Opportunity School District Opponents Are Serving Themselves Not Our Kids
In 47 days, Georgians will vote on the Opportunity School District (OSD) amendment. Put another way, Georgians will vote whether or not to force kids to stay in chronically failing schools. Anti-OSD forces dropped a television ad with the same old arguments used for years to scare people into submission. It’s, quite frankly, shameful.
It seems curious that the opposition is focused more on adult problems than the simple fact that any school that is put under state control has to be failing for three straight years. This is about the education establishment protecting their turf, jobs, and hierarchy while students are being robbed of opportunity and economic mobility because of where their parents can afford to live.
For every person screaming “but local control!,” where is the local accountability? Why are you content with sending your tax dollars to schools that continue to fail the same kids, year after year? And despite these failing schools getting at least two types of additional grants on top of state funding (Race to the Top and SIG), they continue to do nothing and scream “even more money!”
Arguments used by opponents ignore basic facts. Some of their arguments, I’d say, are downright lies. They argue OSD is an aggressive state takeover of public schools, but that couldn’t be further from the truth. OSD is providing accountability where none exists. OSD is our state declaring that failing schools are unacceptable.
OSD is our state telling kids stuck in poor schools that we care about their future.
In an op-ed written by Senator Elena Parent, a vocal opponent of OSD, she notes that the amendment fails to address other factors impacting students. That’s exactly why we need OSD: Local accountability is nearly nonexistent.
At the end of the day, anti-Opportunity School District forces seek to keep thousands of kids in failing schools, to protect the education establishment, and to reinforce the education hierarchy. For them, it’s not about kids stuck in failing schools for reasons entirely out of their control. That’s a problem.
About Author
Will Kremer
Will is an active member of the Georgia Republican grassroots. He previously served as Chairman of the Georgia Association of College Republicans, 2nd Vice Chairman of the 7th District Republican Party, and Treasurer of the Forsyth County Republican Party. Promise Land = Forsyth County.
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
i saw the ad, and it has a claim in it that the OSD would, to paraphrase, remove or diminish funding to districts. is the basis of this claim that the new OSD would need its own funding, and thus reduce the QBE grants to districts proportionately, or is it that the powers granted under the OSD would allow such a reduction? because imo, the win-win would be if the OSD provided a practical and likely mechanism to increase funding to failing districts.
Well said Will Kremer. Throwing more money at the problem certainly isn’t the answer. Using the old union playbook (oh wait they are called associations) of fear and the claim of under-funding isn’t going to work. Thanks to Governor Deal and the legislature for trying a different approach and putting Georgia’s kids first.
Thanks to Governor Deal for nothing. He’s starved our schools, slashed funding and done everything he could to cause failures, especially in the inner city schools. His budget constrictions have caused over-crowded classrooms across the state, teacher layoffs, slashed health insurance benefits for all teachers & forced custodian outsourcing. His has created a CCRT and CRPPI testing system to judge failing schools via a flawed testing method that has been thrown out completely or changed to fit his needs every year since it’s inception to ensure that he had a fat list of schools to hand over to his ALEC-friendly, Michelle Rhee for-profit organizations. Like StudentsFirst, American Federation for Children, CharterUSA that have ALL been donating to him, Brooks Coleman (his Education Committee Chairman), dozens of other senators and house reps, and PACS like the “Georgia Republican Party Committee”, “Georgia House Republic Trust” for several years. They also flew him, his OSD architect Erin Hames and the rest of his crew to Louisiana on private jets to see how he could pull it off here in Georgia. Why does he need to make it an amendment to the Georgia Constitution? He doesn’t. BUT, that will seal his corporate for-profit buddies plenty of profits for YEARS to come. Read the actual amendment verbage end-to-end. There’s one thing glaringly missing. That is HOW this will benefit the students. All it talks to is how they all will split up the tax-payer money that they will have a windfall of if this passes. His ads tout more “community involvement”. That is an outright lie. It removes all input from parents, administrations, districts and Boards of Education. It gives ALL power to whomever Deal picks as his OSD czar and removes all power from the recently elected State School Superintendent and the State Board of Education. There is ONE motivation only for Amendment 1 and “Opportunity School District”: to allow out of state for-profit charters to gain control of the facilities AND hundreds of millions of tax dollars funding those schools – OUR tax dollars – to do with what they please with NO accountability to US – the taxpayers. They will operate these schools to make a PROFIT, not a difference in the lives of those school children. It is political and corporate greed at it’s worst and it must not be allowed to happen.
I like to start out with new folks by saying something positive. You’ve mastered ALL CAPS for effect. It almost masks your complete lack of paragraph composition.
It’s been a while since I’ve had to deal with issue shills around here. While I’m used to it, what I find tiresome is someone that posts hyperbole mixed with outright lies while calling someone else’s ethics and motivation into question.
I’ll return when I have time to deconstruct the “substance” of your argument. With that said, a warning: You’re welcome to have a debate here. You’re not welcome to commit libel, nor spread completely provably false information.
I’m going to suggest you think long and hard before your next comment. I appreciate a good debate. What you’ve offered falls far short of that.
