Bravo, Goldy. (I would say that as the chair of one of the NO on 1240 campaigns but he does a good, step-by-step job of dissecting 1240.)

He did leave out a couple of key things about the conversion charter. In other states, it usually is about taking over a FAILING school. This would allow ANY existing school to be taken over.

As well, the petition could signed by either parents OR teachers.

That means in an elementary school with 18 teachers, 10 could sign a petition and upend an entire school community. Ten people. That's not good public policy.

And, the charter group does NOT have to give any public notification they are doing this so you probably might not know until AFTER your school is taken. Again, not good public policy.

But Goldy nails it at the end.

Folks, we don't fully fund our EXISTING schools. These supports and resources that at-risk students need? Those tend to get cut and haven't been financially supported for years. So yes, we need to do more for at-risk kids (although I note that Tacoma created a high school within a high school for at-risk kids that CLOSED the achievement gap. It can be done and without charters.)

So let's fund our existing schools AND early-childhood education. That's the bang for the buck, not a fad like charter schools.

No on 1240, www.no1240.org

I don't care who you are voting for or what issues you support. Please put a stamp on your ballot and mail it in as soon as possible. If everyone waits until the very last minute to mail in their ballots then we won't know who won any of these races for days after the election. Please do your part to save us all the headache and vote by the end of the week if you haven't voted already. I really want to find out whether I can get married or not on election night. Thanks!

Thank you, Goldy. You got it right.

Every one of the claims and arguments made in support of I-1240 is simply false. Every promise made by the I-1240 supporters is also false.

Charter schools are not new. The data is in. We already know that charter schools don't work. Why are we even messing with this idea? Oh, right, because some insanely wealthy people might become even more insanely wealthy if we privatize our public resources.

Bravo, Goldy, and @2!!!

Bravo to @4, too!!!

fix what we have already. more teachers and less back office administration.

I am getting tired of plutocrats trying to engineer my life and lives of my children for their own profit.

We can vote. And this will probably be defeated. But are you not tired of always being put into reaction mode? Where are our bills saying that education, water, power production, safety, roads and bridges belong to the people? How about an income tax on those earning over 500k?

I hope this referendum dies an ignoble death. And gay people can get married. And pot to be legal. And for rich fucks telling us all how to live to go to hell.

Thanks. I was undecided on this issue - there are some aspects of charter schools that I like - but youve convinced me.

What I don't understand is the Gates and Bezoses motivation?

Can someone explain to me what the Gates' and Bezoses motivation is? I am still not clear on why they would put money into this. Is it simply because, as Goldy has described, they trust market solutions? Seems like there has to be something more to it than that.. It is so transparent that they attach themselves to a campaign that tries to sell itself as a public plan when neither Bezos nor Gates send their kids to public schools.

@11 There's a lot of money to be made in the charter school system. Bill Gates is already notorious in the PNW for not giving his money to local schools because (so far) he can't make us do what he wants us to do.

Public school philanthropists used to give money to schools with the understanding that schools know how best to use the money. The new "charity" model for billionaires is to give lots of money with lots of conditions- conditions that tie schools to the personal interests of the individual or corporation making the donation. What this results in is education and classroom policies being dictated by whoever "donated" the most money. This is not what we call a democracy.

Your argument is totally logical and it is very telling to see who is funding 1240. However, I disagree that early childhood learning (ie early academics) to increase test scores is the only proven method. Have you been inside a full day kindergarten class where 5 year olds are sitting through 90 minute reading blocks? I have as a substitute teacher, and the situation is sad! These kids don't know how to color with pictures, but they will score well on reading tests!! Who cares??!!! Please, go look at Finland's educational system (there will be a conference in Seattle about this issue on Nov. 13) and the secret to their success. Or go look at a local (private) Waldorf school and see what their approach to early childhood learning is. Or look at German kindegartens, many of which are outdoor for nearly the entire day. The conversation should not be about high test scores, it should be about providing the right environment for appropriate development to take place.

