Allow parents and communities, not state bureaucracies, to take over failing schools
Seattle Weekly reports House budget Chairman Rep. Ross Hunter is considering a state takeover of schools that are denying children access to a quality public education. I admire Rep. Hunter’s concern for children trapped in failing public schools, and his willingness to do something about it, but I think this proposal moves in the wrong direction. Instead of shifting control over a failing public school to a larger unit of government — the state — policymakers should promote the community by letting parents take over and set up an independent charter school.
Lawmakers should remove the cap that limits the number of charter schools that can open to only eight a year, up to a total of 40. That way more local communities could consider opening a charter school, if parents assigned to a failing school feel that would be a better way for their children to access the public school system.
Removing the cap would benefit all children, because just the possibility of a parent takeover would motivate school officials to improve services for children before that option arises. That, in turn, would give parents the leverage they need to seek positive change in education.
Imagine this message from parents, “Give our kids the education you promised or we’ll look into starting our own school.” Now that’s one way to concentrate the minds of school district officials.
Comments
No charters required to improve public schools
Paul -
This whole nonsensical movement to replace public schools with charter schools is such a waste of energy. Read this article in the NY Times today.
The Secret to Fixing Bad Schools
http://www.nytimes.com/chrome/#/Opinion//www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/opin...
A poor immigrant district in Union City, NJ reinvented itself, no charters required! They focused on the entire educational life of a student, starting at age 4 with pre-kindergarten. They reinvented the roles of the teachers, principals and the students. The kids wear uniforms. They don't chew gum in classes.
Union City boasted a high school graduation rate of 89.5 percent — roughly 10 percentage points higher than the national average. This is far higher than Washington State. Perhaps the WPC should study this school district rather than pushing charters as some kind of magic bullet.
Richard - thanks for your
Richard - thanks for your comment, and for the link to the interesting article - I'll take a look at it. We've never said charter schools are a magic bullet, just one option parents can choose to escape failing schools. When officials in a school district deliver a quality education through traditional schools, as they promise to do, then there is no need for parents to seek alternatives. Charters tend not to open in areas where schools are doing well, because there's no demand for them. In areas where the graduation rate is below 50%, as in South Seattle, parents, especially from minority, immigrant and low-income families, are desperate to get their kids a good education any way they can. And after all,who can blame them? - Paul.
"Failing" schools, charter schools, and you people
Who are you people? Do you have anyone who knows anything from direct observations, experience or formal training about education?
Here's a good one: "Instead of shifting control over a failing public school to a larger unit of government — the state — policymakers should promote the community by letting parents take over and set up an independent charter school." Want to see how ridiculous this idea is? Instead of the word "school", insert the word "hospital". Would you go?
Here's another one:"Removing the cap would benefit all children, because just the possibility of a parent takeover would motivate school officials to improve services for children before that option arises. That, in turn, would give parents the leverage they need to seek positive change in education." Completely devoid of logic. Removing the charter school cap would absolutely not benefit all children. In fact the empirical evidence from objective studies of charter schools certainly indicates that some, and more likely most, children actually inside a charter school do less well inside those very schools.
And the idea that "school officials" would somehow be motivated to bring about some kind of hitherto fore unknown school improvement technique because of the threat of a charter school demonstrates that you have not actually talked to any "school officials" about this.
So, here is my challenge. I am a "school official" - the principal of a struggling K-8 school in rural northwest Washington. I would love to welcome Mr. Guppy to spend a day with me inside my school. See kids learning. See kids struggling to learn. See teachers and support staff giving their all every day. See parents, some happy, some not always. See us respond to every child and every parent in any given day who comes to us with a need or a concern. And then we can talk about how you might support our school and our students, or improve upon what we have here for every child in this school with a charter school. You can email me back your response or accept my offer at finch@olympus.net.
But the truth is, I don't expect to hear anything back.
Thanks for your comments.
Thanks for your comments. First, as a public school parent, and a foster parent, I spend plenty of time inside public schools already, thanks. Second, parents and the public are constantly urged to get involved in public education, then when we do get indignant comments like "who are you people?" Third, most (not all) public school educators care very much about children and work hard every day to help them. Because of its monopoly structure, however, the greatest weakness in the education system is the influence of entrenched interests, led by the teachers union, and resistance to change. charters schools is one way to bring fresh ideas to the system. That's my point.
In the category of "well, that didn't take long"
Gee WPC, we don't even have one charter and you already want to raise the cap on the number of charter schools in this state? I knew this day would come but I thought there would at least be a grace period.
And FYI, there is a clause - the conversion charter - that DOES allow parents to take over a school. You just want the cap raised to take over even MORE schools.
Improving services costs money. And our districts have had their budgets cut and cut services. Yet, at the WPC you decry the amount of money we spend now. Tell us how to improve service without spending more money. Tell us how we provide elementary counselors without money. Graduation specialists without money. Summer school without money.
We don't even fund to the national average.
Money and Education
Melissa;
How much money do you think it would take to "improve" education? We hear a constant deluge of pleas for "more money" and yet those making these pleas offer no plans for how this money would be spent and what the IMPROVED outcomes would be.
Our real problem, I think is not money, it is disengaged parents who believe that their children can be educated by schools without their support. Unfortunately the educational community continues to assure them that if they only had more money they could do this!
Show me where this works!
Charlie, good comment. I
Charlie, good comment. I agree the quality of public education suffers when parents are disengaged. But we have to ask, "Why are they disengage." It is because parents have almost no say in the system. We are forced to be the passive recipient of decisions made by others. (Like the letter that shows up at our house every year telling us where our kids are going to go to school.) By law Washington allows only three forms of school choice: sell your house and move, pay for a private school, or homeschooling. Any family that can't do any of those three is stuck in a system in which all the key decisions are made by others. Is it any wonder public schools parents are disengage, and often disillusioned?