The United States, New York State, and Massachusetts all have something in common. They're running big budget deficits. There are many proposed solutions, but there's one I haven't heard. No one has proposed turning the U.S. over to Yale University for ten years so that Yale could straighten the country out or that Columbia and Harvard take over New York and Massachusetts. But something like that is about to happen in Chelsea, Massachusetts - and it's getting almost no attention.
The Chelsea school district is in bad shape. Chelsea is a poor, largely immigrant community, the poorest in the state, so the taxes it raises for its schools can't match those of other districts. Teacher salaries are the lowest in the state. The results are just what you might expect: high student dropout rates, dismal results on tests and poor teacher morale. The school committee is ready to give up. It hasn't successfully managed the schools, and it hasn't been able to convince the community to pay more. It knows it can't improve the schools with the money it's getting. But, just how does a school committee give up?
Several years ago, John Silber, president of Boston University, proposed that BU, a private institution, take over Boston public schools. He said that BU could do a much better job of running them than the elected school committee. BU didn't end up with the big Boston fish so it tried again, unsuccessfully, in Lowell, Massachusetts. Both school districts wanted to help, but not the fat strings attached to it.
Now, however, BU might get little Chelsea because the school committee seems willing to turn over its authority to operate and manage the schools to BU - for ten years! Under the proposed agreement between the Chelsea School Committee and BU, BU would in effect become the school committee. But, unlike an elected school committee, BU would be exempt from the state's open meetings, public records, and conflict of interest laws and would not be liable for any of its actions in Chelsea, among other exemptions.
The school committee seems willing to allow BU to carry out the powers of a public body without assuming any of the duties and responsibilities of a public body. You can say that if that's what the school committee wants, let them do it. But if that unprecedented move takes place in Chelsea, it can happen elsewhere, so it deserves plenty of discussion.
The teachers have lots of questions. As victims of the current system, they are brightened by the education reforms that BU promises, and are eager to become partners in reform. But if BU takes over, will they still be public employees? Will they lose their due process and job security rights and the collective bargaining status of the union they have chosen? The school committee's proposed agreement suggests they might.
But there should be public concern and discussion of many other issues. One is the issue of money. BU has said that the school district can't be properly run (and BU won't take it on) unless there's substantially more money. BU' s education reform plan proposes huge increases in expenditures for teacher salaries, for retraining, bilingual, early childhood, parent, and other programs. The school committee would allow BU to raise and spend the money for Chelsea.
But why should anyone give money to BU rather than to the school district itself? If only BU can get the money, what happens when BU gets out of the picture in ten years - or earlier, if the amount of money it wants isn't produced? How do grants or gifts get the district into solid financial shape after the "soft" money disappears?
Another question that needs to be raised is, even if it is desirable to have the Chelsea schools run by a private institution instead of its school board, why BU? Does BU have a track record of running elementary and secondary schools? Why didn't the school committee give public notice of a need for help so that other universities or businesses or unions or non-profit groups or a consortia of these groups might have come forth, perhaps with better reform plans? Perhaps other groups might have proposed plans without such heavy strings attached, such as exemptions from state laws and oversight. We don't know the answer, only the question it raises: Should a public agency, elected by people, be permitted to turn over all or most of the responsibilities vested in it by making a deal with one outside group, without considering alternatives?
Unfortunately, the debate surrounding Chelsea will have a strong element of unreality about it. Everyone agrees the local school committee has not done a good job, but does that mean that anyone else has a magic bullet? Of course not, but that's what the public is being sold: the school committee can't raise money, but through BU it will; the school committee can't raise test sores or reform the schools, but through BU test scores will be up dramatically in 5 years and Chelsea will be a national model of excellence.
In medicine we're wary of the pill peddler who sells a cure for a disease that has not yet responded to anything the medical profession has yet developed. We'd be much better off if we promoted the same attitude in education. It would be refreshing if BU or some other institution came along and said, "We're not making promises. It's a very tough set of problems and no one has solved it all. We know what's been tried in the past that didn't work and have some solid ideas about what may work. We're ready to develop them with teachers, parents and others. We know research better than practice but together can help produce knowledge and answers. We know that's not what you want to hear but as in other fields, real progress comes from collaboration and steady research - not from quick-fix publicrelations moves."
The Chelsea situation is a tough one. In principle, it's not a good idea to give up our democratic rights to run our institutions, to elect our officials, and to change policy and personnel. But we shouldn't ignore the fact that the school committee, perhaps the people of Chelsea, are so desperate that this is exactly what they're considering. Bringing education reform and money to Chelsea is a much needed ray of hope for that needy community. No one, least of all the teachers will argue over that. But can't we find a way of helping without sacrificing basic democratic values?