There has been a good deal of discussion over charter schools, some of it coming from public school officials upset over the way charter schools are funded. A simple example shows why they are upset.
Suppose you are the principal of a K-8 elementary school with two classes per grade and 25 students per class. What do you do if 30 of your students decide to enroll in charter schools?
In the very unlikely event that 25 or so are all in the same grade, you could lay off a teacher and save a teacher’s salary. (Of course support staff couldn’t be cut, since they are needed by the remaining students). More likely, you would lose three or four kids per grade and be unable to lay off anyone, resulting in zero savings.
But you would be required to pay the “tuition” cost at the charter school – typically $10,000- $15,000 per student per year, which adds up to $300,000 -$450,000 per year lost from your budget.
So what do you do? Probably cut art, music and physical education staff, to the detriment of the students who remain. To make matters worse, it is likely you also lost some of your most engaged parents – the kind who opt for charter schools.
Doesn’t sound fair, does it?
A better way would be to pay all charter school costs out of the Commonwealth’s budget. That would avoid unfairly burdening local public schools. It might mean we would have to pay a few more dollars per year in taxes, but it would spread the pain more equally. It would be worth it to save our public schools from being starved into mediocrity.
Meanwhile, until the funding becomes more fair, I am going to vote against expanding the charter school program. I encourage readers to join me.
Jim Harvey
Hadley