Would it help the public schools if FedEx paid its fair share in taxes? Maybe that should be a priority of a US Senator instead of setting up an alternative for profit and under regulated school system.
36
Here's the impossible choice that YOU and other reformers have given us: Let charters run wild until the entire public education system is a husk of itself burdened with ELL and high cost Special Ed students OR we have a HUNGER GAMES style fight-to-the-death where public schools and non-public options like charters fight for ever dwindling resources.
7
Respectfully Senator charter schools (CS) are a public cop out NJ instituted CS and overall the general student scores rose to 77%. That would be like seeding college teams with professional athletes. Wow! Look how much better college teams score.
Public schools are over crowded and under funded. Charters don’t fix K-22 problems it’s like red llning was the inner city is unfit so let’s build suburbs but make them unaffordable to the poor.
In a phrase charter schools are privileged schools not public ones. That’s nothing to boast about but a public embarrassment and a governmental shame. So your parents and grandparents did not get a good Public education? What happened to that system was it left to die or was it nurtured for better health & fitness? Get real Senator!
6
Amen Senator Booker. You just lost the support and the financial backing of the teacher's unions, but that is okay they didn't support President Obama the first time he ran and barely the second. President Obama was pro-charter and both of his Secretaries of Education were pro-charter. Heck, John King is the co-founder of UnCommon Schools - an amazing network of charter schools that have vastly improved the lives of tens of thousands of low income and kids of color - directly through their many schools and indirectly by publishing their best practices in books like "Teach Like a Champion" which is a best seller.
The traditional public school system has not changed with the times. It still functions like Ma Bell. When we had only one phone company in this country - everyone had the same lame desk and wall mounted phone. When the federal government broke up Ma Bell into 7 companies, the innovation explosion was unreal. 10 years later we had the cell phone, fifteen years after that we had the smart phone. Now every American is walking around with a computer in their pocket more powerful than the one on Apollo 11 when it landed on the moon. In fact, the typical smart phone has "one million times more memory" and "the iPhone in your pocket has over 100,000 times the processing power of the computer that landed man on the moon 50 years ago." https://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2019/07/02/your_mobile_phone_vs_apollo_11s_guidance_computer_111026.html
6
There isn’t a “crisis in education.” Public schools are asked to solve problems that plague society as a whole. If you had to educate everyone with real problems — and lots of kids have severe learning disabilities, discipline issues, inability to pay attention— it wouldn’t look pretty. But the people in charge of public schools— looking at you De Blasio & Carranza — make it worse by relaxing discipline, allowing addictive phones in schools and not investing in helping children grow soft skills like self restraint and focus. Booker is a shill for corporations who are teacher union busters
9
Like the chameleon, Senator Booker is quick to change colors most advantageous to his political career:
chalkbeat.org: Cory Booker now says he opposes school vouchers. But he backed D.C.'s voucher program just months ago.
https://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/us/2019/09/23/cory-booker-vouchers-dc/
4
Mr. Booker tries to hide the reality of charter schools. They are privately owned but paid for with public money. They do not and have NEVER serviced the same kids as public schools. Therefore the much touted successes they allege are merely data scams comparing apples and bowling balls. They are repositories of segregation. Mr. Booker shows he is in the pockets of charter profiteers.
61
There are so many pretend experts opining and making emotional, negative, non-factual assertions on a topic they know nothing about.
Read and learn: https://thehill.com/opinion/education/355775-the-undeniable-efficacy-of-charter-schools
2
Cory, stop being a sell-out.
8
I'd like to point Cory Booker to this article, the best exposé about what really goes on at charter schools. This was published on Shonda Rhimes's Shondaland.
https://www.shondaland.com/act/a19449580/charter-schools/
5
I worked at both charter and public schools. It’s not true that charter schools cherry pick students — at least not in NYC— they retain students who don’t pass and then those parents get angry and remove their child. The real difference is discipline. Charter schools enforce it. DOE schools don’t. The most vulnerable kids who lack focus, self restraint pay the price by being shuttled through the grades and leaving schools not knowing how to write. But graduation rates are high! I’m a teacher so I’m pro public schools. Charter schools exploit teachers. It’s not a good place to work. But children do benefit (if it’s a good one, plenty aren’t). I don’t think there should be charter schools. There’s no crisis in education but it could be improved if the people in charge began to pay attention to same discipline issues that charter schools do
4
At the end of the day, charter schools and for-profit prisons have a lot in common.
12
@M. Doyle, In Ohio, the food services for the prisons were privatized. The inmates meals were cut, both in quality and amount. That is how Big Business makes money off of the misery of the most hated people in society. I mean, only the "libs" care about humane treatment of prisoners, right? Well, the families of the prison guards cared, because guess who suffers the consequences of the inmates' anger?
2
Senator Booker makes an excellent point that ideology should not inoculate us from accepting good ideas simply because they don’t match “accepted doctrine.” I fully agree. Unfortunately, private for-profit charter schools have become something very different from the original concept of public charters. They are the descendants of the rapid expansion of private secular and religious academies following the SCOTUS decision overturning “Separate but Equal.”
One of the principle factors that brought this rough-cut republic to the forefront of science and technology was public education for all. Denying access to education because of diversion of public funding to limited enrollment for-profit charters is no less a return to Separate but Equal than that based on zip codes. I still do not understand the logic that taking public dollars away from public schools will somehow improve the situation. We must insist that public dollars go to public charter schools with documented success, driving that data to our primary and secondary public schools. Those public dollars must also be directed to salaries for teachers in those schools, unless we are satisfied with inexorably falling behind the rest of the world.
4
I'm sharing a view from Arizona, one of the first state adopters of charter schools, now 49th in teacher pay and 47th in per-student funding. There are some good charters; but often they have been used to crack open the door to privatizers who want to siphon money out of the public system with little accountability or academic transparency. The cycle is: 1) Dis-invest in public schools, then 2) Discredit "failing" public schools, and finally 3) Divert to for-profit charter and private schools. Repeat. We can't fund a parallel school system and expect neighborhood public schools to thrive.
12
I completely agree with you on public charter schools. What I don’t understand is your opposition to Secretary De Vos and her advocacy of private schools. The more competition in the education market place the better. I’m a big opponent of teachers unions who are partially responsible for the failure of the public school systems, particularly in inner cities. Let the free market work it’s magic.
2
@Art Hudson
This public school English teacher would like to point out that "its" as a possessive doesn't have an apostrophe. How about letting the public educational system work its magic without constant teacher bashing.
14
Proponents and critics are often arguing past each other. I think many boosters are trying to light a candle rather than curse the darkness. That's fine, but it misses the critics' point: the very rise of charters is a symptom of democracy in decline. A healthy democratic society should be able to fix its public school system.
7
Thank you Cory Booker. Detractors would benefit from noting that public charters can be set up to work fairly, meeting the same standards of diversity as other public schools, with union teachers. As a parent who helped to found a charter because although we tried hard, we just couldn’t make a dent in the failing public school to which our kids were assigned. We finally gave up trying, and fought hard to found our community’s charter school. Our rallying cry was “Our children get one chance to get an education. Their home is here. Their time is now.”
Thank you Mr. Booker for telling it like it is for families who cannot leave and whose children cannot wait.
3
What is a 'public' charter school? Because a private school receives tax funding does not make it public. Rather, they are free to create the appearance that they serve the public.
6
For Booker to believe that his support for charters isn't ideological is baffling.
10
It is ideological. His ideology is doing the best we can for kids today, not in five years, even if it prevents us from offering a stellar system in five years' time (which, politically, is not going to happen, but for the sake of argument I take to be possible).
Life is nothing but these sorts of choices, between good and perfect, now and later. I have yet to come across ANYTHING that does not yield to the Engineer's Iron Triangle: Better, faster (sooner) or inexpensive--you can have any two, anytime, but you can never, EVER have all three. Education is bound by this principle, too.
2
His ideology is the market, and by definition markets cannot provide for all.
5
Mr. Booker, this is one of the reasons I am not voting for you. The rhetoric of the "failing school" serves only to legitimize right-wing critics of public education and to de-fund and de-professionalize public education. Let's fund public education like we fund national defense for ten years and then see what we have. The charter movement is deeply compromised as so many here have pointed out. Maybe you and Mark Zuckerberg can chat about this over a nice vegan dinner.
15
This is the kind of thinking that shows why Booker will not be President. I like him a lot, but he’s just wrong about this. Wrong.
10
Is Cory Booker a Democrat, a progressive? No, never, he is a Troyan Horse, the worst kind of politician, he works for the enemies of democracy and equality, send this man to the Republican Party, he is all that is against the interests of the people and a shame and a scam to the African American population.
6
Would that be the African-American population that supports charter schools more widely than say whites? District of Columbia, anyone?
1
Senator Booker fails to demonstrate that public charter schools are a good idea. He labels them a good stopgap measure until good public schools are available in the long-term. But good public schools are attainable in structure in the short-term only if we devote our attention and resources to them, rather than continuing to divert resources to charter and private schools. High-performing charter schools, aided by much longer school days and school years (which public schools could have as well, of course) and policies that drive away non-performing students, are rare. But on average, correcting for demographics, public schools produce better outcomes than private and charter schools. What has happened with school choice and charter schools is that more engaged students and parents have been concentrated in fewer schools designed for scarcity, so that they are removed from schools where they would help others. In truth, the domestic situation, parental education, income, marital status, and employment makes more difference than anything else, and high performing students could swap schools en masse with low performing students without dramatic changes in results. The solutions Cory Booker offered with Mark Zuckerberg, charters and computers, only exacerbated divisions. Get the kids a sense of ownership of their schools and get them reading, writing, making art and music, studying at home, and being physically active with sports, and good things will happen.
10
In the late 90's, Ontario's conservative Premier Mike Harris, in the effort to hobble the teachers' unions who were whipsawing local school boards, passed legislation to eliminate local bargaining, created equal funding per student throughout the province and brought in central bargaining. This accidentally created equity for all students and since then our educational system turns out generally very good students. (this year ranked 7th globally)(https://www.bbc.com/news/business-40708421). The top ranked is Finland, and their achievement is generally recognized to be as a result of a focus on equity. Maybe give it a try.
3
Charter schools are a small minority in the universe of school choices. They still leave many behind. It would be better to dedicate the resources to the public school system to serve the whole community. There always seems to be public money to fund football stadiums, but not schools.
9
As a retired Math Dept. Chair of Flint Northwestern H.S., where half of the City of Flint's School age Children, go to Charters, thanks to Betsy DeVos, I can attest that Charter Schools Self Select students they want, and keep out students that have too costly challenges, such as Special Needs and Behavior issues. The students that then go to Charter, take needed public funding with them, and leave the public schools with an even higher percentage of needy children, with even less funding to assist them. This creates a self sustaining feed back loop, dragging City Schools down to bare subsistence level.
13
In Ohio, there was a huge scandal when a major GOP donor and the State Board of Education (packed with compliant GOP operatives) colluded to allow an online charter school (owned by the donor)to rake in millions of tax dollars even though the "school" could not prove that the students actually were online. The contract with the state allowed the online school to count students who were able to log on and did not require the school to prove that they actually logged on or stayed on. And the school choice officer at the Ohio Board of Education was the husband of former Gov. Kasich's presidential campaign director (and his former chief of staff). There are charter schools popping up all over Ohio and they eventually close because running a charter school is expensive and the only way you can make it work is to fund the campaigns of the right politicians. They are a scam.
7
There are several things wrong with public charter schools. (1) Unlike public schools, they can refuse to admit students who have learning difficulties or personality problems. They can cherry pick; (2) They require parents to be deeply involved in making sure that children do their homework and in being available for frequent meetings with teachers. Parents who are poor or hold two jobs are often unable to do this; (3) The heads of public charter schools often are paid huge salaries. Eva Moskowitz, the head of Success Academy, makes over $600,000 year. (4) The teachers in these schools are often young and inexperienced. Many of them come from Teach for America, and quit after a year or two to secure more remunerative jobs. (5) Other, more idealistic ones subsidize the schools by working long hours and on weekends at fairly low pay. They often burnout. (6) These schools are not financially self-sustaining. They depend on (5) and on donations from wealthy individuals.
Public charter schools lead to increasing inequality.
11
Perhaps Senator Booker should better serve his constituents ie all the people of 'New Jersey' best interests and not just focus on the experience he gained as time served as Mayor of Newark.
If he did so he would perhaps come to a different conclusion when it comes to Charter Schools . Or perhaps not given the amount of political donations his campaign receives from Charter School corporate interests and those that advocate for them.
Charter Schools are the ruination of our Public Schools , in Philadelphia over 40% of Children attend Charter Schools. The Republicans who run our State Government favor Charter Schools 'Surprise' and have until recently stymied the School Districts endeavors to oversee them.
Our Governor a 'Democrat',like Mr Booker but there the similarity ends opposes Charter School expansion, has removed the shackles that the Republicans put on the Charter School Commission and finally we are seeing oversight resulting the recommendation of the shuttering of poorly performing Charters.
However the city still has Democrat politicians who like Booker have been bought by the Charter School business and continue to fight the district tooth and nail in their efforts to clean up the mess.
Senator Booker is incorrect Democrats should advocate for Better Public Schools and jump off the DeVos Charter School Bus.
Furthermore supporting the Charter School industry is the forte of Republicans .
Sparticus 'Get Real'.
3
School funding is often based on the district tax base so not only poor neighborhoods but farm communities have poor schools while rich towns or districts have great schools. Working class people that live in rich communities that had the foresight to build affordable housing get to send their kids to great schools.
You don't have to reinvent the wheel. Look at the nations in our world that have excellent public schools and copy what works. Vermont and Washington state have tried to level the playing field in their public schools. Is it working?
1
No Charter School "plays by the same rules" as a public school. To 'play by the same rules' a charter would have to randomly select students from an area, keep them in school regardless of behavior or academic outcome, and hire educators from the same pool under the same conditions as a public school.
8
This is the problem: Charter schools don't have the same costs as public schools, yet they (generally) take the same per-pupil funding from taxes. Per-pupil funding works similar to insurance pools - it depends on a diverse range of people to make up the service population in order to meet the needs of everyone. When healthy people withdraw from an insurance pool it costs significantly more to serve those who remain. Analogously, charter schools, which can turn away any students that don't fit the school's service plan (like kids in wheelchairs applying to charter schools without elevators), tend to serve students with the least expensive education needs while sending the most expensive students to their local public schools. Public schools, which are required to accept all students, disproportionately serve students with the most expensive educational needs while charter schools pocket the difference as profit.
10
I would like a choice also, I would like the taxes I pay go to only public schools. Nearly impossible for any school to overcome a really bad or indifferent home environment. Republicans only want to destroy teachers unions, business people only want to make money. Make public schools work by supporting them.
9
Like the chameleon, Senator Booker nimbly changes colors most advantageous to his political career:
chalkbeat.org: Cory Booker now says he opposes school vouchers. But he backed D.C.'s voucher program just months ago.
https://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/us/2019/09/23/cory-booker-vouchers-dc/
1
Dems are complaining about everybody. Nobody measures up.
Buttigieg doesn't appeal to people of color.
Warren's policies are too far left.
Bernie is a self-proclaimed Socialist.
Biden is against legalizing marijuana.
Kamala's campaign is in shambles.
Bloomberg is phony on stop & frisk.
Deval is a Wall Street darling.
Cory is for charter schools.
Amy is just boring.
Yet they want you to vote. Not for any of these people. Just against Trump. Good luck with that.
6
Public schools are the bedrock of democracy. Charter schools smack of elitism.
5
Thanks, Cory, but we don't need another Republican in the White House. Stay in the Senate and maybe you can do some good.
8
Thank you Cory Booker. Without two different public charter schools in my town, one run on the Montessori model and the other a math and science school, my daughter would have had a much less rich k-12 experience. Even just the opportunity to choose from varied options was a motivator for parents to get more involved in their children's schooling. The teachers in these schools were paid at essentially the same rate, got the same benefits, and were part of the same union as all the other public school teachers.
8
"supporting high-performing public charter schools if and when they are the right fit for a community, are equitable and inclusive, and play by the same rules as other public schools . . ."
I can understand the concerns about education that I will charitably decide inform Mr. Booker's positions, but charter schools continue to stick in my craw.
Public education played a large part in making our country great, and I just plain hate to see that torn down. It seems to me like a vicious cycle--charter schools take tax money from public schools which then become even worse due to loss of funding. Rinse and repeat.
Mr. Booker's position on charter schools is one of the reasons I am not supporting his candidacy for President.
7
Dogmatic?
Like Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren used to support charters. So did Bernie. They both looked at the evidence and saw that the charters that had better results were the ones who were cherry picking students.
It is Booker who is dogmatically insisting that the facts don't matter. He still values the donations of those who believe taxpayer money should be rewarded to charter CEOs who pick and choose to teach only the students who are profitable to teach and demand the freedom to dump the rest.
If Booker doesn't start reading up on this issue, voters will have to assume that he doesn't want to know the truth because the lies are so much more profitable to his campaign war chest.
10
We can not forget that Mr Booker rushed into a flaming building to rescue an entire family and still had the strength to hold a press conference to describe his courageous feat
4
"... are equitable and inclusive, and play by the same rules as other public schools."
As a public school teacher, these are the problems for me. What is the charter school's discipline policy? Does the school expel students who are discipline problems? My school can't.
Does the charter school have to accept students on IEPs and/or who are learning in a non-native language? My school has to accept all students zoned for our school.
Finally, does that charter school have to administer all of the state and district mandated assessments that public schools do?
11
@Patrick G.
I am a charter school teacher. To answer your questions:
1) Our disciplinary procedures are exactly the same as traditional public schools. They are regularly audited by the district to ensure compliance. A student recently punched me square in the face and his expulsion was denied immediately. Thus, we generally can't expel students either.
2)We have to accept any students who are assigned to us by the district (including any student who is in our neighborhood district and any student who choses us in the choice lottery), including IEP students, ESL students, and students with special needs (such as autism). We also have to provide them with at least the same level of services as any traditional public school. These are also regularly audited by the district.
3) We administer all of the state and district mandated assessments.They must be administered in the exact same (heavily regulated) manner as traditional schools.
I hope this clears up some of your questions. To be fair, we are not perfect and our district wide integrated choice system still leaves some students and schools behind. For instance, for a number of years our autism center was not fully serving our students as we didn't have the vast resources of the traditional public schools. That only changed when the district provided us equal funding and when our network became large enough to provide economies of scale in special education instruction.
9
Sorry but your declaration does not CLARIFY the situation of public schools. Come to Florida and see if this fits. Please! Christian Charter schools sprouting up everywhere. On my tax dollar.
3
The effectiveness, equity, for-profit nature, and district integration for charters are a function of their state’s “authorizing statute.” (I mentioned this, and specifically Florida, in a post on this article earlier today). Florida and some other states (cough...Ohio...cough) have incredibly weak authorizing statues that allow for profit driven and parochial schools along with lax oversight and some serious equity discrepancies. In Colorado, charter schools cannot and do not operate like that. I understand the impact charters have in those states and vehemently disagree with that kind of system. That is what DeVos and corporate interests push as alternative to public education. Those schools under that system, however, are not for what Mr. Booker is advocating. The issues you highlight are not specifically a charter school problem, but a lax state authorizing statute problem. Charter schools can be as Mr. Booker is describing (as in Colorado and Massachusetts). They also, decidedly, cannot (as in Florida and Ohio).
2
Success in education depends more on the home environment than the school that the child attends. Keep ignoring the obvious and whistle past the graveyard.
10
The crisis in public education is just one face of the plutocrat’s war against the lower classes. It will not be solved by siphoning public money into a separate-but-unequal, privately-run alternative school system. We need to properly fund our schools. We need to diminish the ranks of overpaid district executives who hop around the nation chasing outlandish contracts. We need to respect our teachers as professionals, pay them appropriately and give them the resources they need. Senator Booker has got to stop being an agent for the wealthy donor class and start fighting for students and parents.
14
I appreciate Senator Booker offering his position in support of privatization of public resources. Unfortunately there is a clear record in places such as Chicago where public schools were first deliberately starved of funds and then the same schools were privatized so that some company could make a fast buck. Privatization drains much needed tax dollars and sends them off to a middleman--who then can use the funds for donating to political candidates. I'm surprised Senator Booker supports this practice in a time of scarce public funding.
12
Mr Booker says "supporting high-performing public charter schools if and when they are the right fit for a community, are equitable and inclusive, and play by the same rules as other public schools."
Can anyone point to charter schools that are equitable and inclusive and playing by the same rules as public schools and doing much better? this seems to be a bit of smoke and mirrors on the candidate's part but happy to learn if there are examples out there of charter schools following the same rules as public schools (ie accepting all students including those with IEPs and learning disabilities), reporting results of standardized tests etc
8
Booker mentions 3 types of schools: public schools, public charter schools, and for-profit charter schools ( I prefer private for-profit charter schools). A lot of the comments assumed he was talking about the private for-profit schools. He was talking about and promoting the public charter schools. But why in the world did he not describe the differences between public schools and public charter schools? If you can't define the question properly and clearly you are not going to persuade me.
1
Like his peer Andrew Yang, Senator Booker has long history of advocating for the failed experiment that are Charter Schools. Perhaps Senator Booker should team up with Education Secretary DeVos in her quest to disband Public Education and replace it with a largely for profit Charter School system .
As a Democrat Booker should advocate for good Public schools , as a tax payer I am opposed to 'my money' lining the pockets of corrupt Charter School Founders and for profit Corporations.
13
Thank you Cory Booker! Voters in the Democratic primary are very happy to know that you would appoint a Secretary of Education who is similar to your friends Betsy DeVos or Arne Duncan.
Every voter who believes in giving huge swaths of public money to privately operated charters that can pick and choose the students they want to teach, with public schools obligated to teach any and all of the most expensive students that private charters can't profit from should absolutely vote for Booker.
If that sounds like what the Republicans hope to do with healthcare -- giving private insurance companies the right to pick and choose customers who are healthy and dump them into a public system if their health needs are too expensive -- that is because that is exactly what Booker wants to do with education.
It all sounds good to voters -- until they realize that it is THEIR kid that gets dumped because he is not profitable to teach or his illness costs too much to treat.
8
Have to say I'm not surprised that a die-hard corporatist like Booker would try to shame people for NOT funneling public money to private interests. It's all for the sake of the CHILDREN, right? Oh, the Wall Streeters are first on the DNC's list every Christmas (and election season).
Corporate forces have been looking for ways to profit from K-12 and college education for decades, and now, the nouveau Democrats are there to make it happen.
Sanders or Warren can't get into office soon enough for me. Let's just get the rest of these big money apologists like Booker out of the party's leadership, please.
7
In response to the following from Senator Booker.
Many public charter schools have proved to be an effective, targeted tool to give children with few other options a chance to succeed.
Perhaps , that may be an accurate comment though I would refute the 'Many'.
Having studied this issue my experience is that Many more Charter Schools are run as a business to line the pockets of the so called Founder . Staffed by unqualified Teachers, over staffed with Administrators whose sole role is largely to discipline students.
Academically these Charter schools under preform, they are allowed to shut out students with special needs. Are overseen by individuals, or for profit corporate entities who have hoodwinked local communities and politicians like Senator Booker into believing the fallacy that they can do a better job at educating our children than our traditional Public schools.
In terms of staffing a traditional Public school has one Principal held accountable for everything that goes on in their building, if they are lucky they may have an Assistant Principal assigned if they meet a student enrollment quota.
In contrast most Charter Schools will have a Founder a CEO a CFO, and a number of additional Assistant Principals. Where is the equity?.
For these and other reasons Senator Booker most Democrats oppose the now proven failed experiment known as the Charter School.
What we need is for our politicians to advocate for better Public Schools Senator Booker .
7
@Britl
I teach at a charter school. I have a masters in education and, before this, I practiced law for 8 years. I teach 8th grade social studies. I would hardly call myself "unqualified." My network operates 7 of the top 10 middle and high schools in my district. Hardly "under performing". We are required to enroll any student who is in our neighborhood zone or who chooses us in the district lottery system, regardless of student needs. There are no admission tests and we have zero ability to refuse enrollment. No charter school in my state can be run by a for-profit company. In terms of equity, our schools are more diverse and integrated than the traditional public schools, which are more segregated now than they were in 1970s when federally mandated busing attempted to integrate schools. 100% of our students attend 4-year colleges and more than 80% of these are the first in their family to go to college. We also have the best SAT/ACT scores (and growth) for latinx, african-american, first or second generation immigrant, and low income students in our district (outperforming all traditional public schools).
I am a progressive and understand your natural aversion to what you see as "privatization." However, when charters are successfully integrated into the existing district, serve students who needs are greatest, do not (and cannot) seek profit, and have better educational outcomes for students, it behooves us to celebrate that success.
7
The Republican ALEC agenda is to privatize education.
In AZ, charter schools were rejected by voters twice. So the Republican legislature went behind closed doors to pass a bill without voter approval.
They designed a charter system that makes it easy to funnel money meant for the classroom into the pockets of 'entrepreneurs'. Charter schools have been around here for decades now and that has never been changed. So it's a feature, not a bug.
One Republican legislator recently made $14 million from the sale of his charter schools built with taxpayer money.
10
"When I was a baby, they fought to move our family into a community with well-funded public schools..."
Was that well-funded public school that Cory Booker's parents wanted for him a no-excuses school that suspended high numbers of Kindergarten children and forced them to blow mouth bubbles and sit without moving at age 5 and 6?
I'm guessing that Booker's parents did not choose that kind of "no excuses" school for him. And I bet if Booker asked the parents in Newark if they wanted a school like the one his parents chose, or the choice Booker insists they have -- a no-excuses school that humiliates and punishes 5 and 6 year olds for their academic struggles, Newark parents would ALSO choose the same type of school that Booker's own parents chose.
Why isn't Booker working to give those parents the choice his parents had -- a highly funded magnet public school that doesn't treat 5 year olds like criminals?
Dear Cory Booker, those parents in Newark want the choice that YOUR parents had. A "well-funded public school" that does not suspend huge numbers of young children and humiliate and suspend them for any academic struggles. Just because you and your billionaire funders have decided that their only choice will be "no excuses" privately operated charter schools does not mean that is what they would have chosen if they had the same choice your own parents had that you refuse to give them.
8
Public, private, charter, magnet. There are good and bad in all those universes. But if there is a single answer to improving education and life outcomes for kids, it starts with teacher training programs. Instead of being inculcated with a set of attitudes and beliefs about social justice and how kids learn to read, teachers-in-training need to be taught the actual science of how our brains acquire literacy, and what to do when it doesn't seem to work for a kid. You may think teachers-in-training are getting this, but they are not. If teachers actually knew how to teach reading, some of the social justice goals would be met too. Americans who can't read well will suffer at the hands of those who can, both with and without consideration of skin color.
3
@Syliva
Here is a challenge to you:
You present me with the "best" teacher you know and I'll give her a class of 30 six year olds, many with severe learning issues, who don't get enough to eat, don't have regular doctor or dental care, have never had their eyes checked and suffer from vision problems, and grow up in homes with peeling lead paint and no proper bed or desk area where they are in charge of their younger siblings and have no quiet place to properly do homework or even sleep. And their parents work 2 or 3 jobs.
And then your so-called "best" teacher has to teach all 30 of those first graders to read at or above grade level by the end of the year.
12
@Syliva , it would be nice if teachers could fix the dearth of reading--or it's death. Adults don't even read, unless you count playing with their cell phones. Serious reading? Nope. And if parents did, and with their kids, it would be a start. But it's easier to say a person with 30 kids at a time for an hour a day should do it. I can see the appeal to offload responsibility and blame that way. But no. It never worked that way.
3
Thank you Cory Booker. The public schools in my area all have a 1 (on a 1-10 rating scale) on the Great Schools website. My son got into a Charter School purely by lottery. It's a great school and he is doing well. People talk about fixing public schools -- I had been part of a parent association which was working hard towards that goal. But we've been trying for years. And have found entrenched reasons why they were not being improved. The fact is that then my son needed to go to school NOW. Not 10 years from now when we HOPED things would be better. Though I continue to support my local public school. Thank God we had this option. We need there to be a race to the top, not to the bottom.
6
Chartered schools tend to be opposed because chartered schools tend to be not unionized with limited guaranteed tenured
for teachers. That is the essence of the problem which Booker ignores.
4
Our public institutions need accountability.
2
@NJ Keith Schools have a system of accountability to the public. It's called the school board. Please attend their meetings. Then try to attend the board meeting of a charter school: chances are good that you can't.
1
Charter schools in Chicago are almost exclusively (and strategically) located in minority poor neighborhoods (middle class parents won't allow them). There is also high staff turnover due to poor working conditions and salaries.
However many people make large profit from this system: contractors (no bid contracts), politicians (campaign donations), and Charter school operators (big salaries). Taxpayers foot the bill.
Charter schools in Chicago also are a strategy for weakening teacher unions which advocates for students and well as for their members.
Charter schools in Chicago are extremely segregated, do not create better outcomes, enrich opportunists, siphon money away from neighborhood schools and undermine educational equity.
Corey Booker no doubt knows all this. His advocacy of charters in disingenous .
10
Wrong. Charter Schools only operate differently for bureaucracy and funding. As far the student experience they are the same as public schools. There is nothing different in their approach from a public school. If they were I would support them.
Instead avocations like yours lead to schools further being used as money making machines from school food contracts at elementary schools to the NCAA at Universities good intentions or not. There money is in school systems - it is just not where it is needed or warranted. Wonderful changes like Common Core fail because school districts get the mutated McDonalds version. Charter schools are just the express lane to new corporate contracts and new zero value administrator positions.
Corey - Ever been in charge of thirty children for eight hours a day for twenty years to be questioned by a 42 year old mom with her first child about how her child's poor behavior is acceptable? That is what you sound like. Nobody should care about about a graduation rate if graduates cannot read or think for themselves. Success is not a number you politician.
2
It seems as though Mr. Booker is the privileged voice here.
6
If public "charter schools" are the right fit for some location, they should be incorporated into the public school system rather than be maintained separately.
5
Well, there goes Booker establishing his "moderate Democrat" credentials by following in the footsteps of President Obama and his education secretary Arne Duncan, who was Besty DeVos in a grey flannel suit. Public school teachers all over the country have been on the move, showing us what workers' struggles can do. And instead of supporting them, "moderate" Democrats invariably throw them under the bus. When will Democrats learn to support their base?
8
The research is pretty clear. Not all charter schools are successful. However, when they are, it's more a reflection of the educationally engaged parents who have selected this option for their children than anything unique to the charter school itself. In effect, these engaged parents have simply removed their children from an educational environment that is, more likely than not, populated with the less engaged children of less engaged parents. In effect, we are advancing a lifeboat model of education which allows some children to achieve (laudatory nonetheless) but still neglects the most economically, socially and educationally challenged population of our society.
Ronald Zigler
Associate Professor Emeritus of Educational Psychology
Penn State University
15
@Ronald Zigler
Absolutely correct.
But there is more. Cory Booker is advocating for giving private CEOs the franchise for operating those lifeboats so they can profit from it.
If Cory Booker was advocating in good faith for that lifeboat model, he would be writing this op ed to advocate for more magnet public schools.
But Booker is really advocating for privatization. And that is because that is the agenda that his billionaire donors embrace.
6
I grew up in the public school system and yes, there are problems. However, there are ways to address them without necessarily pulling kids entirely out of an inclusive environment or taking away money from public schools. When I was young, I was an excellent student. Instead of going to a separate school, I was enrolled in more challenging classes within the school (.e. math, science, etc.) while continuing to take classes like art, PE, etc. with the general school population. I thought it was a great situation that challenged me yet I still was able to socialize with a wide variety of people. I very much value my public school years even as I went to a private school later on.
In terms of supporting education, I'd like the US to consider raising the income and benefits of teachers. My mom was a teacher in Asia many years ago and while her income was not tops, she had excellent benefit and the respect of students, parents, and society. Students literally had to cross the street, greet her, and bow to her when they saw her in town. That was the custom. Recently, I learned that you cannot become a teacher in Finland unless you are in the top 10% of your college class. Their pay is equivalent of that of doctors and lawyers. In contrast, most ambitious - monetarily or intellectually - people in the US do not become teachers.
5
Firstly, not all charter schools/systems are the same. The quality of these schools is a function of the states' "authorizing statutes" and the amount integration into the local school districts.In some states, they can be for-profit. In some states, there is very little oversight (See e.g., Florida and Ohio). However, in many states, like Colorado, the authorizing statute specifically prohibits for-profit charters AND requires the school districts themselves authorize any charters (thus ensuring accountability to the local district). In Denver, charter schools are part of the same "choice" lottery system as traditional public schools.There are no admission requirements at any school. Thus, charters do not choose their students nor do charters "drain" students from other schools. If you have a problem with funding following these students to charters schools, you actually have a problem with the way our schools are funded (per student), not with the charters themselves.
Secondly, while many charter schools are not appreciably better and do not have the impact desired, many charter schools are demonstrably better and have the most desired impact on the community. For instance, my charter network operates 7 of the top 10 middle and high schools in my district.100% of our graduates attend college (80% of our students are first-in-their family college attendees). They are also more diverse than traditional public schools, which are more segregated now than they were in 1970.
4
Traditional public schools are an apartheid system of allocating access and resources to only those fortunate to live in the best neighborhoods which of course equates to income level. They are monolithic monopolies that prevent innovation and have a multi-generational track record of failure. In fact, it was the Democrats who innovated by creating a competitive system with public charters. While charters are hampered in most communities receiving less than their traditional public school brethren in funding, they provide exactly what they are supposed to do innovation and choice for parents. Unlike traditional schools, they get shut down for non performance and must compete for students. Mr Bookers swipe on “for profit charters” is nonsense as all charters (there are no for-profit charters only services provided to charters by commercial providers) but in the end every charter is free to families, open enrollment and measured by the same means as the all other schools. The real for of the Charters are the unions as they lose members as teacher are employed by charters.
3
It's important not to confuse public charter schools with "for-profit charter school schemes." These are different animals. Booker is arguing here for "high-performing public charter schools." Families of all races and incomes are showing strong preferences for such schools. They want to have choices for their children.
3
Step 1: run down neighbourhood public schools.
Step 2: award charters to politically connected people.
Step 3: push kids whose families pay attention to education into those charters.
