Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 11, 2021 23:05:12 GMT -5
My oldest went to a charter school for 2 years. The school was no way equipped to handle the needs of my youngest. I could have pushed the issue and fought them constantly, but why? Our public school had a very good special needs department and I wound up sending both kids there. I only sent the oldest because she was in with the “gifted” kids so she was sheltered from the problem students. The public school had a fantastic gifted and special Ed department. Regular Ed was questionable and I would have paid for private school if I had to rather than send my child to regular Ed there I guess I don’t see the harm in pulling out the brightest of the students and letting them excel without being pulled down by problem students. I’m the parent of a special needs child and even I get angry that parents force mainstreaming to the detriment of regular Ed kids. If a child is disruptive, whether it’s because they are special needs or just have behavioral issues, they shouldn’t ruin the education of the kids that are there to learn. I don’t care the race or religion of a student, if they are the smartest, pull them out and let them flourish. That is what charter schools want - for all the difficult kids to go elsewhere. I am glad you had an option that worked for your kids. I guess I don’t see the issue with having a charter school that non-problem kids attend to. Doesn’t it make their education a lot better when they aren’t distracted by behavioral problems? I remember a friend of mine threatening a lawsuit if the school didn’t mainstream her special needs child. This girl was super sweet but she got nothing out of being in regular Ed classes. And she did have some behavioral issues. Not violent but more acting out because she was in an inappropriate setting. She had an aide with her at all times but that didn’t prevent the distractions. Why shouldn’t kids get to learn in an environment with other kids that are there to learn and are on the same page academically? If my oldest was in a class with regular Ed students she would have been bored stiff. If my special needs child was in a class with regular Ed students she wouldn’t have a clue what was going on and would have been disruptive (she would want to talk to everyone!). I feel like we want to bring all kids down to the lowest common denominator.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 19:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2021 9:18:58 GMT -5
Why shouldn’t kids get to learn in an environment with other kids that are there to learn and are on the same page academically? If my oldest was in a class with regular Ed students she would have been bored stiff. If my special needs child was in a class with regular Ed students she wouldn’t have a clue what was going on and would have been disruptive (she would want to talk to everyone!). I feel like we want to bring all kids down to the lowest common denominator. Exactly. I once met a Special Ed teacher who was really unhappy with mainstreaming; I know she had her own interests to protect but she said that when she had all the Special Ed kids in her class they bonded, they had parties, and they learned from each other. My own son had a touch of ADD and I spent the equivalent cost of a new SUV to send him to a military boarding school for HS. It was exactly what he needed and I'd do it all over again. He was an honor student and the officer of two companies when he graduated. He had options, though, when the public school wasn't working for him. Most kids don't. When I ask people who vilify charter schools and vouchers whether that means that they believe that only kids whos parents have money, or who are athletic or academic superstars, should have options. They never have an answer.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,393
|
Post by thyme4change on Feb 12, 2021 10:26:43 GMT -5
That is what charter schools want - for all the difficult kids to go elsewhere. I am glad you had an option that worked for your kids. I guess I don’t see the issue with having a charter school that non-problem kids attend to. Doesn’t it make their education a lot better when they aren’t distracted by behavioral problems? I remember a friend of mine threatening a lawsuit if the school didn’t mainstream her special needs child. This girl was super sweet but she got nothing out of being in regular Ed classes. And she did have some behavioral issues. Not violent but more acting out because she was in an inappropriate setting. She had an aide with her at all times but that didn’t prevent the distractions. Why shouldn’t kids get to learn in an environment with other kids that are there to learn and are on the same page academically? If my oldest was in a class with regular Ed students she would have been bored stiff. If my special needs child was in a class with regular Ed students she wouldn’t have a clue what was going on and would have been disruptive (she would want to talk to everyone!). I feel like we want to bring all kids down to the lowest common denominator. The biggest problem is when we compare schools, especially types of schools. If charter schools take all the smartest kids and have high testing, and problem kids go to district schools, even if the district school segregates kids by ability, the school gets graded lower. Multiply this out and you get the incorrect message that charter schools are better at educating than district schools. It is hard to chose the right school, but when the deck is stacked, it leaves great schools with bad images, unless you dig deeper. We are a society that only reads the headline. People just don't get the full story, and it leads to bad decisions.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 12, 2021 10:56:02 GMT -5
