What is a ‘Public School’? Principles for a New Century

Abstract

Recent developments in the provision of education in the U.S. mean that the old definitions of no longer hold. Mr. Hess offers his suggestions for a broadened definition that will help education regain its status as a shared ideal. THE PHRASE has become more a rhetorical device than a useful guide to policy. As our world evolves, so too must our conception of what public means. James Coleman eloquently made this point more than two decades ago, implying a responsibility to periodically reappraise our assumptions as to what constitutes schooling.1 In a world where charter schooling, distance education, tuition tax credits, and other recent developments no longer fit neatly into our conventional mental boxes, it is clearly time for such an effort. Nonetheless, rather than receiving the requisite consideration, has served as a flag around which critics of these various reforms can rally. It is because the phrase resonates so powerfully that critics of proposals like charter schooling, voucher programs, and rethinking teacher licensure have at times abandoned substantive debate in order to attack such measures as anti-public schooling.2 Those of us committed to the promise of education are obliged to see that the ideal does not become a tool of vested interests. The perception that schooling has strayed from its purpose and been captured by self-interested parties has fueled lacerating critiques in recent years. Such critics as Andrew Coulson and Douglas Dewey find a growing audience when they suggest that the ideal of schooling itself is nothing more than a call to publicly subsidize the agendas of bureaucrats, education school professors, union officials, and leftist activists.3 While I believe such attacks are misguided, answering them effectively demands that we discern what it is that makes schooling and accept diverse arrangements that are consistent with those tenets. Otherwise, growing numbers of reformers may come to regard schooling as a politicized obstacle rather than a shared ideal. While I do not aim to provide a precise answer as to what schooling should mean in the early 21st century, I will argue that are broadly defined by their commitment to preparing students to be productive members of a social order, aware of their societal responsibilities, and respectful of constitutional strictures; that such cannot deny access to students for reasons unrelated to their educational focus; and that the system of available in any community must provide an appropriate placement for each student. In short, I suggest that it is appropriate to adopt a much more expansive notion of schooling than the one the education community holds today. What Isn't Public? Traditionally, schools are deemed to be those directly accountable to elected officials or funded by tax dollars.4 As a practical matter, such definitions are not very useful, largely because there are conventional public that do not fit within these definitions, while there are private providers that do. We generally regard as schools those in which policy making and oversight are the responsibility of governmental bodies, such as a local school board. Nongovernmental providers of educational services, such as independent or educational management organizations (EMOs), are labeled nonpublic. The distinction is whether a formal political body is in charge, since these officials are accountable by election or appointment to the larger voting public. There are two particular problems here. First, how hands on must the government be for us to regard a service as publicly provided? The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Education, and most other state, federal, and local government agencies contract with for-profit firms for support, to provide services, and to evaluate service delivery. …