Charter school pioneer: Charters and public school systems can learn from each other
Interesting essay in Education Week by Ember Reichgott Junge of Minnesota, who, while in the state senate there, authored the first chartered school law in the nation.
Here is an excerpt. Please read the full piece in Ed Week:
As the state Senate author of Minnesota’s 1991 legislation that authorized the first chartered schools (or charter schools, as most people call them), I am in awe of the number of young lives touched by chartering today: 2 million students in an estimated 5,600 schools across the country.
And yet, I know that some charters are not delivering the quality education we envisioned 20 years ago.
As we look to the future of chartering, it is important to revisit the origins and set the historical record straight. Here are some key facts that may surprise you and dispel a few common myths.
• Legislation for chartered schools came from the conservative right, in opposition to unions. False.
• The proposal for a “charter school” was suggested by a prominent leader of a national teachers’ union. True. It was Albert Shanker, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, who challenged attendees at an education reform conference in Minnesota in 1988 to imagine how teachers might partner with the public education “system” to encourage risk-taking and change.
• Chartered schools emerged on the national scene within weeks of passage of the Minnesota legislation. True.
• As the Senate author, I celebrated passage of the first chartered school bill when it passed by a margin of three votes. False. By the time we passed the chartered school law in 1991 in Minnesota, I thought the bill was so compromised that a chartered school would never open. I was bitterly disappointed. Approval to start a chartered school was required from both the state board of education and the local school board; there was no alternate sponsor.
Yet, years later, I realized that had we not compromised on the bill, chartering likely would not have passed the state legislature.
It’s time to ask: What’s working in public chartered schools, and what’s working in public district schools? How can we learn from each other?
–From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
73 comments Add your comment
Dunwoody Mom
June 13th, 2012
6:49 am
I would like to ask Ms. Junge if she ever foresaw that the charter school movement would become a political pawn in many states or that it would be taken over by for-profit companies.
Tabitha
June 13th, 2012
7:02 am
You use the “for profit” term like its evil. Most of us experience for profits giving us better products and better service than the government. For profit companies have a simultaneous pressure for more quality and lower costs. It’s called competition.
Government on the other hand does not.
I like the idea of competiton, more models, more questions, more data, more experiments, more choices. Over time, I have a lot more faith in the working of the market than I do the government. It’s not like the government has not had the field to itself for a long, long time. Many of us feel like innovation and change are needed in areas that government schools won’t attempt.
Dunwoody Mom
June 13th, 2012
7:07 am
“For-Profit” in terms of educating our children is evil.
Shar
June 13th, 2012
7:13 am
Why not add private schools into that mix of learning? As their approach is more focused (selected students and a curriculum that is almost exclusively college preparatory unless the school is remedial in nature) they are a good source of information on how to address particular populations. Unlike public schools, private ones are completely dependent upon tuition and gifts paid by willing parents or other funders – there is no automatic millage rate increase or SPLOST to count on. They have to prove value all the time, in just about every class, activity and facility, in order to survive. And their teacher pay scales are lower, too – they have to provide an environment in which teachers want to work.
It’s easy to revile private schools because they get to pick their students and can throw out the ones that misbehave. If parents were required to participate in their public schools and their children were required to behave in order to qualify for school choice, it is conceivable that a similarly constructive environment could be achieved for the broader array of needs and abilities that public schools serve.
Attentive Parent
June 13th, 2012
7:19 am
I have a copy of Albert Shanker’s full speech which is hugely alarming on how to manipulate the language of charters to hoodwink the American public. My copy though occurred at the National Press Club in Washington, DC on March 31, 1988.
I also have a copy of the 1988 Andover, Mass federal ed lab’s plan for radically restructuring the mission of school districts using duplicitous charter language. The community would be unlikely to appreciate the change they had agreed to until it was too late. It was called “Education by Charter.”
All this research was because I Had read Fulton County’s new charter and recognized all the misleading terms and thus the actually agreed to results. It really broke my heart to see the Board had approved that contractual travesty 7-0. That meant there were board members who approved the charter wrongly believing it would preserve academics in Fulton.