Step 4: neighbourhood public schools lose students, and are left with fewer students who need more attention.
Rinse, repeat. After ten years
Step 5: hold up the most successful charter school as an example to compare to the average public school. Declare victory and accuse those who like facts of “dogmatism”.
Step 6: run for President.
7
@Christian Haesemeyer
This is exactly right.
One reason that Cory Booker is so unpopular as a Democratic candidate is that voters are tired of being lied to and misled. Warren and Sanders also used to believe in charters but looked at the facts.
Booker is still looking at the donations of his billionaire funders and pushing their dishonest rhetoric and this article demonstrates that Booker - unlike Warren and Sanders -- really cares only about pleasing them, not about the most disadvantaged families. Those families are only important to Booker and his funders if they have kids whose test scores make charters look good - if not, their value is nil.
While some Republican voters might be ignorant enough to believe Booker's dishonest propaganda, most Democratic voters are getting wise to the "I want to give money to a private charter that picks and choose who they want to teach and then lie to you and tell you that private charter works miracles."
1
As for wrong-headed dogmatic positions on education, consider the issue of vouchers, particularly for special education! Many special education students cannot be educated in their own school districts, as in small and even medium-sized school districts, there are no enough students with the same particular need, with the same type or level of disability or learning difference to make-up one class. In many cases, school districts work together to have one district teach students of one age group with a particular need, and another district taking on another group of students. In some cases there are specialized special education schools to serve the needs of a certain group of students. In some cases these schools are public; more often they are private, but for the benefit of public school special education students who cannot be served in standard public schools.
How are these schools funded? By vouchers!
But to many teachers' groups, vouchers are seen as being for only religious or charter or some elitist group. They are "of the devil"!
If we were to be open-minded, we might see great value, utility and compassion in vouchers for special education students and take them out of the debate on vouchers, charter schools and other perceived anti-public education schemes.
Let us be open to the education of all and not be lost in our rhetoric.
Rabbi Daniel Epstein,
Baltimore
1
These charter schools rob the public education system. They get to chose whom they want, not opened enrollment. Where is gym, music or art? Problem children get removed! They take space away from public schools and from what I understand, the outcome is not any better. Money would better be served of all, not split up to those private charters that are not accountable to the cities that charter them, of their board of educations. Also no union protection for teachers.
Charter schools have proven that they 1) make school segregation worse, 2) provide a worse or, at best, no better outcome when they cannot kick out the kids who don't score at the top, 3) make their investors very wealthy, and 4) drain money from other public schools that need the funding. Look at Louisiana.
I think people like Cory Booker are well meaning and really believe that these schools can help, but the reality they end up being another way of creating the segregation academies of the post Brown v BoE South, by offering a good ROI by privileged white investors, while keeping people of color out of their kids' schools.
2
Conservative education policies around the world are universally destructive and regressive. The whole idea of education is apparently a privilege, not for anyone but the rich. Only the private schools seem to have any level of input into education ideology. It is bizarre, at a time when the internet and other options can deliver far better educational options and environments at lower costs for students and teachers.
The education system has been and is falling to bits on a more or less routine basis for a long time. The notorious Oklahoma situation is perhaps the most obvious systemic breakdown. but these "Wait and Die" policies for public education are clearly now mainstream in conservative agendas. Public charter, "School of the Air", whatever, has to be the healthier option for the future.
Good for you. Welcome.
I find it funny that his owners told him to go out and shill for them in the New York Times, how else could you explain something like this. Regardless of his personal experience with charter schools in Newark, they are an attempt by capital to privatize education and funnel public funds for education into private hands. It does not get more nuanced in any particular way its simply another attempt to profit off a factor of american life, as a democrat I will pass on helping to enrich private equity guys so they can continue to force me to know who politicians like Corey Booker are.
4
Stop being a toady, Mr. Booker, for venture capitalists, edu-scammers and grifters. You can either stand with an Eva Moskowitz or a Randi Weingarten but not both; they are ethically incompatible. What you want is nothing short of an escape for some from the great urban unwashed. You mean well, I think, but you are being used by bad people. Ask the educators and public school personnel and their elected leaders what they think, not millionaires looking to score on the public's dime. You want better schools provide students with better lives and watch the results.
1
What good idea Cory?
Maybe people are being dogmatic. Or maybe people don’t agree that public charter schools are a good idea. Your problem is that the movement has failed to persuade people.
The research looks pretty inconsistent to me. There are some outlier charter schools that are successful, just as there are some outlier public schools. But at scale, charter schools are just as (un)successful as public schools, lack democratic accountability, and cost more. So why should I support this?
Similarly, turning Newark’s public schools over to Mark Zuckerberg only persuaded me that lack of accountability is a terrible idea, tech leaders have no special expertise in educating poor children, and I will never vote for you for higher office. Good luck to you!
3
Public schools need to be desegregated and fully funded with living wages for teachers.
If you want innovation and experimentation do it within the public school system.
Charter schools damage public education.
My son was in a charter school which went under for incompetence, mismanagement, and terrible teaching.
I fell prey to their false promises and PR.
It was a lost year for my son, before I got the full picture.
1
The entire public education system of the Republic of Chile is based around "semi-private" schools, which are what we would call, in the USA, for-profit charter schools. And the failure of that school system is at the heart of the protests and violence we've been hearing about for the last few weeks.
1
@GKR In the US, we have a well-developed public charter school system. It is in no way a failure.
2
Public schools can be and are also testing grounds for best practices. Why do we need an entirely separate school system to try new lessons or materials?
No matter where you look, charter schools have always been about segregation, privatization, and tax credits (google the New Markets Tax Credit under Clinton). The proof is in the corruption and devastation (borne disproportionately by black and brown families).
3
@Maude Lebowski The percentage of students in public charter schools by race (2016): White 32%, Black 26%, Hispanic 33% (National Center for Education Statistics)
2
This is what I loved about the Cory Booker of the past. He was experienced, full of on-the-ground knowledge, and independent in his thinking. Somehow he became a conformist cookie-cutter Democrat. He's absolutely right about charters. Many Americans--many of them African-American--have already voted for their feet. American liberty means having a choice. And even though it's a conservative idea, that means parents who love their children get to have that choice--not the unions, not the bureaucrats, not the ever-expanding government overseers. Nice to see Cory Booker stand strong again.
2
I work at what is considered to be the best Charter School in the State of Missouri. It's a wonderful place to teach, for students to learn, and we have a strong since of pride in our community. All around us there are failing schools, most of them public. I am proud to teach here. Our students excel and learn. I have not political bend to these comments, I'm simply stating that for 300 students this school is working and many, many of the schools in inner-city St.Louis are not.
5
This may be an unpopular line of questioning but how much of the blame for underperforming schools can be put on the parents? Why is it always the teachers or the administrators who are to blame? I have friends who teach in the public school system in Los Angeles and they tell me they spend a huge amount of their time, often a majority, trying to get their students to behave. So many of their students do not show any respect for teachers or other authority figures on campus and often openly defy teachers to kick them out of class or send them to the office. Some kids literally bully and threaten teachers with no recourse! This even happens in a first grade class!
At what point do we start holding parents accountable for their children? It should not be the school's job to teach children respect and discipline.
The questions are, what can schools do to deal with unruly kids and return the focus to educational instruction, and what can be done to teach and encourage better parenting, including not having children if you aren't ready to be a good parent.
5
What distinguishes a public charter school from a private one?
Let us not forget that Cary Booker, the brother of U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, co-founded a Memphis charter school that was shut down in 2016. He now has a top state education position in New Jersey.
2
The American life is really badly corrupted and disorganized. From education, colleges, health care, justice, politics, etc...
In Europe we would not accept this mess.
Cory, you are hopelessly naive. Charter schools will be used to further erode public education. Maybe that isn't your goal, but it is the goal of Republicans as you acknowledge right in the op-ed. That's why democrats rightfully feel the need to hold the line, and you should join them. Improve the existing public schools, don't create new alternatives that will only undermine those schools.
3
Here’s a different view
Massachusetts in general and Boston in specific offer powerful evidence of just how successful charter schools can be. Check out research undertaken by the Boston Foundation with a team hired from Harvard and MIT that determined charter schools have a significant positive impact on the urban kids of color who are historically underserved by traditional schools. Time and attention — a longer day, a longer week, a longer year and young passionate teachers can transform lives.
1
I was a public school teacher, mainly high school, but middle school too. I am retired now, but I still keep up on the issues effecting education.
Betsey DeVos is a disaster as Education Secretary. Her only connection with public schools, prior to becoming secretary, were the ones she never attended. And DJT is encouraging all that is not good about her.
In
California, charters started about 30 years to offer an alternative to failing public schools. But the failures see,med to be happening in urban schools, where a large part of the school population is minority. After the initial 100 were up and running, more followed. Much of the charter system became an avenue for some not well intentioned individuals to profit off the system. In Oakland California, one gentleman scored a public charter to run a charter under the direction of the Oakland Unified school district. Long story short: He started the 'school' in a building he owned, charged the charter rent, installed his wife as the school secretary and at least one of his children as a teacher, with no teaching credential. He was making money. He was found out by the investigation and reporting of a local news station in SF. Oakland schools pulled his charter.
I am certain there are charter schools that meet their mandate and it is probably more than likely a 'bad apple' situation. Charters pull money from the rest of the schools.
1
Mr. Booker, you only half understand what you are talking about. I was a classroom teacher for over 35 years so what follows is not opinion, it is experience. I do agree with your comments about strengthening public schools, and yes funding plays a part. But funding does not fix the core of the problem, which is society. I'm sure, in some cases, the exit to charter schools is about racism or privileges, but it more often than not has to do with family. Many public schools are ravaged by lack of parenting, gangs, violence, and the removal of discipline from the classroom. Problems are often whitewashed by weak administrators.
Students are allowed to curse and threaten teachers and bullying and violence are common. Pressures from politicians and agenda-driven groups have turned public schools into incubators for social causes. It is little wonder that parents who care and are concerned for their children are leaving public schools in record numbers. It is also little wonder that teachers are leaving the profession in record numbers as well. A recent CNN report stated that the average new teacher stays in the profession just 4.5 years. Fix the disrespect of authority in society, hold parents accountable for their children's needs, actions, or poor performance, restore a safe environment within school walls, get rid of the drug dealers and the gang recruiters, and you will go a long way to restoring and revitalizing public schools.
4
"neat ideological boxes" ARE "abstract issues."
the "more privileged voices in the party" ARE NOT abstract issues.
However, slogans continue to be the prime bait of too many career politicians, including our former president, arguing about "tear down the system," while ignoring our need for major changes in "rebuilding" a new foundation.
They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. I don't know what the answer is, but it isn't just handing more money over to failing school districts. Parents want choice and we need to figure out how to give it to them.
1
Mr. Booker, you are right. I believe that because of my experience as a teacher in the public schools. The majority of my students, in any neighborhood, cared about their children's education. But there was always a hostile minority, who were raising disruptive children, who could foil a teacher's efforts to teach. You had to be concerned with 'discipline' all the time. It was rarely possible to spend time with an individual student, trying to assess the work they had done & how they might improve. Certainly, The disruptive children need help. But how about the needs of the majority of students, especially in minority neighborhoods, whose parents care about their education, but who don't have the wealth necessary to send their children to private schools. For them, a good public charter school may well be the answer.
4
Here in the heart of the Bronx there are charter schools around every corner. The kids look spiffy in their uniforms, and seem to enjoy themselves as kids have always done. But where are the changes in opportunities and achievements implicitly promised? Are there more students from these neighborhoods accepted to prestigious universities? It seems a betrayal to our democracy to embrace privatization at the expense of public schools. So much talk of test results, I want to see real results in the lives of poor people. Without real reduction in income inequality charter schools are just a cruel joke at the expense of the common weal.
3
I can't believe this is still a thing. Look at the data on charter schools. They do everything worse at twice the cost and they rarely endure.
Thank you for this opportunity to trim the number of candidates I need to take seriously.
3
I'm fine with charter schools provided they don't siphon money away from the children going to public schools and that they don't relegate the public schools to being a dumping ground for the most difficult and challenging students.
I find it hard to give weight to Booker's school reform initiatives when his signature achievement in the turning around Newark's troubled system was to burn through hundreds of millions of dollars in targeted giving, donations from folks like facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, in a futile effort to cram through just the sort of reforms he's still hawking on the campaign trail.
Twenty million of it went to consultants and other reformers who simply lined their pockets while selling charter snake-oil. Another $140 million vanished in "construction costs" for repairs that didn't happen. Schools closed, students were shuffled around according to opaque computer models, parents and community groups were alienated, and classroom performance did not improve. Everybody got paid, but kids still weren't getting educated.
It is disheartening to see Booker return to this tainted well for another drink and, furthermore, to see him blame those who don't want a second serving of poison as ideologically blinded.
5
Charter schools can only be as proficient as the state exams MADE UP BY THE PEOPLE THAT BENEFIT FROM PUBLIC EDUCATION.
1
If we're going to do this, we're going to have to do it right. I taught ESL for a charter school network in New Orleans for a year and a half. The schools were obsessed with data, but yet the data served no greater purpose other than to be collected and used as a cudgel against the teachers. Teaching to the test is pointless. In reality, in a data driven, "education as a business" environment, the first thing we need to do is ask "Where are all the supply chain and logistics professionals?" After stripping away Progressive or Cardinal Newman-style claims about the purpose of education, teaching is little more than bringing the right content to the right student at the right time. Education is supply chains and logistics.
Both the Right and the Left are stuck in an arms race in the American Public Schools. The Right is dogwhistling an old Dixie tune called "Massive Resistance". The Left thinks they're striking a blow for Paolo Friere. Neither side is doing a particularly good job at teaching kids.
1
I wonder if the perceived value of Charter schools for some children come mostly for moving a child from a school where the peer group reading readiness is low to a school where it is high. In my limited experience, the reading level of the class is just or more determinative of the educational outcomes as any other factor. In other words, if all your classmates are poorly ready, GET OUT
4
This is why I am not voting for you.
8
Charter schools are decisive. For most of our history Americans have had a shared experience, public school. Charter schools are destroying that common thread in our society. Students in regular pubic schools have a diminished experience because of the existence of charters. Charter schools don't meet the primary test of Brown v the Board of Education. Because they are separate they are inherently unequal.
4
Wealthy Americans fund charter schools in order to destroy the public school system. The South is filled with all white "Academies" while the African American and Latino students are left behind in the gutted public system. Is this the model we want for the country? . . . In his eagerness to throw the loyally Democratic teacher's Unions aside, and promote the favorite, anti-Union, scheme of his Wall Street, billionaire backers, Senator Booker exemplifies everything wrong with today's corrupt Democratic Party.
3
Perhaps smaller public schools are a better step to
improving education.
The "Consolidated Schools" that were created after the War
which had 1,000, 2,000, 3,000 and even 4,000 students
were a mistake. Yes, they made for great athletic teams
but produced an school bureaucracy that did not serve
either the teachers or the students.
We also need to bring discipline back to the school.
If a child will not behave, will not study then remove them
from the class full of students who wish to learn.
Offer them a "Hands On" school, a "Wilderness School"
a "Therapeutic School" even a "No Excuses School"
whatever may work but do not, do not, do not let them
disrupt the learning of others and threaten both students
and teachers with violence.
5
Why do you keep giving this man a platform? Dogmatic? Absolutely. Deny my kid's school funding because your kid is too good to learn with us riff raff? Definitely time to get dogmatic.
5
Oh puhleeze. Charter school exist for exactly two reasons -- as a grift, and as a way to destroy teacher's unions.
And anybody telling you otherwise -- ESPECIALLY a putative liberal Democrat -- is selling something.
7
Senator Booker fails to address any of the evidence on the comparative performance of charter schools versus normal public schools. No doubt that is because the evidence is that charter schools have no performance advantage, but instead are a way of siphoning resources into favored schemes and favored hands at the expense of an entire school system.
It is understandable that he is doubling down on a central plank in his personal political agenda. But that's all it is.
7
Cory Booker: Charter schools are in effect draining public funds for the whims of a few "elites" who do not want to test their ideas in public schools. I have no problem with charter schools, only the public funding of them. In some places, charters are simply shell companies to suck dry taxpayer funds. You need to own up to that. Schools online, in strip malls, and "homeschool" charter schools are a sham. In New York City, the Success Academy model has been to insist on taking space from public schools. They literally move into the same buildings and draw down the resources of the public schools. What do you have to say about that?
5
Everyone needs a good education, and therefore charter schools should not be an option just limited to the poor. The criteria for whether a charter school gets money is whether they are successfully educating students. If not, then shut it down. If the charter is working, try to get them to expand.
The most successful governmental programs are the ones that aren't just "Robin Hood" programs. Take Social Security as an example. SSN takes more from wealthy than poor people but everyone gets some benefit. Therefore even though the GOP wants to cut it every few years, they end up getting nowhere. If you look at foreign countries, there is broad support for universal healthcare systems because everyone benefits, vs in the US, the governmentally provided healthcare for non-retirees is targeted at providing benefits to the poor. Hence ACA and Medicaid are under constant attack.
2
It is very disappointing that Mr. Booker didn't provide a link that would support his claim about his Charter school program.
2
It's simple. You can emancipate yourself and join the Liberal Enlightenment or not. If you are not a part it, please don't be a dedicated unenlightened critic. I don't have a problem with the freedom to practice your beliefs. We liberals would like the same. Instead we are forced to pay the high taxes that fund incarceration and militarism like no other country on earth.
Freedom! From dark religion! Up with the Light of a Living Loving Lord! If you would seek the path of the Christ, learn from the Buddha. Our old culture is over. Good riddance. The "Good Old Time Religion" ain't good enough for me.
Well, he just dropped a few places in my list.
3
No Booker. Stop being a corporate shill at the expense of breaking one of America’s most important public institutions. Public education is not for sale. Take your snake oil and beat it.
5
Extremely hypocritical. You try to act "woke" about the lives of poor people in America, but the policies you propose show the opposite. You want to rob money from our public schools.
4
senator booker, I love you and your politics.
Oh that's right I forgot why nobody's suppoorting CB in the primaries. Wall Street, Pharma, charter schools...
3
Thank you, Cory Booker, for speaking out. It has baffled me for years why Democrats aren't more supportive of the progressive education being modeled by charter schools.
Here in MA – arguably one of the most progressive states in our nation – it's the privileged that voted down an expansion of charter schools based on unsubstantiated fears that their high-performing schools would be somehow damaged. The real losers though are those who live in high poverty neighborhoods who don't have the same resources or opportunity to give their child the education every American deserves.
2
What happens when we properly fund the Public Schools that are actually accountable to the community served as an Instrument of Democracy?
Who owns the value of the Real property in communities that have been best served by charter schools (https://www.reit.com/sites/default/files/chart1.png)?
Why is accountability important?
3
It would be very easy for someone from public education to point to a dozen magnet schools and insist that absolutely proves that the public school system is perfect. The problem is that public school officials are not as blatantly dishonest as Cory Booker.
Booker doesn't care about the kids drummed out of charters.
That is the bottom line. Charters that have the top results get those results ONLY because they refuse to teach the student they decide are not worth teaching.
Charters are PRIVATE magnet schools. Cory Booker knows this. What he won't address is why a private CEO should profit by running the type of school that has always been successful.
I don't see Booker clamoring for more public MAGNET schools! Why not? It is clear that Booker's goal is not about students, but about helping to undermine public schools by insisting that the franchise for teaching the least expensive students should be given to private CEOs that the billionaires who fund his campaign like the most.
What a shameful opinion from someone who supports charters that kick out the students they don't want to teach and also supports their lie that the students remaining are exactly like the students in failing public schools.
2
This op ed demonstrates Cory Booker's fear that having anti-public school candidates like Mike Bloomberg and Deval Patrick entering the race might cut into the support Booker has from anti-public school billionaires. What if they stop supporting Booker and start giving their money to Bloomberg and Patrick?
Booker wants to convince his billionaire pals in the "ed reform" movement that he is the best leader to wave the anti-public school flag.
And maybe this op ed will convince those public school hating billionaires to support Booker over Bloomberg or Patrick. But real Democrats support public schools.
2
I have a point that many may consider "off topic."
Trump's 2017 tax bill now allows parents to fund pre-college school tuition with 529 savings accounts. This change will allow many more white parents to send there kids to non-public schools, encouraging racial and economic segregation. Until Corey Booker calls for repeal of this change, his advocacy for charter schools fails the legacy of the civil rights movement.
2
His hypocrisy is breathtaking based on his failed attempts in Newark.
They don't work other than for the students they carefully cherry-pick from the public schools. Great for those selected. Not so much for those left behind.
Public education is the key to a fully functioning democracy. Not separating kids into haves and have nots.
2
This opinion piece represents all the reasons I will never, ever vote for Cory Booker or any candidate like him. Neo-liberal, corporatist and incredibly patronizing. Why should I listen to someone who has such obvious contempt for progressives?
2
Public Charter schools are not public. The charter school industry put the name Public in their title to sweeten-up and hide the fact that they are Privatized schools. Booker can put lipstick on this pig but its still a pig. Booker disingenuous as always ignores the facts that Charter schools are not subject transparency laws like real public schools are by law required to do. If you want to know a teachers
pay or how taxpayers money is spent tough nuts a charter school does not have to provide that information. In 2014, when the New York state controller wanted to audit the books of Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy, the charter leader took him to court and won, barring the state from trying to see how public tax dollars were spent. And Eva is paid half a million a year in her job. So-called public Charter Schools are not even subject to state laws.
Charter schools also select who gets in and how to boot student. Special-needs students can be denied or programs for them are not provided. There is also no local control over these privatized schools. There is no elected school board. The list goes on. Booker
fails in being upfront about the real details of Charter Schools. Like the CS industry profiteers he purposely uses “Public” in the title/charters of these schools to legitimize and soften what these schools really are: Private schools. Shame on Bookers. The Senator should tell the public how much money he
has been given for his support by the charter schools
industry.
3
From these overwhelming replies it is clear Booker's attempt to restart his campaign is a non-starter. Time to throw support to the progressives. He should call Ocasio Cortez and ask her advice.
1
An interesting advertisement for donations from the charter school movement by a foundering presidential candidate.
2
I'm so disappointed in Mr. Booker for this! Many things can pass the litmus test he suggests, yet have undermining side effects. Charter schools are a dirty bandaid on a public school system that reflects the systemic racism of our society and must be fixed. The infection will inevitably spread and kill the public school system, truly one of the gems of American social progress.
2
Well, there are a lot of problems in the public school system, and most of them have one common denominator: the monetary poverty in that school district. Schools in wealthy districts have most of what they need; schools in poor districts have very little of what they need, whether in classrooms, teachers, parental guidance of students, or student preparedness.
This cuts across all racial lines: it's not about ethnicity. It's about money, and nothing will change until the wealth disparity is addressed. Even pouring money into schools won't help unless the living conditions outside the schoolroom rise to a decent standard so that schoolchildren have the social stability necessary
This entire op ed is clearly a defense of giving every parent a voucher and letting them choose a charter, public, or private school that is willing to teach their kid.
Booker uses the same pro-voucher propaganda about how we need to just give students vouchers so they aren't limited by their zip code.
If you support the Betsy DeVos idea of vouchers, this op ed would make you happy, knowing that there is a candidate in the Democratic primary who clearly has embraced the reasons why vouchers must be given to all parents.
Of course, if you don't support vouchers, then Booker's reasons seem rather ridiculous since Booker is clearly implying that public magnet schools are huge failures and expanding public magnets is no solution and instead resources should be given to private CEOs to open private charters that pick the student they want to teach. And how is that different than vouchers, again, Senator Booker?
2
I'm uncomfortable with the allocation of government money to private organizations. That includes charter schools.
The problem is, how that money is spent needs to be monitored. All too often, though, the government agency that is to do the monitoring has its budget cut simultaneously.
2
And this is why I will not vote for Cory Booker. Advocates of charter schools have not effectively explained why they represent a better, more equitable alternative to just making all public schools better, more well-funded, staffed, and resourced. Why create a separate, generally non-unionized, and more market-incentivized system that takes money away from struggling public schools rather than allow experiments in public schools? Why exacerbate a condition where *some*schools will be better than others - where *some* students will get better opportunities than others?
2
As a public high school teacher, I don't understand the point of making a new public charter school. It seems to me that if the admission is based on lottery and no other requirements, like GPA or test scores, it'll just be a smaller pool of the same sorts of students at the failing school; if there are requirements, then there will be a hierarchy. In Las Vegas where I teach, charter schools are used as a way of getting motivated students away from the unmotivated ones. So, the public school will become a lower-tier school than the charter school. If you think this won't have a cyclical effect on the teaching talent that comes through the school, you're wrong. It's very draining teaching at a school where the kids have no motivation to be education, no matter how legitimate their apathy might be. So good teachers will leave the public schools for the charter, and the education gap will widen. Why not work to fix the public schools instead of abandoning them?
1
@Debra But what are the bright and motivated students to do in the meantime?
And I suspect that it's the motivated parents of those students who make the effort to enter the lottery, so it will be a different mix.
Booker says - "Fifty years later, access to a high-quality public education still often hinges on the ZIP code a child lives in, skin color and the size of the family’s bank account. . ." - and unfortunately public charter schools do nothing to combat this reality. In fact they actually contribute to segregation because they tend to keep low-income kids in their own neighborhood going to public charter schools with other low-income kids. Often these failed public-private partnerships have fewer resources than the low-performing public school - they rarely have robust special education services, preferring to just kick out anyone with special needs, and on average don't perform any better than the local public school. Sure the "best" public charter schools are great - but often these schools are not primarily serving low-income kids. They are usually specialty schools that attract middle and upper-middle income families living in urban areas. So if politicians want to support public charter schools they need to be honest about their limits and not use low-income kids as a shield to protect public-private partnerships where unaccountable private organizations get to grab public school funding for "experimental learning"
1
It is really important that Booker's ideas about charters are shared by Mike Bloomberg, who was a rabid advocate for giving public school resources to charters run by CEOs his billionaire pals liked.
It is really important to note that Mike Bloomberg was the guy who just yesterday finally acknowledged that targeting African-Americans for stop and frisk was a racist idea.
I wonder if Bloomberg will ever acknowledge that targeting African-American charter school Kindergarten children for suspension and punishment isn't necessary.
The people promoting charters never had a problem with charters that suspended 20% or more of their Kindergarten class because those charters were always the ones serving students from the same populations that Bloomberg insisted must be stopped and frisked.
There are people like Cory Booker who have looked the other way. I'd like to see someone ask him if he believes that a charter that suspends 20% of its 5 year olds is really only suspending the most violent children who absolutely needed to be treated that way to keep the school "safe". That justification reminds us of the justification for excessive stop and frisk policies.
2
voters ought to be reminded that Senator Booker served as Mayor of Newark from 2006 through 2013 - thus the data he cites reflects student achievement reported five years after his term ended. Odd that here he attempts to put a positive spin on data that makes plain the abject failure of the Newark school system to meet the needs of his young constituents during his eight-year term in office. An opportunity missed.
1
Charter schools may be great for the kids who get in to them, but what about the kids that don’t? There aren’t enough slots for everyone. Helping some lucky kids at the expense of the rest doesn’t seem much of an improvement to me. How about instead we do something to help everyone?
1
I agree with WalterZ. I don't understand why the charter schools' findings were not applied in the public schools. Instead, charter schools grew in number and a number of public high schools closed resulting in the students going to another public school. Results? Overcrowding. one public high school in West Philadelphia closed down and got sold to a real estate company and now the former school building is an apartment house. it was easy to transform the high -ceiling classrooms into one bedroom apartments where the bedroom is on an over-hanging loft. A researcher found out that while many charter schools advertise near-hundred percent entry to colleges for their graduates, only a few remain in the colleges they entered. They just couldn't continue. Mr. Booker, you didn't go to a charter school; you went to a good public school. I have been through many "innovations" in the US public school system. it's time to stop innovating and make sure the teachers teach and demand that their students learn.
1
I have yet to see many comments from a parent whose children attended a Public Charter school in Oregon. While I cannot speak to problems some may have or for-profit schools I can attest to the benefit for my son.
He was speech delayed and received early intervention services until the first grade and then released. He continued to struggle and underperform, yet was too “ high functioning” for further testing. I finally paid myself for a neuropsychologist who diagnosed possible Aspergers and an unspecified learning disability. The story goes on with years of struggle, discouragement and self paid tutors.
By the eighth grade he was depressed and wanted to quit. I enrolled him in a Public Charter School with their full knowledge of his struggles and diagnosis. At that school they helped him to develop another IEP ( individualized educational plan) and looked at him as an individual. He began to thrive. He used dictation software and had personal attention. He graduated with a full high school diploma passing all state mandated testing and is now in the Air Force and has nearly finished his AA in Criminal Justice. Had it not been for that school I believe he would have dropped out of high school.
I recognize the anecdotal nature of the comment but individuals matter and the one size fits all nature of the public school system has its limitations.
4
When he was Mayor, Corey Booker succeeded in changing public schools because the unions representing the faculty and the administrators were willing to change. That is not the case in many communities. Obstinate resistance to change continues to characterize many public school systems.
The layers of administration without which so many private schools function and the difficulty of removing inadequate faculty remain. Some years ago, The New Yorker provided an lengthy review of the latter problem in an article titled "The Rubber Room."
I favor issuing vouchers to parents valid for payment at the accredited school of their choice. After all, monopolies are rarely helpful.
2
@Quiet Waiting , attacking public schools as you do, and personal character attacks on good people who happen to disagree with you, have accompanied the kind of "I know best" top-down attitudes that have created such difficulties in this matter. Perhaps you might listen with an open mind to the "obstinate" parents, teachers, citizens--including college teachers like me--who have seen charter schools that are not at all the miracle cures that they are touted to be. Faculty in high schools have been denigrated, overworked, disrespected-- many quitting during the first five years--largely as these efforts to cause public education to appear (or be) "failed", so that corporate pals like Betsy DeVos and Company can "save" them. Bringing corporate dedication to profit, however disguised, whether "monopoly" or not, does not strike us all as the answer. Letting teachers and schools serve the public, funding them rightly, respecting teachers, and restoring respect for learning throughout the land--those will help. Let's try those, why don't we?
2
@jb - You accused me of "...personal character attacks on good people who happen to disagree with me." I have not attacked the character of any individual and I hope you are not suggesting that my decision to cite excessive numbers of administrators or the presence of some faculty who do not deserve employment is a character attack,
Like you, I teach in a college. I begin each year reading freshman essays replete with errors that their authors should have stopped making by the time they finished middle school. If charter schools or private schools. including non-profit schools such as the many religious ones in my community, can do a better job, I am quite willing to let them do that job.
2
@Quiet Waiting , perhaps I misunderstood your claim that "obstinate" opponents' mere hatred of change caused them to balk at your wishes--rather than considering them as worthy of respectful hearing.
1
I think charter schools are an absolute must for families that are poor but actually care about their children's education, and are trying to change the opportunities available to their children.
The worst public schools cannot be changed by more money, despite what the teachers unions would have you believe.
Yes the buildings themselves may need to be updated and make sure that students have proper textbooks and such, but if parents are not involved the students will continue to fail.
Parents need somewhere to send their children that is safe, and a place where they possibly can have their children excel and get into a decent college eventually.
The public school system also needs to dump many incompetent administrators with hefty paychecks, but no one seems to want to talk about that.
4
I passionately agree that we need to be open to good ideas that don't fit in a specific "ideological box." But this piece doesn't make a case for this idea being good; it makes a case for public education reform as a key issue that needs to be front and center in 2020.
The argument that options are necessary hinges on the longstanding issue of underfunded public education. Instead of advocating for stopgap measures, this piece should be a call to arms about the real problem. The majority of voters cannot afford private schools - this is has massive bipartisan appeal.
Public charters are not the only alternative to leaving lower income communities waiting and suffering indefinitely. Let's actually, you know, help them. Let's fic what broke instead of gambling on experimental new options. That's money we should pump into the existing educational infrastructure, because the federal government has a duty to ensure every child gets a quality education free of charge. No voucher necessary.
2
I could not agree less with this piece.
Charter schools syphon precious money away from public schools. In NJ, each student brings with them a significant amount of state aid. When that student leaves, they take the money with them. What they don't take is the fixed costs. So where do the ensuing cuts come from? Programs.
Further--charter schools can sometimes be pet projects. A Chinese language school is one example but there are others.
If public schools were adequately funded, that would be one thing. If teachers were adequately paid, that would be another. But as health care costs soar, teachers are seeing their pay diminish and there is not sufficient state or federal aid. We simply cannot afford to have students be syphoned off into pet cause-schools. That wrecks public school for everyone else.
Further, this is not a theory. This is what has happened in districts already.
I am surprised at Senator Booker, especially coming from a state like NJ, where public education is NOT failing. I would think he would look to some of the districts that are thriving as models and leverage that knowledge into a system for all. But to advocate for a methodology that we KNOW, for sure, wrecks thriving public schools---well, that is bad policy and it reflects poorly on him.
4
I think it's telling that Booker cites the Center on Reinventing Public Education, an organization funded by charter school advocates such as random rich guys who think "success" in a narrow field entitles them to drive education policy in our country, and comes up with "research" that just so happens to favor things like (surprise!) lowering teacher pay and busting unions. Interestingly, Booker refers to "louder, more privileged voices in the party," such as teacher's unions, that actually represent hundreds of thousands of working educators, as though charter advocates and billionaires relentlessly trying to push charter schools are somehow being ignored by Dem leadership.
Of course there are good charter schools, just as there are good public schools. And there are both great teachers and weak teachers at both kinds of schools.
What Booker conveniently fails to address in this article is that the primary difference, in the real world, between charters and public schools is that charters get to implement "innovations" like paying administrators more and teachers less, resisting unionization even within districts that have unions for traditional public schools, squeezing more out of employees for less compensation and security, and operating with far less public oversight than public schools. Oh, and I'm sure he'd be shocked to learn that many of these charters "counsel out" difficult students, disabled students, or simply those who fall behind and hurt their numbers.
3
I could not agree less with this piece.
Charter schools syphon precious money away from public schools. In NJ, each student brings with them a significant amount of state aid. When that student leaves, they take the money with them. What they don't take is the fixed costs. So where do the ensuing cuts come from? Programs.
Further--charter schools can sometimes be pet projects. A Chinese language school, is one example.
