There is a lot of heated debate on Charter Schools drawing funds away from public schools. Some argue (the conservatives) that this added competition will help public schools improve their standards and will save schools in America. Others argue (the liberals) that public schools won't be able to improve their standards, especially inner city schools, if their already low funding is being split between voucher schools. It will be the death of public education.
Charter school seem to give hope and the chance of a better education to populations that live in metropolitan school districts. Its a chance for low-income families to put their children in an environment like a private school, but without having the same financial strain.
It seems to me that the deeper issue here is that our education system needs a massive reform. Our children are not being properly prepared for higher education. Our teachers are underpaid. Our families are not happy. To some, charter schools are a way to fix that. But it is apparent that a lot more needs to be done.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Do Charter Schools have a product life cycle?
I was poking around on the web today looking for more information on Charter Schools and came across a podcast from School Improvement Industry Weekly. The article was an editorial of Charter Schools in Ohio and discussed the product life cycle of such schools. You can find it in the right hand navigation bar under pod-casts.
The individual argued that free standing charter schools are effectively obsolete. Education Management organizations (EMOs) or charter Management organizations (CMOs) will inevitably replace them. This reiterated what I wrote earlier about the concern of more and more charter schools closing. It makes me think of the risks of putting a child in a school that has a chance of closing. Switching schools constantly (and curricula) is not going to provide a healthy learning environment.
The pod-cast goes on to say that the rapid growth era of charter schools is coming to a close. The next 12-18 months in Ohio will see fewer schools open and more faltering schools close.
The authors views are based on the product life cycle theory. He argues that products and services go through a one-way process of development, growth, maturity and decline. Therefore EMO's, CMO's must eventually replace charter schools
Some argue, however, that Charter schools, EMOs and CMOs are not a product, but instead are organizations offering the same service. The new competative services out there pertaining to education are online courses.
Survival of Charter Schools is a struggle because of per pupil payments below allocations per district schools, limited access to school facilities and financing, political risks, regulations that burden small schools but don't add much to educational performance, and isolationist tendencies in management theories.
Without annual subsidies, substandard facilities and the burn out of staff many schools will close.
But Charters also have many competitive advantage: intense loyalty of families and staff and school leadership, adaptability of educational advances to local needs, investment in a cooperative infrastructure, and ownership by the school.
This gives me more to chew on for now. What do others think?
The individual argued that free standing charter schools are effectively obsolete. Education Management organizations (EMOs) or charter Management organizations (CMOs) will inevitably replace them. This reiterated what I wrote earlier about the concern of more and more charter schools closing. It makes me think of the risks of putting a child in a school that has a chance of closing. Switching schools constantly (and curricula) is not going to provide a healthy learning environment.
The pod-cast goes on to say that the rapid growth era of charter schools is coming to a close. The next 12-18 months in Ohio will see fewer schools open and more faltering schools close.
The authors views are based on the product life cycle theory. He argues that products and services go through a one-way process of development, growth, maturity and decline. Therefore EMO's, CMO's must eventually replace charter schools
Some argue, however, that Charter schools, EMOs and CMOs are not a product, but instead are organizations offering the same service. The new competative services out there pertaining to education are online courses.
Survival of Charter Schools is a struggle because of per pupil payments below allocations per district schools, limited access to school facilities and financing, political risks, regulations that burden small schools but don't add much to educational performance, and isolationist tendencies in management theories.
Without annual subsidies, substandard facilities and the burn out of staff many schools will close.
But Charters also have many competitive advantage: intense loyalty of families and staff and school leadership, adaptability of educational advances to local needs, investment in a cooperative infrastructure, and ownership by the school.
This gives me more to chew on for now. What do others think?
Monday, May 19, 2008
Education elsewhere, plus schools under fire at home
A few months back I was talking to a friend of mine about the role of charter schools in education. At the time she was teaching abroad in France, and had plenty to say about our educational system when compared to theirs. Unfortunately, her blog about this got lost when the server she was using crashed, but I would like to post what I can remember from our conversation.
