  charities,  and  philanthropists.  This  has  led  to  an  element  of  

charter  schools  that  completely  defies  the  original  objective  of  the  charter  school  

movement,  the  operation  of  for-­‐profit  charters.  While  some  saw  charter  schools  as  a  

plausible  means  to  fix  a  broken  system,  others  saw  it  as  a  potential  business  

opportunity.    

Organizations  and  politicians  have  leapt  at  the  charter  school  concept  as  a  

catalyst  to  further  the  privatization  agenda.  A  movement  that  started  out  as  a  liberal  

idea  to  better  schools  has  become  a  justification  for  conservatives  who  advocate  the  

privatization  of  education.  The  original  charter  school  concept  has  been  warped  to  

  24  

create  institutions  that  serve  students  even  less  than  many  public  schools.  There  

have  been  numerous  charter  school  scandals  involving  school  officials  receiving  

disproportionately  large  salaries,  while  teachers,  unprotected  by  unions,  remain  

severely  underpaid.  In  addition,  several  charter  school  founders  have  been  indicted  

with  embezzlement  of  taxpayer  funds.    Charter  schools  were  able  to  become  a  

reality  through  the  efforts  of  democratic  lawmakers,  however  in  recent  years  the  

movement  has  seen  steadily  growing  partisan  support  from  Republicans.  Today,  

more  and  more  democrats  oppose  charter  schools,  as  all  the  implications  of  

independently  run,  government  funded  schools  become  clear.    

The  significance  of  education  as  a  relevant  national  topic  is  commonly  

trivialized,  but  in  truth  the  future  of  this  country  depends  it.  These  undereducated  

children  will  grow  up  to  constitute  the  voters  and  leaders  of  America.    To  retain  

international  influence,  it  is  essential  that  the  American  populations  of  the  future  

are  intelligent,  competent  global  citizens;  at  this  rate,  we  will  be  lucky  if  they  can  

read  at  a  basic  level.  Speculating  about  a  national  education  system  constituted  of  

exclusively  public  schools  or  charter  schools  does  not  present  a  feasible  resolution  

to  the  ineptness  of  our  current  program.  In  each,  there  are  illustrative  examples  of  

abysmal  failures.  Similarly,  there  are  both  public  schools  and  charters  that  have  met  

with  remarkable  success,  these,  unfortunately  are  the  exceptions.  Most  schools  in  

America  hover  somewhere  around  mediocre.    

 

 

 

  25  

 

 

The  Solution    

This  presents  the  question,  if  neither  public  nor  charter,  then  what?  The  

answer  is  overwhelmingly  simple,  both.  Both  charter  schools  and  public  schools  

exhibit  characteristics  that  are  vital  to  success.  Public  schools  receive  the  majority  of  

state  education  funding  and  are  typically  able  to  operate  on  the  tax  dollars  they  

receive;  charters  meanwhile,  have  a  generally  smaller  student  body  and  insufficient  

public  funding,  creating  the  necessity  to  look  to  outside  sources  for  funding.    Charter  

schools  are  not  held  to  a  standardized  curriculum  and  are  therefore  free  to  develop  

innovative,  and  oftentimes  more  effective,  teaching  methods  whereas  public  schools  

must  teach  and  be  assessed  on  a  specific  curriculum.  In  order  for  the  system  to  

function,  public  schools  need  to  put  aside  their  resentment  of  charter  schools  and  

acknowledge  that,  oftentimes,  their  strategies  for  raising  student  achievement  

actually  do  work.  Similarly,  the  charter  needs  to  distance  itself  from  the  corporate  

corruption  that  is  taking  over  the  movement  and  that  has  no  place  in  education.  

Ideally,  charter  schools  and  public  schools  would  abandon  their  mutual  hostility  and  

cooperate  together  to  create  an  optimally  beneficial  approach  to  education;  one  that  

focused  on  less  on  the  system  and  more  on  the  student.    

