Slog
News & ArtsMonday, June 25, 2012
News Why Parents Say YES to the Washington Public Charter Schools Initiative
Posted by Flor Alarcon on Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:02 PM
This guest post is by Flor Alarcon, an education advocate and the parent of three children who have all attended Seattle Public Schools. She is also co-Chair of Latino City Employees, and co-Chair of Mujeres of the Northwest.
As a parent of children who attend our public schools, I was glad to sign the petition to place Initiative 1240 on the November ballot, and I support a YES vote. Here’s why.
Initiative 1240, the Washington Public Charter Schools Initiative, is an important measure for Washington parents, students, and teachers that will finally bring the option of high performing public charter schools to our state. Parents and students in 41 other states have the option of public charter schools as part of the public education system, and the states that have the best charter school laws are getting the best results in improving academic outcomes for many students through public charter schools.
Charter schools are independently managed public schools operated by qualified nonprofit organizations that are authorized and overseen by either a state charter school commission or by local school boards. Public charter schools are free and open to all students, and subject to the same academic requirements as traditional public schools.
Initiative 1240 will allow up to 40 public charter schools to be authorized in Washington over a five-year period. These schools will be funded based on student enrollment just like traditional public schools are. Not one penny is diverted from our public school system or from our students. It’s simple—the money follows the child, just as it would if a child transferred from one traditional public school to another. Just as it should.
Public charter schools authorized under Initiative 1240 are subject to strict accountability requirements and performance reviews, and teachers in public charter schools are held to the same certification requirements as teachers in traditional public schools.
And that’s not all—under Initiative 1240, if a public charter school is not performing, it will be shut down.
Public charter schools are required to comply with all the same laws and regulations related to civil rights, parents’ rights, health and safety, and non-discrimination that govern traditional public schools. But public charter schools are free from certain other regulations so they have more flexibility in setting curriculum, budgeting, hiring and firing teachers and staff, and providing more customized learning experiences to meet the individual needs of their students.
As a parent, I want more public school options available so that I can choose the best learning environment for my children. Studies across the country show that charter schools in many states are achieving outstanding results. The results are particularly impressive for urban, minority and low-income student populations – students who were struggling and being left behind in traditional public schools. We should learn from these successes in other states and allow the option of high performing public charter schools in Washington to help students who aren’t succeeding in our existing public schools.
So as a parent, I’m asking that when you see someone in your neighborhood with a petition for I-1240, please sign it. As the Seattle Times recently wrote in a positive editorial, it is once again time voters in Washington state to have a meaningful discussion about public charter schools. The status quo in our public schools works for some of our children but it is failing too many others.
Please join me in supporting YES on 1240.
(A guest Slog post opposing charter schools can be found here.)
3
Due to their highly variable nature and selectivity, Charters are not a good deal for students of color or LGBT students. The claim of public oversight is laughable and in the cases the public does get involved (when they aren't removing their kids from "that school" where "those people" go), it's invariably bad.
Case in point, Louisiana allowing charters to ban gay kids: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/09…
And where there are LGBT friendly charters, it's inevitably because the freedom of choice afforded to charter administrators is extremely bad news for gay kids.
Case in point, Louisiana allowing charters to ban gay kids: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/09…
And where there are LGBT friendly charters, it's inevitably because the freedom of choice afforded to charter administrators is extremely bad news for gay kids.
4
Actually, I seem to remember that a recent study showed most charter schools performing more poorly than public schools.
5
However a school "performs" in the public eye is ultimately based on arbitrary, meaningless exams.
The only performance that matters is whether or not the school performs to the student's and the parent's satisfaction.
That any parent or student is told that they should have fewer choices in education because some charter schools do the same bad things that some public schools does is ridiculous.
The only performance that matters is whether or not the school performs to the student's and the parent's satisfaction.
That any parent or student is told that they should have fewer choices in education because some charter schools do the same bad things that some public schools does is ridiculous.
8
In this proposal, can sectarians set up religious schools? If yes, then I say hell no, as it would simply be a scheme to funnel public funds to homophobia and other shit.
9
No matter what the propaganda in this editorial claims, charter schools suck money, attention and other resources away from public schools. Fragmenting our educational system by sucking money from our schools and handing it over to private corporate interests is not the way to go. Don't screw over public school kids just to hand money over to corporate "schools."
10
I'm not in principle opposed to Charter Schools: if the schools remain Public, and Secular, and subject to meaningful standards and protections, and not just a mechanism to leave behind a rump school district drained of the resources it needs, getting more parents involved and giving them a say seems like a good thing - as long as that's what happens, which seems open to question as Charter Schools are actually implemented.
But this nonsense about "high-performing public charter schools" really is objectionable. All the studies say that where Charter Schools have been implemented they're no better than their non-Charter predecessors and peers, and sometimes significantly worse. As pointed out previously in this thread, this bit of doublespeak is trying to advance the notion that somehow you'll only get the best of the Charter System, and not the worst. I'm all for new systems that only give the best they potentially can, without the accompanying worst, but that's not how things work. You'd be better off not trying to promise the moon, and simply offering what I said at the start: parent-involved, parent-directed public charter schools that are answerable to high standards and that don't destroy the rest of the school system. If, of course, you know how to design that, which seems questionable.
But this nonsense about "high-performing public charter schools" really is objectionable. All the studies say that where Charter Schools have been implemented they're no better than their non-Charter predecessors and peers, and sometimes significantly worse. As pointed out previously in this thread, this bit of doublespeak is trying to advance the notion that somehow you'll only get the best of the Charter System, and not the worst. I'm all for new systems that only give the best they potentially can, without the accompanying worst, but that's not how things work. You'd be better off not trying to promise the moon, and simply offering what I said at the start: parent-involved, parent-directed public charter schools that are answerable to high standards and that don't destroy the rest of the school system. If, of course, you know how to design that, which seems questionable.
11
"high performing public charter schools"
Charter schools are no more "high performing" than public schools. The phrase is loaded. We will get charter schools, not "high performing charter schools", because charter schools are overall not demonstrably better than public schools. SOME charter schools might be better than SOME public schools. That doesn't mean ALL charter schools will be better than ALL public schools. There are SOME public schools that are better than SOME charter schools, and by your selective logic, that means we should keep them.
"Not one penny is diverted from our public school system"
This is not only a big lie, but you actually manage to point out that it is a lie in the very next sentence:
"It’s simple—the money follows the child"
If the money follows the child, and the child is not at a public school, then the money for that child does not go to the public schools. And that amount of money is more than one penny.
"if a public charter school is not performing, it will be shut down."
That's GREAT, because we TOTALLY need LESS schools. Let's just shut down all the underperforming schools, and send all those kids to the overperforming schools. That makes SENSE, especially if you flunked elementary math.
"independently managed public schools" and "public charter school" are LIES. Damnable blatant lies. A "PUBLIC charter school" is a PUBLIC school that is operated by the PUBLIC school system. 1240 will introduce PRIVATE charter schools operated by PRIVATE entities. You're a liar, liar, pants on fire. A charter school that is not operated by the PUBLIC school system is NOT a PUBLIC school. It is a private school operated and owned by a private company. That is not PUBLIC school by any stretch of the imagination. Unless you are a corporate-education-paid shill, in which case it's not your own imagination but that of your self-interested employers who eagerly want to receive our tax money and squander it.
