Charter schools are public schools

I am a New Yorker and a mom of three and I’ve been asking myself a question lately. What is the purpose of public education in New York City? I thought it was to educate kids, but you certainly wouldn’t know that from the statements and behavior of our elected officials.

On Feb. 1, Gov. Hochul announced a budget proposal to raise funding for district schools and allow more public charter schools to open in New York City. The howls of protest from lawmakers would have you think that opening more good public schools in the city was akin to planting a nuclear bomb.

Assemblywoman Rodneyse Bichotte-Hermelyn said, “This is another way of dismantling our public school system.” Sens. Shelley Mayer, John Liu, and Robert Jackson claimed that new charters would “increase the financial burden on NYC traditional public schools, taking much-needed resources away from schools serving the vast majority of our children.” Jackson suggested Hochul’s proposal would have a “devastating impact.”

Really? From my perspective as a parent, public charter schools are part of our city’s public school system. Indeed, they seem to be one of the best parts. They are open to all through a random lottery and decades of research show they have the greatest success with students who have historically been most underserved by district schools — those who are low-income, Black, or Hispanic. The best among them are exceptionally innovative, offering a true alternative to what had previously been available to parents.

On a personal level, the choice that public charter schools provided is what kept my family in the city.

My zoned district school was not a good option. Our son attended pre-K there, but with its low test and safety scores, poor parent reviews, and no evidence of improvement over many years, we were concerned about keeping him there for kindergarten. The school had a “gifted and talented” program, but the within-school segregation it fostered was off-putting. Private schools were too expensive.

Luckily, that year, a Success Academy was opening in our neighborhood and we won a spot. When we went to an information meeting, we were impressed by the level of organization, the school’s focus on rigor and joy, and the diversity of the other families. It was an easy decision to enroll our son.

My two younger children followed him into Success Academy and, like him, had great experiences. Their teachers were incredibly attentive and my children loved the structure and celebrations. They flourished academically

Like any parent knows, each child is unique and as my children grew, they had different needs and followed different educational paths. Today, my youngest is a fourth grader at Success, where she will stay for middle school, my son is a sophomore at a Brooklyn Catholic school, and my middle daughter is at a citywide district middle school with plans to continue there for high school.

My family’s experience exemplifies the reality for parents in this city: We don’t care if the public schools are district or charter. We just want good schools where our children will flourish.

Hochul’s proposal is responsive to this reality. She knows that too many city parents don’t have choices and are desperate for better options. She knows that competition for the few good schools is fierce, with waitlists for charter schools and byzantine application and ranking systems, or high housing prices, for sought-after district schools. And she knows we have talented, innovative educators who are ready and willing to quickly open new schools where parents want to send their children.

Yet the lawmakers and activists opposing her proposal don’t care. In their blinkered reality, “public education” is restricted to only one type of school — those controlled by the district. They think if they close off other options, parents will happily send their children to whatever school is available to them, regardless of quality. It’s true that many parents will have no choice, but they won’t be happy. Population and enrollment declines, already massive from the pandemic, will continue. Is that really what lawmakers want to impose on families?

This brings me back to my original question. What is the purpose of public education in this city? If the purpose is to educate children, then shouldn’t our elected officials be embracing any public school that fulfills that promise? And shouldn’t they stop the demagoguery that implies public charter schools are “taking resources” when in fact they are an integral part of this broader system and using per-pupil public funding for its intended purpose — to educate children?

One would hope so.

Hansen is an architect.