Charlie – I guess I’m a rookie here. And obviously you are not. I was unaware this was your sandbox. I’m not debating you. I stated my opinion about how I feel that our public education system has been treated by The Gold Dome in recent years. I live with a teacher, I’ve experienced it firsthand. As for the contribution figures, they are straight off of http://www.followthemoney.com. If indeed they are inaccurate, I cannot offer an excuse for that. I was simply stating the facts as I read them. And I don’t like what I have read. As well, please save the language arts critique of my run-on’s, etc. This isn’t a term paper, just Freedom of Speech….you know, 1st Amendment. How ironic to me that OSD is Amendment 1.
David, this isn’t my sandbox, this is my publication. As such, I’m ultimately responsible when people decide that they can come here and commit libel on others. You’ve taken a few “facts” as you see them and added provably untrue allegations. As such, you have opened this up to more than beyond the usual political commenting.
We’re going to break this down one at a time, and I caution you in advance that your ability to remain here is dependent on answering only the specific questions as they are asked.
Let’s start with the claim of “They also flew him, his OSD architect Erin Hames and the rest of his crew to Louisiana on private jets to see how he could pull it off here in Georgia.” When did this happen, and what is your source? Be specific. (Hint, I was on one of these trips.)
I’m not a fan of the OSD. However; If you want to further your cause, try using reason instead of actuations.
Let me give you an example of where your actuations is not doing you any favors. Classroom sizing is based on the number and sizes of a room that holds a class or by not having enough teachers.
State law enforced by the DOE, and predating Gov. Deal ,Purdue and Barnes set min. students per classroom. Local Board of Educations control the physical property where a classroom is located. They are assisted by the BOE in inventorying and assigning classroom viability on a facility to facility bases after a on site inspection of the school building, which last I checked in 2012 totaled over 1200 structures under Title II funding control (if you don’t know what Title II funding is, please stop reading now and go waste other peoples time). If a classroom is over crowded it is because a local school system has not expanded it facility inventory (AKA building more classrooms or using portable classrooms until they do) or hired a teacher to full the classrooms legal instruction unit.
Funding teacher pay is the direct responsibility of the local district. They set the final rate of pay, and the contract. If the lack a teacher is due budgeting, it is the local system’s responsibility to fund the complete payroll using both state funding and local property tax collections. It is extremely difficult to get a variance for over crowded classroom because your system didn’t want to fund payroll.
Funding for classroom additions is thru a number of funding sources. Example, property tax collect, ESPLOST, Title I grants, and state DOE direct funding. The direct funding is made only in extreme cases in counties which collect small amounts of property tax and have small ESPLOT return opportunities. They are added as a line item to the education budget by either the DOE or the district house rep. to be used juts for the school or classroom units stated in the DOE budge to achieve a specified FTE load for stated school. To my knowledge, the majority of them are in rural school systems and do not cover the whole cost of funding the faculties or classroom additions. In cases where a local BOE can not meet the required classroom size by grade, they can ask for a variance for 1 school year at a time for each grade.
Either way, the Governor has little to no involvement in classroom over crowding choices.
You left out Common Core and Agenda 21. You lost me by stating that career educator and 24-year legislator Brooks Coleman is “his [Gov. Deal’s] Education Committee Chairman”. I know Brooks and he would only do what he feels is best for kids. He is one of the few politicians I can personally vouch for as in it for the right reasons. Thank you for helping me decide to vote yes on Amendment 1.
Well, he is Gov Deal’s “Education Committee Chairman”. See: http://www.house.ga.gov/Committees/en-US/Committee.aspx?Committee=102&Session=24 .
And Mr Coleman has taken money from American Federation For Children ($3000)…. and StudentsFirst, who were his 4th highest non-individual donor @ $7000. Vote yes, that’s your right. My guess is he will too.
Michael J. Dudgeon is Vice-Chairman under Brooks Coleman on the Education Committee. Mr Dudgeon’s #1 non-individual contributor is American Federation for Children (directly tied with StudentsFirst) at $4500. StudentFirst came in 4th at $2000. #FollowTheMoney
My default position with any constitutional amendment is NO unless I’m really convinced it’s a good thing – particularly since the actual text of the amendment is never on the ballot. I’ve just started researching this OSD proposal, and I have some questions for those who know a lot more about this than I do:
1) What was the thinking behind creating a new state-level agency rather than allowing the existing State Board of Education to run the OSD?
2) SB 133, the enabling legislation for the OSD, repeals Code Section 20-14-41, which seems to give the State Board of Education the ability to intervene in failing schools, including the withholding of state funds after a few years of non-compliance. Was this authority ever used? Were the results good, bad, or mixed? What are the main differences between this existing form of intervention and the OSD proposal, and why will OSD succeed where I presume the State Board intervention failed?
3) The proposed amendment allows “…the state to assume the supervision, management, and operation of public elementary and secondary schools which have been determined to be failing through any governance model allowed by law.” I suppose the enabling legislation SB 133 effectively defines the “governance model allowed by law”. So if the amendment is adopted, could the General Assembly later change the definition of failing to include more schools or to target specific schools? Could they do so for reasons other than academics? Like say, define failing to include schools that adopt (or refuse to adopt) transgender friendly policies?