This  utopian  collaboration  may  seem  impossible,  but  its  not,  in  fact,  it  has  

already  been  done.  Located  in  Central  Falls  Rhode  Island,  The  Learning  Community  

Charter  School  has  been  working  with  local  public  schools  to  share  the  successful  

reading  techniques  they  have  developed  and  raise  students  reading  level  

  26  

throughout  the  community.  The  Learning  Community  opened  in  2004  with  the  goal  

of  proving  that  poverty  does  not  need  to  stand  in  the  way  of  success  (Central  Falls  in  

the  poorest  community  in  Rhode  Island),  and  since  has  catered  to  the  towns  most  

impoverished  students.  The  school  has  been  remarkably  successful,  especially  in  the  

realm  of  reading.  In  low  income,  minority  areas,  reading  is  often  neglected  because  

the  students  are  simply  too  far  behind  to  begin  with.  The  learning  community  

developed  a  unique  and  intensive  reading  initiative  that  has  significantly  raised  

their  student’s  scores.  After  achieving  such  gratifying  results,  teachers  at  the  

learning  community  approached  their  public  schools  peers.  Because  of  the  generally  

well-­‐established  animosity  between  public  schools  and  charters,  they  extended  the  

olive  branch  somewhat  apprehensively  and  were  astounded  at  the  welcome  they  

received.  Teachers  from  both  schools  have  been  working  together  in  the  classroom  

to  share  methods  and  techniques.  In  the  words  of  Meg  O’Leary,  co-­‐founder  of  the  

school,  “  If  other  independent  charter  schools  like  ours  thought  about  what  they  are  

ready  to  share  and  connected  with  their  local  school  districts  and  communities  to  do  

similar  work,  there  would  be  an  unbelievable  change  in  this  country.”    

Looking  at  education  in  America  as  a  single  entity  that  can  be  described  by  

statistics  and  scientific  studies  is  an  inherently  defective  method.  Many  interested  in  

education  get  caught  up  in  just  this  sort  of  analysis,  looking  at  the  numbers  and  

claiming  that  they  present  a  definitive  view.  But  adhering  to  this  practice  implies  a  

uniformity  that  does  not  exist  within  American  education.  The  variance  from  school  

to  school  within  a  state  can  be  huge,  and  the  variance  from  state  to  state,  where  

differing  legislation  comes  in,  is  even  more  pronounced.  Numbers  are  objective,  and  

  27  

the  success  or  failure  of  a  school  is  subjective;  it  becomes  an  apples  to  oranges  

situation.  In  examining  education  on  a  national  level,  statistics  are  a  superficial  

means  of  extrapolating  a  conclusion;  instead  we  must  look  to  actual  schools  

individually  and  from  there  analyze  what  has  met  with  success  and  what  with  

failure.      

Public-­‐charter  partnerships  have  been  suggested  in  the  past  as  a  lifeline  for  

the  controversial  charter  school  movement,  but  in  reality,  collaboration  would  serve  

not  simply  to  support  charter  schools  but  also  reinvigorate  public  schools  that  

continue  to  employ  outdated,  ineffective  teaching  methods  and  incompetent  

teachers.  Examples  such  as  The  Learning  Community  provide  tangible  evidence  that  

this  can  succeed  and  lead  to  educational  excellence.  If  America’s  existing  education  

system  is  to  survive,  this  collaboration  is  key;  educational  reformers  will  neither  

give  up,  nor  move  on,  and  if  progress  continues  to  come  so  haltingly,  eventually  they  

cease  attempts  of  improvement  and  will  abandon  the  system  completely,  looking  

instead  to  replacement.  America  does  not  have  time  for  that.  The  imperfections  of  

both  the  public  education  system  and  the  charter  school  movement  have  been  the  

topic  of  much  controversy;  but  the  reality  is  that  while  politicians,  educators,  and  

organizations  debate  over  which  one  has  failed  American  children  more,  American  

children  continue  to  fail.  Everyday  millions  of  children  are  going  to  school,  whether  

public  or  charter,  and  receiving  a  substandard  education  that  does  not  prepare  them  

for  college  and  does  not  prepare  them  for  a  career.  A  system  built  upon  the  

cooperation  of  both  public  schools  and  charter  schools  is  an  attainable  reality;  but  

first  the  adults  that  control  our  schools  need  to  stop  clinging  to  tradition,  need  to  

  28  

put  away  their  opportunistic  agendas  and  their  bias,  because  this  isn’t  about  the  

adults,  this  is  about  children.