The New York City tabloids–whose owners are zealous about charter schools–have whipped up a frenzy against Mayor Bill de Blasio because he did not approve every single charter application rushed through the Bloomberg board at its last meeting in October 2013. That board, which never said no to Mayor Bloomberg, approved an unprecedented 49 charter applications, some of which are co-locations.
A co-location means that a charter, which is operated by a private board of directors, gets public space in a public school. The public school has to surrender “empty” rooms that were previously used for art, music, resource rooms for special education, and any other space that is not considered a classroom. The regular public schools–attended by 94% of all public school children, must be overcrowded to make room for the charters. Because the charters are heavily subsidized by private funding, they typically renovate the space (not good enough for them), and their students have the latest and best of everything. In New York City, the term “academic apartheid” is becoming a reality, in the very same building. In some co-located spaces, the children in the charters have separate entrances, to keep the others out of their space.
De Blasio had to decide what to do with so many co-locations. The city already has 183 charters.
He approved 39 of the 49. He turned down 9, and one is under review.
Let me say that again. He approved 39 of 49. That is hardly anti-charter. In fact, many public school parents are outraged that their schools will now be forced to give up space to a charter that operates under different ownership (private).
Of the 9 that were denied, three were destined for Eva Moskowitz’s charter chain called Success Academy.
But of the 39 that were approved, Eva won three.
Instead of celebrating the addition of three new charter schools to her growing chain (the largest in the city), Eva has gone on the warpath, claiming that de Blasio is anti-charter and wants to hurt the poor black and brown children she serves.
The media do not know that her schools do not serve the same demographic as the children in the public schools. She enrolls fewer children with special needs and fewer English language learners. Her schools have a high suspension and attrition rate.
Her logic seems to be that since she gets high test scores (note the above sentence as one does tend to get high scores by keeping out low-scoring students), she deserves to get whatever space she wants, rent-free.
By that logic, the city should give extra privileges to students with high scores, and should take away space and privileges and programs from those with low scores.
This makes no sense.
Public schools must serve all children, not just those who can get high scores on standardized tests. Public schools must serve children who don’t speak any English. They must serve children who have severe disabilities. They must serve those who have emotional and social problems. They must serve those who have all kinds of problems and who are unwilling or unable to walk in a straight line.
It is sad that Governor Andrew Cuomo threw his political weight on Eva Moskowitz’s side. As governor of the state, he is responsible for all children, not just the precious few in charter schools.
Everyone understands that the hedge fund managers and equity investors are supporting Eva’s fight against de Blasio. He has already annoyed them by saying he wants them to pay a slightly higher tax rate to fund universal pre-kindergarten. The charter school fight gives them a chance to strike back at him, while pretending “it’s all about the kids.” They would like nothing better than to take down New York City’s first progressive mayor in at least 20 years (some one say even longer).
De Blasio has not declared war on charters. He has made a judgment. Many public school parents are angry that he approved 39 out of 49 charter co-locations. Eva and the tabloids think she should have whatever she wants.
The question before the Mayor is whether he will continue to fund a dual school system–one sector able to choose the students it wants–and the other sector serving all. He is trying to have it both ways, and it doesn’t work. He gave the charter lobby almost everything it wanted, and they still came after him as if he had given them nothing at all.
I have said before, you and your bloggers must begin to at least try to understand the role of the charters. You cannot continue to blindly choose your helpful facts and criticize the charters for doing the same. It is clear to almost everyone that the new Mayor does not like charters and will only do the required minimum to help…he has as much as stated this position numerous times. Peaceful coexistence is possible, but only if you open your minds. http://www.gippersblog.com
Peaceful co-existence is not possible when charters are sucking up resources and space from already underfunded public schools in order to educate the easiest kids while public schools get the ELLs and the special needs.
You’re absolutely right, Dienne. In fact, that is my biggest problem with the actions of deBlasio thus far. He thinks you can “be nice and compromise” with the extreme right wing and Wall Street Hedge Fund Sociopaths funding this attack on our public schools.
You can’t.
Look at what deBlasio did: He approved 39 of the 49 charter applicants, including many which will be adversely impacting the educations of public school students who will now be literally SQUEEZED by these odious, exploitive businesses that pretend to be “schools” moving into their school buildings.
deBlasio didn’t just split the difference, or make a small gesture or minor concession: he gave the Charter Pushers 80% of what they asked for: Eighty Percent!
And in return for that much more than gracious overture, he’s being excoriated and savaged by billionaire funded “reformers”, hedge fund miscreants, right-wing media propagandists, conservative Republicans and threatened rival “Democrats” who are willing to sellout our kids for “30 Pieces of Silver”.
deBlasio is being treated like a “Charter Abolitionist” when in reality it would be more realistic to treat him as an “80% Supporter”.
Yet, he’s taking just as much abuse, and he’s being subject to just as many vicious, deliberate lies as he would have been if he REALLY had rejected every charter application AND announced his plan to eliminate all of them by the end of his first term. (Which, in an ideal world is what he SHOULD do; the attacks couldn’t possibly be worse than they already are AND he’d gain supports from parents like me, big time!)
Like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, whose extremely moderate, pro-corporate “health care plans” were based on Republican ideas and only scratched the surface of what was really needed, they too were called everything from “Communist” to “Dictator” and accused of everything from “destroying individual freedom” to geronticide.
If they had instead embarked on a French, or British or Canadian or Swedish system of universal health care, guaranteed for all, they would have taken no less abuse; but they would have also then stirred up their progressive supporters who would have provided them with the backing they needed. Instead, confused and frustrated progressives gave far less support than originally expected.
So, if deBlasio wants us to REALLY have his back on this, he needs NOT to run and hide, or cower timidly as they pour on more lies and abuse: he needs to speak openly, clearly and proudly about his positive vision for public education in NYC and throughout our nation.
His enemies have proven that they will savage him with every available means if he dares to modify what they’re doing, even slightly. The time has come to realize that they HAVE declared war and when that happens you can’t “compromise” with people who will only accept your absolute unconditional deference and public evisceration.
Stand tall, Mr. Mayor. We have your back and you can educate ALL Americans, coast to coast, about the harmful effects of charters and the clear plan of their billionaire backers to take control of our public schools—using our hard earned tax dollars.
The time to Stand And Fight is now! We’re with you. Please lead.
Thank you for letting us see what is at stake for American children and our public schools. Charter schools can afford their own schools. Gipper made me realize that peachful coesistence is not possible.
I find the co-located charters especially heinous. “Upstairs Downstairs” used to be popular on US TV when I was a kid. Anyone remember, The show about the kind of classist society the American revolution was against? It was quite charming, even quaint and at times rustic.
I have a lesson plan for those who support a two-tiered education system. It’s not complete, perhaps some other teachers will undertake a collaboration online and help me finish it, but I hope it’s a start.
