The Laws To Destroy Public Education in America

With the selling of public school buildings; like the William Penn High School to Temple University, strategically situated in North Philadelphia; and the closure of so many public schools, as in Philadelphia where 32 public schools were closed in 2013, one has to wonder about the future of public schooling. The existence of public schools in the next ten years, school closures in the near future, and public school as a priority in America remain in question as I believe that the destruction of public schooling is not a coincidence and has been strategically designed. Consider that in 1647, Puritan children read the bible in public school to learn about their Calvinist religion. Although public education in America was first established for educating citizens to read the bible, the bible has since been abolished from public schools in America as the purpose for public education has obviously changed. In 1790, the Pennsylvania constitution addressed free public education for educating poor children while rich children were expected to pay for their own education. By 1827, public education was free for all children in Massachusetts. By 1830, laws were such that slaves were not permitted to learn to read while those who did learn to read risked their own safety. However, between 1866 and 1877, African Americans mobilized to have free public schools for the first time in the south although whites benefited more than the African Americans. In 1954, the supreme court ruled the Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka that segregated schools were inherently unequal and were to be abolished (Center for Racial Justice, n.d.). However, the move to be separate has not been put to rest by many. The attack on public schools through American laws has continued to be motivated by those who want to be separate through choice.

Historically, over the past 100 years, public schools have been expected to serve as multi-purpose institutes so as to discipline, feed hungry children, encourage and identify talented children, raise self-efficacy and test scores, have winning sports teams, accommodate student learning styles, and provides students with skills that are sensitive for the present economy. The weight and responsibility of public education is unlike any other institution. Unfortunately, those who teach and administrate in public education are often blamed and scrutinized as teachers are penalized and despite the expectations for educators from the public, their value as high professionals has not been recognized (Reese, 2007). Vilifying public schools has been a mission for republicans who in 1983 had controlling power over the U.S. Department of Education and the National Commission on Excellence in Education (NCEE, 1983). The hidden agenda of NCEE was that of debasing the public school system as the republicans have not changed today. Vilifying public schools is a way republicans have used for introducing school choice, vouchers, and privatization and dualism (Tienken & Orlich, 2013).

Considering how public schools have been blamed in the past, we can consider the launching of Sputnik by the Russians in 1957, policy makers viewed that event as a signal that American education was inadequate. Education has been considered a national security priority by American educational policy makers and Sputnik has often been the catalyst for educational reform (Tienken & Orlich, 2013). Feeling inferior to other nations particularly the Soviets led to A Nation at Risk as the report described American instruction mediocre and if it were imposed on Americans by an unfriendly nation, we would view the instruction as an act of War (Tienken & Orlich, 2013). President George Bush resided over the time of recession and again public school was blamed, not economic policy as the weak economy was blamed on a poor school system. Although the Sandia Report proved that the system was not at risk, proponents of charter schools, vouchers, school choice continue to energize the dual kind of system. The Sandria Report can be found @www.ed.gov/pubs/natAtRisk/risk.html (Tienken & Orlich, 2013).

The NCLB act is found to have never been for the purpose of strengthening public education. Susan Neuman the former secretary of ESEA said in Time Magazine on June 8, 2008 that some in the Bush administration viewed NCLB as a means for destroying public education and the population would support marketization and privatization as the Law played as a wedge between the public and public education to create the dual system (Wallis, 2008). Bush’s administration overplayed charter schools without discussing the downsides including economic segregation, and lack of substantive empirical finding on student achievements of students in Charter schools as compared to similar students in traditional schools (USDOE, 2004, 2005). Ironically, schools are required to use data to improve their programs but the Bush administration did not use data to drive charters schools. Barach Obama who is a democratic president; reauthorized NCLB as sanctioned by President George Bush in 2001 and again the charter schools are springing up all over the country.

Under the guise of improving public education came NCLB, whose agenda was for discrediting public education and for promoting a dual educational system. The rich will be with the rich, the poor will remain with the poor and money will be taken from the general school funds for funding those schools where the child attends as charter schools will take the place of the public school. Who should want this this? The one who will have the crumbs from the rich man’s table? In most urban areas, the greatest amount of income tax for funding schools does not come from the rich, but rather the poor but the most affluent are in the suburbs. If those who are prosperous take their money from public and transfer to private schools, public schools will have even less to educate students. I believe charter schools are a hoax and will be until they can prove with data that they are the cure for public education.

Will public schools remain a viable institution for the future? Consider that if one has a special needs child, they are not accommodated in charter and many private schools. If one's child has poor behavior problems they will not be admitted into charters or private schools. So, what does that tell one about the future of public education? If one views public education as having value to one’s children, one will need to be aware of what is occurring before our very eyes. Dualism is winning. We must insist on restructuring without NCLB and recognize that NCLB is corrupt. We must demand that morality and social justice be the pillar of our public schools and demand that moral leaders and policy makers and not politicians devise plans for these schools. Funding is being withdrawn while charters and vouchers will take the place of education in America as the laws of the land have been so sophisticated as to deceive the people.