Have you been inside of a kindergarten class where 5 year olds are forced to sit through 90 minute reading blocks? (Where teachers are forced to use reading curriculum that is completely scripted,designed by an "education reform" company.) I have experienced this scenario, as I work in the public schools as a substitute. My point is that schools already are not free from corporate influence in the classroom. In addition, many children do not know how to draw simple pictures with crayons, but they can read (or decode well) and can write a few letters with their pencils. Toys and playtime have been eliminated from most all day kindergartens. Maybe they will pass standardized tests at a young age, but who cares? What will these kids be like when they are 30 or 40? How is this focus on testing good for their development as children? Seriously, please find a different argument for education reform besides advocating for early childhood academic learning. Play develops the mind as well as social capacities. Art develops the mind and creativity. Go look to Finland or other Western countries where there are excellent public education systems in place. Or go interview your local private Waldorf school about their philosophy on the matter and how Waldorf graduates score later on with testing. I am not for 1040 as I do not trust the money behind it. However, there is much about the public system here that needs to be fixed.

Can anyone shed any light on why Tacoma Mayor Marilyn Strickland is supporting this by appearing in commercials for I-1240? I'm really surprise and disappointed. Any thought at all to account for this would help me understand.

Can anyone shed any light on why Tacoma Mayor, Marilyn Strickland is appearing in tv commercials supporting I-1240? I don't understand her support as her op-ed content in western Washington newspapers is merely the talking points from the initiative backers.

@11

http://educationalchemy.com/2012/06/26/e…

http://current.com/shows/the-young-turks…

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/…

As a former public school teacher who is now getting a master's degree in education policy, I am disappointed by the many inaccuracies in this piece. Please do not accept this editorial as the gospel truth on what this bill does, the effectiveness of charter schools, or how you should vote.

The CREDO study (link below) shows that although the average charter school does not perform better than the average traditional public school, charters work very well in some places and for some students. In particular, the average charter school performs BETTER than an average public school for students in poverty and English Language Learners.

The study also says that “charter schools that are organized around a mission to teach the most economically disadvantaged students in particular seem to have developed expertise in serving these communities” (p. 7). The text of 1240 specifically says that they will give preference to applications that target disadvantaged populations. I support the idea of expanding access to preschool, but what about the kids who are in failing schools NOW? It’s too late to provide them with preschool. Why are we turning our backs on an initiative that could make a difference for real children right now?

In addition, Washington is one of the few states in the country where the achievement gap is getting bigger instead of smaller (link below). Our approach is not working, and it’s certainly not all about money—budgets are tight everywhere. I went to public schools and believe in public schools; I do not believe in a fully privatized market of education. What I do believe in is using a limited number of charter schools to target groups of kids whose achievement has stagnated or regressed.

I used to teach at a charter school in another state and I can tell you that charters are not perfect. Of course they won’t solve all their problems. However, they have the potential to do really great things for some of the kids in our state who are struggling the most. I am voting yes on charters, and I hope you will too.

CREDO study: http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/MULTIP…

Evidence of our growing achievement gap: http://tntp.org/assets/documents/TNTP_Wa… for evidence

@13 I emphasize "high quality" early learning. There's no one way to do it, but we're not just talking daycare for the sake of daycare.

As a former public school teacher who is now getting a master's degree in education policy, I am disappointed by the many inaccuracies in this piece. Please do not accept this editorial as the gospel truth on what this bill does, the effectiveness of charter schools, or how you should vote.

The CREDO study (link below) shows that although the average charter school does not perform better than the average traditional public school, charters work very well in some places and for some students. In particular, the average charter school performs BETTER than an average public school for students in poverty and English Language Learners.

The study also says that “charter schools that are organized around a mission to teach the most economically disadvantaged students in particular seem to have developed expertise in serving these communities” (p. 7). The text of 1240 specifically says that they will give preference to applications that target disadvantaged populations. I support the idea of expanding access to preschool, but what about the kids who are in failing schools NOW? It’s too late to provide them with preschool. Why are we turning our backs on an initiative that could make a difference for real children right now?

In addition, Washington is one of the few states in the country where the achievement gap is getting bigger instead of smaller (link below). Our approach is not working, and it’s certainly not all about money—budgets are tight everywhere. I went to public schools and believe in public schools; I do not believe in a fully privatized market of education. What I do believe in is using a limited number of charter schools to target groups of kids whose achievement has stagnated or regressed.