In this lesson learners will develop critical thinking skills by experiencing discrimination in the form of harassment. Harassment is behavior that is known to be unwanted but persists. Most free countries, including United States, have laws protecting citizens from specific forms of harassment in public spaces. Please read the instructions and then perform the role-playing exercise described.
Close your eyes if it helps you imagine. You are on the playground or in the hallway of a co-occupied school building in New York City. You could see the Statue of Liberty from there when the school was built. You hear a familiar schoolyard chant.
“Nya nya nya nya nya, you go to ______ school.”
(Ask students if they chose playground or a specific area of the school-cafeteria, auditorium, locker room, hallways, time of day etc. – where the separated groups might encounter each other, and socialization/interaction might take place. Are teachers or other adult monitors present? How do other kids act? Encourage learners to be “in character”).
Fill in the blank. Is the word “charter,” or “public?”
Why did you pick the answer you chose? Do you think children would sing such a song? Do you think such behavior would be desirable?
Follow up and extension activities, contingencies for different levels, learning styles, and the special needs or gifted students in your classroom, and ongoing formative assessment required beyond this point. “Learning design” (holistic) is not the same as “instructional design,” (generic multimedia) and there are professionals who are trained to know such nuances—probably let them lead, but if please you have ideas, please speak up while it’s still nominally a free and democratic society.
(I’m posting this and similar elsewhere too. CC share share-alike!)
Sorry, peaceful coexistence is not possible.
Separate and unequal public schools are unconstitutional.
You have made the perfect point CC!!!!!!!!
Agreed, the charters were the ones who wanted to “compete” – their goal is not peaceful coexistence, it’s to make money on the backs of children while claiming the teachers are the self-interested ones defrauding the public while well meaning billionaires are the real people interested in equality…
In what sense are charters as a group unequal public schools and Stuyvesant high school and Murry Bergtraum High School equal public schools?
They are not equal because generous donors are funding the charter schools. So charter schools get all new computers, smart boards, ne furniture…..public schools get ever shrinking resources and are told what they have to spend it on for the most part. When charters decide to take over the complete population of a failing school (special education and ELLs students included) and turn it around I will give. But they have no interest in that.
Stop Charter Schools NOW!!!! Stop the rich of both political parties while we still can! Stand up to the Charter School Bullies! Boycott their newspapers,television shows and advertisers!
Gipper, The role of charters is to undermine. Undermine public education. Undermine teaching experience. Undermine living wages for teachers. Undermine broad curriculum. Undermine congregation. Undermine community schools.
I don’t think anyone here is unclear about the role of charters. I think many of the people who work at charters are unaware of their role in corporate reform.
Gipper, you must begin to understand that we, bloggers, here on this blog are concerned citizens who think you, and other supporters of charters are the ones who are not playing fair. You and those who think like you must understand that charters are taking public tax money and deciding which students they choose to educate. Public schools do not get to make that choice. That is not fair. Furthermore, when a charter accepts a student, and then decides to get rid of that student, for whatever reason, and said student goes back to a public school, the tax money does NOT follow the student back to the public school. This is not fair. Charter schools can get rid of students for reasons that public schools cannot. This is not fair. Also, charter schools receive private money on top of the tax money that follows each student. Public schools do not, generally, receive corporate or private donations UNLESS they are located within zip codes that are associated with high socioeconomic levels. This is not fair. Charter schools receive public tax money, but do not have to play by the same rules as public schools. This is not fair. Peaceful coexistence is not possible because we are not playing by the same rules.
And so what do you think of the common core, that seeks to take over public education at the FEDERAL level vs. the corporate level?
Isn’t the only “choice” whether or not to use Americans’ money to give all Americans the same shot at an education, or just some Americans? Is that a real “choice?” Who chooses? Who doesn’t? How is that decided? Do parents decide? Do Bloomberg’s friends and business associates? I think people have valid questions about charters in all states, not just NY. Who wrote the laws? Who enforces them? Are they enforcing all of them, equitably, for the right reasons? I don’t know, but those are good questions that seem unanswered by defenders of charters, and which their facts, relevant or not within their intended context, fail here in an arguably much more fundamental way to address.
Charter schools in NY are asking for fairness. The charter law doesn’t give charter schools any money for buildings. District schools don’t pay rent for their buildings, which are built with capital money funded by the state. Charters are public schools, and as you say, their students should get equitable treatment, which means either District school space or capital funds.
Regarding your other questions, I think it’s incumbent on charter school critics to raise real issues with data. Chartering entities are both good and bad. The good ones close bad schools and rarely allow a poor charter application to get approved. One certainly hears a lot of anecdotal evidence of charters acting badly, but presumably there would be legal findings, law suits, etc. if it were happening systemically. Bad charters are the worst enemy of good charters.
Did you say the same to the Mayor Bloomberg, when he did the polar opposite. Eva Moskowitz was given acces to ANY public school, whether it was a failing school or not. Practice what you preach, equality for ALL students is more important than peaceful coexistence.
I asked elsewhere, is “fair” a fair question to be asking? I really find you to be sidestepping the question and hiding behind a straw man of a lie. There’s a bigger lie, and from here it appears to be the only leg on which the alleged “need” for charters is standing. I’m asking if parents should care a great deal more about the bigger lie, which renders your point moot—as parents, students and teacher will plainly see, it simply wouldn’t happen in absence of the bigger lie.
All corporate reform is built on the false claim American schools are failing. It’s not true, so …next? This lie trumps your lie (which I still don’t know for sure is a lie or that it matters even if it is). Got anything else?
Do professional educators across the globe, from your neighbours to the north to the respected Finnish educator Pasi Sahlberg, travelling about country in search of a single policy maker who’ll take good advice, care more about American children than their parents do? I think that’s a real question. That and, “Do Americans care about *all* American children—can anti-public Americans run their individual races to the top up the backs of “other people’s children” — and not blink? I can’t imagine the answer to either question being yes, can you? Anyone?
Now, in my experience, our gracious host, Diane, believes facts are important and corrects her misstatements when proven wrong—in fact she has an established record of doing that. I haven’t seen her explain, but I can wait.
I can see you sincerely believe it’s a big deal. I don’t, for reasons already given and, perhaps even more fundamentally, because I’ve heard tell the man who backed InBloom hacked phones across the pond and threw his friends and lovers under the bus, and because I’ve seen that a man who pointed his finger at a teacher, behaved like a miscreant child in need of a time out, and who takes money from some of the same “public” charters’ backers, throw *his* goons under the bus, yet apparently no law is taller than either of them. The moneyed in America are above your paltry laws. Parents can see this. They don’t trust Rupert with their kids’ data. You argue they should trust his friends to teach their children. Why? Why shouldn’t they trust actual teachers? Your obsession with minutia has so far obscured your response to these clamouring alarm bells, if you have one.