If public schools were adequately funded, that would be one thing. If teachers were adequately paid, that would be another. But as health care costs soar, teachers are seeing their pay diminish and there is not sufficient state of federal aid. We simply cannot afford to have students be syphoned of f into pet cause-schools which then wreck public school for everyone else.
2
I don't understand how a charter school can be considered inclusive and equitable when only some kids get to go and the money that pays for it is taken from the education of the kids who don't.
3
Four questions here:
1) What causes a "failing school"?
2) What are successful charter schools doing that public schools are not?
3) Why must we assume that the profit motive which operates in charter schools is essential in any discussion about achieving better schools?
4) Why can't public schools emulate the lessons of charter schools when there is no copyright or exclusivity to their insights?
If we don't understand the causes of schools that fail, and if public education will not disappear or go away, then how will we solve the situation of providing good public education?
There is no reason why effective charter schools cannot be studied and learned from. If it is truly about being able to attract the best teachers, then can we admit that the pool of top teachers is not available to everyone because all teachers, everyone, cannot be the best, by definition.
Profit and education generally don't mix, because a love of learning and a love of making the highest salary are generally not compatible. A teacher who is motivated by money must check that motivation at the door if he/she is to truly impart a love of the subject matter, in general.
If charter schools "have the answers," then why not have them share those solutions with public school administrators, college education departments, and current teaching faculty? It would seem like we could all benefit from those answers.
4
@Srose
Four answers:
1) So-called under-performing or "failing" schools are without exception located in impoverished communities with family dysfunction being a common denominator.
2) So-called "successful" charter schools produce relatively better standardized test scores by cherry picking well behaved, compliant students who have supportive and engaged parents. And by excluding or culling the special needs, ELLs. and the non-compliant children who do not respond to a strict test-prep curriculum.
3) Not a relevant assumption.
4) See #2. Exclusionary policies are not legal in the public school system which is charged with educating ALL students. Charters have no secret, magical methodologies that they will not divulge because they do not exist.
It's obscene how charter schools have been used as a political tool to destroy the teachers' unions - because that's what they are. As another commenter has pointed out, these schools originally were set up to test new ideas on what works. In New York City, they have become simply a blunt instrument to rail against the teachers' union. It's not even disguised - they are funded by hedge fund billionaires intent on diminishing the union's power. What has risen up instead is a system of charter schools that markets itself cleverly to cherry-pick students, getting those that are likely to perform better with parents who are highly committed to their children's education (i.e. likely to read to their children, make sure they do their homework, etc.). What a surprise that these students do better than the public school students! Instead of then saying, "Hey public schools, try our approach," the charters go to Albany and lobby against better funding of public education (of course). Of course, the public schools CANNOT adopt an approach that cherry-picks students. The tragedy of this is, of course, that public resources available for public schools are reduced because of competition from unfairly advantaged charters. What a phenomenal joke that they go around saying they are better and using every opportunity to denigrate the public schools. Imagine how great the public schools would be if this competition did not exist. Moskowitz can shove it.
8
Stuart - such a law would be unconstitutional, even ignoring the rights of the child's other parent. But we are free to lookout where candidates send their children to school when we decide for whom to vote,
I'm not dogmatic, but its absolutely clear that charter schools siphon off money from the public schools at large.
The entire point is to improve the public schools as a whole, not create a two tier system.
6
Let's be clear about the "false choice" Cory Booker insists we must make:
We must NOT establish magnet schools that are overseen by the public school system. Instead, the franchise for magnet schools MUST be given to private CEOs because ... well, nowhere in this anti-public school screed did Cory Booker explain why private operated charter schools with no oversight using public money are better than public magnet schools with oversight.
It's telling that charter advocates like Cory Booker never point to the success of public magnet schools to fight for more public magnet schools.
The question is, why not?
Booker can claim that Harvard teaches the exact same students as CUNY and just does a better job with them, but that doesn't make it true. But by Booker's reasoning, we must direct all our resources to Harvard because the results are so much better.
By Booker's logic, the fact that Harvard is a private school is why it is superior to CUNY and therefore Harvard and its administrators should be lavishly rewarded for doing such a great job teaching the most disadvantaged and struggling students.
I'm tired of faux Democrats like Booker ignoring public magnets in favor of privately operated charters. It's clear that his goal is not better schools for all, but helping privatize public education as his billionaire donors want,
7
Anyone with an open enough mind should look at New Orleans charter school experience since Hurricane Katrina. As a Democrat and activist for better public education opprtunities in 1990's, I was well aware of the horrific failure of our public school system to meet students' needs. Since Hurricane Katrina, all school are now run on a charter basis and we have seen improvement in test score across the board. This includes for-profit organizations that have worked alongside non-profits. There were of course problems that arose and legitimate complaints around personnel and policy as the system worked through the transition. But today schools are held accountable, those that fail to meet established standards lose their charters.
Our students are enjoying a higher quality of education and the city is benefitting by offering all its citizens well run, student oriented education.
4
@Bill Kappel , I agree that looking at New Orleans is a good idea--of a case where charter schools are being credited for more than they have achieved. But there's not time in these comments to address this, pro or con. Interested people might read this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2018/09/04/real-story-new-orleans-its-charter-schools/
2
In Michigan, thanks to the DeVos/Prince families, charter schools are far less accountable than Public Schools. Their proliferation has resulted in more segregation and fracturing of local social cohesion. Which I believe is the objective in some quarters. More chaos more votes for ultra conservatives. In my observation schools in areas with out charter schools within their district tend to score higher than those with, something that needs study.
5
@Riverwoman
Indeed.
1
As an inner city educator we need to rethink our public schools. Tourist travel to NYC for our expensive world class museums, attractions & landmarks yet many of our students in the outer boro's are missing out on these middle class experiences. I don't remember most of what I read in textbooks but as an adult I'll never forget all of the things I saw and did.
I tried to give my students experiences; visiting Ellis Island, the 9/11 Memorial and Museum, Tenement Museum and Chinatown lunch, a Broadway Show, the Cloisters, Sony Wonder Lab ... I was able to connect with my students and their families (they wanted to come along) and expose them to academics in a fun & memorable way. I applied for Target Grants, found free events and reached out to museums and venues across the city.
Mayor DiBlasio & Chancellor Carranza talk about limiting accelerated and gifted programs in NYC, I believe we need to offer all of our public and charter students a world class education in our world class city!
1
Senator Booker
Pay teachers a good salary and hold them accountable .
Cut school administrators in half.
Every state university system should develop a teacher scholarship system based on academic standards.
Example..
After the third semester students would apply for acceptance and if qualified for the program would receive free tuition and room and board and books and fees plus a monthly stipend of $500.00. Upon graduation the student would owe the state two years in a low income area.
7
@libel
That's not a bad idea at all.
Here's the problem with your opinion, senator: the kids that remain in public schools, when active charter schools are present and funded, tend to be the neediest kids - either because the parents don't see other educational opportunities, or, sometimes, because the charter school does not have the resources to meet these children's needs. This tends to leave traditional public schools with a population with greater and greater educational needs, and fewer and fewer resources. Eventually, this becomes a death spiral. Moreover, as I am sure you know, schools are a focus of a community - if kids go to a school outside of the attendance area, this tends to lead to significant community disruptions. We all want the best for our kids - but we should want the best for ALL kids - because all of our futures are impacted.
3
Or we could just adequately fund all public schools. But that idea is too obvious.
6
Is it reasonable to let parents choose the school they believe is best for their kids?
Then, have the government give those schools more money to support the increasing number of kids that want to go there.
Would this help weed out the bad actors (e.g. charter schools that aren't providing good education)?
2
It's simple -- at least if you believe in a society that considers a good education as a right and not as a matter of affordability or personal circumstance.
Fund all public schools well, regardless of neighbourhood. Teach modern, secular curriculums. Pay public school teachers decent salaries. Make paying public school taxes mandatory, not a choice, and do not allow tax write-offs for those parents who wish to send their children to private schools.
Parents should have every right to enrol their children in the private school system, but they, and their governments, should not be able to do so at the expense of the public one.
4
Booker is absolutely correct in his insights and recommendations. As an educator who has worked as an inner-city-based teacher and administrator at the secondary level for both a large-city school system and for 2 public charter school organizations over 2 decades, my observation is that the key is to offer high quality, ambitious, community-rooted schools for all children in the U.S. Results come from talented, passionate educators (of course with appropriate compensation and a share of workplace governance) and involved parents, regardless of their income or personal educational level attained. Finally, teachers and administrators need the freedom to innovate, to customize the school experience to best challenge and support their students and families.
1
Charter schools were intended to be a testing ground for figuring out the best practices in a classroom. Then that information was to be applied to the public schools.
Instead they have evolved into a kind of separate system that is antagonistic to the public schools.
It has been demonstrated over and over that a diverse classroom (gender, race, ethnicity, wealth, etc.) produces the best outcomes (see reporting by Nikole Hannah-Jones). Charter schools create far less diverse settings and drain resources.
The false promise of the charter school has turned into a political football and needs to return to its original intent.
198
@WalterZ
I think about charters as being cousins to programs like Teach for America - which got its start sending recent college graduates to intensive summer boot camps and then areas with dire teacher shortages but morphed into a 2-year resume-padder for ambitious elite graduates that directly undercuts veteran career teachers in cities like New Orleans.
Whether the initial "mission" was legitimate or always a Trojan horse for an unpopular end goal is irrelevant. The outcome, somehow, is always the same: more instability and precariousness for everyone who isn't firmly establish at the top of the pyramid, with mixed results (at best) for the people they claim to really care about.
It's a scam.
29
@WalterZ “Instead they have evolved into a kind of separate system that is antagonistic towards the public schools.”
Here in NYC the antagonism has flowed in the other direction, from the public schools (and teachers unions) towards the charter schools. Despite strong track records and satisfied parents, successful charter schools have to fight for space and operating permissions. In fact, the state has had to intervene to enforce fairness when the local government would not.
12
@WalterZ Spot on. If charter schools would be used as testing grounds--a benchmarking experiment under an evaluation microscope to identify best practices to move to all public schools--they would be much more useful and we would not need to keep adding more of them to draw maximum value from them. This would take those who taken sides being willing to change & collaborate. Teachers unions & administrators would need to be open and much more willing to seriously attempt best practices identified in charter evaluations. And charter administrators would need to change their focus to improving & perfecting practices in a small number of schools rather than building empires of many charters in their systems. And state & local governments will have to devise ways for whatever number of charters they enable NOT to drain funds from traditional public schools.
@WalterZ you're also right about diversity in the classroom producing the best outcomes. Thorough school integration would be a much more efficient way to improve school outcomes across the board than adding numerous more charter schools.
2
Excellent column. I hope that you have a chance to argue for public charter schools in the Democratic debates.
1
What is it about charter schools that make so many parents want to send their kids there?
Is it possible that urban public schools are not doing their job of educating poor and minority youths? Well, yes.
2
Charter schools were sold as "laboratories" for developing innovative teaching methods that could be rolled out and scaled up to improve public schools. You don't really hear that anymore.
As the smokescreen has drifted away with the wind, charter school supporters are left with nothing more than ad hominem attacks on public schools supporters--supposedly we cannot think outside "ideological boxes" and are dismissed as "privileged voices."
If charter schools were willing to work within the structure of a union workforce at union wages, then it might be possible to see this as primarily about innovation instead of money. If charter schools were willing to take on all students and not expel students who are problematic, then it might be possible to see this as something other than filtering and leaving "problem" kids behind for others to deal with.
But they are not.
22
@Yellow Dog Democrat
As you state, charter and religious schools are free to expel children with problem behaviors, which public non-charter schools are not. This is the biggest issue I have with comparing public schools with charter and religious schools. Some states, such as Ohio, have withheld needed funding from schools and have kept the money Ohio's "rainy day fund". All children could be helped with smaller class sizes and an aid if needed.
5
Thank you, Senator Booker. There is a difference between public charter and private for-profit charter, just as there is a difference in accountability between public and private schools. Most public charters have the same accountability as the public school and work within the school districts. They provide options in places where public schools might not be the best fit or are failing. And when buildings are falling apart, when there is poor administration and fear of violence, yes parents want to have a choice.
The attitude that everyone should go to public school is disingenuous in its failure to recognize that public schools are not equal. Someone proposed politicians send their children to public schools — many do. But their public schools are not the failing ones in inner city districts or rural communities. There is a vast disparity in funding, in quality of teachers, in teacher salaries, and in education provided in America’s public school system. Wealthy parents have choices—everything from private to moving to better districts. Yet we have a system where poor parents are arrested for falsifying information in an attempt to have their children attend a better school outside their zip code.
Our public schools are failing due to lack of equity. Charter is not the problem. It is not a the solution either. It is one option in a toolbox of education. Blaming charters for failing public schools is a scapegoating distraction from addressing the real problems.
2
@Dee
I would do some research because you are dead wrong. The vast majority of charter schools are "non profit " in name only. The head of NYC "non profit" Success Academy is paid $800.000 a year for 46 schools that have been exposed for forcing out children they considered difficult ,something a public school is not allowed to do. They pay teaches less, have NO rules on ethics so Success Academy and other charters also employ the relatives of the "owners" for fat salaries. In AZ all charter schools are "non profit" despite massive scandals including one that got 46 Million that it paid to its one separate "private" company but was still classified a "non profit" another online non profit spent as little as $300 per student. Again do some research re alleged "non profit" Charter Schools
Thank you Cory Booker for thinking outside the box. Your experience shows that taking risks to solve the problem of failing public schools can open up opportunities for our students. We have learned the difference between private and public charters through trial and error. Not everything we try will work, but those who have the courage to try are the leaders our country needs.
79
@Steve Our kids deserve better than trial and error. Policymakers should have taken more steps to insulate kids from the risks of for-profit schools, and created more of a foundation for all schools to be able to prosper. I'm in Michigan, where we've seen our schools decline to the bottom five in the last fifteen years because of competition amongst both public and charter schools for dollars that kids bring in. It's disheartening and disgusting to see our kids used as guinea pigs for anything labelled "best practices". They deserve better. Charters can offer a variety of benefits but only when managed effectively, and when they're held to the same standards public schools are, especially in terms of accessibility and accountability.
7
@Steve
Completely agree.
Everyone on this comment section needs to see the documentary “Waiting for Superman”
5
The reality in my rather affluent area north of Charlotte is that for profit charter schools are designed to convince white people that they are better and more exclusive schools than traditional public schools and to draw children and dollars from those real public schools. The charter schools don’t provide buses or lunches and, as such, few lower income students attend and you end up with de facto segregation and you suck dollars and influence from traditional public schools. Some truly not for profit organic charter schools can be justified but our GOP legislature has created a free for all allowing a multitude of for profit entities that market to insecure middle class whites.
4
It’s disappointing but not surprising that Booker refuses to acknowledge where he’s gone wrong promoting so called “school choice.” Instead, he opts to attack the progressive wing of the party for being “privileged.”
Charter schools suck up much needed funding from the public system, choose only a small selection of students, have limited community oversight, and refuse to allow teachers to unionize. Stop presenting charters as a “rational” policy proposal and be bold enough to fight for robust and progressive funding for quality public education for all.
164
@PhillyG Though I agree with a lot of what you say, not all charter schools prevent or oppose unionization. Booker is right that there are publicly run charters and privately one runs, and there are districts that carefully monitor charters and hold them accountable in the same ways that they do other public schools. Where I live and work in Oakland and San Francisco, there are charters that were created by teachers working with parents to explore alternative approaches such as social justice academies. The question is, once we know that something works, why don't we make it available to all students in the district, rather than setting up a have-vs-have-not dynamic.
9
@KateR As a parent/founder of a highly effective charter school, I would like to offer that there is no reason a traditional public school cannot adopt the successful, innovative ways of a charter school. In fact, some have. The trend from the start however, has been for Traditional Public Schools (TPS) to complain that charters 'take their children' and along with them 'their' dollars. This discussion should be child-focused, not centered on unions or political ideologies.
@PhillyG Texas has a strong portfolio of charter schools and believe it or not, some of the strictest oversight. Three strikes in three years, and a charter school is closed, no due process. TPS must have three strikes in five years, and even then, it is unlikely that they will actually be closed.
10
@Sailor
You simply cannot lump all charter schools together. The fact of the matter is that the bad ones garner the most attention. As someone who has worked in charter schools for over a decade, i can tell you I've worked at incredible schools that have the most important interest in mind: our children and their love of learning. Oversight in California is much tougher on charter schools- we have far more scrutiny than standard public schools. We don't get special treatment, and the misconception that charter schools cherry pick only the best students is perpetuated by the opponents. We work together with the school board in our county and were granted a charter because we exemplified best practices. And we are up for renewal every three years to show that we are continuing to refine and develop our school. I think what Booker is essentially saying is to find and focus on those schools that ARE working (and not just by test scores) and share those practices. I absolutely love teaching and couldn't imagine doing anything else. I've taught in traditional public and private schools as well, but teaching in charter schools have allowed me to be and do my best work with children.
9
You just lost any consideration as a candidate from me. In OUR town charter schools are the ones that swoop in, charging for education, sucking up funds from already struggling public schools, and 'teach' with no teaching standards applied. They are allowed to decline to teach kids with special needs and they are a for-profit enterprise which makes me mad. It is not the ELITES who want to charge for education, and make it harder for public schools and public school teachers who have TRAINING to survive. It is the elites who want to tank our amazing public ed. system and then, once making it impoverished and tattered swoop in and start charging. Did Betsy De Vos and her ed-for-profit gangs get in your ear??? The solution is to PROPERLY fund public ed, not let the sharks take over.
5
This support for the bogus idea that Charter Schools are better than fully funding Public Schools is the answer to poor educational opportunities is one of two reasons I have never considered Senator Booker in the Democratic primary for President. Along with the destruction of the Newark Public Library system, Senator booker has shown that he just doesn't understand the importance of high quality public education and literacy.
2
To ignore the wealth gap between schools, which lurks implicitly in Mr. Booker's essay, is to ignore one of the root causes of disparity between "poor-performing schools" and successful ones: poverty.
1
Charter is the best tool to degrade public schools. Elitism American style.
3
Mr. Booker raises good points. Is he, also, prepared to tackle other educational issues that might cost him serious votes, starting with tenure for K-12 teachers? That's corrosive, and for obvious reasons. Whether you're a welder or a sixth grade teacher, it would seem that your motivation to do a good job might erode after five, ten, fifteen years on the job. If you're a welder and don't improve, you get fired. If you're a teacher, you are pretty much untouchable, so long as you don't show up drunk or diddle kids.
I have heard many arguments against tenure for K-12 teachers that make sense to me, but not a single argument in favor of tenure that makes sense to me. Perhaps I am stupid. I am, after all, the product of public schools.
@August West , over half of new teachers quit the field within five years, after all their training and hope. It's not because the work is too easy or the life too sweet. They're driven out by a campaign of vilification, over-testing, deliberate overwork in planning, class sizes, anonymous student "evaluations", being thrown under the bus for angry parents or administrative bullies. Oh, and by mean-spirited lies like those some commenters here allege, I'm sorry to note.
3
@August West , and no, I don't think it was the public schools' fault.
Everyone likes new ideas Mr. Booker. But that's not what charter schools are about. The republicans have been pushing the charter school issue as a means of undermining public education. Why? Because public school teachers have strong unions and the right wingers oppose unions at every opportunity. Surely a man with your intellect and political experience know that. Please stop trying to gain attention by parroting worn out right wing red herring nonsense. It diminishes you.
5
@wyleecoyoteus , yes. Universities had no unions, and now well over half of teachers are kept part-timed, without benefits or raises for several decades now. They are exhausted and near poverty, very dedicated, but headed for real poverty in age. That's the dream come true for the teacher-basher corporate crew and their plan to "save" education. If only computers in homes were the new "education", or maybe computers in "study areas" for parents who work. No overhead, no human teachers to care or answer or share--just corporate "learning modules" and the sweet sound of billions rushing into the corporate suites. And yes, they are the actual "elite", from education head DeVos to Booker here. He really is one of them.
3
It’s a nice sentiment and one of the things I strongly agree with Senator Booker on. However, lets get real here. Higher income white liberals and teacher unions are huge democrat party donors and largely hate charter schools. Low middle and low income black and hispanic democrat voters are much more supportive of charter schools, and not surprisingly have much less money to donate to political fundraisers.
Its all too predictable in today’s political environment which group wins out here.
@Roy , it's "democratic party." And "democratic voters."
Your republican affiliation is no surprise to many of us. And please, don't pretend to favor low and middle come minorities. The republican nature simply doesn't allow it, and it gives a quality of disingenuous falsity to the whole. That is only one reason that I request a citation for your claim that minorities with low incomes favor charters. I'll check back.
1
This set of platitudes and truisms and data avoided is previsely why I don’t think Cory Booker should be President.
3
John Oliver did a good review of the for-profit culture of many corporate charter schools. Sure, some of them are OK, but ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_htSPGAY7I
4
This is one heckuva hot topic in DeVos's hometown of Holland, MI, where Christian reformed school meets public school meets charter school. Look at the alma maters of local elected officials and business owners and all-around decision makers. Then get back to me about fairness and equitable treatment for all.
2
where is talk of Klein's Shock Doctrine? This is about the privatization of public goods, like education and the watering down of credentials because money needs to be made. So BAs are all you need to teach and administrators have little to no experience. Easy to transform a school and change it into a money making machine. Charter schools are just businesses masquerading as educational institutes.
2
Come on, mister Cooper, what about giving each child the same chance to good education? Very thin story, this.
I'll listen to Cory Booker's opinion's on charter schools when he stops taking money from the charter schools' lobby.
3
Booker just lost any interest I may have had in him.
3
Cory ' Corporate' Booker needs to study and read the educational works and practices of the late Dr. Barbara Sizemore regarding delivering quality affordable public school education.
Without regard of the color aka race aka ethnicity aka national origin aka socioeconomics, health and housing of the students and parents as excuses and explanations for failure.
Dr. Sizemore practiced what she preached in Chicago and the District of Columbia. She was Dean of Education at Pitt and DePaul. She was a teacher, a principal and a superintendent. See ' The Ruptured Diamond' by Dr. Sizemore.
Along with her many acolytes from the beginning and converts to her humble humane empathetic cause. See Diane Ravitch ' Reign of Error'
2
Corey Booker. Neo-liberal corporatist, confirmed.
In other words, more middle-of-the-road sameness when utter change is called for.
Have we not learned anything?
3
Yeah. No. Thanks the guy who takes millions from Wall Street.
2
Thank you, Senator Booker. If you have a knee-jerk reaction to public charter schools as bad, then you are part of the problem with public education, and you likely haven't walked in the shoes of the parents who are stuck sending their children to bad public schools. How can it be that DC public schools showed the highest rates of improvement in reading and math scores in the 4th and 8th grades, while 44% of DC students attend public charters? I ask, do you really think you know better than their own parents, which schools work for their children?
63
@Maureen, yes, I do think professionals know better than parents. Because parents are interested in what works for THEIR kids and the professionals have to figure out what works for ALL kids. The system is not perfect. Fix it; don't institutionalize bypasses.
10
@Maureen
What happens to the 44% not in the charters?
Shouldn't the improvements in the charters be applied district wide?
4
@Maureen
Booker and his cronies want to give parents 2 choices -- either an underfunded public school that has to teach every child, or a privately operated charter that is heavily subsidized and teaches only the students it wants to teach and dumps the remaining students back in the underfunded public school.
Of course parents want the first choice. But here is the rub -- that choice is NOT the parents to make. It is the charters to make. And if you want a charter but the charter doesn't want your child, you learn the hard way that the system you thought was so good was not.
Lots of people liked their "good" health insurance that didn't cover cancer treatments. They were told the same lie by people who had that health insurance -- it's wonderful! And those people weren't lying since it was wonderful when your kid is healthy, Unfortunately, they learned the hard way that it wasn't wonderful when their kid was not.
The very same people promoting private charters are also promoting private health insurance that is free to drop sick children. Those same people promoting charters say that if they give those private health insurance companies that only cover only the healthiest children and drop them when they are sick the very same money that they give to the public health insurance companies that cover the sickest kids, all children benefit, They do not. Promoting that lie hurts everyone.
13
It's encouraging that Cory Booker has a much more nuanced view of the federal role than some of the other running for president.
Having studied district & chartered public schools all over the US and having sent all 3 of our youngsters to urban district public schools, I think the debate about which is "better" district or charter - is a waste of time. We ought to be learning from the most effective schools
1 Serving cross section of students,
2. Serving primarily or exclusively students with whom traditional schools have not succeeded
3. Using particular approaches, such as Montessori, project based, etc.
There are examples of district charter collaboration around the country using "lessons learned" from the most effective schools.
1
There's nothing charters can do with students that public schools cannot. What charters do do is separate the best-supported students from the least-supported ones, leaving public schools with an even harder job to do.
Want everyone in your district to get a better public education? Alleviate poverty. Everyone wants the best for their kids; the desperately poor can't afford it.
3
The only "public" charters that outperform public schools are those that act like private schools and first make it clear to parent that their children are NOT wanted if they do not commit to everything asked of them, and then have the chutzpah of drumming out students who struggle academically even when their parents are doing everything they are asked.
Now, there are plenty of great PUBLIC schools that won't teach every kid and make that clear from the start. The only difference is that there isn't a CEO profiting handsomely from not having to spend one penny on a kid they don't want to teach. When public schools act like private schools, the savings goes to the public schools that teach the most expensive kids.
When charter schools act like private schools, the savings goes to overpaying unethical administrators who insist they deserve it because they "teach every kid who wins the lottery".
The fact that Cory Booker is now promoting schools that benefit the CEOs tells you a lot about Cory Booker.
Booker COULD be promoting more public schools that simply pick and choose students the way charter schools do.
Instead, Booker justifies a private CEO benefitting from that advantage. Something is wrong here.
As a former public school teacher Corey booker just lost my support. Throughout the article he refers to charter schools as "high performing" public charter schools. Never refers to "high performing" non-charter public schools in the same manner. Charter schools are not transparent and Booker fails to address this issue and therefore lends credence to their non-accountablility. We have seen privatization of education and it fails. Where there has been success it is negligible and short-lived. Dilitante billionaires procuring headlines for their "good works" is not a solution
Fund public education to the levels the "boomers" had and you will see a tremendous improvement. Corey that was a big swing and a miss. Go back and do your research. We do not need another Arne Duncan or Ms. DeVost running or ruining public education.
You should back public education and full funding if you want support. You are grasping at straws
1
Mr. Booker, I had considered supporting your campaign, but this op-ed is a foot shooting. Charter schools are generally a scam.
Finally, some teachers have stood up to this scam in places like L.A., Arizona, West Virginia, and Chicago. In Chicago, charter school teachers went on strike (Wait, I thought they couldn't do that!) a year before the public school teachers did.
This scam is unraveling.
3
According to Dale Russakoff’s book The Prize, Cory Booker and Mark Zuckerberg held sham town hall style meetings about chartering the Newark public schools AFTER they had already put in motion the plan to do it. This reveals the extent to which Booker has no respect for community and democratic control over education or even “parental choice.”
Here's the disparity -- we criticize and often harshly penalize parents who move their folks into better funded districts and even if it's not legal. We give them harsh sentences (maybe deserved? hard call) . Yet wealth folks, Lori Loughline,and others who also lie, but pay get very very light sentences. Where is our humanity? We are ALL better off with better schools. Felicity Huffman got nothing - a few weeks in an easy jail, yet low income folks who just want to get their kids into better school get long sentences. I say let's see Huffman and the others with millions caught up in this silly and deplorable scandal (really for USC?) make better by funding deserving kids to move towards better education prospects. Will that happen? probably not as we don't really believe in education for all.
Instead, let's pay teachers a lot more, limit classroom sizes and hire from the top of graduating classes instead of the bottom. Then, let's get rid of most of the technology (read:babysitting students so the teacher can get some work done.) and get more humans in to work one on one. Lastly, as a teacher for decades, I say get rid of most of the "extras". When fourth and fifth graders still have to look at the times tables to do their math, something is very wrong. The old saw "readin, writiin, an rithmetic", just might not be so bad, after all.
4
Senator Booker take the pledge not to take donations from corporations and the billionaire class, and voters may take your policy positions and Presidential campaign more seriously. You have many real accomplishments as a mayor and as a US Senator. But there is a reason that voters also see you as owned by corporate and billionaire interests and power. You may be right about investing in both public schools (the real long-term answer) and “good” public (non-profit) charter schools (the more immediate answer for poorer Americans living in neighborhoods with broken public schools, who need the help today). But until you clearly stand against the corruption and grotesque income inequality that is destroying America’s poor and middle class - including public schools and any public good, your NYT Op-Eds and impassioned pleas for the middle ground will fall on deaf ears. Obama won on Hope and Change and the Audacity of Hope in 2008 (by 2012, we realized that he too was more corporate-owned that we had hoped for, but was still better than the Republican alternative - and Romney was infinitely better than Trump). Your message is out of sync with where the country is in 2019/2020.
Originally, charter schools were established for experimentation, to search for better methods of education.
Today, they have evolved into a way of procuring public funds for the private sector, for profit.
They are selective in their enrollments, unlike public schools that must accept all students. They don't accept special education or poor performing students, so when they test, they get high rankings.
They not only don't accept low achieving students, they recruit the best from public schools, further lowering the rankings of their public counterparts.
3
Publicly funded [private] charter schools is a fraud. The key change that needs to happen is some type of testing before moving to the next grade. Too many ate moved automatically, and at key stages we suddenly ‘find’ the problem.
"Many public charter schools have proved to be an effective, targeted tool to give children with few other options a chance to succeed."
And many more have been disastrous boondoggles designed to siphon money from the public system. Ohio is a case in point. A staggering number of charter and online schools here have proven to be very problematic, open failures, or exemplars of white collar crime (that's particularly true of the online schools).
Our only hope for real improvement in educational outcomes is robust investment in the public school system. And I say that as a private school teacher. I have yet to meet a person who works in the private system who doesn't voice finding any voucher system problematic, and who doesn't voice wishing a monumental effort to improve the public system could be made so that all students receive the benefits ours do.
As one teacher at my school put it, "Vouchers are nothing more or less than kickbacks for those already wealthy enough to afford a private education." Whether it's two-hundred or twenty-thousand dollars back, it's a federally funded discount for those already lucky enough to afford independent schools. And those schools already provide significant financial aid based on need.
What we need to do is redirect massive sums from the MIC to education. We'd have to point far fewer guns at our fellow humans if we were even modestly better at opening minds and instilling more humane lessons.
4
Having done research and published on education policy, I can tell you that the effectiveness of charter schools is the same as the effectiveness of public schools. And once you account for the fact that some charter schools do not have to pay for benefits for teachers like public schools, the bang for the buck is the same, too. I am not suggesting that charter schools cannot be a reasonable tool in the toolbox, but the idea that some people have that charter schools are THE solution in and of themselves is just plain wrong. Opening more charter schools does not move the needle one way or the other. Finland produced an amazingly effective school system by focusing on teachers, particularly making it extremely competitive to gain admittance to education schools, standardizing teacher training, supporting early career teachers, and raising the status of the profession, as well as actually making schools more uniform (in employing best practices) rather than making them compete with each other. If we want to improve American schools, we should look at some of the same reforms. But if you want a quick spur to improvement, I suggest a law requiring all children of members of congress to attend public schools. I bet that would increase attention on the quality of public education.
178
@Stuart Finland also made school reform subsidiary to making their society more egalitarian as a whole. Their stellar educational results were an unintended byproduct of this overall goal.
10
As a retiring PS teacher who was vilified for 12 years under Bloomberg, I applaud your comment, and would give it 100 "likes" if I could.
21
@Stuart Who specifically said chartering is THE answer? Having helped create public school choices in more than 20 states, and having testified in a number of legislature, I've never heard someone make that assertion.
As to your suggestion about Member of Congress, there are huge differences among suburban, rural and urban public schools. One of the largest publicly supported school choice programs in the country is called suburban public schools - in some cases available only to people who can afford to live in exclusive suburbs that have virtually no housing for low income people.
10
It seems that the only way to improve public schools is to improve the dynamics of the families that have children attending. We have to look beyond the walls of the school. Higher wages for low income workers, access to affordable and supportive childcare, and universal preschool would go a long way towards improving the performance of the children who attend, thus improving the school system as a whole. My son’s private preschool requires at least ten hours of parent participation a year (besides tuition) and there is no way that would be possible if we didn’t live in a privileged community. As it’s been pointed out in some of the other comments, it’s hard to thrive if you’re trying to survive.
2
I am utterly opposed to Charter Schools. They create a loophole that can be so easily abused and they drain resources out of those very same failing schools. No, Cory Booker. Just nope
Thank you, Senator Booker, for calling out the hypocrisy within our party regarding charter schools. It was necessary and sobering.
I am a former teacher. The reason I am a former teacher is because I decided that I could not move the needle in Alabama given that we have a Republican supermajority in the legislature whose collective IQ is a good 20 points lower than mine, and that may come across as snotty, but trust me, I’m being conservative with my estimate. Most of these legislators are anti-science evangelicals who think we’re “gonna get raptured outa here soon,” so their brains are simply incapable of holding two opposing thoughts at once and seeing the value of both even though they might disagree with one. They have totally wrecked public education, they cannot be reasoned with because of their “I’m Baptist so I’m never wrong” mindset, so it’s no wonder that we remain dead last in everything.
Why are we in a perpetual yard brawl with Mississippi to see who can win the dead last spot in public education? One, because we have a Republican supermajority, two, because we have more evangelical Baptists than any other states, and three, because our schools are so racially divided. The “school choice” initiatives that businessmen like Del Marsh have put forth have some merit, as he’s actually very smart (not an evangelicals Baptist) and I believe he wants to do some good, but they fail to address the underlying racism that our public schools *still* grapple with.
There is no legal distinction between "public" and "for-profit" charter schools. All charter schools weaken the public school system, engagement of the community, and teacher workforce.
To draw a false dichotomy is to to play into marketing my conservative activists interested in privatizing education. Charter is charter.
2
A "good idea" that doesn't affect "louder, more privileged voices"? How cynical and disingenuous, at best.
Charter schools generally have zero accountability and transparency despite using taxpayer money.