So I wrote a post http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/what-happens-when-a-charter-pillages-minds-and-wallets/ to alert parent groups and taxpayers and school board members elsewhere to be on the lookout.
That there was now an organized effort to use charters to misleadingly commit schools and districts to a radical vision of education reform that Americans have fought against for decades. And to bring it on through an unappreciated by one side binding contract.
And now this story.
I guess Cobb County really is to be next on the chopping block.
Jordan Kohanim
June 13th, 2012
7:24 am
“If parents were required to participate in their public schools and their children were required to behave in order to qualify for school choice, it is conceivable that a similarly constructive environment could be achieved for the broader array of needs and abilities that public schools serve.”
How would public schools require this? Would they throw out students whose parents didn’t participate? I think one of the reasons the public sector is suspicious of the private is that the public school is REQUIRED to serve everyone. Even if certain requirements aren’t met, public schools have an obligation to the public–not the consumer of the good (to borrow an analogy). So one of the biggest questions of this debate that is often over looked is what the public, that is the group the public school is supposed to serve, wants. A work force participant? An innovator? A socially-sculpted individual?
Charter schools can and do wonderful things. Public schools can and do wonderful things. Private schools can and do wonderful things. The difference between these two entities can be found in the quote above. “Requirements” are allowable by two of these entities and not allowable by one.
What do public schools do with an individual who refuses to meet requirements? How do you REQUIRE a family to learn? To be honest, I’d be more afraid of a system that did require participation of parents in order for a child to be part of public education. It doesn’t exactly seem fair to force a child to be held accountable for another human being’s decisions.
Ironically, that’s what has been asked of teachers for year.
Attentive Parent
June 13th, 2012
7:30 am
Dunwoody Mom-you cannot look at the Central Office of any school district and metro Atlanta and pretend that it doesn’t operate for profit. At least markets determine compensation through prices and willing buyers and sellers.
School districts use the power of taxation to reward administrators for loyalty with compensation amounts that no one would willingly pay them. The going rate for someone whose doctorate is based on a belief that math and science are racial and sexist constructs and that traditional approach must thus be jettisoned is not very high outside of the Central Office bureaucracy.
Why taxpayers should pay someone like that 6 figures for the rest of their life while they push policies and practices that destroy children’s futures is practically criminal? Such admins are certainly profiting with every paycheck.
In fact the inability to get paid outside the ed bureaucracy at anywhere close to what is paid through our taxes buys the loyalty and compliance that pushes bad ideas on our children no matter what. Their history. Their outcomes on children. The long-term consequences to the social and economic foundations of our country.
Profit by consent for a superior product or service is far better than what we have now in education. Profit by coercion for a product that is designed to be mind arson.
Here we go....
June 13th, 2012
7:51 am
Here comes the onslaught of public school system employees bashing the charter movement.
Dunwoody Mom-you are a moron. Ignorance is far more evil than anything else you can spell.
What's Best for Kids?
June 13th, 2012
7:52 am
I hate it when I have to subscribe to a magazine to see the article…stinking for-profit magazine. Those people should work for free so that we can be informed!
GwinnettParentz
June 13th, 2012
7:56 am
Demonizing profit will apparently continue to be the mantra of the Democrat left and their union allies. To them, rather than being places of learning, schools are primarily places of cash (dues) generation for the unions and their political allies.
Luckily for our children and their future, that corrupt view is being looked upon by voters with far less tolerance these days: http://goo.gl/gtkqU
Dunwoody Mom
June 13th, 2012
8:00 am
Well, I’m not a school system employee – never have been. I am a proud product of public schools and my children as well.
I have asked this on a couple of blogs and to an acquaintance who is a big charter school proponent and have received no answer that makes sense or answers the question?
What happens when these companies get bored with running these schools, they have squeezed all the money they can from these schools/taxpayers and move onto the next big money maker – leaving these charter schools and its students behind?