It was stated by others, the schools are separate and unequal. Does the US Constitution declare there should be equitable access to education? (I’ve already heard “the word’s not in there,” and that’s not what I’m asking.)
Here again, only somewhat paraphrased and condensed, are the questions I’ve been asking, which you’ve been methodically ignoring:
Why are you building a two-tier education system in the USA?
How does “E pluribus unum” translate to exploiting one group of children economically, to the advantage of a weaker group?
What can parents and educators do to stop these assaults on their schools and their communities now, before it does more damage to a nation already ripped asunder by wealth disparity and a predatory class willing to cannibalize the nation’s future for their short term personal gain?
Have I been clear in what I’m asking? Is replacing some kids’ schools and leaving others’ to rot, while testing companies get rich, acceptable to most Americans? Should American parents and teachers keep asking questions of the people stepping up to receive 6-figure salaries to test their kids for 12 years, or to proclaim which teacher is good, which is bad …do American parents’ questions matter? Will their questions ever be answered?
Hey “Gipper”. Did you think you could somehow obscure your extremist right-wing ideas that are all over your odious blog and also pretend to be some sort of “moderate” urging “compromise” on this blog?
Are you actually so obtuse as to think we couldn’t see what is so obvious?
The mayor, if anything, was far too moderate in approving more of these pseudo “schools” that are thinly disguised companies with one goal: to phase out all public education over time and eventually turn it into a for-profit monopoly under their control—one in which, increasingly teachers, school buildings and even students themselves become “overhead” which stands in the way of ever higher ROI for a small number of already wealthy investors, and corporate executives.
Characterizing the mayor’s approval of almost 80% of these charters as “opposition” is bizarre and moronic.
Tell your funders that they’re wasting their money by paying you to spew your disinformation and mendacity around the web.
Because it’s not working, troll.
We’re parents are not buying it, and the awareness of the attack on our public schools is spreading. And we WON’T allow you to destroy this vital part of our country’s past, present and future.
Now, get out of your pajamas and run upstairs; your sandwich is ready and mommy is turning on Fox “News” as she always does, this time of day. 😉
Why do you have to be so nasty? Why can’t people offer a differing opinion to this conversation without being attacked and called names? You may not agree, and your position may be the better argument, but nastiness only cultivates more rancor. How can anyone have a conversation when they are attacked for their opinions? You’re a teacher, don’t you teach your students to respect each other’s opinions?
I don’t know how you can expect to be taken seriously when so much of what you say is wrong. Charter schools *are* public schools. All in New York are 501c3 Not For Profits and are not even permitted to contract with For Profit entities. There is not “ROI”, “Business”, “wealthy investors”, etc. It is 100% fictitious (nice word for complete BS).
You speak for yourself, but you don’t speak for Charter Parents. You also are blatantly disrespectful to the many liberal and progressive supporters of Charter Schools, whcih you apparently don’t even believe exist.
Is “unfair” a strong enough word in all cases? The idea prevalent amongst many reformers is that “resistant factions” should be “separated” and coerced or otherwise forced into accepting terms of surrender to the faction with the money to influence legislation and the tools of coercion. But those are tools of people who can’t lead, and have already failed. Likely Diane’s “bloggers” (many of us life-long educators with graduate degrees in education and/or years of classroom experience, all of us lifelong learners engaging with dignity and mutual respect in the public education debate) might describe our actions, and more accurately, as “doing the hard work—of democracy.”
I don’t think closing down charter schools chosen by largely economically disadvantaged parents is progressive, nor “doing the hard work of democracy”. I think there is a lot to be done to improve working conditions and recreate the middle class, but that is not the way to do it. Pursuing your American Dream shouldn’t come at the expense of other people’s, least of all economically disadvantaged students and families with little political voice.
I guess it comes down to whether you value public education and schools more as employers or as the means for students to achieve success.
You’ve totally lost me, other than “doing the hard work of democracy” I’m not sure, are you referring to my post?
There are massive public school closings in Chicago and Philadelphia where erosion like the people of NYC elected de Blasio to prevent went too far. I’m disappointed in the Mayor for approving so many charters as I believe two-tiered education is against the public interest and the good of the country, and I hope parents will rally around Letitia James. I hope all the other educators here will let Mayor de Blasio know who has his back, across the country and around the world. I believe parents should choose to support a single, cohesive public education system, for the good of their kids and their communities, and I believe when the misinformation is swept aside that’s exactly what they’ll do. I believe most charter owners believe it too.
The city’s Overclass is no doubt also exerting tremendous pressure on De Blasio behind the scenes.
The only thing that can be a counterforce to that is bodies in the streets. Unfortunately, Moskowitz is permitted to act with outrageous impunity, closing her schools and sending children, parents and staff hours out of the city to demonstrate (which is also, by the way, a gross, in-your-face violation of the DOE’s Chancellor’s Regulations, which prohibit political activities during school hours).
These are people whose avarice and will to power are insatiable. They won’t stop until until they’ve completed their hostile takeover of the public schools, and have turned every single child into a “little test-taking machine” and profit center.
Fear and grieve for a republic whose Overclass is allowed to cannibalize the country’s most fundamental institutions.
Whoever said public schools were political orphans had it exactly right. It is amazing to watch. It’s as if the kids that are already in those schools simply don’t exist. I listened to media celebrities outraged comments on this and the public schools kids in those buildings are not even mentioned.
They apparently have no voice in this, nor are they a concern of any of the people who are supposed to be representing their interests. Poof! They disappeared. How could you miss a whole group of kids? How does that happen?
I know how you feel, Chiara. I get so upset by this. But I think we know the answer. It happens because the media are owned by the same back-room billionaire boys club who is manipulating this game. The so-called reporters on these media outlets are talking heads, they are NOT true investigative journalists. The celebrities who voice outrage are being manipulated by the same back-room billionaires as the media outlets. We, who know the full story don’t have the clout. Our message is still not getting out loud and clear. The supposedly democratic governor of New York State, and the supposedly democratic president of the United States are being manipulated by the same club. The two national teachers unions have been manipulated by the same club. For crying out loud, look what happened with PBS! Even the “Public Broadcasting Station” got caught holding their hand out to this group! How can they all miss a whole group of kids? Because they are being manipulated. Because it hasn’t touched them personally. Because our side doesn’t have the billions, and the access to “spin makers” and people who can work on this full-time.
I don’t understand something, and please take this as an honest question- it’s my understanding that NYC spends more $$$ per child on public school education than almost any other school system in the country. Why is the argument constantly about money? Why isn’t the conversation about taking a close look at how those dollars are spent and increasing success by putting support behind the programs that are truly working? Money has been thrown into the NYC schools and it hasn’t solved the problems. So what are the problems (that schools can actually address) and how can we affect change there?
