April 2014 Charter & Cyber Charter School Reform Update from the Democratic House Education Committee
May 12, 2014 Auditor General DePasquale Releases Charter School Report, Recommends Creation of Independen
The state legislature is currently in the process of rewriting the charter school law. Lobbyists are everywhere, representing the unions, school boards, charter schools, school districts, etc. After reading the two state reports listed above, I found them relatively balanced and attempting to compromise between the two points of view - the districts' and the charters'. Typical of any compromise, both sides are never completely happy, but they are getting close to cutting the baby in half.
After the publication of the first report, the Yinzercation blog posted an article entitled "12 problems with Charter Schools". The author states in the first paragraph of the article:
"Are there good charter schools? You might be surprised to hear my short answer to this question, which is “yes.”The author goes on to mention the model Pittsburgh area charter schools that are named in the report. I should mention that City Charter High School, the school I co-founded, was listed as one of only three model charter high schools in the state. The author states that
"Many people I talk to these days assume that I am entirely anti-charter. That’s not true."So after stating that the author is not "entirely anti-charter" she proceeds with a blogpost entitled the 12 problems with charter schools. Here are the 12 problems listed:
- Most are not helping kids.
- Some are actually hurting kids.
- Far too many are cash cows.
- The industry is rife with fraud and corruption.
- Lack of transparency and accountability.
- Skimming and weed-out strategies.
- Contribute to the re-segregation of U.S. education.
- Drain resources from struggling districts.
- Closing traditional public schools.
- Lack of innovation.
- Hard to get rid of the bad ones.
- Charters promote “choice” as solution.
After reading this long discussion about everything that was wrong with charter schools, I decided to review poverty vs. AYP statistics for Pittsburgh Public High Schools and Pittsburgh Charter High Schools. In the following table, Pittsburgh high schools are ranked based on their combined 2012 PSSA scores (687 PA high schools are ranked from highest to lowest - #1 to #687.) The second column states the percentage of students who live in poverty who attend that school.*
It is no surprise that the blog does not put the local public schools under the same scrutiny with respect to the 12 problems. The four schools with the least amount of poverty were the district's magnet high schools (CAPA, Sci-Tech, Obama) and Taylor Allderdice, not the charters. And the four lowest achieving schools were also district schools, not the charters. The four lowest achieving high schools were in the bottom 10% of the state. I do not put this information out to damn the local public schools, but to bring the assertions of the Yinzercation blog into question. Nor do I intend to bore the reader with a step by step refutation of these assertions. As much as I'd like to, I'm afraid I would lose my readers.
The blog put out a challenge to the high performing charters:
Frustrated, we (myself and a fellow teacher) approached the Heinz Endowments about starting a charter school that was created from the ground up whose mission would be preparing students for the 21st century workplace. They gave us a planning grant to design the school in 2001. During that year we put an advisory committee together and worked on the school plan. We asked Superintendent John Thompson of the Pittsburgh Public Schools to be on our advisory committee and consider the possibility of allowing the school to open from within the district. He threw us out of his office. We presented the school to the Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers senior staff - Al Fondy, John Tarka and the executive committee. We said that the district was struggling in their high schools. We had a great model built on best practices to consider, money from the foundations and would like the union to consider partnering with us. I said to the union leaders, "We could create a model high school and put a huge sign on the side of the building that said 'PFT reforms education in Pittsburgh'." They stated that it was not the union's job to do school reform and that if we leave the district and create this school they will oppose us any way they can. Finally, we approached the leadership team at Peabody High School about chartering a school from within the district using the existing faculty (which the charter school law allowed.) After a few weeks of consideration we were turned down.
Hence our school became a charter school - City Charter High School. We were turned down by the Superintendent, the union and a local high school. We are now one of the model charter schools in the state (according to the report.) Each of the charter schools in Pittsburgh has a similar story. The Environmental Charter School (mentioned in the state report as being a quality charter school) opened in two old school buildings in the Regent Square area of Pittsburgh. They opened because the District abandoned the schools and wanted the neighborhood parents to bus their children to other neighborhoods for elementary school. Manchester Academic Charter School (a Blue Ribbon school), Propel Northside Elementary School and Urban Pathways Middle/High School all opened because Northside parents were upset with many school closings on the North Side, and only low achieving schools left to attend. The Urban League Charter School, also listed as a model charter school by the state, opened in East Liberty due to the large district racial achievement gap and a perceived need for a school with an Afro-Centric program. All of these charter schools are non-profit entities. None are trying to eliminate public education, they are just trying to give at-risk students in poverty an opportunity for success. And by and large, they are succeeding at a rate that is higher than the current public school alternatives (see chart above.)
