Private schools are the antithesis to social justice
November 5, 2020
Say you were born into privilege, born into a well-educated and financially stable family. Say you chose to attend a private high school. How do you reconcile your upbringing with your fight for socioeconomic fairness?
When a student from an attentive, wealthy, highly-educated family leaves the American public school system for a private school, they contribute to educational inequalities. While I only use the term “private school”, my argument applies to charter schools as well. Students who choose to attend private schools deplete public funding for public schools, divert private funding and weaken public classroom environments. If these students are to serve as advocates for social justice, they must first condemn how their choice to attend private school contributed to socioeconomic inequality.
Public schools rely on state funding. This funding diminishes when privileged students flee the public school system for private primary or secondary schools. Much of public school funding is raised through the community’s property taxes, a process which absolutely reinforces systemic inequities, but is not necessarily affected by private school attendance. However, as Jess Gartner explains in How are Public Schools Funded?, many states at least partially fund their public schools based on attendance rates and test scores. Attendance rates and test scores at a given public school will be lower if privileged students who have access to extra resources flee to private schools. The less funding allocated to the school, the lower the salaries of faculty and staff. Thus, the retention rate of skilled, experienced teachers falls. Coupled with the scarcity of classroom resources caused by underfunding, public schools impacted by the flight of privileged students cannot maintain a high standard of education. Private schools remove high-resource students from the public system and reduce public funding allocated by the state.
Public funding is not the only way schools receive resources. Private donations, booster-club fundraising and parent involvement improves the quality of primary and secondary education. According to Richard Kahlenberg’s study, Socioeconomic School Integration, students do better with “a community of parents who are able to be more actively involved in school affairs and know how to hold school officials accountable; and stronger teachers who have high expectations for students.” Wealthier parents are more likely to have the leisure time to be involved in their children’s education. This includes more early education for their child, parental volunteering in the classroom and school fundraising abilities. Not only are private school students depleting public schools’ funding, they are also weakening the community support which encourages students to thrive.
Besides the tangible funding and support that private schools siphon from public schools, they also diminish the classroom environment. As Jared Keller’s Slate article explains, privileged students are often able to be more motivated in the classroom, while underprivileged students are sometimes unable to fully engage in the classroom due to personal or financial stressors. But socioeconomically diverse classrooms tend to benefit learning. Kahlenberg’s study looked at socioeconomically integrated schools in Montgomery County, Maryland and concluded that “Low-income students in middle-class schools [who] are, on average, surrounded by peers who are more academically engaged and less likely to act out” perform better than low-income students in high-poverty schools. Performance improved despite both schools having similar public funding. In essence, underprivileged students — who may be impeded by racism, financial instability or are academically underprepared — may not be able to be as engaged in the classroom as the privileged students who come from a wealthy, high-resource, educated background. Having a socioeconomically diverse classroom positively impacts the academic experience of underprivileged students.
By its nature, choosing to go to a private school for an increased quality of education comes at the expense of those left behind.
The Macalester community promotes the idea that confronting your privilege is about recognizing how you benefit from it and taking steps to relinquish power in order to uplift others. Students who propagate this value readily discuss college admissions, job hirings and “amplifying others” in vague, unspecific language.
But rarely — or at least not in my circles of classmates and social media — do I find students condemning private primary and secondary education. This is a simple step in the fight for socioeconomic justice: acknowledge how private schools contribute heavily to educational inequality and condemn the privileged students who leave public schools behind.
Let me be clear: it’s one thing for a marginalized or under-privileged student to attend a private high school in order to pursue an otherwise inaccessible educational opportunity. Redlining, systemic racism and unfair funding for public schools have in many cases made public schools disproportionately poor quality for low-income and BIPOC students. If a student from one of those communities is able to go to a private high school, it can be an effective tool for combating systemic oppression.
Furthermore, some people don’t decide which school they go to. Their parents make choices for them, in which case, maybe they should send this opinion piece to their parents or spread the word to their affluent community.
