One of the worst of the corporate reform policies is co-locating privately-managed charter schools inside public school buildings. It creates fights over space and resources. It sets parent against parent. One school (the charter) gets preferential treatment. Often, the charter has a rich and powerful board of directors. Co-location–or charter school invasion–creates what some call academic apartheid, with two schools operating by different rules under the same roof, one with the best of everything, the other with leftovers and shrinking space.
In Los Angeles, parents and teachers are protesting a co-location at Boyle Heights Elementary School, which is celebrating its centennial year. More than 500 people showed up to protest.
This article shows how co-locations tear school communities part. When you realize that a school’s culture is an essential ingredient of its success, you understand that co-location stabs the school and the community in the heart.
Now that the LA school board has a new president and a new majority, maybe it will rein in the giveaway of public space to private corporations who make their own rules.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“…co-locating siphons key resources from the already-underfunded traditional public schools, depriving students of playground space, library time and other resources.”
I agree that “Co-location” (Charter School Invasion) = “Academic Apartheid””
Is there no end to the educational insanity?
LikeLike
This law needs to be repealed. This is one of many examples, along side the Parent Trigger law, that demonstrates that policy and procedure are two very different things. You might have a policy that sounds good on paper and may even have some value, but when procedure is not taken into consideration through a pilot program, the results can be disastrous and you wind up with something that creates more damage than if nothing had been done in the first place.
LikeLike
I was going to disagree, but on second thought,
Elementary schools whose kids have disinterested parents are problematical.
Those kids with disengaged parents will remain in anything forced upon them by government (parents don’t want to go to jail) and without advocacy (active involved parents) seem destined to a mediocre educational future. Some kids will ‘improvise, adapt and overcome’. My guess is most will not, but I have no statistics on that.
LikeLike
Why don’t we give this a chance to work in Adelanto where the new superintendent is cooperating with the new school that will open next week in the school building where failure was apparently an option? If everyone cooperates, they could become a model for the rest of the nation. I hope no one messes up this opportunity.
LikeLike
Changemaker does not appear to know anything about the trigger in Adelanto. The school was challenged by 100% free and reduced lunch, 24% English Learners, and a high 14% Special Ed. To add to this, there is a high rate of students moving in and out of the area. But LaVerne, the charter school in Hesperia that is taking over Desert Trails, is much different. It has a high percentage of white students(40%) compared to Desert Trails 4%. Also, LaVerne has ZERO English Learners and ZERO Special Ed. So, if the new charter in Adelanto is successful, you can bet that it is serving a whole different population than previously. We’ll soon find out when school opens.
LikeLike
I think about the kid whose dad is missing; whose mom likes her bab(ies) but has no concept of care and drops them off as often as she can to ‘enjoy’. How does such a system deal with those very dear children?
LikeLike
Does colocating magnet programs in neighborhood schools cause the same sort of problems?
LikeLike
This is quickly becoming a one-note horn with the continuous sounding of “but magnet schools do it too!” argument and it sounds an awful lot like an argument a child might use with their parent to justify why they shouldn’t be punished for wrongdoing.
Is that your point — to absolve all charter schools from criticism (which, by the way, outnumbered magnet schools more than 2 to 1 in the same NCES survey referenced below) by trying to deflect to magnet schools or is this another anecdotal sharing of your disatisfaction with your children’s school district? Either way your argument falls short.
People have repeatedly pointed out the very small percentage of magnet schools in relation to other public schools (.03% in 2010/2011 according to the National Center for Education Statistics). Magnet schools were designed to address racial segregation and white flight by eliminating geographical boundaries and white families were lured in by offering specialized, enriched curricula. They largely failed at this mission and instead some of the remaining few have morphed into selective elite schools, very similar to the worst of the charters.
The movement is considered by many, if not most, educators as a failure and no one here is advocating for their expansion or offering them as a solution to any perceived problem.
You can’t seem to work with these facts. Why?
LikeLike
I asked about this because 1) I have noticed that there are magnet schools co-located in neighborhood schools in well regarded school districts like Montgomery Country (I believe they have six language immersion programs in neighborhood elementary schools, for example), 2) I attended a G and T program co-located in a neighborhood school in the late 60’s and was oblivious to any local reaction and was curious if my education came at the expense of the neighborhood children, and 3) because the competition for space and neighborhood distruction mentioned in the post seem to be based on the existence of two schools under the same roof, independent of them being a charter school or not.
I think your comment may be the first I have seen here, other than those by Joe Nathan and myself, arguing that magnet schools and charter schools are essentially the same. Very few of the contributors here would agree that “some of the remaining few (magnet schools) have morphed into selective elite schools, very similar to the worst of the charters.” We are in agreement that the two kinds of schools are esentually the same.