Colonel Jack
June 13th, 2012
8:10 am
@Tabitha … “For profit” as a stand-alone term is, of course, anything BUT evil. It’s the way this country (and any other capitalistic society) operates. That being said … “for profit” has absolutely NO PLACE in education. I wish the people who want to see education run along business lines would understand one fundamental fact: *Education is not a business.* We do not produce a product. We do not have the luxury of rejecting sub-standard materials (whatever “sub-standard” means this week). There is no place in a proper education system for profit. In the case of education, “for profit” is the epitome of evil, because it means there’s an objective OTHER than educating children.
GwnnttPrntz
June 13th, 2012
8:14 am
Demonizing profit will apparently continue to be the mantra of the Democrat left and their union allies. To them, rather than being places of learning, schools are primarily places of cash (dues) generation for the unions and their political allies.
Luckily for our children and their future, that corrupt view is being looked upon by voters with far less tolerance these days: http://goo.gl/gtkqU
— GwinnettParentz
Dunwoody Mom
June 13th, 2012
8:14 am
In the case of education, “for profit” is the epitome of evil, because it means there’s an objective OTHER than educating children.
Hear, hear, Colonel Jack.
I love teaching. I hate what it is becoming...
June 13th, 2012
8:33 am
Ooh! And here come the charter school defenders, calling anyone who has a different opinion a “moron”. So civil.
Charter schools are just like public schools in that there are good ones and not so good ones. However, charters do not have the same oversight as public schools, and there in lies a lot of the problem. It is too easy for those running a charter to become focused upon the “bottom line” to the detriment of the students. If we are going to have strong schools (public or otherwise) we, as taxpayers, need to know those schools will be closely monitored for misuse of funds. People like to talk about the success of charters in New Orleans, without mentioning the schools that have folded, leaving teachers unpaid and students abandoned in the middle of the year, while the higher-ups take off with the money. This would never happen in a public school, and it should not be allowed to happen in ANY school. Some charter proponents are in favor of strong regulation of the charter system. I respect that. But too many seem to want to head willy-nilly into the process without sufficient safeguards in place. Why is that I wonder? Could it be because such safeguards would prevent excessive profiteering?
And my big question. Why push charters? Why not find out what successful traditional public schools are doing and try to replicate that? (And yes, there are successful traditional schools, despite folks being told over and over they are all failing.) I suspect it is because such an approach would force people to recognize that it is NOT the school systems that are really the problem – it is societal problems that are affecting the schools. And those societal problems will COST money to solve, not make money for someone. Even with the charter school movement, those problems will persist, and we as a society will have to deal with them – and not just in the school systems.
justbrowsing
June 13th, 2012
8:34 am
I am not agaist charters- as long as they also are held to similar standards as those of public schools. If they are to even be partially funded by taxpayers, they should be serving DIVERSE and comparable populations, like their public school counterparts. This should and needs to be the case if it truly is to be fair.
PHLASH
June 13th, 2012
9:01 am
When the business of education becomes business, becomes profit, then profit has usurped the most important thing in education. If we set profits above teaching and learning, then we’ve given up what is necessary for a healthy democracy. The “for-profits” adopt a business model that, these days, uses a “quality control” method that is highly specious: standardized testing.
The question is: how do we allow for the innovation and pedagogical elbow-room that a charter approach *can* offer without handing over our children’s educational experiences to a sociopathic corporate mindset bent on profit, profit, profit?
PHLASH
June 13th, 2012
9:02 am
I’m not demonizing profit. I’m simply unwilling to make it my God, either.
Shar
June 13th, 2012
9:07 am
@Colonel Jack and Dunwoody Mom: You write ,”In the case of education, “for profit” is the epitome of evil, because it means there’s an objective OTHER than educating children.”
In the case of public (whether charter or traditional) schools, educating children is, sadly, towards the bottom of the list of objectives. At the top is protecting and expanding the bureaucracy, then increasing budgets, then providing employment for adults, then assembling a personal power base, then handing out sweetheart contracts with the local big boys for provisioning, real estate and the like. These are all hidden agendas, covered over whenever questioned by the inevitable blanket excuse “It’s for the children!”
