Y'all should stop calling them "Charter Schools" and start calling them "For-Profit Elementary Schools". Start drawing the comparison to shitty for-profit colleges.
I mean, most aren't. Most are non-profits, as are all religious voucher schools and many other secular ones. That would just be false information.
Ditto. Also, they should be held to higher standards than regular public schools due to better funding.
As mentioned elsewhere, because approving them often requires cutting deals, they are often funded worse, even if you add fundraising dollars on top of that.
This idea of charter schools is fucking tons of privatization bullshit, and the idea of just shuffling kids around to different schools doesn't actually fix anything.
Mmm, that would sound silly if you applied it to anything else. "Shuffling kids around to different colleges doesn't actually fix anything." "Shuffling kids around to the more responsible parent in a divorce doesn't actually fix anything." "Shuffling adults around to a different corporation for jobs doesn't actually fix anything."
Of course it can!
So what about the DoE removing common core and fucking over special needs kids across the board? What about allowing more and more guns inside the schools or even mandating them? What about the dozens of possible conflicts of interests DeVos serves? What about the teachers in public education of both sides being absolutely appalled and in arms over the her and he policies?
Look, I see where you're coming from, you genuinely just want more kids to have more chances and opportunities. However as charter schools are currently presented, they don't offer these sort of opportunities. Only a minority have students who are more proficient than the neighboring public schools, while the majority perform on the same level or worse. So charter schools are not the solution.
If we want children to have a choice of school and education we at least should ensure that all public schools are funded and are performing at a certain standard. Something to remember is that schools get funding based on the amount of students attending. Say over time the school loses 1/4 of its students to charter schools, they are then losing tens of thousands of dollars in resources.
Or take into consideration choice for kids to thrive. That should be within the curriculum and have any assortment of options available that are up to school and community that is government funded. For example, my old high school and middle school had taken severe budget cuts and lost a lot of programs that would help the students thrive. Woodshop, auto class, NJROTC, and a machinery class. NJROTC, the school couldn't afford any instructors, so the class gets axed. I spent 3 out of my 4 years in the class and was the last class to have it. In those 3 years I saw many many people change and become much better, stronger individuals simply due to the inherit nature of the course and the community it pushed and fostered. A family friend is the COO of a local factory plant and the only reason the school district still has a shop/auto class and such is because he and the company works with the district to provide the tools and such to them.
This is all coming from someone who attended an above average school for the greater Detroit area. I know how bad things are and were in the schools around me. I care very deeply about the issue, and the solution is absolutely not to build more charter schools or even more schools.
Hey, before anything else, I just wanted to say thank you for the actual discussion. So much of NeoGAF irritates me, but I never want to become 1 of those people who dismisses an entire group. Thank you for challenging my assumptions!
1. The Department Of Education cannot "remove" Common Core. It was a governor-level idea. States adopt them. Schools have already invested in buying the materials. Whatever happens, it won't be because of DeVos' pulpit. And, as I wrote, if you're mad about suburban parents hating Common Core, blame Duncan for assuming anyone who didn't want it was not worth hearing.
2. It won't fuck over special needs kids. We are already underfunding it because we are great at identifying special needs now but haven't made the requisite adjustments, for obvious budget reasons. We cut corners and hope for the best.
Why WOULD DeVos cut special needs funding? Test scores would plummet, Republicans and Democrats would revolt, sob stories would be everywhere. It doesn't even make sense. I can accept people ascribing insane behavior to Trump, but, like her or not (I think she is okay; I am mainly defending policies she likes), she is a rational actor.
3. Guns in schools is not a decision made nationally. If she spent more time in urban schools, she would be way more cautious, though. (I am from Wisconsin Rapids, a small, rural town, where that would be less scary and weird. Like, kids would call in sick for hunting season.)
4. As for conflicts of interest and district teachers being pissed, DeVos lost the chance to win them over or quiet them at her hearing. If I blame everyone except Alexander for being awful education secretaries, I have to blame her, too.
This is no reflection on her so much as it is an acknowledgment of the new political reality.
5. Charter schools? Not true.
https://edexcellence.net/articles/credo-urban-charter-school-study-report-on-41-regions Unless we are referencing different studies, urban charter schools are serving a much more low-income population. Great studies show moderate gains for urban charters. If you are referring to Detroit, yeah, they did before at or above. Maybe this isn't sufficient for you to jump on board, but it is for me.
Anecdotally, I'm in Milwaukee. There are 100 schools that are more than 80 percent low-income, 80 percent African American. I'm at a voucher school, Lutheran, that is usually the number 1 school. We blew it last year and are...3rd, behind 2 schools in a charter school network. The top schools in reading, mathematics, science (ha ha ha), and social studies are mostly Lutheran schools. If you do the same for Hispanic Americans, they're mostly Catholic schools. There are bad schools in all sectors, but 1 out of 10 black kids in Milwaukee read at grade level, which is why 55 percent graduate high school. My school is 90 percent, despite being just as poor and black in the student population. We get 4,000 fewer dollars than public schools for each student. In other words, with 900 students, we're shorted $3,600,000, but we get far better results.
6. As for funding, don't blame DeVos. Blame suburban Democrats and Republicans. I posted DeVos saying the same thing above.
I hear you.
http://maps.edbuild.org/DividingLines.html An old boss of mine runs that group. I believe in ESA, but you would probably hate that. However, it would create equity across districts and schools.
If you're complaining that district schools lose dollars for every student they lose, yeah, duh. But they also are not incurring the expenses of educating them, so it's a wash. In fact, since most choice schools get fewer dollars per child, it actually goes back to taxpayers. However, yes, they have to pay for those buildings whether children are in them or not. I acknowledge this is tough, consolidating or closing! Kids are more important than adults, however.
I also hear you on "non-core classes." All I can say is that these are the consequences of having horrible district schools for 50 years. Results? Flat or down. Future productivity? Down. Unfunded benefits? Up. So, now come the hard times. That is really why I am a conservative: take a little pain now to avoid great pain in the future. The answer is rarely more money, as we saw with Duncan. People will squander it. Get mad at school boards, governors, and state legislatures, not DeVos.