YES to CHOICE, but equal rules for schools

Wow! The more I read, the more I change my mind about where I stand! I really do try to have an open-mind when reading about vouchers, charter schools, private schools, etc.
I believe that with choice comes responsibility, which means responsible use of vouchers, responsible choice of the school that is truly best for your child, and responsible parent involvement in your child's education and upbringing regardless of choice of school. Some parents move their child back and forth from public to charter and vice-versa, blaming the schools. Guess what? It may be that your child is a problem! I had a child in my class at the Charter School I taught at last year who was a problem wherever he went. The problem? Nothing was ever his fault. Who taught him that? His parents. Everytime we contacted his parents it was never his fault. It had to be another kid, a teacher, etc. They pulled him from the Charter School this year and put him back in Public, but I don't care where he goes--until his parents teach him to take responsibility for his actions he's gonna have problems.
If the parent has a legitimate financial need (and they aren't taking advantage of the system!) then they should be able to use a voucher to enroll their child in a better school. The biggest reason for change (based on my reading) is the environment of the neighborhood public school where the child lives. I know there are other reasons as well, but a parent should be able to enroll their child in a school where they know their child will be happier and safer.
I am advocating responsible use of vouchers to enroll children in public, private, or charter schools, but since these schools are all competing for public tax dollars, than they need to operate under the same basic state laws, rules, and regulations. Bernstein states that charter schools, by law, are free of most state mandates and are not obligated to conform to teacher union work rules and hours. He also says that while charter schools are subject to the same health and safety, civil rights, and student assessment requirements of other public schools, they are exempt from other state regulations. I do think that competition will make the quality of education better in the long run, but all schools should be competing on the same level playing field. I've worked for both an excellent public school with high test scores, and a high quality charter school. I've seen for myself that both kinds of schools have a lot to offer.
One area of concern is for the true "middle" class. What about the family (like mine) who lives in a school district where there is a concern about the environment in the high school and would like to send their child somewhere safer, but can't afford to move to a nicer district and makes too much money to qualify for voucher help? My wife and I are doing everything we can, like working a second job, but we still fall in that "middle" category. We could've moved into a nicer school district, but right now the value of our house is down because of the economy, so we don't want to sell just yet.
Finally, with the use of public tax money, vouchers, etc. and consistent state regulations and laws for all types of schools, will there be "private", "public", and "charter" school labels? This reminds of a quote by the villian in the movie "The Incredibles". In the movie there are "normal" humans and people with extraordinary powers called "Supers". The villian says that his goal is to make everyone a "Super", and that when everyone is "Super"----NO ONE will be. If all schools are available to everyone through choice and vouchers, and if they're all being held to the same high standards of accountability under the letter of the law, then can we just call them all "Schools"?
I meant to stop there, but I can't help myself. One of the things I've admired about this country is the chance to be excellent and distinguish yourself. I love dynasties in team sports, and even individual dominance like what Tiger Woods is doing to his PGA Tour competition. The opportunity has always been there to rise above and be GREAT. Unfortunately, this results in others being labelled as average. I think that there is a prevalent attitude of mediocrity in our country today. We want to eliminate all the "failing" schools, we want to focus on the failing, the poor, and the unachieving--but what about the gifted and the excellent? Would making all types of schools more the same, make them more average?

Is increasing CHOICE for parents good for American education?

I am very divided in this choice issue.

YES: I say "yes" because education is a free public service and it should be a choice in our free country. It is good for parents to have a variety of choices to educate their children. Everyone knows that all children are not the same, do not learn the same, etc. Having a choice of going to a charter school, private school or a public school should be the parents choice. Some of these schools might offer something else that the parent would like to imcorporate into their children's lives - ex: religion (Mary's presentation explained the religious aspect as does Amy's teaching experience), character education (offered mostly as an official course in charter school's) and down to the little things like uniform.

NO: I think that sometimes having a such a big choice in education can lead to the parents jumping their children around. In my experience, I have had parents enroll their children and if they don't like something about the school then they take their children somewhere else, and then if they don't like that schooll they have brought them back. One family moved their children five times in one year. How can that child learn? The main reason I found why parents move their children was that there were family problems at home and as soon as someone in the school caught on or started inquiring, then the children were taken out of that school. Another problem with all these choices, according to the Plain Dealers when schools like the Cleveland Academy of Math, Science and Technology or the International Preparatory School shut down in the middle of a school year, their students who get dumped on the curb and have to transition back into the public schools.