You see, in much of Europe, education is not only public, higher education is actually affordable. In France specifically students are put on career pathways as they enter high school, so that when they leave they have some focus to bring into the "real world." On one hand, this system allows students to focus their education, and it allows them to avoid taking classes they find unnecessary (such as art history), but at the same time it is limiting because students tend to get pushed into their track based on their grades in primary school. This is similar to how we push students into certain tracks in our public schools, with honors programs, regular classes and special education. Only, instead of those titles, the honors equivalent students get to take science classes, and the "lower end" students are forced into marketing.
As Alison described this to me, she started talking about how she wanted to combine the best of our school system with the best of theirs, and start charter schools here in the States that provided students with better education than our current public schools allow. I am not entirely sure how she intends to do that in her home state of Washington, because charter schools aren't legal, but I did find her ideas intriguing. So, I looked further into them, to see what was being done elsewhere.
To start with, after a half-an-hour of diligent "Googling" I could not find any evidence of charter schools in Europe, though I did find a paper on ERIC about the push to provide vouchers for private schools in the Czech Republic published back in 2001. Vouchers are an entirely different alternative education topic, and I would like to address them in the next couple of days, however, I do not want to get too far off topic today. In my research I discovered a school district in Louisiana that is implementing career pathways in their public schools. The article presents these pathways in a positive light. Having recently discovered that charter schools are not required to hire certified teachers or administrators, I'm tempted to say I would prefer it if my state decided to restructure their school system, much like the district in New Orleans, rather than allowing for charter schools.
When I set out to write this blog, I wanted to investigate charter schools, both for advantages and disadvantages. Clearly over the last couple of weeks I have discussed quite a number of disadvantages, so, for parents who would like to hear the other side of the argument, I found this article from the Oakland Tribune. Public schools are notorious for being unsafe, part of the reason I started looking into charter schools was because I wanted my child to be safe. This article not only discusses how charter schools tend to be safer than public schools, but a principal is quoted as saying, "students feel a real sense of accountability. This is their school and they are helping to build it." To me this sounds like a very positive potential aspect of charter schools.
I'm not so sure how I feel when I read about schools like this one in New York that is planning on offering teachers 6-figure salaries. I am pretty certain a salary like this would attract high quality teachers, but I don't think my college professors even earned that much! Since the funding is coming from the general public, it seems odd to me that charter school teachers can be paid so much more than public school teachers.
Another noteworthy charter school in the United States right now, is one in Minnesota. It is currently under attack for not drawing a clear enough line between church and state. Recognizing the website I pulled this from is highly biased, I found a second source, that confirms that the school may be encouraging students to practice religion.
I am finding that charter schools have good intentions, and while they sound like a good opportunity to put education in the hands of the local community, they tend to fall short of expectations. If you want to read more about that you should review my last two posts. I need to quit writing for now, but later this evening I will try to find more positive examples of charter schools, as well as perspectives from other parents around the country.
You see, in much of Europe, education is not only public, higher education is actually affordable. In France specifically students are put on career pathways as they enter high school, so that when they leave they have some focus to bring into the "real world." On one hand, this system allows students to focus their education, and it allows them to avoid taking classes they find unnecessary (such as art history), but at the same time it is limiting because students tend to get pushed into their track based on their grades in primary school. This is similar to how we push students into certain tracks in our public schools, with honors programs, regular classes and special education. Only, instead of those titles, the honors equivalent students get to take science classes, and the "lower end" students are forced into marketing.
As Alison described this to me, she started talking about how she wanted to combine the best of our school system with the best of theirs, and start charter schools here in the States that provided students with better education than our current public schools allow. I am not entirely sure how she intends to do that in her home state of Washington, because charter schools aren't legal, but I did find her ideas intriguing. So, I looked further into them, to see what was being done elsewhere.
To start with, after a half-an-hour of diligent "Googling" I could not find any evidence of charter schools in Europe, though I did find a paper on ERIC about the push to provide vouchers for private schools in the Czech Republic published back in 2001. Vouchers are an entirely different alternative education topic, and I would like to address them in the next couple of days, however, I do not want to get too far off topic today. In my research I discovered a school district in Louisiana that is implementing career pathways in their public schools. The article presents these pathways in a positive light. Having recently discovered that charter schools are not required to hire certified teachers or administrators, I'm tempted to say I would prefer it if my state decided to restructure their school system, much like the district in New Orleans, rather than allowing for charter schools.
