The Zero Sum Game
Being Played with
Georgia’s Education:
How
Opportunity
School District
will commoditize the future of the most vulnerable students
he was thought to be the last person to speak on the Georgia House
Education Committee’s agenda that day. While many others had taken
to the stand to express their varied opinions as to why Governor Nathan
Deal’s proposed Opportunity School District (OSD) legislation should or
should not be passed, Lisa Morgan was the only teacher to speak.
We are committed to
each and every one of our
children - and not just their
academic growth, but to
their social growth, their
emotional growth. Our
students have so many
challenges that you
can’t understand!”
She had heard for weeks about OSD and had been privy
to the Governor’s push for an improved educational
model for the state. But as a veteran kindergarten
and first grade teacher, Lisa’s main concern was how
this and any legislation would affect her students. She
would come to learn that despite their best intentions
and efforts, the Governor and his Office of Student
Achievement had failed to take into account the
irrefutably most vital variable - the student. And while
lawmakers, academicians, consultants, and business leaders
had chimed in their opinions regarding the legislation
to amend the Georgia Constitution to allow for a state
takeover of local community schools, one key voice had
yet to be heard - the educator.
“I understand you are a teacher, is that right, Lisa?” asked
Representative Brooks Coleman, the chairman of the
House Education Committee. Lisa proudly exclaimed,
“Yes sir, I am a teacher!” She continued, “I am a fourteen
year veteran of DeKalb County Schools at Midway
Elementary School - which is on the OSD list…”
The trepidation in her voice was not only obvious,
but further conveyed Lisa’s apprehension to her school
having made the list.
14 | KNOW • Volume 13
Issue 2
One might ask why a teacher would not want her school
counted among those eligible for an “opportunity;”
however, the semantics are all but subversive when it
comes to the Opportunity School District legislation. To
“make the list” a school has been deemed a “chronically
failing” institution by having received a grade of F on the
College and Career Ready Performance Index (CCRPI)
for three or more consecutive years. And while this
litmus test for school success is now considered the state
standard, systems had yet to really grasp how to even
implement the measures needed to be effective regarding
the CCRPI.
“This is very personal for me,” said Lisa. “You’ve heard
[them called] students, children… but these are my
babies you’re discussing today!” “I have worked with my
colleagues at Midway for 14 years. We are committed
to each and every one of our children - and not just
their academic growth, but to their social growth, their
emotional growth. Our students have so many challenges
that you can’t understand!”
For all its worth, the scores that determine a school’s
viability are limited in surmising it’s growth and potential
to serve its students in light of the overall community
climate. In a recent interview with GAE, State School
Superintendent Richard Woods noted the disparity the
CCPRI yields when it comes to giving a panoramic
view a school’s success. “A raw number doesn’t
necessarily reflect what is taking place in a school,” said
Woods. “You’re looking at parental involvement, you’re
looking at issues such as poverty, that some schools are
starting off a little bit behind others. And this is by no
fault of their own - it’s just the reality of their situation.”
Poverty/Equity
In 2012, the U.S. Census Bureau ranked Georgia 6th
among the top 10 states with the highest number of
citizens living below the poverty line. Just two years later,
the Center for American Progress Action Fund released
a report that showed Georgia had worsened with regards
to poverty and moved to the 4th poorest state in the
union. Research has proven that upward mobility for
people living in areas of poverty is extremely difficult
if not impossible. For cities in southeastern states such
as Georgia, the statistics are even more staggering. For
example, less than 20 percent of children being raised
by parents in poverty in the Atlanta area today will ever
hope to earn higher wages than their parents and escape
the vicious cycle of impoverishment.
With poverty come many challenges to education that
more affluent communities would hardly consider
tangential. However, when basic needs such as nutrition,
housing, hygiene and even guardianship are not met,
they serve as major contributors to a child’s inability to
learn. Lisa told legislators, “You hear the school cannot
live apart from its community - and you’re trying to solve
the chicken and the egg problem. What came first: the
problem in the community or the problem in the school?
