Let’s put aside arguments about who is most responsible for Tucson Unified School District’s declining enrollment and poor test scores. By my lights, the district does a far better job with its students than it is given credit for, but I know others see it as a failing district which has brought its problems on itself.
Instead of arguing about the strengths and weaknesses of the district, let’s consider a different question: Who benefits when TUSD is trashed incessantly? Who wins when TUSD loses?
The short answer is, the winners are the enemies of public education. They have spent decades building a multi-billion dollar campaign to make terms like “failing schools” and “government schools” part of our vocabulary. They portray our public schools as a national disgrace, then figure out ways to move as many students as they can into charter and private schools. It began as a conservative, Republican-based effort, but an increasing number of progressives, and even people who consider themselves further to the left than garden variety progressives, have joined in.
It’s not surprising to hear people on the political right singing in the anti-TUSD chorus. It’s built into their anti-“Big Government,” anti-regulation DNA. If you want to shrink government to the size where it can be drowned in a bathtub as Grover Norquist, a man who never saw a tax or a government program he didn’t hate, famously said, getting rid of all those nasty “government schools” makes perfect sense.
But when people on the political left join the chorus and sing, “TUSD is awful, let me count the ways,” most of them don’t realize that they’re being played, that they’re singing a tune out of the conservative playbook. I can almost see the players on the right high-fiving each other every time someone on the left lends the anti-public school cause a helping hand.
Unfortunately, this phenomenon isn’t limited to Tucson. The anti-public school movement has been alarmingly successful at working its way into the national consciousness.
Let me go into more detail about the people who win when people trash our systems of public education.
The Demonizers, Privatizers and Profitizers
Demonize. Privatize. Profitize. Those are the three pillars of the “education reform” movement.
It begins with demonizing our system of public education. Before you can persuade parents of public school students to move their children to charter and private schools, you have to convince them their schools are so bad that anything would be better.
There’s nothing new about people criticizing the ways we educate our children or suggesting ways we can improve the educational process. It’s been going on as long as we have been a country. Way back in 1819, Washington Irving wrote the classic tale, The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, which featured a pompous, undereducated, incompetent schoolmaster named Ichabod Crane. The story lampoons him and the meager education provided in the one room schoolhouses of the day. Many of our greatest writers have continued Irving’s tradition of depicting schools and teachers in less-than-flattering, and sometimes damning, lights. Journalists and educators regularly publish articles and essays describing the problems plaguing our schools and suggesting ways to improve them.
All with good reason. The process of educating young people will always be a flawed enterprise. Criticism and constructive suggestions for change are part of the continuing process of figuring out ways our schools can better serve our children.
But today’s “A pox on all your public schools” style of blanket demonization is a recent phenomenon. Its purpose is not to improve the schools. It is to weaken and eventually dismantle them.
If we’re looking for a moment when the demonization movement began in earnest, it would be the Reagan administration’s 1983 publication, A Nation at Risk, which argues that the way we educate our children is so deficient, it threatens our nation’s survival. The pamphlet’s thesis is summed up in its most famous passage, which compares the failures of our schools to an attack by a foreign power.
“If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war. As it stands, we have allowed this to happen to ourselves. . . . We have, in effect, been committing an act of unthinking, unilateral educational disarmament.”
A Nation at Risk took the country by storm. It had people asking, is public education really so bad it poses a risk to our national security?
Yes, replied the demonizers. It really is that bad.
The intensity of demonization has picked up since that first shot across the bow, helped along by some of our wealthiest families, which have spent billions creating what has come to be called the “education reform” movement. Every time we hear about troubled schools and school districts, the demonizers use it as an opportunity to generalize the problem into a plague engulfing the entire system of public education, an epidemic of national proportions. Our schools, they want us to believe, are in their death throes.
Their efforts have been and continue to be successful. The “failing schools” mantra has become part of our national consciousness.
I experienced the devolution of the country’s view of teachers and schools firsthand. For my first 20 years as a teacher, a level of respect was afforded me by friends, and even people I met for the first time, simply because I was a member of an esteemed profession. But starting in the early 1990s, things began to change. Instead of being greeted with respect when people learned I was a teacher, I was eyed with suspicion. I was another one of those failing teachers working in one of those failing schools. I was asked why our schools are doing such a lousy job educating our children. They weren’t accusing me personally. They were expressing a notion that has become common wisdom, that our public schools are failing to educate our children.