I guess I don’t see the issue with having a charter school that non-problem kids attend to. Doesn’t it make their education a lot better when they aren’t distracted by behavioral problems? I remember a friend of mine threatening a lawsuit if the school didn’t mainstream her special needs child. This girl was super sweet but she got nothing out of being in regular Ed classes. And she did have some behavioral issues. Not violent but more acting out because she was in an inappropriate setting. She had an aide with her at all times but that didn’t prevent the distractions. Why shouldn’t kids get to learn in an environment with other kids that are there to learn and are on the same page academically? If my oldest was in a class with regular Ed students she would have been bored stiff. If my special needs child was in a class with regular Ed students she wouldn’t have a clue what was going on and would have been disruptive (she would want to talk to everyone!). I feel like we want to bring all kids down to the lowest common denominator. The biggest problem is when we compare schools, especially types of schools. If charter schools take all the smartest kids and have high testing, and problem kids go to district schools, even if the district school segregates kids by ability, the school gets graded lower. Multiply this out and you get the incorrect message that charter schools are better at educating than district schools. It is hard to chose the right school, but when the deck is stacked, it leaves great schools with bad images, unless you dig deeper. We are a society that only reads the headline. People just don't get the full story, and it leads to bad decisions. But you are assuming that people are flocking to charter school because of test scores and not their experience at the public school. In my experience, there is a world of difference between the regular Ed classes in my home district and our charter school. I know because I sent my daughter to the regular Ed before she tested into the gifted program. While we didn’t live in a disadvantaged area, we live in a huge school district that covers many disadvantaged areas. Agree with me or not, but my experience is that the kids from those areas are much more likely to be problem students. I understand it because they live in homes where parents are unstable, some of the parents are in and out of jail, etc. Had my daughter not tested into the gifted program, she would have been sent to private school. Luckily she is naturally bright so I was able to remove her from regular Ed. Otherwise, I would have paid the $20k a year for private, non-religious school. I had options because I had the money. I find it sad that poor kids are stuck in schools with no choices, being dragged down by kids who don’t care. I’m not against public school. Both of my kids went to one. I’m against trying to guilt parents into a shitty school situation because some parents don’t care enough to fight for their kids. I feel very sorry for those kids (hell, I was one of those kids!) but don’t feel I have an obligation to ruin my child’s education so as not to abandon those kids.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,393
|
Post by thyme4change on Feb 12, 2021 11:21:21 GMT -5
The biggest problem is when we compare schools, especially types of schools. If charter schools take all the smartest kids and have high testing, and problem kids go to district schools, even if the district school segregates kids by ability, the school gets graded lower. Multiply this out and you get the incorrect message that charter schools are better at educating than district schools. It is hard to chose the right school, but when the deck is stacked, it leaves great schools with bad images, unless you dig deeper. We are a society that only reads the headline. People just don't get the full story, and it leads to bad decisions. But you are assuming that people are flocking to charter school because of test scores and not their experience at the public school. In my experience, there is a world of difference between the regular Ed classes in my home district and our charter school. I know because I sent my daughter to the regular Ed before she tested into the gifted program. While we didn’t live in a disadvantaged area, we live in a huge school district that covers many disadvantaged areas. Agree with me or not, but my experience is that the kids from those areas are much more likely to be problem students. I understand it because they live in homes where parents are unstable, some of the parents are in and out of jail, etc. Had my daughter not tested into the gifted program, she would have been sent to private school. Luckily she is naturally bright so I was able to remove her from regular Ed. Otherwise, I would have paid the $20k a year for private, non-religious school. I had options because I had the money. I find it sad that poor kids are stuck in schools with no choices, being dragged down by kids who don’t care. I’m not against public school. Both of my kids went to one. I’m against trying to guilt parents into a shitty school situation because some parents don’t care enough to fight for their kids. I feel very sorry for those kids (hell, I was one of those kids!) but don’t feel I have an obligation to ruin my child’s education so as not to abandon those kids. You are correct that it is based on experience. This is the most difficult part about discussing education. It is, by nature, extremely local and individual, but also universal. I do like school choice, I just