School "Choice" and Other White Lies

After nearly a half-century since the landmark Brown vs. Board of Education decision that legally banned racially separate and unequal education, conservatives are taking a strong interest in Black folk and public schools. A high profile, big-ticket ad campaign is pushing the idea of school vouchers in the African American community. The ads -- and their backers -- are part of the complex relationship of school reform to race.

The television ads are numerous, plaintive and compelling. Black folk. Regular. Sincere. Speaking directly into the camera about their aspirations for their children's education and lives. Given prevailing stereotypes of apathy and neglect, the spots, which also are heard on radio, would be a welcome respite from such standard portrayals of Blacks in education. In fact, the ads sponsored by the Black Alliance for Educational Options (BAEO) deftly switch the focus from the typical "unteachable kids" frame to one that squarely blames dysfunctional schools.

The campaign would be right on target if it weren't for the group's solution: school vouchers. Called "choice" by conservatives, (like BAEO founder Howard Fuller and much of the group's funders) the difference between the "choice" movement and authentic school reform is the difference between abandonment and accountability. Vouchers are especially troublesome. They enable parents to withdraw public education dollars and spend them where they choose (usually at private schools). It is the ultimate breach in the social contract: Taxpayers are no longer a community unit committed to the maintenance of public education for all. They are individual consumers out for the best deal.

Conservative groups are quick to downplay the role of funding in school quality. A case in point: one BAEO press release (to be filed under What Were They Smoking?) touts research that "finds" it is choice -- not books, good teachers, etc. -- that advances Black education. Considering that the only choice that matters is choosing a better school over a struggling school, the underlying problem with the "choice" movement is clear. There shouldn't be any bad schools in the first place. The fact that the bad schools are concentrated in our communities should move us to fight the entire system -- not search for a better place within it. But that would show general concern for Black folk which is clearly not what BAEO or its funders (right wing stalwarts Bradley and Friedman Foundations among them) are really about.

That is not to deny that many schools are in trouble. They certainly are but the answer lies in wholesale reform, not in a few of us taking the money and running. However, these groups are not interested in real reform because it costs money; money that some schools don't have and that others would rather invest outside of the classroom in metal detectors, security and the like. Even in the city of San Francisco, progressive in comparison to most districts, the district spends more money on police than school nurses.

Clearly, money matters. Who gets it and for what purpose is at the heart of the education debate. They are decisions that have been fraught with racism, controversy and even intrigue for centuries. And school vouchers are no different. In fact, the same interests that are behind these ads are the same interests that have opposed quality education for Black people for many years.

The Roots of Black-White Inequality

The truth is, inequitable funding and the resulting low quality schools are yet another broken promise of Reconstruction. Black families were considered illegal less than a century and a half ago and were allowed no autonomy or authority as a fact of slavery. As "emancipated" men and women, we were promised access to the nation's "great equalizer," public education, as part of the tremendous debt owed us. In fact, the debt concerning education is a literal one. It was common practice for enslaved and (post slavery) "indentured" children to be "loaned" out for service as apprentices in exchange for cash to support the private school tuition of their "owner's" children. In other words, White children of the gentry, for at least three centuries, were educated as a direct result of the deprivation of education (and wages) of Black children.