At least a for-profit company is more upfront about their goals, and they know they have to deliver some kind of value to justify their profit. As the discussion about the Fulton sciences middle school charter shows clearly, schools that fulfill their educational mandate are allowed a significant amount of leeway. A profit and loss statement makes the cost a lot clearer than secret trips to Turkey or cheating on tests.
Dunwoody Mom
June 13th, 2012
9:13 am
At least a for-profit company is more upfront about their goals
We aren’t talking about Macy’s or Wells Fargo – we are talking about the education of the chidlren in this county. The goal of making large profits with regards to educating children (the actual education itself being secondary) is ok with you? Wow.
Devil's Advocate
June 13th, 2012
9:14 am
“For profit” means for profit. The primary goal is to make money by any means available. Customer satisfaction, quality, and innovation are all secondary relative notions when considering the target market and what competitors are doing in the market. A market with 5 competitors can all get away with selling crap together because that is what is available for consumers and the leader will either be the least crappy and/or the cheapest. Don’t spin that businesses are out to save the world. They are there to benefit owners and investors period.
GwnnttPrntz
June 13th, 2012
9:16 am
The elephant in the room that defenders of the failed status quo will never adequately hide from view—is that parents increasingly want to decide what’s best for their own kids. It’s a conviction which decades of frustration with traditional public schools have produced.
Along with the flat-earth arguments of a dwindling band of status quo defenders.
Devil's Advocate
June 13th, 2012
9:24 am
I would argue that if a child fails in public school that the order of blame in general is the child, the parents, then optionally the teacher and the school. If one child in a class is able to earn an A and progress to eventual gainful employment then what excuses cause another child in the same class to fail? If the problem is with the teacher or the school then no student would succeed.
Lee
June 13th, 2012
9:30 am
Traditional public, charters, private, religious, etc, etc, schools all have their good and bad points. To simply say that for-profit private schools are “evil” is a bit hysterical, IMHO.
—————————
“*Education is not a business.* We do not produce a product.”
No, you provide a service. So does the garbage collector, hospital, police, fire department, water department, exterminator, lawn maintenance guy, and a host of other folks.
—————————
As a parent who had one child go through public and one attend private school, one of the most noticable differences was that the private school knew who their customer was. If they did not provide good value for my money in the form of a good education for my daughter, they knew my daughter and my check could walk away.
Sadly, many in the public sector ignore that simple principle.
Devil's Advocate
June 13th, 2012
9:35 am
Lee,
Is your public school child a failure while your private school child is the model of success?
Colonel Jack
June 13th, 2012
9:49 am
@Shar … you may be (pleasantly) surprised to learn that I agree with your assessment of the current state of public education 100%. Those who run the show have totally lost the focus. When education becomes a jobs program for friends and family … or a basis for that most ephemeral of all things, “political power” … then it’s just as evil as a “for-profit” motive. Most teachers use the phrase, “For the children,” as a guide and a watchword. Most of those above the classroom level in education use the phrase as a punchline. (I say most, not all … there are examples of the opposite in each strata.) And as far as fulfilling the educational mandate – it does seem to cover a multitude of other sins, does it not? Transparency, my friend, is what should be in effect at all levels.
@Lee … yes, teachers provide a service, as do the other examples you cited. But that does not make education a business. There’s a difference between public-sector services, such as law enforcement, fire protection, and education, and private sector services, such as exterminators and lawn maintenance. When discussing services, that distinction must be kept in consideration. The private sector services are, indeed, businesses which live or die by the bottom line, and among which the people have many choices. Public-sector services like the ones cited are not businesses and, in most cases, the public doesn’t have a choice.
Colonel Jack
June 13th, 2012
9:52 am
@GwnnttPrntz … One must understand what is behind those “decades of frustration” you mention. There is a massive failing in public education, and I’m not so much of a status-quo guy that I can’t admit that. But the failing is not necessarily *in the classroom.* Remember, the teacher is at the bottom of the pecking order (or food chain or line of command or whatever you want to call it). Teachers are given the curriculum they must teach, and in many cases are told exactly how to do it and what to say. It’s the people at the administration level and above who decide what is done in classrooms, and teachers who buck those directives do so at the peril of their own careers.
