Education >
Education (Other)
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould states allow charter schools?
Title endorsed in part by:
Results so far:
| No | 24% | 18 votes | Total: 76 votes | |
| Yes | 76% | 58 votes |
No
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesShould states allow charter schools?
Since our wonderful Constitution of the United States of America handed the reins of public education protection to the state, we have had to assume that the state was taking care of public education. One of the many fine points that came from Brown v. Board of Education noted that an unanimous Court recognized "education is perhaps the most important function of the state and local governments."...This makes sense to me, because what better way is there to ensure the success of your citizens? To promote an educated vote? The state, in my opinion, should be about the business of protecting public education, rather than supporting charter schools, in any way.
Education, unfortunately, was not among the rights which were secured with explicit protection under our United States Constitution, but I do believe that the implied protection of public education was still, in its essence,given to the states. I think that most people have a sort of historical dedication to the support of public education, mainly because our forefathers thought it was a good idea to provide free public education to all its citizens. The federal government then handed the licensing, operating, and overseeing of the schools to the state and local levels. Good idea then, but the state and local administrations started to become lax in their strict scrutiny of the public educational systems within their jurisdiction.
I often feel that the public is angry with itself for not having done something before the ravishes we are now seeing, happened. How could we have let this happen? Are things really as bad as the headlines scream? What can be done? The public is not responsible for what the state departments of education, all over this country,have allowed to happen to our public education system. The states should have practiced the strict scrutiny principle over the local school districts. Even if the law is implied, again, I believe that the oversight of our public education rests in the hands of state governments, and, in my opinion, the states have failed the public, miserably. Had the states done their jobs, the local districts would have done theirs, or risk being shut down. The public should have been well informed of failing districts, by the respective state departments of education.
Also, teachers in all public schools throughout the state have to be certified, at least by the state in which they practice. Every teacher who teaches in public schools has to pass the same sets of tests before becoming certified by the state. The more education the teacher acquires, the more state licensing boards have to be passed. Thus, there are qualified public school teachers all over the states, across this great country, and they should not have to defend themselves against snide, often, demeaning remarks regarding their abilities, simply because they have chosen to practice as a public school teacher, while the state has been failing to do its job. Public school educators should be applauded for their continued dedication throughout this public outcry against them.
There are many excellent private institutions of learning, but the charter school choice is not to be equated with these educational systems. Just what definition of charter shall we choose? Let's go directly to charter, the verb. Whose doing the granting of this charter? Who is certifying this charter? Maybe we are hiring, renting, or leasing this charter. If so, for how long? I really would like for parents, who are choosing charter school education over their local public schools, to really think about their decision. I wish these same parents, who are rightfully concerned with the plight of our public schools, ask administrators at their local public school district, hard, but fair questions, such as, "How are the schools funded?Then go from there. Honest administrators will answer these legitimate questions. Parents really have to be involved, in positive ways with their child's school and obtain valid information about their school district. The more parents know, the !
better the district will become.
Funding of public education is a huge factor in the quality. Revenue is raised by a percentage of the value of property taxes on the property located within the school district. Children located in districts with more valuable property, benefit from the higher expenses. Not so for those students in districts where the property is less valuable. Keep in mind that both districts made the exact, same efforts. Along with that thought, realize, please, that many major cities practice giving tax abatements to large corporations, which agree to locate in their city. Somehow, all of this makes for a very unequal budget, that, I think is similar to what happens in most states. Many states, however, with all of their intricate funding formulas, fail to rectify the inequalities in the funding of school districts, across the country.
The public school system is fractured, but it is not broken. It can be fixed, but it must start with the states. We all have to remain aware of our public schools, and states owe the public an explanation. As a first effort at assuming their responsibility, they should explain, in clear language, what is happening, as they begin to operate in the way, I believe, the federal government intended when they handed them the authority to oversee and the power to protect public education.
Learn more about this author, Eva Clark.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Yes
For years now, secondary public education in the United States has struggled under the weight of administrative bureaucracy and a misguided focus on structure rather than academic success, particularly within urban centers. It is an issue that first received widespread attention upon publication of the 1983 president-commission ed report, "A Nation at Risk" and continues to be a topic of concern in almost every election at the city, state and national level. In light of bureaucratic reluctance to initiate fundamental reform, other alternatives to traditional public schools have been born out of grass roots efforts seeking to rebuild rather than rehabilitate the current system. One such effort has resulted in the establishment of charter schools; institutions which are free to develop a myriad of pedagogic approaches and cater to the needs of each community. It is my belief that states should continue to support such schools.
The problem, in a nutshell, is that public school systems are unnecessarily burdened by bureaucracies that not only fail to act in a timely fashion, but often drain resources that were intended to support actual academic improvements. Moreover, school boards do not set out a clear and succinct agenda for scholastic achievement, thereby conveniently avoiding the issue of accountability. Their primary purpose is to maintain administrative affairs, so it is no surprise when students do not fare well under this system.
While there may be no quick and easy solution to ineffective secondary education, more and more people are turning to charter schools to educate their children. Close to 4000 schools are now in operation across the United States. What distinguishes charter schools is their exemption from most state and local regulations, rendering them essentially autonomous in their operations. In addition, since funding follows each child to the schools they attend, charter schools must either satisfy parents that their children are improving scholastically or risk financial ruin. This type of direct accountability is absent in present school systems perhaps explaining why so many students easily fall through the cracks; some even unable to read or write upon graduation.
The appeal of Charter schools stems from the flexibility permitted at the administrative, curricular and regulatory levels. For example, the Academy of the Pacific Rim in Boston, Massachusetts includes classes in Mandarin Chinese and Tai Chi as part of the regular curriculum. Their mission statement is to empower students of all racial and ethnic backgrounds to achieve their full intellectual and social potential by combining the best of the East - high standards, discipline and character education - with the best of the West - a commitment to individualism, creativity and diversity. A clear direction and philosophy is evident and the school has been in operation for over 11 years. Other Charter schools approach academic success from different perspectives, but regardless of the viewpoint, the key is commitment to student scholastic improvement.
Numerous studies have been conducted concerning the effectiveness of such schools by comparing state test scores among other criteria. As with most statistical assessments where different variables are utilized and are often unpredictable, the results are not conclusive. However, to measure the effectiveness of Charter schools as a whole without accounting for the differences in quality, years in operation and individual student success, would fail to provide an accurate picture of such schools. Detractors have often pointed to Charter schools whose charters have been revoked by the state and the resulting difficulties endured by children bereft of a school. No doubt, flexibility and freedom from regulation provide an environment conducive to innovation, yet without strong leadership and foresight, any institution, Charter schools being no exception, will invariably fail. That is, of course no reason to completely do away with the Charter school concept. It simply puts the responsibility on parents to do their research when and if they decide to send their children to a particular Charter school.
States should continue to support Charter schools because they offer options to parents who would otherwise be forced to continue sending their children to failing schools. The traditional school system, with its top-down bureaucratic structure, and regulation-stricken curriculum, has not met the challenge of educating the diverse needs of today's student body. Charter schools were conceived out of such deficiencies, allowing for curricular flexibility and regulatory freedom to promote student success. Nonetheless, states should continue to keep a watchful eye on Charter schools to ensure they are providing quality education and appropriating public funds towards academics.
Learn more about this author, Simple Mind.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Education (Other)
- Is the No Child Left Behind law beneficial for children?
- Is the use of laptops in the classroom beneficial or a distraction?
- Should religious student clubs be allowed in public schools?
- Is going to school a good idea in today's economy?
- Are public libraries a thing of the past?
- No Child Left Behind Bill: Should tests come from the federal or state governments?