I used to teach at a charter school in another state and I can tell you that charters are not perfect. Of course they won’t solve all their problems. However, they have the potential to do really great things for some of the kids in our state who are struggling the most. I am voting yes on charters, and I hope you will too.

CREDO study: http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/MULTIP…

Evidence of our growing achievement gap: http://tntp.org/assets/documents/TNTP_Wa… for evidence

@17

Mayor Strickland is a member of the NewDeal group which plans to expand charter schools

http://www.cityoftacoma.org/page.aspx?ci…

http://newdealleaders.org/2011/03/28/the…

http://www.tvw.org/index.php?option=com_…

Sorry about the double-post above. Just a few more thoughts.

- Most of the literature on charter schools fails to draw a clear conclusion, which is very different from saying that charter schools are failing. In addition, most of the findings are based correlations, not causation. For instance, just because states with multiple authorizers tend to have lower average charter quality does not mean that the use of multiple authorizers is what CAUSES the lower quality. Another plausible explanation could be that states like Washington where big school districts have a knee-jerk reaction against reform, no matter its content, are left with no choice but to offer multiple authorizers... and it could be exactly this anti-reform climate that is responsible for charter schools' low performance. When looking at the critical difference between correlation and causation, almost all of the arguments presented in this article fall short.

- Contrary to conventional wisdom, research actually indicates that teacher experience is not usually the strongest predictor of teacher quality. Experience and quality cannot be used interchangeably. Some new teachers are extremely effective, and some veteran teachers are not. Just because charter schools tend to employ younger teachers does not mean they employ worse teachers. They may be able to attract young, enthusiastic candidates who are passionate about serving disadvantaged communities. This is another case where looking at an average correlation does not tell the whole story.

- It's fair to say that charter schools are accountable to taxpayers in a different way, and even fair to say that it is a worse form of accountability (though I wouldn't), but it's plain wrong to say that they are not accountable. Taxpayers who have kids can vote with their feet by sending their kids to a charter school or pulling them out. The authorizing board (which could be a school district with a locally-elected board) has the power to shut the schools down if they are not performing--a level of accountability to which traditional public schools are not subjected. Besides, nobody really exercises their local control over regular public schools anyway! Voter turnout for school board elections is typically around 15%, and school board meetings are sparsely attended. Is this form of accountability so much worse than that?

- I agree that parent trigger laws are a terrible idea, but I don't believe that this law is one. I believe that I-1240 requires a majority of teachers/families to support the conversion, but it does not guarantee (like California does) that a majority opinion is enough to force the conversion. It leaves the authorizing board's discretion and authority in place. At least, that is how I read the law.

- Finally, a few factual concerns. Regarding for-profit providers, this does not seem to be a problem. The voter pamphlet says, “Contracts for management of the charter school could only be with nonprofit corporations” (p. 14). In addition, I’m not sure where Goldy gets the idea that charter schools don't have to pay any money for buildings and can essentially just steal them from the district. I've never seen an operation like that, and the text of the law doesn't seem to indicate that kind of arrangement.

Dr Wayne Au
assistant professor U of W Bothell

http://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com…

studies
http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-…

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/Charter-Sch…

brookings
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/researc…

Hi, Please help me with Initiative (1241) 523. Let's put Derpa Der behind us once and for all. Yours, Daniel H. Elliott - Help to allow academia to do what it is meant to do. Thank you!

@21/23 Have you actually read 1240? And has your masters degree program discussed bias and peer reviewed sources? Because The New Teacher Project link is hardly a credible, peer-reviewed source. In addition, you make other assertions that you don't back up with references, thus you are just as guilty of what you are accusing Goldy of.
Read some peer-reviewed research on school choice (Hoxby and Hess and Hanauer are NOT peer reviewed sources - they release think tank white papers that don't undergo any scrutiny). Look at the wiggle words in 1240 - could, may can - those are not absolutes. And if you previously worked for a charter, you should know that a non-profit organization can get the charter, then contract out to a for-profit charter management group to run the school.
As for the parent trigger laws? This one IS actually the worst. Do you think it is right that a small percentage can cause upheaval in a school community?
Hope your Master's degree is successful in teaching you some more critical thinking skills and research skills.

