Thanks for coming to class on Thursday for those who were
able to make it. I first want to say, To Professor Waterston we all wish you a
speedy recovery. On to the lesson, we saw that charter schools can be seen both as
benefit as well as a burden to the community.
When charter schools are placed in affluent neighborhoods, the limited resources
that are given to those public schools would then be directed into the charter
school. In a good neighborhood that is seen as a burden because it is taking
money away from the good schools. However if a charter school is placed in a poor neighborhood it may
be seen as a benefit because it is seen as an experiment which can possibly
lead to success. In either area the stakes are considered to be high
considering that children’s education is on the line.
Another
issue that was given attention to was the funding methods, in the “Scholarly Investments
article”, private investors was investing into the charter school’s network. Sally made the comment that it reminded her
of the social impact bonds. I look
backed on the social impact bond's discussion. I agree as well that it does pertains to our conversation. The question
if “the potential benefits outweigh the
potential risk, as people in the status quo need help now” still exists just
through a different framework, charter schools.
The exercise that was given to the
class was to decide which school out of the two which share the same building
would stay open one being a charter school and the other being a public school.
The differences from the outset should have been easy to make a decision considering that the charter
school was given an A and the public school was given a C. However one of the
comments that Professor Stein mentioned repeatedly was be skeptical of the
sources. The main obvious was being that the DOE's measures of what was
considered to be an A school. Some of
the differences that was discussed during classes was one being the population
for the public school was quite larger that the charter school. Another being that
one has the larger amount of resources which can contribute to the education
inequality. An important factor that was mentioned was through Sally comment which was whether the schools had an effective Parent Association. At the end of the exercise
the majority chose to allow the public school to stay open (including myself). The
biggest problem which was not discussed in depth in class is why is closing a
school even an option. Since the beginning of Bloomberg’s administration, 140
schools have been closed with even more slated to be closed this year.
Question what is a benefit and a disadvantage of closing
schools? What does closing schools mean on an
individual level, as well as for society? And to make this more relatable, how
have we been affected by a school closing directly or indirectly.
8 comments:
Hello, David. Thank you for the wonderful class last week!
The discussion on the quality of charter school in specific, and on the education system in general, is an extremely important issue that deserves extensive amount of attention from our government and the society. However, as you have brilliantly pointed out in your blog question, David, that on what basis could our government righteously justify closing a school due to its underperformance if the preferment metric itself is problematic? Also, what could be the benefits of closing schools while simultaneously neglecting the effort to search for the fundamental flaws in the current education system? The abbreviated version of my answer will be—there is no reasonable justification for these false approaches to problems in education. As an outcome driven institution, it appears that the center of our education system has shifted away from children to numerical data. Furthermore, in today’s education performance metric system, we concentrate, for the most part, on exam performance while omitting the details of students’ schooling experience. Although I do not have any specific evidence at hand, but I am certain that there are ample data and evidence that could suggest high-exam performance does not guarantee an exceptional education nor would it ensure an enriched schooling experience for students. Rather, students’ exam performance is more effective as an instrument to further a school’s reputation (by saying this I am hinting at the fact that the nature of education system has gradually become paralleled to a pro-profit business model). I believe these two factors, namely exam performance and schooling experience, are two equally important indicators for accessing the quality of a school, but neither one should be used independently as an assessment metric. Unfortunately, our current system favors only the formal indicator. Therefore, it is important for us, the people as well as the government, to work painstakingly towards a more human centered system rather than numerically driven system. Without first addressing this fundamental flaw in our education system, the distinction between charter school and public school would be less significant for both school systems are trapped in the same exact vicious cycle that is responsible for failures in our education system.
Hi David, thanks so much for such and interesting class and topic.
I agree with Sylvie, there is no justification for the type of unrealistic and evasive problem solving attitude taken towards our education system. Like you stated David the large number of schools that have been closed since Bloomberg became mayor of NYC is quite astounding. Closing schools because they are not meeting the appropriate numbers in test scores is not the answer to solving any of the problems related to our education system. Too much time and emphasis is placed on numbers and the fundamental basis for education is being put aside.
I think that the amount of private resources used to run private and charter schools could be better used to improve our public schools. The school buildings which have been in used for many years could be repaired and improved, new buildings could be built to house the overwhelming number of children in our public schools instead of closing them for under productivity. Many of our schools are failing because they are overcrowded and teachers cannot possibly do a good a job of teaching a class with more than 35 children. If the money invested in charter schools were to be used in improving our already existing schools, hiring more teachers, paying our teachers better and in buying or improving our school supplies, our education system and the numbers would be much better off.