"more flexibility in setting curriculum"
So that they don't have to waste time on things like history and can focus on things like how to sell more Coca Cola.
"budgeting, hiring and firing teachers and staff,"
So they can cut corners by hiring cheap, underskilled teachers and fire skilled, better-paid ones. Result: A cheaper education! (Not a better one, but a cheaper one, and cheaper is better! Just ask Walmart!)
"Studies across the country"
What studies?
"show that charter schools in many states"
What states?
"are achieving outstanding results."
All of them? Most of them? Or just, you know, SOME of them?
Hopefully these brainwashed fanatics will go the way of the similarly-cultish Seattle Monorail Project people, and their wobbly-headed nonsense will be thrown out by the people.
(Probably not though, because they all voted to turn our liquor sales system into complete mainstream crap. Next up, no doubt: A bill that allows beer to be made and sold anywhere, resulting in our microbreweries being replaced with Coors factories. Of course, after we privatise our schools, we'll have to privatise our police (Blackwater is cheaper!), our fire departments, heck, even our courts. Why do we even need government when we can just let corporations run things?)
More...
Charter schools are no more "high performing" than public schools. The phrase is loaded. We will get charter schools, not "high performing charter schools", because charter schools are overall not demonstrably better than public schools. SOME charter schools might be better than SOME public schools. That doesn't mean ALL charter schools will be better than ALL public schools. There are SOME public schools that are better than SOME charter schools, and by your selective logic, that means we should keep them.
"Not one penny is diverted from our public school system"
This is not only a big lie, but you actually manage to point out that it is a lie in the very next sentence:
"It’s simple—the money follows the child"
If the money follows the child, and the child is not at a public school, then the money for that child does not go to the public schools. And that amount of money is more than one penny.
"if a public charter school is not performing, it will be shut down."
That's GREAT, because we TOTALLY need LESS schools. Let's just shut down all the underperforming schools, and send all those kids to the overperforming schools. That makes SENSE, especially if you flunked elementary math.
"independently managed public schools" and "public charter school" are LIES. Damnable blatant lies. A "PUBLIC charter school" is a PUBLIC school that is operated by the PUBLIC school system. 1240 will introduce PRIVATE charter schools operated by PRIVATE entities. You're a liar, liar, pants on fire. A charter school that is not operated by the PUBLIC school system is NOT a PUBLIC school. It is a private school operated and owned by a private company. That is not PUBLIC school by any stretch of the imagination. Unless you are a corporate-education-paid shill, in which case it's not your own imagination but that of your self-interested employers who eagerly want to receive our tax money and squander it.
"more flexibility in setting curriculum"
So that they don't have to waste time on things like history and can focus on things like how to sell more Coca Cola.
"budgeting, hiring and firing teachers and staff,"
So they can cut corners by hiring cheap, underskilled teachers and fire skilled, better-paid ones. Result: A cheaper education! (Not a better one, but a cheaper one, and cheaper is better! Just ask Walmart!)
"Studies across the country"
What studies?
"show that charter schools in many states"
What states?
"are achieving outstanding results."
All of them? Most of them? Or just, you know, SOME of them?
Hopefully these brainwashed fanatics will go the way of the similarly-cultish Seattle Monorail Project people, and their wobbly-headed nonsense will be thrown out by the people.
(Probably not though, because they all voted to turn our liquor sales system into complete mainstream crap. Next up, no doubt: A bill that allows beer to be made and sold anywhere, resulting in our microbreweries being replaced with Coors factories. Of course, after we privatise our schools, we'll have to privatise our police (Blackwater is cheaper!), our fire departments, heck, even our courts. Why do we even need government when we can just let corporations run things?)
12
Every dollar that goes to a charter school is a dollar taken away from a truly public school in desperate need of funding.
No, no and for the third time no.
No, no and for the third time no.
13
I bet Flor Alarcon is really glad that Initiative 1240 does not guarantee access for English Language Learners: Latinos and Latinas really groove on the no-guarantee clause, especially immigrants.
Also, can Ms Alarcon show statistics that prove the majority of charter schools outperform public schools in a majority of the 41 states where they currently operate? I did not see any such statistics or reference to them in her post.
Also, can Ms Alarcon show statistics that prove the majority of charter schools outperform public schools in a majority of the 41 states where they currently operate? I did not see any such statistics or reference to them in her post.
14
It is funny that Flor Alarcon cannot be found on the Washington State voters list. How do nonvoters support initiatives? Why should they?
15
Not one penny is diverted from our public school system or from our students. It’s simple—the money follows the child, just as it would if a child transferred from one traditional public school to another.
The word "system" instead of "school" may technically keep this passage from being completely illogical, but only in the way that splitting the check with people eating at the restaurant next store makes sense.
16
Since we can't trust the government, let's all trust corporate entities! What could *possibly* go wrong???
17
@5 Parents and children already have all sorts of choices, but it's not up to the state to provide those choices. From our state's constitution: “The legislature shall provide for a general and uniform system of public schools.”
If parents want an overpriced and incomplete education experience for their children, with little or no oversight, there are plenty of private organizations that are happy to help. We shouldn't gut the public schools just to feed the coffers of the for-profit education industry.
Nationwide, charter schools do worse than public schools, despite having their pick of students, far more resources per student and far fewer administrative requirements.
If parents want an overpriced and incomplete education experience for their children, with little or no oversight, there are plenty of private organizations that are happy to help. We shouldn't gut the public schools just to feed the coffers of the for-profit education industry.
Nationwide, charter schools do worse than public schools, despite having their pick of students, far more resources per student and far fewer administrative requirements.
18
The lengths some folks will go to in order to subvert Brown v. Board. Don't think for a second that isn't the motive behind a separate school system.
19
I hear charter schools make black children clean the toilets for no pay! And they kill gay kids and feed them to the retards. It's true, I swear.
20
"The lengths some folks will go to in order to subvert Brown v. Board"
Except it's usually black parents who support and want charter schools. Too upidity for you?
Except it's usually black parents who support and want charter schools. Too upidity for you?
21
"Support for charters among African Americans rose to 49% in 2009, up from 42% in 2008. This year it leapt upward to no less than 64%. Among Hispanics support jumped to 47% in 2010, from 37% in 2008.
Opposition to charters is expressed by 14% of African-Americans and 21% of Hispanics. Twenty-three percent of African-Americans and 33% of Hispanics take a neutral position.
Among the public as a whole, charter supporters currently outnumber opponents by a margin of better than 2 to 1. Forty-four percent say they are in favor of charters, while 19% stand in opposition. Parents in general are even more supportive of charter schools: 51% like them, 15% don't.
The NAACP and its sister organizations are correct that charters are "overrepresented" in minority communities. But they neglected to find out what parents in those communities actually think about that fact. As it turns out, parents in communities with charter schools favor them by a margin of 57% to 16%."
Opposition to charters is expressed by 14% of African-Americans and 21% of Hispanics. Twenty-three percent of African-Americans and 33% of Hispanics take a neutral position.
Among the public as a whole, charter supporters currently outnumber opponents by a margin of better than 2 to 1. Forty-four percent say they are in favor of charters, while 19% stand in opposition. Parents in general are even more supportive of charter schools: 51% like them, 15% don't.
The NAACP and its sister organizations are correct that charters are "overrepresented" in minority communities. But they neglected to find out what parents in those communities actually think about that fact. As it turns out, parents in communities with charter schools favor them by a margin of 57% to 16%."
