4 ms·

> ...the Democratic party which opposes school vouchers and funding increased choice in education for disadvantaged neighborhoods... Hmm, in my city (LA), one

> ...the Democratic party which opposes school vouchers and funding increased choice in education for disadvantaged neighborhoods... Hmm, in my city (LA), one Republican (Riordan) and later Democratic mayors (Hahn and Villaraigosa) have strongly supported charter schools, and the results (after two decades plus) are decidedly mixed. I used to be a moderate supporter of charters, basically for the reasons you mention, but the experiment has generally failed. Basically, oversight of a network of charter schools is really hard, so there will be bad charter schools that "look good" from the outside. It's hard for parents, even involved parents, to understand this before their kids graduate, so there's no good corrective for charters that are siphoning money off, or providing poor educational outcomes. This seems to be a case where market pressures suffer from a too-long feedback loop, and information about outcomes is too hard to acquire.

stcredzero 8y ago
Hmm, in my city (LA), one Republican (Riordan) and later Democratic mayors (Hahn and Villaraigosa) have strongly supported charter schools, and the results (after two decades plus) are decidedly mixed. I used to be a moderate supporter of charters, basically for the reasons you mention, but the experiment has generally failed. So there was some success and there was some failure? Urban public schools seem to be a failure overall. Shouldn't we see an experiment that yielded some successes as a success in gaining information? Basically, oversight of a network of charter schools is really hard, so there will be bad charter schools that "look good" from the outside. It's hard for parents, even involved parents, to understand this before their kids graduate, so there's no good corrective for charters that are siphoning money off, or providing poor educational outcomes. This seems to be a case where market pressures suffer from a too-long feedback loop, and information about outcomes is too hard to acquire. I think this applies to schools, period. No, there's no good corrective which guarantees a parent can use to put their kid into the right school, outside of moving to a good neighborhood. (And even there, there's no guarantee.) The information loop is going to take generations to work out. So long as the institutions last over several generations, that will at least be possible.
- mturmon 8y ago
  > ...Urban public schools seem to be a failure overall.... This is just not true. My kid, now 13, goes to an LAUSD school and it has worked for her and her classmates. (We left a higher-"rated" [and there's another topic] suburban district by choice, in fact.) A lot of people in LA view the charter experiment as generally a failure and a distraction from actually improving the schools we have. This overview (https://laist.com/2018/07/22/do_not_publish_-_ref_rodriguez_resigns_from_lausd_board_amid_charges_scandal.php https://laist.com/2018/07/22/do_not_publish_-_ref_rodriguez_...) provides a good run-down of the sorry end of the "pro-charter" majority that prevailed in the LAUSD board. The pro-charter board president was directing public funds to a private charter organization he was separately paid by. He had support of Reed Hastings, the Gates Foundation, and a host of well-meaning billionaires (and some not so well-meaning). > ...So long as the institutions last over several generations... This kind of stability isn't going to happen in LA or any significant city. I really think that my point about the difficulty of informed "choice" by parents in this "market" is important, and your comments on it (like this one) are ludicrous. In general your comments on this topic seem rather un-grounded in either experience or research. You must be aware that many former charter supporters (e.g., Diane Ravitch) are now strongly against them?

stcredzero 8y ago

Hmm, in my city (LA), one Republican (Riordan) and later Democratic mayors (Hahn and Villaraigosa) have strongly supported charter schools, and the results (after two decades plus) are decidedly mixed. I used to be a moderate supporter of charters, basically for the reasons you mention, but the experiment has generally failed. So there was some success and there was some failure? Urban public schools seem to be a failure overall. Shouldn't we see an experiment that yielded some successes as a success in gaining information? Basically, oversight of a network of charter schools is really hard, so there will be bad charter schools that "look good" from the outside. It's hard for parents, even involved parents, to understand this before their kids graduate, so there's no good corrective for charters that are siphoning money off, or providing poor educational outcomes. This seems to be a case where market pressures suffer from a too-long feedback loop, and information about outcomes is too hard to acquire. I think this applies to schools, period. No, there's no good corrective which guarantees a parent can use to put their kid into the right school, outside of moving to a good neighborhood. (And even there, there's no guarantee.) The information loop is going to take generations to work out. So long as the institutions last over several generations, that will at least be possible.

mturmon 8y ago
> ...Urban public schools seem to be a failure overall.... This is just not true. My kid, now 13, goes to an LAUSD school and it has worked for her and her classmates. (We left a higher-"rated" [and there's another topic] suburban district by choice, in fact.) A lot of people in LA view the charter experiment as generally a failure and a distraction from actually improving the schools we have. This overview (https://laist.com/2018/07/22/do_not_publish_-_ref_rodriguez_resigns_from_lausd_board_amid_charges_scandal.php https://laist.com/2018/07/22/do_not_publish_-_ref_rodriguez_...) provides a good run-down of the sorry end of the "pro-charter" majority that prevailed in the LAUSD board. The pro-charter board president was directing public funds to a private charter organization he was separately paid by. He had support of Reed Hastings, the Gates Foundation, and a host of well-meaning billionaires (and some not so well-meaning). > ...So long as the institutions last over several generations... This kind of stability isn't going to happen in LA or any significant city. I really think that my point about the difficulty of informed "choice" by parents in this "market" is important, and your comments on it (like this one) are ludicrous. In general your comments on this topic seem rather un-grounded in either experience or research. You must be aware that many former charter supporters (e.g., Diane Ravitch) are now strongly against them?