Should we take a chance on a charter school
April 13, 2011 6:47 AM Subscribe
What are your experiences with choosing a charter school over the public school system for your elementary aged child?
I have a son who will be in 3rd grade next year. He's been in our neighborhood public school since kindergarten and this year was staffed into the gifted pull out program (on Mondays he's bussed to a different school for the day) as well as diagnosed with ADHD. We have not been very happy this year with the gifted program and communication with the school or the teachers.
He's been accepted to a gifted magnet school for next year through the DCPS, however with Rick Scott's enormous budget cuts there may not be any magnet programs and/or we'll go to a 4 day school week.
There's a new charter school opening closer to us that seems to be amazing, however we've heard horror stories locally about charter schools not meeting standards, closing unexpectedly in the middle of the year or basically being run more like a daycare than a school. This school is run by Charter Schools USA and while it *seems* to be a great opportunity, we're just so leery about changing him out of the public school system to something that is more risky.
tl;dr-If the public schools seem to be falling apart, would you put your child in a brand new charter school run by a charter school corporation? Are there any downsides to charter schools?
I have a son who will be in 3rd grade next year. He's been in our neighborhood public school since kindergarten and this year was staffed into the gifted pull out program (on Mondays he's bussed to a different school for the day) as well as diagnosed with ADHD. We have not been very happy this year with the gifted program and communication with the school or the teachers.
He's been accepted to a gifted magnet school for next year through the DCPS, however with Rick Scott's enormous budget cuts there may not be any magnet programs and/or we'll go to a 4 day school week.
There's a new charter school opening closer to us that seems to be amazing, however we've heard horror stories locally about charter schools not meeting standards, closing unexpectedly in the middle of the year or basically being run more like a daycare than a school. This school is run by Charter Schools USA and while it *seems* to be a great opportunity, we're just so leery about changing him out of the public school system to something that is more risky.
tl;dr-If the public schools seem to be falling apart, would you put your child in a brand new charter school run by a charter school corporation? Are there any downsides to charter schools?
Best answer: The president of Charter Schools USA is affiliated with the Heritage Foundation. This should tell you something about the values these schools want to instill in children.
I'm the mother of grown children, I also have a doctorate in history and politics of education, my politics are pretty far to the left. I would absolutely not send my kid to a school run by such a corporation.
posted by mareli at 7:34 AM on April 13, 2011 [9 favorites]
I'm the mother of grown children, I also have a doctorate in history and politics of education, my politics are pretty far to the left. I would absolutely not send my kid to a school run by such a corporation.
posted by mareli at 7:34 AM on April 13, 2011 [9 favorites]
Best answer: If the public schools seem to be falling apart, would you put your child in a brand new charter school run by a charter school corporation? Are there any downsides to charter schools?
Well, quite often, money from the public schools is diverted to fund the charter schools, thus further starving the public schools.
posted by Thorzdad at 7:54 AM on April 13, 2011
Well, quite often, money from the public schools is diverted to fund the charter schools, thus further starving the public schools.
posted by Thorzdad at 7:54 AM on April 13, 2011
Best answer: My kid has been in KIPP charter schools in San Jose since 4th grade. Both the elementary and high school vastly out perform their public school counterparts. So I'm a big believer in charter schools.
That said, there is a huge diversity of charter schools, perhaps more so than public schools because they have more freedom to experiment. Not all are stellar by any means. I think the most important factors are:
1) What is the ethos of the school and do you want that for your child? For example, KIPP is about every kid completing a 4 year college education irrespective of background. It's focus is on more teaching time and very strong academics. The schools days are long and the kid get lots of home work. They work pretty hard compared to their friends in normal schools. And that's OK with me.
2) What is the record of other schools run by the same group? This is probably the best predictor of how the new school will turn out.