People who had the privilege of going to private schools should not necessarily feel guilty. All I’d like to highlight is the need to address this hypocrisy before declaring that you are willing to give up power or opportunity to uplift the oppressed.
It is a little sickening to hear people hark on about confronting their privilege or fighting for socioeconomic justice when I know that they have spent their whole lives escaping the exact same people they claim to fight for.
It makes me pessimistic and distrustful of Macalester students’ willingness to truly confront their own complacent role in socioeconomic injustice.
What makes students so sure they would actually be willing to sacrifice power and opportunity for the sake of social justice if they have previously gone out of their way to do the opposite? How can students hold others accountable for dismantling systemic inequality when they haven’t held themselves accountable?
But it’s not just about the students or the individuals. As humans, as parents and as ambitious people, we all want to utilize every resource available to us to achieve our dreams. We shouldn’t have to choose between a good education and contributing to inequity. The laws need to change. Systemic segregation is one of the most urgent issues plaguing America. Our public schools should be the accessible and obvious choice.
Someday private schooling may just be an alternative, but today it is an advantage. Until our generation can address the issues of segregation and educational inequity, either make the right choice or at the very least condemn the fact that you made the wrong one.
Wathanak • Feb 7, 2024 at 11:21 pm
The American School system is a mess. As a person who goes to private school in Cambodia (Im asian) I dont understand why like that. I go to one of the best, and most expensive schools in my country- doesnt mean im affecting someone else. But in America somehow you do? Plus we have plenty of private schools here, and public and there is no “state funding” or “state taxes”. Plenty of private schools that are cheap and expensive, while public is free (to a lesser extent the quality wouldnt be on par wit private schools.
Heather Guretti • Aug 26, 2022 at 1:07 pm
You do realize when kids go to private school their parents STILL pay the public school taxes in FULL? I think you need to do a little more research here before speaking on a topic that you clearly are very confused on. Also, many kids do not “make the choice” to attend private high schools, their parents send them there no matter what.
Lucy Lou • Mar 27, 2022 at 9:41 pm
Written by a student of a private college. Interesting.
Bob Spaulding '65 • Nov 16, 2020 at 1:03 pm
Thank you Margo for welcoming alternative viewpoints to weigh in on your editorial.
You ask what changes should be made to improve the dismal results of our public education model. It is an apt question because America fares poorly in comparison to other developed countries that spend far less on education per student, and this embarrassing trend is accelerating in recent years. Sadly, our schools that are the most deficient are in the poorest and minority inner city neighborhoods and invariably better in whiter, suburban settings.
Much of this is due to parental involvement, as you point out. But it is hard for parents with less education, time, and income to confront teachers and administrators at their local failing schools, especially if they are single parents. Another factor is union seniority rules that give more experienced teachers their choice of schools and leave inexperienced, beginning teachers to flounder
in the toughest schools.
Charter schools give such parents a choice. They are publicly funded but largely free of unions and give their teachers and administrators more autonomy in designing their curriculum, disciplinary policy, school dress code, and hours of instruction. The results are huge jumps in test scores, student and teacher morale, parental involvement, and college preparedness. Union advocates claim they “cream” the best students to achieve the illusion of superiority. But a lottery system belies that assertion. When a charter school is introduced, the demand by parents is so intense that a lottery decides those allowed to attend. This permits a fair comparison of the educational results of the charter students with the same demographic of students unlucky enough to stay in the public, union-run school. The progress of the charter students are vastly superior, and a great embarrassment to the public school bureaucracy, many of which, ironically, are forced to change and do better to lessen the disparity. This is why the biggest advocates for charters are single, Black and Hispanic inner city Moms. It is also why the California NAACP broke with the state Democratic establishment on this issue. In short, competition works. Monopolies, whether in the private or public sector, are invariably bad for the consumer.
For readers interested in more information about school choice, a good and convenient source would be the You Tube videos of Black activist Candace Owens.
Gabe • Nov 14, 2020 at 8:47 am
I agree with the sentiments in the article but have to admit that while reading it I wondered whether I was reading a piece of satire. A student at one of the most elite, privileged schools of higher education in the country is criticizing others who have chosen the exact same form of education as the author. There is no meaningful distinction between private high school and private college – the arguments proffered above are equally applicable.