4) The proposed amendment gives “…the power to receive, control, and expend state, federal, and local funds appropriated for schools under the current or prior supervision, management, or operation of the Opportunity School District…” Does this mean that that the state can continue to fiscally manage a school’s funds even after it has left the OSD?
I’d appreciate any insights you may have.
I agree that the default position on any state constitutional amendment is no. Ballot language below:
“Provides greater flexibility and state accountability to fix failing schools through increasing community involvement.
Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended to allow the state to intervene in chronically failing public schools in order to improve student performance?”
Consider the amendment has nothing to do with community involvement yet that what’s cited by the preamble in forming your opinion.
thank you for citing some actual language. this also raised a heretofore unanswered question for me: how would a school get out of the OSD? Suppose there is state intervention in a school, and lo and behold, three years later its performance metrics rise to where it otherwise would not have been in the OSD. What happens then? Will the local BOE get another chance? Will the private contractor get to stay indefinitely? Is there a decision procedure laid out for transition out of the OSD at all?
These are similar to my questions. Unfortunately, I haven’y had time to research these yet for answers.
– So presumably the OSD would make teacher/administrative changes in schools? Where/how will they find the different teachers and administrators? What is the hiring process? Same contract as everybody else or something special?
– If the teachers and administrators are the problem (it’s the only significant difference between systems isn’t it? Everyone is teaching essentially the same curriculum) isn’t the problem really with the local school boards? Don’t they do the hiring? So what happens when an OSD school goes back into the regular system? If we haven’t fixed the issue with the school board, we’ve only managed a temporary fix.
– It really looks and smells like another path to get for-profit charters in place (but I may be wrong), which sends up red flags for me.
I have some reservations as well, given that the Senate turned aside a series of floor amendments (including appeals process for the schools, a limit on the number of schools that could be added to the district, and a ban on for-profit operators) that would have made the amendment better.
Ditto– I’m completely on the fence about this, and commentary that tries to go deeper than ideology or “it’s better than what we’ve been doing” are hard to come by.
And I’ll add that in some way, “throwing money at the problem” is exactly the solution, since average household income in a district is a very reliable predictor of the quality of the local public schools. That might not mean increased spending on teachers and facilities will fix a failing school, but the effect cannot be dismissed out of hand.
The problem is we have thrown money at these schools. It has been done in the form of SIG grants and race to the top funds. Whether that money makes it to the schools in question or is divided up among an entire district, stays in administration, whatever, is somewhat up to the local district on how the money is actually spent.
I again go back to the districts that have the most failing schools – DeKalb, Chatham, and City of Atlanta – that each issued press releases last July showing amazing new initiatives for their failing schools and included in each of their press releases that the initiatives demonstrated why OSD isn’t needed. The problem was, each of these schools had been failing for years. But the initiatives were only undertaken once OSD passed the general assembly.
Anyone care to bet whether or not these initiatives that prove OSD isn’t needed would have been undertaken had OSD not been put on the ballot?
Chatham’s issue is they migrate students. They create magnets, art academies, charters, career academies, whatever. So they audition to these specialty schools which have grade and behavior requirements. Other students were moved by the NCLB allowances to leave a failing school. Meanwhile the children from three relatively close facilities who didn’t get into the specialty schools end up forced into just one building so the other two schools (the ones that were in worse shape then that lone school they keep open) are converted into the new magnet, academy, charter whatever. The high test scorers are gone, the strong parent support people moved their child and the children who most likely need the most help are now in one “neighborhood” school. One such school had 3 people shot and killed with in view of the campus ground in the last 16 days.
I realize that this is a blog- so there really are no rules, but I find it troubling this is clearly one writer’s opinion, but it is presented in the exact same way as all the other pieces of actual reporting (or summaries of reports). I might be off base with the purpose of this site, but if the intention is to share local and state news, than i believe it is a matter of journalistic integrity that you tell readers that what they are about to read is an opinion and not actual news coverage.
I’m sorry that people posting under their own names with opinions bothers someone who wants to question other people’s integrity under a psudonuym. As for the disclaimer you seek, perhaps you could spend a few minutes looking around the site, maybe even at that tab on the top left where is says “welcome”. If you click that, you’ll find this:
“As is customary with new media, articles may not be as clearly defined within those rigid categories. As such, we will not pretend that our authors do not have biases or agendas. Rather, we believe the true honest debate is one where these biases are worn on our sleeves.”
If you’re looking for an echo chamber where you only have to read things you agree with or are otherwise given a trigger warning, you’ve come to the wrong place.
I was hoping for some answers to Jared’s questions from Will or Charlie but I guess they’re too busy. Maybe they could request one of the governor’s men to fill in.
They’re more detailed than info I have in my head. I’ve sent off some emails. My main subject matter expert is at a conference/unavailable.
suggestion that you make the responses to the questions posed by Jared a new post or bump this post somehow so it doesnt get buried?
looking forward to the answers! Thanks Charlie.
Thanks Charlie and I second Lea’s suggestion.