Unfortunately, I am led to believe that arguments put forth by Yinzercation with respect to its concerns for our children are disingenuous. Yinzercation is quick to blame school choice, the governor, the legislature, high stakes testing, etc. Its stand on major issues such as School Choice, Seniority Based Layoffs of Teachers and the state of the District's Budget is telling. When asked to confront an issue such as Seniority Based Layoffs, Yinzercation will always side with the union rather than the needs of children.
How self-righteous is Yinzercation when it calls upon the charters to answer to the 12 concerns. Why doesn't it measure the public schools using the same 12 concerns? Let's pick one concern to dig a little deeper. To state that charter schools contribute to the resegregation of education in America is appalling and simply incorrect. The resegregation of American schools started before charter schools were ever invented. Gary Orfield, from the Harvard University Civil Rights Project, published a paper entitled Schools More Separate: Consequences of a Decade of Resegregation in 2001. If you want background on the resegregation of American schools read Orfield's paper. Locally, the Pittsburgh Public Schools began resegregating their schools when they went to neighborhood K-8 schools while eliminating most of the comprehensive middle schools. They closed a number of comprehensive high schools and created haves (the magnets) and have nots (the comprehensive schools). The achievement listed in the chart above documents this. Charter schools resegregating America... hardly. Pittsburgh did that job all on their own. The most you could say about Pittsburgh charter high schools is that they reflect the racial balance of the district as a whole. For the record, City Charter High School has a racial balance that is much more consistent with the District's overall demographic than most of its high schools.
Consider this... Since the Nation At Risk Report in 1983, the district had 17 years of operation (up to 2000) without any charter schools in existence. During that time there was no school choice for our inner city youth except for District magnets. The number of high stakes tests were much less than currently exists. And yet, during that time the school population plummeted, the expenditure per student skyrocketed and student achievement went down. I'd love to know who Yinzercation wants to blame for those 17 years. Charter Schools did not create these problems, the problems created the Charter Schools.
It is time for liberal, progressive, citizen oriented groups, such as Yinzercation, to elevate their game. Truly progressive citizens are concerned with access for everyone; they see quality education as an enabler for a quality life. Truly progressive citizens would spend their time finding quality schools (no matter district, public, charter or private) for all students and quit fighting about charters vs. district schools. It time to find a way to provide all of our children with a quality education. It is time for Yinzercation to become a PUMP, not a FILTER.
*The Poverty statistics can be found at http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/national_school_lunch/7487
and the PSSA statistics can be found at http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/school_assessments/7442.
It is no surprise that the blog does not put the local public schools under the same scrutiny with respect to the 12 problems. The four schools with the least amount of poverty were the district's magnet high schools (CAPA, Sci-Tech, Obama) and Taylor Allderdice, not the charters. And the four lowest achieving schools were also district schools, not the charters. The four lowest achieving high schools were in the bottom 10% of the state. I do not put this information out to damn the local public schools, but to bring the assertions of the Yinzercation blog into question. Nor do I intend to bore the reader with a step by step refutation of these assertions. As much as I'd like to, I'm afraid I would lose my readers.
The blog put out a challenge to the high performing charters:
"How will the region’s six high-performing charter schools identified in Rep. Roebuck’s report help to address these 12 concerns? How can we make their noteworthy work a part of the conversation about improving public education for all students?"Let me tell you a true story. When I was working in the Pittsburgh Public Schools in 2000, we (the Office of Instructional Technology) implemented a project at Peabody High School that helped students obtain Microsoft Certifications. Computers were purchased through a Link to Learn grant, a teacher volunteered to run the program and it was implemented. It was not uncommon for the students in the Business Education classes to be the lowest achieving, most at-risk students in the school. In the first year the teacher was able to help his students to obtain over 175 Microsoft Office certifications. The program was a huge success. We approached the principal and asked if we could expand the program next year, get a few more computer labs and train a few more teachers. There would be no cost to the school. The principal declined saying that other faculty members weren't open to this new technology and we would have to wait until we had a younger staff. We approached the Director of Vocational Education for the district and tried to implement the program at the district level. We would pay for it and train staff; he could take the credit. He threw us out of his office. Business Education was none of our business.