They are immune to Freedom of Information Acts; they can be exempt from state controller audits; their boards can meet privately and in secret. The teachers aren't state certified. In some states they can request additional waivers to state law.
Even the name is a ruse - any charter school can call itself "public": https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2019/02/02/charter-schools-are-not-public-schools/#4e00a3a26832
What a disappointing screed.
2
Hasn't everybody figured out by now that charter schools are basically a scam? Senator Booker, stop making excuses for not giving real public schools, with real locally elected boards running them, all the money they need to educate our children.
1
Another form of the same old defeatist attitude used as an excuse to transfer funds from public to private interests.
Is it too much to ask a candidate to come up with a plan to fix something - without giving the treasury away to the politically connected?
The public schools, and US education in general, can't be fixed by transferring the "fortunate" few into these unique, and gamed for success schools.
1
Sure, as long as you start by closing all of Betsy DeVos' for-profit charter schools, that don't take mentally or physically disabled children. No one's tax money should be wasted on these shams.
2
Charter schools only exist to evade teacher's unions and peddle edu-tech products. Providing them public money is ridiculous. Efforts should be spent securing funding and decreasing segregation. Charter schools accomplish neither of these goals.
2
Just some helpful context: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2019/07/cory-booker-brother-failed-charter-school-presidential-race.html
It might be worth remembering that Sen. Booker's brother's charter school in Memphis was shut down by the local district after numerous operational and academic set backs.
2
If you want to understand the problems with charter schools, read Diane Ravitch's Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America's Public Schools. Support your local public schools.
2
The studies on charters have been clear.
They can occasionally outperform public schools a very slim minority of the time. A majority of the time they perform as well as public schools and a plurality of time they are MUCH worse. I don't like charters, but in my view they can be part of the education equation, in some minor and very controlled way. But thanks to Bill Gates's entirely misguided promotion of charters, a campaign that failed hugely and was swept under the rug (https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-melinda-gates-foundation-education-initiative-failure-2018-6) they have become an outsized influence on the education question. The issue is that they have been touted as some kind of broad reform engine, which they are definitely not. They can be used in specific circumstances to a small amount of good effect. Otherwise, they are part of a privatization agenda that is enormously bad for kids' education. https://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/11/charter_roundtable
Booker no doubt knows this. But let me ask you something. Do you believe that eliminating teacher's unions, lowering teacher pay, increasing class sizes, and diverting public money for private profit will help your child? If not, then you are "ideological" about charters — according to Booker.
2
Andrew Cuomo should read this! As should AOC and others representing districts with low-income students who can get a better education by being offered better schools, including charters. It's easy to say you can stand up to billionaires - it's a lot harder to stand up against the NYC teachers union. Politicians need to put children first.
1
Exodus 5:6 “You are no longer to supply the people with straw for making bricks; let them go and gather their own straw. 8 But require them to make the same number of bricks as before; don’t reduce the quota. They are lazy; that is why they are crying out,‘Let us go and sacrifice to our God.’ 9 Make the work harder for the people so that they keep working and pay no attention to lies.”
Charter schools are sold on the basis that they will be "more efficient," which translates to "less funding, fewer resources." American education will not recover until we (1) get away from this false econometric presumption, (2) ensure that all children show up to school with the basic resources they need, (3) respect public school teachers for what they are: professionals.
1
What a major disappointment from Senator Booker. This list of generalizations, platitudes and cliches does not disguise the ugly reality of charter schools. They signify that leaders have given up on equal access to high quality public education. Fund public education. We've done it before. Take a look at Finland, for example. Or read Diane Ravitch's work on the subject. Obviously Booker hasn't done that and he should before he makes anymore foolish op eds on the subject.
1
The exact things that will improve education (tracking kids by ability, separating kids with behavioral problems from those who don't, vouchers that allow public dollars to be used for private education, transferring the dollars spent on futile special needs kids to kids who are physically capable of learning, and allowing charter schools to cherry pick their students) are the exact things that the Democrat party opposes. We can have either a public school system that provides an extremely low quality education that is roughly equal for everyone, or have a public education system with some great opportunities like but de facto segregation.
1
What makes a public charter school different than a public school?
10
@JES : Per Wikicrapia, "A charter school is a school that receives government funding but operates independently of the established state school system in which it is located." I didn't read the rest and can't vouch for its accuracy or usefulness.
As I understand it, charter school are free to create their own curricula but must participate in all mandated national or statewide testing. Some people, like Booker, consider them promising because some of their populations tend to do better on those standardized tests.
But other NYT Picks comments suggest that charter schools are free to cherry-pick their students, which renders their accomplishments suspect.
Charter schools aren't the answer; as another commenter wrote, following the best-practices of nations with the best public-school systems *is*.
7
By and large, public schools are staffed by teachers, who are members of a teachers’ union. Charter schools are privately-owned ventures, which fight tooth and nail to keep unions out of their schools. Public schools are largely staffed by career educators, who frequently have teaching degrees. Charter schools are largely staffed by bright young people, most without teaching certificates or any intention of becoming career teachers. Charters frequently offer jobs to college grads and include student loan forgiveness as part of their compensation packages. When these young people complete a four or five year contract, most of them leave education to pursue other professions. Also, charter schools generally teach kids to perform well on standardized tests while public schools provide a broader education to their students.
5
@JES Don't get your facts from other commenters. If you're genuinely interested, do some research.
3
Let's go back to the time when private schools were funded solely by parents who wanted a private education for their children. Public education's loss of revenue went into severe decline as private school parents finagled public school money for their schools. First, it was textbooks. Soon, it was charter schools. But many of these schools do not support the ideals of America such as freedom of religion and fact-based science and history. Instead, these schools promulgate Christianity, no evolution, and the divine right of white Europeans to take over the New World without regard to the genocide of Native Americans and slavery of Africans. Now, public school dollars are being spent on security guards. So, overall, much less $$$ are spent on education.
I always liked the idea of having our military sponsor bake sales to raise $$$ for their mission rather than public education. Remember during WWII that Americans were encouraged to buy war bonds to support the war effort?
As some other commenters have pointed out, since charters and public schools score on average about the same (no better, no worse) on high stakes tests why do we keep supporting them? In Michigan the reason is profit. DeVos and her husband opposed accountability measures for charters in Michigan and the Republican legislature obliged. In addition, school choice has decimated many underfunded and understaffed districts who lose students to other districts who enroll their students and get the per pupil state allowance which follows them.
Booker's so called "reform" in Newark was not a success. See Dana Russakoff's book on this: https://www.amazon.com/Prize-Whos-Charge-Americas-Schools/dp/0547840055.
Booker spent his time as mayor of Newark having lunch with Wall Street donors. He is as fake and phony as they come.
Well, I'll give the good Senator a fingersnap for speaking up. Beyond that, I have zero applause for him. His stands on public education are precisely why I will not support him for president (unless he's the last one standing).
He leaves out so much.
"The treatment by many Democratic politicians of high-performing public charter schools as boogeymen has undermined the fact that many of these schools are serving low-income urban children across the country in ways that are inclusive, equitable, publicly accountable and locally driven."
Treatment? You mean having a difference of opinion? I would have thought as a politician that he had a thicker skin by now.
Apparently Booker has not read the studies nor read the articles about the cherry=picking charters do. Nor the low numbers of Special Education, ELL and homeless that they serve.
Publicly accountable? Please, you practically have to have them on tape taking a bribe and use a vise to get them out of their buildings to be shut down. And it highly depends on each state's law (he conveniently leaves that out).
Locally driven? Did he mean grass-roots because KIPP is not local. KIPP, like many charters throughout the country, is highly segregated. We all know that is not good for kids.
Booker can stand with his DFER (Democrats for Education Reform) pals. I will stand with unions who work hard every single day to make real public schools work.
1
This fails the primary test of essay writing: defining key terms (and avoiding emotive and filler text). "Public charter school" sounds like a contradiction-in-terms. So why not just define it for the reader? Exactly what's the difference between this model of school, and a "for-profit" one? "For-profit" tends to be a disparaging epithet. Is that what it is here? Let us know. At any rate, not being clear, by a politician, often hints at hidden agendas.
Charter schools are a license to steal.
1
Our rural "public" charter school has been taken over by Christian evangelicals. SO WRONG!
2
Among other false statements in Sen. Booker's push for Charter Schools is the idea that "non for profit" is good and is actually 'non for profit" in fact these "non for profits" rake in tens of millions probably billions. nationwide paying themselves. One in Arizona paid itself 46 million to companies it owned and bought private real estate with money that was supposed to go to education. New York's "Success Academy" paid its head just under $800.000 for running. 46 schools that the NYT has exposed for running "difficult" students away. Charters are a for profit scam and Sen. Booker knows it but he needs the money he gets from many of the same people who support them.
1
Corey Booker talks a good game, but the Newark school system tells a different story. I’m speaking here as a former New Jersey taxpayer, who saw hundreds of millions of public money spent on “school construction” in places like Newark, where maybe a few millions of actual construction took place. For people who cheat on this scale, the fabrication of test results and other “performance metrics” is as natural as breathing.
Outside of the wealthier districts, where property owners can exert some oversight, the New Jersey education system is deeply flawed, with Newark as a prime example. While no one individual can or should be blamed for this, anyone who points to it as a success should be treated with the utmost skepticism.
2
As usual in this debate, the writer opens with the theme of race, and suggests that charters help to even out the color divide he sees in public schools. But in my community, the hottest, most desirable, most lauded charter school is located in the wealthiest, whitest part of town. Pretty much on the county line, and as far away as possible from the poorer, browner parts of the district. It could not have been made any less available to kids from the district’s more challenged public schools. I do not think this was an accident.
The charter school system steals money from the public pocket and places it in private hands. The system is rife with abuse. It should be abolished.
1
Vouchers that allow parents to send their kids to private schools are a much more affordable solution than funding new charters or throwing more funding at poorly performing public schools. Local parish, Catholic, or other parochial schools have tremendous success in graduating students with a strong academic foundation at a fraction of the cost of a seat in a public school. Parochial schools accept students of all denominations and have contributed to the education of scores of today's leaders, scholars and entrepreneurs.
Charter schools may benefit the children that the school allows to remain within its halls, but does nothing to improve the public schools that most children will be forced to attend.
Charter schools fly under the radar and skirt the laws and regulations that public schools must obey. Problem child? Charter school kicks them out. Developmentally disabled child? Charter school kicks them out. If you ignore the inherent selection bias of charter schools, then they're (sometimes) a great alternative to public schools.
Mindlessly throwing money at public schools is not going to correct the institutional and societal issues that plague low performing schools. The problem is not with the teachers, it's with the resources and the socioeconomic bubble in which the children live. Mr. Booker has some experience with throwing money at a school system. Under him, in 2010 Newark was given $200 million from Mark Zuckerberg and other philanthropists. It was funneled to the Foundation for Newark's Future, where the money was pumped down the rat hole of bureaucratic waste with neither the city, nor the school system seeing any tangible benefit from the exercise.
4
The stated goal of charter schools is to relax some of the perceived restrictions and limitations of public schools in order to let new ideas flourish. Well if it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander. Instead of setting up a two-tiered system, let public schools do what they need to. The argument that teacher's unions are an impediment to pedagogical progress is bunk. This whole charade started with Bill Bennett's bogus report when he was Sec. of Ed. under Reagan. There has been a continuous stream of anti-public school propaganda since that is designed to undermine teacher's unions and the concept of truly public education in general. This has followed the GOP pattern of criticize a public insitution/service, underfund the service to it cannot function well, then use the poor performance as proof of its failure, and then privatize the service so that profiteers can run amok without any concern for the citizens affected. It's popular to say that we're "throwing" money at schools. Funny how I never hear it said that we're "throwing" money at the Pentagon.This opinion piece is another example of how Senator Booker can kind of sort of maybe talk a good game, but he is really nothing more than another corporate, Clinton-style Democrat. We need more of those like we need a hole in the head.
3
I have worked at private schools, public schools, and a public charter school that went bankrupt in the middle of the year.
It locked its doors at lunch time on a Wednesday and refused to ever let the students back in, or pay the teachers for the time they had already worked.
Another time, I was teaching at a public school that had to accept almost 100 students from a charter school that closed its doors one week after the state disbursed funding for the semester.
Of course, it kept all of the money from the state and our public school received nothing to absorb and educate those students.
I reject the premise that public charter schools are "full of good ideas."
While there are bound to be a few good ones, most are run by people or "management" companies that use charter schools to enrich themselves from taxpayer funds They hide behind the secrecy of closed meetings and shell companies designed to protect themselves from any and all liability.
At least in my state, charter schools have no accountability whatsoever for how they spend our public money.
Thank you, Cory Booker. I had considered you to amongst my top three considerations, but this article exposes your ignorance of reality regarding this issue.
You just lost me.
3
You can't support teacher unions by subverting teacher unions.
You can't support public schools by siphoning funds away from public schools.
There is no evidence charter schools perform any better than standard public schools. The ones who do, however, don't have robust special education programs or ESL programs, so it's a false equivalency anyway.
So Mr. Booker says "our primary litmus test for supporting a policy should be whether it is a good idea that, reasonably implemented, can help those who need it" - this makes it simple: it's not a good idea. You might "help" a handful while pushing the rest of the school further into the mire.
6
@Otis Tarnow-Loeffler Yes!!!
Why does the quality of a child’s public education depend in the US on their zip code? Happily, it doesn’t work that way in Canada.
3
@Andy Real estate, plain and simple. Property/school taxes are what fund schools therefore high taxed suburban areas tend to have the best schools near urban centers. Until the US actually gives exactly the same amount of money for each student in the country via a repository of all the money collected specifically as a school tax, the inequality of the system will never change. That is not something the liberals who live in these suburbs actually want, much like affordable housing, they fight it. Real estate is tied to schools in this country, values of homes are what concern folks the most, not an equitable education system for all or mixed income community. I know that's true right here in Westchester county.
2
The time to stop being dogmatic about charter schools will come right after steps have been taken to assure religious dogma plays no part in them.
3
@S.P., bingo. Over the years I’ve known of several charter schools that were established and run by evangelical Christians. It’s an open secret that they are religious schools. It’s a crime, really. A theft of public funds.
1
The most dogmatic about this issue are supporters of charter schools. They make the assumption that they are better than traditional public schools, never mind any evidence or any concern about the disruption they cause.
1
I taught at a public charter school in Brooklyn and was appalled by what I saw: an inhumane discipline system, young and inexperienced teachers who were "coached" by 25-year-old "experts", a warped pedagogy that was based on power and control of both teachers and students (see: Doug Lemov), and the widespread use of corporate jargon (among other things). While it may have been easy to remove ineffective teachers from this school-- no unions--the teacher turnover was so high that many did not even stay beyond one year. Very few teachers had families; the hours and schedule were hardly conducive to such a thing. And while the results or DATA may have been better than at a failing public school, the means used to arrive at those results were, in my opinion, extremely questionable. How many students with disabilities, moreover, do these types of schools turn away? So, in response to "why does it have to be an either-or/public or private argument" it is because public charters divert funding away from the public school system while operating without all the regulation and oversight required of traditional public schools. Charter school teachers in NYC, for instance, are not required to be certified and, in many cases, are certified by grad schools founded by charter schools where the pedagogy boils down to classroom management.
Overall, this school was more like a test-prep and less like a school. I hope this is not what the future of education looks like, Cory Booker.
8
@stephanie, yes, the non-union teachers are often treated as disposable. It’s common for charter schools to hire more teachers for part time work, rather than filling the positions with full time workers who would qualify for full benefits. Funny how people who sit on the far left of the sociopolitical spectrum overlook that anti-union aspect of the charter system.
1
"We refused to accept the false choice between supporting public-school teachers and giving parents options for their kids when they had none,"
The BETTER choice is to support students, not parents or teachers or administrators or bureaucrats. There is no service in this world that is really best when there's no choice, one-size-fits-all, centrally planned, with the primary focus being on paying more rather than getting better outcomes for students with a bit of liberty to choose.
3
Charter schools may benefit some, but they are clearly harming public schools and the millions of children who do not have parents doubling over to get them into a better school. Enough in enough.
9
I view charter schools as a path for good students with involved parents to get away from a failing school. There is no magic or special sauce to the charter schools, it is the student population and those student's parents that can make a difference. To suggest that parents in a failing district should stick it out and fight for change is ridiculous, they are looking for a better life for their children. Cannot speak for other areas, but NJ state taxpayers fund districts like Newark, over $800mm last year. At a funding level of $23k per student, the problem isn't money.
9
The Democrats have good hearts and want kids to be well educated. Despite Mr Booker's words, Republicans want the same thing. Republicans have grown tired of the existing establishment which has shown zero interest in reform, and has backed the charter school movement as an alternative. Clearly kids left in smaller failing public schools will suffer but at least a good number will be saved. Better to save some than none, Republicans would say.
Democrats on the other hand have no answer to what must change in public school. More money is the only answer, when studies show that significant increases in spending have not improved performance.
Underperformance in city schools has many root causes. Disruption in the classroom, and schools hesitancy to discipline and eventually expel disrupters. More single parenting, which means less time and energy to discipline kids in the house and less time to help kids with homework. Difficulty retaining good teachers because they lack the admin support to enforce discipline in the classroom and keep them physically safe. Difficulty firing poor teachers due to union rules.
Where are the leaders to state these points, which everyone knows to be true? Easier to blame republicans than stand up for the kids. Easier to fall in line with the unions lining their pockets than to stand up for the kids.
Mr Booker just wrote an impassioned plea that literally offered not one single reform. Stop the blame game. Suggest soluations.
5
@Elliot: No, republicans are for charter schools only as a way to kill public schools and pave the way for a humongous business opportunity for rich people to take even more money away from the rest of us. That being said, charter schools would be ok if: they had to hire unionized teachers, didn't take over precious space in public schools, had to pay their own way and had to accept any child. On other words play on an even field.
3
@Larry So you are pro-choice so long as it's limited to more of the same that's been failing our kids for decades?
Charter schools are not all the same. We should look at what works and try to emulate it and at what doesn't work and eliminate it. Adults tell children to be the best they can be. They should give the children the best of what is known to work.
3
If charter schools succeed by sidestepping general guidelines and rules, then maybe the solution is in dropping the rules and let teachers teach rather than conform to irrelevant guidelines. I can think of no law passed in the past 50 years that has helped public schools succeed.
8
Charter schools make public schools worse by draining students, money, and other resources. They should be banned altogether, simple as that. Take all that money and redistribute it evenly per student across all public schools in the state.
19
@Claudia Gold Albert Einstein is widely credited with saying, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results.”
Why must everything be “either or”? Why not both is best? Every child, family, situation is different and requires specific solutions. Why must the existence of charters threaten the public schools? Can’t we figure a way for both to thrive and give families the right to choose what’s best for them?
3
@Kathryn Markel:
No. It just doesn't work that way.
Charter schools are driven by the profit motive. Education is not among their priorities.
Check out the massive campaign contributions that charter school companies make to state legislators.
The purpose is to get laws passed that allow the companies to gorge themselves from the public trough.
I received my undergraduate degree in teaching. During the course of my teacher training, I worked with public school teachers in urban and suburban settings. The teachers I worked with had stopped making any effort to teach— they were just keeping order and collecting a paycheck. To my dismay, I recognized that if I stayed in the profession I would likely end up like them. It is hard to be a good teacher.
No organization can be effective in accomplishing its mission if it can’t remove underperforming (not to mention non-performing) employees. A key difference between traditional public schools and charter schools is that the latter can remove under and non- performing teachers. Unfortunately, teacher unions make removing bad teachers effectively impossible for traditional public schools. Charter schools will threaten traditional public education for as long as teacher unions protect bad teachers.
5
@Jim Evert The "unions support bad teachers" trope is fake. Unions represent the collective interests of employees who want their work to have an impact---to be successful at teaching kids-- not the individual interests of employees who can't do their jobs. It's a "sympathetic" way to attack unions.
I was a teacher union rep for 26 years. The union did a great deal to remove bad teachers---far more than the administration did on its own initative. Teachers don't want to work with others who aren't doing their job. It's bad for kids, for the school, & for morale. People go into teaching to educate kids, and want to be successful. Like most people.
Collectively, as a union, we initiated a better evaluation system--detailed and objective; mentor programs; ongoing in-serevice programs; and other supports. We worked with the HR department to ensure that these were widely available; paid; and implemented fairly . And we supported administrators in their efforts to get bad teachers to either improve or to leave.
We communicated with unions throughout the state and the nation. What we were doing was common. It's become the norm.
The "unions support bad teachers" trope is simply one more way to attack unions. It's not supported by the facts.
8
@Jim Evert What have you personally ever read or experienced about any of this? Public schools are not a "mission" nor a Silicon Valley "project." Your statement has truth to it, and in some cases IS true, but your pedestrian generalizations are insulting to teachers. Glad you did not stick with the field.
1
@Kraig
Thank you for stating this so well. In the state where I taught the unions supported administrators in dealing with under-performing teachers. As you said, no one wants to work with teachers who aren't doing well. When ineffective teachers remained in their jobs the reason was always lack of effort by an administrator.
2
Do not further damage underfunded public schools by diverting funding to elite charter schools for the few. This is a class-based fraud designed to split the advocates for better public education.
Booker has been financed from the start of his career by wall street money. No surprise he supports corporate education for the few lucky ones and is willing to neglect the majority.
7
@Touger The only actual evidence he offers is a correlation between allowing charters and an increase in graduation rates in Newark. His article also tries to cherry pick 'high performing charter schools.'
There's a reason for this. There isn't good evidence supporting this argument.
1
Public charter schools in poor rural areas like ours deflect money from public schools. Exempt from many state and federal educational mandates about curriculum and standardized testing, teachers in these schools tend to be more free to develop and implement real student-centered educational practice. As a veteran teacher whose creativity and ability to serve ALL students has been frustrated by lack of adequate funding, coupled with crippling mandates I have continually questioned: Why not release these strangleholds on teachers, and allow all public schools to function with equal funding and teachers free to teach in the way they know to be best for their students?
10
The core issue with our public education system has to do with the fact that they are largely funded by property taxes. That means children lucky enough to be born to parents who can afford to live in wealthier communities receive a better education than those whose parents cannot. Let's stop this practice so all public schools become the best in the world.
13
On the west side of Chicago, the Noble Network of charter high schools is the only real option most students have. The city's largest neighborhood (Austin) doesn't have a high school (figure that out), but the Noble schools have filled that gap. And filled it well--the majority of their school have the city's highest rating (1+). A few are a half notch down at 1.
My only quibble is that Noble, like most charters, pays their teachers significantly less than public school teachers. Most Noble teachers are there long enough to get some experience and then move on to public school. They should all be paid a similar rate.
3
@McKlem Well, you just answered your own question. Of course they should be paid the same, but WHY do you think privatization was chosen in the first place? If you lived through the 1980's in this country the answer might come immediately... Very angering people do not figure it out.
5
Booker is polling at 2% and this is his way of rising in the polls? Charter schools have little accountability. They cherry pick students, and they still aren't doing better on standardized tests. And they take away money from cash strapped public school districts in Texas, and other places.
A former college football player, Booker threw a Hail Mary pass at the end of regulation, and it fell harmlessly out of bounds.
9
@Rafael
Charter schools do not cherry pick students. Almost all charter schools matriculate students via lottery.
Universal equal FEDERAL funding for all public schools would go a long, long way toward implementing better outcomes.
No child should have to settle for a moldy schoolroom with too few desks, poorly trained and low-paid teachers, a small library or none at all, scant funds for computers and so on, just because their parents cannot afford to pay enough to subsidize their schools. The whole notion of property taxes supporting public schools in a disgrace.
Meanwhile, of course, many commenters blame the parents. Guess that's easier than getting rid of Very Special Tax Breaks for Billionaires.
7
I went to an excellent public school in the Capital Region of New York. Do you want to know the secret to why it was so successful? FUNDING. It takes money to attract talented teachers, build classroom facilities and fund extracurriculars that lead to improved learning outcomes. You get what you pay for.
Charter schools don't only pull critical funding from public schools, they do so with far less accountability. If charters want that public money, they should have to follow public rules.
10
Parents such as your own Mr. Booker valued a good education for their children and would stop at nothing to insure that they received one. My guess is that many public schools that are failing in more impoverished communities is a result of the indifference of the parents. Poverty has a way of destroying ones pride when everyday is just a fight to survive. When children go to school hungry and improperly dressed this is not something charter schools resolve. In looking at the track record of charter schools they are no shining beacon on the hill, just ask the people of Michigan.
7
Around here, many charter school initiatives have been a ploy to slash education spending, break teachers unions, and segregate schools by race.
Most of the charter schools aren’t any better than the traditional ones, and many are worse.
If parents want to improve public education, they should organize to elect better school boards, mayors, state legislators and governors. If they don’t, charter schools usually won’t help. If they do, charter schools usually aren’t necessary.
15
Paul Plutocrat owns a charter coach. The city pays him $50 to transfer a dozen people cross town. He pays the driver $7 per hour. He cannot find qualified drivers for this rate, so he hires drivers without a CDL. They get no benefits. If they complain, they are fired without appeal. The Plutocrat Bus Company rejects passengers with walkers or other special needs. Paul receives a substantial tax break to provide this substandard service.
Personally, I would prefer the city spent the same $50 to transport 60 people cross town. Riders would know their bus and drivers are fully licensed, fairly compensated, and unionized. They would feel magnanimous that all riders, regardless of special needs, are welcome to ride. The city bus provides a public good, far more affordably than Paul Plutocrat’s company. This sounds a lot like the debate over charter schools.
9
Mr. Booker - what is a 'public charter school'? I could be wrong, but it seems that this might be a term concocted to make the term 'charter school' easier to swallow.
At the suburban public school where I teach, we. teach. EVERYONE. We develop curricula, courses, programs, and IEPs in an attempt to reach students where they are. We offer courses in all of the arts, relevant technologies from CAD to auto shop/engines, 6 languages, so many wonderful social studies and english classes. To those who continue to bash teacher unions, all of the above takes funding - beyond 'hiring the best teachers', funding provides realistic class sizes, security personnel, social workers, a lot of special ed staff, a certain amount of tech equipment (all of which has an expiration date), teacher training, classrooms without asbestos, water fountains without lead pipes...
I want this for EVERY kid. I am pretty sure all teachers do.
And I know that there are many schools that couldn't dream of it. Charter schools are a short term solution for some that exacerbates the problem in the long run. And that's the problem - 'for some'. We need quality schools for EVERY KID.
Let those who can afford it send their children to 'really good private schools'. Yes, I would love for low income families to have school choice, but I believe that if we invested in public education, the number of families wanting choice would dwindle.
15
@Connie L I'm a proud public school teacher who made the mistake of leaving for a year to teach at "a really good private school." The students were years below grade level and undisciplined while the parents were cruel and vindictive toward teachers who didn't reward their angels with A's despite gross lack of effort. In addition, they fired teachers every few months. They wanted to rehire me, but I couldn't wait to get back to public school.
9
We have a high-functioning charter school in our community, and it started with good intentions. However, it has now become an enclave for the privileged. This charter does not provide bussing and relies upon a waiting list for admission. There is nothing in place to make sure it is serving the underprivileged children in the community. It feels like it has become a free private school. Meanwhile, the test scores of the traditional public schools lag behind, but they are serving a wider population of students. If the charter school mirrored the economic diversity of the local public schools, then we could have a valuable conversation about best practices.
9
@John In Betsy DeVos's hometown no less! Surprising? NOT!!!
Charter schools can often provide a good education to some kids. Like mine. They are just another cop-out of our obligation to provide an education to all kids. In our rich community with a fair bit of public housing, charters have led to significant segregation and the rich kids in town all apply to the charters and otherwise head to private schools.
The intense 'school reform' movement in town is gone. The leaders sent their kids to public school. School board election are no longer intense battles over how to make the schools better. They are "good enough", but nothing like the education my sons got from their years in a very white charter.
4
I grew up attending an online public charter school. My parents chose it over the local public school because, at the time, it had gang problems. My charter school has always been amazing. They sent my brother and I to private speech therapy for years, gave my brother occupational therapy when required, and with the excellent education I received, I got accepted into several wonderful colleges before chosing the local CalState school.
At the same time, my charter school was underperforming. Many parents enrolled their children with learning disabilities or special educational needs because of the wonderful support my school offered. Unfortunately, it meant a portion of kids didn't test well, and my teachers were always concerned that we might lose funding because of it. However, my teachers put their students first and administration confused to help families get the services they needed.
I agree with Mr. Booker, we can't put kids into a one-size-fits-all model of education. Public schools are amazing and can be very effective, but sometimes kids need other options.
4
The idea that "markets are always the solution" is precisely why we have now become a nation of haves and have-nots, since this always ends up benefiting the already privileged (at least in the long run), and over time the gap only widens.
That Booker does not understand that this neoliberal philosophy of the last forty years has been an unmitigated disaster for our country is a good argument for why he should never be president.
16
https://www.publiccharters.org/about-charter-schools/charter-school-faq
I read enough comments to realize many readers don't know much about public charter schools. This link will answer all your questions. The main thing to know is that ALL public charter schools are tuition free. They are not profit making enterprises. Approx. 15% are managed by for-profit agencies but the profit, if it materializes, does not come from the students themselves. The other 85% are managed by non-profit agencies.
A true for-profit school is termed a private school. These schools charge tuition and operate without any public funding whereas public charter schools are part of the public school system in that they receive tax dollars too. The main difference is that a public charter school may offer a different curriculum. For example, since art and music programs are being curbed in the public schools, a charter school might offer a rich program in the arts. This will vary, of course, by state and what might be lacking in a particular community.
Mr. Booker didn't explain very well what the public charter system is, but his point is a good one. Adding public charters schools to the mix offers variety and choice to parents. Any student, regardless of his or her prior performance, may apply. Many schools use lotteries to award slots when applications are greater than opening.
7
@DeputyDog
Please read this:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2018/08/13/how-to-profit-from-your-non-profit-charter-school/#33faba693354
Many so-called non-profits adhere to the practices described in this Forbes article. Here in Los Angeles we've seen dozens of stories about these kinds of abuses of the system. They are not anomalies, but rather standard practices. Charter schools are just a way for profiteers to get on the gravy train for our tax dollars.
5
@DeputyDog We have plenty "for profit" charters in Michigan. Some are scams some are good but even the good ones pay outrageous pay to their "CEOs" which is what they call their administrators. One made $500,000 per year.
4
@DeputyDog: There is no such thing as a "non-profit" charter school.
It is just a marketing gimmick.
The charter school establishment realized that public education money was the largest source of taxpayer dollars that was being untapped by profit-making concerns, and found a way to direct it into its own bank accounts.
You have had the wool pulled over your eyes.
3
What does a national focus on charter schools do for kids in rural communities? If a county high school graduates fewer than 100 students per year, there is no population density for “school choice.” The decision to have charter schools must be a local, not national, decision. Whether they get federal funding should be based on the same requirements as public schools, including accommodating students with disabilities and reaching the same accountability standards. Beyond that, how each state and local system manages their schools is up to them, whether that includes charter or magnet schools or not.
A national focus on public education should mean making funding a priority and focusing on new ways to support students from difficult backgrounds, like homes with drug addiction, absent parents, food insecurity, abuse, and other childhood traumas. It should mean funding preschool for all as well as vocational school, and controlling college costs. What it shouldn’t mean is creating schools that are held to lower standards, whether charter schools or not, or micromanaging local schools and teachers.
7
As a child mental professional, I see mostly then negative side to charter schools. While these schools pride themselves on teaching an underserved community, they have little tolerance or empathy for children and families managing the stress of living in poverty. They suspend any child that acts out on their anger and they do not help children who are behind academically. It is because of these strategies that charter schools are succeeding.
If charter schools strive to take kids where they are, and help them succeed then I would support charter schools; but instead they expect children and families to adhere to their rigid standards and as a result weed out many children that could benefit from their services.
9
@Jr are you referring to private, for-profit charter schools?
@Jr
Charter schools vary tremendously. Its foolish to equate your experience with a few with every charter school.
Charter schools can be very successful when they do not have to accept special education students and English learner students, or even students with behavior problems. Charter schools then drain the students who are relatively "easy" to teach while leaving the public schools a ghetto with more "difficult students": special education students and English learners. Los Angeles Unified School District is an example of misguided Charter school policy funded by wealthy ideologues. However, I am sure Mr. Booker can count on campaign donations from the likes of Eli Broad and Austin Buetner and the wealthy Charter School advocates who want to destroy public education and lower their property taxes.
5
Having a choice is often desirable but risky, a dynamic apparent in reproductive services (pro or anti-choice), healthcare (keeping health insurance or not), and in public education. Democracy itself is a choice, and a risky one, considering the current administration. Freedom can be messy. Charter schools, just like continuation schools and Magnet schools, have their place. But as always, there are special interests, and most of all, lack of funds. School districts across America, the richest country in the world, lack appropriate funding.
3
A charter school is nothing but a business plan. It is a shell that might possibly contain a good school. The way to make genuine improvements in education is not with a business plan.
Genuine improvements in education result from the combined efforts of students, parents, teachers, and school administration. Charter schools are not magical ways of achieving this.
Choice is not a silver bullet, and is often counter-productive to genuine progress, although it feels good.
6
My daughter teaches in a high functioning charter school in a low income community in San Jose, CA. When I visit the school, which is frequently, I see joyful children who are engaged, excited to learn, and engaged. While test scores don’t tell the full story, it’s worth noting that this school’s scores are quite high, and higher than those of the the public schools in the same area.The teachers at this school are dedicated and work long hours. It is abundantly clear that this school is serving its community well. Thanks, Mr. Booker.
11
CA is in the middle of a huge charter school scandal where millions were stolen. This has soured my opinion of them because of the lack of financial oversight and regulation. Seems better to stick with closely regulated public schools...
10
Thank goodness Cory Booker has no chance of being the Democratic nominee. What a dishonest assessment of what's ailing inner city schools. Why not fund them properly but changing how schools are funded; using property taxes as a funding mechanism is a huge problem both for older residents and for students in lower income neighborhoods.
10
I work at a Chicago school where our administration is forced to verify addresses to prevent overcrowding. We are proud of the great work we do and a testament to what neighborhood schools can be with the right investment and leadership.
