34 ms·

This is just not an adequate summary of the decidedly mixed record of charter schools. My kid, now 14, goes to a Los Angeles USD public school that offers spec

This is just not an adequate summary of the decidedly mixed record of charter schools. My kid, now 14, goes to a Los Angeles USD public school that offers specialized magnet programs for gifted and, separately, highly gifted, kids. The highly gifted program is quite accelerated and could accommodate some of the special needs you see evidence of in the comments here. (They are with their peers, not put into classes with older kids.) On the other hand, the charter movement in LA, purports to solve the school choice problem, had a lot of encouragement from the political establishment (both R and D over probably 20 years). But — 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). More generally, the whole concept of charters and a market in elementary education has fundamental flaws. Starting with the fact that there are no good ways for parents to really judge the effectiveness or quality of instruction.

beaner 6y ago
My comment by itself certainly isn't an adequate summary. That's why I recommended a whole book.
- mturmon 6y ago
  You claimed that "the data shows they work" and I was pushing back against that because it is false. Charters failed in LAUSD, the second-largest school system in the US. It was honestly tried here, with the backing of several successive mayors, and donations from several rich foundations and billionaires. It turned out the profit motive wasn't as helpful in this setting as abstract speculation had supposed. Speaking personally, I used to defend charters but I changed my mind after this record of failure. As long as we're linking books, here's this book reference from Diane Ravitch (https://dianeravitch.com/about-diane/ https://dianeravitch.com/about-diane/): During the 1980s and 1990s and into the early years of the twenty-first century — as a writer, professor, assistant secretary of education under George H.W. Bush, and member of prestigious conservative think tanks, such as the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and the Koret task force at the Hoover Institution — Diane Ravitch was a leading advocate of conservative ideas for fixing America’s education system, including charter schools, standards, accountability, and high-stakes standardized testing. But about 2006-07, she began to realize that these policies were not working. She began to criticize them, and to criticize the federal “No child left behind” law, with the publication of the book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, she became one of the most outspoken critics of ideas she once championed. Here's a short article of hers showing how for-profit charters in New York City managed to co-opt the education agenda of the mayor: https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2014/03/27/new-york-charters-against-deblasio/ https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2014/03/27/new-york-charters-a...
  - beaner 6y ago
    I'll read yours if you read mine! I think Charter Schools and their Enemies may contain some stuff on CA schools but I haven't gotten that far yet. It starts out talking about NYC schools. It literally contains tables of data. I know that neither of us can come to a well-rounded conclusion without putting in a good faith effort to listen to arguments from both sides. It would be nice to be able to come back after doing so and continue the discussion.
    - mturmon 6y ago
      Like I said, I have already studied this question to my satisfaction. Also, in general, I have lost patience with much good-faith argument regarding neoconservative initiatives. In retrospect, I think most of the money and power behind the charter schools initiative became focused on dismantling public schools, and (like Diane Ravitch) I regret ever arguing for the benefits of charters.
      - beaner 6y ago
        That's a bummer. You mentioned California specifically and one of the things discussed in the book is how charter schools in California specifically were neutered in important ways to basically remove their advantages; to remove what allowed charter schools to perform better anyway; to make them indistinguishable and therefore pointless. So it's no surprise any review of the performance of these specific schools would not be compelling. But deeper than that I think you've adopted an awfully defeatist and close-minded opinion. You don't have to keep yourself updated or read new things, but you must also then admit that your understanding is not sufficient, and that your opinion may be uneducated. No matter how much you read of any topic, there is always more to learn and new perspectives to be shared. Especially with such a new, live topic. I don't mean this meanly but it's certainly your loss. I hope you come around to open-mindedness again someday!
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
        6y ago

beaner 6y ago

My comment by itself certainly isn't an adequate summary. That's why I recommended a whole book.

mturmon 6y ago
You claimed that "the data shows they work" and I was pushing back against that because it is false. Charters failed in LAUSD, the second-largest school system in the US. It was honestly tried here, with the backing of several successive mayors, and donations from several rich foundations and billionaires. It turned out the profit motive wasn't as helpful in this setting as abstract speculation had supposed. Speaking personally, I used to defend charters but I changed my mind after this record of failure. As long as we're linking books, here's this book reference from Diane Ravitch (https://dianeravitch.com/about-diane/ https://dianeravitch.com/about-diane/): During the 1980s and 1990s and into the early years of the twenty-first century — as a writer, professor, assistant secretary of education under George H.W. Bush, and member of prestigious conservative think tanks, such as the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and the Koret task force at the Hoover Institution — Diane Ravitch was a leading advocate of conservative ideas for fixing America’s education system, including charter schools, standards, accountability, and high-stakes standardized testing. But about 2006-07, she began to realize that these policies were not working. She began to criticize them, and to criticize the federal “No child left behind” law, with the publication of the book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, she became one of the most outspoken critics of ideas she once championed. Here's a short article of hers showing how for-profit charters in New York City managed to co-opt the education agenda of the mayor: https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2014/03/27/new-york-charters-against-deblasio/ https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2014/03/27/new-york-charters-a...
- beaner 6y ago
  I'll read yours if you read mine! I think Charter Schools and their Enemies may contain some stuff on CA schools but I haven't gotten that far yet. It starts out talking about NYC schools. It literally contains tables of data. I know that neither of us can come to a well-rounded conclusion without putting in a good faith effort to listen to arguments from both sides. It would be nice to be able to come back after doing so and continue the discussion.
  - mturmon 6y ago
    Like I said, I have already studied this question to my satisfaction. Also, in general, I have lost patience with much good-faith argument regarding neoconservative initiatives. In retrospect, I think most of the money and power behind the charter schools initiative became focused on dismantling public schools, and (like Diane Ravitch) I regret ever arguing for the benefits of charters.
    - beaner 6y ago
      That's a bummer. You mentioned California specifically and one of the things discussed in the book is how charter schools in California specifically were neutered in important ways to basically remove their advantages; to remove what allowed charter schools to perform better anyway; to make them indistinguishable and therefore pointless. So it's no surprise any review of the performance of these specific schools would not be compelling. But deeper than that I think you've adopted an awfully defeatist and close-minded opinion. You don't have to keep yourself updated or read new things, but you must also then admit that your understanding is not sufficient, and that your opinion may be uneducated. No matter how much you read of any topic, there is always more to learn and new perspectives to be shared. Especially with such a new, live topic. I don't mean this meanly but it's certainly your loss. I hope you come around to open-mindedness again someday!
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - 6y ago