3) Where is the principle coming from? In the KIPP system they train in another KIPP school for a few years before starting their own school. To me they seem incredibly competent in transferring the culture to the new school from day one.
posted by Long Way To Go at 8:19 AM on April 13, 2011
That said, there is a huge diversity of charter schools, perhaps more so than public schools because they have more freedom to experiment. Not all are stellar by any means. I think the most important factors are:
1) What is the ethos of the school and do you want that for your child? For example, KIPP is about every kid completing a 4 year college education irrespective of background. It's focus is on more teaching time and very strong academics. The schools days are long and the kid get lots of home work. They work pretty hard compared to their friends in normal schools. And that's OK with me.
2) What is the record of other schools run by the same group? This is probably the best predictor of how the new school will turn out.
3) Where is the principle coming from? In the KIPP system they train in another KIPP school for a few years before starting their own school. To me they seem incredibly competent in transferring the culture to the new school from day one.
posted by Long Way To Go at 8:19 AM on April 13, 2011
Two of my three kids went to charter schools in Southern California, and they were nothing but progressive. I'd even venture to call them "hippie" schools, jokingly of course. They were not run by a private venture, they were cooperative, parent-run, non-profit ventures.
Just check out the particular school you are interested in. Charter schools seem to be a way of channeling like minded families together, for better or for worse. They have to meet the same guidelines and standards of regular public schools, so the curriculum isn't going to be radically different, but the teaching methods may be. Whether they meet those standards is the question. Some schools will quickly reject kids that don't perform well, in order to keep their stats up. This certainly doesn't serve kids who need more attention.
And, for what it's worth, I'd be skeptical of any school that is run by a for-profit commercial concern.
posted by Xoebe at 8:25 AM on April 13, 2011
Just check out the particular school you are interested in. Charter schools seem to be a way of channeling like minded families together, for better or for worse. They have to meet the same guidelines and standards of regular public schools, so the curriculum isn't going to be radically different, but the teaching methods may be. Whether they meet those standards is the question. Some schools will quickly reject kids that don't perform well, in order to keep their stats up. This certainly doesn't serve kids who need more attention.
And, for what it's worth, I'd be skeptical of any school that is run by a for-profit commercial concern.
posted by Xoebe at 8:25 AM on April 13, 2011
My sons all started at a public school, but then we moved. They then went to a Charter school recommended to us by other parents for the rest of their elementary schooling. Many kids were driven outside their home school area to attend the same school as my kids - I found this out when arranging for play dates. What I found is that the curriculum was...more diverse. More interesting, and engaged my kids more. They were taking drama classes, dance, and learning about art as well as the usual math/english/history etc. The principle was friendly enough with the kids that (well at least my kids) worried more about disappointing him than being punished, when they got in trouble. My oldest was diagnosed with ADHD, and he had an IEP. The faculty at his school bent over backwards to assist him with difficulties focusing, etc. This is only anecdotal, however, and not all charter schools are the same. My mom, who has been a teacher at public elementary schools for going on 30 years, could not speak highly enough about the charter school system in our area (San Diego county), but I tuned a lot of her teacher-work talk out. Now I wish I'd paid more attention, so I could share her information.
posted by routergirl at 8:37 AM on April 13, 2011
posted by routergirl at 8:37 AM on April 13, 2011
Charter schools have greater flexibility in terms of what they teach. When applying for its charter, they have to detail their mission, curriculum, etc. This is one of the reasons that there is such a variation in quality where, like public schools, some can be very good and others can be very bad. It's important that you decide whether or not the overall mission of the school is consistent with what you find to be important in a school.
Another consideration with a new charter school is that opening a new school is akin to opening a new business. There are likely alot of unknowns such who the principal will be, how s/he will interact with the staff, etc. This will likely be mitigated because it's a network of charters, but there still will be unpredictability.
posted by statsgirl at 9:58 AM on April 13, 2011
Another consideration with a new charter school is that opening a new school is akin to opening a new business. There are likely alot of unknowns such who the principal will be, how s/he will interact with the staff, etc. This will likely be mitigated because it's a network of charters, but there still will be unpredictability.
posted by statsgirl at 9:58 AM on April 13, 2011
I’ll go with what valkyryn says. My son has never been on a public school, always charter and I only have good things to say about it (this one is run by the city; no profits involved). They even got the “Blue Ribbon” from the White House which I think tells a lot about the standards. However every charter school is different and I have also heard horror stories about some other charters; so I wouldn’t decide by the fact that it is charter or not.