Government schools are beyond redemption, the demonizers insist, so why should we throw more money at them? Cash-strapped state legislatures, especially Republican-majority legislatures, agreed and have been more than happy to cut school funding. As a result, underpaid teachers are working in classrooms with too many students and using decades-old teaching materials. The school buildings where they work are deteriorating from lack of repair.
The demonizers point to underfunded schools they helped create and use them as another reason to disparage public education. Things are getting even worse, they say.
That’s the first step, convincing people that our public school system is so badly damaged, it is beyond repair. The next step is to offer an alternative: privatization. If public, government-run schools are a failure, they argue, the obvious solution is to put education into private hands.
At first, the privatizers only had one weapon in their arsenal: private school vouchers. Government-funded vouchers to pay private school tuition came into use in the 1950s, but most of them were localized programs put in place in southern states as a way to allow white students to continue attending segregated schools after Brown v. Board of Education mandated school integration. It wasn’t until the education reformers’ anti-public school message became part of the general discourse that we began to see voucher programs implemented in other parts to the country.
Even then, vouchers have been a limited success. Private schools educate no more than 10% of the population, and most schools attract students because of their religious affiliation. Students in religious schools continue to make up 80% of the country’s private school population.
It wasn’t until charter schools began to take hold in the early 1990s that privatization took off. Charters have the advantage of receiving public funding, making the cumbersome system of requesting and receiving individual student vouchers unnecessary. For privatizers, charters are the best of both worlds. The government funds them on a per-student basis, just like school districts, yet the privately-run schools retain a great deal of independence from government rules and regulations. Even though well-funded voucher systems exist in many states, private schools continue to shrink as a percentage of the entire school population. Charters, on the other hand, continue to grow.
Privatization of education is a big win for conservatives. It allows them to create schools in their own image where they can choose curriculum and create rules for student dress and behavior which fit their world view. It shrinks the size and power of government while increasing the size and power of the private sector. It also strikes a blow against powerful teacher unions by pulling teachers away from consolidated school districts and scattering them over an array of disconnected schools, some of which have a mix of credentialed and non-credentialed teachers, making union organizing far more difficult.
Privatization offers another potential win for the education reformers — the ability to make a profit. With 51 million young people attending K-12 schools, education is an untapped market, a gold mine waiting to be exploited. Just think, if you skimmed only $10 off the top from 51 million students, that would be a half billion dollar haul. And that’s just $10 a head. If the people who run charter schools and for-profit private schools make full use of their money-making acumen, they can figure out any number of ways to capture a significant chunk of the $8,000 to $20,000 a year the government pays to educate each student. That’s billions of dollars in potential profit. The possibilities are almost endless.
Profitizing private and charter school education is in its infancy. Thus far they have only been able to siphon off 20% of the total student population. Nonetheless, people who run charters have figured out ways to make serious money. Recently, Arizona state senator Eddie Farnsworth netted $13.9 million from the sale of his charter school chain to friends. Another way charters can turn into cash cows is by creating for-profit charter management organizations(CMOS) which take care of their finances. The schools’ government funding disappears when it moves up to the CMOs, allowing the owners to pay themselves high salaries and make lucrative financial deals far from the prying eyes of government auditors and the public.
One of the most notorious examples of turning privatization into profit is K12 Inc., a chain of online charter schools. It is a publicly traded corporation — you can buy stock at $30 a share — which brought in $253.3 million in revenues last quarter and netted $18.5 million in profit.
Making a profit offers an added incentive for the education reform movement. The more demonizing, the more privatizing, the greater the chances for operators of privatized schools to take a cut of the hundreds of billions of dollars spent educating our children.
The Scapegoaters
Scapegoats are valuable tools for people and institutions hoping to avoid responsibility for their actions by shifting the blame. Few institutions fill the role of scapegoat better than our public schools.