School choice is definately needed! Vouchers and Charter School help this idea.

I really believe school choice is a must in America. As we have seen not all public schools are doing what they need to be doing to give the future of America the best education they can receive. Parents need to have the ability to chose the school that will help their child learn as much as they can and teach them how to be a productive member of society. Vouchers allow parents to send their children to schools that are doing what is needed to be done. As Beck brought up the Washington DC schools are dangerous and unfit for children to attend. This idea of Vouchers lets children get the education they deserve and need from a school that is fit to give it to them. Charter schools are also important because when they are run properly they force the public schools to step up their game and improve to keep the students from leaving. This was the whole idea for Charter schools, to improve the public education through competion and help public schools find new ways of teaching. Charter schools can really be thought of as a lab....they do the experiments so the public schools don't have too. Once they have perfected the outcomes of the experiements they can send this data to the public schools and the public schools will be more willing to try after seeing the data. Without choice our public schools would never have to improve or cahnge their ways which is not something anyone wants to see happen. Choice makes things better and will hopefully give the education all children deserve to more children.

School Choice.

My first thought when I think of school choice is; Yes, everyone should have the opportunity to choose. I do think parents should be able to choose. Sometimes the district's we live in have poor schools. The children don't have a say in where they go. As a parent, it is their job to find a school that is appropriate and safe for their child. Like Glenn Beck stated; Washington DC schools are not just unsafe, they are dangerous. I feel if parents would like to remove their children from that kind of environment, they should be allowed. School is mandatory. Shouldn't it be mandatory to receive an education in a safe environment. A lot of these children come from a hard home life, then we throw them into a public school district that is equally hard if not harder. I think President Rutherford Hayes put it best..."To give all an equal chance to acquire knowledge is the best and surest way to give all an equal chance to acquire property. " When it comes to districts like Washington DC's, I think the parents should be given an equal chance to decide where they send their child.
A lot of what I read made very good sense. I found myself agreeing with a lot of what the proponents had to say. Some proponents felt; Vouchers would localize accountability as opposed to relying on government standards. I thought this was a great idea. However, the more I read about this topic, the less realistic it became. They wanted to promote free market competition. That sounds easy enough, right? I think just assuming that having districts lose their students would provide some incentive to improve. This assumption would work if the schools had funding to improve. I think there is a lot more to this topic. I think their intentions were good, but it became unrealistic. The more I read about vouchers/charters/school choice, the harder it was to pick one side.

School Choice

When reflecting on the question “Is increasing choice for parents good for American education?” it is easy to start having conflicting thoughts. When discussing vouchers and charters, there are many variables that come into play.

In defending the use of vouchers for students to attend a school that is not considered in academic “watch” or “emergency”, I think that it is great for that student to have the opportunity to receive a “better” education elsewhere. In reading the EdWeek article Arizona High Court Rejects Private School Vouchers it says that “Voucher supporters argued that the programs help parents meet their children's educational needs. Opponents said vouchers undermine state support for public schools”. If parents are able to choose between sending their children to schools that have proven success versus ones that have not then it is understandable that they want them to receive the best education possible. However, vouchers can only go so far and help so many students. Would schools be able to improve if that money were given directly to them instead of using it for students to go to a different school?

When looking at the chart titled Voucher Use in Cleveland Catholic Schools, it showed that a majority of the students enrolled in the schools were there because of the vouchers. Do the same children receive the vouchers each year, or does it always change? I know the parents have to apply for them, but how easy are they to obtain? If students do not get to stay at the school they attend because of the voucher I honestly believe that they will have a hard time going back and forth between two different schools. Also, what happens in the event that the school that they should attend no longer is considered under academic watch or emergency?

In regards to charter schools, there becomes even more choice involved. Charter schools “frequently take alternative curricular approaches (e.g., direct instruction or Core Knowledge), emphasize particular fields of study (e.g., the arts or technology), or serve special populations of students (e.g., special education or at-risk students)” (Charter Schools 9/10/04). I am of the belief that there are certain students who are not able to “fit” in the “typical classroom” who may benefit from these unique approaches to education. Because charter schools typically have less students in each class, students receive more individualized instruction. The truth is, however, that there is a varying degree of effectiveness when comparing numerous charter schools to their pubic school districts. I agree with Leigh Dingerson and Julian Rogers when they say “We need charters in Ohio to incubate new educational strategies and to figure out what works to support our most disadvantaged kids. If we slow down, step back and reflect together, we can find ways to better support the best charter practices and hold all our schools accountable to our students, our communities and our collective commitment to public education”(Plain Dealer 3/30/09).

