EduShyster (aka Jennifer Berkshire) interviews Yawu Miller, editor of Boston’s Bay State Banner, about charters and Question 2, the November referendum on lifting the cap.
http://edushyster.com/tag/bay-state-banner/
Miller is not anti-charter. Nor is he pro-charter. He has applied to charters for his own children. But he understands the widespread concern that charters will weaken public schools.
Yawu Miller: What I’ve noticed in the debate in Boston is that people are not against charter schools. They think that there is a place for them. They think that charter schools work well for some people, maybe for their own children. But they don’t want to see the kind of expansion that’s being proposed now. They think there’s a threat to the district school system if that happens. You hear a lot of people saying *I’m not anti-charter. I’m against this ballot question.* I think the funding issue has caused a lot of people who pay attention to the schools to come out strongly against this.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
His newspaper’s subsequent editorial endorsement of the ballot question that would lift the cap on charter schools is available here: “Vote ‘yes’ for better educational opportunities”
http://baystatebanner.com/news/2016/sep/28/vote-yes-better-educational-opportunities/
Why are we giving private actors and organizations the ability to profit by creating schools that have the freedom to suspend, punish, humiliate and treat like a criminal any child that costs them more money to teach? And the only oversight is by people who WANT them to do that. Do you know why? Because if you eliminate the lowest performing kids, your test score average rises. Math 101. And it’s true. When your goal is better test score average, what are the lives of a few unworthy kids who are expendable to the people who run charters and the people who oversee them. Like Stephen Ronan. Most likely he believes those kids are unworthy anyway, right Stephen? You never fight for more oversight — on the contrary, you jump through hoops trying to explain that there’s no need for any oversight at all.
Stephen, if you really believed half of what you claim, you’d want a system where public schools could send their lowest performing students to charters. Every kid with special needs is sent to charters since you keep claiming they work miracles.
Why aren’t reformers fighting for THAT? Is it because they are no different than Donald Trump and any lie in the pursuit of money, profit, and power is always okay?
Fight for charters that public schools can send their most difficult to teach children. Why aren’t you doing that?
It would go a long way if ed reformers would admit that establishing a new system of schools alongside public schools impacts public schools.
I’m not clear on why admitting this is so difficult. Not clear on why they insist on pretending the other side of this equation doesn’t matter.
No one rational buys that, because it’s ridiculous.
Cami Anderson admits this. She has to. To deny it is ludicrous. There’s nothing wrong with people asking about the effect on existing public schools. Those schools are as important than any prospective schools.
This seems obvious to me. I’m baffled by how all these millionaires and political professionals don’t get it.
Chiara: “It would go a long way if ed reformers would admit that establishing a new system of schools alongside public schools impacts public schools.”
My impression is that ed reformers not only acknowledge an impact but celebrate that as most likely a positive impact.
You can argue with Dmitri Melhorn’s analysis here in his discussion with Mark Weber, but you can’t argue that he’s ignoring the potential for impact:
“In Florida, traditional public school performance has improved as school choice has expanded. Ditto in Denver. Ditto in New York City, especially in the boroughs with the highest charter penetration. Ditto in the 2008 study I cited from Texas, which Jazzman agreed was well done….
“As for the tipping point, how does Jazzman explain away the studies of Washington, D.C., as summarized by Clinton Administration policy wonk David Osborne here? In D.C., two thirds of students attend a different school than their closest traditional school, and 44% of students attend charters. Both traditional and charter schools are improving dramatically, faster than any other city in the nation, and faster than any state other than Tennessee.”
http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2015/10/charter-schools-exchange-part-iii.html
Here in Boston, alongside a growing charter sector during the past 20 years the traditional public school sector reports substantial improvements, whether in test scores, graduation rates or numbers of high school students receiving arts instruction:
http://www.bostonpublicschools.org/domain/238
Stephen,
We had a dual system for decades. It must have been great from your point of view but the Supreme Ciurt said it was unconstitutional in 1954
🙂
Diane: “We had a dual system for decades. It must have been great from your point of view but the Supreme Ciurt said it was unconstitutional in 1954”
Are you referring to a dual system within the traditional public school system?
Stephen,
We should emulate Finland, the best school system in the world. No charters. No vouchers. A great public school system for every child.
No dual system that divides haves and have-nots.
Keep your charters. Enjoy them. They undermine democracy. And they are bad public policy.