22
You're taking money away from public schools because the "public" in your public charter school doesn't stand for the same public as I know the word. These not public schools take my tax money and serve less disabled and ESL students than the public schools we already have. I feel like this is an excuse to use my money for religious schools, I can't vote for more money to go to religion, they really don't need it and once they take our money the joke is on us.
23
All these upidity blacks demanding charter schools. How will well off white liberals keep them in their proper place and schools?
24
8
"In this proposal, can sectarians set up religious schools? If yes, then I say hell no, as it would simply be a scheme to funnel public funds to homophobia and other shit."
Yes, they can. This is an issue in Minnesota (where charters actually started). As well, the largest charter organization in the country is run by a Turkish-based group. This initiative leaves open the option for ethnically-themed schools that could include some "religious education."
As far as "parent-driven charters", the overwhelming majority are NOT started by parents or teachers. In this initiative, the word "parent" used 16 times and only once about family engagement and that is just to say it's a consideration that a charter proposal must have. If this is so much about involving parents, why doesn't the initiative language reflect that?
I Got Nuthin: - this would be the FOURTH time we would be saying no. You'd think three times would be enough but obviously not.
The Stanford CREDO study showed that 17% of charters do better (this is surveying about 20 states, a good number), 43% do the same and 37% do worse. Those are not good odds at all for bringing on a whole other public education system. This is not to say that those 37% are bad schools or the 17% are great schools - they just did worse or better.
The GAO just came out with a study saying charters do not take in/keep as many Special Ed as they should. They are now studying ELL students but I suspect they will find the same thing.
I'm Melissa Westbrook and I write for the public education blog, Seattle Schools Community Forum blog. If you would like to learn more about charters, we have written a six-part series about charters (an objective one including history, landscape today, federal law, etc.) It's on the homepage of our blog to the right. saveseattleschools.blogspot.com
I have read this initiative extensively and I am happy to answer any questions you have about the initiative. Write to me at : sss.westbrook@gmail.com
It is really great that so many readers get the fact that while it is good to learn about charters in the rest of the country, what will count is what THIS initiative creates as charter law for Washington State.
More...
"In this proposal, can sectarians set up religious schools? If yes, then I say hell no, as it would simply be a scheme to funnel public funds to homophobia and other shit."
Yes, they can. This is an issue in Minnesota (where charters actually started). As well, the largest charter organization in the country is run by a Turkish-based group. This initiative leaves open the option for ethnically-themed schools that could include some "religious education."
As far as "parent-driven charters", the overwhelming majority are NOT started by parents or teachers. In this initiative, the word "parent" used 16 times and only once about family engagement and that is just to say it's a consideration that a charter proposal must have. If this is so much about involving parents, why doesn't the initiative language reflect that?
I Got Nuthin: - this would be the FOURTH time we would be saying no. You'd think three times would be enough but obviously not.
The Stanford CREDO study showed that 17% of charters do better (this is surveying about 20 states, a good number), 43% do the same and 37% do worse. Those are not good odds at all for bringing on a whole other public education system. This is not to say that those 37% are bad schools or the 17% are great schools - they just did worse or better.
The GAO just came out with a study saying charters do not take in/keep as many Special Ed as they should. They are now studying ELL students but I suspect they will find the same thing.
I'm Melissa Westbrook and I write for the public education blog, Seattle Schools Community Forum blog. If you would like to learn more about charters, we have written a six-part series about charters (an objective one including history, landscape today, federal law, etc.) It's on the homepage of our blog to the right. saveseattleschools.blogspot.com
I have read this initiative extensively and I am happy to answer any questions you have about the initiative. Write to me at : sss.westbrook@gmail.com
It is really great that so many readers get the fact that while it is good to learn about charters in the rest of the country, what will count is what THIS initiative creates as charter law for Washington State.
25
Just to add, one of the big problems that the Department of Education (feds) have found is that authorizers throughout the country, despite their law having the ability to shut-down poor performing charters, find it very difficult to do. Just saying you can close them doesn't mean it will happen much to the chagrin of many authorizers.
Understand that this initiative takes money out of districts not just by the movement of students but via operations and capital levies. In fact, with capital levies, if the charter is in a private building, taxpayers, via education levies, will be paying to maintain that private building.
It also created a Charter Commission that has virtually no oversight and no way to remove Commission members (the initiative is silent on these points). The Charter Commission also gets to okay charters ina totally different way than the other authorizers who are school boards. It is a very odd thing because there is a long list of what School Boards have to look for in a charter proposals and then the language says the Charter Commission doesn't have to follow that list.
What does the Charter Commission follow? The initiative is silent on that issue as well.
And, of course, there is the conversion takeover which would allowed a charter that is approved to circulate a petition to teachers OR parents and with a majority of signatures, take over an EXISTING school, failing or not.
Why would the ability to take over a high/mid-performing school be in there? Because one of the top issues for charters is getting facilities. Districts do not have to give them buildings and so they have to pay that cost themselves (after all, each charter is its own district and that's their responsibility).
That means your neighborhood school could get taken over by a charter whether the school is failing or not. That would be devastating for any district and, if it's a brand-new building, it's gone to a charter. (The district retains ownership and must pay for major maintenance but has lost control of the building.)
Please, Decline to Sign I-1230. It is the details that matter.
More...
Understand that this initiative takes money out of districts not just by the movement of students but via operations and capital levies. In fact, with capital levies, if the charter is in a private building, taxpayers, via education levies, will be paying to maintain that private building.
It also created a Charter Commission that has virtually no oversight and no way to remove Commission members (the initiative is silent on these points). The Charter Commission also gets to okay charters ina totally different way than the other authorizers who are school boards. It is a very odd thing because there is a long list of what School Boards have to look for in a charter proposals and then the language says the Charter Commission doesn't have to follow that list.
What does the Charter Commission follow? The initiative is silent on that issue as well.
And, of course, there is the conversion takeover which would allowed a charter that is approved to circulate a petition to teachers OR parents and with a majority of signatures, take over an EXISTING school, failing or not.
Why would the ability to take over a high/mid-performing school be in there? Because one of the top issues for charters is getting facilities. Districts do not have to give them buildings and so they have to pay that cost themselves (after all, each charter is its own district and that's their responsibility).
That means your neighborhood school could get taken over by a charter whether the school is failing or not. That would be devastating for any district and, if it's a brand-new building, it's gone to a charter. (The district retains ownership and must pay for major maintenance but has lost control of the building.)
Please, Decline to Sign I-1230. It is the details that matter.
26
AZ and Utah have had huge issues with the Gulen Charter schools and the accusations of "indoctrination" and misuse of taxpayer funds sent back to Turkey.
http://azstarnet.com/staff/tim-steller/a…
Beehive Academy in SLC was threatened with closure several times and faced similar accusations.
What concerns me most about this poorly written initiative is the non-elected charter board overseeing things - just ripe for appointments based on paying back campaign donors or rewarding good buddies. Well, that and the fact that I want my public tax dollars paying for actual public schools, not publicly funded private schools that can exclude any kids they want to exclude.
http://azstarnet.com/staff/tim-steller/a…
Beehive Academy in SLC was threatened with closure several times and faced similar accusations.