If you asked the manufacturing sector in the 1990s why productivity growth was slowing, they would be sure to tell you it’s not their fault. “It’s the kids today. They come out of school with no job skills and no work ethic. They’re the ones dragging down production.” Ask today’s business leaders why the minimum wage isn’t keeping up with inflation, and they give the same basic answer. “Schools are doing such a lousy job educating our kids, our workers barely deserve the wages we’re paying them.”
Why do African Americans remain at the bottom of the country’s economy? “Look at the schools they go to! If teachers knew what they were doing and taught those kids basic reading and writing skills and a little respect for authority, they would be able to climb the economic ladder like everyone else.” How about poor white families trapped in a cycle of poverty for generations? “Like I said before, it’s the schools.”
It’s the schools. That’s a convenient, all purpose excuse for problems the country’s leaders don’t want to deal with.
Politicians are fond of creating blue ribbon commissions to conduct five year studies when they want to duck an issue. By the time the experts return with their 200 page white papers which no one reads, the country has moved on.
Our schools are even more effective when it comes to deflecting calls for change. You simply blame the schools for the problems and challenge educators to come up with New! Improved! educational strategies. Then you sit back and wait. Everyone knows it takes years for students to work their way through the grades using the new educational methodology before we can hope to see any positive results. Five or 10 years down the line, most of the country has forgotten the reasons the changes were made in the first place. Some people will continue to insist that nothing has changed, that the problems are as bad as ever. The answer to their concerns is, “It’s the failing schools! Time for another round of New! Improved! educational strategies. Or, better yet, let’s send all those kids in failing public schools to charters and private schools whose owners know how to get the job done.”
Who Loses?
Who loses when we trash TUSD and all the other public schools which have been demonized so effectively by the education reform movement?
Children lose. Public schools are more successful when they have enough money to pay teachers the salaries they deserve, provide up-to-date teaching materials for students to use and keep their school buildings in good running order. And they’re more successful when they have the respect and support of their communities.
Parents who love their children and want the best for them lose too, of course.
The progressive agenda loses. Efforts by people who want to correct some of the social and economic problems which plague our society, problems which, among other things, lead to children doing poorly in school, are dismissed by conservatives who point their fingers at the public schools as the cause of society’s ills.
And when progressives join conservatives in public school bashing, they make efforts for genuine societal reform that much more difficult.
And our country loses. We are in danger of harming one of our finest, most innovative creations, our system of universal, free public education. We put our future at risk if we discard the vision of an increasingly equitable and effective system of schooling and replace it with a balkanized hodgepodge of isolated, privatized schools.
This article appears in Jul 18-24, 2019.


Now you are blaming progressives? And you are completely wrong about my family. The first step was getting out of the public school monopoly. Nothing else. And we immediately saw improvements in all areas.
So now maybe TUSD can integrate a Sex Ed course that most parents do not want taught to their children. At least the few that are paying attention.
Oh look, they are leaving again.
It’s like the captain of the Titanic who thought if he could just blow enough smoke up the ship’s tail pipe it could be saved. Not going to happen here. The damage has been done and there are just too many holes to be plugged.
And by the way, public school teachers earn more and have better benefits, including retirement pensions, than do charter or private teachers. Let’s get that straight.
Something for free has no value. Public schools became too free. Just wait until they do that to college.
Thanks, David, for a good rehearsal of the catechism of your faith community. For some of us, it’s not failing to understand all the articles of your faith that has motivated our apostasy; it’s the many, many points where your faith masks or distorts the realities in our communities.
Failing to speak honestly about the educational inadequacy of what is ACTUALLY happening in SOME portions of districts like TUSD and Amphi is one hugely confidence-undermining aspect of your approach. Reality denial is not a way to combat your universal bugbear, “PRIVATIZERS!!!” You are in fact handing them victory; discourse about public schools loses its ability to leverage necessary reform as it becomes thick with lies and aggressions against anyone who dares to tell the truth about what they have experienced in the schools.
An institution that has lost the ability to tell the truth about itself loses its ability to improve when necessary and thus loses its legitimacy.
If the “truth” problem were the only problem with your approach, it would be solve-able if you and your fellow travelers could come clean about what is actually happening in the classrooms and in the governance meetings. But there is another problem: your whole system of thought and practice stands or falls with the validity of modernism, and modernism has been pretty roundly discredited. American institutions WILL eventually catch up with the fact that almost no one now believes that there is a “neutral” position which can form the foundation for a universal system of schooling that all the different religious and cultural groups in this country would or should find acceptable. You can call pluralism “balkanized” if you like, but that won’t change the direction things are moving in.