The good news is that if you don't like the charter, you can always go back to the public system.
posted by 3dd at 10:15 AM on April 13, 2011
The good news is that if you don't like the charter, you can always go back to the public system.
posted by 3dd at 10:15 AM on April 13, 2011
There are a lot of myths in this thread:
"Very occasionally they underperform."
No. Charters significantly and fairly routinely underperform local public schools; 37% perform worse and only 17% perform better.
Not necessarily the case and varies by state. In my state, for example, charters are not held to the same level of financial accountability and transparency, which is troubling when tax dollars are being given to a private company. There are some other major issues relating to student discipline and charters in my state but it's a little too arcane and off the topic to go into here. :)
"My oldest was diagnosed with ADHD, and he had an IEP. The faculty at his school bent over backwards to assist him with difficulties focusing, etc.
While I'm sure the individual teachers your son worked with were excellent, students with IEPs receive support via the public school district, which is required by law to provide support to all students with disability who live in the district boundaries even if those children are enrolled in private religious school. If he had special aides or anything, those were employees of the public school district, not the charter school program; training his teachers received and any assistance in implementation of the IEP came from and was funded by the public school district, not the charter. In theory, the same level of support should be forthcoming in public school classrooms in the district, since those teachers would be receiving literally exactly the same training and support from literally exactly the same people.
To the OP:
Our district chartered a charter school that opened this past year. The program chosen is a well-regarded charter program with experience serving high-poverty populations, and about half of whose schools outperform local districts, which (note above) is a good rate. The curriculum is ambitious and praiseworthy. However, the first year of the school has been a little bumpy, from my outsider perspective. They opened without any real idea how to run buses or food services; they had to contract to purchase both from the public district as a result. They have mishandled FOIA requests in such spectacularly huge ways that they may get hit with a state fine, which is very unusual -- again, they apparently have no one on staff familiar with student privacy rules or freedom of information rules, which is doubly troubling as they're required to have someone do a state training and get certified to provide their FOIAs. Either they didn't bother or whoever they certified didn't pay any attention during the training. We've had a few problems with how they handle student discipline (serious enough student disciplinary issues return to the public school district, so we see a few) and student records -- some students who left the charter seem to have fallen off the face of the earth. We have no idea if they moved, dropped out, etc., because the charter didn't keep very good records. It just doesn't seem like their administration has much of a handle on the nuts and bolts of actually RUNNING a school, beyond the teaching part.
From what I hear from teachers, they love their freedom in the classroom to actually TEACH but the lower pay and longer hours are burning a lot of them out and several plan to leave at the end of the year; it'll be interesting to see what their turnover in teachers is. Some teachers have also told me they find the administrative situation rather chaotic. From what I hear from parents and students there, bullying is a problem, and, again, the administration hasn't taken it very seriously. (Bullying's a problem everywhere, but the lack of appropriate response is troubling.) Out of just under 500 students initially admitted, some 100 (92? maybe?) dropped out by October. Some of that is simply that student mobility is very high in our district, and I'm sure some of it is parents who decided the bus ride was too long or the extra time too much hassle and they'd rather have their kid at a neighborhood school. But that's a LOT of student turnover.
I do think this particular charter program has the potential to run a great school, but they have got to get the administrative chaos under control first.
Anyway, based on watching the particular charter try to get its feet under it, and what I know about charters generally (37% perform worse, half perform the same), I would be hesitant to enroll my child in any charter's first year in existence. Far too many growing pains, and I don't know that you can know if you're looking at a good or a bad charter until the program is up and running.
I would like to say I think KIPP charters are almost universally fantastic.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 11:27 AM on April 13, 2011 [1 favorite]
"Very occasionally they underperform."
No. Charters significantly and fairly routinely underperform local public schools; 37% perform worse and only 17% perform better.
