Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Look at the Colorado charter school results
The Colorado League of Charter Schools just posted new data about charter school success in Colorado. You can find it here. While often charter high schools lag their peers, if you remove the alternative high schools from the mix, Colorado charter high schools out perform their traditional public counterparts.
Look at it this way...
So, remember that CREDO report that came out and is quoted by both sides of the charter school argument. Here is one more in favor of charter schools. So, let's say that 37% of charter schools are terrible. Let's either close them or give them a year or two to improve (unless they've already been warned). That leaves 63% about the same or better than their local schools.
There are a couple of things demonstrated, at least it seems so to me. First, one of the criticisms of charter schools is that they do not always hire certified teachers and they most often do not have unions. So, it seems that this is evidence that union teachers and certified teachers are not a necessary component to a decent education.
Second, charter schools operate on smaller budgets and often in makeshift facilities, not in nice buildings or with all of the frills of traditional public schools. I realize that not all traditional public schools are nice or have frills, but many do, especially in newer areas or suburbs. It seems to me that charter schools give evidence that a decent education can be had for less money and without building new buildings or at least the best new buildings.
This many not mean that charter schools should exist. It does seem to demonstrate that more money and more licensed teachers is not the answer to education reform.
There are a couple of things demonstrated, at least it seems so to me. First, one of the criticisms of charter schools is that they do not always hire certified teachers and they most often do not have unions. So, it seems that this is evidence that union teachers and certified teachers are not a necessary component to a decent education.
Second, charter schools operate on smaller budgets and often in makeshift facilities, not in nice buildings or with all of the frills of traditional public schools. I realize that not all traditional public schools are nice or have frills, but many do, especially in newer areas or suburbs. It seems to me that charter schools give evidence that a decent education can be had for less money and without building new buildings or at least the best new buildings.
This many not mean that charter schools should exist. It does seem to demonstrate that more money and more licensed teachers is not the answer to education reform.
A must read on standarized tests
Saw this today. Good historical notes and commentary on standardized testing in schools. The other important note is that schools are not natural institutions. They are social creations and are subject to change and need to change with changes in culture and information.
Monday, September 26, 2011
How about these union apples?
Julia Steiny wrote a nice little piece on the change in A.J. Duffy from his role as union boss to charter school founder. The crux is that Duffy, who formerly fought tooth and nail for the traditional union values of seniority and making it tough to fire teachers, now opposes seniority and long processes for firing teachers.
She quotes an interesting Harris poll about Americans' opinions of unions. It's not surprising that a large number of Americans are becoming anti-union. Fewer people are members and unions interfere with many rational processes. The truly salient statistic is that "well over half – 60 percent – of the union households themselves feel similarly. Only 47 percent of union members believe they’re getting their money’s worth for the dues they pay."
Funny that 60% of the people who benefit from these organizations still think that they aren't really doing what they are supposed to be doing. In a nation in which a newly elected president takes 53% of the vote to be a "mandate" from the people, perhaps unions ought to listen to Americans, perhaps even their own members.
Go, Mr. Duffy. I don't know if you are a true convert or you are a chameleon, but get those charter schools going and promote and pay based on competence and assist those who aren't good teachers to find other forms of employment.
She quotes an interesting Harris poll about Americans' opinions of unions. It's not surprising that a large number of Americans are becoming anti-union. Fewer people are members and unions interfere with many rational processes. The truly salient statistic is that "well over half – 60 percent – of the union households themselves feel similarly. Only 47 percent of union members believe they’re getting their money’s worth for the dues they pay."
Funny that 60% of the people who benefit from these organizations still think that they aren't really doing what they are supposed to be doing. In a nation in which a newly elected president takes 53% of the vote to be a "mandate" from the people, perhaps unions ought to listen to Americans, perhaps even their own members.
Go, Mr. Duffy. I don't know if you are a true convert or you are a chameleon, but get those charter schools going and promote and pay based on competence and assist those who aren't good teachers to find other forms of employment.