Hi StuckInUtah,

It appears you have not read 1240 as closely as you imply. As I said, I am opposed to parent-trigger laws. I agree with you that it's not right for a small percentage to cause upheaval in a school community. However, this law is NOT a parent trigger law. The text of 1240 says the following:

"(3) In the case of an application to establish a conversion charter school, the applicant must also demonstrate support for the proposed conversion by a petition signed by a majority of teachers assigned to the school or a petition signed by a majority of parents of students in the school."

Again, this is NOT a parent trigger. In California, the parent trigger law guarantees that if a majority of parents sign a petition, the state WILL take one of four turnaround actions, including conversion to a charter school. What the Washington law does is ensure that IF a charter school applicant proposes converting a traditional public school into a charter school, they CANNOT DO IT UNLESS a majority of the teachers or parents sign off on it. It is a safeguard for the community rather than a new right for them to exercise.

In addition, regarding the use of for-profit providers, please note the following provision in 1240 from section 203, part c:

"Contracts for management operation of the charter school may only be with nonprofit organizations"

Naturally, I am aware that all sources are not equally reliable... though I'd consider the text of 1240 to be a pretty reliable source of what the law is intended to do! My point is that the literature on school choice is mixed both in quality and results. I am merely offering alternate perspectives not because I believe I have discovered some final truth, but as proof that this is a complicated issue and that it is not as easy as saying that charter schools are bad. The same studies (e.g., CREDO) that are being used as evidence against this initiative could just as easily be used as evidence for it.

I still haven't fully understood the resistance to Charter schools in the state of Washington. At the same time, Charter schools haven't really done a great job communicating a clear message beyond the standard bullet points. Looking specifically at the issue about educational expenses made in the article:

1) There is an impassioned plea that Charter Schools would rip away $100 million from an already underfunded public school system.

a) Based on the current state budget, approximately $6.8 Billion is spent on K-12 education in Washington. That support goes out to schools regardless of its' performance. An allocation of $100 Million to the Charter school initiative represents 1.47% of the total state expenditure to schools (yet I often do see this percentage stated in articles).

b) In Chicago/Illinois, charter schools only received about 60% of what an established public school received per student. Currently in Washington each school receives about $10,000 per student from the state. What will the allocation to charter schools be in Washington? I have not read one article that addresses how this issue will be handled if charter schools are approved.

c) Charter schools do overall pay less equivalent salary than public schools. Teachers also have choices, if they do not want to work for less pay they don't have to accept a job at a charter school. My partner, who is an incredibly passionate and gifted teacher, wasn't at first able to get a job in a public school system. Many districts would not even give her an interview. She was accepted at a charter school system in Chicago where over three years she was able to both hone her craft as an educator. Since moving to Seattle, she has continued her career as a teacher and recently earned National Board certification. Couldn't her teaching career path be a potential win for public schools in the state of Washington. It takes a year or two for any teacher to really establish the necessary set of skills to excel as an instructor. Charter schools in Washington could provide valuable on-the-job training for teachers that may ultimately end up in the public school system.

Charter schools are not perfect, but I do not know why they have been demonized by a core set of influencers and journalists that generally support other choice initiatives like R74 and I502.

Some of my friends and fellow educators in New York produced a very interesting documentary called "The Inconvenient Truth Behind Waiting for Superman." While I am not 100% against charters, I just want what is best for our kids. And this bill is not it. Check it out if you can before you vote.

KJones- What about charter schools, and I-1240 specifically, will improve student achievement?

psimons- As a taxpayer, I'm reluctant to waste even more money on yet another education reform fad.

Hi Jason,

I believe that the main strength of charter schools is their flexibility in setting a goal or mission for a school and then building up their staff, culture, and practices around it. Many of the things that they do could potentially be done in regular public schools as well but rarely are. It is easier to build this kind of school from the ground up than to try implementing change after change upon a staff and student population that may not be receptive. Also, since charter schools are schools of choice, nobody is forced to stay in them. Schools must be responsive to students' and families' needs if they are going to keep them as clients.

