Andy Smarick is clearly disappointed with the op-ed we authored in the Washington Post. We argued that, for many reasons, the rough balance we have in Washington, D.C. between charter schools and traditional public schools is serving our children well.
We don’t want to debate Andy’s points one by one. Nor do we want to repeat many of the smart observations made by D.C. Public Charter School Board (PCSB) member (and Smarick’s Bellwether colleague) Sara Mead in her recent post.
But we do want to clarify a few points that may have been ambiguous in the Post article, as we fear the lack of clarity may have contributed to Andy’s alarm and could possibly concern other education reformers.
First, this does not signal a slowdown in PCSB’s authorizing. PCSB has approved seventeen schools in the past three years. There is no intention on the part of PCSB’s staff—nor, to our knowledge, PCSB’s other board members—to stop approving strong charter applications. And there has been no slowdown in our efforts to support growth by high-performing charters already in D.C.
There are still tens of thousands of children in D.C. attending low-performing schools. Over eight thousand individual students are on charter school waitlists. On top of this, 2,500 new students come to D.C. each year. And PCSB’s constant oversight has led to the closure of many low-performing schools and campuses (eighteen since 2012). Only by adding and growing strong charters can we ensure that families have access to enough quality educational options.
Second, PCSB does not “ring fence” D.C. Public Schools (DCPS) or other charter schools when making authorizing decisions. We don’t deliberately keep charters away from other schools and don’t intend to start. Our view is that competition makes schools stronger. That’s what has worked in D.C. for the past nineteen years. There is no reason to think it won’t in the future.
Third, we support a rough balance between charters and DCPS because we have confidence in DCPS’ ability to improve and offer quality schools. Our views about D.C. cannot be applied to every city. In cities where the traditional school system is characterized by straightjacket union rules, revolving-door leadership, chronic low performance, or toxic politics, there may well be no alternative than to replace the entire system with a robust offering of charter schools. Today, that is not the case in D.C.
Finally, the rough balance in D.C. will not be enforced by a charter cap, whether hard or soft. It will be earned by both sectors—traditional and charter—competing to offer parents the best possible options for their children. If we do this well, thousands of new families will move to D.C., attracted by great charters and traditional public schools; thousands of other families will stay instead of moving to the suburbs. That’s a future we find inspiring, and it’s one that is only possible because of the strong charter school sector we have in Washington, D.C.
Scott Pearson is the executive director of the D.C. Public Charter School Board. John H. "Skip" McKoy is a PCSB board member and former board chair.