If you would like to discuss other issues in education I would be happy to oblige given the proper opportunity. I have commented on a variety of issues over the last year, including advocating for peer evaluation of teachers, the quality of education in schools of education, the incentive structures built into typical teacher labor agreements, advocated for the education lf gifted and talented students, and even explained the the comcept of sampling error. I try to keep my responses relevant to Dr. Ravitch’s post or the responses given by other posters.
LikeLike
Chris, this is the first time I think I’ve heard someone here say that the magnet schools movement is regarded by “many if not most educators as a failure.”
Personally I think there are some great (non-selective admissions) magnet schools.
I also think that the Julia Richman complex in New York City is a wonderful example of a number of schools sharing space. People from all over the country have visited and praised it.
http://www.jrec.org/
Sharing facilities can be complicated. It does involve challenges but I think it also can be great.
LikeLike
I’m not a fan of magnet schools, but (at least in my town), there is a huge difference. Every magnet schools offers buses and free/reduced lunch. Most of the charters do not. By that fact alone, Charters effectively exclude a large portion of the student population from even entering the lottery.
LikeLike
It seems to me that your objection to charter schools could be dealt with by changing the regulations governing charter schools so that they provide transportation and free and reduced price lunch.
I think choice schools are. A good thing because it allows schools to be different from each other. With traditional zoned schools the emphasis must be on school uniformity.
LikeLike
Yes, if all charter offered transportation and free lunch I would have a better time with them. However, I am not a fan of lottery schools in general. I don’t like the idea that you have to “win” a spot. I disagree that traditional public schools are uniform and don’t consider their student population.
LikeLike
I am surprised to see that you don’t think public schools are relatively uniform. I live about 400 feet from a middle school boundary in my town, and if the middle school my children were assigned to had a significantly different set of programs and or approach to education than the middle school to which the folks across the street were assigned (say one school was Montessori and another Waldorf), the system would break down as parents would seek out the type of school that they felt would be best for their child independent of where their home was located.
LikeLike
I have a child in 1st grade and, yes, I do think our schools has unique aspects to it and I expect all the schools in my town do. Each school has a unique set of teachers and students and that creates a nice community. My state has adopted the CC so charters and public schools are following the same curriculum.
The town next to me has very “good” schools and they just have neighborhood schools. Some people go for broke just for these traditional schools.There are no magnet schools in this town. The one charter that got approval had their management company abandon them before they even found a site for their school. This town has a much smaller low income population than my town.
My town has bunch of magnets (including two Montessori, IB, arts, core knowledge, STEM, humanities etc.) In my town, even with all these endless offerings, people still flee the public schools for non-specialized charters (from what my fellow parents share with me, what they think is innovation are the same things my child’s school is doing). So what choice do people want? For my fellow parents, it seems they want the choice to have a much smaller percentage of low income students with their children and much smaller class sizes.
I am not an educator and I have no idea what my child needs as far as the details on how to educate him. What I feel he needs may be much different that what the pros know. How he ticks at home is much different from his behavior and attitude at school. I take care of him at home, reinforce his learning, have the means for him to participate in outside activities, give him love, etc., but I leave the majority of his education to the professionals. Maybe i am naive, but so far so good.
The assumption is that parents’ feelings about what their child needs is correct and all students would succeed. What about the parents whose feelings are wrong? Would their child be reassigned to a more appropriate school?
LikeLike
My town has no magnet schools or programs, no IB programs (though to be fair a number of strong students take classes at our local university while in high school), no language immersion, no STEM programs, etc., just traditional zoned public schools. Only one charter school, and that is an alternative high school run by the local school board. Of course there is a private Montessori school, a private Waldorf school, and a private progressive school for those whose parents that can afford it.
Will parents enroll their students in a Waldorf school when their child might have been better off in a STEM oriented school? Probably that will happen, but I don’t think the solution is to have schools that are designed to make it impossible for parents to choose the wrong school.
LikeLike
Co-Locations have been horrible in NYC…
LikeLike
What makes you say that?
From my own experience, and the data that I’ve seen, co-locations have actually worked out pretty well in NYC. Also, are you only referring to charter school co-locations or public school as well? I think it is relevant to keep in mind that the majority of co-locations have nothing to do with charter schools at all.
Click to access Space_Optimization_Report_June_2011.pdf
Click to access Facts_Colocation.pdf
LikeLike
NYC public school parents have protested against co-locations.
Bloomberg’s puppet board ignores them.
LikeLike
I understand that public school parents have protested. I also feel as though I have at least a rudimentary understanding of why they are protesting. Furthermore, I do believe that there should be a better system in place to hear and address such grievances.