Pat • Nov 10, 2020 at 12:07 pm
I found this piece thought provoking in many ways and concerning in others. The author obviously did her research, but I thought it might make sense to do a deeper dive into a very large school system in Texas, the Houston Independent School District. Here is a link to their budget process:
https://www.houstonisd.org/site/handlers/filedownload.ashx?moduleinstanceid=275925&dataid=247968&FileName=Budget-Basics_2019_ENG-V2.pdf
Perhaps I misread or misunderstood the assertion regarding attendance, ” Attendance rates and test scores at a given public school will be lower if privileged students who have access to extra resources flee to private schools.” But as I read the HISD process, the dollars are allocated on a per child basis upon attendance not “enrollment.” I think this is a key distinction. Indeed, HISD provides for “Small school subsidy – additional funds for campuses that have very low student enrollments that help provide the same levels of service as larger campuses.” If you are asserting that children of “privilege” would pull up the percentage of attendance because they are likely to “show up” each day to class, I suppose that may or may not be the case. However, should it not be upon the parent or parents (or guardian) of each child to instill a culture in that child that values education and attendance? Why penalize “privileged” children at public schools based on the spotty attendance of children whose parent or parents fail their own child (if that indeed is the cause of poor attendance)?
83% of the HISD budget comes from local property taxes. The HISD document link provided states, the increasing property values in Harris County have actually lead HISD to sending money back to the state of Texas (TEA) for reallocation to poorer school districts. You state, “Much of public school funding is raised through the community’s property taxes, a process which absolutely reinforces systemic inequities.” It seems to me, in the case of HISD at least, your assertion is not only false, but the property taxes collected and distributed on a per student basis says the opposite is true; more dollars spread across less students. In effect, parents sending their children to private schools are subsidizing public school children on a per student basis. Are there school districts poorer (less property taxes collected per student) than HISD? Of course. Perhaps it would be interesting to see a study on the impact of private schools on districts with lower per student collections from property taxes. However, I tend to think the lack of funding in such a case is a function of something other than students going to private schools. If districts allocate based on how I read HISD, ceteris paribus, the more children that opt for private schools, the more dollars per child become available for the public school.
I wanted to start with a definition of Charter School as a basis for my next concern: “Charter schools are public, tuition-free schools that are open to all students. Often operated independently from the traditional school district, charter schools provide high-quality instruction from teachers who have the autonomy to design a classroom that fits their students’ needs.” My first thought was this definition sounds very close to our Public University system in the United States sans the “tuition-free.” I’d like to know your opinion on the quality of schools such as University of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio State, etc. Those schools compete for students. Furthermore, according to the American Association of University Professors only “21 percent of all universities have faculty unions. Among public universities, 35 percent of universities have unions.” This is in sharp contrast to most public school districts in the United States. https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/sass/tables/sass0708_043_t1s.asp I guess my question becomes, why not proliferate the Charter School model rather than remove it as a means to leveling the playing field?
I think we all want the same thing (at least I hope we do). We want children to have access to a high quality education and all that goes along with providing it. I am unconvinced that private and charter schools are a material cause of “systemic inequality.” In fact, I tend to think the charter school model as defined above seems a path to narrow unequal access and can also effectively compete against private schools. Such competition for students and resources likely leads to better overall outcomes for all students at a much higher level.
Let’s assume we achieve equal access. How do we want that to look? Do we want access to the lowest common denominator such that every student learns the exact same material and receives the exact same grade regardless of ability or effort? That may bring us equal outcomes, but at what cost to our overall standard of living? Or does our equal access provide for a competitive environment that successfully brings out the best in each and every student?
A competitive environment results in unequal outcomes for many reasons. Some are within the control of the student, some are not. There’s a reason NFL quarterback Russell Wilson is paid 35 times more than his backup Geno Smith. Both have access to the exact same coaches and facilities. There is also many reasons some students within the same public school achieve better results. Those differences have nothing to do with the existence of private schools.
