‘A little bit shallow’: Cara Fitzpatrick calls for context & immediacy

The award-winning veteran praises journalists whose school choice coverage adds context and forces readers to grapple with complexity. 

By Alexander Russo

Nearly 20 years into her career, Cara Fitzpatrick has done it all. She’s been a local education reporter. She’s published award-winning investigative work, most notably the Tampa Bay Times’ blockbuster 2015 series, “Failure Factories.” Lately she’s been an editor for Chalkbeat. With the publication of her new book, “The Death of Public School,” Fitzpatrick is now an author.

In this new interview, the veteran journalist shares what she learned — and what makes for useful choice coverage.

The quality of school choice coverage varies widely, according to Fitzpatrick. A few veteran reporters do a standout job, but there’s a lot of “shallow” coverage that fails to capture history, nuance, and real-world tradeoffs.

Choice isn’t universally supported by conservatives, she points out. It doesn’t necessarily increase segregation. And families that chose public school alternatives aren’t universally happy with their decisions.

Most of all, Fitzpatrick urges reporters and editors to focus on actual families making difficult decisions.

“All of the arguments about school choice become a lot more complicated when you talk to families who are trying to make the best choice for their child with the options they have,” she says.

 

All of the arguments about school choice become a lot more complicated when you talk to families who are trying to make the best choice for their child with the options they have.

 

This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. 

Where did you start out in terms of your feelings about the traditional public school, and where did you end up?

 Cara Fitzpatrick: I didn’t really come in with rose-colored glasses about the public school system necessarily. I was starting my research on the book after having been a part of “Failure Factories,” which described the results of disastrous policy choices in one school district in Florida. Those were traditional public schools that were segregated and under-resourced. I spent a lot of time in those schools, and I found it heartbreaking. I talked to a lot of families there and heard awful stories about what was happening. And I was struck by how little it seemed that people in power cared about it.

I wondered if school choice was really an answer to these problems I had written about — and I was surprised by how much people’s reactions to that series were based on their views on choice. Traditional public school advocates often viewed “Failure Factories” through a lens of funding and integration, while choice advocates thought the obvious solution was more school choice. 

And where did your reporting lead you in terms of answering that question?

CF: I don’t know that my views on public school changed at all. It’s our country’s best attempt at educating all children, and the system is often horribly inequitable. School choice is often presented as an easy solution to that — and it’s not. There are no easy solutions.

Was there anything significantly surprising or eye opening that you learned in reporting this book — something that you didn’t know five years ago?

CF: When I started, I had kind of the general gist that I think a lot of people have, which is this stylized history of choice. What I ended up finding fascinating was that Milton Friedman did write an essay at the same time that segregationists were using school vouchers to try to get around Brown vs. Board of Education. They’re literally at the same time. And then other people were making arguments for religious liberty that resonate today and some voices were saying, ‘Actually, this could be a tool for empowerment for low-income kids.’ So many things overlap. I think that makes things more complicated and less clear cut than some advocates might like. But I think it’s more interesting.

 

I didn’t really come in with rose-colored glasses about the public school system… I wondered if school choice was really an answer to these problems.

 

Based on your reporting for the book, what did you come away thinking about the past media coverage you saw?

CF: Some of the coverage early on with charter schools was very favorable, and sort of echoed some of the language the advocates used, setting up this battle between innovation versus bureaucracy. I mention that in the book.

For the segregation era, I relied a lot on stories in the Black press, because they tended to report less “both sides” coverage about segregation. The Black press was more honest about what was really going on. But mainstream coverage had its uses, too, for research.

I relied heavily on local media coverage, particularly in cities like Milwaukee, where it was an important local story and regularly covered. That was incredibly helpful.

And what do you think when you see the media coverage of vouchers and choice in the present day?

CF: It varies quite a bit. You can kind of tell some of the reporters who’ve been at it for a while and have institutional knowledge. You know, Jeff Solochek at the Tampa Bay Times has a lot of knowledge and is consistently a really good, fair reporter. Other coverage, sometimes it’s a little bit shallow, without as much of an awareness that vouchers and choice have been around a long time.

