Let's say that RSD high schools are graduating a lot more students in recent years than in the past. How is it, then, that so few of these RSD graduates qualify for the state tuition waiver to attend even the state's community colleges?
The Success Network is experimenting with ways to unburden teachers. Yet even with these innovative supports, the job is difficult, and many facets of the model still need improvement for teachers and students alike.
What is it about the American character that makes so many buy into the notion that discipline, conformity, and punishment are as important in our schools as they are in our prisons? Why do we feel the need to be so strict with other people's children in our schools?
The thing voters need to ask themselves is: Who do they believe has the best interests of their child in mind more -- the person who interacts with them every day and is part of their local community, or the corporate CEO 500 miles away who answers to an unelected board and investors?
Through its unholy partnership with high stakes testing, the charter school movement has diverted our attention from the real issues confronting us and discouraged genuine innovation and reform. To paraphrase Einstein, "Charter schools are to experimentation as military music is to music."
President Obama has called charter schools "incubators of innovation" and "laboratories of innovation," and he has done so for several years, despite the fact that, so far, the laboratories have yielded nothing.
Reformers act as if they believe that teaching is something you do in your twenties when you are idealistic and want to "give something back" -- and then you move on to a "real career" in some other sector.
Jorge Cabrera spent three years working as a community organizer for an education reform group in Bridgeport, CT. Now Cabrera is speaking out about a movement that he says is obsessed with charter schools, averse to real debate and in thrall to Ivy League leaders -- even if they've never led anything.
Why should we trust the same billionaires responsible for the largest wave of minority home foreclosures in U.S. history with boosting student achievement? The answer is, we shouldn't.
Some research suggests that charter schools perform no better than existing public schools. And even if we wanted to, it would be nearly impossible to take the charter movement to scale. So why are the billionaire "disruptors" of the hedge-fund world so hell-bent on establishing charter schools? Money and influence may help to explain it.
This summer will mark the 10 year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. But it also marks the start of an ambitious effort to break up New Orleans' long-beleaguered public school system and replace it with a market-based system in which charter schools compete for customers, in this case students and parents, and for top test scores.
I've resisted this notion for a long time. The money, I liked to say, belongs to the taxpayers, who have used it to create a school system that serves the entire community by filling that community with well-educated adults. But hey-- maybe I've been wrong.
It is some sort of amazing Jedi mind trick -- citizens and taxpayers are looking right past the causes of schools' financial problems and deciding to blame it all on local school boards.
In Oklahoma and other states, market-driven school reform has failed. It is a wounded bear. A wounded bear is more dangerous, however. In their last gasps, national corporate reformers are counterattacking. As competition-driven reformers come out of the shadows, however, even more stakeholders will rally and defend public education.
Contractors use those loopholes as justification to hide basic public information from taxpayers including the fees they charge the public, how they spend public funds, and the details on the quality of public services they are paid to provide.
No doubt you have many questions about the pro bono-ists' civil-rights-based challenge to the state's cap on the number of charter schools. As always, I am happy to shed light.