I know I mentioned the new school building, built around my neighborhood, and how it contains electric escalators which children are not allowed to use and the big entrance that was so nicely built, how I thought it was a waste of resources and space. However I received an important input on my observation from Nico and Professor Reitz, they believe that the care and pride we take in our educational buildings account for a lot. I think they are right. I also believe that in many instances the appearance and the pride we take in our schools can help to improve the moral of our educators, our students and the neighborhoods in general. However, I just think that in some cases, priority should be given to utilizing the space wisely and that maybe in some instances a pretty scene and a pretty façade is not the most important of necessities, my over populated neighborhood is one of those instances, but then again that is only my opinion, my neighbors feel much better about taking their children to this nicer looking school building.
I think that public schools should always be given every last opportunity to survive and succeed, instead of having to close if tests scores are not high enough. There has to be accountability as to what is happening in that particular school that grades are not being met. Those who are in charge should take the time and the resources necessary to figure out what is wrong and how it can be improved, instead of just deciding to close down a school without a close investigation. Public schools are for the children of the neighborhood, as opposed to charter schools, where the children come from all over the city. Public school children are most inconvenienced and have more to lose when their schools are closed. I think our children deserve better then to be told (if cannot do not succeed right away, we will close you down and you will have to find a better way to educate yourself.)
Hey David, thanks for the class! I learned a lot!
I, too, agree with Sally on the charter school model being similar to the idea of social impact bonds. That was one of my initial reactions doing the readings. There is a definite double bottom line in both situations: 1) to improve some aspect of social life, but 2) to also make a profit.
But, in regards to your question, I think Sylvie highlights the crux of the argument: “...what could be the benefits of closing schools while simultaneously neglecting the effort to search for the fundamental flaws in the current education system?”
Closing schools offer quick fixes to deeply ingrained problems—lack of student readiness and a poor education background, for one. And charter schools aren’t the panacea to those problems. Neither are teacher ratings or standardized tests. Doesn’t closing such schools just lead to a widening of the gap between the most disadvantaged and the advantaged in our population?
What’s the benefit to closing schools you ask? Well, there has to be accountability, sure, but I’m not so sure we’re going about it the right way. I don’t know enough about the “grades” these schools receive, but are there ever any early interventions to correct the perceived problems? And what happens to the buildings after? What does that say to a probably already disadvantaged community? What a sense of lost hope that must represent, compounded by what I imagine many of these closings occurring in low-income neighborhoods.
To me, school closings should be a last resort, not a commonplace occurrence, as it seems to be. Education achievement is shown to be a predictor of many healthy outcomes… I fear that the closing of these schools, on a large scale, further tips the scale in favor of more privileged classes.
Dear David and all you Verons who I miss!Thank you for your good wishes. I really appreciate it.
I'm so sorry to have missed this discussion. Perhaps it is better that I wasn't there because there is no way I could have possibly kept my deep, deep worry and concern about charter schools close to the vest. Yes, I would agree with Sally too. Like social impact bonds, charter schools are a slippery slope. Are we willing to sacrifice the HUGE, LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS for any short-term gains (which have only been CLAIMED and never been substantiated--I'm not convinced they can be substantiated (Yes Professor Stein--Keep pushing us to question the sources--by what evidence (are certain claims made) and by what quality of evidence?--remember there is research designed "to show" NOT just "to know).
The DANGER, the very real danger with Charter schools--is the further destruction of the public sector and the very real threat Charter schools pose to the RIGHT to education which every American has--one of the BEST things that this country has ever done!!!
The whole issue brings to mind Farmer's critique of "social entrepreneurism" which I've assigned to my leadership class for this week. Here's one little quotation from that article, so relevant to this discussion:
“…even though we’re [social entrepreneurs] not from the public sector, we need to do everything in our power to make sure that the public sector does not shrivel and die. Why? Not only because a functioning public health or education system is often the only way to bring a novel program to scale, and not only because we need the participation of governments to address the current environmental crises at the transnational scale needed to make a difference. There is another reason to fight the neoliberal gutting of the public sector, and that is this: only governments can confer rights. The right to health care and the right to education can be moved forward by people like us, but non-government organizations, universities, foundations, and forward-thinking businesses are not, alas, in the business of conferring rights."
Thanks for the informative class, David. And Professor Waterston, I hope you are feeling as well as can be and that you make a speedy recovery. Rest, and we missed you in class.