I think a major result of the rise of charter schools in Chicago has been increased competition for Chicago students. Since funding in Chicago is tied to enrollment, this competition has forced neighborhood schools to do better. However, Charters can put aside money for marketing that traditional schools cannot. Charters are then able to entice students to come to schools that are, at best, on par with the neighborhood option.
It's true that not all of our underfunded neighborhood schools are serving students as well as they should, but the same goes for Charters. While Charter schools can be closed, it is rare, and a school closing in a very disruptive event for a community and the life of a child. On the other hand, an over-saturation of schools isn't good for anyone.
2
Can Mr Booker show where Charter Schools out perform public schools using a random distribution of Students? IE that have the very similar students bodies in regards to race, sex, economic status, etc. of the schools they are trying to replace (and yes that has been the goal replacement of a "failing" school with a "better" one.)
Most studies I have seen show charters tend to be worse, unless there is opt in for the parents (a form of parental selection) or ones that use various ways of selecting students. That they also don't provide the wide array that general public schools have to support, like those for children with special needs.
The reality is that most charter schools are not equitable in the way that Mr Booker claims. No more than the difference between suburban and urban schools in most of America. A sham equality.
Mr Bookers charters tend not to achieve the "holistic" approach that he calls for. They actually, as a movement, actively work against it.
If Mr Booker wants a coalition based on repeatable improvement in education that improves education for all students, I don't think anyone would have a problem with that. But the coalition he promises is not this.
Further, there has been no rigor applied to charter schools, and often less accountability than even the most poorly run traditional public one.
This is Mr Booker's love of corporate interests shining through.
11
We have thousands of schools in this country and countless educators who have studied them. Some schools produce better outcomes than others and we should know by now what works and what doesn’t. Yet no-one has developed standard models for successful schools. Why in the world not? What’s most frustrating about these warring visions of how to structure public schools is that we should be way past all of this by now: we should have effective, affordable, replicable systems for educating our children regardless of their demographics. Why don’t we?
2
@Unbalanced
Schools in CA are governed by locally elected school boards. Their philosophies radically differ from each other, resulting in chaos and schools being a political football...
1
@Unbalanced
Standard models for "successful" schools are predicated on factors well beyond the control of schools. Therein lies the rub. The dog (family culture) always wags the tail (school culture). It is no surprise to anyone that the model for a successful school relies almost completely on two parents who are well educated, who believe in the importance of education, and who are fully supportive and engaged with their children's education in ways that go far beyond mere lip service.
3
@rab
Some schools do far better than others in areas with comparable demographics. Why do some schools with few well educated parents have far better outcomes than their peers? We should be able to repeat those successes. Different children will have different educational outcomes, but we should know by now how to achieve best results for everyone.
Lets play a game of football. I get to pick my team, and each player must follow my direction and if they cannot, or refuse to I can kick them off the team. On your team, you must take the first 11 people who walk through the door, regardless of ability, past experience, or even interest in playing. If they do not follow your direction you have to play them anyway...now, go win the Superbowl. That's the difference between public schools and charter/private schools.
13
Can we admit also that the Charter School movement is not of any interest in the suburbs. So we are really dealing with the education of urban working class kids. I volunteer in Paterson and see good kids coming out of the charters but when I see the kids who win awards etc, I see Hispanic and Asian kids, but far fewer African American kids. So it still looks like the charters are getting the motivated kids from families that are stivers. The families that have collapsed are not represented.
3
Cory Booker has great ideas, but in this article he does not clarify the business model of so called public charter schools versus private charter schools. Without knowing who is running or profiting from or how the two models are funded, it’s difficult to form an opinion or buy-in to his stance.
1
Your story about New Jersey and charter schools there may have arguments you can make that are sustainable but in Texas, too many fail due to many reasons, oversight being the most obvious. Money is often channeled to private owners and corruption too easily available. My main reason for not wanting these charter schools is their drain of resources and pupils that are needed by the public school systems throughout the state of Texas. A wide diversity of ethnicities and needs is the task of public education, with funding facing problems with the Texas Legislature, the local districts, the old Robin Hood decree which made wealthier districts pay sums to poorer ones, all creating significant problems for all students. Charters are an intrusion and an unwelcome one, similar to home schooling. Our current political climate troubled by many inequities of segregation re-emerging, students' failures, shootings and more, but for the vast number of us, let's strengthen our public schools.
4
Charter schools and choice are no substitute for the infusion of funds needed to create equitable opportunities for children. Nor do they offer those raised in poverty to enroll their children in schools outside of their community. As mayor Cory Booker had no way to offer Newark parents a choice to attend "well funded schools" in those communities where local real estate agents refused to show his parents a home. As Mayor Cory Booker had no way to secure more state funding for his schools, funding needed to upgrade outdated facilities and secure the additional staffing needed to support the children raised in poverty. Under those circumstances, charters might be the only viable alternative available. Cory Booker isn't running for Mayor. He's running for President. As a candidate I would like to see Mr. Booker work on policies that make it possible and profitable for children of all races to live where they choose to live and to have rich and poor students have access to the same resources as the "well-funded" schools his parents fought for him to enroll in. Charter schools and choice are eye-wash policies that sidestep the real problems children of color and children raised in poverty face.
8
What we need is universal quality free public education. Inasmuch as Charter Schools siphon money from that project, leaving the "dregs" of the less successful, connected, or lucky to suffer the consequences, it is a bad idea.
Teachers should be well paid and respected, and in an ideal situation public schools should be the school of choice of everyone. (Germany does a good job of this if you want an example.)
Creating more division and inequalities is not the answer.
11
My son goes to our zoned elementary, which happens to be a STEM magnet school. This year, friends of ours who live in the next school zone moved their son to a STEM charter school. The mother was excitedly telling me about all the things their son would get to do this year -- science fair! robotics class! weekly labs! -- and I had to bite my tongue hard to keep from telling her that all those things were available in a public school, if she'd just done the work to find it.
Much of what charter schools tout is already available in public schools. Unless what you're looking for is just something new and shiny.
11
Many people who support charter schools are Well intentioned, and public schools have problems for sure.
But charter schools systems are typically run by corporate types who want schools to be run more like businesses. This means that weak performers are weeded out ruthlessly; and salaried people are replaced with automation as much as possible.
This is not education; children do not develop and learn at the same pace, and this years weak performers may end up superstars in the future.
Put educators in charge.
12
@MaryC
This is absolute hogwash. I have two kids in two different public charter high schools. Both are outstanding schools regularly in the top 5 of my state. They are run like high schools - by educators. There's no corporate business model whatsoever.
I'm guessing most people complaining about public charter schools have zero first-hand experience with them or they have a biased agenda.
73
@Bryan This is not the format for such a lengthy and involved discussion, but your line is student based. There is much more involved in the background and while it can work the question really is why would you want it to. At best Charter schools can outperform public education, but that in practice is rarity. Charter schools for the most part have stuck with the same teaching methods and standards that public education has. So what IS the point? That varies but the corporate business model while not precise is a fairly accurate criticism if you have the patience to investigate. I own two schools and an after school program with my wife. She taught in public schools for 10 years. My mother is a retired school teacher of 27 years and Principal for 8, my sister is a university professor and has taught at for profit colleges, my father in law is a retired school superintendent, my sister in law is a special needs middle school teacher and my cousin has taught at a Catholic High School for the last 15 years. There is so much to know and a boatload of variation but at the end of the day our goals are the same. Charter Schools are not anything special or new, but for the money, the compromise and the investment it is only a lateral move with less stability. There is plenty wrong with what we have but Charters are not a solution the problems, they are a treatment of the symptom with caveats that many consider unacceptable if presented forthright. My agenda is community.
1
In Arkansas where it is based, the Walton family foundation has made it largest grants to charter schools and tuition vouchers. It appears to be part of a systematic effort to destroy public school systems. Five years ago, the State of Arkansas used low test scores in five schools--designated as "low performing" which means, of course, all black--as an excuse to take over the Little Rock public school system. The first appointed superintendent, a man of demonstrated competence, was fired when he opposed new charter schools. The time the State can keep control is expiring, and now we have seven low performing schools. As part of its release of the LRPSD, the State board revoked recognition of the teacher's union. Now this gets me to my point: I think attacks on public schools are really about unions that rich families like the Waltons hate. Ditto Republicans, since teacher unions are big contributors to Democrats. I will grant it's complicated, and there may be places where charter schools are the answer, but mostly, I think, this is about union busting.
10
I am a university educator and I firmly oppose charter schools. There is a big push in my state of Indiana to underfund public schools and let them fail so that the private charter schools can take their place. This will be a disaster for the future generations. Citizenry everywhere should wake up and support local public schools.
Also, vote out all crony corrupt politicians who support agenda of their masters who own charter schools.
11
It is good to read such a sober piece by Corey Booker on this topic. It is important (and increasingly rare) for someone to acknowledge the benefits and shortcomings on both sides of a debate. And this happens to be a debate where both sides can co-exist. To those commenters here who want to end all charter schools because of the failings of some, I just ask if you would apply the same standard to public schools? Booker is clear in that he wants to bolster public schools while acknowledging that there are cases where students would be better served if charter schools are available. We have to be able to think this way, to be able to hold two ends of a pole at the same time, if we are going to address this and other issues facing this country.
All that said, several years ago, a book titled 'The Prize' was written about a grant of $100 million that was given to the public school system in Newark. Spoiler alert: the $100 million was essentially squandered. It was a major embarrassment. And Booker was a key player in the saga. Unless he learned a lot from that experience, I'm not sure Booker is the one to shape our country's educational policies.
9
I'm tired of the competitive business model argument for the educational system. It doesn't work. It doesn't work for a lot of reasons. I'm also tired of the "failing schools" moniker. I teach in a "failing school" and I wonder why this term always seems to apply to urban schools and not suburban schools. I would counter that I have accomplished more with less in a shorter period of time.
A public school that is failing is a reflection of a community that is failing -- it is a symptom of a much larger problem that neither holding teachers accountable, adding excessive funding, nor standardized tests can fix. The problem can only be fixed with more people and more cooperation. Not more money and more competition -- this is an unsustainable model and only provides an illusion of success.
12
Always remember, there is no money to be made off “successful” public schools. Thus they must “fail” somehow.
15
Step 1: Stop funding schools primarily through local property taxes, making a kids school completely dependent on how nice their parent’s house is. We are the only rich country in the world that does this.
That Mr. Booker doesn’t even bring up fixing this deeply rooted flaw in our system first before siphoning off money for profit seeking ventures shows how pointless Democratic incrementalism can be.
13
“As a party, we need to take a holistic approach to improving outcomes for children who are underserved and historically disadvantaged. That must mean significantly increasing funding for public schools, raising teacher pay, fully funding the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, investing in universal preschool, eliminating child poverty — and yes, supporting high-performing public charter schools if and when they are the right fit for a community, are equitable and inclusive, and play by the same rules as other public schools.”
I agree that we should “take a holistic” approach but I worry about who decides when (public charter schools) “are the right fit for a community”. I can see too many communities with too many children left behind, left out of the public charter school. When those children and their families are left behind and left out, they end up in schools with no resources and they are doomed to fail. What do we do then, Senator Booker?
7
@Alyssa Hammond We need to focus on making our society as a whole more egalitarian that will go a long way to solving our educational problems.
When charter schools are required to accept handicapped, autistic and behavior-challenged students at the same rate as non-charter schools, then they deserve their funding. But cherrypicking top students and denying those that are more expensive to teach allows charter school to shine compared to those schools who do the real job of public education -- which is to offer all children the best education possible with limited resources.
19
@Mbrown Please add to that list - English Language Learners
Public schools should be the best schools, bar none. Obviously this will entail reviewing and changing how schools are funded. Schools in underprivileged areas should equal schools in upper class neighborhoods and teachers should be more than merely adequately paid. Sectarian schools are permissible provided they (in addition to their religious instruction) teach the same required subjects that public schools do. Charter schools are an abomination in my opinion regardless of how "good" some of them seem to be. They take away funds better alloted to public education, Not every child aspires to a college education and vocational training should be given the same attention as college preparation courses are. When it comes to education - public should be the determining factor.
10
For those of you so committed to public schools, very few of you have actual experience attending one as a student, and absolutely no experience of what it's like to be a student in a bad one. Now I don't blame your parents for placing you in great schools. That's what sane and responsible parents do, and what the majority of parents--rich and poor--are motivated to do. That's what I expect you to do as parents--unless you really are committed to sacrificing your children's education on the altar of your ideology.
But why are you, progressives all, committed to a position that only affords freedom of choice to the privileged and connected? In survey after survey, low income Americans are telling us they want school choice. Yet, you all keep ignoring them because it disrupts your tidy ideological framework. If we want low income Americans to stop thinking of us as elitists, we should stop acting like elites who are afforded privileges denied to the majority. If Democrats are to reshape themselves as a party, the first step is to actually listen to what poor people want rather than telling them what they should have.
11
@Saalim Carter --how odd that you think few public school defenders have attended public schools. All my family of all generations attended public school and that includes 2 grandchildren. We all believe in public schools, whether or not public charter, as long as they are well-funded, have good leadership, and encourage parent involvement. Problem public schools often have a socio-economic influence, but that means that parents should have options, that they should be involved in improving their own environment as well as that of the schools, and they are going to need the BEST principals and assistance, rather than the leftovers. Too often charters are funded by taking funds from the non-charter public schools.
8
I remember the uproar when President Jimmy Carter sent his youngest child to the local public school in DC. Why would he do such a thing? Those local schools were terrible! How do you think that affected the families who didn’t have any other choice but to send their kids to DC Public schools?
I am a product of subpar Public Schools. I actually did not know the extent of that fact until my first year at a Private University located in Texas. It was the whitest place I had ever been - and oh, how that made a difference. Those kids had a body of knowledge that was shocking to me. I had to teach myself certain math skills just to pass my classes.
This was in the late 70’s and I was from an area that was populated by white flight private schools. Those of us kids remaining in public schools had the experience of learning while the buildings rotted around us. Rooms that had to remain unused because the ceiling was collapsing; books that were missing not only pages, but entire chapters torn out; and windows that could not be opened because they were painted shut or warped. This last one is a particular memory because the school was not air conditioned and I had a teacher who always let us know how hot her room was - 103! I remember my Mother shaking her head after reading about another school in the district getting new band uniforms because the old ones were 8 years old. My school needed toilet paper and books.
We can and should do better for our communities!
Well said! I would also like to add that while politicians are dithering over this issue, parents need solutions now. Charter versus public versus private schools issues have been in discussion in Tucson for over 15 years. In the meantime, my children have finished school (they attended local Catholic private schools) and graduated from college. Families don’t have time to wait around for public schools to improve. Charter schools are able to get up, running and performing quickly while public schools are weighed down by administrative bloat and dysfunction.
1
Education is our future. If you don't embrace that, we all have a problem.
Where public schools are failing, they need fixing. If that means appropriating more money to certain schools - do it. Have the courage to put a manifesto for education.
Lets try to fix what we have. First step is to define the problem, whether its poverty, racism, or other social factors.
Its great to push public money into private institutions to help a few, but we need to help the many. That means properly funded public schools.
12
Thank god for a politician who has this kind of courage— It takes so much COURAGE to go up against the teachers union that does not, and never will, stand for the best interests of kids. If protecting teachers from out-of-control admin and negotiating decent salaries was all this was about, union dues would be a fraction of what they are and teachers would have much more money to put their own kids through college. This is about money, for UNIONS— NOT for teachers, and this is certainly not for the best interests of kids. Shame, shame on Democrats who know otherwise!
4
@Elizabeth How many handicapped and high-maintenance students are charter schools required to accept? How many for non-charter schools? If you cherrypick the best students, you're obviously going to have a better outcome.
10
@Elizabeth Correction
No one trains to be a teacher, spends hundreds of 'out of school time' hours correcting work, writing lesson plans, staff development, conferencing with parents and staff, etc.
who does not have the students' best interest. Public school teachers are overworked, under appreciated and vastly underpaid. I know because I did it for 30 years. I suggest you spend sometime in classrooms. Educate yourself.
And this, ladies and gentlemen, well illustrates why I have no interest or support for Mr. Booker's presidential candidacy. (Though I would, of course, vote for him over the much worse alternative in the general election, just as I do in NJ senate elections.)
11
Mr. Booker: I was a teacher in Newark, NJ in 2010 during your tenure as mayor. I was a new college graduate who joined the Teach for America program (which deserves a separate comment). As someone coming from several generations of pubic school teachers, I was disheartened to find that Newark's "education reform" consisted of shipping in untrained college graduates through TFA and placing them in charter schools. Many of these schools were brand new, run by administrators with no experience in education but with questionable ties to private funding, and used extreme, militarized systems of "behavior modification" that emphasize learning solely for the purpose of improving standardized test scores.
I remember interviewing at several of these schools and being appalled- seeing kindergartens routinely shamed for not answering questions correctly, not allowed to talk at any time during the day except when called upon, and given 2-3 hours of homework per night. This was at one of the schools you have championed and cited as exemplary. I'm certain that you or Mark Zuckerberg or whoever else would never send your own children to these schools. And I do not believe that urban, black/latino children need to be punished and controlled in order to learn.
Finally, these schools paid half of what public schools paid their teachers for twice the required hours of work, in horrible conditions with bad insurance. I ended up working at a public school in Passiac and loved my time teaching.
32
I am over the moon to see a serious article about public education. It's a nightmare! Everything needs to change from the basic R's, to giving teachers creative freedom, to everything else. However, I'm a little confused about the terms you use in the article. In Nevada, charter schools are for profit and magnet schools are public schools in low income neighborhoods that specialize in different areas like medicine, pilot training, the arts, and STEM. Every kid in the zone for these schools is automatically enrolled in the school and has first dibs on a place in one of the specialty programs. After that, spaces are opened to the rest of the city students to apply via lottery. Is this what you mean by public charter? If so, then I whole heartedly agree with you! Not only do these schools receive more funding that draws better teachers, they also help students narrow their focus of study which leads to better post high school success. But I think it's important to use a name like magnet rather than public charter because there is an enormous difference between the two.
1
@Kris Magnet schools and charter schools are two completely different things. And that is not what Mr. Booker means when he says "public charter".
What you described as having specialty programs, are magnet schools that are run by the public school system. Anyone that lives in that school's zone or district can attend and then are selected for the programs within that school if they choose to specialize.
Charter schools do not have specialized programs, students are awarded a seat via a lottery, and they are not run by the local school district. They are "public" because anyone can put their name in the lottery and get accepted if their name is drawn and they take money from the local public school district when a student chooses to attend a charter school, not "public" like the schools in your local school district.
You are correct that there is an enormous difference between the two but you cannot call charter schools by the other name.
2
@Kris You make great points about how 47 states have differing charter school law AND nomenclature around public education.
Mr. Booker just explained why I'm not interested in his candidacy. Public schools need our support, not privatization of public schools.
33
@John Harkey charter schools are public schools, John. This isn't about privatization, this is about quality, public charters having a role to play when it comes to closing the academic achievement gap.
A sensible message, but cluttered with genuflections towards certain ideologies. "eliminating child poverty"---how are you going to do that? "fully funding the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act"---what does that mean? How much funding is "fully funding"? What do you do when demands are unlimited? How do you reconcile that with the needs of un-disabled students?
Stick to the message the parental choice is a good thing. that charter schools can provide a superior education, and that their existence pressures traditional public schools to improve).
1
We need to recognize that accountability is the key to any successful organization. I don’t oppose unions, but I do oppose the lack of true accountability in many of our public schools, it is this lack of accountability in the public school systems that led to the emergence of the extensive charter school movement. Most people want to send their kids to good public schools, but if the education and social environment in those schools is lacking then they will, if it is within their means, send their kids to charter schools. The Democrats need to get out of the NEA’s pocket and vice versa.
7
@Thomas Smith This strikes me as a topsy-turvy stance –– given that one of the key (unintended?) functions of charters is to weaken school accountability. Meanwhile, ublic schools face frequent audits and measures of compliance on state, national, and district levels.
13
@Thomas Smith accountability is a noble cause, but regular public schools are already held accountable in many ways. Charter schools should be held to the same standards as regular public schools, and have the same accountability measures.
12
Actually, you need to learn more. Public schools have been “leaving no child untested “ since 2002. What are the results? Teachers were told what to teach and how to teach starting in 2002, and that has nothing to do with unions. The states that have scored the highest have strong unions. Unions have nothing to do with what is taught and how. Listening to the people who actually teach and might be a place to start learning something. I am so proud of the teacher’s who were out in the streets marching. They are overworked and underpaid.
The states and federal government have been making up the rules and after seventeen years there is not much to show for it except in areas with educated parents, who talk with their children, read to their children and travel with them. America has a very uneven society and will remain that way until there are changes. Most students attend public schools. How about starting there and listening to those who are in classrooms everyday?
7
Corey - wrong, wrong and wrong!
Obviously, the gentleman from New Jersey fails to see the big picture. Charter schools are but one part of the libertarian assault upon the common good. Funding private schools with taxpayer money plays right into the hands of self-described Anarcho-capitalists such as Charles Koch. Their goal is to slowly destroy universal public education. As Lincoln warned in 1859, this takes closer towards Mudsill caste economics; the end of upward mobility.
36
@Frank L. Cocozzelli I think you misread the editorial. It was about funding public charter schools, not private ones.
6
@SR In California as I understand it the charter schools are run by private organizations but they receive tax dollars from the same pool as the public schools. Are those charter schools public or private? What happens to funding for public schools under that model?
4
@SR In Tennessee, Charter Schools are private. but funded with public money. I have never heard of high-performing charter schools that do not skirt accountability and inclusion issues.
8
It is hard to have a dispassionate discussion about charger schools without recognizing that the funding formulas differ state by state. In Denver, Colorado, charter school funding takes full account of district wide facilities, legacy and special ed costs in a manner that allows charter schools to co-exist public schools without draining resources in an inequitable manner.
Not so in Pennsylvania, where charter school growth in a district directly undermines the viability of public schools in that district, resulting in steady declines in operating dollars per pupil in those schools.
Charter schools – or what years ago was called site-based management – may be a good idea, but to discuss it in as general a manner as Booker does without acknowledging the critical state-by-state differences undermines honest debate over the issue.
22
I hate charter schools. They only further drive divides among students/student opportunities; seem to operate on a for-profit basis, rip off public school budgets, and are operated in quasi-public, quasi-private modes, meaning they often answer to no one. Bad, bad, bad.
33
Charter schools are just part of the "gig economy" - employment is more or less "at will" - yeah, there's some freedom in teaching methods and a more motivated student body, but pay tends to be low (the administration takes the lion share of the funds, even in "non-profit" charters - just like "non-profit" colleges which employ teacher-adjuncts as low-paying serfs).
I think of charter schools as the "Uber" of teaching - Uber provides a really good software package that automated the process of ordering a ride, but, in an effort to eliminate the competition (ie, taxis), decreased the cost to the consumer by subsidizing the pay to drivers, then decreasing the pay, with the end result of lowering the pay to drivers, causing many to quit.
So it is with many charters - they start off strong, but eventually start running down because teachers quit to take better-paying jobs and they have to take teachers who don't have credentials, including not having a college degree.
20
I am proud of Miami-Dade County in respect to educating all our children. Two years in a row, the county public schools have been the best of all metropolitan systems in the state, with no F-rated schools and only one D-rated school. As a reward, in the past two election cycles, the voters have voted to tax themselves to give the teachers a raise. Of the charter schools in our district, several of them received D's, but those have closed. We seem to have a civic sense of responsibility here in this city of immigrants.
10
A good education lifts ALL boats! Public education is the single most important issue today. With a good education a child born to parents of moderate means can achieve greatness. With a good education health issues can be tamed. With good education crime goes down.With a good education people learn tolerance. With a good education climate change can be better understood by the general public. So, should you desire a higher quality of life elect representatives that value a great public eduction.
Rex Tillerson, Jeff Bezos, and countless other successful Americans attended their neighborhood schools.
Some Charter schools aren't accountable to the public. Rules and regulations defer state by state. Any school that fails to hire certified experts in their field fails to educate properly. Value expertise in education at all levels.
13
Mr. Booker vaporizes his own argument for Charter Schools through his suggestions to address failing schools by "significantly increasing funding for public schools, raising teacher pay, fully funding the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, investing in universal preschool, eliminating child poverty..."
There will be no need for Charter Schools when we simply fund schools properly and provide needed resources, especially with the slew of state and federal unfunded mandates placed on local school districts. The state of US schools represents the state of US society; a budget obsessed with military spending, which places the tax burden squarely on the poor and middle class. When politicians want to start talking about inequalities then maybe we can collectively have a rational conversation about how to fix America's schools. Until then, please spare us the bromides on Charter Schools.
31
@Jonny Boy
US funds its public schools better than any other country, and has worse results than most. Funding is not the problem. A culture that does not value education is.
Granted some charter schools have good ideas and good results. But I would never support them unless they operate with the same set of rules and regulations as the public schools and they allow teachers to be part of a union. They need to share their best practices and not just take the best and brightest.v
I taught in a public alternative school for years and thought our system had the best of both worlds. These magnet schools used a lottery system, a specialized curriculum and any city resident could attend.
9
@Carolyn Wayland
There are some "rules and regulations" that are harmful to the education of our children. It is precisely their ability to operate without some of those rules and regulations that makes some charter schools successful.
1
Sen. Booker is correct, it is about the zip code you are in, but his solution is not to cure what ails the undesirable zip codes, but to move to a better one. Fix the down in the dumps zip codes and you have the schools you need because if you can do that, you will fix most of the educational problems that are a part of depressed zip codes: disenfranchisement, depression, disinterest, devolved families, truancy, drug abuse, et cetera.
8
Interesting points about education, a pivotal bridge our kids must cross to become fully integrated into society, and able to think for themselves and act independently, and become knowledgable in what they choose to do, honest and decent and with feelings towards each other (could it be love, or is it asking too much?), and accepting the 'golden rule' to guide ourselves as social beings, and draw joy in all we do (in other words, no matter the hurdles, find a way for redemption in overcoming them, with integrity and responding positively to the challenges life has on offer). But, when proposing different systems to educate our children, and ourselves, be careful not to abandon the needed support of public schools that may be failing...by opening new one's next door...while neglecting the former, and frustrating and castigating too many students unable to compete later in life. Can't we look abroad for guidance, if some humility remains? Witness Finland, for instance, where teachers are some of the best paid professions in town, and where the education is excellent, based in promoting excellence in a cooperative environment. Let's keep an open mind and be flexible. Just saying...
6
Charter school "success" (student "outcomes") is defined very narrowly by standardized test scores in only two subjects. This is accomplished through a de-facto test-prep curriculum made possible by a regimented, no-excuses discipline and demands for absolute student compliance. The attrition rates in charter schools that adhere to this formula would be completely unacceptable in the public system. By example, the 2020 graduating class at Success Academy has 114 seniors; when this cohort was in 2nd grade, there were 353 students. What school system couldn't produce desirable test scores if they were allowed to drive out the weaker students? This idea is fundamentally unamerican.
20
@rab Ding, ding, ding! Right on point.
KIPP's charter schools love to talk about their graduation rates and going to college rates but the question always is: how big was the cohort when you started versus the graduating class?
1
Mr Booker is making a point about dogmatic responses to public high performance charter schools,
The views of his detractors might be summarized as: "just fix public schools".
For anyone actually interested in education, it might be worth further reading about the many changes in the Newark education system that are working together to impact outcomes, to beat the odds.
This includes everything from universal pre-K education to magnet schools to technical-vocational programs.
https://www.crpe.org/news/how-newarks-public-schools-both-traditional-and-charter-are-working-together-lift-all-boats
A family member has worked in both public and public charter (not corporate) schools in low income neighborhoods. The staff development and student support, especially for special ed, were much stronger in the charter school.
As a charter school teacher in the South, she was sent to Newark to visit the schools there because they are regarded as the gold standard. Now she is working within a public school as a teacher to bring them up to speed in newer concepts that she learned in the public high performance charter system.
4
The schools that need to be charted are those that the adults carry within themselves to use in their households and neighborhoods. Children's learning, reading especially, needs to begin at home way before kindergarten. Turn off the TVs, open up a book and read them to your children every day and night. Spend time with the children discussing critical issues of the day. Teach them to create and build. The most effective movement to uplift children's education begins at home. The governments and organizations cannot read to children before they go to bed, the parents can. Go to the public library, check out a half dozen books and read them next week to your children before they go to sleep. Do this every week. Talk about their homework and help them to do it. Go to parent-teacher conferences and develop work plans. Attend school events. Be a parent that facilitates learning.
That is the kind of message I want my President to articulate.
9
The main issue with most private and charter schools is- they are mostly religious in nature and part of a for-profit business scheme where education take a back seat.
Influence of religion in our public policy and public education has played an important role to erode our democracy and helped rise in Christian/Evangelical fundamentalism that helped a liar & impostor like Trump to become our President.
Most of the current politically polarizing issues like abortion, climate change, minority/LGBT rights, education policy (including spending public money on private/charter schools which are all religious in nature, teaching evolution, and many more), GMO, racism/slavery, immigration (of non-Christian/Evangelicals and promoting Christian/Evangelicals from other countries) etc. Even seemingly non-related issues like gun control and other issues that need some basic or rudimentary understanding of data/fact, logic, and science, indirectly depends on that as well.
"Officially" it all started around 1976 with deeply religious Reagan (as per a NPR program). It affected Repulicans the most, but both the parties, including progressive Democrat Jimmy Carter, started embracing it to a lesser degree.
That must change.
10
I've traveled extensively and have also hosted international students/travelers for years. There are two things about America that absolutely SHOCK my family and guests from places like Europe and other educated, affluent countries:
1) How we fund our schools, and
2) The difference between what Fox News says compared with other, "legitimate" news sources like the BBC or PBS.
I think we know why they are shocked.
20
Dale Russakoff's "The Prize: Who's in Charge of America's Schools," is brilliant investigation of the Newark school crisis initiated by Sen. Booker and Gov. Chris Christie and thoroughly documents the manner in which two ruthless politicians used the Newark school system to further their career goals and gain clout. In a manner reminiscent of the fox and the cat in "Pinocchio" they persuaded Mark Zuckerberg to donate $ 100 million to the Newark Public Schools. which was used to pay various politically connected "consultants," but somehow never found its way to the schools. Local government, parents and teachers were shut out of schools' management, and many parents were suddenly forced to send their children to distant schools despite their protests.
The hypocrisy of Sen. Booker's sudden concern about quality urban education assumes that Newark's voters have short memories and that the crisis in public education is a binary between non-profit and for-profit charter schools. Sen Booker and Gov. Christie worked hard to eviscerate a struggling public school system and it was only the community's efforts that finally ended this disaster when Zuckerberg's money was all spent and the politicians moved on.
20
@UESLit Please share a source that documents this.
@friend of a friend. Russakoff was a long time WaPo investigative reporter. “The Prize” was published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt in 2015 and is widely available. She has also appeared on NPR and presented at Stanford, Penn and other education research institutions.
1
If charters want to take public money they have to share the "best practices" that they believe contribute to their success and allow researchers open access to their facilities. Otherwise you will not convince me that successful charters aren't simply gaming the system, whether that is through exclusion, or not having to live by the same rules and regulations as public schools, or not giving teachers a lifelong career path. If they have a secret sauce, share the recipe. I doubt they do.
Ultimately successful charters will be bought out by educational corporations. That's how capitalism works in America. We'll never get our public schools back. But we'll lose control and money to well paid executives and shareholders distant from our communities.
32
I don’t have a problem with charter schools provided they are required to meet the same accountability measures as public schools AND are not allowed to cherry-pick their student. None of this ‘Sorry, we don’t have the resources to meet your severely disabled child’s needs, but I’m sure the public school two blocks over does.’
Unfortunately, I don’t think such a thing exists. Even if it does, please keep in mind that the students that enroll in charter schools are already self-selecting in that they come from families who value education and have the means and time get their children to-from schools that may be located quite a distance from their homes.
25
This is truth.
1
Level the playing field...No picking students, No expulsions at the drop of a hat and open the books. But even with all those advantages to charters, my neighborhood elementary public school outperforms area charter schools in performance metrics. I had been offered a seat for my son at two charter schools I happily declined and will keep declining them. Love it!
19
I rarely hear what charter schools do differently than public schools. What is the magic potion that charter schools supposedly know that will improve student outcomes. Are they using different materials? Curriculum? Better trained teachers? What do they do differently from public schools?
12
They have behavioral standards to which the students and parents must adhere. Parents must be involved in the student’s education and school events. Homework must be completed. Poor behavior is the classroom is not allowed. If there are any problems the student is unenrolled and sent back to the public school.
Of course, charters often do better than public schools. They only keep the children, and parents, who are motivated and behave.
9
There is no secret sauce so I’m not sure, but many charter schools cherry pick their students, take few students with disabilities and serve fewer students whose first languages are not English.
6
@TN Reject students they don't want.
Officials should heed the good advice and constructive critiques of the commenters. To make a distinction between public schools and public charter schools is a semantic shell game that serves no one. Mr. Booker take note: public education, starting with the one room school house, is what allowed our country to become the role model of democracy and make strides in fulfilling our ideals. Those efforts are being thwarted by undermining public education. If there’s money for public charter schools put that money to use in public schools. They were and still are the best resource for our kids and our future. The money is there. Make every public school great - there are enough great ones to emulate. And stop diverting money, commitment and attention away to charter schools - public and private! It’s a disservice to all of us but mostly our children. Have you seen the faces of kids sitting in auditoriums waiting to hear if they were chosen, by lottery, for a school and not hearing their name? It’s heartbreaking and can have lasting implications. That doesn’t happen when we embrace public schools in which parents are happy to enroll their kids. Creating more private schools is not the answer either. When kids from varying backgrounds including “class” interact at school you have a healthier, happier and more productive society better able to face the profound issues facing us today from climate change to technology to governance.
28
Charter schools were designed for one purpose: to get around teachers’ unions. This is important so I’ll say it again: charter schools are used by city governments to avoid negotiating with teachers unions. Unions are not only one of the best instruments of upward mobility in our nation’s history but through their collective bargaining over the decades, they have brought ALL workers, unionized or not, every benefit & concession working people have today. This includes banning child labor, which allows all children the chance to attend school. Charter schools don’t just undermine organized labor. They don’t play by the rules. They have several methods of selecting their student to ensure their schools’ test scores will be higher than those of public schools. Even when a lottery is used to randomly select students, the selection of good students, or more accurately the rejection of poor ones, is done retroactively. A lottery-selected student, who doesn’t perform well or is otherwise problematic, can be, and often is, cast out of the charter school and back to their public school within a few months of what appeared to be a fair selection process. Charter schools get away with these kinds of practices because they are private ventures, which are not held to the same high standards as public institutions. So not only do charters weaken teachers’ unions but they figure out ways to avoid serving our neediest children. IMHO, this goes against our shared American value of fairness.
