Washington State’s Supreme Court ruled that charter schools are unconstitutional.
“After nearly a year of deliberation, the state Supreme Court ruled 6-3 late Friday afternoon that charter schools are unconstitutional.
“The ruling overturns the law voters narrowly approved in 2012 allowing publicly funded, but privately operated, schools.
“Eight new charter schools are opening in Washington this fall in addition to one that opened in Seattle last year…
“Chief Justice Barbara Madsen wrote that charter schools aren’t “common schools” because they’re governed by appointed rather than elected boards.
“Therefore “money that is dedicated to common schools is unconstitutionally diverted to charter schools,” Madsen wrote.
“The ruling is a victory for the coalition that filed the suit in July 2013, asking a judge to declare the law unconstitutional for “improperly diverting public-school funds to private organizations that are not subject to local voter control.”
The Background:
The state held four referenda on charters. Voters rejected them three times–in 1996, 2000, and 2004–but in 2012, Bill Gates , Paul Allen, Alice Walton, the Bezos family, and a handful of other billionaires created a fund of more than $10 million (correction by reader: $17 million) to support another charter vote, called I-1240. The billionaires outspent the opposition in the election by 50:1. The measure barely passed by a margin of 1%. Stand for Children stood with the billionaires.
“The League of Women Voters of Washington opposed the measure, as did the Washington Education Association and the Washington Association of School Administrators. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has been opposed to all charter schools since 2010, and, although the National Parent Teacher Association conditionally supports charter schools, the Washington State PTA opposed I-1240 for not meeting “criteria for local oversight.” A variety of Democratic organizations and officials opposed I-1240.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
This is a victory for all of the people who in the last 4 years have opposed charter schools in our state and have gotten the word out to the public.
This is a victory for our schools our communities and our children.
Dora Taylor
Hooray. But the charter supporters will be back.
What is shocking to me is that it wasn’t unanimous. Lawyers. If people are making profits, it isn’t a non-profit. When the bottom line, lining their pockets, is more important than educating the kids, and all that goes with it (supplies, teachers, counselors, etc.), how can they dare say its about the kids. Public schools do more with less, and are forced to do more with less and less, and are subject to more scrutiny than these scrupulous charter operators. This should have been a unanimous decision. Charters are unfairly taking public dollars, and parenthetically, vouchers–which are huge tax breaks for corporations–are just as perverted. Its about time these “philanthropists” get bitch slapped by the laws they are so adept at circumventing and purchasing.
We attend a charter in another state. And while I agree the officials should be voted in, I have to say that our Charters does more with less. Charter schools get money just like any other public school, per student attendance. When your child is accepted into a charter they ask the parents to commit to 20 hours of volunteer time per parent (so 40 hours from a 2 parent household.) This guaruntees the school the extra help they need to deliver the promised education. Because parents that don’t want to volunteer don’t want to commit to that. In our charter we have a certified teacher in every classroom along with an instructional aid. We also have a student cap of 28 kids in each class. (We cam from a school that had over 1300 elementary kids my children had 36 kids in their classes with no aid.) The charter can do fundraisers all year long. The public school was aloud one fund raiser per year. (I’m using charter and public to distinguish between the two, but I am aware both are actually public schools.)The parent volunteer committees are amazing. One committee helps bring to life and make tangible what the kids have been studying at the end of each unit. Any where from a toga party and Greek feast to dieting a cows eyeball. Now keep in mind these schools are much smaller than their public counterparts. These schools must provide the same education and meet the Common Core criteria, Standardized tests and reporting to the state, which all costs a lot of money. So while there may be charter schools that somehow have found a way to get rich just as the top heavy district admin have in every state. Some charters that are run by PARENTS are and can be a good thing. Fine make the officials be voted for at each charter. But then so should every school official be voted on. No more district hiring. And for that matter all Principals for every school should be voted in. Public school tax dollars are being exploited every which way through Sunday, Every State was tricked into accepting Common Core Standards and reporting to the feds,and taking on progressive tests built by PRIVATE companies. The data is freely given, and those private companies make money off of children’s data without compensation. If Charter committees were voted in that would be closer to localized education than the district beauracacy we have today.
Why just stop at voting in the building principals?
All instructional staff should be voted on as well. All teachers, all aides, everyone.
Of course, you could elect representatives to a school board and invest them with that decision making, and if they do something you don’t like, vote them out next election.
But that model doesn’t seem to work for you. Other than that I appreciate your relating your positive experience with charter schools. It is sad that your experience seems to be the exception to the rule.
Maybe your area is different, but in my area, charters have FAR more resources than public schools do. The simple counting of students brings in a lot more money. Charters get counted once, on October 1, and then can jettison any student they want and keep all of the money for the year. It reduces class sizes and gets rid of those who lower test scores for the charters. Of course, it means that the public schools get the students without the money. In Utah in the last 1 years, if charters were funded the same way as public schools, charters would have lost $7 million. If public schools were funded the same as charters in that same period of time, public schools would have gotten $65 million in additional funding. More with less, indeed.
Of course it does more. It has selected parents who are willing to make up the difference. That’s the whole point. By requiring parents to commit to donating services and goods and sometimes outright cash (which many charters do, even if it’s illegal), charters can educate children for a lower cost. Public schools can’t require parents to donate; they accept the responsibility to education every child regardless of the ability of the parent to help in anyway.
“When your child is accepted into a charter they ask the parents to commit to 20 hours of volunteer time per parent (so 40 hours from a 2 parent household.) ”
So it has a regressive policy that works to keep out the poor. Congratulations on finding a nice segregationist school for your child.
Yes, corporate charter schools that only accept and keep the students they want, and the corporate CEOs and managers reject or get rid of those children who are too difficult and challenging to teach are going to appear great to ignorant parents who have no idea what is going on—the birth of a caste system in the United States.
The untouchables will end up being the children who have no school to attend—what is already happening in cities like New Orleans—and their learning will take place in the streets from pimps, drug lords and violent street gangs—this in turn will increase crime and the U.S. will probably move from 6th place as one of the top ten most dangerous countries in the world to a higher rank.
Meanwhile, all the parents with children who were accepted and stayed in one of these privileged corporate Charters will be moving into gate guarded communities in the U.S. creating bubbles—-just like we find in India—where the privileged live and the untouchables are kept on the outside.
In a few decades the U.S. will be just like the largest democracy in the world, India, where almost 40% of the people live in severe poverty, are illiterate and the child death rate from malnutrition and starvation kills off about 3,000 to 5,000 children a day.
I was interested in what you said until I came upon “bitch slapped,” then I knew you are the product of a coarse upbringing or schooling.