When I set out to write this blog, I wanted to investigate charter schools, both for advantages and disadvantages. Clearly over the last couple of weeks I have discussed quite a number of disadvantages, so, for parents who would like to hear the other side of the argument, I found this article from the Oakland Tribune. Public schools are notorious for being unsafe, part of the reason I started looking into charter schools was because I wanted my child to be safe. This article not only discusses how charter schools tend to be safer than public schools, but a principal is quoted as saying, "students feel a real sense of accountability. This is their school and they are helping to build it." To me this sounds like a very positive potential aspect of charter schools.
I'm not so sure how I feel when I read about schools like this one in New York that is planning on offering teachers 6-figure salaries. I am pretty certain a salary like this would attract high quality teachers, but I don't think my college professors even earned that much! Since the funding is coming from the general public, it seems odd to me that charter school teachers can be paid so much more than public school teachers.
Another noteworthy charter school in the United States right now, is one in Minnesota. It is currently under attack for not drawing a clear enough line between church and state. Recognizing the website I pulled this from is highly biased, I found a second source, that confirms that the school may be encouraging students to practice religion.
I am finding that charter schools have good intentions, and while they sound like a good opportunity to put education in the hands of the local community, they tend to fall short of expectations. If you want to read more about that you should review my last two posts. I need to quit writing for now, but later this evening I will try to find more positive examples of charter schools, as well as perspectives from other parents around the country.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Employment
I have been searching around on the Internet and talking with some public school teachers and I have found some very disturbing things. A Charter School can operate outside the regular administrative structure of the local school district and school board, free of many state regulations. That means the operators can hire whom they want as principal or as teachers, can choose curriculums and set up a schedule for the school day and year, for example, independently of the district administration and school board
Which basically means anyone can be a Charter School teacher. It would not matter if you ever taught a class or even took one for that matter. You wouldn’t need any sort of education to work at a Charter School.
What do others know and think about that?
Which basically means anyone can be a Charter School teacher. It would not matter if you ever taught a class or even took one for that matter. You wouldn’t need any sort of education to work at a Charter School.
What do others know and think about that?
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Accademic Success
One of the big ideas that everyone says in favor of Charter Schools is that they improve student academic achievement over traditional public schools. I was running through the National Education Association’s (NEA) website and found lots of information to the contrary look at some of the things I found
➢ Charter schools that were part of the local school district had significantly higher scores than charter schools that served as their own district.
➢ Students taught by certified teachers had roughly comparable scores whether they attended charter schools or traditional public schools, but the scores of students taught by uncertified teachers in charter schools were significantly lower than those of charter school students with certified teachers.
➢ Students taught by teachers with at least five years' experience outperformed students with less experienced teachers, regardless of the type of school attended, but charter school students with inexperienced teachers did significantly worse than students in traditional public schools with less experienced teachers. (The impact of this finding is compounded by the fact that charter schools are twice as likely as traditional public schools to employ inexperienced teachers.)
I’m sorry I would not want my child going to a school with uncertified teachers. I don’t understand how someone is allowed to teach someone else without having a degree. And even if I did send my child to a charter school and didn’t care weather or not she got a certified teacher or not I wouldn’t want her academics to suffer because of the teacher.
➢ Charter schools that were part of the local school district had significantly higher scores than charter schools that served as their own district.
➢ Students taught by certified teachers had roughly comparable scores whether they attended charter schools or traditional public schools, but the scores of students taught by uncertified teachers in charter schools were significantly lower than those of charter school students with certified teachers.
➢ Students taught by teachers with at least five years' experience outperformed students with less experienced teachers, regardless of the type of school attended, but charter school students with inexperienced teachers did significantly worse than students in traditional public schools with less experienced teachers. (The impact of this finding is compounded by the fact that charter schools are twice as likely as traditional public schools to employ inexperienced teachers.)
I’m sorry I would not want my child going to a school with uncertified teachers. I don’t understand how someone is allowed to teach someone else without having a degree. And even if I did send my child to a charter school and didn’t care weather or not she got a certified teacher or not I wouldn’t want her academics to suffer because of the teacher.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Some Data
I found this data on one of the links at the bottom of the Center for Education Reform Article and I am not sure what to make of it. While it shows there is an increase in number of charter schools and achievement gains in some states that have them. It also shows that eleven percent that have ever open have been closed. While me and every parent out there would want there child to succeed as much as possible in school I would not want to have my child going to a school only to have it shut down. So I don't know how to feel about this data or charter schools yet.