54
@Peter Simon I want to like this a thousand times!
1
As a former private and public school teacher, I believe that a blanket description of educational practices whether in private or public schools is wrong. Still, I believe that the culture in schools where students are allowed to pass from grade to grade without doing work; schools where students are trapped in their classroom with teachers moving from class to class to cut down on potential incidents in the halls; schools where lessons are determined effective by how quiet the class is; schools that insist students walk through the hall silently; schools that make organizing a field trip more work on the teacher than necessary; schools where administrators focus only test scores but not authentic learning; all contribute to students who cannot compete in the work force. The poorest schools should receive the most money. The poorest students need access to field trips, computers, lots of counselors to help them and their families navigate the social system, access to health care via many nurses in the building. I taught in a building of about 1,000 students with only one school nurse. I have also taught in a building of 200 students with one school nurse. One need not be a math major to see the numbers do not add up. Sure, there are good charter schools out there, but the educational system is focusing on the wrong ends.
19
I stopped listening to Cory Booker when he accepted money from
Nestle for a children’s nutrition program in New Jersey. He clearly doesn’t understand how that was a deep conflict of interest. So it’s not surprising that he’s going down the same path with education.
22
Please look at the actual numbers and do usage of them.
After reading Education Weekly (the nations's biggest non-partisan regular K-12 journal) I could see a few glaring trends. Overall, charters have NOT created an uptick in performance, and the trend in suburban charters is actually downward.
In specific inner city charters student scores are significantly higher. Here's the big caveat--only SELECTED inner city schools serving children of color, not the majority of them.
Charters are still a sham by the private sector. They only came into being in 19991, right at the close of the Reagn/Bush years push for privatizing everything they could
Questions?
35
There is very little real impetus behind public charter schools - or any those advocating the public schools are not the ones with monetary and political power (nearly the same thing). Approving public charters will lead in due course to private for-profits schools.
12
Our family’s “high-performing” public, non-profit charter school just decided to close its doors, mid year, on December 20th. Close to 300 students and many teachers, staff, and administrative staff are all losing their school with very little ability to find solutions which meet the needs of their family. Teachers and staff, who have worked for less than a living wage and have no union protection, are left with no jobs and no severance right at the holidays.
You know who is doing the right thing by this community? The public school district and the teachers union. They are the ones stepping in the gap and placing students and trying to hire staff. Meanwhile, the charter school leadership is patting themselves on the back for making such a good business decision.
I can’t remember a time where a public school just closed its doors mid year, can you? If public charters are going to exist, the authorizing district has to take more ownership for their operation and institute more robust oversight. Districts also shouldn’t be opening any new charters until we deal with the vulnerabilities of the ones we already have.
41
A major problem for education, a service, is that is impossible to know what that service will be until it is produced and consumed simultaneously! And, studies have shown that it is difficult to objectively evaluate a service. My high school was mediocre as most graduates went to work in a factory, entered the military, or got married! Most students came from families whose parents had not finished high school and thus knew little about how education should work. That said, students were sent to school rested, fed, and there was an expectation they would follow the rules. This is a far cry from today's students and parents.
Our politicians, especially Republicans, push charter schools as a panacea because they don't know how to change parents' behaviors and attitudes. Plus, these politicians see government as being the problem that can be corrected by the marketplace. Lastly, politicians believe the marketplace will reduce costs through competition. Please refer back to my first two sentences to see the inherent problems.
Yes, unions see charters as unfair competition (they are) and charters don't perform at higher levels even though they don't follow the same rules and can skim better students whose family want them to get a good education. But the bottom line is that it is politically popular to claim that the marketplace can improve anything! Like all human devised systems, the marketplace is far from perfect!
8
I appreciate Senator Booker's aims and passion. But, he is simply wrong on the facts and, wittingly or not, is contributing to the undermining of public education. In the end, such a move will, in my view, exacerbate inequitable education, unequal life chances and outcomes, and disenfranchisement of impoverished families in American society.
12
@Good Luck How is that DC public schools showed the highest rates of improvement in math and reading in 4th and 8th grade, when 44% of those tested students attend public charters? Please explain.
1
They cherry pick their students
@Maureen Maybe because they can expel kids easier: https://www.publicschoolreview.com/blog/d-c-charter-schools-expel-more-students-than-other-public-schools
As a clinical supervisor for a university, I have been in my share of charter schools. For every outstanding charter school, I have seen a dozen failing charter schools. Oversight is lax. Coporate-based curriculum is rampant. Non-licensed and non-certified teachers abound, and segregation is apparent in almost every charter school as they tout a lottery to gain entrance into a taxpayer funded school. State Legislators seem to have their hands in way too many of our state's charter schools, making a tidy profit for themselves and their friends. Public schools are not in crisis because we have poor teachers; public schools are in crisis because Republican legislatures believe that the free market can solve public school's problems. As a 40 year educator, I am tired of listening to legislatures complain about public schools. Fund public education properly. Quit trying to get by on the cheap, and then, let teachers who are trained and credentialed do their jobs.
53
@SCoon , yes. This should be a pick.
1
No, just no. Fully fund ALL public schools appropriately so we don't have parents playing the zip code game.
33
Booker touts Newark's charter schools but doesn't mention how the same city's public school squandered their share Mark Zukerberg's $100M gift for less than stellar results.
A lot of that money went to the teacher's unions ($49M) and consultants ($29M).
A lot of people got richer while keeping things more or less the same.
10
"Many public charter schools have proved to be an effective, targeted tool to give children with few other options a chance to succeed. "
This is plainly false. A few, select public charter schools have proven successful - most are failures that enrich private entities and are poorly regulated. They simply provide false hope and unfilled promises to desperate parents.
17
Lost in all this back and forth about charter vs, non-charter schools is a factor that has certainly contributed to our educational inequities--the practice of providing the majority of funds for public education through property taxes.
This is one of the most outlandishly stupid ideas people have ever come up with, as so much of the revenue that comes from property taxes depends on local valuation--a dimension under the complete domination of psychological perception rather than any sort of factual rubric.
So millions of kids are destined to be shortchanged in resources for their education by a funding system that relies on the vagaries of people's "feelings" about how "valuable" given locations are.
No other nation primarily funds education this way--it would be considered blatantly unequal and absurd. In most other place education is funded through general tax revenues in which property taxes are only one component in the mix, and generally equivalent amounts are doled out to various districts no matter where they are located and who lives there.
The American system of property tax support of education has certainly contributed to our wide inequities in educational efficacy--but it can be argued for out plutocrats that was the intention all along; there are the Elite who will learn to run the world, and then there are those who learn to serve the Elite, and the latter don't need well apportioned schools.
21
@Glenn Ribotsky Your point is so obvious, I can't believe I never thought of it.
Charter Schools are private schools that cherry pick students based on religion, wealth, or perceived ability except that they are funded by tax dollars. Wonderfully successful scams by people like DeVos and, apparently, Booker.
18
Public school teachers and administrators often complain that charter schools are allowed to expel disruptive/dangerous /mentally challenged students, whereas non-charter schools must allow disruptive/dangerous/mentally challenged students to remain in class.
Also, many charter schools require parents to sign agreements to support their children’s studies and monitor their behavior, with expulsion resulting if the parents violate the agreements. This could never occur in non-charter schools, where parent involvement and support are so often zero.
Since it is obvious to all that allowing disruptive/dangerous/mentally challenged students to remain in school harms the education of the other students, perhaps more attention needs to be focused on how to turn the problematic students into involved, motivated and better-performing students.
I know, this is a tall order that requires changing the behavior and attitudes of both the problematic students and their parents, but when a dam is threatening to break you don’t focus on the small dribbles, you focus on plugging the big leaks.
5
I know! Let's properly fund ALL schools to the same level, regardless of the tax base of the district. Then all children would have good public educations.
9
Nice attempt to whitewash your own history. To those who want to know what happed in Newark I recommend Dale Russakoff's (full disclosure, on the NYTimes staff at the time) book The Prize (2015) to see how Booker along with Teach For America and some wealthy folks threw lots of attention to charters and unqualified teaches while the public schools remained underfunded. We don't need charter schools, rather what is needed is an end to the socioeconomic segregation of schools. Look no further than the work in the Wake County, NC schools that ended such segregation and found that the success of all students rose. The issue is equity and quality for all, not just a few.
11
@George well said!!
Public charter schools are a TERRIBLE idea. Just come to New Orleans. Every school is now a charter and kids aren’t appreciably better off.
But we have many small kingdoms each with their own highly paid administration performing functions that used to be done centrally.
7
Booker's argument boils down to: Your corporate masters will never allow you to be free. We should at least buy some padding from them for a few select lottery winners to lessen your suffering. Who could argue with lessening your suffering?
The root of our problems in education arise from the unequal way schools are funded in which the rich make sure their taxes go to schools for their kids. Like all economic inequality it MUST be addressed and now!
7
It was generous of Booker to not call out Senator Elizabeth "No Teachers' Union Left Behind" Warren for her hypocrisy. Before she came a politicians she was a strong advocate for not charters but for universal vouchers. Wrote a whole book about it.
Funny how she doesn't talk about that anymore.
3
@David Rea , what book was that? I think you're talking about Diane Ravitch, aren't you?
1
@David Rea , btw, changing your mind when you've been wrong, and publicly, isn't hypocrisy. It's what honest people do. What do you do?
Stick with the publics . The charters are often smoke and mirrors. They claim to take anybody but in reality they take who they want and discharge those that are doing poorly .
If the publics worked with these rules they would certainly rule .
6
@R U SeriousTrump Please cite your evidence for....oh, wait, you're from Belmont, MA (73% white student population, $121k median income).
Yeah, public schools are working pretty well for you, huh?
I thought Newark was run well under Booker. He was competent and things worked. Don't knock him for making things work.
6
Charter schools in NC are a bullet- train to segregation town. They have zero obligation to provide transportation, and other services that regular public schools must. Their academic results, when you can get them, are skewed by “who can get here.” They are a patronage-vehicle for conservative Republicans to fund for-profit education machines and bible-pounding constituents that want to teach creation, with a few exceptions for cover.
Maybe where you are from, charter schools are not the education-industrial complex siphoning money at the public trough, but I see little else dominating the “charter school market” here.
224
Yes, you are absolutely right. The greatest, unacknowledged problem with public charter or magnet schools is the lack of transportation. The school district in which I reside is well known and congratulated for its magnet schools. However, no transportation is provided for students outside the magnet school’s zone. The result? Families that have a stay at home parent, or flexible work schedules, or can organize a neighborhood carpool can get their children to a desirable magnet school. The vast number of these parents are white. Unfortunately, the student who lives in a far corner of the district, whose mother changes beds at the Hampton Inn and whose father cuts grass for a landscaping firm, cannot get to the district’s highly successful math magnet because she has no way to get there. Thus, the magnet is predominately white and middle class. Too bad for the student of color, who may be the next Einstein.
25
@Revoltingallday It is the same issue here. The district has "choice" for all schools--you can go to any school in the district if there is space--and you can get there. That eliminates people without cars, or who work two jobs, from having real choice.
18
@Revoltingallday Exactly correct!
Here in NC, the self-selecting, self-perpetuating charter school boards, complete with an out-of-state "consultant" from some right wing advocacy group, are masters in concealing their self-dealing from the public, despite being subject to the state's open meetings and open records laws.
Here is an article about Shining Rock Classical Academy's troubles here in Haywood County, which has a long history of self-dealing and ignoring transparency laws.
https://smokymountainnews.com/archives/item/27646-shining-rock-fails-to-properly-notice-meeting-again
9
Charter Schools rarely outperform the public school communities they serve, but they are picky about the students and parents they will accept and keep. https://www.newsweek.com/charter-schools-vs-public-schools-funding-test-scores-performance-1461659?amp=1
Charter Schools don’t always accept “special needs” children, or late enrollments as do public schools. They tell parents of challenging children, “you must do as we request or you can go back to your public school”.
Public schools have been relentlessly criticized for more than fifty years, and whatever additional money they received during those years was conditioned and controlled in its use by regulations created by politicians, not educators. It’s a system, top to bottom, charter and public, designed to successfully serve only the privileged few.
We would do better to put educators in charge of schools, but that idea has never been popular.
207
@Steve Bell
Steve, one of the characteristics of public charter schools is that educators often ARE the ones in charge. It is their ideas and practices that shape how things are done. As a result, it's more organic and less top down. It's more nimble, too, and can more easily reshape a curriculum when the mix of student needs changes.
9
@Steve Bell Your statements are not true. The vast majority of charter schools in my area serve low-income communities and are Title I schools. They have huge proportions of students with IEPs. They are run by educators.
12
@DeputyDog
I'm not sure where the schools you refer to are, but I've seen this defense of charters before, and it doesn't track with any of my own experiences. I used to be an educator, and worked in two large public school districts, both of which had charter options, many of which were not run by educators. I often hear charter advocates talk about "innovation" but it usually boils down to less oversight / accountability, often led by an administrator with an MBA instead of an MEd, more concerned with shoehorning whatever data there is to conform to their narrative than they are with actual student performance.
10
There are only three things that will solve most, in not all, our problems: Education, Education, Education. Education cures disease. Education cures ignorance, stupidity, hatred, intolerance, racism, sexism, antisemitism, poverty, fear, war etc etc. Education is the only pathway to a better life. Unless and until we fully fund all public institutions of learning so that the highest quality educational opportunities are available to every American we will fail as a democracy. Fully fund public pre-school education, primary schools, high schools, vo-tech schools, colleges and universities. And do it now, today. If there is enough money for stupid senseless wars, surely there is enough money for education.
I'm with you Mr. Booker. Be experimental and open in approach rather than doctrinaire. Do whatever works!
88
There are pros and cons about the merit of charter schools but, as most of these comments indicate, a reasonable debate cannot take place because progressives are wedded to an ideological mindset that shuts out reasoned discussion. The fact that a moderate black Democrat invites this kind of "shame on you" reaction is sadly in step with progressive thinking on virtually every public issue. There is almost a Stalinist posture on everything that would make the Chinese Communist party proud. The glory of democracy is that everyone is entitled to express their views on social issues with the expectation of dignity and respect. Progressives and the Democratic Party have forgotten this basic tenet of democracy.
That's why I'm no longer a Democrat.
4
@Alex
Were you ever?
Booker's opinion piece starts out with ad hominem attacks on his opposition and you seem to have nothing better, branding those with the temerity to disagree with you as akin to "Chinese Communists" and "Stalinists."
The data doesn’t lie. Mr. Booker is well meaning but wrong. Charter Schools generally don’t outperform their feeder public schools. https://www.newsweek.com/charter-schools-vs-public-schools-funding-test-scores-performance-1461659?amp=1
A problem with our schooling of young people is not what the school is called, but how and who is involved in its governance. Everyone, and everything that matters most is ignored: parents, teachers, students, even what should be taught, because failed tradition rules organization, curriculum, and evaluation. Top down management and governance treats everyone and everything as objects to be worked upon, and controlled. All the arguments about schools are about things instead of talent and opportunities, budget included.
A solution for all schools, regardless of what they are called, would be a form of governance that valued the abilities, capabilities and goodness of all the people involved — a system similar to Deming’s Total Quality Management that values teamwork in goal setting and in fulfillment of consensus goals. This, of course, depends upon recognition of the value of each individual, a recognition that is overwhelmed by a traditional focus not on people but on things.
1
I lived in Newark when it went from mostly White to mostly Black. The teachers in the HS (Weequahic) remained and the high-track classes (Whites, Blacks, Hispanic) that remained were relatively unaffected. But .. on the whole, the school became a total joke. It was a place to park kids for a few hours each day and not mush more.
The school failed, but it certainly had nothing to do with the teachers who were great. It was the attitude of the students and their parents.
There were some of all colors who cared about getting a education. For the rest, getting an education was not important. IMO, it was important to *not* get an education. Conspicuously.
This is not to offend or to protect anybody. It is to note that sometimes, it is not *always* the teacher or the school at fault. Sometimes, some kids, simply refuse to learn or even just to try. They are not internally motivated and refuse to be motivated externally.
Even the Marines, who certainly know a few things about motivation toss people out.
Put all the good students into a class and they will almost always do OK. That's what the high-track classes at WHS did. As a whole, the HS was pretty bad. The good classes were pretty good anyway.
Charter schools that skim the best students are not the solution.
6
There are two main problems in our schools: Bad behavior and the attack on memory.
Bad behavior disrupts education for all. Schools should be able to re-direct the badly-behaved into other environments, while retaining the FTE funding, which would provide more money per student in poorer neighborhoods.
The attack on memorization as part of education increased disparities in outcomes as those who incidentally can remember foundational facts and definitions race ahead of those who need some "drill and kill" (as memorization is mocked) to retain basic foundations of knowledge.
In short, education requires order and hard work. Tough schools used to equalize outcomes despite family background. Now schools simply "pass through" family background. This "kindness" of schools not demanding good behavior, hard work, including memorization of foundational knowledge, has been infinitely cruel.
6
Hurray for Cory Booker!
Charter Schools have consistently shown that they can deliver higher quality education to kids—particularly low income, minority kids—than district public schools.
And as research in Massachusetts shows, it is not all selection bias as opponents claim.
It’s a shame that siding with poor kids vs the all powerful teachers union is a sign of courage in the Democratic Party. But it is and hard off to Cory Booker.
8
@Meg Actually, charter schools have NOT shown that they can deliver high quality education. In some limited circumstances, maybe. But there is no long term study that shows your claim to be categorically true. And, honestly, if they are so fantastic, why aren't wealthy people registering their kids?
5
@Somewhere in NY Why is that public charters are so threatening? How can forms of competition to, and changes in, the complete lock-down on hours, days, and procedures that the teachers' unions exert on our public schools be bad?
1
@Somewhere in NY
Wealthy people choose private schools over any kind of public institution.
Charter schools take funds from public schools get to pick and choose their student population, leaving the local public schools with more of the most challenging students and less funding to support them. Booker talks high and mighty about equity, while conveniently omitting this fact.
8
Every parent truly interested and vested in their child's education should be given an option for their child to excel. This should be non-negotiable. If you want it and you're willing to push your child to succeed, you should get it. The good news: from my experience, this happens one way or another. The bad news: mankind will never be able to design an educational system that ensures excellence where their parents don't check their homework, don't attend PTA meetings and parent-teacher conferences, don't actively establish high expectations, encourage extracurricular activities, police their child's social circle, etc. I don't know why we aren't more willing to talk about this. Sure, poverty makes everything across the board worse, but if you have a parent pushing you across the finish line at every turn, the advantage you have over your peers is utterly incalculable. It's almost not even fair. It is the X factor.
6
Show me the charter school that has a similar percentage of ELLs, students with disabilities, and low income students as the true public school down the road, that does not practice exclusionary admissions (i.e. they take anyone who shows up, as long as they are in zone), that doesn't counsel out or exclude by not providing services true public schools do, and that employs only certified teachers and you will have shown me a school that performs no better than the true public school down the road. Choice doesn't mean better. The time, energy, and money spent on charter schools and voucher schemes would have been better spent on improving our most valuable resource---public education.
Senator Booker, your history on education is the number one reason I won't vote for you. In fact, while I vote blue no matter who in most cases, I wouldn't be able to cast my vote for you if you won the primary. Drop out and go spend some time in the real trenches, teaching and working in true public schools.
11
Dear Mr. Booker,
Our district will be forced to allocate funds to a charter school — it only took 50 signatures to get one. Now public funds are being used to pay for this school — the costs just to get it started could be used to reduce teacher caseloads, pay for professional development, defray the costs of ever rising insurance premiums, and heaven forbid, fund teachers salaries. Where is this particular charter located and which parents demanded it? It’s located in a predominantly second-language learner zone and the 50 parents who petitioned for it and got their way: ones that chant the dog whistle mantra “America First.”
I understand the desperate need for school reform, but that reform needs to start with school board members with graduate degrees in education, superintendents who work with research universities as well as county and state education departments, and principals who value students learning and the teaching profession.
10
Charter schools may seem necessary in lieu of failing public schools but bandaids should not be a permanent solution. Until we find a way to make public schools equitable in their funding and expected outcomes we will continue to find reasons to use bandaids because bandaids are a quick and easy solution. Quick and easy doesn't solve the problem.
5
If we had an underperforming hospital, would the best solution to the problem be to create a charter hospital that would treat a small percentage of the patients in need of care?
If charter schools continue to be public school off ramps for parents who are most willing to advocate for their children, aren’t we still left with the question of how we fix underperforming public schools? This is especially true when test scores are used to measure school performance just as some of the more promising students in underperforming schools leave and take their financial support with them.
I’m not ideologically opposed to public charter schools. Many in my area are quite good. I’m opposed to politicians touting charter schools as a fix for public education. Given that charter schools and schools of choice grew out of the publication of A Nation at Risk in 1983, one might reasonably expect some evidence of overall educational benefits almost twenty years into the 21st century. Instead we still have politicians like Corey Booker making the same arguments that charter school proponents have been making for at least 25 years. If innovative charter schools are offering their students a rich, stimulating curriculum, why aren’t we implementing those innovations in our public schools? Instead of creating new charter schools, shouldn’t we be looking very seriously at how to more effectively transport the work of the best charters to the public schools? That was the original idea.
8
Most of our big cities are segregated along lines of race and economics. Under these circumstances, how do you think schools are going to fix things and why are you putting the blame only there?
6
This is why I will not support Mr. Booker for president. He knows very well that public charters have not been "responsibly implemented" - they've been shoved down the throats of taxpayers who see their hard-earned dollars funding fat-cat investors who pay themselves rent, fudge their numbers, and close schools without any notice. We've had lots time of time and examples now to judge public and private charters, and while they may have started out as a good idea, in too many cases they are wasting our money.
8
I am a product of public education from grade 1 to grade 20. Because of high quality public education I was able to do something that is quite rare today: achieve a higher standard of living than my parents.
If people with means want to send their kids to private schools, fine. But I have problem with using public dollars to fund schools that get to reject "difficult students" who are then "relegated" to public schools.
I also have a problem with paying schools teachers so poorly. I cannot understand how anyone can think that the average public school teacher is getting "over generous" benefits. And charter schools often compensate teachers at even lower levels.
Finally I find the idea of "for profit schools" abhorrent. It's right up (down?) there with "for profit healthcare"
Classic race to the bottom. What a country!
17
How about you require the same amount of transparency for charter schools that you do for public schools? Maybe they have to pass the same tests as public schools. Or they can't reject students - the same as public schools. They are permitted to demand a certain number of parent volunteer hours or charge a fee. Allow public schools to do the same.
It's hard to believe there is no financial gain for proponents of this social experiment. Here in Florida, just last year, a charter closed in the middle of the year without having to reimburse the hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars it had pocketed.
Sorry Senator, you're not going to convince anyone who knows anything on this one. Between this issue and your earlier vote on reducing the cost of pharmaceuticals, you don't deserve the nomination.
10
The primary cause of low performing public schools is a failure of the primary educator of kids - their parents. Particularly in low income areas, too many parents do not invest themselves in their kids education. For this reason, charter schools are essential to allow those parents who truly care about their kids education to allow those kids to flourish in an environment with other kids whose parents truly care. Until one can figure out a way to get all parents to care about their kids education, charter schools are essential.
3
Start by appointing a Secretary of Education who is genuinely concerned with public education.
8
An obsolete tax is causing seniors to lose their homes. Why should "property tax" be used to fund schools? A fair tax would come from income of all kinds. One small local school district spends $80 million a year to transport students to any school they choose, including charters. All should pay or possibly transportation costs should be paid by the families that choose schools farther than the closest one. And what about banks? They own a large portion of your house and yet they escape taxes. Um...
5
As a teacher, I have often wondered why the solution to a failing school is to reduce its number of students by creating a charter. Why not begin with a question: What does this school need in order to be able to improve? Then, continue with finding answers to this question.
14
Start with poor administrators that make $185,000 to $125,000. They often seem to have no clue or care for improving education They collect huge checks backed up by PTA-like school boards that rubber stamp everything mediocre.
5
The biggest problem in public education is the method we use to fund schools. It is fundamentally unfair to direct local property taxes to local schools, as this results in high funding levels for upscale neighborhoods while starving schools in poorer districts. Those taxes should be pooled and then distributed on the basis of student population.
I oppose charter schools as many (most?) refuse to be transparent in terms of their finances, salaries for teachers, administrators and CEOs, enrollment and educational outcomes.
Students and taxpayers deserve better.
22
The opposition to public charter schools in the Democratic party originates, in my experience, mainly from public teacher unions who want to maintain the status quo of government monopoly over public education.
When this opposition is at odds with better outcomes and greater school choice for low income or minority students, politicians often side with their donors. And public unions are huge donors.
We all tend to all agree that choice and competition among service providers are good things - except when it comes to the education of disadvantaged children.
7
@Jack Do we have charter military, charter airports, and charter libraries? No, because these are things, like schools, that are created for the common good. Do poor people use the airports as often as the wealthy? No, but we don't create charter airports to ease their accessibility. That isn't the problem.
5
I'm a public school teacher in Los Angeles, which has more charter schools in its district than any other city in the country. The charter industry here has been unscrupulous and dishonest, working and investing its money at one point to put a money-launderer on our school board because he would support charters.
L.A.'s charters has refused to serve special needs students and have siphoned off tens of millions of dollars that were desperately needed by neighborhood public schools. Their policies have been opaque rather than transparent, and a number of charter companies have been found to be corrupt. They owe much of their success to dishonest practices, such as dumping underperforming students just before annual testing.
We don't need charters; we need adequately resourced neighborhood community schools. Public education is not just a service, it is a promise. Right now, it is a promise both major political parties are breaking.
36
@Vesuviano : Make sure you differentiate your criticism between private and public charters - the latter are constrained to be demographically similar to other public schools and stay open as long as they get results.
One of the biggest challenges for public charter advocates is is to get people to understand the differences between the two. Thank you for providing the opportunity.
3
@Chris
Can you explain further? In my view, if a charter gets money that is siphoned away from the local public school system, it is a public charter. Am I mistaken?
3
Strange that Booker fails to mention the 200 million dollars that were poured into Newark schools by Zuckerberg and others when he touts the city's improved schools.
Charters and private schools have proven time and time again to be no better than public schools across the board but they do collect students and greater funding from families with higher income and education. Time and time again these factors predict student outcomes better than any measure.
When we really want the best education for ALL our kids public schools are the only option. But there's no quick profit in that so we get see it slowly undermined by efforts like Booker's.
19
In my state, the vast majority of charter schools underperform normal public schools, yet are not required to meet the same standards. They have resources lavished on them, all while having less expected of them. This is a recipe for destroying public schools.
Another major problem with the charter schools is that they can have a theme, which can in effect exclude students of different races and religions. They don't promote 'e plurubus unum', but rather divisiveness.
13
Agree with many other commenters, I will never support a candidate who supports charters. Charters only "succeed" by kicking out or refusing children with higher needs or more challenges. They can only be viewed as "successful" when viewed through a narrow lens, without context of the whole system.
And hear, hear to the commenter Bret, taking issue with discussion of a "crisis in public education." Any crisis that exists has been manufactured by charter and testing advocates... the real problems remain the same as they always have, and they are structural, societal issues. School funding, low student to teacher ratios, and plenty of non-traditional enrichment (art, music, etc) are what we can do to improve all our schools.
Charters give that opportunity to a few while taking money away from the system that is tasked with providing it to all.
Anyone who won't fight for public education will never have my vote.
27
Years ago, I attended high school in Providence, Rhode Island. At the time there were 4 high schools in the city, and they provided students with a decent education. Today there are almost 20 including a number of charter schools, even though the city's population is less. The abundance of schools hasn't made the system better. It's made it worse. In fact, it's so much worse that the state took it over last week due to its abysmal performance.
The answer to public education's problems isn't more schools. There is a limited money available for public education Diluting it by adding more charter schools, each with its own expenses, is not the answer. The way to improve public education is to fix public schools.
24
@Seldoc, If your numbers are correct, it means class size has become much smaller. Perhaps there are data to determine if this is the case in other places.
If charters give parents choices, what happens to the kids whose parents aren't invested in getting the best education for them? We need to educate all kids well, not just the ones with parents who with the time and energy to find something better. And let's not forget that most of the nation's charter schools don't do better than comparable schools, once you account for selection bias.
19
This is a very short sighted view of grade school education, with Mr. Booker's remarks geared for urban areas. Smaller more isolated communities, rural Montana, for example, do not have the luxury (understandably a pointed word) of sustaining charter and public schools. It is commendable that New Jersey was able to promote both in seeking solid education for children. We simply do not have the tax base to support both, with the teachers salaries lower than the average wages, with charter schools teachers requirements including "No Degree Required", and with the types of needs in this rural community including meals for poorer kids. For some children here, breakfast, lunch and snacks in between may be the only food they get that day. Unfortunately, Mr. Booker is exhibiting the reason those of us out here will look elsewhere for a candidate. He is already ignoring the rural regions of our country.
9
@Chris Yes! Rural areas can not afford two school systems. In addition, in my hometown, with a racially diverse population, charter schools are simply an overt way to re-segregate schools. Charter schools are not required to offer transportation or food service, thus culling out “those people”. The Republican plan in North Carolina is to so hollow out traditional public education, through the use of charter schools, home schooling, online schooling, and private school vouchers, so that the only kids left in traditional public schools will be the “least among us”. Then, “public” schools will simply be funded as segregated schools for African American students were funded before 1965. And, through gerrymandering, voter ID laws, voter intimidation, and other anti-democratic tactics, those left behind will have their voices of concern and dismay diminished and muffled.
6
Chris, Where my extended family lives, in rural Iowa and Nebraska, the trend has been to close small rural schools and consolidate students in central locations. This saved money in the short term, but it destroyed the sense of community in areas that used to come together around a school. In some cases, it turned whole towns into ghost towns, as the reason for young families to move to the town was eliminated with the closing of its school.
Where I live now, two towns in my county have been threatened by this kind of consolidation, but fought against it by opening public charter schools. Northern Virginia isn’t a place that usually welcomes public charter schools, but because the charters that applied for approval were backed by their communities and locally run, they were given the go-ahead. They’ve been able to operate within the same per-pupil budget that the rest of the district uses because they have more flexibility to, for example, combine classes in innovative ways, or utilize sharp new technology and curriculum that would otherwise take more time to filter through bureaucratic channels. Also, parents and community members have been invested in volunteering. The public charter model is working for a couple of small rural schools here, and I think it would be a good option in Montana as well.
2
This issue is primary among the reasons I won't support Booker.
He is not only complicit in the "educational reform" movement that is decimating public education, but he also falls for all the empty rhetoric.
"High performing schools" is an absurd concept. Schools don't "perform." The test results for students in schools, the so-called metric of high performing schools are achieved in several ways:
By enrolling students with affluence and privilege.
By enrolling only students who already do well on the measures that are valued - i.e. the competitive, selective schools in NYC.
By excluding students whose backgrounds don't predict high scores.
By drilling kids to get better scores - a horrid pedagogy with short term gain and long term devastation.
By culling the student population over time (Read: Success Academies)
By brutalizing students, particularly of color.
By cheating.
Public education needs money, teachers who are deeply respected, small classes, wrap-around care and educational practices that conform to what we know about child development and cognitive science.
85
@Barking Doggerel Hear, hear!
1
Mr Booker doesn't mention the elephant in the room: teacher's unions who oppose non-public charter schools as a threat to their members. What is more important: kids' education or preserving overly generous teachers' benefits?
If Mr Booker were truly motivated solely by quality education, why would he exclude for-profit charters? Judge every school by its record: public and private charters AND traditional public non-charters.
@KS What is a non-public charter school? Aren't all charter schools public schools?
The teachers at my children's public charter school were unionized.
4
@KS Fun fact: The majority of teachers in the US do not belong to unions, often because they are legally barred from doing so. By law, teachers in my state (with one exception, due to one district being grandfathered in) are legally barred from unionizing, collective bargaining, and striking. We can join euphemistic professional organizations, but they cannot lobby on our behalf, cannot collectively bargain, and cannot support us other than maintaining a list of lawyers to turn to in malpractice or employment discrimination or harassment suits. The only benefit to us of membership in them is professional insurance. Interestingly, the states that bar teachers from unionizing are largely the lowest performing on measures like the SAT, ACT, NAEP, and ITBS, while states with strong teacher unions tend to be the highest performers.
3
@KS
The data show that unionized teachers provide a much stronger education than non-unionized teachers.
"Overly Generous Teachers' Benefits". Ha Ha, read that line again and again for more laughs. Yeah, teachers are so well compensated that in my state, 70,000 people hold licenses to teach, yet choose to stay out of the field. It's a really sad day when Americans hate other Americans because they actually have health care. "Curse those people who get paid a living wage!" The people who are saying how easy it is to be a teacher... none of them teach.
7
A society doesn’t “fix” schools with a change in structure like the one charter schools represent. It can improve schools with a lot of money the represents commitment. Same schools , smaller classes, teachers make more leading to more competition to become a teacher, more enriching extras that aren’t extra, like art, music, and trips to the theater. This is what rich schools are already like. It’s money. Local funding of public schools is a way to ensure inequality. Charters don’t change that basic system.
13
Dogmatic? Well, what is these schools have strict rules and kick out the troubled kids, back to the public schools. Sounds like a good way to have the best 'environment' and 'test scores'. Nah, you go on about 'privileged' voices, I taught at a great, low-income, high-minority high school in Arkansas. Awesome. And, we had everybody. These cherry-picking charter schools with few rights for teachers are junk. Support the public schools. I guess you may want a type of private military for our defense (that's happening, too).
America, 'the People', all of us, together.
21
My husband and I chose the very best school district when we made our first move with children. Doesn't everyone? Well, no. As Cory Booker points out, indirectly, there are school districts, or schools, where the parents don't care, and the children aren't motivated and studious, as a result.