think there are problems with charter schools and we shouldn't eliminate district schools. I think my conversation isn't as much with you, as it is reacting to the political ideals of my state. I don't believe that churches should get state money to run a school without adhering to the standards. I don't think all district schools should become charter schools. I do believe that school choice is important, via both charters and open enrollment. I also believe we should support public schools with increasingly flexibility. They shouldn't have to be structured the way schools were in the 70s. I also believe that we should have a better system of judging the schools. The problem with going solely off your own experience is that you could go to 12 schools in 12 years thinking you haven't found the right fit. And there are still 25 schools you didn't try. It isn’t like buying toilet paper, where changing brands next week has no consequences.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 12, 2021 11:42:41 GMT -5
But you are assuming that people are flocking to charter school because of test scores and not their experience at the public school. In my experience, there is a world of difference between the regular Ed classes in my home district and our charter school. I know because I sent my daughter to the regular Ed before she tested into the gifted program. While we didn’t live in a disadvantaged area, we live in a huge school district that covers many disadvantaged areas. Agree with me or not, but my experience is that the kids from those areas are much more likely to be problem students. I understand it because they live in homes where parents are unstable, some of the parents are in and out of jail, etc. Had my daughter not tested into the gifted program, she would have been sent to private school. Luckily she is naturally bright so I was able to remove her from regular Ed. Otherwise, I would have paid the $20k a year for private, non-religious school. I had options because I had the money. I find it sad that poor kids are stuck in schools with no choices, being dragged down by kids who don’t care. I’m not against public school. Both of my kids went to one. I’m against trying to guilt parents into a shitty school situation because some parents don’t care enough to fight for their kids. I feel very sorry for those kids (hell, I was one of those kids!) but don’t feel I have an obligation to ruin my child’s education so as not to abandon those kids. You are correct that it is based on experience. This is the most difficult part about discussing education. It is, by nature, extremely local and individual, but also universal. I do like school choice, I just think there are problems with charter schools and we shouldn't eliminate district schools. I think my conversation isn't as much with you, as it is reacting to the political ideals of my state. I don't believe that churches should get state money to run a school without adhering to the standards. I don't think all district schools should become charter schools. I do believe that school choice is important, via both charters and open enrollment. I also believe we should support public schools with increasingly flexibility. They shouldn't have to be structured the way schools were in the 70s. I also believe that we should have a better system of judging the schools. The problem with going solely off your own experience is that you could go to 12 schools in 12 years thinking you haven't found the right fit. And there are still 25 schools you didn't try. It isn’t like buying toilet paper, where changing brands next week has no consequences. It's definitely different in my area (can't speak to the entire state). I only know of one charter school in my county. I was fortunate that it happened to be built in the mountain area that I lived when my children were younger. It was a great fit for my oldest at the time, but that is because it was mainly children that lived in my same little mountain area (translation:affluent families). I understand that we did not have the same issues that our public school had. I wound up selling that house and moving off the mountain (loved the area but the roads were deadly in the winter!). At the same time, my youngest was entering school and my oldest didn't want to go to a different school than her little sister (the charter school was NOT a good fit for my youngest). That's how we wound up in public school. I am a product of public school as are my children. I'm not against public school. I'm against parents not having choice. I'm also not a fan of Catholic schools because I dont think their education is all that great (in my area). I get that it is a cheap way to get your kids out of public school so you are avoiding the behavioral issues. But i don't see the education itself being that great. And i'm definitely against the guilt. I'm not going to send my child to an underperforming school just because other students dont' have parents to fight for them. Unfortunately, you can toss as much money as you want at some schools but you can't overcome the home life.
|
|
bean29
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 9,924
|
Post by bean29 on Feb 12, 2021 12:44:51 GMT -5
I am not an educator, but I think a big part of the problem with Charter or School Choice or whatever you call it is that as someone mentioned, they pick off all the High Achieving and normal students and leave those that are more difficult to educate in the public schools. All would be well and good if the funding went per type of student, but there is a set amount per child from what I understand, the funding is weighted in favor of the School Choice schools.