"Stanford, CA – A new report issued today by the Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University found that there is a wide variance in the quality of the nation’s several thousand charter schools with, in the aggregate, students in charter schools not faring as well as students in traditional public schools."They have to meet the same guidelines and standards of regular public schools"
While the report recognized a robust national demand for more charter schools from parents and local communities, it found that 17 percent of charter schools reported academic gains that were significantly better than traditional public schools, while 37 percent of charter schools showed gains that were worse than their traditional public school counterparts, with 46 percent of charter schools demonstrating no significant difference." LINK
Not necessarily the case and varies by state. In my state, for example, charters are not held to the same level of financial accountability and transparency, which is troubling when tax dollars are being given to a private company. There are some other major issues relating to student discipline and charters in my state but it's a little too arcane and off the topic to go into here. :)
"My oldest was diagnosed with ADHD, and he had an IEP. The faculty at his school bent over backwards to assist him with difficulties focusing, etc.
While I'm sure the individual teachers your son worked with were excellent, students with IEPs receive support via the public school district, which is required by law to provide support to all students with disability who live in the district boundaries even if those children are enrolled in private religious school. If he had special aides or anything, those were employees of the public school district, not the charter school program; training his teachers received and any assistance in implementation of the IEP came from and was funded by the public school district, not the charter. In theory, the same level of support should be forthcoming in public school classrooms in the district, since those teachers would be receiving literally exactly the same training and support from literally exactly the same people.
To the OP:
Our district chartered a charter school that opened this past year. The program chosen is a well-regarded charter program with experience serving high-poverty populations, and about half of whose schools outperform local districts, which (note above) is a good rate. The curriculum is ambitious and praiseworthy. However, the first year of the school has been a little bumpy, from my outsider perspective. They opened without any real idea how to run buses or food services; they had to contract to purchase both from the public district as a result. They have mishandled FOIA requests in such spectacularly huge ways that they may get hit with a state fine, which is very unusual -- again, they apparently have no one on staff familiar with student privacy rules or freedom of information rules, which is doubly troubling as they're required to have someone do a state training and get certified to provide their FOIAs. Either they didn't bother or whoever they certified didn't pay any attention during the training. We've had a few problems with how they handle student discipline (serious enough student disciplinary issues return to the public school district, so we see a few) and student records -- some students who left the charter seem to have fallen off the face of the earth. We have no idea if they moved, dropped out, etc., because the charter didn't keep very good records. It just doesn't seem like their administration has much of a handle on the nuts and bolts of actually RUNNING a school, beyond the teaching part.
From what I hear from teachers, they love their freedom in the classroom to actually TEACH but the lower pay and longer hours are burning a lot of them out and several plan to leave at the end of the year; it'll be interesting to see what their turnover in teachers is. Some teachers have also told me they find the administrative situation rather chaotic. From what I hear from parents and students there, bullying is a problem, and, again, the administration hasn't taken it very seriously. (Bullying's a problem everywhere, but the lack of appropriate response is troubling.) Out of just under 500 students initially admitted, some 100 (92? maybe?) dropped out by October. Some of that is simply that student mobility is very high in our district, and I'm sure some of it is parents who decided the bus ride was too long or the extra time too much hassle and they'd rather have their kid at a neighborhood school. But that's a LOT of student turnover.
I do think this particular charter program has the potential to run a great school, but they have got to get the administrative chaos under control first.
Anyway, based on watching the particular charter try to get its feet under it, and what I know about charters generally (37% perform worse, half perform the same), I would be hesitant to enroll my child in any charter's first year in existence. Far too many growing pains, and I don't know that you can know if you're looking at a good or a bad charter until the program is up and running.
I would like to say I think KIPP charters are almost universally fantastic.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 11:27 AM on April 13, 2011 [1 favorite]
The CREDO study linked above has some significant issues, perhaps the biggest of which is 1) that they only looked at about a third of the states that have charter school laws, and 2) they didn't compare actual students, but hypothetical model students. I think it's safe to conclude that charter schools are not the overwhelming success that some make them out to be, but I'm unwilling to be quite as pessimistic as the CREDO study would suggest we be.