The practical thing to do is to start having conversations about what meaningful standards and transparent funding mechanisms should be in a pluralist environment and how we can invest in better agencies to oversee a pluralist school system. Better oversight IS needed, across the board, in public district schools, charters, and privates. What is NOT needed: lying about what is going on in TUSD and rehearsing and re-rehearsing the utopian catechism of some theoretical modernist factory-model one-size-fits-all public school system that never has existed and never will exist.
That faith is dead.
Great article, David. Thank you for your knowledge, experience and insight. – Leila Counts, TUSD Board Member, Happy TUSD Parent, Educator
Who wins? Rich people.
Ignorance is as ignorance resents (and proud of it).
It would be interesting to hear the numbers of TUSD teachers who send their own kids to private or parochial schools. This was going on at least 30 years ago, but I think it started years before that. Observant teachers knew earlier & more about the downhill slide of TUSD schools than many other parents of students in the district.
In the 1990s one TUSD “Teacher of the Year” had his own daughter attending a parochial school where the teachers worked longer hours & made a fraction of the pay of TUSD employees. I doubt he would have argued that more money or higher teacher salaries would bring improvement in the quality of education.
Responses: Ed Stays Valid Only…… “Modernist factory one size fits all” came about largely because of a shortage of money thereby necessitating factory structures to minimize costs. Not enough money going into the system required large class sizes, standardized procedures and practices that only minimally meets the needs of the individuals. If we had an ed system like say Finland where everyone gets the same amount, and a large amount, of school dollars, then we could meet the individual needs of students.
No Going Back….Public school teachers might make more money and benefits because private or charter school owners are sucking up all the taxpayer dollars to line their pockets. Instead of public money going to kids and teachers it’s going to ed profiteers. Something for free means free money going to school owners/operators. BASIS owners are multimillionaires made wealthy by screwing taxpayers and kids.
Carlos your explanation sounds just like what the democrats do with everything from race, global warming, health care and immigration. They line their pockets from donors to corporate entities. Funny you would have said that.
Maybe what we should be asking is why can’t the public schools operate with the same money that charters do. let’s start with Admin jobs payroll. And the thousands of them.
“Public schools are more successful when they have the money to pay teachers the salaries they deserve.”
Nope. Should I run the comparison of Arizona versus Connecticut again? Connecticut spends $22,000 per student versus our $8,500 per student. Yet, our math scores are higher for Blacks, Hispanics, Whites and Asians. The only thing that spending has done for Connecticut is to damage their economy so severely that they haven’t created a single job for their high school and college graduates in 20 years.
A better sentence would be that public schools are more successful when they engage parents, inspire students and support teachers. When they focus on providing an incredibly great education for every student. And, when they know how to do it.
Money has nothing to do with it.
@David Safier: Do you see any difference between trashing TUSD and telling the truth about TUSD, David? Think for a minute about what kind of damage falsely positive statements and misleading, manufactured images that bear little relation to student experiences may have. Think about what may happen to people who, seeing the districts advertisements for an arts focused school, enroll their kids in a school that has recently lost magnet status for failure to meet the improvement benchmarks stipulated by the court. Think about people who hear Leila Counts story of highly qualified Kindergarten teachers and then enroll a kid in one of 80-something classrooms that will be covered by a rotating cast of uncertified, long-term subs this year. What are the consequences of a complete mis-match between projected image and reality? What happens to betrayed and destroyed trust, David? Look at your bar graphs showing declining enrollment. There it is. Your approach to writing about the district perpetuates and feeds it.
@ Carlos Encinas: I wish I could believe that in TUSD, as in Finland, increased funding would necessarily get allocated in ways that improved the quality of education. I used to believe it, but then I watched the governing board and their budgets for awhile. Money from parent fundraising, dear g money, 301 money, Red for Ed money: same story. It gets recruited with stories about what students and teachers need. Too often, it gets applied in other ways.
Dear g = autocorrected DESEG
MMP I have been a teacher for35 years in TUSD. I sent my two children to TUSD schools. They are doing great. Most teachers send their children to TUSD schools or other public schools.Your comment was totally false.