• New schools: In the 2005-2006 school year, 424 new charter schools were opened, a full 13 percent increase since last year. (The previous school year saw an increase of 15 percent)
• The increase comes despite caps being reached prior or during this last school year in at least seven states.
• The total numbers of charter schools, 3,625, serve approximately 1,076,964 students in 41 states.
• Already for the 2006-2007 school year, 90 additional schools are approved to open.
• The largest numbers of students in charter schools are in grades K-8 (52 percent). Fully 83 percent of charter schools serve children in first grade, an increase of 27 points in two years.
• Fifty-two percent of charters nationwide are elementary, 21 percent are high school, and 27 percent are a combination.
• States with the strongest charter laws show the greatest consistent increases in the number of operating charter schools and student enrollment. (Arizona, California, Delaware, DC, Florida and Texas). Most of those states also show commensurate achievement gains.
• California leads the states with highest enrolment numbers at 219,480 and 81 charters opened this year. If counted as a state, DC leads the nation with market share of public schools at 26 percent.
• Eleven percent of charter schools ever opened have been closed.
• Three and one half percent of schools approved never open.
• New schools: In the 2005-2006 school year, 424 new charter schools were opened, a full 13 percent increase since last year. (The previous school year saw an increase of 15 percent)
• The increase comes despite caps being reached prior or during this last school year in at least seven states.
• The total numbers of charter schools, 3,625, serve approximately 1,076,964 students in 41 states.
• Already for the 2006-2007 school year, 90 additional schools are approved to open.
• The largest numbers of students in charter schools are in grades K-8 (52 percent). Fully 83 percent of charter schools serve children in first grade, an increase of 27 points in two years.
• Fifty-two percent of charters nationwide are elementary, 21 percent are high school, and 27 percent are a combination.
• States with the strongest charter laws show the greatest consistent increases in the number of operating charter schools and student enrollment. (Arizona, California, Delaware, DC, Florida and Texas). Most of those states also show commensurate achievement gains.
• California leads the states with highest enrolment numbers at 219,480 and 81 charters opened this year. If counted as a state, DC leads the nation with market share of public schools at 26 percent.
• Eleven percent of charter schools ever opened have been closed.
• Three and one half percent of schools approved never open.
Friday, May 9, 2008
Homeland Security in our Schools?
The other day I decided to look on Reddit, a site where readers decide what news makes the front page, and I saw an article from the Delaware Business Ledger about a new charter school forming in Wilmington Delaware that bases its core curriculum around homeland security. I was shocked, students will be taught about Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT), guarding prisons, etc. Now, this doesn't sound like something I want my daughter to attend! I did not realize the curriculum at charter schools could be so focused.
After reading this I decided to look into the role of the separation of church and state in charter schools, because I have heard rumors of religious ones before. It turns out this is still illegal, we can indoctrinate our students in patriotism, but not religion, in a state sponsored school. During my research, I ran across this article, arguing that the government should allow the teaching of religion in charter schools. For a long time now there has been debate about the role of religion in public classrooms, and I wonder if the debate is going to shift from the role of religion in general public schools to the role of religion in charter schools.
I think I should talk to Angie, and see what she thinks about all of this. Do the parents at her son's school seem to want a curriculum that is focused on careers after school? Or, instead of focusing on careers, are they simply trying to find a group of like-minded families, so they don't have to deal with typical school politics? It seems like a school could run much more smoothly if there is just a small group of students, whose parents agree on major issues. At least, there would be a lot less fighting about what is and isn't appropriate to let children learn.
After reading this I decided to look into the role of the separation of church and state in charter schools, because I have heard rumors of religious ones before. It turns out this is still illegal, we can indoctrinate our students in patriotism, but not religion, in a state sponsored school. During my research, I ran across this article, arguing that the government should allow the teaching of religion in charter schools. For a long time now there has been debate about the role of religion in public classrooms, and I wonder if the debate is going to shift from the role of religion in general public schools to the role of religion in charter schools.