Devil's Advocate
June 13th, 2012
10:00 am
It’s pretty simple, really? Public schools are open to the general public which means they are subject to the full range of student personality types. Private schooling is a paid service with selective admissions. Which one do you think will produce at a higher rate? A student can do well in either system if the student is motivated. Parents paying for private school are paying a premium to not subject their children to potential distractions from the general population. This frees teachers to do their jobs with less stress and interruptions which also allows for a stronger academic support structure. Bottom line, if I’m paying thousands of dollars for a service then I’d better be getting something more than the “free” version (after tax consideration).
Homeschooler
June 13th, 2012
10:06 am
Lee,
Would you say your private school child is better prepared for college? Better educated in general? Has true knowledge of the basic subjects and not just a “study for the test” mentality? Places a higher value on education because his/her friends all placed a higher value on education? Just wondering.
Devil’s Advocat’s statement reminds me of those parents who say “my child is ‘fine’ in public school”. Kids in public school usually do turn out “fine”. Some of us want better than “fine”. Some of us want to give the child every opportunity to be exceptional.
In regards to “for profit”. I do believe that education can be successful if operated “for profit”. Day care centers are the perfect example of company that provides a service in which the goal is to provide physical, emotional and even educational care to a child. They can often successfully do so. However, we can’t deny that the ultimate goal is for profit. They are a business. Their bottom line is to make money. It doesn’t mean they are not going to provide the best care for your child. That they are not going to have the best equipment, provide good foods etc.. They will do so for the purpose of getting and keeping your business. They aren’t taking care of you child because they love him and just want what is best for him. Your child is still being cared for and they are still making money. Private schools work the same way.
I don’t really understand Charter Schools enough to be for or against them. I’m just saying that “for profit” is not a bad thing in education or anywhere else.
Dunwoody Mom
June 13th, 2012
10:11 am
@Homeschooler, that day care would shut down in a heartbeat if it is not making money.
Shar
June 13th, 2012
10:28 am
Dunwoody Mom, that’s the point. A for-profit school would indeed shut down if the value it delivered was out of whack with the price it charged. Traditional public schools’ stockpiling of resources is not on a P&L statement, it’s on an informal, personal but completely understood and accepted balance sheet of who-owes-what-to-whom. That’s why certain jobs are protected, certain no-compete contracts are justified, certain curricula adopted. Assuming that public schools are somehow free of self-interest just because they don’t turn a profit is wishful thinking.
Dunwoody Mom
June 13th, 2012
10:39 am
But, Shar, that’s my question about these for-profit schools. What happens to the teachers, the students, etc., when those companies decide they no longer want to be in the “education business”. And this will happen…..this charter school movement is a fad perpetuated by these companies to make money – not educate children.
Shar
June 13th, 2012
10:39 am
@ Colonel Jack, your point about that sadly compromised phrase, “For the children”, is thought-provoking. I agree that teachers in the classrooms are the most likely to be professionally and emotionally committed to the personal well being of their students, and the fact that they are the most powerless to address issues that hinder their students’ education is something that we should look at from a policy point of view. Bureaucrats look at their colleagues, their budgets and their pensions, and they are professionally committed to furthering the well being of their superiors, who control all three. Parents, too, even well intentioned ones, are often blinded by their focus on their own child and, truthfully, their own convenience – “For the children” becomes “for my child and my source of babysitting/food/healthcare/afterschool activities.”
Transparency is indeed crucial, but it is toothless when the customers – parents and students – are both subservient to and less informed than those making the decisions. It is very difficult for a parent who has not graduated from high school to effectively critique curriculum or pedagogy, especially when he or she gets stonewalled when it is attempted. Students who try to do so run the risk of bad grades.
eddawg
June 13th, 2012
10:40 am
I find it fascinating the dichotomy of though & support for & against “for profit” charter schools vs. “for profit” universities. It’s amazing how some of the same people are in support of “for profit” charter schools, but they’ll totally dog “for profit” universities, like UPOX. Aren’t both a offering a choice?