The one part about charter schools that I don’t understand is the ones that are designated “for-profit”. In Kelly’s presentation I was astounded to hear that there are schools that cut back on the cost for each student and pocket the money that is left over. Shouldn’t the money that is designated for each pupil be spent on that pupil? I know it’s the parents’ choice where to send their kids, but to me the school should have the students’ best interest at heart, and in reality these “for-profit” schools don’t seem to fit that description.

Why Not Increae Choice?

The more choices for a child's education the better. Can you imagine if the parents of East Cleveland were limited to just the Cleveland Public School System? The number of kids failing and falling through the cracks would multiply immensely. It's just a shame that charter schools get such a bad wrap. Amanda was telling us of how her school and many other Constellation schools have to write a letter to Mr. Strickland pleading to him how much they love their jobs and how much they want to stay. That is very sad to me. When I interviewed for my position at the school I'm at now, my principal told me that the only difference between charter schools and public schools is the funding. My school (Westside Community School of the Arts) has no more than 20 students per class, there are smart boards in every classroom along with computers. The room I am in now has 6 flat screen computers. Plus the kids attend music and art every day for thirty minutes. What Cleveland parent wouldn't want that for their child? Yet schools like mine are fearful of closing leaving kids stuck and teachers jobless. Williams even states that the charter schools who escape the bureaucratic messes are lucky but are not safe.

Berstein lists all the "supposed" benefits of charter schools and then rips them apart saying that they aren't what they seem. What is he basing this on? Has he researched all of the charter schools out there? There are plenty of schools that are performing at these standards and are producing results. The ones that are not should be shut down. If the kids aren't benefitting from the school and test scores remain low year after year, then yes the school should be shut down. But there is no need to get rid of the performing charters schools. When I first started applying for teaching jobs out of college I didn't give one thought to the possibility of charter schools. Seven years later I am finally getting my first real teaching job and it's at a charter school that I am growing more and more found of everyday that I am there.

Parents need as many choices as possible today. It is their sole responsibility to decide what kind of education is best for their child. Even if it means doing so by process of elimination. If one school is not the right fit for their child then they have the option to send them somewhere else. We always learned in school that we always had a choice and were reminded to make the right choice at all times. This is exactly what parents are doing today. Making the right and best choice for their child.

Its not the idea of CHOICE, its the CHOICES available

Increasing choice is not necessarily a problem in the idea itself. Increasing choice allows the parents to be active in the education process. It gives them some control over the type of education they would like their student to have. But, the part that needs improvement is the choices available. Think of the idea of wanted to offer a child choices of what to have for a snack afterschool. You want them to learn to make choices and have some control, but you also don’t want them eating Oreos and Doritos non-stop. By giving them only positive things to choose from it is a win-win situation. Let’s offer them celery with peanut butter, goldfish and apples, or cheese and crackers. They get the freedom to choose, but we also know that there will be a positive outcome. Choice isn’t the issue; it’s the strength of things from which to choose.

If some of the choices include underperforming schools that are unsafe, lack academic standards, and don’t challenge the individuals then we need to relook at the requirements for schooling. Initially in our class discussion I was very surprised to hear the inconsistencies classmates shared about their charter schools. But then I thought, how can we challenge the charter schools for something that parallels the public schools? We have spent many classes discussing the inconsistencies in public schools. We have public schools that fall into the same categories of unsafe, lacking academic standards, and not challenging the individual. Why would we expect it to be different with the charter schools? If 1.2 million students are attending charter schools (as stated in Rethinking the Notion of Public vs. Private) there must be some draw from the parents.

I think what we need to address is the strength of our choices. We need to find a way to hold ALL schools accountable. I don’t have any problem with the idea of the voucher program. From the little I know I see benefits to giving the students in inner city schools choices, this can increase their education and also offer new experiences to those in private schools. But, as I said in class, we can’t just let this be a “band-aid”. We need to cure the base issue to hold the schools accountable and increase their education so the government isn’t paying more and more each year to send students out of the district. This also seems that it would hurt the inner city district because their highly motivated and educated students will be the ones to have the follow through to attend other schools.

I like the idea that was stated at the end of the article “Take the Time to Find the Best Charter School Practices”. That we need to take a minute and step back and reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of charter schools. This will help us to find ways to support the practices of charter schools while holding them accountable.