My favorite education reform this evening would be to replace much of our 5th grade science technology curriculum with checkers, chess, Go, backgammon, bridge and poker, replacing the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System annual exam, with some tournaments. You with me?
Yes, I’m with you on that suggestion Stephen.
Super! Lots of guest lecturers and volunteer tutors, eh? Could swap out the bridge for Four Up and Scrabble if demand warrants…
I’d prefer to see Yachtzee along with Scrabble and Liars Dice-teach kids how to detect lies and bs!
Thanks. I wasn’t at all familiar with Liars Dice, but, checking out the “Elements of strategy” section for Liars Dice in Wikipedia, it certainly seems an excellent choice!
Don’t mist this
MA Receives $12.5 Million from Feds to Expand Charters– Before Public Votes on the Issue
by deutsch29
How about the gall of John King et al to send our tax money to tilt the outcome of a pending vote. Where do I and others express outrage, and does it even matter at USDE? I suspect the latter.
Ohio got 71 million right after the rush vote on taking over Youngstown.
It’s a fair question- how much coordination is there on this?
I don’t know about this case, but Philanthropy Ohio has an agenda for education. It is currently sponsoring “stakeholder” meetings across the state for the purpose of creating the ILLUSION of grassroots support for the topics on its agenda, about ESSA flexibility, carefully omitting the charter school and on-line learning scandals.
Philanthropy Ohio has been getting Gates funding for a long time. The press and the invitations to the current “stakeholder” meetings have not been upfront about the education agenda for ESSA already shaped by this organization with help from Education First. Education First is a PR firm where the lead partner brags about having worked for Achieve, the Gates Foundation on Common Core, and lists Philanthropy Ohio as a client (in addition to Gates and other foundations). The upshot is that coordination with state and federal policy”movers and shakers” is not off the table at all.
On this blog and elsewhere we have been introduced to philanthrocapitalism. How about philanthrogovernance? This idea seems to me a path to greater understanding of the decline in support for democratic governance and marginal interest in supporting anything reminiscent of the common good.
see how Education First is working on ESSA “flexibility” guidance for states here http://education-first.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Education-First-Making-the-Most-of-ESSA-May-2016-1.pdf
And here is some of the questionable cheerleading for philanthrocapitalism in Bishop, M. & Green, M. Green, (2008). Philanthrocapitalism: How the rich can save the world. NY: Bloomsbury Press.
The “social impact bonds” and “pay for success” programs offered as financial products to address social needs and problems have been promoted by USDE as well as Goldman Sachs and major foundations (e. g. Pritzker in Chicago). Pre-school and prevention of recivitism are programs being sponsored in this way.
There’s a place for charter schools????!!!? Really? I have a few suggestions for the location of charter schools but this is a family blog so I won’t go into the details. Why not pour all this cash into the public schools where most of the kids are being educated (so far)? Why do billionaires hate the actual public schools so much? If you read this blog, you know why billionaires hate public schools.
http://yeson2ma.com/
Great Schools Massachusetts forgets to mention existing public schools. Happens an awful lot in ed reform.
Seems like a huge omission- a referendum on schools that makes absolutely no mention of existing public schools. They may want to leave the echo chamber every once in a while. They’re probably going to have to admit public schools exist if they continue to claim to be public education advocates.
Massachusetts needs to understand what is at stake. Removing the cap on charters will result in a gold rush of opportunists eager to a exploit a ‘new market.’ Scaling up always reduces quality, and at the same time, they will be harming many of the best public schools in the nation. The amount of out of area dark money flowing in to this campaign should set off alarm bells to parents and community members. A yes vote will result in the Walmartization of charters in Massachusetts. Cheap and sub par is what you get. Charter schools today have very little to do with an identified local need and a lot more to do with the politicization and monetization of public school funding. All these out of state corporations seek access to local tax dollars, and it will most likely result in taxpayers spending MORE not less on education.
Funny how this same game moves from state to state to state and yet those who are suddenly inundated with poorly regulated CHEAP AND SUB PAR charter schools stomp their feet and say “WHY is this happening to US?”
I also don’t get why they continually set this up as middle class people versus poor people.
There are no poor kids in Massachusetts public schools? That seems unlikely. Does this framing also mean middle class people reject charters? Why? I’m told all the public schools are horrible and all the charter schools are wonderful. Seems like middle class people would want them too.