Saturday, September 25, 2004
Letter To The Editor In The Washington Post
The Washington Post published a letter to the editor based upon one of my blog posts.
Can Charter Schools Measure Up?
Saturday, September 25, 2004; Page A22
In his Sept. 11 op-ed, "Charter Schools: Still Proving What Works," Jonathan Schorr said that "charters are not in themselves a reform strategy; they are a blank slate." I disagree. The rationale for giving public funds to charter schools is that when traditional public schools begin to lose students to the competition, they finally will implement reforms to stop the exodus.
Why are some charter schools not successful?
* Many are run by people without experience in education.
* Many are run by people with experience in education but who may not know about a better or different way of doing things.
* Like other start-up businesses, charter schools are businesses that may struggle in the beginning and need managers with crucial skills. Effective boards of directors also play an important role.
* Curriculum may not match student population.
Parents with children who are doing well in neighborhood schools almost certainly will leave them there. For those whose children are struggling or not being educated, charter schools and vouchers become an escape hatch. But when this population reaches charter schools, many are years behind academically, and the established curriculum has no answers for them. At the Cesar Chavez Public Charter High School for Public Policy, this problem was so bad that the original curriculum had to be scrapped.
* The facility allotment means that charter schools must comb the hot District real estate market for properties that rent for about $10 per square foot. The result is that kids are educated in spaces that may lack good ventilation, temperature control, noise abatement and personal space. I have seen students taking final exams while wearing their winter coats. Loan guarantees, from Sallie Mae and others, help charter schools receive needed financing, but they do not solve the basic problem of having to break the budget to rent or purchase property.
Charter schools and their accrediting bodies are learning from past mistakes, but progress is slow and that has led to much criticism.
MARK S. LERNER
Reston
The writer is a member of the board of trustees of the William E. Doar Jr. Public Charter School for the Performing Arts and is a former member of the board of the Cesar Chavez Public Charter High School for Public Policy.
Here's the original submission. You can see that it was edited by about 50% due to space considerations according to the newspaper.
Jonathan Schorr's column in your newspaper "Charter Schools: Still Proving What Works?" (September 11, 2004 Page A21) is mostly correct in his description of the charter school movement, but he makes one statement which is troubling in it inaccuracy and he leave out some important facts about the environment in which charter schools operate.
The author states, "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 Mr. Schorr, but I must strongly disagree with this assertion. Charters are a reform strategy. That is exactly the rational given to justify giving public funds to non-traditional schools. The idea is to fix what is wrong with public education with the theory being that when traditional public schools begin to lose a large proportion of their student populations through competition they will finally implement reforms to stop the exodus.
Now let us turn to a more important issue which is not addressed in his editorial. Just why are some charter schools not successful? In my experience the answer has its roots in 5 causes.
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, Executive Director of the William E. Doar, Jr. Public Charter School for the Performing Arts commented to me recently, 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. 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 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 the Cesar Chavez Public Charter High School for Public Policy this problem was so bad that the original curriculum had to be immediately scrapped.
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 | 7:54 AM |
|
Can Charter Schools Measure Up?
Saturday, September 25, 2004; Page A22
In his Sept. 11 op-ed, "Charter Schools: Still Proving What Works," Jonathan Schorr said that "charters are not in themselves a reform strategy; they are a blank slate." I disagree. The rationale for giving public funds to charter schools is that when traditional public schools begin to lose students to the competition, they finally will implement reforms to stop the exodus.
Why are some charter schools not successful?
* Many are run by people without experience in education.
* Many are run by people with experience in education but who may not know about a better or different way of doing things.
* Like other start-up businesses, charter schools are businesses that may struggle in the beginning and need managers with crucial skills. Effective boards of directors also play an important role.
* Curriculum may not match student population.
Parents with children who are doing well in neighborhood schools almost certainly will leave them there. For those whose children are struggling or not being educated, charter schools and vouchers become an escape hatch. But when this population reaches charter schools, many are years behind academically, and the established curriculum has no answers for them. At the Cesar Chavez Public Charter High School for Public Policy, this problem was so bad that the original curriculum had to be scrapped.
* The facility allotment means that charter schools must comb the hot District real estate market for properties that rent for about $10 per square foot. The result is that kids are educated in spaces that may lack good ventilation, temperature control, noise abatement and personal space. I have seen students taking final exams while wearing their winter coats. Loan guarantees, from Sallie Mae and others, help charter schools receive needed financing, but they do not solve the basic problem of having to break the budget to rent or purchase property.
Charter schools and their accrediting bodies are learning from past mistakes, but progress is slow and that has led to much criticism.
MARK S. LERNER
Reston
The writer is a member of the board of trustees of the William E. Doar Jr. Public Charter School for the Performing Arts and is a former member of the board of the Cesar Chavez Public Charter High School for Public Policy.
Here's the original submission. You can see that it was edited by about 50% due to space considerations according to the newspaper.
Jonathan Schorr's column in your newspaper "Charter Schools: Still Proving What Works?" (September 11, 2004 Page A21) is mostly correct in his description of the charter school movement, but he makes one statement which is troubling in it inaccuracy and he leave out some important facts about the environment in which charter schools operate.
The author states, "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 Mr. Schorr, but I must strongly disagree with this assertion. Charters are a reform strategy. That is exactly the rational given to justify giving public funds to non-traditional schools. The idea is to fix what is wrong with public education with the theory being that when traditional public schools begin to lose a large proportion of their student populations through competition they will finally implement reforms to stop the exodus.
Now let us turn to a more important issue which is not addressed in his editorial. Just why are some charter schools not successful? In my experience the answer has its roots in 5 causes.
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, Executive Director of the William E. Doar, Jr. Public Charter School for the Performing Arts commented to me recently, 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. 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 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 the Cesar Chavez Public Charter High School for Public Policy this problem was so bad that the original curriculum had to be immediately scrapped.
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 | 7:54 AM |
| 
