[valuearb]

Valuing "public education" means you don't value education per se, but you value the part that maintains your party a voting base of education unions and bureaucrats.

Moving my kids from public school to a charter was the second best thing we ever did for them. The difference in the quality of their education was immense.

Breaking public school unions would be the best thing we could do for public schools. There is ZERO justification for tenure at the school teacher level.

[jacobolus]

You can already see the results in several states. It’s pretty ugly so far, and likely to only get worse. Teachers are trending less qualified and less experienced, move from district to district more, turnover is higher, everyone is more stressed out, parents and students are less satisfied and less successful, schools are still poorly maintained and supplied, more money than ever gets siphoned off by business consulting firms etc. The super-wealthy in those states get a bit of a tax cut, but nobody else really sees any advantage.

The primary way that charter schools juke their stats (to the extent they are able – often their outcomes are just objectively mediocre) is by selecting out a collection of students likely to be successful and kicking out the rest. Of course, there is a spectrum, and some charter schools (just like some regular public schools) are quite successful.

Valuing “public education” means that you value education of the broad citizenry, instead of only valuing education for your own kids and screw everyone else.