My goal was simple - to focus only on Cassidy - and offload some of the burdensome state and local initiatives (ie. primary program) that I believed were actually making it harder for us to meet our goals.
Ed Ford, who was Secretary of Governor Paul Patton's cabinet, told me that Kentucky was not ready for charter schools. End of story.
So I don't have any particular antipathy toward charter schools in and of themselves.
But what I didn't know (or care about) at the time was that the state constitution requires the General Assembly to provide quality schools across the state. Making Cassidy even better while others floundered did nothing to meet this goal.
Viewed from the state level, any law governing the schools must work toward providing quality schools for each Kentucky student regardless of where children live or the wealth of their parents.
Some say charters are the way to accomplish this. The argument is that business opportunity will bring out entrepreneurs and competition will raise the quality of instruction for all kids. But so far, everything I read about charter schools tells me that, where they exist, they are performing about as well as the public schools - and no better.
Some are great. Some are terrible. Most are somewhere in between.
Where we do find success (in either setting) - we either find a highly supported (or select) student population; or a strong principal, a longer school year, and a faculty that is working their butts off.
But counting on charters to fix broken schools across the state is not likely to produce the promised long-term benefit. As more and more entrepreneurs understand how difficult the work is, and how narrow the fiscal margins, they're looking for better opportunities to make money.
This is the circumstance in Texas where entrepreneurs were invited to step in and establish charter schools - but nobody showed up.
This from the Dallas Morning News:
Failing Texas schools face dwindling options
AUSTIN – Fixing the worst schools in Texas is about to get harder.
A 2006 law meant to spur improvements at low-rated schools gave the state two options for campuses that rack up five consecutive years of "unacceptable" ratings – closure or the use of outside managers to run them.
In practice, though, there's just one choice.
The state did not attract a single bid – from either a private company or a nonprofit entity – after soliciting proposals for several months for an outside manager.
"At this point, we have no one to call on," said state Education Commissioner Robert Scott. "Because there are no takers, we are left with just one option – closure" for chronic underachievers....
1 comment:
Thank you for your insights from someone who knows.
I am writing to give another viewpoint of the situation you linked in Texas. I run a Texas 501 (c)(3) nonprofit, and I have volunteered to help fix this problem in the two major state newspapers. No one from the education community has ever contacted my organization, which is at http://itmh.org.
In the Houston Chronicle (probably one of the five biggest newspapers and #1 in Texas), I volunteered to run these schools at no charge. However, we were never contacted. I volunteered to the Dallas Morning News (#2 newspaper in the state)editor this morning. We will see if anyone really wants help.
Education is the responsibility of every one of us. We cannot depend on the government for this or anything else. Our forefathers made that perfectly clear, but we seem to have forgotten our country's lessons.
Many teachers and parents read my posts to volunteer to fix the nonperforming schools. Mr Scott, who is responsible for the correction, has never been in contact with my organization, nor has anyone else. I have plenty of experience in education and turning around problem organizations. I do not see this as a big issue.
However, when everyone wants to point fingers at others, nothing good happens. We will see what happens here.
Thank you for taking a stand for the education of our youth.
Post a Comment