I do everything I can to make my classroom a safe place
apart from the community.”
The Georgia Budget and Policy Institute reported in
2013 that as long as poverty exists in Georgia, its children
will need help through public and private efforts.
Yet while poverty remains prevalent in the state and
perpetuated by counterintuitive legislation, schools in
communities trying to leap the hurdles of basic necessity
for their students are still judged by the same standards
as schools that need the least. Thus, one can argue that
OSD is based on a false premise; there is no such thing
as a failing school. The state and society have failed these
communities and their schools.
The process
Should this legislation pass the public vote in 2016 to
amend Georgia’s Constitution to allow the formation
of the OSD, schools on the list will be taken over by
the statewide school district for the 2017-2018 school
year. The OSD would be operated outside of the State
Board of Education’s jurisdiction and would have its own
superintendent who would be appointed by (and only
report to) the Governor. It would have the authority to
take over 20 schools per year and could have the capacity
of having as many as 100 schools under its control at a
time. Factors such as geography would further determine
if and when a school is taken over by the OSD.
It’s important to note that while these measures to
improve schools may seem new, the state of Georgia
already has constitutional authority to take over
chronically failing schools. The distinct difference is that
no new school district has to be formed, nor would the
existing governance structure be circumvented. The
addition of OSD would make for the fourth (4th) staterun school system in Georgia.
“Please don’t add another bureaucrat telling me what
I need to do for my babies,” pleaded Lisa before the
House Education Committee. “I know what they need
and I can tell you by name. I’m doing what I can for my
children. I need the resources and the help from others
who are as committed as I am to do that.”
With Georgia’s education budget still trying to recover
from many years of significant austerity cuts, the existing
three (3) school systems are barely being funded.
Nevertheless, the constitutional amendment would give
the OSD the authority “to receive, control, and expand
state, federal, and local funds appropriated.” Additionally,
the OSD would have the ability to determine if and how
much additional funds per student a school needed and
could divert resources from other schools in the system
to meet the determined need. Albeit a noble endeavor
for one particular school, other schools in the district
suffer from having funds diverted to the OSD school.
To another degree, the OSD may withhold up to
three percent of the school’s funding to cover
administrative costs.
OSD schools would be managed by Education
Management Corporations (EMCs). These for-profit
organizations have been a point of contention in many
education debates. Some question whether or not EMCs
have the academic success of students at heart or if there
is not a more political motivation behind their efforts.
“Follow the money,” urges GAE General Counsel Mike
McGonigle. “OSD skims public money off the top and
gives it to private education management corporations.
These EMCs also make political campaign
contributions to legislative supporters of OSD and
other privatization efforts.”
It’s important to note that
while these measures to
improve schools may seem
new, the state of Georgia
already has constitutional
authority to take over
chronically failing schools.
Under OSD supervision,
a school’s fate has one
of four outcomes:
• Direct OSD management
• Shared governance with local
school board and the OSD
via a contract (in which the
OSD has the final authority to
direct changes to school)
• Convert the school to
a charter school (with
collaboration with the state
Charter School Commission)
• Close the school and
reassign students to a
school not on the list
Lisa’s school could be under OSD control for up to
ten years. During the OSD “occupation,” there is
no guarantee that the EMC managing her school
would keep her on to teach her kindergarteners and
first grade students. Existing administrators would be
automatically replaced. Furthermore, teachers run the
risk of being substituted by non-certified personnel from
organizations such as Teach for America. In particular,
Teach for America often recruits and employs young
college graduates from all over the country who may
or may not have studied education in undergraduate
school as a primary discipline. Whereas Lisa and her
current colleagues at Midway Elementary are committed
www.gae.org
| 15
and invested in their local community school, the vast
majority of their potential replacements return to
their home states where they may or may not
continue teaching.
I’m highly insulted that
anyone would suggest
that I don’t have high
academic expectations
of my students. I’m
personally insulted by
that! I do everything I can
for my students.”