The truly deprived student doesn't have a chance. Only parental intent matters I guess. And studies show that the most important factor in your life is the other students in your school, not the teachers, not the curriculum...your classmates.
And so when we chose the best school district, we were also choosing a district where the parents cared and the students were also motivated and studious.
So It is only when your parents care about moving you to a 'good (charter) school' that you benefit. If your parents don't 'care' and you are poor, you are left to the dregs of education. Is this fair? The key is to provide good education to all children, regardless of parental awareness/education/intent.
Oh, well, then of course if all the 'good students' have fled those 'bad schools' so no matter how the teachers try, the learning environment never can be truly 'good'. Talk about vicious cycle.
My heart goes out to the kids 'left behind' in this world of choice and charter schools.
9
Centrists like Sen. Booker always call progressives "ideologues" and "purists," who are "dogmatic." Centrists present their own views as sensible, data-driven, and "holistic." But I think Booker's pro-corporate, pro-charter school position is no less ideological than the views of those who defend public education.
26
If public school funding were fair and equitable I might have a bit more patience with charter school backers, but funding isn't equitable or fair. Poorer areas of the country face financing schools on the basis of a low property tax base for a population of students who will need a lot more help with their education because of endemic poverty. As a community college professor for the last 19 years I have seen first hand how students from these backgrounds have a lot to overcome just to get to the starting line, let alone the finish line. As a society we need to fix the gross levels of inequality of income and opportunity. Good schools for everyone are a part of this but they are not the whole answer. Charter schools that cherrypick the best students and discard those with special needs are definitely not part of the answer.
29
My son has autism. His school is specially designed for kids like him. Do I wish his public school did that -YES but sadly it does not so I’m glad we have a choice.
10
@Denise
My local public high school has a program for Autistic kids built right into the main school, so they can get some specialized care and also be mainstreamed a bit.
2
"...many of these schools are serving low-income urban children across the country in ways that are inclusive, equitable, publicly accountable and locally driven..."
I see no reality whatsoever in this statement. I have attended local charter board meetings and have delved deeply into the data.
In Massachusetts, charter schools segregate low income Black and Latino students into charters that with diminished curricula, poorly trained teachers and a twisted test culture that prioritizes state tests over the SAT's and AP's.
Charter kids in Massachusetts sustain real damage. Selective colleges avoid them, largely considering them to be ill prepared for college.
My children attend an urban public high school where 42% of the kids are low income. The vast majority of these students attend college. The three charters that have located in our community have shown a paucity of "good ideas" and do not generate positive outcomes for students, despite their misleading statistics.
Cory - this is definitely not a hill for you to die on. Charters stand on shaky ground. They are not the future.
27
@Cousy I spent a year as interim director of special education services at an award-winning public charter school in Lawrence, MA after three decades in public schools. I learned first-hand how students from a school with 98% minority (mostly from Spanish-speaking homes) could earn the top score in 8th grade Math across all MA schools on the state test. And why 1100 children were entered into a random lottery for 7 openings.
ALL teachers met the day after student assessments were given to plan how to address gaps against state standards and tests and instruction altered. EACH principal knew each student, since schools were small, family-like places. Kindergarten students listened raptly to James and the Giant Peach being read, and offered that the sharks made James feel "excited", "frightened" or "nervous" (their words). ALL students had an extended day and year program to close achievement gaps. ALL teachers believed passionately that their students could learn. ALL staff worked on yearly contracts--many of them long-time veterans. And the special education rate was 17%, not a cherry-picked group.
One year later, as an interim Asst. Superintendent in a similar small city public school. ESL teachers told me "Hispanic children's parents just don't value education as much" as the explanation for their test results--right before they admitted to never having looked at the state tests.
Look beyond your own city's experience for what works--please.
2
@NFM
It sounds like you have no idea what happens in regular public schools. The public school faculty that I know are similarly dedicated. And most do not need to be a repeat interim.
And "getting the top score in 8th grade math" shows just how disconnected you are. I am willing to bet that in 6 years these same kids will be nowhere near college ready, and that their SAT scores will be terrible.
1
I think this whole discussion misses a massive problem in the US Education system. Every time we vote someone new into office the US curriculum changes. In the time my children have been in school we have had No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top and Common Core and whatever Trump's is called.
My children are four years apart and yet their reading comprehension strategies, math strategies and even the content of learning units has changed dramatically.
How exactly are teachers supposed to be experts when we constantly ask them to teach in a completely different way every few years when the political winds change?
We need our politicians out of the classroom. Set federal standards, write some VERY big checks and then STEP AWAY. Let the actual experts take it.
45
And this is why you won't be president. Charter schools may be fine in huge cities like NYC. But in small urban districts, like Albany NY, they are just a payoff to corporate school owners. The district is too small to split up that way. It is cherry picking that leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy of failing public schools. Also, if they are paid by my tax dollars; how is it they aren't considered public schools? They certainly aren't private schools. And why can't private schools get the same financing per student as charter schools? what is the difference except that the corporate profit taking isn't there? After all, in NY they board of regents is otherwise turning private schools into public schools with "substantial equivalence". As for local districts wanting them; I have yet to see that. Minorities manipulated into believing they want them by corporate advertising....that I have seen. But that isn't the whole district, so I have not seen a district where the majority wants them. I have only seen state mandates for corporate interests.
11
I thought Sen. Booker was very clear. He was supporting PUBLIC charter schools, not corporate charters. There’s a world of difference.
8
@Robert Jacobs
Sorry, but Booker and other's rhetoric about "public" charter schools is a misdirecting falsehood: charter schools are private entities that receive public funds, with minimal or no public oversight.
Virtually all charter schools cherry pick their students on the front end, or "counsel out " students on the back end, which makes for the bogus statistics and "miracle schools" propaganda that privateers like Booker and his pal Christie pushed.
9
@Robert Jacobs Good point. Public charter seems an oxymoron. Mr. Conant wrote years ago that public schools are a bulwark support of democracy: level playing field to start from, civics including separation of Church and State. The present reality is a sad contrast, and I confess to have benefited from it: differential funding, the requirement to include very handicapped kids with inadequate resources to mainstream them, and the differential heritage of poverty and racism. I admire Sen Booker's efforts which may be called pragmatic and even successful, but there is a chasm of deepening inequality down that road.
"While millions of families are struggling with this system, we have Republicans in Congress, the White House and state legislatures across the country making problems worse, undermining public education and attacking public-school teachers."
The two problems I have with Mr. Booker's argument are his non mention of the Teachers Union and its lack of accountability. He is correct that Charter Schools can help improve the overall quality of our children's education. Yet, he fails to mention that the Teachers Union does everything it can to undermine these same Charter Schools he mentions.
When, for example, the Teachers Union (or the teachers) went on strike in Chicago, and they suggested they were doing it to make the educational live of their students better, who were they kidding. Chicago especially, is one of the cities in the country that can least afford increases in teachers pay, with little or no increase in the student's educational experience.
The other problem I have with this argument is that he makes it into a political issue, a partisan issue. When you look a t Charter Schools and their benefits, and then you look at de Blasio and his attitude toward Charter Schools, how can he even suggest this is a Republican issue alone?
5
@bsb In North Carolina there is no Teachers Union.
Reading Booker’s opinions on this issue, you’d think that the only way to improve public education is via charter schools.
There are many other ways, but charter schools are profitable and they undermine teachers unions, so they are a big hit with the wealthy - the people who hold all the power in this country (and wise children go to private schools).
And it should be noted that the educational value of charter schools is highly controversial.
19
The many commenters saying we should fix public schools rather than fund alternatives fail to offer a single suggestion for how those public schools could be "fixed."
Of course what they really want is for us to provide more money for higher teacher salaries (how many of these commenters actually ARE teachers, I wonder?) but no one has even been able to show a link between higher school funding and better school performance.
Sometimes a school's problems start with its students. Kids who arrive at school without having been taught to value an education; who consider it cool to turn off, tune out, and disrupt; who influence their classmates to seek street cred by following their examples, will bring down ANY school's performance, no matter how great its teachers or how high its funding.
13
So, how in this case the charter school will be of help?
2
@Green Tea
Greater funding would allow for parent education classes, school nurses and psychologists in numbers proportional to student numbers, after school academic and recreational opportunities available to students who followed rules, field trips, career guidance and many other necessary functions that contribute to breaking the cycle of poverty. And yes, better compensation would begin to address the amount of training, preparation, education and dedication we require of our teachers.
1
@Green Tea , These students are still minors. Schools should be able to help them grow, and at least partly offset deadbeat parents rich or poor.
Dear Cory : Congratulations and thank you. Your words regarding education and charter schools reflect the clear rational thinking we desperately need in our leaders; it reflects the “medicine” we need to heal this country. You are exactly right, don’t toss out a good idea that is working in some communities because it’s been championed by “the other side.” Our leaders need to stop “grouping issues into parties” we need leaders who can point out when “the Emperor has no clothes” and also recognize when the “other side” has a good idea. Thank you Cory, you’ve just won my vote.
7
A public charter school saved both of my kids' futures. There are abuses--primarily for profit charter schools--but the good done by the many more legitimate and caring charter schools far out weighs the bad.
I believe that if people who care about kids and their education did a bit of homework to see how these legitimate public charter schools work and how they improve public education and individual districts, they would stop with the slander that they are all corrupt and taking money from public schools.
8
@Kevin Brock
That is true here in Ohio, as well...not enough oversight, too much profit for charter school CEOs, and some falsification of attendance.
18
@Kevin Brock And if true, they should be reformed to serve kids and their districts. That's how we do it where I live and it works very well. The teachers are also part of the union and receive the same wage as any other teacher.
It's hard to overstate how important my kids' school was for them.
6
@OrchardWriting State law governs how charter schools operate. North Carolina's General Assembly is controlled by Radical Republicans, who see charters as a way to re-segregate schools.
15
How about we just start funding and upgrading all public schools rather than creating a new system? A lot more money from federal government
Is required. Relying on local property taxes is a disaster.
This two part system only means we a abandon those kids to regular public schools, those kids who don’t have adults advocating for them, we essentially warehouse these kids. It’s not to late to do an overhaul of all our public schools and do what they did in Finland — ban all private and special schools and focus only on public.
28
The public school systems across the country have been starved by politicians, plundered by redistribution of public dollars to charter schools and religion-based schools, and the “teach to the test” curricula and mind sets. Charter and religion-based schools should be self-supporting and offer scholarships to those too poor to afford their tuitions. I want my tax dollars going to improve the public school system, not the elitist charter/religion-based schools that are doing no better than the public schools in preparing the future leaders of our country.
33
@MDR Public charter schools DO improve the public school system. Don't be misled by the few of these schools that operate for profit and truly do remove funds from local districts.
2
@MDR The public schools in CT are well funded. The real issue is that they are being treated as a parental surrogate. Not the teachers fault but the failure of the parents (or lack of parents) which no one on the left ever wants to address.
3
@tom
Failure to address poverty as the root of educational difficulties is a non-partisan issue. The efforts to improve these conditions are too costly in money and political influence to be effectively addressed. By the way, it is the Left who make more efforts to alleviate poverty and the Right that does more to perpetuate them.
1
Charter schools have run amok here in Indiana with little meaningful oversight by the state legislature. They are not public schools despite the designation as such. The governing boards are not elected. Teachers salaries in charter schools are not determined by the same pay matrix as the public district where the charter school operates. Teachers' retirement is not part of the Indiana State Teachers' Retirement system where a definite benefit still is available. When candidates like Booker write about charter schools, they would do well to look at how charter schools vary from state to state and go deeper into the statement that charter schools improve test scores. The key to successful charter schools lies not in the "charter" funding concept, but in the parental involvement aspect of charter schools. Let me give you an example of what I have seen happen with charter schools: after enrollment day, somehow the students who are a discipline or academic problem are no longer in the school so the charter school has gotten the state funds, but not the responsibility of educating. There is not enough room in this comment to write about the waste of money here in Indiana for charter schools.
32
I hear you, *and* you’re speaking of a state with a low accountability formula for charters. In states like New Jersey, New York, DC that Booker is referring to, charters are highly accountable and have high-quality teaching workforces.
4
@Hypatia - $40 million + loss for the Indiana Virtual School alone and new ones pop up like tumors every day.
3
@Hypatia
I see the same situation with the charter schools in Denver Public Schools.
1
My kids are in a not-for-profit charter, because it uses a different teaching paradigm than is available in any public schools I know of. It is a better fit for many students because ages and subjects are integrated instead of separated. Assignments can be re-done until the kid understands the material and gets it right. That’s the best way to make sure no child is left behind! Public school teachers actually go there for training in the teaching methods used. Have a little imagination. Charter schools can be a good addition. Education is not one-size-fits-all.
14
@J Effective instructional methods are also used in public schools. It's hard to know exactly what you mean by "ages and subjects are integrated instead of separated" but I can attest to the fact that my 42-year-old daughter learned in a public school environment similar to this description. The only substantial "innovation" of the charter school movement is its ruthless effort to control the narrative at the expense of public schools.
3
@J Who selects the governing board for your kids' charter school? What measures are in place to ensure accountability to taxpayers who are footing the bill?
2
There are charter schools, and then there are whatever these things are in North Carolina with the name "charter," but with absolutely zero accountability to taxpayers. These schools in NC take per pupil taxpayer dollars, after forming a self-selected board, that is self-perpetuating. They they affiliate with some right wing "advisory non-profit" like the Challenge Foundation based in Denver, CO. The Challenge Foundation gets a seat on the local "charter school" board, but local voters/taxpayers don't.
Our county's local charter school board is a master at self-dealing and doing its business in secret. They recently sent a set of planning documents to the town planners to build a $15 million campus with taxpayer dollars. There was no mention of hiring a planning group, contracting with architects, back and forth on what turned out to be pretty extensive schematic design documents, or any other hint of any such planning in any public meeting or any minutes of any public meeting. That despite the fact that these boards are covered by our state's open meetings and open records laws.
And guess who owns a parcel of land that is part of the planning documents? A member of the charter school governing board.
Charter schools have their place, when appropriate oversight is in place to prevent them from becoming publicly funded segregation academies.
20
This issue conflicts me. I am absolutely a public school guy, from back in the day. I do not like the idea of tax dollars going to what are essentially private schools.
On the other hand, the issue is not that some public schools are “...underperforming...”. The issue is that some urban public schools are dangerous places where kids behave deplorably. Alas, in urban environments, most of those schools are filled with minority kids.
Can we really blame families, almost always minority families, who want their kids out of those environments?
13
Once again, party before people.
Sure, his theme is mostly to advance our children and rightly through education.
But he dismisses anyone who is not a Democrat almost out of hand, and continues to praise as some innate inborn quality that, in his eyes, all Democrats seem to have about education and the need for it.
As a short word of advice, many Republicans have as much or more concern about quality of education, tempered with the realism that there are not endless checks to be written to fund experiment after experiment.
A little less partisan attitude and a little more America first is sorely needed, on both sides. Divisiveness and claiming political belief has the corner on caring about our children and country is not welcome from either party at this time in our country's life.
7
@reid
It might have to do with the fact Democrats support public education and Republicans make drastic cuts too funding for Public Education. Maybe this does not happen on your state level but it definitely happens on the federal level. This is what they refer to as socialism.
1
The GOP pays lip service to education, but by the public policies they enact and their words, actions and behaviors they very loudly underscore that they do not value nor believe in education.
As a black woman who was born in 1962, I grew up in an era where many whites continually looked down on blacks for not valuing education, when, in fact, we wanted into the school house so badly that we risked being beaten and bombs to do so.
Meanwhile Republicans and conservatives have stopped governing based on any type of best public policy practices borne out by scientific method. The only thing that is cared about is the accrual of wealth by the wealthy and forcing all people to live by the narrow religious values of the most conservative, faith based Evangelical and Catholic white men.
I see ZERO public policies from the GOP that would benefit anyone who is working class. I’ve not seen or heard of a GOP public policy that was based on scientific evidence whether on the environment, reproductive or public health, land management and a host of other issues.
We are told that we should get an education, but then we aren’t allowed to act upon what our knowledge tells us because that would make us “elitists.”
Having, wanting or using an education is “elitist,” while supporting a guy who was born with massive wealth who has gold-plated toilets and calls climate change a “hoax” is the leader of your party. You are known by what you support.
3
My daughter chose a local nonprofit charter school over our local high school when she was in 10th grade. She said the public high school kept the students busy with make work assignments without teaching the skills needed for college. The 35-student classes forced the teachers to teach to the middle and to waste everybody’s time with disciplinary actions with individual students. The charter school she attended had fewer students and fewer after school sports, and instead focused the efforts on AP classes.
Some local teachers fight against the charter school saying they take the “best students”. Instead the students who attend, try their best since they know it’s a privilege to attend and to be treated as partners in their education (not be talked down to or kept busy with mindless assignments).
My son continued at the local high school because that’s where his friends attended. Over 15 of the students who had above grade skills in elementary school floundered through high school eventually dropping out to finish their education at local continuation schools to get their GEDs. When I asked a school counselor about the problem, I was told the school recognized it as a problem but didn’t know how to deal with it. The school’s attitude of one sized education didn’t work for all.
6
@M Perez If the teachers in Charter schools were unionized (given a voice) I would support them. I just don't trust the right-wing to teach children anything.
7
You don't address the issue that most charters underpay their teachers and want carve outs from unionization of teachers. If better schools weren't based on exploiting young teachers who then burn out and move on, then this would make some sense. But right now, it's just weird signaling for the presidential election "I'm a moderate and people are attacking me for ideological an short-sighted reasons." Without much in the way of facts or depth to support your position. You're losing the presidential race for a reason Cory, part of it the degree to which this op ed is light weight and not compelling.
9
@David
I think "public " charters, that Booker is writing about, are public schools in every way, including teacher pay.
4
I've spent the past eleven years working in K-12 education in NYC, both in district (public) schools and in charter schools. There are effective and ineffective schools of both varieties. I wholeheartedly support strong charter schools, but I also believe they should be held to the following requirements.
1. They are not-for-profit. This includes not paying their executives exorbitant salaries.
2. They work to get all students to apply to their schools, which includes going door to door, talking with families, and having them fill out applications in their homes.
3. They don't require any specific behavior or agreement from parents, such as parents signing a code of conduct.
4. They back-fill all seats. This means that if there's an open space in a 12th grade classroom they allow a student from a public school to fill it, regardless of that student's prior academic achievement.
5. They treat students with dignity and respect.
6. They're held to a higher standard than public schools. If they don't significantly outperform their comparison schools, as measured by test scores, school persistence and college and career entry, then they're shut down.
I currently work at a charter school network that meets these criteria. We're working hard to help our kids. Charter schools can be incredibly positive forces in their communities, but in my eyes they must commit to the above criteria first.
19
@NA
Are you confusing "public" charter schools with "private" charter schools. Don't public charters have the same pool of teachers and administrators as the non-charter public schools, with the same salaries?
@Just Thinking’ They are public because there is no fee to attend.
2
@NA Thank you for explaining the critical attributes of successful charters, starting with the non-profit status. Having close community partners and adding pre-K and extended day learning is also key. And to those of my public school colleagues who protest charters: have you visited a high-performing charter? They do back-fill openings in upper grades, they do take kids with disabilities, and many with Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) scores that would traumatize any child. I don't resent new models, rigorously tested.
4
Not even remotely surprised to see Booker write this. More Democrats offering disingenuous band aids rather than making the real reforms that are needed.
He says he's for public charters, but will Booker ban the creation of new for profit charters?...
Will he refuse to take campaign donations from for profit charter school companies?
If he doesn't like the Trump DeVos reforms why did he openly praised her American Federation for Children at a conference of theirs as recently as 2016?
We know the answers to these questions. Instead of admitting the real problems like chronic under funding, poor teacher pay, overcrowding and specific efforts to desegregate public schools, we are left with band aids that "provide good schools for some", or (in another area) "medicare for some." This allows them to promise change without rocking the boat too much so they can continue to collect the campaign donations to keep themselves in power.
8
So we continue to perpetrate "winning" and "losing" schools. A few students will be lucky enough to attend the "good" while others remain behind in the "bad," due to the accident of family issues, income, or zip code. The national condition of our public schools is probably the most powerful argument AGAINST universal health care. Will our health care facilities and professional personnel be managed in the same haphazard fashion? Equally efficient and effective ideal models for both are desperately needed.
6
Having failed to improve public schools, now Mr. Booker wants to further undermine public educations by taking public money and give to private schools. Can we hear the phrase pandering. Thanks for taking the easy way out.
15
100% agree. There are ideological restraints by many as well as political motivations by teachers unions that demonize all charters by conflating public and for profit charters. Public charters may not be perfect, but they have brought about much positive results in our city where something like 85% of our public schools are public charters.
6
@BD In New Orleans, who selects the public school charter governing boards? How transparent are they in the administration and use of taxpayer dollars?
The difference is not for profit vs non profit. The difference is how much oversight do taxpayers have of the dollars spent.
5
@BD
If there was ever an example for failed charter schools, it is New Orleans - it has been a total disaster, mostly for the kids.
2
@Kevin Brock, The individual charter boards, some of whom run multiple schools, organize and submit a request to the elected Orleans Parish School Board to run a school. There is a certain amount of churn, since if a school is deemed as failing and cannot right itself it will lose it's charter. In that case the School Board will award the charter to another group or close the school.
Mr. Booker tells us nothing about what makes public charter schools a better alternative to well-funded public schools. He just dismisses people who disagree with him.
17
We all know (or should) that the Booker-Zuckerberg experiment with charter schools in Newark either showed no impact or even negative impact on student outcomes - much in line with national data on charter schools. The charter school label hides a dramatic variety of operators spanning from highly prepared educators with a vision to frightening fly-by-night scam artists who see a charter school (and our children) as an opportunity for a paycheck. The structure of the school is not the issue, Senator Booker - perhaps you would do better to address the actual problems: systemic racism and the closely related problem of a dramatically uneven distribution of wealth, income, services, housing, medicine, and food.
26
Public schools are accurate reflections of the communities and families that they serve. So, do public schools "fail their students"? Or, are so-called "failing schools" simply unable to overcome the chaos and family dysfunction produced by generational poverty, despite their best efforts? Every inner city teacher knows the answer to this question, and we are highly offended when politicians like Booker accuse us of "failing our students". Inner city schools can never be "fixed" until the communities and families they serve are improved through economic opportunities that provide the hope that has been lost a generation ago.
In his book, "How the Other Half Learns", Robert Pondiscio divulges the very unsurprising "secret" of their [test score] success: engaged and supportive parents. Or as he put it, SA cherry picks the kids who "won the parent lottery"
Now how do we get more LIM students to win that lottery . . . ?
14
@rab
the challenge is that in NYC we have "lottery winners" (who are engaged and supportive parents) who cannot get their kids into a decent school. That's why there's a huge waiting list for Success Academy. Why is NYC penalizing these families who now may have to send their kids to schools where less than 50% are at grade level?
2
Mr. Booker casually fails to mention why public school teachers almost universally dislike the Charter school model . Not only do they siphon funds from traditional public schools, they also siphon off the highest performing students - and then lie about it. They claim to have an equitable admission process, but refuse (generally) to use the same lottery/placement system as the traditional publics. Also, they "counsel" parents to remove troublesome/low performing students. And this wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing except they claim to be a better model than the traditional publics while serving a substantially different population. Politicians then use this disparity to attack unions, the traditional PS model, and push for more Charter schools, often in the process enriching themselves.
It's not the model that's broken, it's the interpretation.
76
@Adam
Public teachers 'dislike' them because they put lie to the argument that the woeful under-performance of American schools versus our international competitors has nothing to do with our teachers and their unions.
Every time a group of charter schools outperform their public counterparts - it raises the obvious and uncomfortable questions.
8
@Adam Thank you. I read an opinion somewhere that "No one cared about education until someone figured out a way to make money off it." Yes, exactly what you say: charter schools siphon public funds without transparency to the public.
9
@Adam
In Massachusetts, charter schools are remedial. No one would consider a charter school unless their kids were failing at regular school.
3
There may be a difference between public charter and for profit charter, but I would dare argue that is not the salient issue in this discussion.
For starters, let's get a working definition of public education: this is not conclusive, but essentially, it was and is to provide literacy to the entire population on an equal basis. In America this goal has never been achieved. Neither I, nor my child, received equal education, as African Americans, all of it came with hard earned battles.
Now, the very definition of a for profit enterprise is to generate a return on investment for the investor, though much of these investments are from the public coffers going to private investors. There is something wrong with this thinking and conclusion, Educating is not the priority.
I would argue though, if charter schools were funded by the public sector as research and new paradigms for public education to be integrated into the whole system; this might be worth trying.
For now, can we fund and hold accountable every school, in every zip code, equal and accountable.
I would also argue that since the allocated funding resources are not enlarged, removing resources from existing schools only serve to have those schools decline further in academic performance.
Public education, by definition, should serve all of its members and your access to resources, information or knowledge should not determine the curriculum of public education. For this, you should pay for private education.
8
@OColeman Yoour third paragraph is precisely what charter schools were to be about—individual free-standing schools prepared to experiment with new conceptions of education, ideas from which both public and charter and even private schools would benefit. They were never to be for- profit and they were to be free to make decisions, guided by a Board (often a generous one that augmented public funds), and as independent as possible for the bureaucracy and teacher unions. There was hope that the members of the union would find models to emulate. Alas, many things have gone amiss. Charters themselves are partly responsible when they select students who will do well, when the idea was to take students by lottery thus enrolling the same mix a public school would enroll, but offering more services to help struggling students.The creation of a roster of schools, as many as twenty, under the same charter does not constitute an creative and innovative reality, but rather a separate system. The Almighty. Standardized tests are also a problem since they do not test for the school as a community that supports the social-emotional growth, the curiosity, the joy of learning too often lost in education. And Betsy DeVoss is about as wrong a choice for her office as a choice could be. Schools are not about money and Greed; they are about children learning and teachers teaching
Eleanor Nicholson
Former Principal of Erie Elementary Charter School in Chicagoq
1
Cory Booker, you are going to get clobbered for writing this.
"As Democrats, we can’t continue to fall into the trap of dismissing good ideas because they don’t fit into neat ideological boxes or don’t personally affect some of the louder, more privileged voices in the party. These are not abstract issues for many low-to-middle-income families, and we should have a stronger sense of urgency, and a more courageous empathy, about their plight."
Your NYT audience is largely liberal, well-enough-off, and mostly white and THEY DON'T GET IT. Your argument is one that almost no one in this audience understands, or they refuse to see it, despite the research and positive examples in cities that have progressed due to the combination of good charter and public schools.
They are ferocious in their commitment to traditional public schools that simply do not work for too many kids, especially kids of color whose families cannot afford to supplement their weaknesses with outside of school activities and social networks. Many African American families are totally on to this and that is why more of that demographic group is willing to see charters as an alternative.
But for some reason, you are going to get clobbered for pointing this out, and now so will I.
9
@SJL
Yesterday we had Bloomberg telling us he was sorry for Stop & Frisk didnt matter that he deliberately ruined the lives of thousands of innocence people and lets forget about the people who were shot. In a black church he's sorry. Doesnt matter what he deliberately did, he is sorry now. Al Sharpton is saying everyone should apologize to give Bloomberg cover
Today we have a failing presidential candidate lecturing us on how we should feel about charter schools, and deliberately forgets to write all the facts and that he has taken money from the Trumps and Betsy for his campaigns. How about that crime bill he worked on with Jared,
People of Hong Kong are fighting for their freedoms and instead of them speaking to that story pledging to help them or covering stories where people in rural Alabama have hook worm, no housing no charter schools, or other states where people are behind
Mr. Booker believes in a concept that has failed to lift up the majority of students and their communities.
Booker,. Bloomberg maybe if you could spare the time and go to rural counties especially in the south and listen to the American people, your statements would matter. Right now neither one of you have a concept of what America needs.
Take a clue from the students fighting for freedom in Hong Kong and listen to their stories about how the majority of people actually live in China and listen to the people in rural Alabama not much of a difference. r
1
Taking $50,000,000,000 from the defense budget and giving each state $1,000,000,000 for education would help quite a bit toward equalizing schools, if proper oversight of fund allocation were in place. And that oversight bit is, of course, the rub.
13
@K. Norris
There are no studies that support the idea that funding is the problem. US schools far more than their OECD counterparts and harvest much worse performance.
The states that spend the most per pupil significantly underperform those states that spend less per pupil.
See NY vs. Utah by way of example.
5
@SteveRR If you want to argue against something, please give sources for your information. The way the money is spent is important, too. Here are two sources that counter your argument that increased funding does not produce better outcomes: http://neatoday.org/2018/08/01/money-matters-in-education/ https://gsppi.berkeley.edu/~ruckerj/QJE_resubmit_final_version.pdf
Also, proof read your writing before posting.
1
Charter schools in Newark have replace community based schools and siphoned off precious resources and institutional knowledge. Newark Public Schools are experiencing growing concentrations of special needs and English as a Second Language students without the necessary resources to support them. Stronger students and students with more resilient families attend the charters, which have far greater funding both public and private.
23
@Linda D Thank you for stating the obvious facts. We are freed by reading comments like yours that cut through the hypothetical
.
2
I teach two classes back to back that have blind students. Charter schools, even public ones, are allowed to say that they cannot appropriately teach these students. My school also has two classrooms that exclusively serve autistic students. Also not highly recruited by charter schools, public or otherwise.
105
I agree that it is not a good idea for charter schools to be run by for-profit organizations.
However, as far as I can tell from available data, only about 15% of charter schools nationally are run by for-profit entities; the vast majority, about 85%, are run by non-profit organizations.
Thus, those who claim or imply that all, or even a majority of, charter schools are operated for-profit are wrong.
A much more meaningful issue to address would be the reasons so many poor/minority parents are determined to enroll their children in charter schools rather than leaving them in under-performing public schools.
6
@Mon Ray
The reasons are largely cultural.
Some parents like schools with "tough" discipline and uniforms. Some families who lack familiarity with college preparation are confused by misleading charter marketing: "all of our students are accepted to college" (mostly to open enrollment colleges). Some families think that the admissions process necessarily means that a school is better, rather than the open registration of public schools. Some parents (sadly) conflate scores on state sponsored tests with SAT/AP tests. When college comes around, they are gobsmacked that their charter kids have lousy SAT scores after getting high MCAS scores.
1
Why not reform the structures of public schools instead of sharing the limited funding (and the limits are too great) with charter schools. In my experience, when the playing field is level public schools do better than charters. When charters get to pick and choose their students, limit class size and relax the curriculum they certainly excel. That just tells me that more funding to public education combined with a far sighted vision and strategy is what is needed. Charters are one of the factors that is debilitating our public schools.
56
I have no objection to having charter schools be part of the mix but these schools must offer union protection for it's staff and provide a good education to all types of students and not become a place that ends up serving only low performing black and brown students. Our communities do not need more segregated schools: public, private, or charter.
15
If what charter schools do is so effective those ideas would have been adopted by all schools by this time. Charter schools merely screen out the undesirables through a difficult admission process, or they kick the problems out once they surface. You don't have that luxury in the "real world" of public education. If charter schools were so great why don't they just take the bottom 10 percent of each school district and preform miracles with them??
73
@Gerard Some charters do exactly that. The approval process should incentivize this: It saves taxpayers money (traditional alternative schools spend huge per-student amounts), and the outcomes are better, both behaviorally and academically. Unfortunately, not many schools like this exist, so an RTC or similar evaluation is difficult or hard. But it IS being done.
5
@Gerard
You've described the informal process in Massachusetts, where for the most part, only students that need significant remedial help (along with a few unsuspecting immigrants) go to charters. The charters fail them at every turn. They kick out the "lost causes". Any bright students leave the charters to return to public schools.
1
First off, let’s not confuse public charter schools with private, for profit charter schools. Mr. Booker is absolutely right. Public schools are a reflection of the complicated facts that exist in so many neighborhoods. What do you say to a dedicated and successful student with fully supportive parents in a class full of other kids with skills far below their grade level? A few students in the class have serious behavior issues and regularly disrupt the teacher’s best efforts to perform their job. Parents with complex issues of their own, struggling to survive, are not engaged with their kids. Schools become the de facto parent. Income and resource disparity in our nation limits chances for success for so many. In the meantime, what’s a responsible parent to do to give their child a better opportunity for a better life? Public charter schools are frequently the best option currently available.
9
@PeterKa
Wow you certainly understand the issues of non engaged parents. If you understand the issues of poverty,racial discrimination, unequal but separate here in NYC, why arent you doing something other than telling poor people what is wrong with them and providing the so white answer?.
Wall Street makes a great deal of money from charters, every look at Eva salary.? Every think about the uncertified teachers from Teach For America who are cheap and in no union because they have no certifications, However as long as they can stand in front of the students it doesnt matter. why should they have benefits?
Ever think about why the public school test scores are low, or is it just poor people dont care in your eyes. Ever understand the Cities funding pattern and zip codes.
It is pure ignorance to blame the parents and communities. Look in the mirror and start blaming yourself for allowing this corruption to exist.
Charter discussion is like health care coverage for all or maintain private insurance the people are the ones who suffer, but who cares, when your poor you deserve nothing per your thoughts.
@Tony
Thanks for your reply and your passion. You might consider that you also have no idea what I do to change the current reality.
Thank you Senator Booker. Traditional public schools are not the best places for everyone.
I chose a local Charter public school for my Chinese son because he could learn Mandarin and be surrounded by teachers and other students that look like him. This was not possible in the traditional public school system.
6
@Michael Di Pasquale My son learned Mandarin in a public school. He was surrounded by students who looked like him and many who did not, that being one of its strengths. Let's make public schools work for all students.
7
Yes, yes, yes. First off, thank you for explaining the difference between a public charter vs. private/for profit. This is where the discussion needs to begin; many of the the comments here reveal that people conflate all three when in fact they are radically different. Public charters follow the same rules and standards as public schools, with perhaps a little leeway to experiment. The teachers have public pensions, etc. They do take funds per student from local districts here in PA, but get significantly less per student. And the local districts—often overcrowded—are not hurt. That argument simply doesn’t match the facts here, where new school buildings are constantly being considered to alleviate crowding. Building schools is much more expensive than sending a few hundred kids to charters! My two children attend a public charter, which is akin to a public school without the geographic boundaries. It accepts students from across the state who don’t fit in their local school for a variety of reasons (bullying, academically, etc). It is a life-saver for those students and their middle class families—a much-needed alternative to private (unaffordable to most!) or home-schooling. It is also a powerful way to create magnet schools, to give middle-class students the school choice traditionally reserved for the rich, to experiment with different ways of teaching/learning. It is also the future—helping to unlink academic excellence and geography.
