[...]On Charter Schools, Part 3: Criticisms of Charter Schools » Edurati Review[...]…

[...]On Charter Schools, Part 3: Criticisms of Charter Schools » Edurati Review[...]…

As for unions, that sounds like a great topic for a post. It is in the works, but it is a lengthier conversation. Off the top of my head, I will say that I have a unique experience with the union. I personally feel that our union protects the current generation of teachers (itinerant, pre-tenure) better than UTLA does.

The segregation piece in particular is interesting. These schools serve residential assignment patterns that already mirror segregated housing patterns created to send kids to traditional district schools. These concentrations, particularly of black parents, in charter schools are less about housing and assignment, patterns, which predate charters, as they currently exist (and school segregation that is endemic of that) and more about the ethnicity of the people who feel the most urgent need for an alternative. Harlem is full of black people. The traditional public schools in that area are terrible overall. So this is a natural response from the most put-upon sector of students who attend those schools.

But let’s get beyond that…school integration is laudable, but I don’t particularly think it should be considered a goal state. Which is to say, if there’s a school where 100% of the kids are black or 100% are Latino, and everyone is testing advanced proficient, I think that should be enough for everyone.

Again though–and I do want to say this whole thing was very balanced–I think part of what we’re dealing with here is a failure of the charter community as a whole to communicate the circumstances out of which these things arise. Charter school kids are educational funding second-class citizens. Charter closings are a benefit not mirrored in the traditional sector. High achieving schools that are 100% proficient should be cornerstones, not outliers. The specificity needed to describe the model appropriately isn’t out there at the consumer level. In plane, practical terms, and this is the really important nugget, “charter” means “any place other than the school my kid attends now.”

Thanks for commenting. You are absolutely right. All charters are not created alike. How do we differentiate between magnet-type charters and charters who focus on the disenfranchised and margininalized?

Many charters schools, though, are enrolling those who’ve washed out of traditional schools. These are the lowest performing of the bunch. For some, this is their last opportunity to get an education.