Friday, September 23, 2011
M. Freedman vs. M. Friedman on education
Miriam Freedman takes an extremely socialistic position when she says that the answer to fixing public schools is "simple." She thinks that if we close private schools (and I assume charter schools) and don't give people a choice about their schools, then because rich and powerful people would have their kids in public schools, they would advocate for more money and more programs in public schools.
I hate to say that someone so intelligent is naive, so I won't say that, but it does make me wonder at her optimism. First, it seems that she must overestimate how many super wealthy people there are in the United States and how many of the next level of wealthy people send their kids to private schools. I assume from her bio that she is in a much higher income and wealth bracket than I am, so perhaps that is the society with which she surrounds herself.
It also seems a bit optimistic that the wealthy who currently flee the public schools for the safe haven of private schools would advocate for any other public schools other than there own. There are many high wealth districts that do very well today. The parents from those neighborhoods are not the ones that pile into school district board rooms demanding charter schools or other education reform.
I also wonder about her idea that teachers are scorned. I certainly don't scorn teachers, either in public schools or private schools. Most people that I know do not. We certainly want bad teachers to receive appropriate coaching, discipline and termination (if necessary). We don't want teaching to be a protected profession. We expect it to be like other professions in which competence as well as education is the determinant of a person's success and advancement. No, this isn't universal, people make mistakes or pick their favorites in any profession, but it's not the way it normally works or is supposed to work in a good organization.
No, I have to admit that I remain unconvinced by attempts at social conditioning. Milton Friedman was right. Most people will work for their own if they have the ability and knowledge. His idea of vouchers, as early as 1955, led the way to saying that individuals do have power, and we need to give it to them. While I support charter schools even more than vouchers, the idea behind charter schools is that parents need to be given the power to choose. They may make mistakes, just as we all do in all aspects of life, but the overriding principal is that you can't make someone learn, even in the perfect school. Even in great schools, kids drop out.
So, in the battle of Freedman vs. Friedman, I'll go with Friedman on this one.
________________________________________________________________
In fairness, Freedman does emphasize the importance of parental involvement, with which I agree. How to legislate that is another matter. You can lead a horse to water...
Also, in fairness, it's not clear if Freedman takes this position because she is a socialist or because she believes it's a pragmatic way to fix the public school system. In any case, it yields the same results.
I hate to say that someone so intelligent is naive, so I won't say that, but it does make me wonder at her optimism. First, it seems that she must overestimate how many super wealthy people there are in the United States and how many of the next level of wealthy people send their kids to private schools. I assume from her bio that she is in a much higher income and wealth bracket than I am, so perhaps that is the society with which she surrounds herself.
It also seems a bit optimistic that the wealthy who currently flee the public schools for the safe haven of private schools would advocate for any other public schools other than there own. There are many high wealth districts that do very well today. The parents from those neighborhoods are not the ones that pile into school district board rooms demanding charter schools or other education reform.
I also wonder about her idea that teachers are scorned. I certainly don't scorn teachers, either in public schools or private schools. Most people that I know do not. We certainly want bad teachers to receive appropriate coaching, discipline and termination (if necessary). We don't want teaching to be a protected profession. We expect it to be like other professions in which competence as well as education is the determinant of a person's success and advancement. No, this isn't universal, people make mistakes or pick their favorites in any profession, but it's not the way it normally works or is supposed to work in a good organization.
No, I have to admit that I remain unconvinced by attempts at social conditioning. Milton Friedman was right. Most people will work for their own if they have the ability and knowledge. His idea of vouchers, as early as 1955, led the way to saying that individuals do have power, and we need to give it to them. While I support charter schools even more than vouchers, the idea behind charter schools is that parents need to be given the power to choose. They may make mistakes, just as we all do in all aspects of life, but the overriding principal is that you can't make someone learn, even in the perfect school. Even in great schools, kids drop out.
So, in the battle of Freedman vs. Friedman, I'll go with Friedman on this one.
________________________________________________________________
In fairness, Freedman does emphasize the importance of parental involvement, with which I agree. How to legislate that is another matter. You can lead a horse to water...