Is there anyone else besides Solochek you would recommend for coverage of choice and vouchers?

CF: Mark Walsh at Education Week has been around a long time and has covered the legal twists and turns. His coverage has been consistently good and fair. (The lawyers will tell you that too.) I have always relied on Matt Barnum for a lot of school choice coverage, especially research. I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention him because I was a fan before I worked at Chalkbeat. J. David Goodman, who covers Texas for the New York Times, has had some good, nuanced stories about rural conservative opposition to vouchers.

Is there anyone out there who’s covering the human side of the story, as opposed to the legal or political angles?

CF: Mike Hixenbaugh at NBC News is someone who does center families and voices, particularly related to some of the culture war issues. He had one story about a gay man whose mom was trying to ban library books and she was at school board meetings – but she was a Christian homeschooler who had basically cast her gay son out of the family.

 

Some of the reporters who’ve been at it for a while and have institutional knowledge… Other coverage, sometimes it’s a little bit shallow. 

 

What should reporters know if they’re covering vouchers seriously for the first time? What widespread myths or advocate talking points should they be wary of?

CF: Oh, so many.

Advocates on both sides often say inaccurate things, particularly when it comes to research. There’s some evidence that public schools do get better — or at least, improve their test scores — in response to competition. Traditional public school advocates are reluctant to acknowledge that, but it’s worth grappling with under what circumstances that’s true, how it’s measured, and what the limitations of competition are.

You often hear that school vouchers will increase or cause segregation. The research doesn’t really support that, though it could change as programs grow. And you have to consider how segregated the public schools are, too.

You hear that there’s no accountability for choice programs. That varies a lot from program to program.

School choice advocates often present choice with no downsides, no negative research, and as a solution to all things. It’s safe to say it’s not that simple. Some conservative think tanks also seem to publish frequent research that neatly aligns with their views. Read it carefully. Ask other researchers about it.

Keep in mind not all families have had positive experiences with their “choices.” Attrition in choice programs is worth looking into.

I think reporters also should be aware that not all conservatives agree on every aspect of school choice. We’re seeing this with religious charter schools right now, as well as the fight over school vouchers in Texas.

What does “shallow” choice coverage look like, besides that it ignores the historical context? And how can reporters help readers grapple with the complexities?

CF: I think you can cover school choice as “advocates say this” and “critics counter this,” but the complexity comes from understanding the long arc of the history and — this is important — centering families. All of the arguments about school choice become a lot more complicated when you talk to families who are trying to make the best choice for their child with the options they have. And, also, understanding that probably most families aren’t thinking about the broader political arguments when they’re making these choices. They’re thinking about things like recess and safety and enrichment options and class sizes and start times.

One example of shallow or just misguided coverage was with Carson vs. Makin last year. The case basically said religious private schools can’t be excluded from public benefits given to secular private schools. Some of the news coverage made it sound like this was just the Roberts court gone wild — which ignores that Carson vs. Makin was built on a string of cases going back 20-plus years and is part of a very successful effort by conservatives to push church-state law in that direction. In my view, that’s a more interesting story. Some lawyers involved in those earlier cases will tell you that they never thought the religious discrimination argument would get this far.

What are the big stories and angles for choice and vouchers in 2023-24? What topics and events should education journalists be looking for?

CF: The legal trajectory of religious charter schools is an ongoing and incredibly interesting story. I expect we’ll see that issue crop up in states other than just Oklahoma. But I’m also interested to see how big some of these school voucher programs get and where they end up in terms of cost versus original projections, particularly the universal programs. I want to know who is enrolling in the programs. I want to know what kinds of things are allowable expenses, and how parents are spending the money. And I’m interested in enrollment declines in traditional public schools, and possible increases at charter, private, and Catholic schools.

Previously from The Grade

Laura Meckler on de-tracking, school culture wars coverage, and ‘Monday-morning quarterbacking’

‘A gift’: John Woodrow Cox on covering school gun violence

‘We could have been a lot louder,’ says NPR’s Anya Kamenetz

A cautionary tale about linking school choice and segregation (Gail Cornwall)

Reconsidering the charter school segregation narrative (Jessica Lahitou)