What concerns me most about this poorly written initiative is the non-elected charter board overseeing things - just ripe for appointments based on paying back campaign donors or rewarding good buddies. Well, that and the fact that I want my public tax dollars paying for actual public schools, not publicly funded private schools that can exclude any kids they want to exclude.
27
Also, charter schools don't have to offer transportation - that's one way they "save" money. So if they don't provide transportation, they've already eliminated the bulk of the low-income population enrolling in their charter school right there. That's how Utah has managed to keep most of its charter schools white. Build the school out a ways, then just the middle and upper middle class can attend - ones whose families have more than one vehicle, where one parent might not have to work and can drive the brood too and from school, or parents who are small business owners or middle-upper management and have a bit more flexibility in their schedules than the blue-collar shift worker or the parents with 2 or more part-time jobs. White flight is the name of the charter game in Utah - that and the incestuous buy the charter school land from a relative, get another relative to build the charter school, while another relative has the charter and hires all the family members to run the school. Nothing like keeping public tax dollars all in the family.
28
Vote against any plan--like this--which does not ban public money from funding religious schools.
29
So you say no to charter schools using public money to fund religious schools? How about charter schools using public monies to rent out space in churches run by the person who also happens to run the charter school.....
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/educati…
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/educati…
30
Things are just rosy down in Lousiana, especially at an Oprah-supported charter school.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-21…
Note the findings listed by the Gates Foundation about the lack of SpEd kids, then look at the big donors for 1240. His own data tells him that charters don't accept or help all kids, but he supports charters starting up in Washington State. Guess the special needs kids don't matter to the Gates Foundation.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-21…
Note the findings listed by the Gates Foundation about the lack of SpEd kids, then look at the big donors for 1240. His own data tells him that charters don't accept or help all kids, but he supports charters starting up in Washington State. Guess the special needs kids don't matter to the Gates Foundation.
32
We could have our own version of Eva Moskowitz - charter school queen and very rich person in NYC.
Is this what we want happening in WA State?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/26/nyregi…
Is this what we want happening in WA State?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/26/nyregi…
34
Thanks for this, it's nice to hear from a parent who has real experience with our public schools. It's also reassuring to know the I-1240 is written to allow only high-performing charter schools in Washington, and there are many layers of accountability. They're funded exactly the same way as traditional public schools, which means the per-pupil funding follows the student to whatever school they choose to attend.
@28 and @8, I-1240 explicitly says that public charter schools cannot be religious and cannot be authorized by a religious organization.
About Brown v. Board of Ed, here's a great article from the head of the United Negro College Fund about how public charters and helping to meet that promise: http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/0…
And don't forget that President Obama supports charters too.
Download the entire text of the initiative and read it for yourself here: http://yeson1240.com/
@28 and @8, I-1240 explicitly says that public charter schools cannot be religious and cannot be authorized by a religious organization.
About Brown v. Board of Ed, here's a great article from the head of the United Negro College Fund about how public charters and helping to meet that promise: http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/0…
And don't forget that President Obama supports charters too.
Download the entire text of the initiative and read it for yourself here: http://yeson1240.com/
35
actually, the initiative very clearly states that the charters in WA canNOT be religious. and, they have to give priority to disadvantaged students.
i support charters. i support them for lots of reasons - higher accountability, greater innovation, higher standards - but because they provide and OPTION for parents who are dissatisfied with their neighborhood school and can't afford or don't want to send their child to a private school.
We're talking 40 schools over 5 years. Come on people... don't hate on it until you've seen it in action (as I have) or attended one.
i support charters. i support them for lots of reasons - higher accountability, greater innovation, higher standards - but because they provide and OPTION for parents who are dissatisfied with their neighborhood school and can't afford or don't want to send their child to a private school.
We're talking 40 schools over 5 years. Come on people... don't hate on it until you've seen it in action (as I have) or attended one.
36
On its face the initiative does not allow religious schools. However, in other states religious movements have had success in opening charter schools with ostensibly secular curricula, that channel money back to their religious organization and/or use curricula based on religious belief.
For examples, see the extremely large network of Gulen charter schools:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/07/educat…
and the scientology-based charter schools that utilize "study tech" - a curriculum that has shown absolutely disastrous results:
http://www.tampabay.com/news/education/t…
For examples, see the extremely large network of Gulen charter schools:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/07/educat…
and the scientology-based charter schools that utilize "study tech" - a curriculum that has shown absolutely disastrous results:
http://www.tampabay.com/news/education/t…
37
actually, the initiative very clearly states that the charters in WA canNOT be religious. and, they have to give priority to disadvantaged students.
i support charters. i support them for lots of reasons - higher accountability, greater innovation, higher standards - but because they provide and OPTION for parents who are dissatisfied with their neighborhood school and can't afford or don't want to send their child to a private school.
We're talking 40 schools over 5 years. Come on people... don't hate on it until you've seen it in action (as I have) or attended one.
i support charters. i support them for lots of reasons - higher accountability, greater innovation, higher standards - but because they provide and OPTION for parents who are dissatisfied with their neighborhood school and can't afford or don't want to send their child to a private school.
We're talking 40 schools over 5 years. Come on people... don't hate on it until you've seen it in action (as I have) or attended one.
38
It's also reassuring to know the I-1240 is written to allow only high-performing charter schools in Washington, and there are many layers of accountability.
Where in the initiative, could you cite page and section number, do you see this laid out? I've read the initiative multiple times and there is NOTHING that allows "only" high-performing.
Also, there aren't many layers of accountability. One big one is the new Charter Commission. There is no way to remove an ineffective one, only people who support charters can be on the commission and they get a totally different way to pick charter proposals than the other authorizer, school boards. How is that accountable?
I've seen charters in action as well in two states. There isn't anything truly special about them. And, the "40 schools in 5 years?" Wording in the initiative would allow this to go higher.
Decline to Sign I-1240. The signature gatherers are getting $14 an hour plus $4 per signature. Someone's trying to buy something.
Where in the initiative, could you cite page and section number, do you see this laid out? I've read the initiative multiple times and there is NOTHING that allows "only" high-performing.
Also, there aren't many layers of accountability. One big one is the new Charter Commission. There is no way to remove an ineffective one, only people who support charters can be on the commission and they get a totally different way to pick charter proposals than the other authorizer, school boards. How is that accountable?
I've seen charters in action as well in two states. There isn't anything truly special about them. And, the "40 schools in 5 years?" Wording in the initiative would allow this to go higher.
Decline to Sign I-1240. The signature gatherers are getting $14 an hour plus $4 per signature. Someone's trying to buy something.
39
41 other states have public charter schools. Some of those states have 20 years of experience with public charter schools. Parents and students in Washington deserve to have at least the same options as parents and students in other states.
40
Well, other states have an income tax. Should we have that option, too?
Charters, over 20 years and 41 states, have NOT proven they work better than traditional public schools. They drain funds from existing schools.
We need to allow the two innovation schools laws passed in the last two years in Washington state to work. We need to allow the Lighthouse School law to encourage STEM schools (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) to work. We have, in Seattle, one of the strongest teacher contracts for assessment in the nation.
Decline to Sign I-1240.
Charters, over 20 years and 41 states, have NOT proven they work better than traditional public schools. They drain funds from existing schools.
We need to allow the two innovation schools laws passed in the last two years in Washington state to work. We need to allow the Lighthouse School law to encourage STEM schools (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) to work. We have, in Seattle, one of the strongest teacher contracts for assessment in the nation.