Mir Miller, NYC wastes money on many programs, consultants, bureaucrats, and a vastly expensive accountability system. By opening hundreds of small schools, the last mayor multiplied the number of highly paid administrators. Mayor Bloomberg doubled the budget.
The pro-charter advocates show a breathtaking lack of empathy. Sickening that they think it is ok to make the public school students at the co-located schools feel like second-class citizens.
I wonder what it’s like. Everyone has “school stories”, their experiences in school. I wonder what those public school kids stories will be like.
I couldn’t imagine walking by the new, elaborate facility and on to my lesser digs WITHIN “my” school as a kid.
It probably doesn’t help that they’re watching their elected “representatives” passionately advocating for one side, and completely ignoring their interest in this. Second-class citizens, indeed.
They made the mistake of attending a public school at a time when public schools are unfashionable among political leaders and media 🙂
Remember Dasani, the homeless girl profiled by the New York Times? She attended two schools targeted for co-location by charters.
“Dasani knows about charter schools. Her former school, P.S. 67, shared space with one. She never spoke to those children, whose classrooms were stocked with new computers. Dasani’s own school was failing by the time she left.” Dasani then moved to another school, Dr. Susan S. McKinney Secondary School of the Arts, where Success Academy eventually co-located and took over “McKinney’s treasured top floor, home to its theater class, dance studio and art lab.”
http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/invisible-child/#/?chapt=1
To all the charter supporters out there I do understand your frustration but I clearly remember fighting for my school with posters, signs rented buses screaming to keep our school open. But in the end the ole master of smoke and mirrors himself bloomberg just shut the darn schools down. So what I am trying to say is this – charter people can scream, kick, make signs and take buses all over NYC but guess what diblasio is going to continue his policies just like ole mikey bloomcrap did. Sorry charters I’m just sayin’
The nerve of this eva moskowitz is incredible! This is one greedy woman pretending to be for the kids like mikey was. Just get your own space charters instead of paying moskowitch half million a year – and her husband pulls down $400,000 as well!!! WAKE UP AND SMELL THE ROSES CUOMO
Cuomo. You’re now making me wonder what YOU KNOW about Chris Christie and the shutting down of the George Washington Bridge.
ROM: I agree, Ms. Moskowitz really has some cajones here… As for Cuomo, let’s face it- he’s just another politician that wants the big bucks to finance his next election ( and win), so that he can make a bid for the big prize, POTUS.
why did he approve so many (39) upcoming charters?
I wondered the same thing. I guess his campaign was just fluff.
Add me to the chorus of wondering the same thing.
In New York City, the term “academic apartheid” is becoming a reality, in the very same building. In some co-located spaces, the children in the charters have separate entrances, to keep the others out of their space.
What more do legislators,educational leaders, and parents need to know?
This situation should be a crime.
Concerned Citizen
March 5, 2014 at 3:40 pm
Remember Dasani, the homeless girl profiled by the New York Times? She attended two schools targeted for co-location by charters.
Thanks. So there’s already a narrative from someone who went thru it.
I remember back when they were gearing up to sell the public “choice” (two decades ago in this state) and the argument was that “teachers unions had captured lawmakers” and we had to bust free from that dirty, POLITICAL corrupting force 🙂
It’s just amusing, now, watching the raw political clout of these VERY well-connected charter lobbyists. The non-charter kids in those schools are politically orphaned. They have no representation, no public advocate, and no one even notices, let alone objects. It’s remarkable to watch.
This issue of “academic apartheid” should become a very vocal and active issue of our NYC public advocate, Leticia James.
I wonder if she’ll step up to the plate, and come out swinging against these charter school operators, such as Eva Moskowitz and Geoffrey Canada.
“The question before the Mayor is whether he will continue to fund a dual school system–one sector able to choose the students it wants–and the other sector serving all. He is trying to have it both ways, and it doesn’t work.”
Speaking of Big Lies: De Blasio has always made it clear that he would continue to fund a “dual school system,” if by that term you mean public schools on the one hand and charter schools on the other. He has said he will continue to give free or discounted space to charter schools that not “well funded,” without regard for what the NY charter law may require or permit. He just approved a couple dozen new charter co-locations (I think your numbers are off, Diane). He calibrated his campaign so as not to alienate most charter school parents, and that’s exactly how he’s setting his policy. And De Blasio’s allies in government, Tish James and Melissa Mark-Viverto, are showing signs that they may drop out of the lawsuit against co-locations filed in December 2013.
FLERP, the mayor approved 39 of 49 charter proposals. Not all are co-locations.
I think people are hearing what they want to hear from de Blasio regarding charters, the same way people heard what they wanted from Obama about Afghanistan. Obama said all along he would escalate Afghanistan, and people were shocked when he did it.
Hate to say the obvious, but — if people are REALLY angry, they can always stop buying those tabloids.
Charter schools ARE public schools.
It consistently amazes me that people who are so passionate about education (and I don’t doubt anyone’s passion or good intentions one bit) are so ill informed on an issue they so strongly debate. The ONLY difference between a charter school and standard public school is this: Charter schools have the freedom to control their own hiring practices (they can go union or not), and free to create their own curriculum (add in additional fine arts and music classes, provide students with more variety of sports like fencing or karate, etc.). Some charters are for-profit, most are not. But they don’t receive more money from the state than normal public schools (they often receive less), and charters can’t decide to eliminate key subjects that the state has mandated students to learn. At the end of the year, charter school students are graded on the same levels of accomplishment per subject that any other public school in their state has been mandated to reach. There seems to be a misconception that charter schools are like private schools with their own rules and agenda; or they are religious based, so subjects that don’t jive with their specific beliefs are left out or contradicted. That is not true.
There is plenty of room to debate the pros and cons of charter schools. But if you don’t begin your premise on the irrefutable fact that charter schools ARE public schools, then your argument is built on a false foundation. Throwing out a baseless, knee-jerk demonization of charters only muddies the water.
For the record, my children attend my local public school, and despite some problems with certain teachers and curriculum, I plan to keep them in the system. But I believe I should have the right to choose otherwise if a charter option is available and the need occurred.
Sorry, Oliver, but charters have gone to court to argue that they are NOT public, that they are private corporations with government contracts. They have won every time. When two charter operators in Calufornia were convicted if fraud last fall, the California Charter School Association entered an amicus brief saying they should not be convicted because charters are private schools, not subject to same laws.