Very impt. landmark decision, may be appealed to SCOTUS if privatizing billionaires from Walton/Gates etc. want to fund fighting it out. Still, it adds for now to the momentum building from the bottom up to oppose the private lies and the private war on public education. We have to stay on the offensive if at all possible, keep taking next steps to advance the public sector, keep the billionaires and their govt. cronies off-balance.
Sha Vis: I don’t understand your point about charter schools being public schools. It sounds like your kids are going to a fine school.However, the point is still valid that the money per student is taken away from the public schools.If that money remained in the public schools, perhaps the class sizes wouldn’t have too be so big.
It’s great that your school follows all public school standards, transparency, etc.
In our state three is a difference between “magnet” and “charter” schools. Magnet schools are true public schools are conducted by the same elected board as the other schools in the district and follow the same standards, tests, and transparency. Magnet schools can emphasize subjects such as foreign languages, STEM, music, etc. Lotteries can be held if demand is greater than supply. If demand continues, more schools can be added.
Of course there are some drawbacks with that system just as with any system. (One is the deep cuts in funding for all public schools (not true for charter schools–they get more money than public schools.)
I don’t have any problem with magnet schools.
Magnets vary. What would happen in your district if magnets schools did not exist? Would the funding for the students currently attending the magnets be given to the other district schools?
That’s the way it would work in many districts. Traditional schools would have more students and more money if magnets did not exist.
Magnets are totally different from charter schools and should be revived as an important part of the discussion about school choice. When comparing magnets to charters, it’s important to remember that magnet enrollment is not based on lotteries like charters because their very purpose is to integrate schools and reduce the harms of racial isolation. Charter school lotteries fly in the face of that noble goal and create two separate and segregated school systems. It’s shocking there has not been a federal lawsuit over that. Anyone interested, I have a whole list of schools I could provide in Los Angeles to find plaintiffs.
Here’s a report explaining some of the need to expand magnets in the conversation about school choice: http://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/reviving-magnet-schools-strengthening-a-successful-choice-option/MSAPbrief-02-02-12.pdf
Joe Nathan: No, if there wasn’t enough demand in the district, the school would revert to a regular school. Parents wanted an IB school in our system, but funding it would cost more than the school we already have so parents began it on their own (before charter schools funded no one with low income.). It had to shut down because of lack of interest.
However, under No Child Left Behind, the district was forced to change some “failing” schools and faculties. They set up “project-based” schools and kept the cost very close other schools. Any student in the district could ask to attend these schools. At the beginning, there was more demand so they had a lottery. That hasn’t been a problem for several years now.
Reblogged this on Crazy Normal – the Classroom Exposé.
Oh I am sure someone will convince them of their error on this decision. I pray they do not cave but when Gates comes to town and opens his wallet we find that everyone has a price. But to me this will apply in all states. How can it be unconstitutional in one state and not in all states.
This was a state court decision, not federal. It only applies to the provisions of the Washington State Constitution, NOT the federal Constitution. It doesn’t apply across states.
Even if it was a federal decision, it would only affect the circuit in which the federal court lies (there are 13 circuits). This has happened many times. It’s why gay marriage was legal in some states but not others for a while in there. Several circuits found discrimination against gay marriage unconstitutional, but the 6th circuit upheld gay marriage bans. That’s when the Supreme Court had to get involved. They had turned down a gay marriage case the year before, but couldn’t turn the case down when the circuits couldn’t agree.
The point is, it would be a LONG time before the Supreme Court would get involved in this, and I doubt it would ever come to that.
It’s a precedent. Yes, it has to do with a state constitution, not federal, but this case will have an effect on other charter laws. I’d bet that a fair number of people in other states are comparing elements of their charter laws relative to their own state constitutions. The Washington state ruling gives public school advocates plenty about which to be hopeful. I’m not a lawyer, but there are reasons that cases reach the US Supreme Court without having disagreement between US Circuits. Don’t they reach the Supreme Court when the issue becomes a matter of constitutional law?
Is anyone keeping track of the court cases in the states where they appear and when the RheeFormers lose due to an unconstitutional ruling?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think I’ve read of several court rulings in different states but I never read that the RheeFormers stopped what they were doing that was unconstitutional.
Are the courts being ignored?
Good news!
Happy dance here in WA State! This has made my weekend! (Which is good, considering I will be spending the bulk of it in my classroom…)
Washington State has a strongly written constitution and some stout case law that made this ruling possible. Other states may not be so fortunate.
This point cannot be stressed enough. This case is specific to Washington and does not set any kind of precedent for other states unless their constitution is written the same as Washington’s (which probably few are). It’s a wonderful victory for Washington, but the rest of us still have a lot of work to do.
Yes, but a state supreme court decision still has implications for all other state courts.
No, it doesn’t when it’s based on the wording of a state constitution. Illinois’ Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of protecting pensions because it’s spelled out in our constitution. That ruling, like the Washington ruling, is not applicable beyond state boundaries.
I’m not saying the ruling is applicable beyond state boundaries, rather I’m saying
that any state supreme court must consider rulings by other state supreme courts when the deciding the same issue.
I certainly hope that this state supreme court decision will set precedent for the rest of the nation… LET THE AVALANCHE OF CHARTER DOOM BEGIN in court after court around the nation – no more free rent… no more selective student admission/expelling …
It is a good day for Washington State and corporate reform takes another step-back. Yesterday, Seattle Education Association had enough and voted to strike for better pay, less testing, recess and support services such as counselors.
Citizens have successfully fought to keep a non-corporate backed school board.
I fully expect to see a push for mayoral control of Seattle Public Schools.
I’m a teacher and parent of a school-age child and I back the teachers of Seattle Public Schools 100%. Shame on the district for trying to spin this on the lazy/greedy teachers.
Q: Re: charters: How can they be legal?
A: They’re not.
Fed Ed is unconstitutional – when is that lawsuit coming? How about all the tax dollars that go to the private company – College Board? They can do whatever they want to the curriculum in their AP classes and we do not have a say.
We have a City Council preliminary election coming up next week in Boston and the charteristas have inserted their money to elect someone to do their bidding. One set of donors works at three white-shoe law firms who have threatened to sue to raise the charter cap.
See more:
http://ihadthreechairs.blogspot.com/2015/09/charles-yancey-vs-billionaire-education.html
What a great couple days it’s been in Seattle.
The billionaires spent $17 million, not 10 million to pass I-1240. I will go to sleep happy tonight as I have been involved with fighting charters since the first initiative was proposed.
