Teachers’ unions tried to shut down a South Central charter school that had been very successful at teaching low-income black and Hispanic students

Drop Dead Fred

Platinum Member
Jun 6, 2020
947
2,038
908
In my opinion, successful schools should not be shut down.

Instead, they should be copied.

Every child should be allowed to attend a school as good as this one.

The fact that the teachers’ union tried to shut down this successful school, instead of copying it, is despicable.

This is the complete article from the Wall St. Journal:

Charter Success in L.A. - WSJ.com

Charter Success in L.A.

School choice in South Central.

October 14, 2008

With economic issues sucking up so much political oxygen this year, K-12 education hasn’t received the attention it deserves from either Presidential candidate. The good news is that school reformers at the local level continue to push forward.

This month the Inner City Education Foundation (ICEF), a charter school network in Los Angeles, announced plans to expand the number of public charter schools in the city’s South Central section, which includes some of the most crime-ridden neighborhoods in the country. Over the next four years, the number of ICEF charters will grow to 35 from 13. Eventually, the schools will enroll one in four students in the community, including more than half of the high school students.

The demand for more educational choice in predominantly minority South Los Angeles is pronounced. The waitlist for existing ICEF schools has at times exceeded 6,000 kids. And no wonder. Like KIPP, Green Dot and other charter school networks that aren’t constrained by union rules on staffing and curriculum, ICEF has an excellent track record, particularly with black and Hispanic students. In reading and math tests, ICEF charters regularly outperform surrounding traditional public schools as well as other Los Angeles public schools.

ICEF has been operating since 1994, and its flagship school has now graduated two classes, with 100% of the students accepted to college. By contrast, a state study released in July reported that one in three students in the L.A. public school system — including 42% of black students — quits before graduating, a number that has grown by 80% in the past five years.

Despite this success, powerful unions like the California Teachers Association and its political backers continue to oppose school choice for disadvantaged families. Last year, Democratic state lawmakers, led by Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, tried to force Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to sign a bill that would have made opening a new charter school in the state next to impossible. Mr. Nunez backed down after loud protests from parents in poorer neighborhoods.

School reformers in New York, Ohio, Florida, Connecticut, Utah and Arizona have faced similar challenges of late. Last year in Texas, where 81% of charter school students are minorities (versus 60% in traditional public schools), nearly 17,000 students had to be placed on charter waiting lists. Texas is currently bumping up against an arbitrary cap on the number of charters that can open in the state. Unless the cap is lifted by state lawmakers, thousands of low-income Texas children will remain stuck in ineffective schools.

Back in California, ICEF says that its ultimate goal is to produce 2,000 college graduates each year, in hopes that the graduates eventually will return to these underserved communities and help create a sustainable middle class. Given that fewer than 10% of high-school freshmen in South Los Angeles currently go on to receive a college diploma, this is a huge challenge. Resistance from charter school opponents won’t make it any easier.
 
In my opinion, successful schools should not be shut down.

Instead, they should be copied.

Every child should be allowed to attend a school as good as this one.

The fact that the teachers’ union tried to shut down this successful school, instead of copying it, is despicable.

This is the complete article from the Wall St. Journal:

Charter Success in L.A. - WSJ.com

Charter Success in L.A.

School choice in South Central.

October 14, 2008

With economic issues sucking up so much political oxygen this year, K-12 education hasn’t received the attention it deserves from either Presidential candidate. The good news is that school reformers at the local level continue to push forward.

This month the Inner City Education Foundation (ICEF), a charter school network in Los Angeles, announced plans to expand the number of public charter schools in the city’s South Central section, which includes some of the most crime-ridden neighborhoods in the country. Over the next four years, the number of ICEF charters will grow to 35 from 13. Eventually, the schools will enroll one in four students in the community, including more than half of the high school students.

The demand for more educational choice in predominantly minority South Los Angeles is pronounced. The waitlist for existing ICEF schools has at times exceeded 6,000 kids. And no wonder. Like KIPP, Green Dot and other charter school networks that aren’t constrained by union rules on staffing and curriculum, ICEF has an excellent track record, particularly with black and Hispanic students. In reading and math tests, ICEF charters regularly outperform surrounding traditional public schools as well as other Los Angeles public schools.