8
it boggles my mind that Booker, after the debacle in Newark where he was in bed with the "reformers" in education for the money, wants to revisit this issue. And it further boggles my mind that teachers bear the brunt of all the problems in the world even though every bit of research shows time and time again that schools are just one of the puzzle; they need wraparound services. Finland,the acme for the "reformers," has complete wraparound services. Schools are as good as their neighborhoods and are often the only beacon of stability in places where there is scant to be found.
78
I am interested in what the wrap-around services are that those schools perform. Could you please list them? Thank you.
1
@Demkey
In the 1970s Finland actually declared children to be a natural resource. Every Finnish school offers healthcare options, mental care and social workers for students. They also guarantee a hot meal (which is not actually guaranteed here in the US.)
Perhaps the most important difference though is a not a service but an attitude. Finnish teachers are considered experts. Their thoughts on education are highly respected. Politicians are pretty hands-off and the Finnish system of education is more stable and cohesive for that.
16
@Lauren The idea of being respected for your expertise is novel to me as a teacher in America. I routinely have extended family tell me what is going on in schools, and when I correct them, they smirk...as if I couldn't possibly know. There is an overall lack of curiosity and intellectualism in America, which often makes me feel not only devalued as a teacher, but simply as an educated expert in certain areas.
3
If only charters in Texas met their promise of innovation. Nope. They do not exceed their peer public schools despite having odd exemptions in state law that allow them to "curate" their student body. Any discipline history at all (say, a 1st grade incident) allows them to not grant a prospective student access well into the future. And, if a student incurs a discipline infraction while in attendance, the child is booted out and back to public schools.
How is selective admissions and aggressive ejection innovative? It isn't. It is cruel.
Texas does a horrible job at enforcing charters to, well, uphold their charters. So. you get other oddities such as charters serving less economically disadvantaged students, English language learners, and special education students than nearby public schools.
Simply put, charters are no better than the private colleges that gamed students and the federal student loan program.
23
American public schools are unequal by design, and present the perfect opportunity for Senator Booker's backers to make a profit. The richest country the world has ever known should have one of the best public education systems to match. The United States ranks at 27th place internationally.
Public schools should be federally funded, and teaching remunerated as a profession, i.e. doctors, lawyers. The calculus by which public schools are funded is an admixture of 7% federal dollars, state funding of varying degrees depending on the whim of the state, local property taxes and state lotteries, which is inherently discriminatory.
I would suggest that Senator Booker educate himself by learning the statistics of public school funding worldwide at ascd.org and reading Diane Ravitch's writing on the subject of charter schools and the state of education in general, but I'm sure he's well aware of them. He's just too beholden to the education-industrial complex to care.
43
Charter schools can cap their enrollment and keep small class sizes. Public schools can't. By definition they don't play by the same rules as public schools. End of story.
My school district is rife with stories of children, particularly special education or behavior troubled, enrolling in charters, only to wind up back in their neighborhood public school after being told by a the charter that they "couldn't best serve them there".
When charters do get told to play by the same rules and public schools, they talk about the same reasons why they won't succeed as public schools--the emphasis on standardized testing, the impact of poverty and trauma on children learning.
So I ask, what exactly do we need them for again?
41
Sen. Booker is right on charter schools. By any reasonable standard public schools are a mind-boggling failure. My best friend teaches at an urban high school. The things that go on there are scandalous. F's are given as an absolute last resort. Why? Because it creates extra paperwork for the teachers, & accusations from administrators about a teachers incompetence. Students are given multiple opportunities to retake the test with the bad scores thrown out. If this doesn't work they are given open book tests which some nevertheless fail. If nothing else yields the desired result then they are given a D-, passed to the next grade and become someone else's problem. They are coddled more than a six-month-old baby. this should be a crime. American kids don't possess the communication & computational skills they need to succeed in college, the working world let alone life. That is a fact beyond debate & is an outrage. The DOE says a huge percentage of students graduating from high school can't read or write on a college level. It's no wonder they flounder when they get to a competitive environment. This is fraud. A high school diploma should mean something. It doesn't anymore. We need to raise the standards not lower them so everyone gets an A. Lowering standards so everyone passes is flat out evil since it will be impossible to tell the competent from the incompetent. Is this the total intellectual bankruptcy of progressive educational system...such as it is? I would think so.
9
@Bill Brown sadly you are exactly right. I recently asked a friend who is a teacher in our school district about a girl I know who is in 5th grade and reads at 2nd grade level. Will they send her to middle school where she will flounder? Her answer... they always send them on. No one fails and repeats any grade. They will graduate regardless of whether they learned what they need to learn to succeed in ANY job. And we are in an affluent school district. I can only imagine how many more kids are passed through the system in the less affluent districts!
4
I experienced the same things in the public school where I taught. However, the grade inflation and lowered academic and behavioral expectations were perpetuated by a feckless administration bowing to affluent and influential parents who could make the most noise and complain. In my experience, the students who were most likely to cheat or lie, or complain about a grade lower than the A they thought they deserved were affluent students in higher level courses. I found this behavior much harder to deal with than actual behavioral issues in a class of “non academic” students who had multiple learning and behavioral disabilities.
Teachers who tried to push back and uphold high standards were undermined. (I spent several hours of my last day at school last year trying to defend myself against a parent who was incensed that her child earned an A- instead of an A).
This was in a large high school that is becoming increasingly diverse. Just as in our society at large, the parents with the most clout are gaming the system.
2
My son attended a charter (middle) school and it was excellent: staffed by caring, dedicated, conscientious teachers who went above and beyond for all of the kids. I chose the school because the curriculum built physical education into the school day, and neither of the other two schools in our immediate area did this.
7
@Nomad The same can be said by my two son's experience (one with special needs) in our public school system.
I am humbled by the dedication and attention the fine teachers, aides and other stuff gave to them both. The spectrum from one being very capable and 'advanced' if you want to call it that, to the extra time and care my other son with cognitive problems brought were both served well beyond my hopes.
We will be forever grateful for this blessing.
Public schools can do exactly the same thing, without the cherry picking, expense and alienating good teachers.
3
1. The concept that urban schools are underfunded is a huge myth. Our cities spend more than all others in the world and have abysmal results. When confronted with this awkward fact, the usual responses is “well, we have to eliminate poverty”. Until then, throwing money at underperforming schools at this point is a complete waste as Mayor DeBlasio has shown us with his Renewal disaster.
2. Most charter schools are not for-profit entities. Only 15% are for-profit so posters who mention this are either not informed or as Mr. Booker writes are wedded to their ideology and sound bite.
3. In NYC, there are huge waiting lists for not-for-profit charter schools whose achievement rate match those of elite suburban schools even though the population is completely filled with under-represented minorities. Conversely, if they don’t get into these great free schools, 70% of the kids in non-charter NYC public alternatives do not meet grade level standards. We should expand non-for-profit charters until wait lists are eliminated.
13
@NYC Moderate
1. Not entirely true. Money that is "thrown" at these failing schools is earmarked, and most often used for things (like testing) that will not help the school. Nobody consults the teachers on how to spend that money. As for poverty, to deny that that impacts education is beyond naive. Just look at every wealthy district's public school. They almost always show better results because of what happens in the community and at home.
2. For profit or not-for profit is not entirely the issue. They can select whomever they take and they can get rid of those that don't meet their expectations, that are privately designed with no public accountability. True public schools have neither of those options.
3. Can't speak to NYC, but there is no credible data that shows that Charter schools do better than public schools.
19
@Bret
Nor necessarily the case that charters select their students. Here in Washington DC admission is solely by lottery, the same lottery that traditional neighborhood schools participate in. The only real "thumbs on the scale" are sibling preference and geographic preference for traditional schools. All have enrollment caps, so you're not guaranteed entrance to avy particular school (same in NYC...).
5
@Bret
I never said that poverty doesn't impact education but it's completely different to say "we need to spend more" while ignoring the fact that the vast money that is spent per pupil has had absolutely no effect on education. When confronted with this issue (no improvement for additional money spent), the argument becomes "we have to solve poverty".
OK - take the wasted money going to education (again, no improvement) and put it to poverty matters but don't call for more money in education because we are literally wasting it.
Finally, to complain about testing is ridiculous when the pass rate for NYC schools is less than 50%. Think of it: half the kids in our school system can't read or do math at grade level and that's after focusing on it. What should they focus on instead if they can't read/write/do math proficiently?
2
Charter schools harm traditional public schools in several ways, primarily by siphoning financial resources from the public schools, and more importantly, the students and their parents whose engagement has secured their enrollment in charters. It is precisely those parents whose advocacy for their children is critical in advancing any needed educational reform. Bottom line, it is the equal playing field of the public schools in this country that provide the foundation for our democracy.
34
@Nancy Lederman
You must be thrilled that Success Academy has an HUGE wait list as all these families are the vanguard in advancing needs educational reform. If that’s the case, how’s that’s going in NYC public schools (who are funded at an equal or a higher level than every other major city in the world yet have abysmal results)?
5
@Nancy Lederman You're missing Booker's major point. For many students and families, the public school system does not provide an "equal playing field".
3
@Nancy Lederman This is a bogus argument. Charter schools DO NOT harm public schools by siphoning financial resources. Parents are abandoning public schools because they don't work. it's so bad that more and more parents assuming a crushing level of debt so their children can get a quality education. Private & charter schools do a better job of educating our kids. This isn't a close call. They require more work, more discipline, and more focus from their students. Frankly, the majority of public school students would flounder if they had 2-3 hours of homework every night. Many would flunk out. Yes, private schools get to choose their students and usually won't take kids who can't handle the workload. But they also get to choose their teachers and won't put up with anyone who's incompetent. One of the biggest differences between public and private is discipline. Private schools simply won't tolerate kids who cause problems. They are suspended, expelled or aren't invited back the next year. There is no discipline in public schools and one of the reasons they are a mess. Obama's 2014 directive which made it harder to discipline bad kids didn't help. It was a giant step backward. It's not the job of teachers to be social workers. We need to make it easier for teachers to remove violent & disruptive pupils. No matter what stage you are in your life, there're consequences for your actions & school is no exception. Teachers need to be able to set boundaries in their classrooms.
8
Charter schools sap scarce resources from the rest of the public school system and too often create elitist divisions between the haves and the have-nots. Of course Cory Booker, who receives a large portion of his donations from Big Education, would be in favor of them, just as his Big Pharma donations make him an opponent of Medicare for All and allowing Americans to purchase cheaper, Canadian-produced drugs.
Booker's arguments are typical of centrist, Third Way Democrats who believe there is always a policy that can simultaneously serve both the people and the powerful, that we can navigate a path between corporate and quotidien interests so that we never have to answer labor's classic question of "whose side are you on?" Unfortunately, Democrats have been doing just that for forty years, ever since the Reagan landslides, and what it has gotten us is an historic, absolutely polarizing wealth gap that is literally eating away our democracy like termites and made a President Donald Trump not just possible, but inevitable. Another Democratic president who appeases the corporate lobby by avoiding fights over wages, union rights, and monopoly power in the name of "unity" and avoiding "divisiveness" will be another four years marked by more crushing poverty that wipes out entire communities. That kind of Democrat we don't need.
54
@Boris Jones , All the issues you mention are important. Cheating the next generation with abysmal education is more urgent and consequential, and Mr. Booker should be commended for taking it up.
Thank you, Mr. Booker. Here in Columbia, we have tried increased per pupil funding for the disadvantaged in the traditional public school framework and academic metrics are still abysmal and the system is going broke. Good charter school and voucher options are needed for those who seek alternatives w the goal of academic excellence.
9
Thank you Senator Booker for your common sense approach and having the courage to speak out for the kids who are not able to get a quality education in our most underserved neighborhoods. The orthodoxy of the progressive agenda very simply works against the kids who need the most help in getting a solid education.
12
The Senator from New Jersey seems to want to go down the path of least resistance that doesn't solve the over all problem. Want to educate kids in poor districts, what about getting the teacher to student ratio down to 10 to 1 instead of 30 to 1. Or what about giving new parents entering into the educational process a road map for success, a simple class for parents that informs them how to be better educational parents. Do we really think that people who are struggling to put food on the table, are reading to their kids or helping with math home work? Parents that struggle, raise kids that struggle, on average and those children need more help to succeed. Charter schools don't provide that help, they are a Red Herring. It's all about what happens before they enter the school house door.
30
Mr. Booker needs to be reminded that we have already tried the “separate but equal” approach to public education and the results were abominable. The solution is to invest in public education and ensure that every child has access to a quality education, not create islands of success in a sea of mediocrity.
57
I agree that it is not a good idea for charter schools to be run by for-profit organizations.
However, as far as I can tell from an internet search, only about 15% of charter schools nationally are run by for-profit entities; the vast majority, about 85%, are run by non-profit organizations. Some states and cities have lower percentages, some have higher. However, the national average is around 15% for-profit.
Thus, those who claim that all, or even a majority of charter schools, are run for-profit are wrong.
11
@Mon Ray Speaking of internet research, take a look at how "non-profit" charters actually make a profit? How their CEOs get big salaries? How they keep kids and parents who are invested and counsel out those who aren't?
There is more to a charter school's intentions than the label.
17
@Mon Ray Unfortunately, functions of charters schools such as food service and maintenance are often outsourced to private corporations owned by individuals sitting on the charter's non-profit boards.
9
@Ad My point is that only a tiny minority of charter schools are for-profit. If you look into the matter you will find that non-profit organizations that violate the law by making a profit will lose their non-profit status.
I am not familiar with data that show CEOs of non-profit charter schools making “big salaries,” and how those compare to the salaries of regular public school administrators. It would help advance the discussion if you could provide sources/citations for this assertion.
1
This is not about "ideological differences," Sen. Booker. It is about the reality that transferring funds to charter schools drains valuable resources from public schools.
It also has to do with the ability of charter schools to deny admission of more "at risk" students (in Special Education and English language learners) and the documented "pushing out" of students who are not performing well academically or behaviorally. Statistics have demonstrated that over the K-12 spectrum, significant numbers of students leave charters to return to public schools. It is also the lack of charter schools' accountability on both fiscal and academic measures; more than 1,000 grants were given to schools that never opened, or later closed because of mismanagement, poor performance, lack of enrollment or fraud.
Professional education credentials are not required for teachers at most charters. Outsized attrition rates of both teachers and students in charters is alarming and deleterious to academic achievement.
A more enlightened approach to improving student performance has been demonstrated through the efforts of those teachers who have gone on strike who demand that funding for public schools be more equitably distributed through increases in Title I allocations, that class sizes be lowered, and that critical support services be increased.
It's not a facile solution, but one that holds much greater promise for K-12 students across ALL communities, urban, suburban and rural.
39
This is very disappointing. At 1-2% in the presidential polls Senator Booker writes about charter schools. What next? Reform of the Department of Housing and Urban Development? Support for Amtrak? It's as if he's given up.
3
"We can’t dismiss good ideas because they don’t fit into neat ideological boxes or don’t personally affect some of the louder, more privileged voices in the party."
Like, say, Medicare For All?
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
22
Let's suppose I don't think my local police department serves my neighborhood very well. I complain that the officers spend all their time on the wealthier side of town, and neglect mine. Can my neighbors and I get our hands on some taxpayer money, take money out of the police department's budget, and hire a couple of "charter police officers" to protect our neighborhood?
Sen. Booker calls opponents of charter schools ideologues, but he is just as ideological in his desire to depend on the market and to undercut further our already badly eroded public institutions.
385
@Chris Rasmussen
If the statistics show that local policing rates are abysmal despite highest-in-the-world funding levels, I’d say, yes, you should start that conversation.
Charter schools wouldn’t exists if public schools were doing a good job - they exist because public schools are failing its constituents. We don’t see charters in well-performing suburbs.....
FYI - it’s not a funding issue as our cities spend more per student that all others in the world and get abysmal results.
13
@Chris Rasmussen That is not a good comparison. Charter Schools were created through a legal process that allows them to be organized as an option to traditional public schools.
8
@NYC Moderate I pay taxes, so I am well aware that public education is expensive. I agree that the outcomes are sometimes disappointing, given the considerable expense. But it IS a funding issue in this sense: every student who enrolls in a charter school reduces the amount of tax revenue allocated to the public schools.
46
Setting up high performing Charter Schools sounds great but it ignores the fact that you are choosing some children to succeed and others to fail. Schools can’t overcome homelessness, squalor, parents working 2 or 3 jobs to survive, Ganga and the myriad of problems facing poor neighborhoods. Fixing failing schools is difficult, but not impossible. Unfortunately, most politicians think they are education experts. They underfund, denigrate teachers and present grandiose plans that are foolish or unrealistic. Would you let a plumber perform heart surgery on you? Provide the materials, repair the buildings and let the professional educators do their jobs.
119
Charter schools take local money and fund a for-profit corporation. How does this help locally? If charter schools having something to add to children's education, why not work with the teachers' unions to apply successful techniques in all our public schools? Why not ask the unions, which I completely support, to adopt more local, school- or zone-based control and provide the education that is needed for a particular district or population without threatening the community value of universal public schools? Charter schools are just another way in which a public good is being privatized and in some ways act like the private schools they imitate, by not accepting all applicants and by expelling children who don't cannot conform to their demands. This is hardly public education. All children need to have the very best opportunities afforded to them. Only a universal public system can possibly do that, and as charter schools siphon our tax dollars, the country's largest school system has less and less to work with for improve our schools, sorely in need of improvement.
99
@Ellen Tabor Yes! Charter schools are not public schools. They are merely publicly-funded schools.
48
Thank you Ellen!! That’s exactly right. And charter schools can absolutely pick and choose who they allow including no services for special needs kiddos or accommodations for different learners. NOT the answer.
26
Exactly. They set up a “nonprofit” to run the school. They build the school. Note that it often looks like an office building. The school pays all of its public money to the for profit entity in rent for the building and to lease all the equipment. The for profit entity makes the profit and pays the debt on the school. In 15 years or so, the building Is paid for and can be converted to another even more profitable use or maintained as a school if the owner is skimming out sufficient profit. One method of increasing the profit is requiring the parents to “volunteer” many hours a year eliminating hired manpower and also minimizing the number of children from single (working) mothers who can actually “afford” to attend. By and large charter schools are a scam on the level of private prisons and they both seem to go hand in hand.
21
Well put. Kids in failing schools need options. Why would anyone with a heart or a brain deny it to them?
Public schools in New Jersey and New York and D.C. spend vast amounts of money per student. For example, per pupil expenditure in D.C. now is over $18,000! Yet the public schools there are mostly failing--in fact, the Department of Education itself at one point concluded that D.C. had the worst public school system in the country. It's not a lack of money that's the problem.
There are some terrible charter schools. But they can and should be closed. Public schools almost never close, no matter how awful they are.
Give the kids in these places a decent chance in life, as Mr. Booker says. Just an option!
12
@Letmeout Did you ever ask why the schools in high poverty area are failing? Think harder...
1
I oppose charter schools. I am not loud. I am not privileged. I am not an ideologue. Public schools, for all their flaws, are one of the greatest ideas in American history. If those schools have problems, by all means, let's fix them, rather than undermine them by allowing private citizens to use taxpayer funds to run "charter" schools.
504
@Chris Rasmussen In the meantime, until schools are "fixed" (an excellent proposition and one I fully agree with) what should parents of school-aged children do to ensure they have the best chance at a future? It is reasonable for them, if possible, to choose a better school in the form of charter schools. When their local public schools can offer the same or better, then there will be no advantage to charter schools and enrollment will favor the best.
18
@Chris Rasmussen
You are so mistaken.
There are public charter schools that are tailored to address specific students and specific interests and career aspirations that are extremely successful and an asset complimentary to the traditional public schools.
A blanket NO is not helpful to the downward spiral of America's public school system.
15
@Chris Rasmussen As others have pointed out, no one knows how to fix public schools. Meanwhile, kids continue to need schools. Charter schools exist because public schools are broken and aren't able to serve their students. Giving parents and children no other option but their catchment-based housing option run by a failing public school system worsens disparities and will continue to cause generations of children to fail and fall farther behind. How is that a solution while you and others sort out the "fix"?
11
Why not fix the public system instead of giving taxpayers' money to private interests whose priority is to make money, not educate?
349
Agreed. And real public schools have to operate under a number of requirements that are not imposed upon charter schools, thus limiting the ability of real public schools to compete.
40
@Katherine Kovach High-performing charters are non-profits, at least in my area. They are not profit-maximizing, they are performance-maximizing. Have a look at KIPP and Mastery Charter, two exemplars. Both non-profit, so I'm not sure where you're getting that their priority is to make money rather than educate. You've got it wrong.
7
@Katherine Kovach
Stop - 85% of charters are non-profit so the "make money" line is simply fake news.
We've tried fixing urban public school system and US cities provide more money per student than all other cities in the world and our results are abysmal.
Take a look at NYC - how did DeBlasio's Renewal program work compared to the money spend? how do the results of the kids in that school compare to that of Success Academy?
5
Why are public schools funded by towns? Would it not be better to be funded only by states/federal taxes then distributed evenly to schools depending on how many students that school has? As is the case all over Europe?
Out system here is very obviously set up for the rich districts, where more money comes from tax revenues who then obviously have better schools. It is set up for poor districts to fail. Poor people who work pay less into school budgets because those towns don't have the tax revenues.
It is a set up that will always fail.
74
Exactly. Fund all public schools via federal taxes and all public schools will get the resources they need. PUBLIC services should be EQUAL.
6
@Nob
This type of school funding has been tried before. Guess what happens? The wealthy areas create non profit funding sources for their children and once again the education gap is created.
A solution is 150% funding per student in identified school districts BECAUSE their cost of education their students is much more than a wealthy area. State over sight is essential regardless public, private(yes they get State funding) or charter schools.
Mr. Booker reveals the problem with education in his second paragraph when he describes his parents attempt to get him a good education--the underfunding of neighborhood schools. There is NO crisis in well-funded schools. And the Center on Reinventing Public Education--hmmm. I'm sure "reinventing" involves charter school supporters. And let's check how Newark's graduation rate changed so dramatically. Credit-recovery, perhaps?
22
I understand that many parents, especially in urban school distrcts, are dissatisfied with public schools, and that they are willing to consider almost any alternative that promises something better for their children. Proponents of charter schools claim that these schools are not burdened by the many regulations that govern public school systems, and can improve learning outcomes by engaging in innovations that public schools cannot. But it seems to me that charter schools sap tax revenues from our public schools, and that they are much more likely to undermine public schools than to improve them.
80
@Chris Rasmussen in our area they offer inferior education to parents who want the pretense of privilege or who are culturally conditioned to think that wearing a uniform and putting children in detention for wearing traditional hairstyles suited to their hair texture means an upscale environment.
11
@Chris Rasmussen I like the glimmer of understanding you have here that parents want their children to have an education where they learn to read and can actually go to college and graduate. The money does not belong to school districts. It is not theirs. It belongs to the student and it follows the student if they move from say Camden to Cherry Hill.
There is no one railing against young couples who live in city with a failing school district who decide to move to a small town with excellent public schools. This is the school choice of those with the means to pay the rent or mortgage in a nice town like Highland Park or Princeton, or Warren or Montclair. But what about the rest of the world? Those that can't afford this option? Do we have to send our kids to a failed school because of some ideal vision that older white people have in the suburbs of the way the public school system is supposed to work? Thank you, but no.
Support teachers more, invest in professional development and quality resources, pay them more and reduce class size. Provide relevant and rigorous curricula for everyone not just the wealthy who are usually white . Restore the arts and sports. Provide enough counselors including college counselors.
We don’t need charters for that. They have reinforced segregation and most are not places the white finders or school runners would send their own kids.
70
A good discussion to be had here as Mr. Booker indicated. Am sure his thoughts on this will be dismissed by many as taking contributions from Charter schools. But understanding that charter schools increase choice and hence increase accountability across the public school system is important. For-profit aspect of charter schools is where we need serious rules and regulation to focus on holistic performance of students. Not for profit charter schools deliver real value with focus on STEM, Art and other academic interests. Parents and students deserve a choice when the local public schools are failing. It is interesting that no one accuses politicians opposing charter schools on principle of being in the cahoots with teacher unions.
12
@Matt Public schools must educate every student who enrolls. What does accountability mean under those circumstances?
15
@Matt
It is high time we start listening to our teachers and not overpaid administrators eager to try the latest educational "experiment" on our kids. We would do well to start electing more politicians who are in "cahoots" with teachers.
6
Public Charter Schools can no more bar entry to a student with a disability than a traditional school can. They must take every student that enrolls, IEP and all. Some charters even are designed with students that have learning differences in mind. Some provide services for underserved communities and work with Americorp tutors to provide extra help to students whose struggles outside the classroom are preventing success in the classroom. And charter schools are far more regulated than traditional schools. Auditors review the books, regulatory filings, and performance metrics of every charter school on a regular basis (in DE every 5 years.) If they are failing their kids, they are closed. When was the last time your local school underwent that kind of scrutiny?
5
Excellent Op-Ed. If not president I would proudly see Mr. Booker the secretary of Education though I think New Jersey still needs him.
10
Mr. Booker, please do your homework. Look at suspension, expulsion and transfer data from high achieving charter schools vs public schools in same districts. Then cross analyze with variables of IEP and 504 plan status and last dig a bit deeper and ask two teachers and/or parent of a smaller sub sample to complete Vanderbilt teacher/parent checklist measuring attention and impulsivity. I believe you will find these high achieving charters are systematically pushing out students with anxiety and attention related disabilities. This is pervasive and disastrous for the students left behind. The charter’s academic success is to be commended as are their teacher training and structured classrooms. Yet charters by and large must cease their harsh zero tolerance disciplinary practices in favor of restorative and collaborative problem solving approaches. You would do a great service to address this and stop charter school discrimination based on neurological conditions, thank you.
224
@jbw431
Allast, a meaningful, relevant point added to the discussion. Booker mentions not the negative selectivity factor the charter school add to an already unequal treatment of children in disadvantaged situations.
16
@jbw431 Thank you, thank you! I am a teacher of students with emotional and behavioral disabilities in our neighborhood public high school. We often find ourselves teaching students whose needs have not been (or could not be) met by local charter schools. These students have experienced rejection and failure and have returned to our school to be taught by trained, licensed, and skilled professionals. They will always have a place in true public school classrooms, which are mandated by law to serve all comers. I am proud to do this work, galling though it is to have my school negatively compared to the very charter schools that could not serve my students.
21
@Fiddler50 Your experience is not universal. Our high-performing charters in Philadelphia have more resources for students with emotional and behavioral disabilities than the public schools. Their teachers have far more professional development about trauma-informed approaches. They have more focus on social-emotional learning. I'm sorry you have had this experience, but not all charters are like that and that's the very point of this editorial.
4
Cory Booker, who is in the hands of the corporate charter cartel, once again, shows his ignorance. Charter schools serve to make a profit with a private board. Unlike public schools, charters are not accountable or transparent. Research proves that charters are a gimmick, an expensive one at that, as they either perform at the level of a neighborhood school, or worse. The profit motive rules the day at charters, unlike public schools, and many close in the school year without notice because they are losing money. Senator Booker has had a long history tied to the corporate charter industry, in fact, until recently, he received thousands in donations from none other than current Secretary of Education Betsy DeVis, a supporter of the private charter movement and other disastrous ideas for education. Booker also shows his ignorance in claiming charters are “public.” Far from it. Charters are private entities that put profits above students.
161
@Adam you calling public schools accountable is a joke of cosmic level proportions. Schools can’t even fire sex offenders, but yeah they’re super accountable
1
None of what you said is actual fact. In DE EVERY charter school is a public, tuition-free school and a non-profit entity. Every charter school undergoes an audit of its books and performance metrics every 5 years. And all board business is public and subject to FOIA regulation. There is no corporate charter cabal conspiring to suck money from taxpayers, just a lot of parents and teachers who want to do their best for their kids.
3
It's early in this comment period, but so far Mr. Booker your words seem to have fallen on deaf ears. Please keep pushing your well thought out narrative. Every child deserves school choice regardless of their Zip Code.
16
@Tom Wolfe I agree. It's time we backed away from click-bait superficial shorthand and looked at the actual picture of the actual issues. I would like to see more of Sen. Booker's insights made current in the discussions of where we are and where we need to go in America.
3
@Tom Wolfe What do you mean by school choice?
@Tom Wolfe, Same here. There seems a perfect fit between Mr. Booker and K-12 reform. A functioning education system could really make a positive difference in a generation's time, and is uniquely important lever for a better labor force, integration across socioeconomic and racial schisms, and better educated parents for the next generation.
The public charter schools that most city/urban districts need are charters that serve as independent, accountable "alternative" schools. We know students in district-run alternative programs are poorly served, by and large: Challenging students are dumped there, as are teachers principals don't want but can't easily fire. A recipe for disaster, all paid for by you and me. Charter schools serving this student population are needed everywhere and have the flexibility to create school days and practices that work for traumatized kids or children with different needs. We should welcome accountable, transparent public charters--run by nonprofits who get audited--no matter what "tradition" says.
I have yet to see a city where the accountability taxpayers deserve--making public the finances of such programs and the academic progress of their students--is present. Allowing this secrecy flies in the face of transparency of public funds, and public charter schools working with so-called alternative populations have thankfully put a spotlight on that problem. Imagine what we'd find in NYC or any big city if you started trying to examine the academic progress of those students!
10
"Especially at this time of a national crisis in public education"
Nope--I don't by this commonly assumed trope. What crisis? Here is the crisis, that poor kids (often kids of color) have infinitely less opportunities than wealthier kids. This is not a crisis of education, this is a crisis of inequality and racism thoroughly embedded within society. The fact that this manifests in the "education gap" does not mean our education system is failing. It means that the education system simply is both more complex than we think and that it cannot solve the problem of inequality on its own. The idea that we need to "reform schools" and "root out the bad teachers" etc. has, ironically, been manufacturing an actual crisis in education of over tested teachers and students (yes teachers are tested scrupulously) for extremely high stakes. The education system has become system of penalizing teachers for things they cannot control and systematically defunding public schools based on the faulty notion that here is a "crisis in education"--when the truth is there is a real crisis of inequality and racism.
420
@Bret
Yes. And Obama was complicit in further developing this test-the-teacher effort while doing little or nothing to make a difference in the root of the problem - income inequality/tax-the-masses so the 1% and buy our country. Booker proves he is not the person we need to lead. Not a bad person and probably well-meaning (as was Obama), but twisted and distorted in his thinking based on his own personal experience, both as a child and as a politician who learned how to get elected. I hope it does not work for him nationally in 2020.
18
@Bret
I agree that it is not a good idea for charter schools to be run by for-profit organizations.
However, as far as I can tell from available data, only about 15% of charter schools nationally are run by for-profit entities; the vast majority, about 85%, are run by non-profit organizations.
Thus, those who claim or imply that all, or even a majority of, charter schools are operated for-profit are wrong.
A much more meaningful issue to address would be the reasons so many poor/minority parents are determined to enroll their children in charter schools rather than leaving them in under-performing public schools.
30
@Bret I agree that the crisis is for the most part a crisis of inequality and racism. There are some issues in public schools that need to be addressed as well.
Many parents, including minorities, want a greater voice in governing the schools within their communities. Charter public schools give parents a excellent opportunity to participate in the governance of the schools their children attend.
Charter public schools don't just appear. There are statutory procedures for creating charter public schools. The local school boards and state education departments have a role in the formation of public charter schools as well as an oversight role. Too often those school boards and state education departments fail to provide necessary support and effective oversight for charters. The public schools also need more support and more effective oversight.
We need charter public schools as well as traditional public schools.
10
Not buying it. Teachers know what schools need. Ask one.
Chances are she/he will say smaller class sizes. Maybe mental health services, additional guidance staff, or school nurses are needed.
This government could save A LOT of $ by eliminating the entire Federal Department of Education. Better still they could invest the money in providing smaller class sizes or whatever it is that TEACHERS know their students need.
144
The testing and technology industries have hijacked public education. More administrators are hired instead of more teachers - because we need more people in charge of all those tests and technology aids, right? So now we have a system that is overly bloated at the top, and those at the top refuse to listen, or if they listen, to take seriously, the concerns of teachers.
When I was teaching high school, the teachers had better solutions to the problems facing our classrooms and kids. But because the teachers didn’t have administrative certifications, their solutions had no merit in the eyes of the administrators.
Our teaching evaluations were based largely on standardized test scores, not classroom observations or any other metric of our individual classroom performance. As a chemistry teacher, my scores were largely based on school-wide scores on standardized English and mathematics tests. No matter what I did in my classroom, if scores on these tests went down, my evaluation score was also lower.
The result of all of this is a deeply demoralized staff for which there is little incentive to improve (unless you are an English or math teacher...then you are responsible for the entire staff’s evaluations). This is how things are in my state’s public schools. While charter schools do need accountability, the faux accountability I described here will go nowhere towards improving our schools.
52
@ego I shudder to think of our country's educational standards and outcomes if states like Alabama are suddenly able to do as they please. Their educational outcomes are already abysmal and have been for years. The majority of the state's residents don't wish to pay for educational excellence. Imagine that times 20, and think of the economic effect nationally of undereducated kids. If there's not a federal agency forcing states to meet (or at least strive for) high expectations for all students, our economy would be crushed within my lifetime.
12
@ego
Alas teachers do not run the schools but, instead, outsiders, often paid "consultants" and educational testing reps, seem to have more leverage. Only only need to look at districts where there are fewer (or even any where near parity) teachers than non-classroom personnel. We spend more on education than practically another nation on the planet, yet much of that does not go directly to the teachers and actual classrooms (and students) but to those ancillary players.
And a loud AMEN to eliminating the federal DOEd, one of the absolute worst decisions from the Carter era. Somehow we managed to educate millions of Americans before Washington decided to run teaching our children as a bureaucratic process. Yes, DC can help, and, as it did in the past, dole out grants and the like, but the notion that secretaries and assistants and assistants to assistants, along with hundreds (or more) regulations will help your local school are a fantasy.
7