I think it is a grim situation if any school has to ever close down. First, the students and all the employees, as well as the community, is negatively effected by the closing of the school. People lose their jobs, students are displaced, and the community loses value because it has lost a school. On an individual level this must be extremely traumatic for the student, especially if the student is young or an upper class men in high school. There is a sense of belonging in a school that shapes your identity, and to have that ripped away can have serious adverse effects on the child.
Furthermore, a school gives value to a community, and if the school closes, what is to save other public areas such as parks, community centers, etc. For society, this means we have essentially failed in creating a place where a child can be safe and be educated, because the place no longer exist. Like Jose and Sylvie have said, closing a school is a quick fix to a larger social ill, and is being ignored by saying that those students will be better off.
Hello David,
Thank you for a great class. I definitely became more informed about charter schools, the theories behind them, as well as the costs and benefits of such schools.
You pose the question asking about the advantages and disadvantages of closing a school. Honestly, similar to the responses that the other Verons and Professor Waterston have given, I do not believe there is really a true advantage to closing a school. The question that should be evaluated is WHY these schools are closing in the first place. You mentioned that since Bloomberg came into office, about 140 schools have been closed. That's insane. Instead of evaluating tests scores and using them as a justification of "failure," there needs to be an analysis of the actual students and their individual work within the school. Personally, I have testing anxiety. Regardless of how much I study, I still over stress and even during the exam, I panic which does mess me up sometimes. I feel that exams should never be the determining factor to determine a school or even a student's success. Moving away from just evaluating based on test scores, as mentioned, we need to examine why the schools are closing in the first place. Is it the lack of resources? The teachers? Why? As Joe stated, and I too agree, closing schools are just a quick fix. But how will it benefit in the long term? By really dissecting the root issue as to why the school is "failing," the community will have a better idea on how to improve the school and work from there. Additionally, they can implement such ideas of help into other schools that are also "failing," as opposed to avoiding the issue and closing the school.
I believe that closing a school also affects a community negative because this resource is taken away from them. In a way, it breaks down the community and the people are forced to find other locations of schooling, community centers, etc.
We need to be able to intervene early and try to help as much as we can so the "failure" never even happens or fix the issue if Bloomberg deems the school ineffective, so the ultimate result will not be the closing of the school.
First off, I want to thank David for his insightful class on Thursday, especially since the topic was very controversial.
Bloomberg decision to shut down schools is both ineffective and, for lack of a better word, unfair. If one were to take map of the areas in which schools were being shut down, there would be significantly overlap with individuals within the same area who are facing poverty, unequal access to medical care, and other social factors that contribute to social ills. For this reason, the Mayor and other City officials must acknowledge the inequality that is contributing to the poor learning environment within schools. As I mentioned in a previous post, the Mayor understands that access to employment, education, and mentoring increases an individual’s chances to be stable and not fall into deviance. I mean the Mayor’s fund for black male achievement is modeled around this concept, yet he does not want to use the same guiding principles for our schools. Moreover, Professor Stein’s example with her son illustrates an important point: students in low-income communities are unlikely to have parental involvement in their education for a number of reasons. Mayor Bloomberg and members in the New York City Department of Education must move beyond the lowest common denominator—closing schools—and get their hands dirty by working to tackle the major issues facing this City that can be solved through investment in education.
As some of you agree, the parallel between chart school models and social impact bonds scares me. Professor Waterston correctly points out that it poses a significant threat to the public sector. Individuals are going to look to the charter schools as a solution for failing public schools without understanding the real reasons that charter schools are able to produce better productivity numbers. Last week I had a debate with one of my friends who support charter schools because of their successes. However, most individuals, like her, do not take into consideration that charter schools receive outside funding, can hand-select the students they admit or kick out, do not fall under certain City requirements that focus on preparing kids to strictly test, and rely on the underlying point that students simply applying to charter schools most likely represent students who come from families with a vested interest in making sure their son or daughter gets into college. So, as Minerva argues, I am all for redistributing resources. If not, the masked, short-term gains pose a real threat to public schools, as Joe stated.
Last, I want to briefly touch up on a point that Professor Stein mentioned: most charter schools do not have teachers’ unions. Charter schools have a very grim history of being anti-union. I know I may be a bit bias here—aren’t we all though—but union are important part of maintaining democratic accountability and ensuring academic freedom. Unions temper private donor and potential political connections from influencing curriculum and meddling in certain issues—even though it is not always successful.
Post a Comment