Checklist for Charter Schools; No Charter School Left Behind; A Taxing Problem; College Aid Plan Widens U.S. Role in High Schools
1) A nice plug for KIPP DC: KEY Academy (and good points about helping or shutting down underperforming charters).
The District is home to some of the nation's best-performing charters, such as the SEED Public Charter School, the nation's only urban public boarding school, and the KIPP DC: KEY Academy, which offers rigorous discipline and academics. Other schools, such as Maya Angelou for at-risk high school students, offer niches unavailable in the public schools. Unfortunately, too many other charters are not delivering on their promise.
2) Gee, what a shocker that this Op Ed trashing charter schools comes from a professor at Columbia Teachers College. She's very clever in using selective data and case studies to make her wrong-headed argument.
3) A big I like charters charters is not only the benefit to the students that attend them, but the pressure it puts on the existing system, which loses students and the money attached to them. Thus, I'm not very sympathetic to this complaint:
Most of the money for a charter school comes from the budget of the public school district it's in. When a charter school starts up, the district suddenly has to finance a brand new school and decide whether to go to the taxpayers for more money or to cut optional but important educational programs and extracurricular activities at regular schools.
That being said, when a school district loses, say, 10% of its students to charter schools, its total costs don't go down 10% because there are some fixed costs, so perhaps there's a compromise -- maybe a district only loses half of the funding...
4) Given how dumbed down so many high school curriculums are, this sounds like good news (though the devil will be in the details).
Several prominent educators said they expected the legislation to unleash a scramble by high schools to gain recognition of their curricula as rigorous.
================
Op-Ed Contributor, Washington Post
Checklist for Charter Schools
Sunday, January 22, 2006; B08
D.C. schools are not a stranger to controversy, so it's no surprise that Washington leads the nation in one of today's most controversial education reforms -- charter schools.
Nearly a third of D.C. students -- the highest percentage in the country -- are enrolled in the more than 50 publicly funded, independently operated schools. A decade into the experiment, charters clearly are giving many students rich educational options that they couldn't find in the public school system. It's also clear, however, that the survival of the movement depends on improving poorly performing charter schools.
Charters are open to all students free of charge, and they are held publicly accountable, but they are operated by private or nonprofit groups rather than the school district. Parents choose charter schools because they are desperate for better educational options for their children. And many are finding them.
The District is home to some of the nation's best-performing charters, such as the SEED Public Charter School, the nation's only urban public boarding school, and the KIPP DC: KEY Academy, which offers rigorous discipline and academics. Other schools, such as Maya Angelou for at-risk high school students, offer niches unavailable in the public schools. Unfortunately, too many other charters are not delivering on their promise.
More than half the charters in the District have lower test scores than the public school averages, and several have been mired in financial and management problems. Eight have been closed because of fiscal, management and student-achievement shortcomings, and more closures are likely as schools come up for renewal of their five-year contracts.
To strengthen the District's charter schools we must:
· Improve authorizing and school quality. The District's two charter school authorizers -- the D.C. Board of Education and the Public Charter School Board -- have not always ensured the quality of the schools that they've chartered. They must strengthen their school monitoring and focus less on process and more on outcome. They need to help poorly performing schools improve and close those that chronically fail to deliver student achievement.
· Think strategically. Authorizers must identify areas -- both academic and geographic -- that lack good schooling options, must solicit proposals and must recruit nationally recognized charter school operators.
· Incorporate charter schools into economic and community development. Building a strong base of taxpaying residents in the District is impossible without good schools. Charter schools are one way to expand the supply of good educational options, particularly in rapidly growing areas or areas in which few good schools exist. City leaders must provide the support -- particularly the facilities -- that charters need to thrive.
· Learn from success . Because charters are not allowed to discriminate in admissions, high-performing schools succeed with the same pool of students who attend the public schools. D.C. Public Schools should examine successful charter schools and implement their most promising ideas in the public schools.
Charter schools are not a panacea, but they are an important tool of educational reform. Chicago and New York City already use charters to fill unmet needs, increase the number of good schools, and bring talent and resources into public education. By learning from their example, the District can improve its charter schools and expand the educational options for all the District's children.
-- Sara Mead is a senior policy analyst at Education Sector, a Washington think tank.
Checklist for Charter Schools
Sunday, January 22, 2006; B08
D.C. schools are not a stranger to controversy, so it's no surprise that Washington leads the nation in one of today's most controversial education reforms -- charter schools.
Nearly a third of D.C. students -- the highest percentage in the country -- are enrolled in the more than 50 publicly funded, independently operated schools. A decade into the experiment, charters clearly are giving many students rich educational options that they couldn't find in the public school system. It's also clear, however, that the survival of the movement depends on improving poorly performing charter schools.
Charters are open to all students free of charge, and they are held publicly accountable, but they are operated by private or nonprofit groups rather than the school district. Parents choose charter schools because they are desperate for better educational options for their children. And many are finding them.
The District is home to some of the nation's best-performing charters, such as the SEED Public Charter School, the nation's only urban public boarding school, and the KIPP DC: KEY Academy, which offers rigorous discipline and academics. Other schools, such as Maya Angelou for at-risk high school students, offer niches unavailable in the public schools. Unfortunately, too many other charters are not delivering on their promise.
More than half the charters in the District have lower test scores than the public school averages, and several have been mired in financial and management problems. Eight have been closed because of fiscal, management and student-achievement shortcomings, and more closures are likely as schools come up for renewal of their five-year contracts.
To strengthen the District's charter schools we must:
· Improve authorizing and school quality. The District's two charter school authorizers -- the D.C. Board of Education and the Public Charter School Board -- have not always ensured the quality of the schools that they've chartered. They must strengthen their school monitoring and focus less on process and more on outcome. They need to help poorly performing schools improve and close those that chronically fail to deliver student achievement.