The charter school where I taught was built around the mission of enabling students from disadvantaged communities to get to and through a four-year college. We had five core values (courage, kindness, joy, perseverance, and truth) that were posted in every classroom and woven into lessons in all subjects whenever possible. The whiteboards at the side of every classroom were arranged the same way (date, teacher's name and contact information, agenda of the lesson, daily learning objective, homework, a motivational quote, etc.) to build consistency for kids between classes and grades. We had a schoolwide discipline system that included demerits and detentions for misbehavior as well as rewards for consistently following rules and exemplifying our core values. First thing in the morning, every homeroom teacher checked kids' homework to be sure that it was there, completed, and signed by a parent. A child who came to school missing a homework assignment had to call home to let their family know that they'd be staying after school that day to make it up. Best of all, every teacher in the school was on board with enforcing these systems because we knew what we were getting into when we were hired.

My school was not perfect; it definitely had its issues. The model wouldn't work without dedicated, effective teachers and significant buy-in from the community. That said, I did see the school do wonderful things for many of our students--99 percent of whom were Hispanic and the majority of whom came from disadvantaged backgrounds. Apart from the longer school day, nothing we did was really outside of the scope of what traditional public schools are allowed to do. Our staff just bought into the mission so deeply that we all self-selected into working there and then worked our hearts out to make the mission a reality.

But you are probably looking for more than my anecdotal evidence, and rightly so. I would direct you to two reports from the federal Department of Education, published in 2006 and 2007, that try to determine which practices at top charter schools are responsible for their success. They found that being mission-driven, teaching for mastery and deep understanding, and holding themselves accountable for successes and failures tended to predict success in charter schools at all levels. At the high school level in particular, successful charters also tended to focus on college preparation, provide wraparound support, and value professional learning. You can read the reports here:
http://www2.ed.gov/admins/comm/choice/ch… for high school and http://www2.ed.gov/admins/comm/choice/ch… for K-8
They are not scholarly sources, but they are based in research on the practices of those institutions. The most-cited scholarly source, the 2009 CREDO study from Stanford, makes a similar guess about what makes some charters so successful. They say that "charter schools that are organized around a mission to teach the most economically disadvantaged students in particular seem to have developed expertise in serving these communities" (p. 9).

Successful charter schools are notoriously difficult to replicate, so what I like about I-1240 is that it caps the number of schools that can open over the next five years. I also like that it says they will give preference in the application process to schools that target at-risk students. To me, this is consistent with following through on what charter schools can do best: tailoring the structures of the system to meet the needs of the community. I also like that in the case of a conversion charter (turning an existing school into a charter school), the charter cannot be approved unless at least half of the parents or teachers sign off on it. They require community support before moving forward. I also like that 1240 heads off funding disputes by indicating which physical resources and streams of money are available to charters that apply through different authorizers (the local district vs. the state).

I am sort of on the fence about charters as a whole, but I do believe that this is a good initiative to ease Washington into the arena. By including caps, targeting at-risk students, not allowing for contracting with for-profit providers, requiring community support for conversion, and providing financial incentives to work with the local school district, the text of the initiative shows that its drafters have taken the lessons learned elsewhere into account when crafting 1240.