ICEF has been operating since 1994, and its flagship school has now graduated two classes, with 100% of the students accepted to college. By contrast, a state study released in July reported that one in three students in the L.A. public school system — including 42% of black students — quits before graduating, a number that has grown by 80% in the past five years.

Despite this success, powerful unions like the California Teachers Association and its political backers continue to oppose school choice for disadvantaged families. Last year, Democratic state lawmakers, led by Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, tried to force Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to sign a bill that would have made opening a new charter school in the state next to impossible. Mr. Nunez backed down after loud protests from parents in poorer neighborhoods.

School reformers in New York, Ohio, Florida, Connecticut, Utah and Arizona have faced similar challenges of late. Last year in Texas, where 81% of charter school students are minorities (versus 60% in traditional public schools), nearly 17,000 students had to be placed on charter waiting lists. Texas is currently bumping up against an arbitrary cap on the number of charters that can open in the state. Unless the cap is lifted by state lawmakers, thousands of low-income Texas children will remain stuck in ineffective schools.

Back in California, ICEF says that its ultimate goal is to produce 2,000 college graduates each year, in hopes that the graduates eventually will return to these underserved communities and help create a sustainable middle class. Given that fewer than 10% of high-school freshmen in South Los Angeles currently go on to receive a college diploma, this is a huge challenge. Resistance from charter school opponents won’t make it any easier.

Charter schools show higher success rates because they cherry pick students. They only allow in students with higher grades, no learning disabilities, no behavioral problems, and parents committed to their children’s education.

The problem with charter schools is that they pull much-needed tax money away from the public school system, leaving the public school students with fewer resources, and a much higher rate of learning and behavioural problems. Parents without the resources to pay the shortfall between the tax credit and the tuition, are stuck in a worsening system, and no way out.

Short changing the public school system is creating a permanent underclass of poorly trained and educated workers with little chance at a better future.
 
...The problem with charter schools is that they pull much-needed tax money away from the public school system, leaving the public school students with fewer resources...

That's the usual complaint, but it depends on several factors. Bottom line: charter schools ARE public schools, and if they can perform better then that should be a choice available to families. What's most important is what's best for the students in any given district.
 
Charter schools show higher success rates because they cherry pick students. They only allow in students with higher grades, no learning disabilities, no behavioral problems, and parents committed to their children’s education..

As the child of two educators and having many others in my family...

Why should ANY teacher be forced to waste their time on children who obviously have no interest in being at school to begin with? Especially past the level of elementary education.
 
Charter schools show higher success rates because they cherry pick students. They only allow in students with higher grades, no learning disabilities, no behavioral problems, and parents committed to their children’s education..

As the child of two educators and having many others in my family...

Why should ANY teacher be forced to waste their time on children who obviously have no interest in being at school to begin with? Especially past the level of elementary education.

Demonstrating that you understand NOTHING about the importance of education.
 
Demonstrating that you understand NOTHING about the importance of education.

I know my far more about education than I want to...

First and foremost, it’s a PRIVILEGE, not a Right. Always has been and always should be.It is largely wasted on a high percentage of those in 8th grade and up.

Why should those students who want an education being harmed by instructors having to waste time, energy and assets on students who don’t care about learning any more than their parents do?

Why are we wasting time teaching foreign languages to kids who can’t speak/read/write English? Ancient/World history to those who can’t find the USA on a map?

our education system is ass-backwards and broken , probably beyond repair.
 
...The problem with charter schools is that they pull much-needed tax money away from the public school system, leaving the public school students with fewer resources...

That's the usual complaint, but it depends on several factors. Bottom line: charter schools ARE public schools, and if they can perform better then that should be a choice available to families. What's most important is what's best for the students in any given district.

What's best for ALL students is access to text books, computers, small classes and all of the resources that Charter Schools provide. Instead, tax dollars go to fund a good education for a cherry picked few, and an inferior schooling for the rest of the district.

