(06-10-2017, 03:15 PM)Vicbow Rules Wrote:     a.  Charter schools that opened near failing schools had poor results.  As a matter of fact, charter schools across Jax and FL generally have lower scores than their neighborhood schools.  There are a few exceptions (River City Science is consistently scoring well.)  As a result of this, charter schools stopped opening near low performing schools and started to move out to the suburbs where the public schools were doing just fine.  Which is the opposite of what the schools were supposed to be for.

  b.  Schools should NOT be in competition with each other.  As a public school teacher with a near perfect pass rate on my End of Course exams each of the last few years, I SHOULD share my information and teaching strategies with other teachers.  If I am in competition with them, it does not benefit me to share my info and strategies because it could help the "competition."  The only losers in this situation are the kids who do not get access to better classroom ideas.  For the record, I share all of my info with whoever wants it.  However, If I was in competition with my co-workers, I do not know if I would be so willing to share, especially if it meant keeping my job or not.

 c.  New Orleans is all charter school (they have no public school system since Katrina.)  They are having a tremendous amount of trouble following the law in regards to access to mental health professionals, English as second language learners laws as well as staying on top of the extremely cumbersome process of accommodations for students with learning disabilities. NPR had a very interesting story about how public schools share funds to hire the necessary mental health professionals and other professionals needed to meet all of the requirements to help children with learning disabilities/mental health issues, but that the charter schools in New Orleans did not want to work together because they want their competition to fail so they can get more students.  Remember, students = $$$.

 d.  Charter schools were meant to be a way to allow innovative teaching.  Let me say that this one is REALLY frustrating as a teacher.  We are told that we are not innovative which is why we need charters, BUT, I am not allowed to be innovative.  The state micromanages everything I teach down to the amount of days I am supposed to teach it.  I, as mentioned above, have an extremely high pass rate, but I have still had people from the district get on my case for following a different pace than I am supposed to.  I kind of get away with it (yearly ending up in a meeting with my boss and a district person explaining why I am doing it the way I am) because I have a good record, but new teachers do not have that privilege.  Remember that we are not allowed to get creative.  We are not even supposed to show documentaries or in some cases video clips.  This is all pushed down on us by a legislature that, being a super majority of Republicans, you would think would want LESS interference and micromanaging.

e.  Charter schools do not have to have certified teachers.  When I heard this I thought that this was just some bull,  I did however look into it and it is true.  They do not have to have the same level of certification that we in the public schools do.

f.  Remember that charter schools can kick kids out.  Public schools cannot.  Every year, after funding counts are made and money is distributed from the state, we, the public school, get a bunch of kids that have been kicked out of the charters (usually around the start of 2nd quarter.)  This of course means we don't have the funding attached to them yet still have to teach them, and are dealing with the kids the charters do not want.

g.  There is no transparency with charters.  My sister-in-law was teaching at one here in Jax.  She made 9,000 less than me and got no benefits.  The question I have is, where did the rest of the $$$ go?  It wasn't to facilities (the school was a dump) and she didn't have smaller classes.  No one knows what happens to the $$$ at these schools.  Shouldn't my tax dollars that are being given to the business that runs the school be traceable? A few years ago a local charter school (military academy one) closed it doors in March because it ran out of money.  They literally had a sign on the door that said we are no longer operating.  It was on the local news.  DCPS said we would take the kids, but their parents were freaking out because seniors who were scheduled to graduate in May, were being placed in 10th and 11th grade because they could not pass the tests that are required in public schools.  How did the school fail to finihs the year?  We will never know since they do not have to divulge their accounting at charter schools.

h.  And perhaps the kicker.  The state provides funds for charter schools to build and operate.  If they fail the business keeps the building that our tax dollars paid for.  Again, this was so ridiculous that when I heard it I thought it was a complete lie, but it is not.

Now, I know that public schools are not perfect, but it is hard for them to compete when the playing field is not level.  If charter schools were held to the same standards as public schools than it would be a different story, but as of now, they are not and it is frustrating to always hear how bad of a job my colleagues and I do, when we are following the guidelines of what the legislature wants, other than to work for free

There is more I could write and I would be more than happy to talk about this with everyone in an adult way (which is to say, NOT like the majority of threads in the politics sections!) but I am taking my kids to go see Captain Underpants, so I can't add more right now!

Quote:[font=Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif]In 1983 Nobel Prize laureate Glenn T. Seaborg headed a national commission to evaluate our education system; it was mostly dedicated to the primary and secondary schools. The general consensus was that our higher education system was all right (that was explicitly said at a plenary session of the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science even as it deplored the primary and secondary schools). Dr. Seaborg’s conclusion was that the schools were awful; this in 1983. He blamed it on the system imposed by the Federal Government (aided by the Courts).

He said, “If a foreign government had imposed this system of education on the United States, we would rightfully consider it an act of war.”[/font]