When I taught in Arizona Catholic schools I had several students whose parents were teachers or counselors in local public school systems. At one point, one of the parents of my students was actively recruited by our principal. The parent wanted to take the teaching position offered her in the Catholic school, but could not afford to do so because the difference between her public salary and the Catholic school salary was so large. Other teachers in the Catholic schools where I taught had worked twenty or more years in the public school system, then transitioned to teaching in the Catholic system after their own kids had graduated from Catholic schools, when they could afford to accept a smaller salary.
Catholic school teachers are in effect subsidizing the cost of keeping tuitions low enough so that a reasonable number of Arizona parents can afford them. Parishes and religious orders also subsidize the schools they sponsor.
A few years ago when Green Fields was struggling financially, as it had been on and off throughout its history, the entire faculty took a 10% cut in their already comparatively low salaries to help the school survive. So should we add their sacrifices to the list of sacrifices David Safier thinks we cannnot afford to make in Southern Arizona to keep schools with low class sizes, individualized attention, and uniformly fully educated, professionalized faculty in business?
We heard recently in one of these comment streams that in TUSD, a district with one of the highest per-pupil funding rates and one of the highest average salary rates of any local public district, there will probably be scores of classrooms this fall that do not have a credentialed, permanent teacher contracted to cover them.
Southern Arizona K-12, public, charter, AND private has deteriorated into an underpaid, underprofessionalized ghetto whose functionality is being patched together with duct tape and chewing gum supplied gratis by parents, teachers, religious organizations, and non-profits who have no option other than to sacrifice in one way and another to try to scaffold and supplement a failing system. And instead of addressing the problem systemically and across the board, citizens of various political allegiances fight with one another and try to use public policy to undermine one anothers preferred systems.
Oh look, in less than 12 hours the likes and dislikes here went from a normal distribution to what we typically see in the comment streams on this sad blog: scores of dislikes on every comment that strays from Democratic Party orthodoxy. Looks like somebody is rigging the distribution again, because theres no way 30-something distinct people happened to read this stream between circa 10pm 8/3 and 7am 8/4.
And that interesting question that kept popping up in the comment streams on Safiers recent pieces remains unanswered: was Safier himself, like Ms. Bracker-Sam, a public school teacher whose kid/s went to public schools, or was he a public school teacher like those mentioned in the comment following Bracker-Sams: one whose own child/ren did not go to public schools?
If the latter, it puts quite a different spin on his policy recommendations, because then he is backing policy that prevents large swaths of the Arizona population from making the same kinds of choices his own family and other wealthy families could make WITHOUT re-directing their tax dollars to support those choices.
As for that other question posed here who wins when people lie about TUSD? the answer is pretty obvious: the winner is the political machine Safier affiliates with and propagandizes for, which benefits in various ways from ongoing automatic infusions of public funds to a district where no one not the public, not the public school supporting Democratic Party, not the desegregation authority has yet figured out how to hold admin and governance accountable for uniformly and consistently applying the highest per pupil funding in the county in ways that benefit students and improve the quality of education.
Yeah, we get it: people who affiliate with this political machine do not LIKE the truth, which is that mismanagement of their own theoretically ideal but factually severely flawed system of education has made exit and alternative application of tax funds necessary for thousands of their own constituents.
I have been watching the same thing S.A.D. These loaded dislikes are more fake news faked even further. Must be an editor that wants to twist the truth.
“…the winners are enemies of public education…”
Nope.
TUSD is a district school which educates the public.
We are enemies of the concept of giving district schools a monopoly on educating the public.
We believe that the public should also be allowed to get a public education, not just at a district school, but also at a charter school, a private school and a home school.
Given a monopoly, districts will never improve. The people in power will always be the people within three years of retirement. And, when faced with the question, do I look out for my family for the next 30 years or all these strangers next year, they form pension culture.
Absent intense competition, pension culture will never propel district schools towards the highly organized state of being able to maximize student outcomes.
Competition makes everyone better. Once TUSD accepts that natural fact they could start to recover. Rather than destroying the rest, why not work at becoming the best? For thirty years we have been hoping that you would get it.