Feb
3
Charter Schools – Post #2 – Josh Hirth
February 3, 2015 | Leave a Comment
Before reading the articles I knew almost nothing about charter schools and little about the New York state public school system. My first impression was that it seemed very similar to the college acceptance process. And while the way charter schools select students is evidentially laden with controversy, colleges and universities get away with the virtual same practice scot-free. While I don think its appropriate or considerate to have a seemingly beautifully modern charter school in the same building as an impoverished public school, I do not believe that it questions the existence of charter schools. While charter schools are, seemingly, becoming one of the most divisive issues in this country (and especially our state), I think there is more to be said about the good they do than the harm they cause.
One statement in Trymaine Lee’s article stood out to me. “Critics say that charter schools—publicly funded but run by private organizations—are being used as a means to privatize public education at the expense of the vast majority of students. They say the charter movement is a Trojan-horse riding under the guise of school choice, used as an instrument to break teachers unions.” While I don’t believe the city should fund what are deemed to be more promising students more than less promising students, I am not sold on the evil of privatization. For years there has been talk of the problems with Americas public school system. How year after year we drop in the international arena in terms of test scores in subjects like science and math. Impoverished neighborhoods, like Harlem (which by the articles seem to be the epicenter of charter schools) have been hit the worst with the worsening education. And now, as charter schools are beginning to reform all that, we call into question their very existence…
As I mentioned earlier the issue of a co-location does need to be sorted out. While I have no problem with selectivity, high school aged kids do not need be constantly reminded that they are not good enough for a charter program, especially during their developmental years. However, I do believe that charter schools should have the right to some governmental school buildings, because as we all know real estate prices in this city can literally make or break a charter school (just like any other institution). One possible solution is to group charter schools into specific school campuses? As in, co-locationing between two charter schools and not between a charter and a public school.
I don’t think there is a better way to understand something than to hear from someone who has first hand experience. The article by Kyasia Mays gave me just that. Instead of trying to destroy charter schools, perhaps the public schools would be better off partnering with them to see how the public school system can be improved. Yet, my biggest concern is that the people running charter schools may take advantage of their position and misuse public funds. For instance “The Pennsylvania auditor general found that the state’s largest charter operator had pocketed $1.2 million in “improper lease-reimbursement payments.” This to me should be the biggest argument against charter schools. Once the floodgates are opened, fraud like the case in Pennsylvania may begin to run rampant.
Overall I do see some problems with the charter school concept, but I think they unequivocally deserve a chance to try and make it work. I do think the city should fund them to the same extent they fund public schools, not a penny more and not a penny less. While I am not sure if the claim is legitimate, the top comment Trymaine Lee’s article stated that charter schools actually help public schools by leaving more money on the table for them to use. To me this outlines just how divisive this issue really is.