But I can't disagree with this:
I don't know that you can know if you're looking at a good or a bad charter until the program is up and running.
You really can't. And one of the main advantages of the charter school model--flexibility--is also one of its main weaknesses--potential lack of institutional continuity. A school that's been around for five or ten years will give you a pretty fair impression of what it's going to be like next year, even if there are some significant staffing changes, but a first-year start-up won't.
In other words, this is a risk that may or may not pay off. Do your research, learn what you can about the people running the new school, and do what seems best to you. There isn't likely to be an obviously right or wrong answer. But know that across the board, a high degree of positive parental involvement is strongly associated with good performance in school. You can do right by your kid wherever he winds up, and you always have the option to try something different next year. The fact that you're willing to put any effort into this decision already suggests that he'll do better than most.
posted by valkyryn at 1:00 PM on April 13, 2011
But I can't disagree with this:
I don't know that you can know if you're looking at a good or a bad charter until the program is up and running.
You really can't. And one of the main advantages of the charter school model--flexibility--is also one of its main weaknesses--potential lack of institutional continuity. A school that's been around for five or ten years will give you a pretty fair impression of what it's going to be like next year, even if there are some significant staffing changes, but a first-year start-up won't.
In other words, this is a risk that may or may not pay off. Do your research, learn what you can about the people running the new school, and do what seems best to you. There isn't likely to be an obviously right or wrong answer. But know that across the board, a high degree of positive parental involvement is strongly associated with good performance in school. You can do right by your kid wherever he winds up, and you always have the option to try something different next year. The fact that you're willing to put any effort into this decision already suggests that he'll do better than most.
posted by valkyryn at 1:00 PM on April 13, 2011
Response by poster: Thank you so much everyone-you've given my husband and I quite a bit to talk about.
@mareli-thank you for telling me about the link to the Heritage Foundation. We are politcally and socially very liberal and were listening carefully last night for any verbiage that might indicate a political or social agenda (either liberal or conservative) or any religious undertones. We didn't hear anything, but we also realize that we were at a sales pitch, so that might not be something that they're open about. The link to the Heritage Foundation will definitely be considered when we're making the decision.
@Thorzdad-again, that's a point we have been discussing. Our personal feelings are that we should be supporting the public school system in our community and we *really* don't want to encourage privatizing anything-and it feels a little hypocritical to us that we believe strongly in funding public education, but we would be taking advantage of a privatized school. If the possibility of the magnet school being eliminated wasn't a factor, I don't think we'd even consider a charter school.
posted by hollygoheavy at 2:18 PM on April 13, 2011
@mareli-thank you for telling me about the link to the Heritage Foundation. We are politcally and socially very liberal and were listening carefully last night for any verbiage that might indicate a political or social agenda (either liberal or conservative) or any religious undertones. We didn't hear anything, but we also realize that we were at a sales pitch, so that might not be something that they're open about. The link to the Heritage Foundation will definitely be considered when we're making the decision.
@Thorzdad-again, that's a point we have been discussing. Our personal feelings are that we should be supporting the public school system in our community and we *really* don't want to encourage privatizing anything-and it feels a little hypocritical to us that we believe strongly in funding public education, but we would be taking advantage of a privatized school. If the possibility of the magnet school being eliminated wasn't a factor, I don't think we'd even consider a charter school.
posted by hollygoheavy at 2:18 PM on April 13, 2011
I confess that I have never done any real research on charter schools, because I haven't need to do so.
My arguably not terribly constructive comment would be that in my neck of the woods, every government hating 'winger and teabagger and his brother is constantly all over the local news media lamenting the total failure of the traditional public school system. They all seem to love the charter school concept.
My kids, 21 and 27, went thorough our public school system with 4.0 GPA's, and got full rides to one of Newsweek's top rated universities. My oldest is now within about a year of his doctorate, and has had his entire post grad education paid for through fellowships. I have zero doubt that my youngest can achieve the same deal if he desires to continue his education aftyer graduating.
Conventional public education has served this family well.
Increasingly as time passes, my mantra for living is, "If the right wing loves it, then it must be f**ked up".
