Saturday, September 11, 2004
Charter Schools: Still Proving What Works
This is the title of Jonathan Schorr's column in today's Washington Post. He mostly correctly describes the scene regarding the charter school movement except for one glaring misrepresentation:
"First, charters are not in themselves a reform strategy; they are a blank slate. They are simply an opportunity to try something new, and they run the gamut from alternative schools for inner-city dropouts and incarcerated teens to International Baccalaureate academies in posh suburbs."
Sorry, but charters are a reform strategy. That is exactly the justification given to provide public funds to non-traditional schools. The idea is to fix what is wrong with public education.
Why are some charter schools not successful?
1. Many are run by people without experience in education. The new schools are created with unrealistic hopes and optimism. Then the kids walk in the door and administrators realize very quickly that they don't know what they are doing.
2. Many are run by people with experience in education. As Julie Doar-Sinkfield commented to me yesterday, if those in charge only have traditional public school experience then they may not know that there is a better or different way of doing things. Teachers come from traditional schools and then, not unexpectedly, teach exactly the way they did in the past.
3. Charter schools are businesses. As I've mentioned before, in many ways charter schools are no different then other start-up businesses. At the beginning it is going to be a struggle and certain crucial management skills will be needed by those involved to be able to react to this dynamic environment. Effective board of directors oversight will also play an important role during this phase of the school's development.
4. Curriculum does not match student population. As opposed to the cry from charter school and voucher opponents that these schemes skim the top of the student talent pool, almost the exact opposite is true. Parents with kids who are doing well in neighborhood schools will almost certainly leave them there. They find that taking advantage of school choice is just too much trouble. But for those parents whose kids are struggling or not being educated at all charters and vouchers become an escape hatch from a dysfunctional system. When this population reaches the charter schools, many originating from homes which are feeding grounds of socio-economic problems and many who are now years behind academically, the established curriculum has no answers for catching these students up to being able to do grade-level work. At Cesar Chavez this problem was so bad that the original curriculum had to be immediately scrapped. I still don't know that they have figured out how to teach these kids.
5. The facilities issue. The facility allotment that charter schools receive per student means that they must comb the red hot Washington D.C. real estate market for properties that rent for about $10 per square foot. This search is a major distraction to the educational mission of these schools. The result of not being able to afford adequate space is that kids are educated in warehouses or church basements where classrooms lack good ventilation, temperature control, noise abatement and personal space. I have seen students taking final exams in December wearing their winter coats due to not enough heat and I have been in lectures in the spring in which you can hardly hear because the windows need to be open to get enough air into the classroom. Loan guarantees, that this paper recently reported are available from Sallie Mae and the one our school received from the City, help charter school receive needed financing for facilities but they do not solve the basic problem of not breaking the budget to afford to rent or purchase property.
The charter schools and their accrediting bodies are learning from past mistakes but progress is slow, agonizing, and leading to much criticism of this new movement.
PermaLink | 9:25 AM |
|
"First, charters are not in themselves a reform strategy; they are a blank slate. They are simply an opportunity to try something new, and they run the gamut from alternative schools for inner-city dropouts and incarcerated teens to International Baccalaureate academies in posh suburbs."
Sorry, but charters are a reform strategy. That is exactly the justification given to provide public funds to non-traditional schools. The idea is to fix what is wrong with public education.
Why are some charter schools not successful?
1. Many are run by people without experience in education. The new schools are created with unrealistic hopes and optimism. Then the kids walk in the door and administrators realize very quickly that they don't know what they are doing.
2. Many are run by people with experience in education. As Julie Doar-Sinkfield commented to me yesterday, if those in charge only have traditional public school experience then they may not know that there is a better or different way of doing things. Teachers come from traditional schools and then, not unexpectedly, teach exactly the way they did in the past.
3. Charter schools are businesses. As I've mentioned before, in many ways charter schools are no different then other start-up businesses. At the beginning it is going to be a struggle and certain crucial management skills will be needed by those involved to be able to react to this dynamic environment. Effective board of directors oversight will also play an important role during this phase of the school's development.
4. Curriculum does not match student population. As opposed to the cry from charter school and voucher opponents that these schemes skim the top of the student talent pool, almost the exact opposite is true. Parents with kids who are doing well in neighborhood schools will almost certainly leave them there. They find that taking advantage of school choice is just too much trouble. But for those parents whose kids are struggling or not being educated at all charters and vouchers become an escape hatch from a dysfunctional system. When this population reaches the charter schools, many originating from homes which are feeding grounds of socio-economic problems and many who are now years behind academically, the established curriculum has no answers for catching these students up to being able to do grade-level work. At Cesar Chavez this problem was so bad that the original curriculum had to be immediately scrapped. I still don't know that they have figured out how to teach these kids.
5. The facilities issue. The facility allotment that charter schools receive per student means that they must comb the red hot Washington D.C. real estate market for properties that rent for about $10 per square foot. This search is a major distraction to the educational mission of these schools. The result of not being able to afford adequate space is that kids are educated in warehouses or church basements where classrooms lack good ventilation, temperature control, noise abatement and personal space. I have seen students taking final exams in December wearing their winter coats due to not enough heat and I have been in lectures in the spring in which you can hardly hear because the windows need to be open to get enough air into the classroom. Loan guarantees, that this paper recently reported are available from Sallie Mae and the one our school received from the City, help charter school receive needed financing for facilities but they do not solve the basic problem of not breaking the budget to afford to rent or purchase property.
The charter schools and their accrediting bodies are learning from past mistakes but progress is slow, agonizing, and leading to much criticism of this new movement.
PermaLink | 9:25 AM |
| 