Can anyone really go to sleep happy tonight completely? I know in NY State, the Supreme Court is NOT the highest court; rather, the Court of Appeals is higher.
If there is a higher appellate court in Washington State, then this is not a done deal.
Still, so far, so good.
In Washington the supreme court is the highest level of the judiciary.
YES…right in Gate’s back yard…
Gates has agita tonight
Sleepless
Agita indeed!
Gates has provided League of Education with MILLIONS of dollars for charter school expansion and campaigns are run to promote charter schools. There will be a lot of people out of work.
Seattle is growing and we recently saw city report to expand education via charter schools. Of course, the recommendation committee was comprised of an individual from the Gates Foundation and business round-table types.
Really, it isn’t a lot of fun living in Gate’s backyard.
Here is the Supreme Court decision: http://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/897140.pdf
Gates et. al spent an absolute fortune writing and defending I 1240. An enormous waste of time, energy and resources- not to mention ..agita!
What is NOT unconstitutional is school VOUCHERS.. EVERY parent should be allowed to send their children to what ever school system they wish. Parents should NOT be FORCED to have their children indoctrinated with the immoral corrupt ‘common core’ stupidity. Parents should be allowed to take that $9000 per child that the state government takes for each child and give it to the school of their choice that teaches morals, honest history, real math & English. WE MUST demand SCHOOL VOUCHERS.
barleywheets, sadly for your argument, vouchers have never been approved by voters in ANY state. They were overwhelmingly defeated in conservative Utah in 2007, by 62%-38%. They were defeated in Florida by 58-42 in 2012 despite the best efforts of Jeb Bush and Michelle Rhee. Ever heard of separation of church and state?
You are right barleywheels – we should not have our tax dollars being used to support indoctrination stations. The liberal bias and the garbage standards, etc. in our public schools MUST stop. Parents need to stand up and demand their rights! But – putting tax dollars in private schools will just lead to them being extensions of the government. The government will attach strings and it wont be things many people in Christian schools, for example, would like – such as telling the schools they must teach gay marriage as a normal family option. Separation of Church and State is twisted by liberals to suit their purpose. The state shall not tell Christians what they can think and teach and believe, that is for sure.
We don’t live in a theocracy, thank you very much.
Funny how you falsely separate “liberals” and “Christians” since Jesus was a well-known liberal and the early Church was a socialist organization.
Funny how you twist the message of Christ to fit the conservative political ideology. Care for the poor, the widow, the prisoner, the captive, the stranger among us, love of neighbor, self-sacrifice, living in community, forgiveness, and giving away all your riches were the message of Jesus.
I am a lifelong Christian and I couldn’t diasagree with you more. There are many, many, like me and you are in a minority that makes up only about a third of the electorate.
I am praying for you both. And for public schools.
By “liberal bias” I assume you mean “fact based”? Sorry, but reality has a liberal bias.
Parent decision to stand up against charters/vouchers has nothing to do with your conservative/liberal twist. That’s just plain silly.
Chris in Florida – check you logic – you are making jumps. I was writing about the indoctrination stations in response to barelywheels. Then I switched to the strings argument as to why we should not want government money in private schools. Then I made an example of private schools using a Christian school. They are separate points. You have to follow the conversation.
Also, check your Bible, when we are at the pearly gates God will want to know what each of us personally did to help the poor, etc. He will not want to know what the government did. I most certainly do not want credit for what our government does. When a government is killing its people, for example, do you think it is fair if all the people living in that country have to answer for murder even if they have absolutely no power over their government and what it is doing? Of course not.
Also be careful with your worries about who is in the majority – if your #1 concern really is your walk with God then you will only be concerned about what you are doing right as per the Bible and when Revelation comes you may be faced with situations where you are right and are standing alone and you have to make your choice. That doesn’t mean the majority is right – it means they have taken the side of the devil. Again – don’t make jumps here – this is just an example. Right is right and wrong is wrong.
Dienne – Check your logic. A liberal saying liberal thought is fact? Come come now…you can do better than that! How about we stick to the topic at hand – our schools. Schools paid for by our tax dollars have to be for all children – not just those of liberal parents. If you think about it the other way around I am sure you could see how this is a problem. If the schools taught all conservative thought then you would see the problem. Maybe a better example is if you are a Muslim and the schools teach Christianity as the one and only religion and all lessons were based on a Christian world view, then you would probably see the issue. If not – I can’t help you – but let’s stick to the topic. It is about charters and our tax dollars.
Ken Watanabe – See my response to Christ in Florida – check your logic section at top.
T2etc, you are right, the state cannot tell Christians what they can think and believe. They CAN however tell Christians what they will be taught IF they attend public schools.
That’s why Christians have the right to attend private schools or to homeschool. That way they can ensure their children will get the more narrow education that that kind of schooling can provide.
But please don’t ask me to pay for your choices. While Christian myself, I’m sure that we would disagree on what is appropriate knowledge for children to be taught and learn about. I certainly want my kids to learn about the failed conservative policies of the last 35 years, both in education and in economics. I’d want my kids to learn about the advantages of diversity, and how it’s making America strong once again. I’d want them to learn about all the cultures and all the religions to gain a true understanding of the fantastic world we live in.
They can get that in the public schools.
T2CPA– Nope. It’s your bias toward liberal/conservative that clouds your discernment on vouchers. Contrary to what you are saying, many of those who are promoting vouchers/charters are “conservatives.”
Well good luck. If they can maintain high academic quality, integrity, and same accountability as educational institution…instead of turning into VULTURES.
Not sure how many voters in WA state would agree with your idea. To me, it’s kind of like Japanese taxpayers are willing to throw their money away into foreign ethnic schools that are glorifying the leader of a hostile North Korean regime.
Vouchers are not the answer. The answer is to get rid of the Common Core Crap and turn the public schools back to the elected school boards in more than 15,000 public school districts.
Most public school districts are transparent, non-profit, and democratic and answer to the elected school boards that parents/voters elected. Part of that transparent system are PTA’s in almost every public school district and state.
The other choice being offered is often worse or the same as the public schools being replaced, is opaque, often fraudulent, authoritarian and for profit no matter how you look at it—-this is not the best choice for a republic that operates as a democracy.
The corporate RheeFormers claim they offer choice and standards but both of those claims are lies—-bald faced LIES!
The public schools have had standards for decades if not more than a century. Public schools must be certified before they are allowed to issue high school degrees and, correct me if I’m wrong, but that certification in almsot every state comes from one or two organizations. That certification requires that there are standard courses in place that are mandatory for students to take and pass to qualify for graduation. Certification teams that are made up of educators who don’t work in the district being certified come in and examine the classes being offered and even sit in on lessons to make sure those schools meet the requirements necessary for certification.