I think I should talk to Angie, and see what she thinks about all of this. Do the parents at her son's school seem to want a curriculum that is focused on careers after school? Or, instead of focusing on careers, are they simply trying to find a group of like-minded families, so they don't have to deal with typical school politics? It seems like a school could run much more smoothly if there is just a small group of students, whose parents agree on major issues. At least, there would be a lot less fighting about what is and isn't appropriate to let children learn.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
What exactly is a Charter School?
To start, I want to define exactly what a charter school is. it turns out that Angie, my sisters friend misspoke when she was arguing for charter schools vs. public schools. Charter schools are in fact public schools. The difference between a charter school and other types of public schools is that they operate under a charter, which is a written contract with a state or district. This charter lays out the mission and goals of the school as well as performance standards and goals and how those goals will be measured. It also details the structure of the school; how it will be managed and organized and who the school will serve and how they will be taught.
Charter schools do enjoy more freedom than other public schools. Depending on the rules and regulations of a school district, charter schools can be excused from them as long as they continue to produce satisfactory results.
I was curious where the idea of charter schools came from and why people felt it was necessary to create them in the first place. Apparently, the idea of a charter originated in the 1970's in New England when an educator by the name of Ray Budde suggests that a a charter be given to a small group of local teachers in order to new teaching approaches. the idea when even further to suggest giving a charter to a whole school to explore different approaches. The three basic values that backed the idea were opportunity, choice and responsibility for results.
Today, it seems that charter schools are formed when a group of parents and or teachers are not happy with the current teaching conditions within a school or district. Perhaps the class size is too big, or a group of people have a different learning philosophy that is not being met.
Charter schools definitions and laws vary from state-to-state. To get a better idea of what one might be like in your area check out this list of state profiles.
Regardless of the state, there are seven basic areas that laws are based around:
- Charter development: who may propose a charter, how charters are granted, the number of charter schools allowed, and related issues.
- School status: how the school is legally defined and related governance, operations, and liability issues.
- Fiscal: the level and types of funding provided and the amount of fiscal independence and autonomy.
- Students: how schools are to address admissions, non-discrimination, racial/ethnic balance, discipline, and special education.
- Staffing and Labor Relations: whether the school may act as an employer, which labor relations laws apply, and other staff rights and privileges.
- Instruction: the degree of control a charter school has over the development of its instructional goals and practices.
- Accountability: whether the charter serves as a performance-based contract, how assessment methods are selected, and charter revocation and renewal issues.
Tomorrow I am going to look into some different views on the pros and cons of charter schools. There will be a lot to sort through since so many people have different perspectives.
Curiouser and curiouser
Recently, I went to lunch with my sister who brought a close friend of hers along. We swapped stories about our children and talked about the ups and downs of motherhood. My sisters friend, well call her Angie, informed us that two years ago she took her soon out of public school and placed him in a local charter school. Angie went on and on about her dislike of public schools and urged us to protect our children's best interests by providing them with a better education by way of a charter school.
My sister and I asked her tons of questions about the pros and cons of both charter and public schools. But I can't help but think the responses I received from her are biased due to the state of the schools in her particular county. I really don't know much about the history and track record of charter schools anywhere let alone in my county. Ever since Angie brough the topic up, I've been curious about the difference in standards of education between charters and public schools and where my child can grow the most
I've decided to start this blog to explore the many opinions and and stances on charter vs. public schools. I hope for this blog to become an open dialogue and a helpful resource for other curious parents out there. I'm more than happy to receive comments from parents who have experienced both positives and negatives about charter schools.
Time to dig in!
My sister and I asked her tons of questions about the pros and cons of both charter and public schools. But I can't help but think the responses I received from her are biased due to the state of the schools in her particular county. I really don't know much about the history and track record of charter schools anywhere let alone in my county. Ever since Angie brough the topic up, I've been curious about the difference in standards of education between charters and public schools and where my child can grow the most
I've decided to start this blog to explore the many opinions and and stances on charter vs. public schools. I hope for this blog to become an open dialogue and a helpful resource for other curious parents out there. I'm more than happy to receive comments from parents who have experienced both positives and negatives about charter schools.
Time to dig in!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)