The Special needs classes have more staff and less students, they cost quite a bit more to serve, but they do not come with more funding. If they are aggregated in with a large number of other students, they cities can afford it, but if they are left with just those that are more difficult to educate and serve - It does not work. It would be one think if the state governments would admit the truth and deal with reality, but they would rather throw stones and duck and hide.
|
|
|
Post by minnesotapaintlady on Feb 12, 2021 12:55:35 GMT -5
Are charter schools different in some states? Ours are all lottery admission and they have to provide special ed services for students that need it to get state funding.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Feb 12, 2021 19:26:27 GMT -5
I guess I don’t see the issue with having a charter school that non-problem kids attend to. Doesn’t it make their education a lot better when they aren’t distracted by behavioral problems? I remember a friend of mine threatening a lawsuit if the school didn’t mainstream her special needs child. This girl was super sweet but she got nothing out of being in regular Ed classes. And she did have some behavioral issues. Not violent but more acting out because she was in an inappropriate setting. She had an aide with her at all times but that didn’t prevent the distractions. Why shouldn’t kids get to learn in an environment with other kids that are there to learn and are on the same page academically? If my oldest was in a class with regular Ed students she would have been bored stiff. If my special needs child was in a class with regular Ed students she wouldn’t have a clue what was going on and would have been disruptive (she would want to talk to everyone!). I feel like we want to bring all kids down to the lowest common denominator. The biggest problem is when we compare schools, especially types of schools. If charter schools take all the smartest kids and have high testing, and problem kids go to district schools, even if the district school segregates kids by ability, the school gets graded lower. Multiply this out and you get the incorrect message that charter schools are better at educating than district schools. It is hard to chose the right school, but when the deck is stacked, it leaves great schools with bad images, unless you dig deeper. We are a society that only reads the headline. People just don't get the full story, and it leads to bad decisions. Well, there’s always going to be a few stupid parents. And if the neighborhood school is unwilling or unable to maintain a certain level of discipline, sending your kid to a charter school maybe the only way to keep them safe and allow them to learn. That was the deal with the Catholic school I attended. Their facilities were archaic, and half the teachers there wouldn’t of lasted a week in a public school. It was definitely not a better school than the local public school, but I still got a much better education there than my friends who went to public school. If I had a learning disability, the public school would’ve been better. There’s also the issue of fit. The nerds paradise my oldest child attends is great for him, but would be absolutely miserable for many other children. One advantage of charter schools is that they can tap into an unmet need. The only trick is to make damn sure that the schools that are dealing with the more difficult children aren’t being underfunded.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 12, 2021 20:54:15 GMT -5
I am not an educator, but I think a big part of the problem with Charter or School Choice or whatever you call it is that as someone mentioned, they pick off all the High Achieving and normal students and leave those that are more difficult to educate in the public schools. All would be well and good if the funding went per type of student, but there is a set amount per child from what I understand, the funding is weighted in favor of the School Choice schools. The Special needs classes have more staff and less students, they cost quite a bit more to serve, but they do not come with more funding. If they are aggregated in with a large number of other students, they cities can afford it, but if they are left with just those that are more difficult to educate and serve - It does not work. It would be one think if the state governments would admit the truth and deal with reality, but they would rather throw stones and duck and hide. I can only speak to Pa (and oped would know more than me having taught special ed...but I can't figure out how to tag her!), but there is increased funding per special needs child. And that funding follows the child to the charter school. I just did some research and it seems there is a really F'd up way that charter schools are funded for special needs students. The funding system for public schools was changed several years ago to more align with costs. Charter schools are still under the old system where a special ed student gets x dollars of funding, regardless of whether they only need speech therapy or are more involved like my daughter. What the flying fuck? Apparently the charter school lobby is a strong one and fought the change. Why do we allow lobbyists? I'm still in favor of school choice but I'm not ok with a charter school making money on special needs students.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 12, 2021 20:58:23 GMT -5
Are charter schools different in some states? Ours are all lottery admission and they have to provide special ed services for students that need it to get state funding. Yes and no. When the charter school opened that my oldest went to, we were considered founding members so our children got in. We were heavily involved with getting the school up and running (ex donated HVAC services and helped with some remodeling, I was more involved with setting up the PTO, obtaining grants, etc). Technically they had to take special ed students. I loved the school but I knew they couldn't provide my daughter what she needed. The school was only two years old when my youngest started school so they might be much better now. I'm not one to fight a school to be a fit for my daughter. i knew they weren't so we went to the public school.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,393
