The New Four-Letter Word

While at the NEA-RA the word “Charter” (as in charter schools) seemingly became the new word of profanity. The simple mentioning of or allusion to the word charter elicited quite the response from both sides of the debate.

Numerous business items mentioned charter schools, and the assembly floor would erupt each time into debate, especially the delegation from California. After Secretary of Education Arne Duncan’s speech, which promoted charter schools directly and indirectly, charter schools remained in the assembly’s thoughts.

The Californians definitely had little positive to say about charter schools; however, the Wisconsin delegation felt that they used and created charter schools with success. One Wisconsin delegate even spoke directly to the California representatives saying that not all charter schools were bad things, that charters could be part of a solution to troubled schools. However, the vast majority of the entire assembly seemed to believe still that charters should not be mentioned much less promoted.

Personally, I know of only one person who works in a charter school, and he likes it so far (but I think he mainly likes the extra pay). Still, I have not seen much research to influence that charters should be created in my area. My state has voted down charters three times–a point of pride for many teachers in my state–and I don’t see the state approving them any time soon.

My biggest concern is if Secretary Arne Duncan and President Barack Obama withhold federal monies to states that don’t reform their way, which may include charter schools. I’ve heard nothing yet to suggest the monies would be withheld, though I haven’t really heard of more than one type of school reform advocated by Sec. Duncan either.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “The New Four-Letter Word

  1. Little Teacher in DC

    “My biggest concern is if Secretary Arne Duncan and President Barack Obama withhold federal monies to states that don’t reform their way, which may include charter schools.”

    Ditto. I personally don’t see a problem with charters. I think they can serve a lot of students who aren’t finding what they need in their public school, for whatever the reason. However, they’re not “the answer”, and I don’t think this is a policy the federal government should be forcing. Besides, charter schools don’t seem like a good idea without local support, so forcing them onto states/local communities will set them up for failure.

    Reply
  2. Pingback: Lack of teacher satisfaction in charters? « Little Teacher in DC

  3. John Spencer

    Charter schools are almost always rigged when they work. Most KIPP schools, for example, have a very selective screening process. In many cases, charter schools fail to take care of teachers and do a poor job of educating children. Here in Arizona the term charter has a real negative connotation, with the exception of two schools (one of which is the Arizona School for the Arts, which is a charter school that abandons most of the “back to basics” mentality seen in others). I’m not against the idea of charter schools, but I am against the white-washing of their success and the claims that they are the answers to school reform.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s