Also, in fairness, it's not clear if Freedman takes this position because she is a socialist or because she believes it's a pragmatic way to fix the public school system. In any case, it yields the same results.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Too good to pass up: Stossel on charter schools
Here is a link to a John Stossel article that I retweeted last night, but decided that it was big enough put out out there one more time. Hope you like it. He picks apart a department of education study that said that charter schools did not perform as well as their traditional public school counterparts.
Monday, September 19, 2011
An unlikely hero leads the charter school charge in Washington
Jared Polis isn't the person that you'd normally find leading a charter school bill in the nation's capitol, but the democrat from Boulder, Colorado spearheaded a bill that allows more charter school growth in exchange for accountability.
Polis wants charter schools to lead the way toward success in education. He also wants them to expand best practices in finance and operational accountability. This is the same direction that is being taken by the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools.
The fact that people on both sides of the political aisle are recognizing that charter schools can play a big part in increasing both choice and quality in education is a good sign.
Polis wants charter schools to lead the way toward success in education. He also wants them to expand best practices in finance and operational accountability. This is the same direction that is being taken by the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools.
The fact that people on both sides of the political aisle are recognizing that charter schools can play a big part in increasing both choice and quality in education is a good sign.
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Charter Schools don't network enough
I spent yesterday at the Charter School Finance Seminar in Denver. It was a good group and the sessions were well planned. Because I'm working with some new charter schools, I attended many of the sessions that were attractive to start ups or newer schools.
One of the amazing things is that with about 180 charter schools in Colorado, many of these charter school organizers had not talked to even one existing school to get advice about start up issues. It's especially amazing to me because I attend some of the training programs offered by the Colorado Department of Education Schools of Choice Unit. In almost every training, the CDE staff tells those in the application process to talk with existing schools to flen information. What better way to start a school than to have talked with people who have gone through it.
The reasons for talking to new schools probably seem obvious, but list list a few.
Good luck, may your school be great and easier to start because you networked with other successful schools.
One of the amazing things is that with about 180 charter schools in Colorado, many of these charter school organizers had not talked to even one existing school to get advice about start up issues. It's especially amazing to me because I attend some of the training programs offered by the Colorado Department of Education Schools of Choice Unit. In almost every training, the CDE staff tells those in the application process to talk with existing schools to flen information. What better way to start a school than to have talked with people who have gone through it.
The reasons for talking to new schools probably seem obvious, but list list a few.
- The old horse's mouth - I know that many charter starters are optimists. I've seen it. I describe many of the issues that I've seen in various schools, and either get a deer in the headlights look that says that they do not believe me or I get the response, "we'll be different."
- Templates, templates, templates - why create your own if someone already has one. The amount of time that some people spend creating forms, policies, procedures and other documents is astounding. Every charter school I go to has different forms, but they are almost exactly the same (in content, and sometimes in basic layout) to another school's. Folks, most charters don't consider their forms proprietary, you can just change the name.
- Enhanced communication for future issues - if you are starting a charter schools, just be aware that every charter school that I'm aware of has had some start up challenges. the ones that have fewest usually are the ones that did their homework the best. They had a list of potential surprises and options.
Good luck, may your school be great and easier to start because you networked with other successful schools.
Friday, September 16, 2011
Follow the Yellow Brick Road
I've written some on Strategic Planning, and I'll be presenting on strat planning for charter schools in Florida in November as well as in Texas. However, instead of my usual how to session, I have a new session for Texas that is about following the strategic plan.
It's difficult enough to get charter schools to take the time to develop a strategic plan. Getting them to follow it is just as difficult.
How many strategic plans end up on a shelf in a binder?
By the way, this isn't unique to charter schools. I've seen this in other businesses. It's never made sense to me to spend the time and energy to create a well thought out strategic plan, then not follow it. If you rush and create a meaningless strategic plan, that's another matter. Then it probably makes sense not to follow it.
However, if your strategic plan really is an expression of your school's mission and a road map to the emerald city, then isn't it relatively important to follow it?
I think so and that's why I've developed this session for Texas. I'll unveil parts here over the next few months so stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)