Open Left

But You Don't Need Charter Schools To Teach Japanese (4.00 / 1)

And, in fact, that's the sort of thing that magnet schools were created for--teaching a specialized curriculum. Destroying public education really is the reason for them, pure and simple.

By their own admission--if you read carefully and critically--the reason charters do worse in high school and better in grade school is that they really don't face that much of a challenge in grade school, compared to high school, which is where the greatest challenge lies:

Charter elementary schools are scrutinized for their ability to attract and retain students on grade level early in their education experience. Charter middle schools face a mix of expectations. Since students can enter with a wide range of preparations, these schools are pressed to recover existing deficits, maintain momentum for students who are already doing well, and prepare all students for the rigors of secondary education and beyond. The pressures for charter high schools may be the most severe of all, including a wider potential range of student academic histories and the need to foster awareness and access to post-secondary options for their students.

Finally, the mention of "their ability to attract and retain students on grade level" also hints at the real major problem here:  self-selection bias.  Since it takes parental effort to get kids enrolled in charter schools, kids in those schools are more likely to have parents who are more motivated and more focused on their kids attention, which ever school teacher knows is a major factor in how well kids do.  Until a comparative study controls for level of parental involvement, it almost certainly overstates charter school performance, probably by a significant amount.

Stepping back at bit, don't you find it rather astonishing that we'd have over a million kids nationwide in charter schools before even having such a study to see how well charter perform?  Doesn't that sort of scream "solution in search of a problem" to you?

The problem, of course, is that conservatives hate public schools.  Hated them when the idea of public education was first proposed.  Hated them when they were introduced in the South.  Hated them when they first started setting up their think tank infrastructure.  Hated them when privatization of schools became the template for promoting the Overton Window.  Hate them to this very day.

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 07:41:16 AM CDT

[ Parent | ]

"conservatives hate public schools" (4.00 / 1)

...except when the football team takes the field. Really, I think it's more complicated than this. In fact, according to some survey results I recall, most people who say that US public schools are failing tend to give their own school higher marks. And I've talked with plenty of conservatives who think US public schools are lousy while they remember quite fondly their favorite teachers from childhood. I think what bothers conservatives so much about public education is that it invariably brings to the surface societal problems of equity that would normally remain hidden. Problems of poverty, homelessness, discrimination, malnutrition, and lousy parenting have consequences in a shared, communal space -- the classroom. And we all know how much conservatives hate sharing someone else's problems.

---

by: jeffbinnc @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 11:55:11 AM CDT

[ Parent | ]

They Love The Football TEAM (0.00 / 0)

The public school?  Not so much.  Never underestimate their capacity for compartmentalization!

Besides, I am, as always where the context warrants it, speaking of conservatives as a political movement, not as individuals.  Individual conservatives can love their local schools, even while the organized movement that speaks in their name wants nothing more than to destroy all such schools.  The more contradictions, the merrier!

In fact, according to some survey results I recall, most people who say that US public schools are failing tend to give their own school higher marks.

This is something I've pointed out repeatedly myself, going back to my earliest days debating wingnuts online in the 1990s.  What it means, quite simply, is that folks always think better of schools the more direct contact they have, and therefore the less influence they've had from the so-called "liberal" media.

The ultimate proof of this is that folks with kids in schools invariably rate the schools higher ("the school your oldest child attends" is a common formulation) than the general populace ("the schools in your community" is typical).

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 13:35:48 PM CDT

[ Parent | ]