For a fully-funded public school district, choice enters in with elective classes where students often have a wide selection of classes that also count toward HS graduation and those choices offer children a chance to focus on specific interests outside of the mandatory standardized classes like U.S. and world history, math and English language and lit.
I hope charters are destroyed root, stem, branch and leaf in Washington State. Good for them!
As the head of one of the No on 1240 campaigns (against the charter initiative in Washington State), it is a happy day. Not because we may be closing down charter schools but because we are upholding our state constitution.
Our constitution, unlike many other states’, has very specific language about public education. We were told by charter supporters that this initiative was the “best charter law in the country” and yet even with their well-heeled supporters (Gates, Waltons,etc), they gambled with children’s academic lives.
They KNEW this law had problems and yet pushed it thru (and only won by 2%).
I do not think it will work to go to the US Supreme Court.
It may not be a national win but it IS a win for those of us nationwide who are fighting corporate ed reform.
Keep up the good fight – we can win (and this is proof).
Thanks for all your work in WA!
Nope – not a theocracy Joe – but not sure what that has to do with anything posted here.
It would become a theocracy if your idea, to give public money to churches and church-run schools, was to happen. The U.S. government is non-sectarian. Don’t give me the “the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation” stuff. The Founders were well aware of the pitfalls of state-sponsored religion and assiduously avoided them.
I said don’t give public money to churches Threatened Out West – please check out my valid points. Reasoning being because the state will ruin them by attaching strings. And, in fact, the founders did not want the state to tell We The People which religion to practice. This takes me right back to my point – no government money to churches or private schools because they will only screw them up.
So pay for your own private schools. Vouchers give public money to private schools, regardless if there’s a middle man in there. The money is not the student’s, nor the parents’. The tax money used for education comes from everyone in the community. Parents don’t pay enough in taxes to pay for the per pupil expenditures in most states.
I’m not an attorney, but unfortunately it looks like Rheeformers have a loophole in Illinois. Here’s what’s in the Illinois Constitution:
ARTICLE X
EDUCATION
SECTION 1. GOAL – FREE SCHOOLS
A fundamental goal of the People of the State is the
educational development of all persons to the limits of their
capacities.
The State shall provide for an efficient system of high
quality public educational institutions and services.
Education in public schools through the secondary level shall
be free. There may be such other free education as the
General Assembly provides by law.
The State has the primary responsibility for financing
the system of public education.
This line “There may be such other free education as the General Assembly provides by law” gives it away. Not good.
““Chief Justice Barbara Madsen wrote that charter schools aren’t “common schools” because they’re governed by appointed rather than elected boards.”
So, the entire Chicago Public Schools district is unconstitutional? (In Washington State, at least)
The laws defining what a “common school” is should be examined, not just the state constitutions. Constitutions may offer a general overview that may not be helpful to public education, but laws and decisions made after may further define the operation or function of state’s common school. They should be examined as well to see if there are any grounds for a challenge in a state. https://www.google.com/search?q=state+constitutions+define+common+school&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Are we talking US Constitution of Washington State Constitution?
Washington state. Education is found nowhere in the U.S. Constitution. That is left up to the states. That is why the U.S. Supreme Court will probably never take up a case like this.
Not to nitpick, but “$17 million” wouldn’t be a correction from “over $10 million,” as both facts are true (17 is greater than 10). It would be a specification or clarification.
Mnjetter,
Both numbers are true but $17 million is a whole lot more than $10 million, ESP when League of Women Voters, NAACP, and PTA (no deep pockets) are the opposition
I have wondered for years why charters are not “taxation without representation.” Remember, we fought the American Revolution over that concept. If our taxes go to private schools over which tax payers have no have no elected board through which they have a say in the running of the schools, where is their representation? This should be a federal issue since it’s a U.S.Constitution issue. Can any legal experts explain flaws in that argument?
I’ve wondered about that also! Experts, what say you?
Many troubling issues with current excuses to rush to charters without solving basic pedagogy issues first: http://lucidwitness.com/2014/06/18/we-all-ignore-a-real-issue/
As several (but not the majority) of Washington Supreme Court Justices pointed out, Washington state has a Running Start program by which state funds are used to support high school student attendance at colleges and universities – which are not controlled by local school boards. (See page 9 of the Dissent)
” Indeed, programs, such as Running Start, that are not under the control of local voters and are thus not common schools, receive support through the $7.095 billion appropriation for public education. ”
Throughout the country there are schools that are part of the k-12 public education program, which are not controlled by local school boards.
These includes colleges and universities in various states through programs such as Running Start and Post Secondary Enrollment Options, ( in Minnesota), public schools run for special groups such as students who are blind, or hearing impaired, or gifted in mathematics, science or art.
Here’s the decision for those interested in reading it: http://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/897140.pdf
Let the haters hate on this comment:
I am a public school teacher. I made the decision last year to send my daughter my local charter because:
1. Class size – the neighboring district has 36 kids with no para vs. 28 kids, full time para, plus parent volunteers
2. Curriculum – More rigorous standards and curriculum at the charter (my daughter is very smart and needs to be challenged). They are working on curriculum one or two grade levels above the public school.
3. Student behavior -the kids next door were coming home and telling me about the bullying, threats, fights, sexual things, etc that they were exposed to in our local elementary school. The charter has more strict standards and zero tolerance policies on many of these issues. The neighbors attend the same school as my daughter now and say that it is so much better not dealing with those things and that I’m lucky my 5 year old was not exposed to them.
4. Values – the charter teaches daily values in the classroom, which my daughter is making connections with what she learns in Sunday School
5. Power lines – there are giant power lines that run along side our local elementary school plus two power stations near the playgrounds. Other states are being forced to bury power lines near schools or move the school. My dad used to work with electromagnetic radiation and said the levels the students are exposed to (although probably legal) are not safe.
6. Peace of mind — she is my child. Her SAFETY is the most important thing to me when she is not with me. The school we chose is just plain safer.
We didn’t start the fire. We are making the best choice for our daughter with the options available. I wish our local elementary school was as great and as safe as the charter. Take into considerations all sides before making judgments.
That’s your prerogative, but the Washington Supreme Court is saying you can’t expect taxpayers to foot the bill for your child’s special school.
I always tell charter parents, “just don’t confuse the choice for your own child with sound public policy.” A lot of well meaning parents in my neighborhood choose charters because they prefer to be with likeminded families. We’ll see years from now what the effect is of segregating communities like that. Oh, wait, the Supreme Court already did, in a decision called Brown vs. the Board of Education.