I remember this case. It was a couple, and it was their first time trying to operate a charter. But there are always one or two bad/incompetent apples who abuse the system, whether intentionally or not. How many times have various unions (including teacher unions) gone to bat for folks who eventually are revealed to have actually participated in criminal activities? The recent, and horrifying, child abuse scandal at Miramonte Elementary in southern California comes to mind…and that particular teacher’s actions were beyond disgusting (and way beyond simple embezzlement). Thankfully, that teacher (Mark Berndt) is currently serving a 25 year sentence, but not before his public school administration attempted to cover up his actions, followed by his defense team utilizing teacher union rules to not only keep him from jail, but to keep him in the school teaching children as well as keep his tax-payer supported pension! (There have been several recent attempts to change those rules to make it easier to fire teachers convicted of sexual abuse and the union has successfully fought those changes every time).
The bottom line is bad apples and bad policies are always around, but they are (thankfully) the exception to the rule. So this singular charter school case you mention, and the feeble attempt by the couple’s defense to hide their actions behind a non-profit corporation, does not change the fact that charter schools are public schools, subject to the same education mandates of any other public school in the state. You may come up with a couple more charter school examples, and I could do the same for standard public schools, but for everyone of those, there are thousands of schools and educators that don’t violate laws and provide kids an opportunity for a great education. Facts are facts: charter schools are public schools. Let’s start from that point, and let the debate continue.
Re: “does not change the fact that charter schools are public schools”
This is not a fact. It’s an argument. You have to make it.
Oliver, what did you think of the UNO scandal in Chicago, where $98 million in state funds was awarded to friends and relatives of the UNO owner, who happened to be chairman of Rahm’s campaign? How about the Zulueta family in southern Florida, which has amassed a $100 million charter real estate empire? Public money!
dianeravitch: charters go to court to insist that they are “private corporations with government contracts.” And how successfully have they argued this fundamental point? “They have won every time.”
Your blog has now been in existence for almost two years. Not a single supporter of the charterites/privatizers has ever been able to challenge this simple statement of fact.
Evade. Avoid. Deflect. Rhee Flee.
The silence is deafening.
Game, set, match, championship point, Diane Ravitch.
😎
Richard, charters are public schools regardless of whether one or two have made arguments in court that they aren’t. According to the courts, corporations are people, so believe what you will about what goes on in that venue. Again, an example or two of a counter argument is in the larger scheme meaningless.
On this question, after much consideration, my position, which initially was “who cares,” has now evolved and settled more or less on Diane’s side.
Here are my bullet points:
* The “charter schools are/are not public schools” is an argument about definitions, not about facts.
* If you want to define “public school” as any school that does not charge tuition, is open to the public, receives public funding, and is subject to some regulatory oversight, then yes, charter schools are “public school.” If you and your audience all accept this definition, then you can say that “charter schools are public schools” and make sense. (It will still not make sense to use the phrase “public charter schools,” though, as that would be redundant.) If you like, you can also spend a few minutes doing a CTRL-F search of state charter statutes for language like “charter schools are independent public schools.” You will certainly find that language. Know that it is meaningless, with zero legal effect.
* If you want to define “public school” as a school that is operated by the government or a government agency, charter schools are not public schools. If you and your audience all accept this definition, you can say that “charter schools are not public schools” and make perfect sense.
* You appear to use the former definition. Most people here use the latter definition.
* This debate is essentially a pointless, infinite game of ping-pong that was started by charter school supporters who believed that the phrase “charter schools are public schools” would help sell the concept to the public. Charter school opponents responded by saying “no, they’re not,” charter school supporters reiterated their initial position, and here we are 25 years later.
* I’m not aware of any settled definition of “public school” that could end this debate (and don’t go looking for one because you won’t find one).
* To me, the anti-charter definition, which focuses on the nature of the operator, is the more sensible one. Because the closest thing to an “irrefutable fact” on this subject is that charter schools are operated by private corporations. Everyone on the planet who matters, including charter school operators, agrees on that point.
I agree that fighting over definitions is pointless. There are good charter schools, and bad ones; but it is NOT irrefutable that all charters are operated by private for-profit corporations. In fact, very few are (less than 15%). The irrefutable fact is that all charter schools, good or bad, private, non-profit, or community-based, report and are accountable to their local school district…not a corporation.
The whole point of my original comment is to stop this knee-jerk demonization of charters. I want the most choice I can get for my kids’ education: public, charter, magnet, private, whatever serves them best. Currently, my kids are in a regular public school, staffed by union teachers, and I have no complaints. I was educated the same way. But if their school began to fail my kids, then I want alternatives. And a charter school should be one of them.
You misread. I didn’t say “for profit.”
They are operated by corporations, and those corporations are private.
Oliver, charters are “public” when collecting money but they are private when they go to court or to the NLRB. Curious. Some even fight in court to avoid being audited. Curiouser. Why do we need a dual school system? Separate and unequal.
Oliver, I for one certainly won’t dispute your “irrefutable” fact. You’re arguing that Eva Moskowitz is accountable to a school board? You’re arguing that the people who, for example, call Putin and Christie “leaders,” play in traffic and play favorites with emergency relief funding also play by your idealistic rule? Argue away, my friend, good luck to you.
“The language of choice is nothing but an attempt to change our common sense and to hide the discrimination.”—Michael W. Apple
For some reason, I cannot reply to your last comment below:
“You misread. I didn’t say ‘for profit.’ They are operated by corporations, and those corporations are private.”
I did not misread, just clarified. A corporation is, by definition, run for profit. And to be clear, all charter schools are not operated by corporations. In fact, less than 15% of all charter schools are run by corporations. The rest are operated by non-profit organizations, universities, school districts, or a combination of those in concert with parents and community organizations. And regardless of who runs them, all charter schools are accountable to the local school district, like any other public school. But you’re also making another broad assumption about the 15% operated by corporations, implying that because they are corporate-run, they are bad. That is not true either. Like everything in life, some are good, some are mediocre, a few are bad.
Corporations are not, “by definition, run for profit.” A “non-profit organization” is a corporation. It is private. Again, this is not up for debate. Ask Eva Moskowitz, she took Corporations Law in law school.
Flerp,
I appreciate your summary. Thank you.
I do have a question.
How does community ( tax payer) control fit in?
The whole concept of an elected school board responsible for oversight, policy, etc.
Perhaps things are different in other parts of the country, but down here there seems to be no elected officials minding the charter “store”, thus no direct tax payer voice, control.
Also, the notion of a ” school of record” ( I think that is what it is called). The zoned public school is the school of record, the one that must accept the student, cannot be full or busy or whatever. We like to refer to it as the place the truancy officer will drop you off .
😉
Thanks for your thoughts.
FLERP,
My town has a charter school, but the charter is held by the elected school board. I think that has to place it squarely in the public school category by both your definitions.
The local school board operates the school? If so, sounds pretty public. Also sounds pretty unusual to me.
That is the way all charter schools work in my state.
What state?
One of the conservative big ones in the middle of the country. My friends call it a “fly over” state.
