Charter schools

[WhyNot]

@Little_Nemo

It’s the equivalent of promoting car ownership by giving out a tax-supported rebate of $2000 on Lexuses. The people who couldn’t afford a Lexus still won’t able to afford a Lexus at the lower price. But the people who can afford to buy Lexuses will get a discount that’s paid for in part by the people who can’t afford to buy a Lexus of their own. And those people will find that because they had to pay for somebody else’s Lexus that their car buying options have dropped from a Camry to a Corolla.

But doesn’t it help those who are just a bit away from being able to afford private schools? We’re about there. We couldn’t afford $1000 a month, but we could probably scrounge up $300 from somewhere. That voucher could be the difference for us.

So yes, I see your point, but there’s more than two groups here.

[Dangerosa]

@smiling_bandit

That may be, but it’s part of the point of Charter schools in the first place. If they fail to achieve what the parents set out for them, they fail. If the community won’t support it, they fail. It’s harsh, but it’s also fair. Not that it decreases my sympathy for the people who are hurt in the process.

Which is great for education as a whole - and lousy when its my kids that are being shunted around and treated like little test subjects, being seperated from friends, and having to go through additional adjustments. My kids are doing darn good in their non-charter school - although the school as a whole isn’t a top acheiver (surprisingly - or not - NCLB test scores break down on socio economic lines) - and as long as my kids are doing well - I’m not going to play charter school roulette.

What is a shame is that parents whose kids are doing well in regular public schools look at population test scores and move their kids out into private or charter schools - which reduces the population of higher achievers in traditional schools. Population test scores aren’t really meaningful on an individual level. If an individual child does better in private or charter, that’s great. But just because the average score at a different school is higher than the school your kids go to doesn’t mean your kid will improve at that school.

[MandaJo]

@KnitWit

I sometimes wonder if running schools (and other institutions) as businesses is a good idea. Theoretically, since any business exists to turn a profit, the better the school, the higher the profits and so on in a circular fashion. The problem is that I’m considering a WELL RUN business. You know, NOT a business in which people spend those profits on, say, drugs. There has to be proper re-investment because it’s still a business that MUST serve the public in a very serious way.

We have other regulated businesses, why can’t these schools be run like a business but still follow certain rules…about minimums that they must teach, minimum test results, minimum qualifications for teachers, etc.?

One problem is that there isn’t anything like a consensus on what a “good” school looks like–is it having every kid meet some minimum? Is it about have a high percentage excel? Is it turning out kids that are prepared to be good citizens, or is it about turning out kids that can earn a living, or is it about turning out kids that are college ready, or is it about turning out kids that are well socialized?

Everyone just says “all of that”, but when we try to do all of that, we end up doing none of it. We can’t even decide who gets to decide what education is for. So much of the discourse on education is hampered because people either have different answers to these questions, or they don’t have any idea at all and there opinions are based on unfounded instinct (i.e., the way it was when I was a kid) and nothing else.

[Sateryn76]

Here’s the difference with charter schools, and a reason why those schools usually do well - the parents who are willing to do the extra work to have a kid in a charter school are the same type of parent who emphasize education and teach their children to value it as well.

I’m so frustrated with the “national debate” on schools. No one in power seems to be willing to say that the failure of schools of any kind is dependant on the behavior of the parents. We can throw money at them, hire fantastic teachers, give everyone a laptop - none of it is going to make much difference if the parents aren’t teaching their kids that education is a priority.

That’s the main reason why I’m for charter schools, vouchers, etc. - every parent should have the right to demand the education they are paying for. I do not want my kids in a school where the other kids are never disciplined, never encouraged, never cared for. I know that it very hard-hearted, and that kids shouldn’t be warehoused, but I see no other way to combat the parents who literally don’t care about their kids.

It breaks my heart, but otherwise it just seems like a race to the bottom.

[PCFiend]

Unsurprisingly to me, most discussions of charter schools quickly tell you who’s got a generally good school system and who doesn’t. Those with good schools are worried about their school’s money being drained away by “experimental” schools (which, btw, not all charter schools really are) and those with bad schools know that it’s not the lack of money that’s making them bad, and view charter schools as the only opportunity they have for their kid to get a decent education, the rest of the district be damned.

I’m not totally sure of this. A lot of really bad school’s (i.e. not just curriculum or student problems but structural problems, such as leaking roofs, no air conditioning) continue to be crappy places to learn if they are passed over for federal funding for charter schools. It’s not the parents fault that this happens, they just want the best for their kids, but what about the kids who have no choice but to attend a school that is falling apart?

[WhyNot]

@PCFiend

I’m not totally sure of this. A lot of really bad school’s (i.e. not just curriculum or student problems but structural problems, such as leaking roofs, no air conditioning) continue to be crappy places to learn if they are passed over for federal funding for charter schools. It’s not the parents fault that this happens, they just want the best for their kids, but what about the kids who have no choice but to attend a school that is falling apart?

My experience is only in Illinois, where the worst failing districts (Chicago Public in particular) spend more money per pupil than many of the most successful ones. They are suffering from many things, but lack of money is not one of them. (*Allocation *of money may well be.)

I don’t really know enough about how federal funding works to answer the question, I guess. Are you talking about federal money that regular schools would have gotten per pupil, should the charter not exist, or additional money that the charter school gets for being a laboratory for new teaching methods?

If you have a specific district which you’re thinking of where schools have had their maintenance budgets* cut* to cover for students in charter schools, I’ll be happy to read up on it and form a more informed opinion, but for the moment I think it’s probably borrowing trouble. Just because something might be a problem in theory doesn’t mean it’s a problem in reality.

[Algher]

After years of research, we still are not willing to admit that one school model does not fit all.

Charter schools allow for specialization - which we need because not all kids are alike.

My neice demands quiet, order, and regularity in her schooling. My son (the same age) prefers an open classroom, collaboration, and constant discussion. This is their personality, and forcing either one of them into the other’s school system will fail.

My neice is able to attend a charter school. With my son, we are looking at private schools.

[Dangerosa]

@Sateryn76

I’m so frustrated with the “national debate” on schools. No one in power seems to be willing to say that the failure of schools of any kind is dependant on the behavior of the parents. We can throw money at them, hire fantastic teachers, give everyone a laptop - none of it is going to make much difference if the parents aren’t teaching their kids that education is a priority.

Drives me nuts as well. There are functionally three factors to success:

1. The quality of the school (environment, teachers, materials)
2. The ability and motivation of the students - my smart kids are not going to reach the same level as my girlfriends truly brilliant child - my other girlfriends autistic kid is not going to reach the same level as mine. And it doesn’t make any difference how smart Carl in my daughter’s class is, he is not motivated to do anything but screw off (at least at the moment).
   3)The motivation and involvement of parents.

Schools only get to control the first - which is probably the least critical factor - and yet we blame the school for all failure. And we’ve decided we need to live in some sort of warped Lake Wobegon where every child is average - so we spend a lot of time and money trying to get kids who are below average up to average (not really a possible task to start with), and not enough energy making sure the kids who are average and better have the tools to reach their potential.