Decline to Sign I-1240.
41
The initiative does not say that charters have to give priority to disadvantaged students. It specifically says that they don't, actually. "PROVIDED, That nothing in this chapter may be construed as intended to limit the establishment of charter schools to those that serve a substantial portion of at-risk students "
My point regarding religiously-based charter curricula is that in the two cases I cited they appeared to be secular, which is how they were able to establish themselves.
My point regarding religiously-based charter curricula is that in the two cases I cited they appeared to be secular, which is how they were able to establish themselves.
42
@39 - should we jump off a cliff just because 41 other states have? You keep repeating the same PR line over and over. You link to things about Chris Eide and other ed deformers in your twitter feed. Might you be an A4ED or Stand 4 children astroturfer?
You also neglect to mention startup costs - all charters have them. Where will that come from? Our public school fund? That would definitely siphon off some money from the public school system.
And believe me, I have plenty of experience with charters. Home state was Arizona, also lived in Utah for several years full time, now just have to be there part time. Both states are overrun with charters, legislative-charter incest, unqualified teachers, fraud, segregation, and very little accountability. In fact, that's why the crooks like charters so much - they can hide ALL kinds of fraud.
Screw 1240 - Washington kids deserve better.
Cheers!
You also neglect to mention startup costs - all charters have them. Where will that come from? Our public school fund? That would definitely siphon off some money from the public school system.
And believe me, I have plenty of experience with charters. Home state was Arizona, also lived in Utah for several years full time, now just have to be there part time. Both states are overrun with charters, legislative-charter incest, unqualified teachers, fraud, segregation, and very little accountability. In fact, that's why the crooks like charters so much - they can hide ALL kinds of fraud.
Screw 1240 - Washington kids deserve better.
Cheers!
43
Why is it considered a good thing if entire schools full of children have their education disrupted because their charter school under performs, closes and they have to be sent to somewhere else? My high school closed when I was a sophomore (under enrollment in the post-baby boom years, love ya boomers!) and I remember how traumatic it was for all of us hormone-enfeebled teens.
Why set these children up for the disruption when we already know that, statistically, charter schools will tend to under perform?
Charter schools are the educational trend du jour. If we can resist a while longer, something shinier will come along to distract the corporatist reformers.
Why set these children up for the disruption when we already know that, statistically, charter schools will tend to under perform?
Charter schools are the educational trend du jour. If we can resist a while longer, something shinier will come along to distract the corporatist reformers.
44
ScreenName, so right.
If we hold out for another 3-5 years, we are going to look like the smart state.
If we hold out for another 3-5 years, we are going to look like the smart state.
45
Look at all the Seattle idealogues ATTACKING like hornets when their ideology is threatened... "OH NO CHARTER SCHOOLS!!! AHHHHHHHHH...... Change will be scary because the political marketing machine tells me so!!" Quick RUN!!!
Someone needs to pop that big ideological bubble Seattle lives in and join the rest of the real world..
I know you all saw the "Ch" at the beginning the name and instantly thought "Christ" and then jumped to all sorts of crazy ideas that religion will take over and next thing you know Dick Cheney and Newt Gingrich will be teaching Sunday School everyday of the week at these schools and we'll become Louisiana in a year from now.
GET OVER YOUR IDEOLOGICAL GARBAGE SEATTLE.
Charter schools won't be the end-all-be-all solution, but golly, maybe we should have options.... our state's current school system really showed well in Obama's race to the top... oh and by the way, the Head Democrat - Obama himself supports Charter Schools... might want to take a hint from the Top Dem in the land.... shhhhhhh .... it's ok to vote for Charter Schools, you won't be considered any less Liberal.... no one will know.
Someone needs to pop that big ideological bubble Seattle lives in and join the rest of the real world..
I know you all saw the "Ch" at the beginning the name and instantly thought "Christ" and then jumped to all sorts of crazy ideas that religion will take over and next thing you know Dick Cheney and Newt Gingrich will be teaching Sunday School everyday of the week at these schools and we'll become Louisiana in a year from now.
GET OVER YOUR IDEOLOGICAL GARBAGE SEATTLE.
Charter schools won't be the end-all-be-all solution, but golly, maybe we should have options.... our state's current school system really showed well in Obama's race to the top... oh and by the way, the Head Democrat - Obama himself supports Charter Schools... might want to take a hint from the Top Dem in the land.... shhhhhhh .... it's ok to vote for Charter Schools, you won't be considered any less Liberal.... no one will know.
46
Anyone who advocates for charter schools is either a sucker or actively seeking to destroy democracy.
This reads like it was written by a sucker.
If I see someone in my neighborhood asking me to sign the charter school initiative, I'll curse the motherfucker out.
This reads like it was written by a sucker.
If I see someone in my neighborhood asking me to sign the charter school initiative, I'll curse the motherfucker out.
47
"It's also reassuring to know the I-1240 is written to allow only high-performing charter schools in Washington, and there are many layers of accountability. "
Ah, yes, the "all above average" fallacy. To be enforced by the Wonderful Wizard of Charters, who can make this guarantee because...um...BECAUSE BECAUSE BECAUSE BECAUSE BECAUSE Because of the wonderful things he does! TRA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA!
This will work out great.
Ah, yes, the "all above average" fallacy. To be enforced by the Wonderful Wizard of Charters, who can make this guarantee because...um...BECAUSE BECAUSE BECAUSE BECAUSE BECAUSE Because of the wonderful things he does! TRA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA!
This will work out great.
48
This is an article about the huge and growing amounts of money being spent on lobbying for changes to charter school laws - removing caps and other restrictions, allowing for-profits and expanding virtual charters (a really, really sketchy brand of charter), etc.
http://www.asbj.com/TopicsArchive/School…
The millions come from for-profit charter operators (charters have been called and out-of-state ideologues, often with ties to charter management organizations.
So, my question to those touting the comforting wording of this bill*: what makes you think this law won’t/can’t be changed to include things you don’t find so pleasing? You going to be able to stop that? Have fun trying.
* An initiative, if passed, becomes a LAW so it is, properly, a bill - it will have no special groovy, of-the-people, protected status once on the books - people seem to hate “laws” but love “initiatives” cuz they’re all choicey (b.s.) and so gratifyingly speedy, not like those laborious, compromisey things done by your, you know, elected representatives.
This is an article about the huge and growing amounts of money being spent on lobbying for changes to charter school laws - removing caps and other restrictions, allowing for-profits and expanding virtual charters (a really, really sketchy brand of charter), etc.
http://www.asbj.com/TopicsArchive/School…
The millions come from for-profit charter operators (charters have been called and out-of-state ideologues, often with ties to charter management organizations.
So, my question to those touting the comforting wording of this bill*: what makes you think this law won’t/can’t be changed to include things you don’t find so pleasing? You going to be able to stop that? Have fun trying.
* An initiative, if passed, becomes a LAW so it is, properly, a bill - it will have no special groovy, of-the-people, protected status once on the books - people seem to hate “laws” but love “initiatives” cuz they’re all choicey (b.s.) and so gratifyingly speedy, not like those laborious, compromisey things done by your, you know, elected representatives.