As for Gates and Bezos, both families contribute to Aviation High School. It is a school that focuses on math and science- there are no sports or P.E. (a student must earn this outside of school.) It is run through the Highline School District. Everyone has to compete just to get in, much like any University.
No tuition is charged. It is the closest thing we have in Washington State to a charter school.
Aviation does very well. Their students are set on achieving.
My children have gone to public schools thus and far. I have volunteered endless hours. I am not a stay at home mom. I am a single mother raising two boys. I took weekdays off, so I could volunteer at their schools.
I have seen many travesties. In my neighborhood, more than 90% of children get reduced or free lunch. The school is located in an impoverished area. Hungry children can't concentrate and cause distractions.
Most of my time volunteering, I dealt with the difficult children- those with learning disabilities and behavioral issues. I did this so that the teacher could actually teach the rest of the class.
Two kids, I helped with for more than 7 years, belonged in a class for those with learning disabilities. Their parents didn't want them to feel ostracized from the general population. Maybe it is just me, but lacking the ability to write one's name correctly spelled and legible by the time one moves onto middle school is very embarrassing. The Highline School District has a no flunk policy from grades K-6, as long as attendance is maintained.
Another child was a psychotic sociopath at the age of 5. He wasn't supposed to be in a regular classroom. He would try to seriously maim himself and others. The classroom door had to be constantly locked to keep him from sneaking out. His parents refused to put him a specialized environment. After he bit one girls hand clean through, and pulled a chunk of scalp and hair out of another student (in one day) the school district could finally expel him. He had bounced around 5 school districts in his first month in kindergarten.
One child, I worked with had many anger issues. His mother would routinely abandon him, but he was always reunited to her. This kid had huge diamond earrings in both ears and very expensive clothes. If it wasn't for free lunch, he would never eat. I tutored him independently. He is a smart kid. He was very behind because he rarely showed up. He punched my son in the stomach twice, without evocation. He resented my son, because my son had what this child didn't...a mother. (Yes I still continued to work with this child, but he was no longer allowed out to recess without direct supervision.)
Public schools aren't succeeding. From my experience, it is because nobody involves themselves. Many parents treat it like a babysitting service.
I don't think charter schools will make a difference. However, you have more than a handful of parents that are just fed up with the system. This appeals to them. They hope charters will make a difference.
If you want to make a difference, shut the fuck up and volunteer. One hour a week- even a month- isn't going to kill you. You may feel awkward at first, but there are many things you can do: tutor, copying, recess monitor. It doesn't matter if you have kids or yours are grown. And if you do have kids, more than anyone, shut the fuck up if you don't volunteer at your child's school.
On that note, if you pack a sack lunch for your child, pack an extra sandwich. Your child can offer it to someone who may have free lunch at school, but nothing to eat when they get home. There many kids going hungry in our schools.

@37 pussnboots: I am really sorry to hear about this!

As a teacher, I understand this fence very well. On the one side, the experience pussnboots describes, while anecdotal, is also a very real component of the distraction and dilution of resources already happening in public schools. Teacher like myself have a hard time with charter school initiatives because they seem to paint a picture of parents and communities coming together because they care about education. However, as much as like KJones, I would sometimes prefer working at a fantasy charter school where the kids actually WANT to be there and they often have supportive families. Think about what this says and does to those students left even further behind as we continue to reduce funding for public schools for ALL students.

Shout out to heavyhebrew`s post: Where are our bills saying that education, water, power production, safety, roads and bridges belong to the people? How about an income tax on those earning over 500k? If concerned parents and teachers were behind this charter schools initiative, they could simply try to increase school funding by 1.4%, but it wouldn`t be very popular because there is no vitriolic blaming and polarized idealogies to debate it (and it wouldn`t have a big impact if it was distributed evenly among all schools & students).

As a teacher, I understand the fence many are on very well. On the one side, the experience pussnboots describes, while anecdotal, is also a very real component of the distraction and dilution of resources already happening in public schools. Teachers like myself have a hard time with charter school initiatives because they seem to paint a picture of parents and communities coming together because they care about education. Like KJones, I would sometimes prefer working at a fantasy charter school where the kids actually WANT to be there and they often have supportive families. Think about what this says and does to those students and their families left even further behind as we continue to reduce funding for public schools for ALL students.

Shout out to heavyhebrew`s post: Where are our bills saying that education, water, power production, safety, roads and bridges belong to the people? How about an income tax on those earning over 500k?

We do seem to be lacking progressive solutions to complex problems on our ballots and in the redundant negative advertising this campaign season, but that is what your legislators are for! If concerned parents and teachers were behind this charter schools initiative, then they might support simply increasing school funding by 1.4%. But it wouldn`t be very popular because there is no vitriolic blaming of administrators or bad teachers or bad parents or Washington politics to make it easy to point the finger during our education crisis. And it wouldn`t have a big impact if it was distributed evenly among all schools & students, much like this initiative.

Whoops. Well, I guess it did work the first time.

Thanks, This is a good article.I liked

this …great!

Thanks, This is a good article.I liked

this …great!