NYT a case study of charter school risks
The NYTimes is running an interesting article about a failed charter school in NYC. It is a useful case study on the risks and challenges facing charters and their students: In Death of Bronx Charter School, a Wider Problem
The Times article obliquely mentions the notorious case of the collapse of the California Charter Academy just before the 2004-2005 school year that left some 10,000 students stranded. In addition to the SF Chron article above, the NYT covered it in this TimesSelect article: Collapse of 60 Charter Schools Leaves Californians Scrambling. Why that case has not garnered more bad press is a mystery to me. Could the press be biased in favor of charters, blind to their shortcomings?
Today's Times article states that charters are supposed to be held accountable and closed if they fail to perform. I'm not so sure that's true in California, at least not with the current state administration which seems to be more than willing to approve charters at the state level when local boards balk at granting or extending a charter. Here in California charters are given more than enough rope to hang themselves, closing only in the most dire cases. That may be a price that has to be paid if charters are to be allowed to innovate freely. In the business world we accept the fact that corporations fail, leaving customers and workers exposed. That is how the market separates the good from the bad and the winners from the losers. Are we really willing to apply the same cold hard edge of the market to our kids? Do we really want to accept the free market charter deal that means that some percentage of charter students will be harmed by failed schools? Clearly, that is part o the charter deal.
Charter schools, which are privately run but receive significant amounts of public financing, are freed from many bureaucratic constraints, and in return are held accountable by being forced to shut down if they fail to perform. Supporters say they bring innovators and new ideas into public education.I've said this before, the same freedom that in theory allows charters to innovate also opens the door to all manner of misdeeds from incompetent management, to poor business practices, to outright fraud and theft of public funds.
But there can be a flip side as well. Sometimes, the freedom and flexibility that are cited as among charter schools' greatest assets allow school operators to get in over their heads. And when a charter school closes, as more than 400 have nationally, it leaves a messy wake of heartbreak, anger and dislocation.
The Times article obliquely mentions the notorious case of the collapse of the California Charter Academy just before the 2004-2005 school year that left some 10,000 students stranded. In addition to the SF Chron article above, the NYT covered it in this TimesSelect article: Collapse of 60 Charter Schools Leaves Californians Scrambling. Why that case has not garnered more bad press is a mystery to me. Could the press be biased in favor of charters, blind to their shortcomings?
Today's Times article states that charters are supposed to be held accountable and closed if they fail to perform. I'm not so sure that's true in California, at least not with the current state administration which seems to be more than willing to approve charters at the state level when local boards balk at granting or extending a charter. Here in California charters are given more than enough rope to hang themselves, closing only in the most dire cases. That may be a price that has to be paid if charters are to be allowed to innovate freely. In the business world we accept the fact that corporations fail, leaving customers and workers exposed. That is how the market separates the good from the bad and the winners from the losers. Are we really willing to apply the same cold hard edge of the market to our kids? Do we really want to accept the free market charter deal that means that some percentage of charter students will be harmed by failed schools? Clearly, that is part o the charter deal.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home