Karen, the biggest school choice program in the country that separates students by income is the suburbs. In most states, if you can’t afford to live in an affluent suburb, you can’t send your child there unless you pay tuition.
Right. That’s why schools and school districts that serve higher numbers of children in poverty should receive increased funding. In California, we have a new state funding formula that does that. It just rolled out, so we will see how it goes.
Also, that is why magnet schools are so important. The idea was and is to create innovative schools that everyone wants to attend. Through an enrollment formula that takes race into consideration, the schools create a better racial balance than often results from housing choices. You get better income diversity, too.
Are you planning to apply for a job at a charter school?
I’m a public school teacher, and I made the same decision as you did. Their basic safety is my major reason. Our neighborhood public school allows a child to throw a desk at a pregnant teacher, and be right back in the classroom the next day. (I was that teacher.) At the charter, my children are SAFE. I only wish that the “best practices” that are working for the charter could be used at the public school. The bureaucracies that are tying our hands at the public school are the problem – not the charters!
“Our neighborhood public school allows a child to throw a desk at a pregnant teacher, and be right back in the classroom the next day. (I was that teacher.)”
Pardon me (well, not really), I think your local public school had no choice, because of a number of factors outside of their control—the ed code, legislation,court rulings, etc. and pressure on the schools by elected representatives and large numbers of politically correct parents to cut back on suspensions and expulsions. For instance, it was my experience as a teacher for thirty years that Administration often fears a parent who threatens to take a school/district but for some reason doesn’t fear a teacher doing it.
It is regrettable what happened to you, but I can’t agree that it was the schools fault alone that this child was allowed to return to class.
I suggest you do some homework to find why this was and is still allowed to happen in the public schools, and I suspect if you followed the money it would lead to someone like Eli Broad who paid for the propaganda that forced public schools to keep those types of violent children instead of sending them to a juvenile prison boot camp of some kind where they should have been educated instead.
I taught for thirty years and I know teachers who were psychically attacked by students and then were allowed back a few days later. The reason they came back was not the fault of the “public school”. In fact, I was threatened almost every year but no child or teen dared to carry out that threat, because of what I said I’d do to anyone who physically attacked me.
The public schools are transparent and have to report lots of data like the number of suspensions and expulsion causing the media to criticize them.
The corporate charters are opaque and do not have to report the number of suspensions and expulsions so the media can’t criticize them as easily as the public schools can be attacked in the press. Yet studies show that corporate Charters suspend and kick students out in much higher ratios than public schools do, because it is obvious that this is what it takes to crate that learning environment that feels safer.
To help educate you on this issue, you might want to read about the laws that transparent, democratic public schools are burdened with, but opaque, autocratic corporate Charters schools, being in the private sector, are not.
Click to access StudentDisciplineRights_Guide.pdf
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2457&dat=19750123&id=Aw9bAAAAIBAJ&sjid=b04NAAAAIBAJ&pg=691,2211813&hl=en
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/419/565
http://www.wsj.com/articles/suspension-restorative-justice-and-productive-schools-letters-to-the-editor-1428524841
Lloyd, we agree that there are some people pushing to reduce suspensions. I think that reducing suspensions, along with other steps to help more students succeed, can be a good idea.
But I think a school or district needs to find a better attorney if it thinks it must put a student back into a classroom the day after the youngster threw a chair at a teacher. There are many approaches in various public schools and districts around the country that include in-school suspension, review and possibly transfer to another school that has specialists working with youngsters who are so angry and troubled they throw chairs, and other steps.
I’m very sorry this happened to the teacher and wish her well.
I suspect that the school and/or district’s administration wanted to avoid a potential court case. That’s the way it was in the district where I worked for thirty years. The reasoning, as we understood it, was because the school district didn’t want to end up seeing a lot of the district’s limited funding end up going to lawyers instead of to instruction in addition to the bad press from the media that often turn this sort of thing into a national circus and distorts the facts—especially when there’s criminal gang of wealthy deformers out there looking for anything to distort and use to make the public schools look bad.
That means many times the administrators make poor decisions, and in this case, I think the student who allegedly threw the desk should have been suspended pending an expulsion hearing.
But I don’t see this as the school’s fault, because change the principal, or superintendent or the majority of the school board and the next round of leadership might do the right thing instead of make the wrong decision.
Nat, I am very interested in your experience. Could you tell me what state you live in?? I have no personal interest in the outcome, just fascinated how this situation is emerging!!
Well put, I have 4 kids that attend a charter school. One of them have a speech delay. Not only did my child catch up to his peers but he also ranks in the top 5 % with test scores in the district.
What? I thought “fairness” was purloined from our being. For the moment it is back, but we must be bold and strong to hold anchor.
I’m thrilled that your daughter is going to a great school.I certainly don’t hate you for wanting the best for your child. However, I don’t think it’s “fair” that taxpayer makes school “fairer” for your daughter at the expense of the other children in your state. I wish you could feel comfortable in donating the amount charged by private schools to the school where you teach and work for laws giving needed funds to all public schools. I don’t know if your income would allow that, but it would be a fairer solution.
Have you and your spouse (if applicable) joined group(s) to work for public school solutions?
I don’t know if any of this would work for you, but I think you have mixed feelings about your need to make the decision you’ve made. It’s an awful decision for millions of parents in this country. I wish you well.
My, the trolls are thick this time of year.
The most important constitutional challenge that needs to occur is the one that challenges the educational standards and standardized testing regimes that reward some students, not by race, gender, sexual orientation but by inherent, just like the three classifications mentioned, mental capabilities with moving on to the next grade, garnering scholarships/preferential treatment and/or graduation and that deny and/or punish other students through inherent mental capabilities by holding back students in grade, not allowing students to take courses they may wish to take, and/or not getting diplomas, awards etc. . . .
As stated in the Missouri Constitution about the purpose of government (of which public schools are a part):
“Article 1
Promotion of general welfare–natural rights of persons–equality under the law–purpose of government.
Section 2. That all constitutional government is intended to promote the general welfare of the people; that all persons have a natural right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry; that all persons are created equal and are entitled to equal rights and opportunity under the law; that to give security to these things is the principal office of government, and that when government does not confer this security, it fails in its chief design.”
I contend that the rewards and denials as outlined above contravene Section 2 of the Missouri Constitution. I’d bet that most state’s constitutions have similar language. Someone needs to take advantage of the constitutional guarantees like Section 2 and challenge the standards and testing regimes as discriminatory.
I’m I missing something here??? I send my kids to a charter school, which is funded by TAX dollars which I PAY along with the other parents in the same charter school. So how is that allowing OTHER parents to foot the bill for my child’s education?