Shar
June 13th, 2012
10:40 am
Dunwoody Mom, if they are making money and are valued by the market they serve, they won’t go out of business. They will do what every successful business does – expand.
Dunwoody Mom
June 13th, 2012
10:48 am
@Shar, there is not an unlimited amount of money for these companies. Once the veil is lifted from what these companies are really all about, they will move on to the next money-maker. Again, they are not concerned with educating children – which should be the priority of any system – traditional public, charter schools, etc. – that is receiving taxpayer funding.
justbrowsing
June 13th, 2012
10:54 am
Another issue with for profits is their mobility- they can close shop very quickly and move on when there is no longer any ROI. If your take any public school and compare similarly situated students performance to those in charter schools- I do not believe you will find a difference. Remember charters look good because they DO NOT teach everyone.
William Casey
June 13th, 2012
10:57 am
@ATTENTIVE PARENT: “That there was now an organized effort to use charters to misleadingly commit schools and districts to a radical vision of education reform that Americans have fought against for decades.”
I’m interested to know exactly what this “radical vision of education” is.
Concerning the PROFIT MOTIVE and education. An inescapable fact of this model is that the “profit” is money now going to investors which would otherwise be going into the education of children. Any efficiencies brought about by using this model would have to be considerable to recoup this loss. If one studies the history of capitalism in America (Standard Oil is the classic example) it becomes evident that “competition” inevitably leads to monopoly/cartel. The day would come when a giant “education corporation” in private hands (probably Microsoft) would control American education. This would not be a good thing for America. This doesn’t mean that there shouldn’t be charter schools. It DOES mean that charters must be carefully written and granted to prevent the creation of an “education trust” along the lines of Rockefeller’s Standard Oil, Carnegie Steel and many others. That is, of course, unless one wants American society to return to the condition it was in circa 1890. Study history.
Dunwoody Mom
June 13th, 2012
11:03 am
Maureen, I’m surprised you have not done a post on the latest grant by the Gates Foundation with regards to the GSR bracelets and measuring teacher effectiveness.
C Jae of EAV
June 13th, 2012
11:12 am
@Attentive Parent 06/12 07:34 – Very thought provoking post.
@Dunwoody Mom 6/12 08:00 – In responce to your question, see former APS Superintendant, Dr. Beverly Hall and what was left behind in her wake of her departure. Point being failures in leadership and/or fiscal mismanagement are not exclusive to charter school goverance.
@ I love teaching 6/13 08:22 – Your statement “However, charters do not have the same oversight as public schools, and there in lies a lot of the problem.” is quite interesting. It continues to amaze me the degree to which some charter school detractors applaude and lift up traditional public school governance as if it represents a model of consistancy and accountability to be emulated. The failures of late in this state are of such moumental perportions, how can one suggest that the oversight of how many large local districts are operating is something we should be proud about? IMHO, when examining how best to refine/reform public education everything should be on the table and there are NO sacred cows.
Dunwoody Mom
June 13th, 2012
11:27 am
IMHO, when examining how best to refine/reform public education everything should be on the table and there are NO sacred cows
I don’t believe anyone disagrees with this point. But, allowing companies whose sole motivation is making a profit to run schools should not something that is “on the table”. As always, my own opinion.
Jefferson
June 13th, 2012
11:27 am
Charter schools are a cop out.
Ron F.
June 13th, 2012
11:55 am
“The elephant in the room that defenders of the failed status quo will never adequately hide from view—is that parents increasingly want to decide what’s best for their own kids”
Parents have that right and a myriad of choices depending on their financial status. The question is, how much of this choice should be financed by the general public? How many options can we expect from what is becoming a more and more limited pot of money? What works for one kid won’t work for another. Obviously some are committing a lot more money to that pot than others. Do those who pay the most get the most say? If this were indeed a business, then the largest stakeholder would get more votes.