It is also to be noted that Charter Schools provide these things at the expense of teacher salaries and benefits - paying substantially less than public schools. Public School Teachers are already one of the lowest paid professions requiring a post-graduate degree and training. Reducing wages doesn't attact the best people.
 
Charter schools show higher success rates because they cherry pick students. They only allow in students with higher grades, no learning disabilities, no behavioral problems, and parents committed to their children’s education..

As the child of two educators and having many others in my family...

Why should ANY teacher be forced to waste their time on children who obviously have no interest in being at school to begin with? Especially past the level of elementary education.

As a taxpayer, why should any of my money go to the wages of a teacher who doesn't want to try to lift up a child's life, and only wants the "easy" students? Those kids will succeed with anyone teaching them.

The purpose of school is to provide a foundation for achievement throughout the child's life.
 
As a taxpayer, why should any of my money go to the wages of a teacher who doesn't want to try to lift up a child's life, and only wants the "easy" students? Those kids will succeed with anyone teaching them.

Your tax money shouldn’t fund schools. Nor should mine. They should be private institutions paid for by those who want their children educated and whose children show the proficiency for learning.

The purpose of school is to provide a foundation for achievement throughout the child's life.

I seriously disagree with you. The purpose of a school is to prepare children to be part of a proper society and to engage in a career that supports them and their family.
 
...The problem with charter schools is that they pull much-needed tax money away from the public school system, leaving the public school students with fewer resources...

That's the usual complaint, but it depends on several factors. Bottom line: charter schools ARE public schools, and if they can perform better then that should be a choice available to families. What's most important is what's best for the students in any given district.

What's best for ALL students is access to text books, computers, small classes and all of the resources that Charter Schools provide. Instead, tax dollars go to fund a good education for a cherry picked few, and an inferior schooling for the rest of the district.
....

"Small classes" is like "livable wage;" an empty slogan. The existence of charter schools does not necessarily mean fewer resources for every student in OTHER public schools.
 
Charter schools decide which students they take and which they do not

They are not comparable to public schools, their "successes" are vastly overblown almost always

The reason they're all much more "successful" is they simply kick out any student they want, even for having uncooperative parents. Public schools have to educate just about everybody.
 
...The problem with charter schools is that they pull much-needed tax money away from the public school system, leaving the public school students with fewer resources...

That's the usual complaint, but it depends on several factors. Bottom line: charter schools ARE public schools, and if they can perform better then that should be a choice available to families. What's most important is what's best for the students in any given district.
This is an example of how Democrats shit on Blacks. Trump pushed for charter schools . He knew how terrible inner city schools are. No one has much of a chance without an education. Democrats want to keep them stupid. They do not care about Black on Black crime.
 
What's best for ALL students is access to text books, computers, small classes and all of the resources that Charter Schools provide. Instead, tax dollars go to fund a good education for a cherry picked few, and an inferior schooling for the rest of the district.

It is also to be noted that Charter Schools provide these things at the expense of teacher salaries and benefits - paying substantially less than public schools. Public School Teachers are already one of the lowest paid professions requiring a post-graduate degree and training. Reducing wages doesn't attact the best people.

You mean like Chicago, where the cost per student is among the highest in the county and the education is dismal? Where the union is holding the city hostage? Where the teachers send their own children to private schools?
 
What's best for ALL students is access to text books, computers, small classes and all of the resources that Charter Schools provide. Instead, tax dollars go to fund a good education for a cherry picked few, and an inferior schooling for the rest of the district.

It is also to be noted that Charter Schools provide these things at the expense of teacher salaries and benefits - paying substantially less than public schools. Public School Teachers are already one of the lowest paid professions requiring a post-graduate degree and training. Reducing wages doesn't attact the best people.

You mean like Chicago, where the cost per student is among the highest in the county and the education is dismal? Where the union is holding the city hostage? Where the teachers send their own children to private schools?

Do you think that charter schools are magic?

Again anyone can run a very "successful" public school if you just don't use the same admission standards

If your charter school is performing worse than a real public school there is something very wrong with that school. The public school should always have the objectively worse students in both behavior and test scores.
 

Forum List

Back
Top