The more general point is that state governments can decide how to regulate charter schools and there are a variety of regulations in place. It seems to me that thinking about how charter schools should be regulated would be more productive than simply calling for an outright ban as is commonly done here.
I think the primary difference between charter schools and district schools is the mechanism of accountability. District schools are accountable to an elected school board, and charter schools are accountable to the parents who select them.
District school boards frequently represent the interests of taxpayers, which is fine, and their elections typically include very few voters, a disproportionate number of whom are school district employees. I think the main missing ingredient here is a voice for parents and children.
Charter schools would have zero income if no parents chose them, so their accountability is directly to parents. I believe that puts the best interests of students and their achievement front and center. The obvious concern here would be that a Board that only answered to parents (and wasn’t elected) would just raise taxes to fund that. The fact that charter schools are funded at a percentage of the district schools their students come from takes care of that issue.
In New York, all charters are 501c3 not for profits and are not even permitted to contract with for-profit companies to operate their schools.
JPR, charter schools are not accountable to parents, as they can kick students out at will. They are accountable to their private board of directors, who tend to be in the financial services industry, aka hedge fund managers, not educators.
I know it’s an article of faith here that charters can kick students out at will. In which states is this legal? Certainly not in mine. Are there studies that support students being kicked out? Not anecdotes, but analysis? Our school district claims the same, but there’s only been one documented case for a single student in the decade that charters have been operating here.
Also, I don’t think the membership of charter Boards have a lot of bearing here. In what way does that negate the fact that parents have to choose a charter for them to get funding; without parents choosing them for their children, they close. I know it’s a favorite argument to conflate charters with privatization, and the volunteer involvement of people from the financial services world as profiteering, or the involvement of the Gates Foundation as a means to sell computers, etc.
Like District Board members, Charter Board members are non-compensated volunteers, and we should be applauding their service.
Is what you report simply the result of the predatory privateers’ M.O? Would there be any market for charters if public schools were adequately funded in the first place? Are the choices all false to begin with? You note voter failure; by marketizing education have we failed democracy?
“The language of choice is nothing but an attempt to change our common sense and to hide the discrimination.”—Michael W. Apple
Click to access BetweenNeoliberalismNewconservatism.pdf
Last month In Chicago, it was reported that “Charter schools’ expulsion rate vastly higher than rest of CPS”
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/success-academy-fire-parents-fight-disciplinary-policy-article-1.1438753
NYC charters, including Success Academy, have come under for for the same thing:
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/success-academy-fire-parents-fight-disciplinary-policy-article-1.1438753
There is a *huge* gap between Diane’s statement that charter schools “can kick students out at will” and anecdotal evidence that a couple of schools have done it. You had the Success link twice, so I couldn’t check out the Chicago article, but the NY one was about suspensions, not expulsions.
It is a flat out lie to say that charters can kick students out at will, and again, one of the reasons why the debate on this site is so polarized. Even charter supporters will acknowledge that there are probably some charters that do this despite it being illegal, and they should be shut down.
There are cases to be made for and against charters without resorting to misinformation and lies.
So we agree, illegal charters, and charters that do illegal things, should be shut down. Can they be legal in one situation, not another, as some assert is the case with their “public” status? …Public when there’s money to be siphoned from marginalized schools or rent to pay, private when it comes to choosing students or treating staff with dignity? And it’s a lie …but it happens and it’s up to the regulators to close bad charters?
In our data driven world it should be easy enough to gather data on percentages of students charter schools expel vs.public schools. All this information should be readily available. Unless of course charter schools really aren’t public schools in which case the whole argument (charter schools=public) crumbles.
I agree that the data should be available, but generally is not. However, charters and districts have to honor FOIL requests, so it should be possible to compare. I think the onus to do this should be on people who say, without such comparative data, that charter schools “can kick students out at will” as Diane said above. Since it is illegal to do so (at least in my state), she should be able to provide data (preferably nationwide since she appears to be painting all charters with this brush) to back up what she says.
Here’s the link to the article about charter expulsions in Chicago
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-02-26/news/ct-chicago-schools-discipline-met-20140226_1_andrew-broy-charter-schools-district-run-schools
Suspension is a prelude to counselling out and expulsions.
Cosmic Tinker, thanks for the link. I agree 100% that that is wrong. It sounds like there is a lot of variability amongst the charter there on this topic. Those that expel students at a higher rate than the District are not high performing schools and should be shut down. But, there’s no reason to throw out the nationwide charter baby with the crappy charter in Chicago bathwater.
Just because the popular press says that charters are successful doesn’t mean they actually are. For example, in the Chicago Tribune article, they say “At Urban Prep Academies, which annually boasts a nearly perfect college acceptance rate…” This has been touted a lot in the Trib, a longstanding conservative, pro-charter newspaper, so it was surprising they even reported on the high charter school expulsion rates. However, the truth is that at all Urban Prep schools, student state test scores have consistently been below school district and state averages, and no more than 22% of their students are considered to be college ready based on a minimum ACT score of 21.
http://iirc.niu.edu/SearchResult.aspx?SearchText=$urban%20prep$&type=NAME#Charter-schools
Their average ACT scores were reported on another school report card website to be 17, so students are probably being accepted to two year community colleges that will take anyone. The proof of the pudding will be how many students actually graduate from college, not how many are accepted to college.
“The proof of the pudding will be how many students actually graduate from college, not how many are accepted to college.”
Something we agree on 100%
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx How is the magnet h.s. system in NYC any different– didn’t it already set NYC on the road to a two-tiered p.s. system, siphoning off the most talented students from zoned schools?
By the time I was raising a family in Brooklyn (late ’80’s-early ’90’s), the magnet system was long in place, with these results: the neighborhood primary schools pulled in most neighborhood children. They were well-mixed SES-wise, & of decent quality.Middle schools were being abandoned by the middle class parents for parochial and private schools, knowing that if they could stick it out for those 3 yrs– & if their kids prepped hard– they’d make it back into free h.s. by testing into a selective magnet h.s. The h.s. in our mixed neighborhood was 100% minority & poor, their zone having been enlarged to encompass several neighborhoods, to make up for the flight of local middle class to far-away magnet schools.
In earlier adulthood I’d had a Manhattan roommate who jumped the sort of hoops typical of college admissions to get her kids into magnets– twice for each kid, as rules changed or children’s specific needs became evident. I knew then I’d leave the city before any kids of mine were h.s. age, to avoid those stressors.
I would say the difference is that charters are promoted as non-selective. That’s why we’re all commanded to support them. They are “just like” public schools, as far as mix of students. It’s a level playing field with non-selective public schools, people are “voting with their feet”, etc.
If that’s not true, then they would have been approached completely differently in public policy and even in media. I don’t know about NY, but no media outlet in Ohio would compare a selective public school to a non-selective public school and insist they’re “the same”, yet they are doing that with charters.