The only way you’re
going to solve my student’s
problems is to come to my
school - talk to me. Go to
each of these schools - talk
to the principals. If I never
hear ‘failing schools’ again,
I will be thrilled.
Famed author and former educator David Greene said
about Teach for America, “They are in the business of
creating policy and not creating career teachers.” Such
was the case in Louisiana, the state whose post-hurricane
Katrina Recovery School District, which the OSD
is modeled after. “Practically every important policy
maker in Louisiana State Education and the city of New
Orleans is a former [Teach for America] corps member.”
The bail of goods/The broken promise
To say OSD is modeled after a less-than-perfect system
would be a gross understatement. In over a decade since
the Recovery School District (RSD) was implemented
by the Louisiana legislature, the students appear to be
in an even worse predicament than before the natural
disaster ravaged New Orleans of much of its resources.
Furthermore, in the wake of RSD, schools that were
taken over by the state recovery system have been either
converted to charter schools or closed altogether.
Dr. Kristen Buras, an associate professor in the
Department of Educational Policy Studies at Georgia
State University, noted that “...New Orleans is the
nation’s first all-charter school district. Charter advocates
describe the district’s achievements as nothing short of
a miracle. The truth is quite different: Flooding New
Orleans with charter schools has been disastrous.”
Dr. Buras has conducted extensive research on RSD for
both professional and personal reasons. The academician
grew up in New Orleans and has had a keen interest
in education reform in her home town. Her research
illuminated some astounding facts:
“...the performance of charter schools in the Recovery
School District is dismal. In 2011, the state began issuing
letter grades. All of the state-run Recovery School
District schools received a “D” or “F” and 79 percent of
charter schools in the district received a “D” or “F.” In
2014, RSD-New Orleans is still performing below the
vast majority of the state’s other districts at the fourth
and eighth grades in subjects tested by the Louisiana
Educational Assessment Program, including English
language arts, math, and science...”
The instituting of RSD in New Orleans can also be
considered suspicious. Act 35, the legislation which
redefined “failing” schools by increasing the threshold
of an unsatisfactory score from 60 to 87.4, was enacted
during a special session. The plans for RSD and the
amendment of the state’s constitution took place at
a home of a legislator whose purview was limited to
his/her own limited exposure to pre and post-Katrina
schools. Pitted as a noble gesture to help improve public
schools, the enactment of the RSD has only further
hindered learning for already disadvantaged students,
ostracized local communities, and disenfranchised veteran
educators - all ultimately at the expense of students.
16 | KNOW • Volume 13
Issue 2
Dr. Buras interviewed one veteran New Orleans teacher
who said, “It’s all about the dollars. Our rights as teachers
have been trampled upon. Reformers say they are
revamping the schools. They get rid of everyone, and they
rehire whoever they want. In many cases, they
replace veteran teachers with first, second, and third
year teachers.”
L E G I SL AT I VE SUMM ARY
Commoditization of education
Georgia’s proposed OSD legislation is indicative of being
just as egregious as RSD. While policy makers, having a
rudimentary theoretical understanding of the education
profession, helped to derive the basis of the Governor’s
proposal, educators in the alleged failing community
schools had little input. Thusly, the idea that teachers are
the cause of poor student performance is easily implied.
During her testimony before the Georgia House
Education Committee, Lisa combated the notion she and
her colleagues weren’t doing their part to educate their
students. “I’m highly insulted that anyone would suggest
that I don’t have high academic expectations of my
students. I’m personally insulted by that! I do everything
I can for my students.”
The vast majority of the schools on the OSD list are
predominately located in poor, urban, and degraded
communities in Georgia. The innumerable challenges
that come from living in such areas cannot help but be
pervasive in every aspect of the community.
“These problems are not going to be solved by the
Governor appointing a superintendent,” said Lisa as she
concluded her statement. “The only way you’re going
to solve my student’s problems is to come to my school
- talk to me. Go to each of these schools - talk to the
principals. If I never hear ‘failing schools’ again, I will be
thrilled. Because I’m sorry, a school is made out of bricks
and mortar. And we’re not buying deficient bricks in
Georgia to build the schools. I think it’s a cop-out when
we say failing schools. Because the schools aren’t failing you’re talking about my babies.”