Frustrated, we (myself and a fellow teacher) approached the Heinz Endowments about starting a charter school that was created from the ground up whose mission would be preparing students for the 21st century workplace. They gave us a planning grant to design the school in 2001. During that year we put an advisory committee together and worked on the school plan. We asked Superintendent John Thompson of the Pittsburgh Public Schools to be on our advisory committee and consider the possibility of allowing the school to open from within the district. He threw us out of his office. We presented the school to the Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers senior staff - Al Fondy, John Tarka and the executive committee. We said that the district was struggling in their high schools. We had a great model built on best practices to consider, money from the foundations and would like the union to consider partnering with us. I said to the union leaders, "We could create a model high school and put a huge sign on the side of the building that said 'PFT reforms education in Pittsburgh'." They stated that it was not the union's job to do school reform and that if we leave the district and create this school they will oppose us any way they can. Finally, we approached the leadership team at Peabody High School about chartering a school from within the district using the existing faculty (which the charter school law allowed.) After a few weeks of consideration we were turned down.
Hence our school became a charter school - City Charter High School. We were turned down by the Superintendent, the union and a local high school. We are now one of the model charter schools in the state (according to the report.) Each of the charter schools in Pittsburgh has a similar story. The Environmental Charter School (mentioned in the state report as being a quality charter school) opened in two old school buildings in the Regent Square area of Pittsburgh. They opened because the District abandoned the schools and wanted the neighborhood parents to bus their children to other neighborhoods for elementary school. Manchester Academic Charter School (a Blue Ribbon school), Propel Northside Elementary School and Urban Pathways Middle/High School all opened because Northside parents were upset with many school closings on the North Side, and only low achieving schools left to attend. The Urban League Charter School, also listed as a model charter school by the state, opened in East Liberty due to the large district racial achievement gap and a perceived need for a school with an Afro-Centric program. All of these charter schools are non-profit entities. None are trying to eliminate public education, they are just trying to give at-risk students in poverty an opportunity for success. And by and large, they are succeeding at a rate that is higher than the current public school alternatives (see chart above.)
Unfortunately, I am led to believe that arguments put forth by Yinzercation with respect to its concerns for our children are disingenuous. Yinzercation is quick to blame school choice, the governor, the legislature, high stakes testing, etc. Its stand on major issues such as School Choice, Seniority Based Layoffs of Teachers and the state of the District's Budget is telling. When asked to confront an issue such as Seniority Based Layoffs, Yinzercation will always side with the union rather than the needs of children.
How self-righteous is Yinzercation when it calls upon the charters to answer to the 12 concerns. Why doesn't it measure the public schools using the same 12 concerns? Let's pick one concern to dig a little deeper. To state that charter schools contribute to the resegregation of education in America is appalling and simply incorrect. The resegregation of American schools started before charter schools were ever invented. Gary Orfield, from the Harvard University Civil Rights Project, published a paper entitled Schools More Separate: Consequences of a Decade of Resegregation in 2001. If you want background on the resegregation of American schools read Orfield's paper. Locally, the Pittsburgh Public Schools began resegregating their schools when they went to neighborhood K-8 schools while eliminating most of the comprehensive middle schools. They closed a number of comprehensive high schools and created haves (the magnets) and have nots (the comprehensive schools). The achievement listed in the chart above documents this. Charter schools resegregating America... hardly. Pittsburgh did that job all on their own. The most you could say about Pittsburgh charter high schools is that they reflect the racial balance of the district as a whole. For the record, City Charter High School has a racial balance that is much more consistent with the District's overall demographic than most of its high schools.
And how shallow is the Yinzercation blog's question "How can we make their noteworthy work a part of the conversation about improving public education for all students?" Don't ask the charter schools that question, ask the district. The district oversees these charter schools. They visit each school once a year and are provided with lengthy annual reports. They know what the charters are doing. The superintendent and the union president have been approached by the CEOs of Propel Schools and City Charter High School with a desire to collaborate. The public schools are not a willing partner. They are in denial about their own schools and angry about the charters, just like Yinzercation.
Consider this... Since the Nation At Risk Report in 1983, the district had 17 years of operation (up to 2000) without any charter schools in existence. During that time there was no school choice for our inner city youth except for District magnets. The number of high stakes tests were much less than currently exists. And yet, during that time the school population plummeted, the expenditure per student skyrocketed and student achievement went down. I'd love to know who Yinzercation wants to blame for those 17 years. Charter Schools did not create these problems, the problems created the Charter Schools.
It is time for liberal, progressive, citizen oriented groups, such as Yinzercation, to elevate their game. Truly progressive citizens are concerned with access for everyone; they see quality education as an enabler for a quality life. Truly progressive citizens would spend their time finding quality schools (no matter district, public, charter or private) for all students and quit fighting about charters vs. district schools. It time to find a way to provide all of our children with a quality education. It is time for Yinzercation to become a PUMP, not a FILTER.
*The Poverty statistics can be found at http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/national_school_lunch/7487
and the PSSA statistics can be found at http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/school_assessments/7442.