49
My link @33 keeps disappearing. Try this one on money and influence. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/03…
50
WOW! Not what I expected here. Anyway, the only thing I don't see talked about it the staff. They will be non-union. Pay is lower and standards are also usually lowered. The school will also be able to teach what they want. Put Tennessee and Lock Ness Monster in your search engine. NO CHARTER SCHOOLS!!!!
51
So @39 is Anne Martens, communications director for Stand for Children Washington, a Michelle Rhee-allied astroturf group that, with the B&MG Foundation, is pushing charters. It's rather telling that in opposing 1100 she had this to say:
She is fairly well compensated and from what I recall was brought into the position after falling on hard times.
Remember when she tried to zing Fnarf?
Jesus wept.
This is about protecting funds K-12 schools, all day kindergarten, health care for low-income children, health care for seniors and people with disabilities, hospice care for people with cancer and AIDS, cops and firefighters and the people who answer the phone when you call 911.
Whoever votes for 1100 is taking money directly from those city and state services and handing it over to massive corporations. We the people, the owners of those state liquor stores, get nothing out of the deal - no profits from the sale, no money for essential services - all we get is the right to pay big corporations more often for the same liquor that we already have no problem getting.
She is fairly well compensated and from what I recall was brought into the position after falling on hard times.
Remember when she tried to zing Fnarf?
Really, Dwight, Fnarf, jut because no one would ever want to breed with you doesn't mean you have to hate on those of us attractive enough to get a date. Most parents are doing the best we can with an entire life who is completely dependent, but I guess that's a level of responsibility that your fat ass can't understand since you can't even be bothered to go one whole foot out of your way. Thanks for sharing.
Jesus wept.
52
I'm a parent. I own a small business. I've never been a teacher. Nor is anyone in my family. Nor am I close friends with any teachers.
But after some thought, and some research, I've come around to oppose the charter ballot initiative. For many reasons. First, they pushed it through, at the last minute, in a very suspicious way. Why did they do that? Were they trying to "sneak one by us"?
Bad idea. Something tells me that Ms. Alarcan is directly or indirectly getting some form of compensation from one of the many "Astro Turf" so-called "Education Reform" groups for herself or a member of her family.
And if it is so "popular", then why did the billionaires backing it have to pay people to gather signatures? If it's really something people want, you don't need to pay for signatures at $4 each.
Charters always "sound good", right off the bat. But when voters look at them closely, they realize that they are actually a very bad idea. That's why you have to take these "polls" that claim widespread support with a LARGE grain of salt.
But let's get to the substance of why this "charter" initiative is such an awful idea. Here are just THREE (3) of the many reasons to oppose this initiative:
REASON #1:
Who Authorizes These "Charter Schools"?
There's no limit on who can be an authorizer. Non-profits, for-profits, anything. Also, the charter schools are specifically allowed to contract fee-based services from their authorizer. Theoretically, Sysco could set themselves up as an authorizer and then sell food service to every charter that they cover. The authorizer can require that a charter use their extra services, but it's obvious that the message could be sent with a wink and a nudge. Authorizers can also subcontract out their responsibilities, also without any apparent restriction. This is obviously the hidden "cash cow" for charters under the initiative.
REASON #2:
Conversion Charters
Conversion charters basically take over an operating school building from the District. A petition signed by half of the parents or half of the teachers is required. Any student who wants to stay can stay, but the District has to accommodate students who want to leave at another school. This obviously would wreak havoc with neighborhood assignment plans. Also, the conversion charter gets the school building rent-free and gets the school's share of any levies that have already passed, including capital levies. The District is left on the hook for major maintenance and repairs that are needed to maintain the school's occupancy permits. The District is effectively left with all of the liabilities and none of the income. As a final insult, the charter school and the authorizer work out he terms of use for the school building, which are then binding on the District, even though the District doesn't have a seat at the negotiating table. It's clear that several charter conversions in a single district could bring the district down financially.
REASON #3:
Funding
New charter schools (not conversions) don't get access to money from levies that have already passed. However, they do get a piece of future levies, and the District they're in has to include them in capital levy planning. Again, this adds a burden to districts while taking money away. Charters also have the right of first refusal to purchase or lease a newly closed school building.
Charters build on the myth that American schools are in "crisis" or that we're supposedly doing a "terrible" job, educating our kids. They're not. If you control for the poorest 20% of our population, US test scores then shoot up to near the very top, with Finland and South Korea.
Charters are a scam. Just ask New York, where the "best" charter in the state has a "CEO" making over $300,000 PER YEAR, in a supposedly "non-profit" school.
I'm not falling for it. And these are just SOME of the reasons I'm against it. Refuse to sign. Protect our schools and our kids.
More...
But after some thought, and some research, I've come around to oppose the charter ballot initiative. For many reasons. First, they pushed it through, at the last minute, in a very suspicious way. Why did they do that? Were they trying to "sneak one by us"?
Bad idea. Something tells me that Ms. Alarcan is directly or indirectly getting some form of compensation from one of the many "Astro Turf" so-called "Education Reform" groups for herself or a member of her family.
And if it is so "popular", then why did the billionaires backing it have to pay people to gather signatures? If it's really something people want, you don't need to pay for signatures at $4 each.
Charters always "sound good", right off the bat. But when voters look at them closely, they realize that they are actually a very bad idea. That's why you have to take these "polls" that claim widespread support with a LARGE grain of salt.
But let's get to the substance of why this "charter" initiative is such an awful idea. Here are just THREE (3) of the many reasons to oppose this initiative:
REASON #1:
Who Authorizes These "Charter Schools"?
There's no limit on who can be an authorizer. Non-profits, for-profits, anything. Also, the charter schools are specifically allowed to contract fee-based services from their authorizer. Theoretically, Sysco could set themselves up as an authorizer and then sell food service to every charter that they cover. The authorizer can require that a charter use their extra services, but it's obvious that the message could be sent with a wink and a nudge. Authorizers can also subcontract out their responsibilities, also without any apparent restriction. This is obviously the hidden "cash cow" for charters under the initiative.
REASON #2:
Conversion Charters
Conversion charters basically take over an operating school building from the District. A petition signed by half of the parents or half of the teachers is required. Any student who wants to stay can stay, but the District has to accommodate students who want to leave at another school. This obviously would wreak havoc with neighborhood assignment plans. Also, the conversion charter gets the school building rent-free and gets the school's share of any levies that have already passed, including capital levies. The District is left on the hook for major maintenance and repairs that are needed to maintain the school's occupancy permits. The District is effectively left with all of the liabilities and none of the income. As a final insult, the charter school and the authorizer work out he terms of use for the school building, which are then binding on the District, even though the District doesn't have a seat at the negotiating table. It's clear that several charter conversions in a single district could bring the district down financially.
REASON #3:
Funding
New charter schools (not conversions) don't get access to money from levies that have already passed. However, they do get a piece of future levies, and the District they're in has to include them in capital levy planning. Again, this adds a burden to districts while taking money away. Charters also have the right of first refusal to purchase or lease a newly closed school building.
Charters build on the myth that American schools are in "crisis" or that we're supposedly doing a "terrible" job, educating our kids. They're not. If you control for the poorest 20% of our population, US test scores then shoot up to near the very top, with Finland and South Korea.
Charters are a scam. Just ask New York, where the "best" charter in the state has a "CEO" making over $300,000 PER YEAR, in a supposedly "non-profit" school.
I'm not falling for it. And these are just SOME of the reasons I'm against it. Refuse to sign. Protect our schools and our kids.