Jennie, the money for your child’s charter is taken out of the public school’s budget. A win for you, a loss for everyone else.
Jennie, your tax payer money and mine then leaves the public school building fund for future repairs and maintenance then leaves the public school and is handed over to the charter school. When I turned down a job at a local charter school, it was because I was told I needed to teach out of a prescribed binder. Three years later, it closed down. Most charter schools exsist in low income areas because they offer longer school days that replace the cost of after school programs that these single mothers cant afford. Many have closed in what was once called the charter capital of new york state because they cold not control the stdents. What did they think would happen when you taught out of a binder in inner city schools.
I paid taxes for years before I had a child. I always considered that my tax dollars were for the good of all society. It is not just parents paying taxes.
I am willing to bet that the total $ you pay in taxes is less than 50% of the cost to educate your children.
Charter schools are mostly funded by retirees property taxes, not you and your precious friends. It’s public money going to privately controlled schools. Sorry, the world doesn’t entirely revolve around you.
“Charter schools are mostly funded by retirees property taxes”
I must be reading that line wrong. Are you saying only retired people own property or that when money is used from property tax to fund schools, charter or public, they only use the money from people who are retired who are now collecting Social Security?
I applaud the Washington State court’s decision that charter schools are unconstitutional. It’s a financial scam that has put millions of public school funds into private profits. Why should the states even have to “take over” charter schools when they fail? Often, the state merely hires yet another private, for-profit firm to oversee the school. Audits are not conducted like they are for regular public schools. Parents are unaware about who really is in control of the school. I have watched “bussing” of low-income minority students to a charter school where academic achievement remains low, there are no remedial programs, and these students are merely recruited to increase the enrollment. In many southern states, retirees from public schools collect their state pension while working full time at a charter school. It’s a great way to pad their personal retirement fund as they can bank over $100k in 3 years or less. Charter schools merely commit financial rape at the taxpayer’s expense. Sure– there are some charter schools that are successful, but a higher percent perform lower than neighboring public schools.
Jane, why is the thought of a retired person collecting the pension they earned (I don’t think you’re objecting to this, are you?) and choosing to work again so objectionable? Would you feel the same way if retired teachers became stock brokers or Walmart greeters? Do you also feel so much disdain for those who retire from a career in the military and then take a job — maybe working for the military as a civilian?
I think this ruling may be more good than bad, but it also leaves a lot of unanswered questions that the answers remain to be seen. My questions are, what are the impacts for students and parents of the students in those charter schools? I am not for all privatization of schools, but I do have some practical questions about this. The timing of this ruling really does make the future uncertain, being at the beginning of a school year.
The interesting questions will be:
1) Since this is a state supreme court ruling, I wondered is there a chance that this will be appealed at the Federal Level? Can the federal government overrule this or is this decision final? While I don’t agree with appealing this, I wondered this question for all the school legal scholars out there in terms of the law.
2) Do you think the legislature will take some action to reverse this ruling? I am for reversing it, but again I wonder about the legal power of the legislature, since it is the state constitution that it was declared a violation of.
3) How quickly will the funding be cut off to these charter schools? I am not sure if in Washington schools are funded daily, weekly, monthly? How much reserves do these schools have (time wise) to run in the case of a funding cut-off? Do you think the charters will try to seek other sources of funding to run in the mean time (e.g. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Heritage Foundation, US Department of Education, or other non-state of Washington sources of Funds)?
4) Will a judge issue a stay delaying the implementation of the ruling to the end of the current school year (while I think the ruling is good, a stay might lessen the impact to current students and parents, not having to change schools mid-year, and give local districts time to prepare for the influx and what they must prepare for in terms of facilities, boundary lines, hire teachers, etc to accommodate students coming back in the various grade levels)?
5) Will the children attending these schools have to switch schools mid-year if the case is upheld and the state funding does get cut off before the end of the 2015-2016 school year?
6) Is the Public school System prepared to accept an influx of children mid-year if these charter schools close and have to move to other schools or campuses? Would the current campuses have enough capacity to take these additional children?
7) If the charters were to close mid-year, would the campuses of these schools be taken over as public schools (perhaps by hiring the employees of the charter as district employees and running the school as a regular public school, at least till the end of the school year)? During the transition period, the public school district could offer the same or similar elective / school focus as the charter had for the time being.
8) Will any property from the current charters (books, materials, information technology, real estate, equipment, etc) go back to the local school district if a takeover or shutdown occurred or will it end up being auctioned due to bankruptcy of the charter organization?
9) Will some of these charters become private schools where tuition is charged and they recieve no state funds?
10) In the event of a charter school takeover mid-year, I wonder how the whole Union / Seniority system would work when it came to integration when the charters are all non-Union. That would be interesting to watch.
I made a typo. I am saying I am not for reversing it.
I am not a lawyer but I live in WA state and know this law well.
One, there are no federal issues and I have not seen any brought up by either side. WA State has a very specific constitution and this is a state issue, not a federal issues.
Two, the Legislature cannot technically “reverse” the Court’s decision. They can try to make changes to public school funding in order to allow the Court to see that the funding is not tied to public ed funds. Problem is, if they go straight out of the General Fund, what other health/safety/social service gets the cut for charters?
Three, they probably will have funding cut off by the end of September. Some “angel donors” have stepped up but, despite being “public” charter schools, we have no idea who or how much.
What’s interesting is that the Charter Commission who authorized 6 of these schools will ALSO have its funding cut off. Who oversees these schools after that is a mystery.
Four, no, I don’t see this being delayed. The majority of these schools have been open 3 weeks. It’s not like they are established schools and yes, it would be hard for districts to just absorb them but yes, it can be done.
As for capacity, the majority of the schools opening are in Tacoma which has expressed unhappiness over the number of schools opening so quickly in their district. I don’t know if they have the room – Seattle Schools already has a capacity issue. It has grown by 1,000 kids a year for each of the last 3 years. But yes, they could absorb the roughly 500 kids out there in the 2 charters in Seattle.
I have no idea what would happen in terms of physical goods/facilities but I suspect they belong to the charter orgs.
I don’t think they could become private as there is a state process for that but again, not sure.
The Charter Commission was urged to prepare for complete shut-down and they failed to do so. There is no structure in place.
Just for the record: It is the mechanism for funding charter schools in Washington that was declared unconstitutional, not charter schools per se. The entire law was declared “unconstitutional” because the funding mechanism could not be “severed” from the other parts.