That’s the whole sales pitch. “Just like public schools, but better! ”
If charters are going to operate as magnet schools, they should say so. It changes the whole debate.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Well it looks to me like they’re the same animal. Our critique of charter school-v-p.s. test scores is that the charter schools ‘cherry-pick’, either upfront via rejection of SpEd/ELL/low-performers they can’t handle/don’t want, or by suspending those people, or by those people’s attrition. How is that different from selective admissions?
My point about NYC magnet h.s. is that you get the same result: a 2-tiered system, talented v. not-so, which statistically breaks down to upper/middle class v. poor.
Montclair NJ magnet schools are different: 100% magnet system, initiated as an answer to segregation. [Anecdotally, we also avoided relocating to that town– tho’ white flight from our Bkln nbhd was typically to Montclair– because one had to select ‘specialty’ in K!]
Montclair, as a town already fragmented into specialty public schools for many yrs– thus undermining local nbhd voting clout– was behind the 8-ball when ed-reform came calling. A town broken up into magnets is behind the curve, because their communication network/ voter clout is fragmented into crosstown segments. They are a progressive population; they’re doing what they can via Facebook, but Christie/Cerf has already gotten its claws into the system via sink-or-swim standardized tests.
I take Montclair as a cautionary tale re: ceding local school control to ideals such as desegregation.
No one would compare a NYC selective admission school to an open enrollment public school. That’s obviously wrong.
Freelancer,
I agree that most all of the critiques of charter schools offered here apply to magnet schools with equal or greater force. If these arguments provide sufficient reasons to close the Community Roots Charter Schools, they provide sufficient reasons to close qualified admission magnet schools.
If folks want to close charters and keep qualified admission magnets open, they need to find a way to make arguments relevant to public policy that apply only to the charter schools.
This is an incredibly easy argument to make in New York State: “Admission of [charter school] students shall not be limited on the basis of intellectual ability, measures of achievement or aptitude, athletic ability, disability, race, creed, gender, national origin, religion, or ancestry . . . ”
I doubt very much there’d be any political will in New York to ban selective district schools, or, alternatively, to amend the charter school law to remove the prohibition on academic screening. After all, the express purpose of the NYS charter law was to expand options and improve the quality of education available to at-risk students.
Operating selective or magnet schools is just one tool the district has to educate a specific subset of students, and it doesn’t relieve them of the obligation to educate children who aren’t in those programs. While I think the criticisms of such programs are mostly fair–that they are a proxy for parental income or education, e.g.–I think there are possible solutions for the tensions selective schools may create other than shutting them down.
I think you can make an argument that there are solutions for the tensions charter schools may create other than shutting them down as well.
I don’t disagree. Especially now that the US DOE has ended its prohibition on weighted lotteries, meaning NYS charters can make a much stronger good faith effort to have student populations representative of the districts where they are located.
I don’t know about NYC, but in my area, selective enrollment magnet schools are for gifted children and students are tested for admission. Typically, the schools are looking for an IQ of 130 and above. Look at the normal distribution of IQ scores here:
http://www.brainy-child.com/experts/normal-iq-range.shtml
As you can see, children with a score of 130 and higher are just above 2% of the population. At the other tail, a score below 70 plus low scores on adaptive behavior (life skills) are indicators of cognitive impairment aka mental retardation. Again, that is just above 2% of the population. Children at both ends of the continuum have special educational needs requiring differentiated instruction that often cannot be met in the over-crowded general education classroom with just one teacher.
In Chicago, the most segregated city in the US, selective enrollment magnets are the most diverse schools in the city.
Qualified admission magnet schools are especially vulnerable to the charge of skimming students. Given the degree of residential SES segregation in Chicago it would also appear that these schools also negatively impact neighborhood cohesion by having students attend schools outside the neighborhood.
Cosmic Tinker, magnet schools were created to promote voluntary integration, not to select elites.
Selective enrollment magnet schools for gifted students in Chicago provide specialized educational services in a state that has defunded gifted education. At the same time, that has resulted in some integrated schools in a city where the majority of schools are segregated.
You can call gifted students “elites” if you want, but research indicates that gifted kids do not automatically actualize their potential without specialized services, including mentors, appropriately challenging curriculum, and regular interactions with gifted peers.
Do we all need to go further out of our way to support Mayor de Blasio? This morning the only faux progressive network, a corporation exploiting the “niche market” or “area of non-consumption” that is the “liberal” US media, unfairly demonized the enlightened mayor and arrogantly presented the corporate propaganda as news, or accepted fact. The charter school industry is actually something that’s harming all American children, including those who are privileged enough to avoid the direct torture of testing. Aren’t they the ones who’ll have to deal with the consequences of segregating and dumbing down the American populace for the next 30 years? They can’t all go into the private prison industry—that would only make it unprofitable!
Today I’ve heard from people who moaned and lamented the fact that Morning Joe told only one side, and also from people who said they phoned MSNBC, and tweeted their objections in real time during the show. Which sounds more effective? Which course of action will *you* take next time? If you were too busy being an educator this morning, will you contact them now, or soon, and insist on hearing them tell Mayor de Blasio’s side?
I agree wholeheartedly. Additionally , the charters should pay the city rent .
The people behind this movement do not seem to realize that a public education is the bedrock of a democratic society. Public education is now in crisis,and we must reform it to meet the needs of our changing society. However, the common core,in its present incarnation, and charter schools are not the way.
“Everyone understands that the hedge fund managers and equity investors are supporting Eva’s fight against de Blasio.” No, definitely not everyone, and in my neck of the woods not even close to the majority. The media has obfuscated this to the point that the average person doesn’t know jack shit.
Just heard this commercial on local TV:
“Hello, I’m governor Andrew Cuomo. For all of us there is nothing more important than our children, and their education is everything. While the state’s new Common Core curriculum is headed in the right direction, testing on it is premature, it creates anxiety, and it’s just unfair. I won’t let our children’s scores count against them. Please tell your legislator to join me in protecting our children because education is about helping kids, not hurting them.”
YOU BASTARD!
Now that he has publicly declared CC/Pearson testing unfair will he withdraw APPR evaluations?
Now that he has publicly told the children of NYS that April tests essentially DO NOT COUNT, how can the scores be used in APPR evaluations.
NYSUT – you silence is deafening!
Here in Indiana we had a charter school advertise themselves as “a public school with the private school experience”. Indiana has only one charter under the direction of a local district, all other (98.5% ) charters are independent, mayoral control or authorized by colleges.
Much is underway to sttack the new mayor in an effort to discredit his evaluative skills with reference to charter schools in NYC.
