Analysis: What the Media Have Gotten Wrong About Betsy DeVos and Detroit’s Schools
If we ask Republicans who they believe is responsible for Detroit’s decline, they will point to big labor. On the other hand, Democrats will blame big business. However, The New York Times seems to place the blame on Betsy DeVos, Trump’s nominee for secretary of education.
The Times has recently published two articles that attribute the sorry state of Detroit’s schools to DeVos. The first article, written by Tulane professor Doug Harris, claims that she is responsible for the biggest school reform disaster in the country. The second article, by Kate Zernike, describes how DeVos influenced the decision to discard a crucial component of a comprehensive reform package that was passed by the Michigan legislature this year.
While it may seem peculiar to hold a private citizen accountable for the state of Detroit’s schools, it is reasonable to examine DeVos’s record as an education advocate to understand her beliefs. Thanks to the work of Harris, Zernike, and others, a misguided consensus is forming that she is someone who strongly supports school choice and opposes sensible school accountability measures.
However, this conclusion is perplexing. The best way to understand DeVos’s convictions is by looking at the organizations she supports and their endorsement of what is known as the charter accountability agenda.
This agenda consists of three main pillars:
1. The use of A-to-F school grades to help parents make informed choices.
2. The closure of underperforming charter schools as the default option.
3. The establishment of standards for charter authorizers to ensure that their incentives are aligned with promoting high-quality schools.
The Great Lakes Education Project, which is supported by DeVos, fought for all three of these pillars during the debate over the $617 million rescue package for Detroit Public Schools. They also argued that district schools should be held equally accountable.
They opposed the proposed Detroit Education Commission (DEC), which would have given politicians the power to open, close, and locate charter schools. All members of the commission would have been appointed by the mayor of Detroit. While some charter advocates view Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan as an ally, there were valid concerns about whether he or a future mayor would administer the commission impartially.
This doubt arose because in November 2014, Duggan enacted a ban on selling any of the district’s 77 vacant school properties to charter operators if they were within one mile of an open DPS school. Many of these properties were located in underserved areas, which some critics expected charters to address. However, these same critics also criticized charter advocates for being hesitant to empower a mayor who had previously prevented them from operating in such areas.
Even if Detroit’s mayor attempted to govern fairly, the DEC’s incentives would have favored district schools at the expense of charter schools. The commission’s success would have been measured in five years based on whether it achieved a "stabilization of or increase in" the district’s enrollment. Since the commission did not have the means to create a surge in enrollment, the only way to meet its goal would be to take students away from charter schools.
In the end, the reform package was passed without the DEC. However, an A-to-F accountability system will still be implemented, providing parents with valuable information. This system will be managed by the state’s School Reform Office instead of the DEC. Charter schools that rank in the bottom 5 percent of all schools for three consecutive years will be automatically closed by the state.
Moreover, charter authorizers in Detroit will now have to obtain accreditation by demonstrating that they can provide effective oversight before being allowed to open a charter school. Failed charters will no longer have the option to seek a new authorizer, and they will not be granted a second chance without significant changes to their leadership and curriculum. Additionally, a consultative body resembling the DEC, called the Citizens Advisory Board, was established to improve the efficiency and transparency of Detroit’s charter schools and provide parents with the necessary information to make informed decisions.
This summarizes the extent of the accountability agenda. Despite this, researchers and journalists continue to label Detroit as the "Wild West" of charter schooling, unfavorably comparing it to New Orleans, which they claim has implemented charter regulations and state oversight effectively. While it may be facile to compare Detroit to New Orleans, given that the latter experienced a natural disaster that led to the establishment of the only all-charter district in America, it is still worthwhile to reflect on the bill similar to the DEC that was passed by the Louisiana legislature earlier this year.
Both sides had valid points. The creators of the law made significant efforts to ensure that political interests would not have an advantage. However, if the teachers unions manage to elect a sympathetic majority, they could appoint a superintendent against charter schools with immense power. Is the risk worth having elected oversight? Is it even a worthy cause to give elected representatives control over charter schools when parents already have the freedom to choose and not all well-intentioned politicians are wise?
These questions are not just subjects of disagreement among reasonable people, but also among like-minded charter school supporters.
Overall, a fair analysis of the situation suggests that DeVos aligns with the mainstream view on school accountability. She supports assigning A-to-F grades, closing underperforming schools, and raising standards for authorizers. On the more controversial issue of whether parents or politicians should have more influence in judging schools, she leans towards giving more power to parents.
This may be enough for some education researchers and reporters to label her as an extremist. However, we believe that most Americans would view it as a sensible stance.
Max Eden is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute.
Ben DeGrow is the director of education policy at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.
Sign up for Newsletter and receive stories like these directly in your inbox.