· Think strategically. Authorizers must identify areas -- both academic and geographic -- that lack good schooling options, must solicit proposals and must recruit nationally recognized charter school operators.
· Incorporate charter schools into economic and community development. Building a strong base of taxpaying residents in the District is impossible without good schools. Charter schools are one way to expand the supply of good educational options, particularly in rapidly growing areas or areas in which few good schools exist. City leaders must provide the support -- particularly the facilities -- that charters need to thrive.
· Learn from success . Because charters are not allowed to discriminate in admissions, high-performing schools succeed with the same pool of students who attend the public schools. D.C. Public Schools should examine successful charter schools and implement their most promising ideas in the public schools.
Charter schools are not a panacea, but they are an important tool of educational reform. Chicago and New York City already use charters to fill unmet needs, increase the number of good schools, and bring talent and resources into public education. By learning from their example, the District can improve its charter schools and expand the educational options for all the District's children.
-- Sara Mead is a senior policy analyst at Education Sector, a Washington think tank.
======================
Op-Ed Contributor, NYT
No Charter School Left Behind
By AMY STUART WELLS
Published: January 22, 2006
No Charter School Left Behind
By AMY STUART WELLS
Published: January 22, 2006
http://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?emc=tnt&tntget=2006/01/22/opinion/nyregionopinions/22LIwells.html&tntemail0=y
GOV. GEORGE PATAKI, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Chancellor Joel Klein and other New York officials are in a huge hurry to raise the state limit on the number of charter schools, now set at 100. Bolstered by a growing demand for these more autonomous schools and some positive charter school test scores results in New York City, they seem to think that the more charter schools, the better for the children of our city and state.
But recent research suggests that not all charter schools are created equal, and that New York policymakers should focus more on the quality of existing charter schools and on how to support the good ones before they call for an expansion...
Amy Stuart Wells is a professor of sociology and education at Columbia University's Teachers College and the author of"Where Charter School Policy Fails."
-------------------
GOV. GEORGE PATAKI, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Chancellor Joel Klein and other New York officials are in a huge hurry to raise the state limit on the number of charter schools, now set at 100. Bolstered by a growing demand for these more autonomous schools and some positive charter school test scores results in New York City, they seem to think that the more charter schools, the better for the children of our city and state.
But recent research suggests that not all charter schools are created equal, and that New York policymakers should focus more on the quality of existing charter schools and on how to support the good ones before they call for an expansion...
Amy Stuart Wells is a professor of sociology and education at Columbia University's Teachers College and the author of"Where Charter School Policy Fails."
-------------------
Op-Ed Contributor
A Taxing Problem
By STEVEN SANDERS
Published: January 22, 2006, NYT Op Ed
A Taxing Problem
By STEVEN SANDERS
Published: January 22, 2006, NYT Op Ed
http://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?emc=tnt&tntget=2006/01/22/opinion/nyregionopinions/22LIsanders.html&tntemail0=y
Albany
THE governor of New York vowed in his State of the State address earlier this month to "dramatically" expand the number of charter schools, now capped by state law at 100, and the battle lines have been drawn.
But whether you favor charter schools or oppose them is of small consequence because the issue of expansion has little to do with students, classrooms, course curriculums or textbooks. It's mostly about taxes.
Much of the recent focus in the charter school debate has been on New York City, which has opened about half of the new charter schools and whose mayor has requested to double that total. The political question, however, is the impact of these schools outside of the City, where unlike New York, school budgets must be approved by residents, who pay for them through property taxes. And although the suburbs and upstate communities are where Governor Pataki has derived most of his political support, voters in these areas are increasingly worried about how his policies will affect local school taxes.
The 1998 charter school law, which I had a hand in negotiating with the governor's strong impetus, has a very large flaw, which if not corrected could fatally undermine efforts to increase charter schools statewide...
Albany
THE governor of New York vowed in his State of the State address earlier this month to "dramatically" expand the number of charter schools, now capped by state law at 100, and the battle lines have been drawn.
But whether you favor charter schools or oppose them is of small consequence because the issue of expansion has little to do with students, classrooms, course curriculums or textbooks. It's mostly about taxes.
Much of the recent focus in the charter school debate has been on New York City, which has opened about half of the new charter schools and whose mayor has requested to double that total. The political question, however, is the impact of these schools outside of the City, where unlike New York, school budgets must be approved by residents, who pay for them through property taxes. And although the suburbs and upstate communities are where Governor Pataki has derived most of his political support, voters in these areas are increasingly worried about how his policies will affect local school taxes.
The 1998 charter school law, which I had a hand in negotiating with the governor's strong impetus, has a very large flaw, which if not corrected could fatally undermine efforts to increase charter schools statewide...
----------------------
College Aid Plan Widens U.S. Role in High Schools
When Republican senators quietly tucked a major new student aid program into the 774-page budget bill last month, they not only approved a five-year, $3.75 billion initiative. They also set up what could be an important shift in American education: for the first time the federal government will rate the academic rigor of the nation's 18,000 high schools.
The measure, backed by the Bush administration and expected to pass the House when it returns next month, would provide $750 to $1,300 grants to low-income college freshmen and sophomores who have completed "a rigorous secondary school program of study" and larger amounts to juniors and seniors majoring in math, science and other critical fields.
It leaves it to the secretary of education to define rigorous, giving her a new foothold in matters of high school curriculums.
Mindful of the delicate politics at play when Washington expands its educational role into matters zealously guarded as local prerogatives, senior Department of Education officials said they would consult with governors and other groups in determining which high school programs would allow students to qualify for grants...
posted by Whitney Tilson at 12:03 AM
<< Home