Absolutely. We most certainly can have strong public schools and choice. More than that, we will not have strong public schools without choice. As a parent and the superintendent of a public school district, I say we must have choice options to have strong public schools. Brevard Public Schools (BPS) serves approximately 73,000 students. We have a wide array of options for students including magnet programs, career and technical programs, charter schools, home schooling, a virtual option and more. More than 40 percent of our students get their education at a school other than their assigned school. About 3.2 percent of students who are living in poverty receive vouchers to attend the private school of their choice. And 6.6 percent of our students are enrolled in one of 12 charters.

Of the 67 districts in Florida, BPS is tied for fourth place in state assessment scores. Our 87 percent graduation rate is the 10th highest in the state. In a district that provides the funding for all 11th grade students to take the ACT, our average score is higher than the state average, inclusive of districts that only assess college-bound students. In our 2017 graduating class of about 5,000 students, 351 earned an associate degree with our dual enrollment
option at a local college.

BPS has strong public schools. Choice is a component of our strength. Like many other districts, and the “choice” advocates suggest, we have only scratched the surface of the true choice that will make public schools strong.When most people consider choice, we think charter and private primarily, along with the aforementioned options.

When will we talk about REAL CHOICE instead of a modified version of the same comprehensive, one-size-fits-all model that graduated me 25 years ago, my father 25 years before that and his father 25 years before that?

My father-in-law is an 80-year-old retired K–12 administrator. His 90-year-old brother is a retired higher education administrator. They retired more than 20 years ago. Would it surprise you that both men can still have very intelligent conversations with me regarding today’s educational matters, often using the same jargon acronyms and referring to the same challenges? Can you name another profession where after a 20-year absence a person could speak to the issues with relative ease? Not only is school choice a must for the continued viability of public education, but an expanded definition of school choice is also needed.

Why are we still teaching every subject to every student, instead of allowing the CHOICE to take only the courses that pertain to their study of interest? Why are the same age-old credentials — high school diploma, college degree and industry certification — seen as the primary pathways to prosperity? Why not allow children the CHOICE to take a course, apply learning to life, then take another course if/when needed instead of having to complete a “well-rounded” and “comprehensive” diploma/degree/certification program?

Lastly, and perhaps most contradictory to the narrative on school choice, why do state and federal lawmakers strip away a teacher’s CHOICES in deciding what to teach, how to teach and how best to measure student proficiency?

This country was built on freedoms of CHOICE. There are many areas of our lives where CHOICE is sought after and valued. Why should education be any different?

What is needed for CHOICE to thrive, within our public schools and districts?

One: public school leaders must fully embrace CHOICE by not seeking to protect programs and structures that have proven to be ineffective simply out of blind loyalty. Our loyalty must be with our children and the CHOICE options that best meet their needs.

Two: we need to create even more CHOICES so that personalization is maximized for our students, families and communities. Our commitment to age-old practices, structures and requirements assume that the future is predictable. Nothing could be further from reality.

Three: state and federal lawmakers must stop creating legislative rulings that drive the foundational inquiry of this article. Is it possible to have strong public schools and choice? I will propose an alternative question. Is it possible to have strong public schools and choice when laws exacerbate tensions among public, private and charter members of the education community?

I do not find fault with “the strong will survive” approach to weeding out the bad educational actor. This allows for the expansion of successful programs and structures that enhance the likes of America’s babies. Why would I not welcome this thinking, especially when considering that children who are most at-risk of not meeting with success are disproportionately black and brown boys living in poverty? I am them; they are me.

Intentional predetermination of who “the strong” is that “will survive” by passing unjust legislation and disparate funding formulas will only recreate the “one- size-fits-all” educational conditions we are trying to get away from.

It is possible to have strong public schools and choice.Let us work together to ensure that this desired outcome moves from “possible” to “probable.”

As I embark on my journey as 2017 National Teacher of the Year, I am eager to have conversations about the great work happening in schools across the country. But in a landscape where education issues are often painted in starkly contrasting black and white, it can be difficult — or even scary — to have the honest, nuanced conversations that these topics deserve.

Wading into the issue of school choice is particularly fraught for me. In this polarized climate, working in a charter school carries political significance, and some people see me as a symbol, not an individual.

Honestly, I get it. I grapple with the role of charters in education, too. But one piece of advice I have been given again and again in this work is that I need to ground my voice in my own experiences as a teacher. I can’t speak for all teachers. I don’t know everything there is to know about education. What I do know is what school choice looks like at my school.

I teach at Codman Academy Charter Public School in Dorchester, Massachusetts, a small school with deep ties to its community. We share a building with a community health center where juniors and seniors can conduct professional internships. Freshmen take gym classes at the local YMCA a few blocks away. Our curricula center on social justice and empowering students as both learners and community members. And, most importantly, we are a public school — free, open to all students and accountable to the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). We meet rigorous state standards while serving our students’ diverse learning needs. Walk into my classroom and you’ll find students on the autism spectrum, those with learning disabilities and English language learners. You’ll find students with emotional disabilities and behavior plans. Above all, though, you’ll find students and teachers engaged in scholarship and working to meet goals set by DESE during our most recent charter renewal process.

Students can benefit from a system in which a limited number of small, community-based, nonprofit public
charter schools operate with increased autonomy, under the authority of and accountable to the state, in order to innovate, collaborate and share ideas with the broader education community. Any system of school choice must protect students’ civil rights by ensuring equitable access for diverse learners and protecting all students from discrimination based on race, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity. A choice system that isn’t founded in these principles will not fulfill the promise of public education.

In our classrooms, we begin new lessons by defining key vocabulary and setting norms for our work together. We encourage our students to explore new ideas, do their research and challenge assumptions. We teach them to listen to one another and collaborate. Rather than giving in to the impulse to disengage from conversations because they are too scary, or shouting at one another across a void of assumptions, I hope teachers can use our own practice as a model for how to engage. If we keep students at the center of our conversations, we can work together to envision a school choice system that is equitable and designed to meet all students’ needs.

This is a question I get asked a lot in my role as the CEO of KIPP (Knowledge Is Power Program), a national network of over 200 public charter schools that educates 88,000 students from underserved communities in 20 states across the country. It’s also a question I think about a lot as a parent whose children attend public schools in New York City.

My answer is, yes, emphatically. Choice and strong public schools are not mutually exclusive, and we have increasing examples that prove the two can not only coexist, but also thrive together. There is growing evidence in communities across the country that public charter schools are having a positive impact on achievement of students in neighboring district schools.

This summer, a new study of New York City public schools showed that the opening of a charter school can improve student achievement in nearby public schools. Temple University professor Sarah Cordes found that the simple presence of a charter school co-located in a building with a traditional public school has a positive impact on student achievement in the co-located public school. The gains were especially significant for students with disabilities.

In Washington, D.C., the existence of public charter schools has had a positive influence on academic performance across the district. Between 2010 and 2015, as the number of charter schools grew by almost a third, significantly more students attending both district and charter schools met standards both in English and in math. These results refute the assumption that charter schools drag down outcomes for students who attend district schools.