Gated Schools for Gated Communities?

By Howard Rothman, 8-29-05

My oldest friend is a teacher in Aurora Public Schools, and I'm sure that he and his colleagues can't be too pleased with a story in Sunday's Denver Post that details how a number of area developers are proposing a new district of their own to attract upscale homebuyers who love the area but hate its schools. As a product of public schools who sent two kids through public schools and, despite all that, still believes in public schools, this idea worries me. A lot.

The piece by Allison Sherry, "Schools as Drawing Card," tells how these developers -- who own thousands of acres east of E-470 -- view this direction as strictly a business decision designed to increase the attraction and value of their property. Aurora school officials, the article notes, are aware of the idea but not involved in discussions with the developers.

What’s wrong with this picture?

Public schools are under assault all across the country. This is nothing new. In many cases, much of the fault for this can be laid directly at their feet. This isn't new, either. And I'll concede that some schools truly are horrendous, with virtually no realistic hope for recovery. But rather than coming up with innovative ideas that might help fix the problems -- or going the other way and having the guts to say the whole concept is irreparably broken and should be scrapped from the ground up -- too many people seem ready to chip away at the edges in the name of freedom and progress. The problem is, as that happens what ultimately is left might not be worth saving.

The rapid spread of charter schools in recent years is hastening this decline, both in ways intended and otherwise. I'm all for the concept, in concept. But it seems to me that since these schools have been officially sanctioned and formally institutionalized they've gone from being an alternative that could help drive all existing schools higher in the name of competition to an alternative that generally benefits only a frighteningly small number of families with above-average access and resources. And as a result ironically leaves the rest of the student population to fend for itself in schools that increasingly do not make the (No Child Left Behind) grade.

Now, some homebuilders who don't care for the school district where they happen to own land want to pull all of their future buyers out. And the school administrators who have undoubtedly been counting for years on these future buyers' future students -- and the per-pupil stipends that eventually would accompany them -- are scrambling (belatedly, it seems to me) to mitigate the implications.

Creating an actual "charter district" may not be feasible. But the idea, possibly introduced as a series of charter schools covering all age groups in a particular community, probably won't go away. Then, what happens when the homeowners in a showcase new Denver development (like Stapleton or Lowry) decide that Denver Public Schools simply aren't good enough -- and all of their children, en masse, will henceforth be going elsewhere? What happens when a handful of existing neighborhoods in Boulder or Fort Collins with top-performing, motivated children decide likewise? Think the public schools that remain around there would remain around there for much longer? I don't see how they could.

Perhaps public schools are from a different era and do no longer meet the needs of our society. Then convince me of that, tell me what will replace them -- for everyone -- and completely tear down the existing system and be done with it posthaste in the name of progress and freedom. If you can't do that, figure out ways to really make the system better without perpetually screwing the people who can least afford to be screwed. This chipping away nonsense just ticks me off. And so does the apparent inability of those in charge to do much to stop it.
[End of article]