We do all want the best for the children/students in our nation. Too often, the solutions offered for “social justice” seem to involve a lowest common denominator solution so that outcomes are “more equal.” I don’t see the abolition of charter or private schools doing anything but that. I’d rather invoke solutions that promote competition for students between different schools (similar to what we see in our public and private college and university systems). The distribution of outcomes will likely continue to form a bell curve, but I think our overall standard of living improves by implementing a system that pushes the median outcome higher and accepts the wider distribution and upper fat tail which might exist rather than pushing the median down such the standard of living sits at a very low level and the distribution is quite narrow. In the latter case, the fat tail to the right still exists, but society as a whole is far worse off.
I appreciated reading the article and your thoughtful response to Bob’s comments as well.
Margo Miller • Nov 8, 2020 at 8:38 am
Hi there Bob,
I appreciate the feedback and commentary! I understand your points about the positive impacts of private schooling on public school budgets and the different influences which determine quality of education, including the impact of teacher unions. Could you share any illuminating examples that corroborate the claims you make? I would like to learn more about what shapes your understanding.
However, as I stated in my article, (and as you said yourself: “The worst education results are in public schools dominated by teachers unions where per-pupil spending is highest”) direct funding is not everything. Community support and advocacy—along with an engaging classroom environment—are key parts of education as well, as I examined in the second two paragraphs of my article. For example, if all public schools had passionate and educated parents like you, with time and expertise to call out misallocation of funding, failures by unions or teachers’ low-expectations, I think public school students would benefit greatly. Furthermore, you offer up some different reasons for failing public schools, but what solutions do you see? Should the answer to a failing public school system be to send the lucky students to private or charter school? Or should we invest our time and energy into redesigning the system so that it works for as many people as possible?
If you have any thoughts about those points, I’m always happy to continue this open discourse. Or, if you’d like to email me, my email is [email protected].
Once again, thank you for putting the time and effort into reading and replying to my article, I appreciate all my readers, no matter whether they share the same feelings as I do.
Margo
Bob Spaulding '64 • Nov 7, 2020 at 8:31 am
Seldom have I seen an article so replete with inaccuracies and faulty reasoning. As one who has written and published about the economics of public and private schools, please consider some easily-documented facts.
Public schools are funded largely by property taxes and state-imposed income and sales taxes. When a family opts for a private school, they relieve the public schools of the expense of educating their child. But they keep paying taxes, perhaps more than the average household because of a higher property tax bill and the high income and sales tax they pay annually. If you do the math, this increases the per-student revenue for students left in public schools–the exact opposite of what this author concludes.
The worst education results are in public schools dominated by teachers unions where per-pupil spending is highest, often around $20,000 per student. The union rules protect incompetent teachers, use race-based disciplinary rules, and have watered-down or dropped the tougher subjects that used to be required for a high school diploma. Teacher pay in these schools tends to be highest and the workload lowest, as shown by hours worked per year, especially now that they can use COVID as an excuse to not allow in-person learning.
Charter schools are spreading rapidly because they generally are not unionized, and accordingly show vastly better learning results. They are publicly financed, but on average at a far lower cost per student than the unionized schools. Their more efficient model is a great embarrassment to the public school bureaucracy and teachers union, who hate the comparison. It is no surprise that the demographic most in favor of charter schools are Black and Hispanic parents whose children are trapped in failing inner-city schools.
To the author, enough of the virtue-signalling. Please tell me where I am wrong.
And to The Mac Weekly editors, thanks for allowing some intellectual diversity into your publication.
Isabell • Nov 6, 2020 at 2:02 pm
Tbh snaps. Never thought about how my past private education left behind underprivileged students, and why I have not condemned this action or brought it up with my parents. It’s also interesting how a lot of Mac students that are social justice warriors likely have attended private education systems, and have yet to acknowledge their own contribution to these educational inequalities.
Alex Johanson • Nov 6, 2020 at 1:43 pm
Smart piece.