While emotional and compelling, Lisa’s testimony
that day seemed to have fallen on deaf ears. The OSD
legislation passed both the Georgia state House and
Senate. It will now be up to the citizens of Georgia to
determine whether or not the state’s constitution will
be amended to allow for the state takeover of local
community schools. In 2016, the deceptively benevolent
ballot initiative for OSD will read:
“Shall the constitution of Georgia be amended to allow
the state to intervene in chronically failing public schools
in order to improve student performance?”
The question is not coming from teachers. The
question is not coming from parents. The question is
not even coming from the Board of Education. It’s
coming from the Governor, who despite all of his many
accomplishments is not an educator. So when it comes
to the fate of Georgia’s future, shouldn’t we be listening
to someone who knows more about his/her students’
potential than a system that has already deemed them
as failing?
The two most important things that happened in the 2015 legislative session regarding the evolution of public education
in Georgia was the creation of the Education Reform Commission, whose charge is to reformulate the school funding
formula, and the Opportunity School District (OSD) legislation that creates a constitutional amendment (to be voted on
in November of 2016) that if passed by the voters would allow the Governor to take over schools he designates as failing.
GEORGIA OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
The Governor’s Constitutional Amendment to allow the Governor’s office to take over schools they identify as failing squeaked through the
House by 2 votes and the Senate by 1. GAE was a standout voice against this legislation. This legislation removes local control of schools deemed
‘failing’ from the local school board, the local superintendent and the community. The campaign to get voters to approve this measure will be well
funded and has already begun. Below are the details of the legislation:
Status: Governor Deal’s proposal to create an Opportunity School District (OSD) for Georgia passed the state legislature 3/25/2015.
The resolution authorizing a constitutional amendment referendum will go before Georgia’s voters on the November 2016 election ballot.
KEY PROVISIONS
Timeline
• The following question would be
on the ballot:
“Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended to allow the
state to intervene in chronically failing public schools in order
to improve student performance?”
School selection
• GOSA would annually assign letter-grade ratings for all public
schools in Georgia on an A through F grading scale.
• Schools with an “F” rating for three consecutive years would
be eligible to become Opportunity Schools.
• The Governor would select a superintendent for the OSD.
• To select from among the pool of eligible schools, other
criteria will be considered such as geographic clusters of
qualifying schools, feeder patterns with multiple eligible
schools, availability of qualified partners, and community
engagement and support.
• The superintendent would be part of the Governor’s Office of
Student Achievement (GOSA).
• Final selection authority rests with the OSD superintendent.
Intervention models
• The OSD superintendent would report only to the Governor.
• The OSD would have four choices for taking over a school.
• If approved by the voters, the OSD would be created effective
for the 2017-18 school year.
Organization
• The OSD would take over up to 20 schools per year with a
maximum size of 100 schools.
Funding
• The constitutional amendment would give the OSD the
authority “to receive, control, and expend state, federal, and
local funds appropriated.”
• Each school would receive funding equal to the state and
federal funding as well as “an amount determined by OSD for
each student enrolled in such school equal to a proportional
share of local revenue from the local school system in which
the school is located.”
• The OSD may withhold up to 3% of the school’s funding to
cover administrative costs.
– Direct management by the OSD.
– Shared governance with the local board via a contract in
which the OSD has the authority to direct changes to be
made at the school.
– Reconstitution of the school as a state charter school in
collaboration with the Charter School Commission.
– Closure of the school and reassignment of the students to
a non-qualifying school in the local system.
• The OSD’s choice would include community input.
• Local boards of education must cooperate fully to make
available requested services at a reasonable cost (e.g.
transportation, cafeteria, custodial, utilities, alternative
education, special education, student information services.)
www.gae.org
| 17