To me, the big issue here is not charters taking money away from traditional public schools, but the fact that in Washington State, there is a system of charter oversight that is at a far remove from the people who fund the charter schools–that is, not elected, but appointed by the governor. I suspect that the issue of charters taking money from traditional public schools (or not) will eventually be the focus, since the point was raised of having charters paid for by a fund not used for traditional public schools. But the ruling itself stood on oversight–that is, the fact that there is no equivalent oversight of charters to that of traditional public schools in that state.
Having taught in both charter and regular public schools, I would like to point out a few things. First, charter schools are public schools which means any student in the district can attend. Because they accept public funds, charter schools are also required to adhere to public laws governing students with disabilities (IDEA) regardless of the population their charter may target (i.e. advanced academics or college prep, etc.). Charters are also required to participate in the same state required testing. What they do differently is usually with procedures for hiring of staff, curriculum choice, discipline and dress code policies, just to name a few. The charter middle school in which I taught was ranked in the top ten percent in the country, had a lottery application system that left hundreds of students on a waiting list to get the next available seat, and a faculty filled with the highest performing teachers in the state. The school also had very strict behavior, character and uniform dress code policies. Students and parents were required to sign a contract acknowledging the policies and the zero tolerance for non -compliance. If you or your child don’t want to follow the rules set forth by the charter, then your child’s spot on the roster was rescinded. When inappropriate dress and behavior are not tolerated and is paired with very high academic expectations, this creates an environment in which actual high level learning takes place. When you expect kids to do their best, provide them with environment in which they can be successful, they will rise to the occasion! The reason regular public schools cannot replicate the success of many charters is, to be blunt, the fault of parents. Instead of supporting high standards for behavior, many parents scream that discipline is racist and a strict dress code is an affront to their kid’s civil rights. The school districts then bend over backwards to make those parents happy which then creates hostile learning environments. When the focus of the school day is on everything except academics then those classrooms are being set up for failure along with the kids and teachers in those classrooms. Those of you complaining about charter schools using public money to do things differently should instead be looking closely to see what makes them so successful, then demand that your district create that environment for all public schools. Hold parents and students accountable for their behavior that disrupts the learning environment. None of those things cost money.
Karen O,
Why do you assume charters are so successful? In many states and districts, they are less successful than public schools.
Ms, Ravitch,
I do know that all charters are not successful, just as all regular public schools are not successful either. Here in Florida, I was associated with a highly successful charter school and was acutely aware of the differences from regular public school to which much of that success can be attributed. That is the point I was trying to make, along with the idea that charters are required to be open to all public school students and are not private schools run with public money. That, unfortunately, is known as “vouchers” here in Florida.
I also know that many charter schools in our area have attempted to serve populations of students with high needs (socially, academically, behaviorally) and they were met with cries from the public to shut them down due to their lack of “success”. I would tell you, though, that those schools are very much needed in the community. Serving those needy kids was their main focus and goal, but their outcomes couldn’t keep up appearances next to other schools considering their targeted populations. Holding a charter school for dropout prevention to the same standards on the same timetable as an IB high school is ludicrous and sets up those charters and the kids for failure. But those kids that the charter was attempting to help and serve got nothing better from their regular public school. Is that public school going to be more successful because those students were funneled back into the system that failed them first time? Chances are the answer in “no”.
As an educator who cares very deeply for my students, I just want what is best for kids. I recently left the charter to return to a regular public elementary school whose population is mostly migrant and low socio-economic families because I felt a great need to take my skills, my heart, and what I have learned to help however I possibly can.
I would also like to thank you for all that you do for the education of our children.
Karen O,
I very much support charters that enroll children with high needs. It is wrong to expect them to get the same test scores as schools whose students do not have the same issues.
Unfortunately there are many charters that avoid enrolling students who are likely to pull down their scores. They exclude them or push them out, then boast of their scores.
Well, that opens up a whole other discussion about the ridiculousness of standardized tests as the only way to evaluate student progress and teacher effectiveness. Oh, I have a few (hundred) thoughts about that! I do agree about the “cherry picking”; I know it happens but had not experienced it personally at my school.
Karen, “cherry picking” happens at a number of district magnet schools around the country, using standardized tests. But a number of people who post here are ok with that practice. I’m not.
In fact, frustration with elite magnet schools is one of the factors that helped start the charter movement. Another way that some district schools “cherry pick” is to be located in affluent districts and hire detectives to make sure that no one from outside the district attends unless they pay the tuition.
Sharing for sharing your insights.
Diane, glad to hear that you support charters serving students with whom traditional schools, whether district or charter, have not succeeded.
Joe Nathan,
Are you talking about traditional charter and/or alternative schools or corporate charters because there is a difference?
The charter/alternative movement was started by a teacher and then president of AFT. It was intended for at risk children. In fact, the district where I taught for thirty years had an alternative high school that was run by teachers who worked as a team so the teachers were making the decisions on curricula, methods, flexible schedules, flexibility on keeping students beyond age 17/18 as long as it took for them to graduate, etc. Last time I looked at that public schools website, it was still there. I was told that their oldest graduate was 24 and the reason they worked so hard for him was because he didn’t want to give up but he had to work a full time job to help his mother shelter and feed his younger siblings and he started working that job when he was sixteen. Teens who got pregnant were given a choice to transfer to that high school too where they also had day care classes for their children once the child was born.
Now if you are talking about corporate Charters—the ones that cherry-pick children, dump the ones that are not easy to work with or score low on standardized test or that are moving in to squeeze out school even in areas where there is no poverty and the parents are affluent, I don’t think Diane means them.
Lloyd, the material I’ve read and the experience I’ve had with alternatives since 1970, when I began teaching, suggests the following.
1. Boston Latin was perhaps the first district option. It was and is intended for the academic “elite” as measured by tests.
2. Alternative schools were started long before the charter movement. Depending on your definition of alternative schools, there were new options created within districts in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, such as Parkway in Philadelphia, Metro in Chicago, and St. Paul Open School in St. Paul, Southeast Alternatives in Minneapolis. These were intended to serve a broad cross section of students.
3. Beginning in the 1970’s, some districts also created magnets, designed to bring together students of different races Some were intended for all students; some were intended for only for those who could pass admissions tests; some used audition or so combination of grades, tests and recommendations to determine who would be admitted.
4. Also in the 1970’s, some districts and combinations of districts began using the term “alternative school” to denote a school to which students who were not successful in traditional schools or with whom traditional schools, were either assigned, or “encouraged” to attend.
5. Al Shanker was not the first person to apply the term “charter” to a school. An educator named Ray Budde was the first to use this term in a report he wrote in the 1980’s. He sent the report to a number of people including Shanker, who wrote about it in the weekly advertisement that the AFT ran in the NY Times. Shanker also spoke about the idea in various speeches.
