Public School Choice: Applying Lessons We Learned Last Year to Demand Real Results for Reform

Last year, I was a leading partner and advocate in the creation of the Public School Choice motion, because I believed that this program was a critical vehicle for reform and represents one of the most significant efforts that the Los Angeles Unified School District has ever undertaken.

But, as with any new program, over the first year we learned that there is room for improvement, and we can - and must - do better for our students and schools. We need to take the lessons learned from the first round of school choice and adjust the program accordingly so that the best and most well-suited organizations are chosen to reform our schools.

So today standing with leaders and educators from around Los Angeles, I strongly urged the Board to do the right thing and improve the school choice process because we need to make it more rigorous, equitable, and beneficial to the students in these schools.

Let's keep what works, and change what does not.

We need a more robust, reform-oriented program, a program that recognizes if there is no qualified applicant. Reconstitution is the appropriate course of action.

Also, we need to make sure that all applicants are held to the same standards and are judged on their proven track record. This can be achieved through a fair advisory vote process that would not tolerate unethical conduct by declaring the applicant ineligible.

When it comes down to it, this should be simple. The organization with the best plan for educating our kids gets to run the school. School competition works because it offers us a chance not simply to tinker at the edges of our school district, but to turn our public education system on its head.

Here in Los Angeles, we have some of the most innovative charter school operators in the country. They have shown us real results, and they've established proven track records of turning around schools. We should give them - and any other organization with a reform agenda and proven record of success - a chance because we cannot place the same old failing school system into brand new buildings and expect different results.

This year, we have an opportunity to improve the public school choice process and deliver our students the reform we promised. Let's not accept the strides we made as a place to stop. Let's continue to move forward with real change and improve upon our innovative and promising school choice program. This is about creating the future of LAUSD - an autonomous, empowered network of schools. So, let's make it fair to all those participating: fair to the applicants, fair to teachers, fair to parents, and most importantly, fair to our children.

 

Follow Antonio Villaraigosa on Twitter: www.twitter.com/villaraigosa

Comments

[cjaco]

01:52 PM on 06/25/2010

Charter schools are a fraud, as well as the CMOs who run them. Invest in public schools instead of enriching the hedge fund managers and other corrupt businessmen who profit from the tax payer trough. They exploit teachers - 60% turnover within 2 years, and exit 75% of their struggling students while not educating special ed or english language learners. Segregation and corporate allegiance are the norm. Private corporate "public" schools are private schools funded by tax payer dollars. The mayor advocates for the destruction of public schools in the name of school choice. Funny how school choice was the mantra of segregationists fifty years ago.
Get educated:

http://charterschoolscandals.blogspot.com/
http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2010/06/valerie-strauss-interviews-diane.html
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/teachers/principal-how-to-really-turn-a.html
http://www.truth-out.org/1110093

[cjaco]

01:58 PM on 06/25/2010

A comment from the blog of Scott Folsom, head of the PTA:

●● smf's 2¢: Mayor Tony is entitled to his opinion. But the courts - the Superior Court, the Court of Appeal and the California State Supreme Court – ruled in Mendoza v. California /aka/ LAUSD v. Villaraigosa that he is not entitled to run the schools. Unconstitutional they said.

* The best board of education (his) money could buy has given him some schools to run anyway, And he has …poorly.
* The same board has given him the superintendent of his choosing; who is now dismissive of Mayor Tony’s suggestions and questioning of his track record.

Somehow this experience and investment and fervor has made him an expert and an authority

…or maybe picking on the schools might take the public’s attention off the fact that he’s gone to all those sporting events, concerts and award shows without paying for the tickets. Ya think?

[citizen1787]

08:52 PM on 06/24/2010

“On July 13, Villaraigosa's companion, KTLA reporter Lu Parker, sent out a tweet announcing that she was attending a Beyonce concert that night at Staples Center. It was the same day Villaraigosa announced that the city would not bill Staples' owner, Anschutz Entertainment Group, for the cost of city services provided at the arena's Michael Jackson memorial. Hours after a mayor's spokesperson told a Times reporter that Villaraigosa was not attending the Beyonce concert, the mayor's office put in a rush order for a proclamation for the singer, to be presented by Villaraigosa in person that night. The certificate recognized her "international success and contributions to the entertainment industry."

http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/politics/villaraigosa-free-ticket-scand/”

http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/politics/villaraigosa-free-ticket-list/