However, I don’t think that protests in and of themselves legitimize the argument. People used to protest integration, but I doubt that anyone here would say they are in the right.
My question is that given a number of statistics that seem to counter many of the points raised by protesters, why is it that co-locations with charters are seen as a bad thing. Also, is it co-locations with charters that is the problem, or co-locations in general.
I think that taking into account a comprehensive view of the problems that exist will help us to better address these problems and find a solution that works for everyone.
LikeLike
Who comes up with these dumb ideas?
LikeLike
The Best and the Brightest!!
LikeLike
Other schools in Los Angeles targeted for co-location may not even be aware of what co-location actually means! Citizens of the World will be co-locating at Stoner Avenue next month. Public outreach within the neighborhood was so poor that parents at Stoner thought THEIR school was actually becoming part of the charter. They were excited about the arts, music, dance, sports and organic lunches that the charter students will enjoy next year and presented zero opposition. The students at the 100% FRL Stoner will not experience any of those benefits. They will just lose the 8 classrooms allocated to CWC. And share common space and resources. And ultimately lose students to CWC. The inevitable exodus of those “FRL” students who will doubtless be enticed over the co-location fence represent Local Funding Formula Control dollars for CWC and will also allow them to seize additional rooms. It isn’t co-location. “Co” means “with”. There is no co-operation here – just theft.
LikeLike
“And ultimately lose students to CWC. The inevitable exodus of those “FRL” students who will doubtless be enticed over the co-location fence represent Local Funding Formula Control dollars for CWC and will also allow them to seize additional rooms. It isn’t co-location.”
They will “buy the Yankees” a la George Steinbrenner. The district will give CWC all the names of the highest-achieving, easiest-to-educate, stablest-family situation, English-fluent kids, along with all the contact info… addresses, phone numbers, emails, etc… and then proceed to recruit them over—otherwise known as “creaming”. When those kids excel, this will, of course, “prove” how great CWC is.
There will be no such recruitment or outreach to the Special Ed., brand new immigrants with ZERO English, kids from foster care, homeless kids, ADHD, kids with IEP’s, kids who engage in disruptive behavior.
LikeLike
I’m not very up-to-date on the LA discussion; however, as a K-5 teacher at a NYC charter school, I would like to add my perspective to the conversation
.
I have a few points to make. All of these points are coming off of my understanding of the issue at hand; namely, that co-locating public schools with charter schools will harm the public schools in some way. The case has been made, by Ms. Ravitch and others, that this co-location will overcrowd public schools, detract from their resources, and degrade community and school culture. From my experience in NYC, I disagree.
1) In NYC, the majority of co-located schools do not include charter schools. Co-locating is a necessity in NYC since there is not enough space for all schools to enjoy their own building.
2) In NYC, co-locating with charter schools has been proven to help public schools. It has been shown that public schools that are co-located with at least one charter school have higher reading score gains year to year than schools that are not co-located with a charter school. Moreover, public schools that are co-located with at least one charter school are in fact less overcrowded than similar public schools that are not co-located with a charter school.
Click to access Space_Optimization_Report_June_2011.pdf
Click to access Facts_Colocation.pdf
3) Co-located charter schools in NYC do not detract from the resources of public schools. Yes, there are some resources, such as cafeterias and gymnasiums, that need to be shared, but this is done in an equitable manner. All decisions about the sharing of spaces are made by a Shared Space Committee, which includes representatives from all schools in the building. Furthermore, if a charter school in NYC makes building improvements of $5,000 or more, a matching amount is provided to each public school in the building.
Click to access Facts_Colocation.pdf
I am aware that in NYC and elsewhere, there are often large disputes that occur when charter schools attempt to co-locate with public schools. These disputes can at times work to corrode the community that currently exists, and can turn teacher and parents of certain schools against one another. However, this does not mean that the policy of co-location is wrong. I think that people should be able to air their grievances, but I also believe that the facts speak for themselves. Due to space and economic constraints, co-location is necessary. If it is ok for public schools to co-locate, it should be ok for charter schools, which are publicly funded, to co-locate. Furthermore, it has been shown that such a co-location between charter and public schools actually works to improve all schools in the building, more so than if the charter school was not present.
I believe that the true problem comes from ignorance, animosity, and a lack of regulation. If we work to fix the systemic problems with co-location, hold all schools to high standards, and ensure that no schools are overcrowded or underfunded, then I believe that co-location with charter schools can be very beneficial. Not only will co-located schools be able to share best practices and pd sessions, they will also be able to share resources and help build a sense of community and civic engagement with one another. In the end, doing so will help all schools, children, teachers, and families in the co-located building thrive.
LikeLike