So, I'm not a big fan of charter schools.
posted by imjustsaying at 5:07 PM on April 13, 2011
My arguably not terribly constructive comment would be that in my neck of the woods, every government hating 'winger and teabagger and his brother is constantly all over the local news media lamenting the total failure of the traditional public school system. They all seem to love the charter school concept.
My kids, 21 and 27, went thorough our public school system with 4.0 GPA's, and got full rides to one of Newsweek's top rated universities. My oldest is now within about a year of his doctorate, and has had his entire post grad education paid for through fellowships. I have zero doubt that my youngest can achieve the same deal if he desires to continue his education aftyer graduating.
Conventional public education has served this family well.
Increasingly as time passes, my mantra for living is, "If the right wing loves it, then it must be f**ked up".
So, I'm not a big fan of charter schools.
posted by imjustsaying at 5:07 PM on April 13, 2011
The president of Charter Schools USA is affiliated with the Heritage Foundation. This should tell you something about the values these schools want to instill in children.
I get the uneasy feeling that some here do not realize that Charter School is a generic term and that not all Charter Schools are affiliated with Charter Schools USA. Or that groups like that the American Federation of Teachers are supporters of the concept. So - not exactly a guaranteed nursery for neo-nazis or whatever.
Bottom line it all is down to the individual school, for better or worse. Friends and relatives with kids in charters have had mixed results - teachers so touchy feely that they refuse to deal with clear cut examples of bad seed and bullying children in one been class to incredibly nurturing of special needs kids in others. They do tend to get more parental involvement, which tends to be a positive thing, especially for those of us whose kids are not going to be 4.0 kindergarten - graduate school.
The Child Jones did kindergarten in a charter. The advantage was a broader socio-racial-economic mix. The disadvantage was the bus. Moved before she could go further in it.
Visit. Talk to the teachers. Talk to the parents. They can tell you far more than anyone here can.
posted by IndigoJones at 5:38 PM on April 13, 2011
I get the uneasy feeling that some here do not realize that Charter School is a generic term and that not all Charter Schools are affiliated with Charter Schools USA. Or that groups like that the American Federation of Teachers are supporters of the concept. So - not exactly a guaranteed nursery for neo-nazis or whatever.
Bottom line it all is down to the individual school, for better or worse. Friends and relatives with kids in charters have had mixed results - teachers so touchy feely that they refuse to deal with clear cut examples of bad seed and bullying children in one been class to incredibly nurturing of special needs kids in others. They do tend to get more parental involvement, which tends to be a positive thing, especially for those of us whose kids are not going to be 4.0 kindergarten - graduate school.
The Child Jones did kindergarten in a charter. The advantage was a broader socio-racial-economic mix. The disadvantage was the bus. Moved before she could go further in it.
Visit. Talk to the teachers. Talk to the parents. They can tell you far more than anyone here can.
posted by IndigoJones at 5:38 PM on April 13, 2011
Response by poster: Indigo Rain-the charter school we are considering is actually run by Charter Schools USA. They are concentrated mainly in south Florida but are expanding through the southeast.
Again, thank you everyone for your experiences and input. We're checking into several of the things you've said and hoping to get some clear cut answers both from the charter school and from the public school board.
posted by hollygoheavy at 4:25 AM on April 14, 2011
Again, thank you everyone for your experiences and input. We're checking into several of the things you've said and hoping to get some clear cut answers both from the charter school and from the public school board.
posted by hollygoheavy at 4:25 AM on April 14, 2011
This thread is closed to new comments.
But really, the question is not whether you think charter schools per se are "better" than public schools per se* but whether the particular magnet school into which your son has been accepted is a better fit for him than the particular other options--public, private, homeschool, whatever--are available to you at this time. Educational programs are notoriously difficult to generalize about, and you aren't going to send your kid to "the average charter/public/whatever school," you're going to send him to that one.
*The correct answer is "They certainly can be better," which is almost a tautology.
posted by valkyryn at 7:31 AM on April 13, 2011 [2 favorites]