I feel that I can speak firsthand on the impact and level of effectiveness of Charter Schools vs the conventional NYC Public Schools. While there are very good and established public schools, the same can be said on some of those better known as charter schools. However, charter schools often fail to inform parents that many are actually public schools as well. With this in mind, many fail to provide the required program for Students with Disabilities (SWD) as well as those required to receive English as a Second Language services (ESL); often masking dis-service and/or changing individualized programs that support the school and not necessarily the student. In addition, much is done to keep private public documents that demonstrate that charter schools fail to accept SWD and those students identified as such are strongly encouraged to transfer to conventional public schools under the umbrella that the charter school is ‘not a good fit’ for the student. Parents often feel so defeated that the are afraid to fight back charter schools demanding that the correct and necessary program be carried out at the charter in the best interest of achieving academic set goals. Moreover, the aforemention often occurs before Grade 3 because early childhood scores rarely impacted school grades. It is important to inform parents that the ratio of enrollment of the aforementioned students is well below that of conventional NYC Public Schools. So then let us really evaluate the instructional program with a meaure of success. Hmmmm! Not so good!!
Financially, parents are led to believe that charter schools and their teachers were far superior to public school counterparts. Many were paid much more than NYC Public School teachers however, they were not held to the same level of accountability and pre-requisite training. Would you allow a brain surgeon, who has not received board accreditation to operate on you? Happy to say that recently there has been much done to equalize requisites. Many charters co-locate and space MUST be shared but the quality of space for them is inadequate so much of their private funding allows for renovations that do not ordinarily take place in NYC Public Schools. Now that a memorandum was effectuated to afford the same monetary awards, reconstruction applications at charters who co locate are far less. I could go on and on. I won’t; but Great Job, Mayor DiBlasio !!!!!
I just wanted to make this comment, as an individual who only recently became aware of NYC charter schools and this long standing debate (but has been reading avidly on the topic). I think many of the discipline techniques incorporated by Success should be incorporated by more schools and ideally all mainstream public schools. The suspensions really direct the inappropriate behavior where it needs to go – the parents!!! The complaints on that point avoid the fact that inappropriate and disruptive student behavior at best derails classroom productivity and at worst turns public schools to what deblasio sees as their true function….babysitting!! Deblasio is a true champion of mediocrity.
Harlem mom, the suspensions are a prelude to expulsion, not correction.
How about data to support this contention? Many charter schools have higher suspension rates because they uphold a higher standard of conduct in school, which I think most people would agree is a good thing. My school uses a progressive discipline program that has never resulted in expelling a student. Not saying it could never happen, but it hasn’t in 10 years.
I saw on Fox News yesterday that 93% of Charters in NYC are minorities. Now that is interesting news.
And from such a credible “news” source too!
So it must be true. Huh?
Actually, it could be an accurate data point, if you (they?) meant to say 93% of Charter STUDENTS.
However, did Rupert’s Network also mention that over 90% of NYC minority students attend public schools, as opposed to charters?
Everyone who has a child in a public school, are a public school teacher or worker, loves someone who works in a public school, or a supporter of public school education, should let Governor Cuomo know that public schools also need and deserve his support. Let your voices be heard… WE WON’T SUPPORT A CANDIDATE THAT IS AGAINST PUBLIC EDUCATION! Public schools deserve funding and charter schools are not the only schools that can ensure a GOOD, QUALITY education. It is time for this fallacy to be addressed and corrected.
When the inner-city schools began closing the achievement gaps that went against the agenda promoting charter schools, so the test, curriculum and policy was shifted to ensure failure. Don’t believe mee, look up Frederick Douglass Academy, this was a school in District 5 that was succeeding beyond ANYONE’s dreams and now it is failing… What happened? That is a question for, then, Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Walcott, and when you asked them that question also ask them, “Why was Eva Moskowitz given carte blanche to any public school she wanted whether it was failing or not?” What about those students who were pushed out of their school? Aren’t they entitled to a place to learn? NY1, ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox TV, The New York Daily News, and The New York Post all support charter schools and not unionized public schools, but more importantly they are supporters of Eva Moskowitz and the Success Charter schools.
The coverage of this issue is NOT fair and definitely not balanced. The reason why there were 1,000 public school supporters with Bill De Blasio in Albany, is because public school teachers are not allowed to attend political rallies during work time, and could be written up or given other disciplinary action for doing so. Additionally the parents of public school students could not attend because PUBLIC SCHOOLS WERE STILL OPEN! Carmen Farina didn’t close down an entire school system in order to support a political agenda, even if it was to benefit them!
Think this is not about unions… You are wrong, all unions are taking a hit. Unions ensure fair wages, overtime pay, health benefits, retirement pensions, safe work conditions, access to upward mobility, worker’s compensation, disability, cost of living increases, and these things cost the 1% their precious money. Teacher’s union, nurse’s union, police union, fire department, union, EVERY UNION is in danger. The city does not want any worker to last beyond five years and charter schools have very high retention rates. This partly because charter school teachers are not given what their peers receive in public schools, and that is due process. You can’t just fire someone without giving them their fair hearing. Why is that wrong? There is no GOOD teacher, who’s worth their weight, degree, and certification, that supports ANY lazy, ABUSIVE, or incompetent teacher. They want to get rid of them, as badly as anyone else, because they area black eye on the profession! However, what they do support is their right to have a career that we can be proud of and a substantial life when they are off duty. They paint a scary picture of public schools that suggest that all children are not learning, and the only savior is charter schools, schools that overwork its teachers. Did you know that teachers in the KIPP charter schools are on call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. If they are home, at any time of the day, if their phone rings and it is a students they are REQUIRED TO PICK IT UP! You cannot do this to a public school teacher, or any worker, BECAUSE IT IT AGAINST THE LAW!
Blame public schools and public school teachers all you want, deflect from the real issues if that helps you sleep at night, but the fact still remains public schools, public hospitals, public safety, and any thing public and anything free will be a thing of the past if we do not see this for what it is, an assault on public schools, public education, and ALL public school workers and students. Tell Governor Cuomo and Eva Moskowitz that public schools deserve space, funding, and EVERYTHING that charter schools get! Additionally, tell the governor public school supporters are voters too!
@dianeravitch can you please direct me to where the data lives for how many students SA schools have suspended? Does it exist?
Also wondering if there is a way to encourage folks posting comments about children with special needs and children that are English Language Learners to consider using person first language. Our children are children first.
Jennifer, See this article –scroll down for a comparison chart: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/success-academy-fire-parents-fight-disciplinary-policy-article-1.1438753
‘Education Apartheid’ is a precise description of this type of decision. It begs the question “Who will be included in these co-locations?” Will these charters be more or less likely to accept inclusion and other special needs students? What about discipline problems. It’s easy to put up higher growth numbers when you can vet your students, a strategy that public schools do not (nor desire) to employ.