'Public schools are the glue that holds a neighborhood together'

AS NEGOTIATIONS, legislation and rumors fly fast and furious around Harrisburg (as they do every year at budget time), there is one particular proposal that emerged recently and is particularly troubling. We have been hearing about the possibility of turning every last one of Philadelphia's public schools into charter schools. This would be bad for children, bad for teachers and, in a fundamental way, bad for society.

I am the product of Philadelphia public schools; multiple schools, in fact. I attended seven public schools before completing fourth grade, and while they were imperfect, as all human endeavors are, they were terrific. The teachers taught me well. They were creative, caring and patient, and they knew their subject matters. They helped rescue me from being a troublemaker on the streets and set me on a path toward reaching my full potential and being an asset to the community. (I acknowledge this is somewhat in dispute around election time.)

I have seen firsthand the dedication of the teachers and administrators of our public schools, but their historical value goes well beyond what they did for me or any other individual child. I learned quite early that public schools are the glue that holds a neighborhood together. Because traditional public schools draw their students from a defined geographical area, the schools become the focus of neighborhood activity. They are the team we cheer for, the landmark that becomes the shorthand for our place in the city and the place parents gather to meet each other. Through the subtle osmosis of such meetings, there occurs a transformation turning a random collection of individual families into a community.

Since local public schools must accept everyone in the neighborhood, each child and every parent feels like he or she belongs to the school's extended family. No matter how big or small a community, the cohesion provided by local public schools is a critical aspect of life that cannot be duplicated anywhere else.

Under current law, charters are not required to hire certified teachers, who we know have acquired the education and training to make them great at what they do. Many charters are for-profit, and studies have shown that they spend, on average, about 20 percent less of their budgets in the classroom than do public schools, instead using taxpayer dollars to turn a profit for their owners. Unlike public schools, which are run by elected officials held accountable by the taxpayers, charters are generally run by private boards of directors who are not accountable to the people who pay the bills.

As I mentioned earlier, Philadelphia public schools are not perfect. But many of their problems are caused by the Corbett administration's steely determination not to fund them adequately. The latest budget is truly apocalyptic. If your house needs repair, the answer is to invest in repairing your house. It is not to build a second, separate house. Reasonable state funding could easily restore to the Philadelphia public schools the respect they have historically enjoyed.

As I think back on my experiences as a child, I imagine that if charter schools were the only option, who knows what would have happened to me. Many schools would not have taken me, and my mother, who did not drive, could never have transported me to most others. Consequently, the city I grew up in would not have been the same.

Last week, I went back to the Julia Ward Howe School - where I attended first grade - as the keynote speaker for its 100th anniversary. As I walked the halls for the first time in 45 years, I had a memory rush. I thought of my teacher, I remembered playing with other kids in the neighborhood and the first signs of a budding self-confidence that grew because of the safe and nurturing environment provided by my public school. It would be a tragedy to lose this crucial part of the fabric of American life.