Matus: John Oliver’s Charter School Critique and the Left’s Growing Divide Over School Choice
I would be greatly interested in hearing Wyatt Tee Walker’s perspective on John Oliver’s views of charter schools.
During the recent episode of This Week Tonight, Oliver passionately criticized charter schools, presenting extreme examples of abuses and neglecting to mention evidence that contradicts his viewpoint. Oliver’s progressive audience, who already hold negative opinions of charter schools, were further reinforced in their beliefs by his portrayal of them as entities that only serve to enrich corporate profiteers.
Undoubtedly, the belief in market competition has contributed to the expansion of charter schools and other forms of school choice. However, it is not the sole or primary factor driving the support for these alternatives. Supporters of school choice, both on the right and left, are primarily motivated by the desire to empower parents, particularly those from low-income backgrounds, with the ability to choose the best schools for their children. Throughout history, this desire for expanded opportunities and alternatives has been particularly strong among those on the left.
This can be seen in the examples of Mary McLeod Bethune starting a private school, Rosa Parks’ desire to establish a charter school, and the involvement of Wyatt Tee Walker. Rev. Walker, the former chief of staff to Martin Luther King Jr., was recently honored by the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools for his role in establishing the Sisulu-Walker Charter School in Harlem, New York. This influential figure, who played a key role in the "Birmingham campaign" that led to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, did not do it for personal gain, but rather because the public schools were failing in their duty.
Many black and Hispanic parents share this sentiment. These communities make up a significant portion of charter school enrollment, as well as the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship program, the largest private school choice initiative in the nation. Surveys consistently show that parents of color are strong supporters of school choice, and there is evidence to suggest they have valid reasons for their support.
All of this was ignored by Oliver.
While Oliver referenced a study by the Center for Research on Education Outcomes at Stanford, which concluded that charter school quality is inconsistent, he failed to mention that the same study found significantly greater academic gains in reading and math for low-income black students in charter schools compared to their counterparts in traditional public schools.
Oliver also raised concerns about issues with charter schools in Florida, such as closures and oversight problems. However, he neglected to mention another study by respected researchers that found higher rates of high school graduation, college enrollment, and higher-paying jobs among Florida charter school students compared to their peers in district schools.
Oliver’s scrutiny is selective and fails to consider the bigger picture. While there are legitimate concerns about the state of public education, especially from those on the left, standardized testing and charter schools are not at the top of the list.
To be fair, Oliver focused on the most problematic charter schools. It is undeniable that there is a need to address these bad apples, and discussions are already underway in many states to better screen applicants and remove underperforming schools.
However, in the meantime, where are the criticisms of the traditional public schools that routinely assign the least effective teachers to disadvantaged students? Why is there not enough attention given to the unions that protect teachers who may lack the necessary skills to educate children? And why is there not more discussion about the elitism inherent in public school assignment plans that allow affluent parents to secure spots in high-performing schools that are off-limits to those who cannot afford to live in those neighborhoods? These policies and practices have long disadvantaged children from marginalized communities, yet too many individuals on the progressive left choose to turn a blind eye to them. Why?
The left’s growing disagreement over education reform and school choice is intertwined with issues of race and class. The opt-out movement, which opposes standardized testing and often spearheads criticism of charter schools and vouchers, is largely driven by liberal, white, middle-class parents. For those living in suburban areas, their children generally attend public schools with positive outcomes. However, for those who are not as fortunate, school choice may be a lifeline.