53
In addition to "Stand for Children", "Students First", "League of Education Voters", "'Democrats for Education Reform", other phony, Astroturf "education" organizations include "Excellent Schools Now", "A+ Washington", "Partnership for Learning" and many others.
They all sound so nice. So caring. So "progressive"; but they're the exact opposite.
These organizations are empty shells. The few "members" they have are usually paid, directly or indirectly, to lend their names to this sham.
Beware of these groups, pushing a deceptive and destructive agenda behind their smiling exteriors.
The "Charter Initiative" is their "Trojan Horse". Let's keep it out of our schools. The last thing we need is to start bleeding money, paying for "private management companies" that would immediately contract with these supposedly "non-profit" charters---using our precious and already inadequate tax dollars.
They all sound so nice. So caring. So "progressive"; but they're the exact opposite.
These organizations are empty shells. The few "members" they have are usually paid, directly or indirectly, to lend their names to this sham.
Beware of these groups, pushing a deceptive and destructive agenda behind their smiling exteriors.
The "Charter Initiative" is their "Trojan Horse". Let's keep it out of our schools. The last thing we need is to start bleeding money, paying for "private management companies" that would immediately contract with these supposedly "non-profit" charters---using our precious and already inadequate tax dollars.
54
Also, add these phony-baloney "education" groups to the list of miscreants as well. These are particularly odious, staffed with conservative Fox "News" types, sellout Joe Lieberman-type "Democrats", hustlers, snake oil pushers and other odious, arrogant "know it all" types who pride themselves on detesting unions, progressives and others who are "in the way" of their goal to privatize our public schools.
They include:
"The PIE Network" (What exactly is in that "pie" anyway?)
The Thomas B. Fordham Institute (Which could be called the Rush Limbaugh institute, when you look closely at the hideous policies they advocate.)
The Center for American Progress (As mendacious a title as they come; it would be like Exxon starting a group called "Americans For Clean Air and Climate Protection")
The Center on Reinventing Public Education (Reinventing in a way that George W. Bush would just love.)
And there are more. Follow the money by looking at their funding. It's not too hard. They're liars with a plan. Don't fall for it.
They include:
"The PIE Network" (What exactly is in that "pie" anyway?)
The Thomas B. Fordham Institute (Which could be called the Rush Limbaugh institute, when you look closely at the hideous policies they advocate.)
The Center for American Progress (As mendacious a title as they come; it would be like Exxon starting a group called "Americans For Clean Air and Climate Protection")
The Center on Reinventing Public Education (Reinventing in a way that George W. Bush would just love.)
And there are more. Follow the money by looking at their funding. It's not too hard. They're liars with a plan. Don't fall for it.
55
I read a lot of generalities without specifics. I'd feel better if you could name some of these states that are doing so much better with charters and some of the programs themselves. I'm glad you have so much confidence. I wish you had the facts as well. While I admit I'm not a charter advocate, it is because no one has shown any proof they work. Just want to see the evidence.
56
And I've been very observant of the role these private organizations have been playing in our politics over the couple decades. Please don't be fooled into giving more money to profiteers in the private sector. Anybody who can't see that that is the real motive hasn't been paying attention. Thanks for the list of very familiar rightwing groups, John Foster. He's given you the facts if you can avoid your bias and check them out.
59
Ah, I see my credibility is in jeopardy by slog commenters. So here's the background, I'm a mom, I grew up here, I've worked on campaigns for Obama, Patty Murray, Death with Dignity, SEIU and the coordinated ballot table (all 7 initiatives in 2010), and now I work for Stand for Children. I do it because I believe think we can do a better job of educating our children. I have union friends. There is no swimming pool full of money in my office and I get paid a plain old non-profit salary. I'm for non-profit public charter schools as an option for Washington kids because I've visited a few and seen what they can do, and frankly, it's pretty amazing. I think it's a reasonable option, especially for the kids who are currently getting left behind. I'm going to vote yes on 1240.
Cheers.
Cheers.
61
There is nothing that a charter school can do for students that a public school cannot do.
Charter school are NOT public schools because they are not owned by the public. It is ownership, not the funding source, that determines whether something is public or private. Otherwise defense contractors would be public corporations.
This initiative does not include any real accountability for the charter schools.
Charter schools do take funding from public schools. A charter school would be entitled to local levy money raised for public schools.
While a religious organization cannot charter a school directly, they can create a subsidiary non-profit corporation that can charter a school.
None of the assurances in this article are true. The whole thing is a pack of lies. This initiative is support by a small number of incredibly wealthy people who want to control public education funding but have no interest in public education - they certainly don't put their children in public schools.
The Gates Foundation has created and funded a squad of nearly identical astroturf Education Reform Organization to create the illusion of consensus when they are all finger puppets on a single hand. These groups have almost no membership. They have the loud voices amplified by Gates money is all.
Charter school are NOT public schools because they are not owned by the public. It is ownership, not the funding source, that determines whether something is public or private. Otherwise defense contractors would be public corporations.
This initiative does not include any real accountability for the charter schools.
Charter schools do take funding from public schools. A charter school would be entitled to local levy money raised for public schools.
While a religious organization cannot charter a school directly, they can create a subsidiary non-profit corporation that can charter a school.
None of the assurances in this article are true. The whole thing is a pack of lies. This initiative is support by a small number of incredibly wealthy people who want to control public education funding but have no interest in public education - they certainly don't put their children in public schools.
The Gates Foundation has created and funded a squad of nearly identical astroturf Education Reform Organization to create the illusion of consensus when they are all finger puppets on a single hand. These groups have almost no membership. They have the loud voices amplified by Gates money is all.
62
@61: "'There is nothing that a charter school can do for students that a public school cannot do."
That's false. A charter school can hold teachers to higher standards and more easily fire them for poor performance. Both of these serve the students, so I would say it is in fact "do[ing something] for students".
Also (and this isn't unique to 61): But I hear a lot of people claim that "charter schools take funding from public schools", but how exactly is this different than the claim "public schools take funding from public schools"? If a neighborhood gets a new school---whether it's a charter or a public school---it will likely result in funds being diverted from other public schools in the county or district. Further, charters don't have tuition, so it's not as if they're taking funding and then preventing students from going there. I am honestly confused about why so many people feel as though this is a strong point, when it seems like a blatant fact that could be applied to any non-private school.
From the looks of it, I don't think this initiative is a good one. I agree with a lot of the (actual) criticisms surrounding it. But what I don't get is the animosity people have against charter schools (for example @46 "Anyone who advocates for charter schools is either a sucker or actively seeking to destroy democracy.") I am a grad student studying to be a high school math teacher. I would never (NEVER) teach in an institution charges tuition, and I would always like to teach in urban, under-served environments (I'm typing this from Harlem, where I'm studying [I grew up in Redmond in Seattle, however]). Instead of hearing the word "charter" and immediately grabbing your pitchfork, I encourage everyone to change the question from "Do we want charters?" to "Is there a way charter schools could benefit our students". One of those questions is actually proactive, and may get some dialogue going.
(side note: I posted on the article that was against charters as well, so if you read my comment there, it may be redundant at times.)
More...
That's false. A charter school can hold teachers to higher standards and more easily fire them for poor performance. Both of these serve the students, so I would say it is in fact "do[ing something] for students".
