Standing Up For Our Public Schools

Summary

The LAUSD Board's recent shift towards a pro-charter majority, influenced by significant charter industry spending, raises concerns about the prioritization of charter schools over public schools, particularly in terms of accountability, resource allocation, and representation of students' diverse needs.

Abstract

In recent years, the LAUSD Board has renewed the majority of charter schools while denying a small fraction, leading the charter industry to view the Board as hostile. Consequently, the industry invested heavily in School Board elections to secure a pro-charter majority. This has implications for charter school oversight, as schools like Celerity and Magnolia, with histories of FBI raids and academic underperformance, are poised to face less scrutiny for their use of public funds. Public school students, who are the majority, are underrepresented at Board meetings and lack a strong organizational voice, while charters receive preferential treatment and continue to expand without adequately serving all students. The Northridge East Neighborhood Council has called for greater accountability from Granada Hills Charter High School, which appears to enroll fewer students with additional needs compared to nearby Northridge Academy High School. The broader issue is the need for a cohesive, city-wide organization to advocate for public education and counteract forces seeking to dismantle it for personal gain.

Opinions

The author suggests that the LAUSD Board has been unduly influenced by the charter industry's political spending, which has resulted in a shift towards a pro-charter stance.
There is a perception that charter schools, despite receiving public funds, are not held to the same standards of transparency and accountability as public schools.
The author implies that charter schools are not serving the needs of all students, particularly those with special educational needs, English learners, homeless students, and those from lower-income backgrounds.
The author believes that public school students are not adequately represented at Board meetings and lack an organized voice to advocate for their interests.
The author points out a specific case where Granada Hills Charter High School is not pulling its weight in educating students with additional needs compared to Northridge Academy High School, and suggests this is indicative of a broader issue with charter schools.
The author argues for the need of an organization that can unite the diverse needs of different student groups across the large geographic area covered by the LAUSD to effectively advocate for public education.

Standing Up For Our Public Schools

“Charters are publicly funded but privately managed and, like most privately run businesses, the schools prefer to avoid transparency in their operations.”

- Bobbi Murray / Capital and Main

In the past five years, the LAUSD Board had denied nine charter renewals while renewing at least 162. The charter industry, therefore, considered the Board to be hostile towards charters and spent $9,695,351.00 on the last School Board election, purchasing seats for Board Members who will do their bidding. Now, with a majority secured, charters like Celerity (whose offices have been raided by the FBI) and Magnolia (which according to the California Charter School Association, operates academically inferior schools) can be assured that the pro-charter majority on the Board will see that these privately run schools are not held accountable at all for the public funds that they receive.

The outsized influence of the charter industry goes beyond the election cycle. Despite the fact that the majority of students enrolled within the LAUSD attend public schools, it is the charters that receive preferential treatment at Board meetings. Parents, teachers, and students are regularly bussed in (during school hours) in an attempt to sway the Board to ignore the various allegations against them. Unfortunately, no such organization exists to represent LAUSD public school students and so their voices are often left unheard. The number of charters continues to expand, without serving the needs of all students; fraud continues to go unpunished and the District forces public school students to give up needed space.

With an incoming School Board that is set to represent the minority of students enrolled in charters, public school students will need other representatives to ensure that their needs are met. The Northridge East Neighborhood Council (NENC), of which I am an elected member and serve as the Chairperson of the Education Committee, provides an example of the type of oversight that should exist. At the May meeting, with a unanimous vote, the Council passed the following resolution proposed by the Education Committee:

“The NENC express concern with the following discrepancies in demographics between Granada Hills Charter High School (GHCHS) and Northridge Academy High School (NAHS): Special Education (2012–13) GHCHS 6%, NAHS 14%; English Learners (2012–13) GHCHS 3%, NAHS 8%; Homeless Students (2015–16) GHCHS 0, NAHS 7; Free and Reduced Price Lunch (2012–13) GHCHS 49%, NAHS 65%. We ask that the LAUSD report on what steps the Charter School Division has taken to ensure that GHCHS is properly following the rules governing enrollment.”

This resolution was the result of many months of discussions by the Education Committee about the effects of GHCHS, which bills itself as the largest charter in the country, on NAHS, which is located within the boundaries of the NENC. In reviewing the demographics of the two schools, it became clear that NAHS was shouldering a larger share of the responsibility for educating students with additional needs than the charter, only 1.7 miles up the road. This included those with special educational needs, English learners, homeless students and those receiving free and reduced-price lunch. Since resources are diverted to ensure that the additional needs of these students are met, the entire student body is affected. It is, therefore, imperative to compel GHCHS to do more to meet its obligation to serve all students in return for the public funding that it receives. It was the conclusion of the Education Committee that this must start by reviewing GHCHS’ enrollment policies.

While the Neighborhood Council system has the unique ability to oversee individual schools throughout the city, this is not enough. The District covers 720 square miles and needs an organization to help bring cohesiveness to the disparate needs of different student groups. By speaking with one voice, advocates for public education can start to counteract those who would disband our education system for their own benefit.

Carl Petersen is a parent and special education advocate and was a Green Party candidate in LAUSD’s District 2 School Board race. He was endorsed by Network for Public Education (NPE) Action and Dr. Diane Ravitch called him a “strong supporter of public schools.” His past blogs can be found at www.ChangeTheLAUSD.com.