We need to demand better of all education options. There’s no debate about that. And I think it goes without saying that the scrutiny we’re giving all schools at this point should improve them all. As I’ve said many times here, until you “fix” the society producing the wide variety of children we see, until our entire society, with all its diversity, agrees on the fundamental necessity of one type of education, then no single model will ever work perfectly. Indeed we need options. Again, how many of those can taxpayer funds be expected to provide?
Ron F.
June 13th, 2012
12:03 pm
“how can one suggest that the oversight of how many large local districts are operating is something we should be proud about?”
Noone is proud of any of it. But at least we can easily see the records and call them on it. The messes that have been discovered happened because noone was paying attention for too long. But it’s still public record and we can all see it and analyze it. Look what it took to uncover the mess with FSA and how much stalling and manuvering they did to try to stop the audit. Nobody here is defending any of the craziness that has been found. Now that it has been found, the process to fix it can begin, and it won’t be easy or quick. With private schools and many charters, there isn’t the same access to records, and enough nepotism on a smaller scale to rival anything we’ve seen in the public systems.
Ron F.
June 13th, 2012
12:06 pm
@William 10:57. Very good summation of history in that post! Unfortunately, there are many who see that as the Promised Land and are quick to ignore the entire century following that where groups fought to undo the damage to the entire country caused by unabated monopolies. And now education is in their grasp…scary indeed.
Devil's Advocate
June 13th, 2012
12:08 pm
And Homeschooler reminds me of what’s wrong with America. If you want your child to be more than “fine” then raise them to want more than “fine”. Parents want to blame everyone else for any subpar performance. Your statement suggests that the top graduates from public schools are just “fine” and that’s not true. People achieve things in life through effort no matter the situation or opportunity. If success required spending your way to the top we wouldn’t have so many success stories.
GwnnttPrntz
June 13th, 2012
12:18 pm
@Ron F: As usual, your union-generated talking points seek to confuse and obfuscate.
The status quo DOES NOT give parents a “myriad of choices.” They are stuck within a monopoly that, only when dragged kicking and screaming (whining in your case), consents to provide a few charter alternatives in exchange for their tax dollars.
The current failing system IS ALSO funded by “taxpayer dollars” (otherwise known as “earnings” to the 50% of us who actually pay income taxes!)
“Stakeholders” are NOT the same as stockholders when discussing the world of business.
There will never BE agreement on what methods of education work best—exactly as with brands of consumer goods, or a place to spend an ideal vacation, or the college your kid should attend.
And it DOESN’T “go without saying” that scrutiny is going to improve the status quo in education. Where in the world is your evidence of that?
old school doc
June 13th, 2012
12:37 pm
Certainly the public schools can learn from the charters. SImple things, like improving communication, having an inviting environ/atmosphere go a long way towards endgendering positive vibes at ANY type of school.
The publics, however, cannot learn that main thing that makes charters “better”: Publics cannot refuse to serve certain children, while the charters regularly do. Until we are able to figure out how to effectively pay for and deal with the education of troubled students, then the regular public schools wiil always be sub par in poorer areas. Wealthier districts seem to be more likely to have the resources to deal with such students, by, for example, paying for more paras, etc. On the other hand, a few troubled students out of 30 can hijack a class with even the best teacher. No “differentiated learning” takes place when 40% of the teacher’s time is spent with 4-5 kids.
How DO charter schools deal with troubled kids/troubled families? From what I have seen, a major portion of the solution is to ship them off to their home regular school, under the guise of ” we are not equipped to serve your child”… my local schools would be so much “better” if we could send the troubled kids to our local charters!
Bane to union shills
June 13th, 2012
12:40 pm
An interesting and characteristically savvy Charles Krauthammer assessment of the Wisconsin recall election … and what it ultimately will mean to the unions: http://goo.gl/JMZxp
C Jae of EAV
June 13th, 2012
12:55 pm
@old school doc – While I disagree with your premise that Charter institutions are better due to selective enrollment, I do believe you’ve identified a core concern of many districts.
Could a possible remedy be establishment of a select number of charters with a specific focus on “troubled”/”special needs” kids to serve as incubators that allow for different approaches to be deployed?
Ultimately if the stat quo has failed to produce sustained consistant results, what do we do different?