Mark Naison is a professor of African-American Studies at Fordham University in New York.
He writes:
How Charter Schools Have Stifled Educational Innovation and Fought the Opt Out Movement
Although charter schools were originally promoted as a vehicle to encourage educational experimentation, their meteoric growth in influence has actually coincided with a REDUCTION in innovation in schools because those promoting them most have also pushed for national testing and test based accountability measures for rating schools. In New York City, for example, the largest charter chains have fiercely opposed the opt out movement, and used their political influence to support state testing at all grade levels and the continued use of testing to rate teachers and schools. They have also virtually eliminated all instruction outside ELA and Math and used high test scores as a selling point, putting pressure on local public schools to raise their test scores to compete with them. They have helped create a political climate, in New York City and New York state, where teachers and principals in high poverty communities feel they might be subjecting themselves to a state takeover and eventual closing if they do anything to serve their students that doesn’t translate into higher test scores. Make no mistake about it, the Charter Lobby welcomes such an atmosphere. It is their version of educational entrepreneurship, even though its results are toxic in high need communities which need arts, sports, community history, and caring teachers and counselors to help students stay and thrive in schools.
Concentration on high ELA and MATH scores is one reason I don’t want charter schools doing their own teacher training. Creativity and responsiveness to student interest and needs must be the hallmark of teacher training. If student teachers are never taught what’s “right,” how will they ever do what’s right?
Good one, Beth!
In NYC one cannot Opt Out because of Farina and the department of Ed as well as UFT or risk promotion to the next grade and deal with lowered GPAs. NYC students cannot opt out of even specific ELA or health class lessons. The blame cannot be placed squarely in Charters. In fact OPT OUT has ushered in the “solution” by means of CBE. The claim; they’re addressing over testing. Look at iReady with “tests included” and viola’ highest increases in the city at CASA. Boxed common core curriculum.
An important piece of the puzzle: Why do kids stay in school? The answer is NOT because of an endless succession of test-score focused core classes.
Most charter networks stifle innovation, just as most districts stifle innovation. The purpose of chartering was, in part, to provide schools with autonomy so they would not be subject to district-imposed conformity. Many independent charter schools, where “site-based decision making” is still the rule of the day, are innovative and joyous places of learning. The charter movement has strayed considerably from the original intentions due, in great part, by the seduction of scale and growth and the emergence of well-financed charter networks.
Steve Zimmerman,
You forgot to mention the profit motive and the power motive.