Julian Vasquez Heilig testified to a State Senate Committee on Education about why charters should be held accountable and be transparent. As chair of the California NAACP Committee on Education, he cites the findings of the national NAACP, which recommended banning for-profit charters and requiring that all charters be authorized ONLY by the local school district, to be sure that they meet local needs instead of replacing public schools.
Yesterday, the State Board of Education approved two KIPP charters for districts that had rejected them. In California, a charter school can be rejected by the local board, rejected by the county board, and appeal to the state board, which was packed with charter supporters by charter-friendly Governor Jerry Brown.
At the charter hearing, Angela Der Ramos, the CTA State Board liaison for the Dr. Oscar F. Loya Elementary School, said:
KIPP is trying to muscle their way into the SF School District, despite the fact that the District and the County denied the charter.
There is no location, so they would force one of the public schools to share their space.
Over and over, the current state board approves charters that are not wanted by the community. The failure rate of these charters is alarming. 39% fail. And there are clear reasons why. Lack of oversight, lack of transparency, budget shenanigans…
The teachers tend to be uncredentialed, inexperienced, and unsupported, as evidenced by the high turnover rate of faculty.
NAACP is in the house speaking against this charter, as is SF School Board candidate Alison Collins, CTA, and reps from the district and county. They already said no twice. Will this board go against the wishes of the community and approve a charter at the expense of public schools?”
The state board gave its answer: Yes, we will go against the wishes of the community and approve KIPP charters at the expense of public schools. We don’t care what the local community wants.
WHY can’t KIPP find communities where they are welcome?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
If a school is receiving public money, that school should be following the same rules and laws as regular public schools are regarding transparency of finances, certification of teachers, oversight, following Special Education laws, etc. Period.
No public money should be going to for-profit “charter” schools (or private schools, or that matter) and no “co-location” of charters in existing public schools.
I’m getting tired of all of this merde. Why is public education money going for private profit?
LikeLike
States should allow local school boards to authorize charter schools instead of putting authorization in the hands of those appointed by state or corporate actors. Local communities know their community and their needs. Why should such an important decision be made top down and outside the community? Current authorization processes in many states are rife with abuse, kickbacks and pay to play. Charters should only exist where there is community interest and need and should occur without political influence.
LikeLike
Yes, that’s the way my state, Maryland, currently does it.
But, of course, our current governor (Larry Hogan, R) has proposed an initiative to make Maryland like most of the charter-friendly states.
http://governor.maryland.gov/2017/01/25/governor-larry-hogan-announces-public-charter-school-act-of-2017-funding-for-classroom-innovation/
Sigh.
LikeLike
“WHY can’t KIPP find communities where they are welcome?”
Oooh, Miss, Miss! Pick me! I know the answer to that one!
LikeLiked by 1 person
And after the forcing of these schools into communities where they ARE NOT WELCOME: oh, the damage done. And oh, that lawsuits would ensue.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on EduIssues and commented:
An important warning from Diane Ravitch about how the CA State Board of Education is overruling local districts and forcing charter schools upon them that they do not want. This drains funds and sometimes facility space from local schools.
LikeLike