Also (and this isn't unique to 61): But I hear a lot of people claim that "charter schools take funding from public schools", but how exactly is this different than the claim "public schools take funding from public schools"? If a neighborhood gets a new school---whether it's a charter or a public school---it will likely result in funds being diverted from other public schools in the county or district. Further, charters don't have tuition, so it's not as if they're taking funding and then preventing students from going there. I am honestly confused about why so many people feel as though this is a strong point, when it seems like a blatant fact that could be applied to any non-private school.
From the looks of it, I don't think this initiative is a good one. I agree with a lot of the (actual) criticisms surrounding it. But what I don't get is the animosity people have against charter schools (for example @46 "Anyone who advocates for charter schools is either a sucker or actively seeking to destroy democracy.") I am a grad student studying to be a high school math teacher. I would never (NEVER) teach in an institution charges tuition, and I would always like to teach in urban, under-served environments (I'm typing this from Harlem, where I'm studying [I grew up in Redmond in Seattle, however]). Instead of hearing the word "charter" and immediately grabbing your pitchfork, I encourage everyone to change the question from "Do we want charters?" to "Is there a way charter schools could benefit our students". One of those questions is actually proactive, and may get some dialogue going.
(side note: I posted on the article that was against charters as well, so if you read my comment there, it may be redundant at times.)
64
@63: I would never claim that all charter schools are good. But I would also never claim that all public schools are good/doing a good job as well...
My goal isn't to try to get everyone to think Charters are good (as you've shown, this clearly isn't always the case). But I think it would be rash to then conclude that ALL charters are bad. All that does is prevent any actual progress from being made, because we focus on there having to be a black and white answer, instead of asking how could charters be utilized to benefit students (especially students in underserved neighborhoods).
My goal isn't to try to get everyone to think Charters are good (as you've shown, this clearly isn't always the case). But I think it would be rash to then conclude that ALL charters are bad. All that does is prevent any actual progress from being made, because we focus on there having to be a black and white answer, instead of asking how could charters be utilized to benefit students (especially students in underserved neighborhoods).
65
@64 I don't think that Washington public schools are failing. By what measure ? The U.S. educates all it's children and I do not believe that is the case with other countries that we compare ourselves with. I believe we have choked our schools with too much testing and narrowing of what is being taught. Washington public school do innovate and have choices. Let's better what we have instead of bring in another system that will siphon off needed funding and buildings. Also, who will watch over new charters if they come to this state and who pays for that ? This initiative allows for school take over by a majority of teachers or parents. That part is extremely troubling !
http://www.snoed.org/programs/pathway-pa…
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/lo…
http://www.k12.wa.us/InnovativeSchools/D…
http://www.examiner.com/article/seattle-…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internation…)
http://www.snoed.org/programs/pathway-pa…
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/lo…
http://www.k12.wa.us/InnovativeSchools/D…
http://www.examiner.com/article/seattle-…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internation…)
66
@65 I've already stated that I don't think this initiative is a good one, so don't imply that I do.
I'm aware that the US educates all of its children, unlike other school systems in the world, and that when you account for that, our education is actually on par with some of the best systems as well. And the presence of testing has certainly stifled our schools in many ways, again I agree with you.
And while I don't think all Washington schools are failing, I do think there are many that could stand to be improved (I don't have much time to search right now, but even looking at Franklin high school [from the link I'll provide below], less than 30% of their students passed the 2008-09 math portion of the WASL.).
Now how we could implement these charters---the questions you bring up as to funding and oversight---are good and important questions. Those are exactly the sort of questions I think it's worth discussing. What I'm against, is avoiding that conversation simply because people are already biased against charters in the first place; that's the opposite of progress.
http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/summary…
I'm aware that the US educates all of its children, unlike other school systems in the world, and that when you account for that, our education is actually on par with some of the best systems as well. And the presence of testing has certainly stifled our schools in many ways, again I agree with you.
And while I don't think all Washington schools are failing, I do think there are many that could stand to be improved (I don't have much time to search right now, but even looking at Franklin high school [from the link I'll provide below], less than 30% of their students passed the 2008-09 math portion of the WASL.).
Now how we could implement these charters---the questions you bring up as to funding and oversight---are good and important questions. Those are exactly the sort of questions I think it's worth discussing. What I'm against, is avoiding that conversation simply because people are already biased against charters in the first place; that's the opposite of progress.
http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/summary…
67
Just searching around for a few more minutes, I found South Lake High School. For the 2008-09 WASL, less than 10% of students passed. And then, after searching on Google, I found an article about a teacher who slapped and choked a student.
I don't think this is how all public schools are in any way. But clearly not all public schools are succeeding.
[Further, and this is more opinion, I think it's telling that all I had to do is look for a school in southern Seattle to find the issues I imagined existed. That is because one of the ways public schools often are not succeeding is through closing the achievement gap between white and minority students. If I think charters could help turn that around, with the right structure, than absolutely I want to include them in the discussion.]
http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/summary…
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/lo…
I don't think this is how all public schools are in any way. But clearly not all public schools are succeeding.
[Further, and this is more opinion, I think it's telling that all I had to do is look for a school in southern Seattle to find the issues I imagined existed. That is because one of the ways public schools often are not succeeding is through closing the achievement gap between white and minority students. If I think charters could help turn that around, with the right structure, than absolutely I want to include them in the discussion.]
http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/summary…
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/lo…
68
Charter schools do not better than public schools, according to the data. This is despite being able to pick and choose students, remove struggling students and students needing special services, and put collective bargaining restrictions on their workforce. If their claims are to be believed, charter schools should do WILDLY better than public schools. They don't. As far as I can tell, the big winners in charter schools are the CEOs and investors, who divert public funds that should be spent in the classroom for high-quality instruction and experienced teachers, for their own private gain. Vote for all students. Vote against charter schools, please.
69
Charter schools do not better than public schools, according to the data. This is despite being able to pick and choose students, remove struggling students and students needing special services, and put collective bargaining restrictions on their workforce. If their claims are to be believed, charter schools should do WILDLY better than public schools. They don't. As far as I can tell, the big winners in charter schools are the CEOs and investors, who divert public funds that should be spent in the classroom for high-quality instruction and experienced teachers, for their own private gain. Vote for all students. Vote against charter schools, please.
70
Don't forget, it's easy to hide profits if you just pay the people at the top more, or put money into advertising or lobbying. This is one way that insurance companies have claimed such low "profits" and still have enormous funds available for lobbying efforts.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
All You Motherfuckers Complaining That aPodments Are Too Small at 200 Square Feet by Dominic Holden
-
SL Letter of the Day: Did You Think I Was Going To Tell You Not To Come Out? (PLUS: Help Free Kate!) by Dan Savage
-
Rightwing Anti-Gay French Activist Commits Suicide at Notre Dame Cathedral by Dan Savage
-
It's Spring! Who's Ready for Street Harassment? by Cienna Madrid
-
Spoiled Rotten: Star Trek Into Darkness by Paul Constant
-
America's Epidemic of Toddler-on-Toddler Gun Violence Continues by Goldy
-
Well-Regulated Beaverton Militia Accidentally Fires Shot into Neighbor's Bedroom by Goldy
-
Slog Overnight by Dan Savage
-
Saint Genet Re-Creates "Shoot" by Brendan Kiley
-
There Are No Atheists In Foxholes by Dan Savage
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (70) RSS