6. What Shanker had in mind was what was happening in East Harlem and some other places around the country – groups of teachers were being allowed to create new district options. Shanker was a skilled promoter but what he was promoting was not new.
7. Some Minnesota educators, parents and community members, where we already had a number of district options, decided to propose that the state permit “chartering” – that is, that a group of licensed teachers, working with others, would be allowed to create new, nonsectarian, public schools open to all, with permission either from a local district or some other entity. In addition to the local board, that supervising entity might be a college/university, social service agency, a statewide board or other group.
Part of the reason I think it makes no sense to compare achievement broadly between “district” schools and “charter” schools is that both vary enormously. There are district and charters that serve students who have not succeeded in traditional schools. There are language immersion, Montessori, Core Knowledge, Early College, arts focused, district & charters. Some advocates of district or charters have spent a lot of money trying to prove one or the other is “better.”
I think it makes more sense to try to learn from and apply lessons from the most effective public schools, whether district or charter. So that’s what our organization does, and that’s what I encourage others to do.
That may be more than you wanted to read, but that’s my sense of the terms alternative school, magnet and chartering.
Thanks. I think I’ve read all of this before but memory is foggy and not precise. Have you read the research that reveals when we sleep, our minds can subconsciously edit and revise existing memories and even create new ones that we never experienced when we were awake so we end up thinking we did something we never did? This knowledge alone is evidence that standardized tests as they are being used by the Common Core Crap are totally flawed and can not work.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/feb/21/speak-memory/
I think no matter what style a school is, private sector schools must be outside the public funded support system. For instance, the private school Bill Gates attended and his children now attend doesn’t get public funds.
Public funds should be for public schools that are transparent, non-profit, and democratic with elected school boards. If a public school district has the legal freedom to let teachers, who work in that public school district, manage and teach in an alternative or charter school, then so be it. The district where I taught for thirty years did it with one alternative high school.
Sometimes it’s not about the test scores of the high-needs students, but rather the specialized services the student might need that the charter school can’t provide at the same level as the local school district. All schools struggle with this issue as the IEP language requires the ‘least restrictive environment.” Often times students with high needs just do not have access to the same quality of special education at the charter school. Once again, it varies greatly from school to school with many variables coming into play. Some charter schools offer comprehensive remedial programs, but others claim they ‘differentiate’ but in reality, they do not. Though charter schools must adhere to the same standards for IEP students, if the behaviors or need cant be managed, back they come to the local school .
Agreed, it works both ways. Some families and special needs students have been very happy with charters. Some prefer district schools.
Some charters serving a high percentage of students with special needs have been started by families and educators frustrated by the district structure. And there are families that prefer having their youngsters attend district public schools, or public schools created by groups of districts to serve students with special needs.
Joe,
I wrote exactly the same thing in my last two books.
Diane, you wrote here that your preference would be no federal funding to help start charters. A lack of startup funds would make it impossible for many low moderate income families and many educators to create charters that serve such students.
That goes to my point again: “Taxation without representation.” Can some legal eagles please, I keep asking, tell my why this isn’t a way to get the courts to declare them unconstitutional?
debbiehopes
The taxation is done by the host school district. Charters can’t set their own tuition or change tax rates.
We live in an urban area in which many families send their children to private or parochial schools. We cannot afford this option, nor can we afford to move to a wealthier suburban community at this time. The charter school has been wonderful for our daughter. The class size is smaller and the curriculum and discipline is well organized /structured. The large urban public school districts just aren’t getting it right. My daughter would never have survived in an enormous kindergarten class. All children deserve access to a good education in a safe environment and we are so glad to have this option.
Ironic that charter students are the only ones in school in Seattle this week.
Also, regarding publicly elected school boards, lets not forget what a mess they have made in many cities and the legacy of waste that has led to bankrupt districts, etc.
From Joe Nocera in yesterday’s NYT re Newark:
“Most telling is her comparison between the resources that a very good charter school, Spark Academy, has at its disposal and those available to the public schools. The KIPP charter network, which runs Spark, gets $16,400 per Spark pupil, of which $12,664 is devoted to the school. The district schools get $19,650 per pupil, but only $9,604 trickles down to the schools. Money that the charter school is spending on extra support is being soaked up by the bloated bureaucracy in the public school system. It is a devastating fact.”
John, they are not in school because the charters are non-union schools, as you well know. That is why the 1% funds charters: to break the unions. But you knew that already.
Some charters have been started by unions (such as ones in NYC). The Minneapolis Federation of Teachers has started an authorizer group to help teachers create charters. In some states (such as Wisconsin) many of the charter schools are staffed by union members.
Some of us urged unions to take advantage of the chartering opportunity to create schools that teachers make sense. There is a growing teacher led school movement involving district & chartered public schools.
http://www.teacherpowered.org/conference
Many of the presenters will be union teachers and or teacher union leaders.
Seattle teachers have not had a strike in 30 years. So it must be pretty important that they are on strike and indeed it is. Large class sizes, extra time in day (unpaid), and lack of Sped student support. All issues that are important to students in the classroom.
OUR school board is not a “mess” so please don’t compare what you don’t know about.
This issue is about a poorly written law that the writers had to have known would not pass constitutional muster. The outcomes are on them. The Court is not going to change its mind.
As a graduate from a Charter High School, I am a able to give the perspective from a student that is often left out when making decisions that will affect the students. Why is it that we often ignore the most valuable perspective to take into consideration in making decisions like this. While I completely understand the dilemma facing taxpayers in supporting a school with funds because of the lack of the control, But have we really reached the age where we get stingy with our money even if it may ultimately help the kids reach higher standards then those set by public schools. Are we not willing to give a little extra to support the schools that have proven performance, is not the ultimate goal of a school whether public or private , to move the next generation upwards in society towards better opportunities. I believe charter schools can accomplish this. The schools may not have to answer to the taxpayers, but we can be reassured that any school will always have to answer to the full extent of the law if it steps out of line.
“The schools may not have to answer to the taxpayers, but we can be reassured that any school will always have to answer to the full extent of the law if it steps out of line.”
No, they don’t have to answer to the full extent of the law. Check out fraud in charter schools. Look here on this blog. Here’s one to begin:
http://interactive.sun-sentinel.com/charter-schools-unsupervised/map.html
I also see you think charters are somehow private. They take public money, which they don’t want to be accountable for, but that money they receive reduces what is left for students who remain in the public schools.
Thanks for sharing your insights.