Guest Viewpoint: School takeovers deserve a grade of 'F'

By Florence Johnson

4/23/02 – Beyond the politics, legal questions, and lofty goals of recent state takeovers of local school districts, including Philadelphia's public schools, lies an important question: Do takeovers work?

The answer has implications for Philadelphia as well as school districts across the country, from the urban centers in New York to the largest cities in California.

At first glance, state takeovers sound dynamic. Yet to date, they have not lived up to their promise even years after their original sponsors have left office.

We need only to look at the unfortunate results in Jersey City, N.J., and other long-term takeovers to see how misguided this approach is.

If we are serious about raising student achievement in our nation's urban centers, then political leaders, especially governors and mayors, must stay focused on the real educational challenges that students and schools must overcome.

They must understand the shortcomings of takeovers and provide local school boards and educators with the full range of support they need to produce results.

Unfortunately, rather than helping school districts deal with the complexities of urban education, too many state leaders and mayors are seeking shortsighted political fixes as evidenced by a rash of school district takeovers. That is what is happening in Philadelphia.

Significant educational challenges must be overcome in America's largest cities if our goal of "no child left behind" is to become reality. Local school officials have the determination to meet this challenge, but all too frequently lack the wide range of financial resources to meet their student achievement goals.

NSBA and our Council of Urban Boards of Education are strongly opposed to takeovers of local school boards as a means of running urban school districts.

Experience shows that the children do not benefit, and ignoring more effective strategies lose valuable time.

Also, there is no real evidence that turning over large chunks of the school district operations to a private management company works. In fact, recent news reports on corporate stock manipulation and questionable accounting practices undermine the theory that private is better.

Urban school districts are underfunded compared to their surrounding suburbs, even in providing the basics. School buildings are often dilapidated, the best teachers can't be offered attractive salaries, and educational materials are in short supply.

In the face of these challenges, takeovers only aggravate the problems to the detriment of the children. In most cities, such as Los Angeles, Miami, and Houston, voters elect the school board. In others, such as New York and Baltimore County, other elected officials select board members.

Either way, the school board comes from the people and governs as a representative of the people.

By replacing a "true" school board, takeovers disenfranchise the public from its schools. The result threatens to:

• promote community indifference;

• cut off the public's access to the people who make decisions about their children;

• disconnect decision makers from public accountability;

• mire the school system in the politics of the state or city hall, and

• remove the independent citizen voice of the school board.

There is no question that the state can play a critical role in ensuring that local school districts and their school boards are up to the task.

In addition to providing financial resources, state technical assistance might be needed to help the schools analyze their problems, as well as design and implement more effective programs.

In some cases school boards might need more flexibility and wider legal authority from the state to implement the very changes being called for in the takeover.

The school district should have goals that are mutually developed with the state, achievable, and subject to multiple measures of academic progress.

After evaluating the success of a school district in meeting its goals, the state should consider direct intervention only if:

• the primary problem is not the lack of resources,

• the failure is substantially attributable to governance or management, or

• sufficient time has elapsed for the school district to implement the improvement plan developed with the state.

Effective accountability requires that schools be governed by officials who are selected locally. There is no evidence that any state or private company has the proven capacity to manage urban school systems.

While constructive efforts are under way in Philadelphia to make the takeover as locally workable as possible, the overall intervention comes at the expense of the local school board and its function to serve the public.

The time has passed for political gimmicks. State takeovers fail on all grounds.

Florence Johnson is a member of the Buffalo, N.Y., school board, and is chair of the Council of Urban Boards of Education, a component of NSBA's National Affiliate program.