|
Post by thyme4change on Feb 13, 2021 10:40:37 GMT -5
Are charter schools different in some states? Ours are all lottery admission and they have to provide special ed services for students that need it to get state funding. Ours are required to provide special ed services, and there is a structure around it. Many charter schools just the requirements in the trash and hope all the special ed kids just leave. They only comply if you come in with a lawyer. I think that sucks. Often charters offer something outside the classroom that could be really beneficial but if they purposely suck at special ed, those kids can't get that benefit. For example, a school that offers (requires) music classes and have good music teachers could be awesome for kids that have autism or dyslexia. But, if that school can't also give them the basics, the child will go to public school that may have a lame or optional music program. A charter school that has an agriculture program could be amazing for a kid who has a learning disability, but wants to have a career with animals or farming. They are eliminated from that school unless they get an advocate to make sure the school is following the law. Most of the time, families do just leave. Some kids really pay the price for that.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Feb 13, 2021 16:33:02 GMT -5
I'm torn on charter schools. On the one hand, they can spark innovation and encourage school districts not to get complacent. On the other, they often pull the most affluent students from district schools and they're not always better at actually educating students. If the kid is happier and getting a better education at the charter school then they would’ve had the regular public school, can you really say that’s a bad thing? The fact that the public schools are getting stuck with the expensive to educate kids isn’t a charter school problem. It is a school funding problem. Saying that charter schools are bad because the district has a moronic way to allocate funds dumb. You are playing into the hands of the people who care more about their bottom lines than the education of children.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 13, 2021 18:57:13 GMT -5
I'm torn on charter schools. On the one hand, they can spark innovation and encourage school districts not to get complacent. On the other, they often pull the most affluent students from district schools and they're not always better at actually educating students. Charter schools use the lottery system for student selection. Why would that favor affluent students? Private schools definitely pull the more affluent from the public schools. In my area, the people that can’t afford the prestigious private school but want their kids out of the school district, put their kids in Catholic schools. I do not think the education at the catholic school is any better than the public school. But it does get the kids out of classrooms with disruptive kids. Problem students are booted. Obviously the prestigious private school takes the cream of the crop. Also offers full rides for a few poor kids that are super smart.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,393
|
Post by thyme4change on Feb 13, 2021 20:43:45 GMT -5
I'm torn on charter schools. On the one hand, they can spark innovation and encourage school districts not to get complacent. On the other, they often pull the most affluent students from district schools and they're not always better at actually educating students. Charter schools use the lottery system for student selection. Why would that favor affluent students? Private schools definitely pull the more affluent from the public schools. In my area, the people that can’t afford the prestigious private school but want their kids out of the school district, put their kids in Catholic schools. I do not think the education at the catholic school is any better than the public school. But it does get the kids out of classrooms with disruptive kids. Problem students are booted. Obviously the prestigious private school takes the cream of the crop. Also offers full rides for a few poor kids that are super smart. Transportation and ability to navigate the process are barriers to a lot of lower income and/or ESL families. My son is in a public school, but we are out of district. We had to turn in 3 pieces of paper when he applied and one piece of paper each year to keep him in. My daughter's charter school has a 5 part process every year, including a requirement for a parent to go to a meeting, high pressure tactics for donations, two online lengthy application and two multi-page forms, along with required fees with ridiculous deadlines. If you miss any one of the steps, they can just drop your enrollment. I have missed one every year, but we have an ideal student and we donate money, so they always hold my hand through the process. I've known several students who have left because they missed a deadline and never received an email or phone call.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 13, 2021 21:02:09 GMT -5
Charter schools use the lottery system for student selection. Why would that favor affluent students? Private schools definitely pull the more affluent from the public schools. In my area, the people that can’t afford the prestigious private school but want their kids out of the school district, put their kids in Catholic schools. I do not think the education at the catholic school is any better than the public school. But it does get the kids out of classrooms with disruptive kids. Problem students are booted. Obviously the prestigious private school takes the cream of the crop. Also offers full rides for a few poor kids that are super smart. Transportation and ability to navigate the process are barriers to a lot of lower income and/or ESL families. My son is in a public school, but we are out of district. We had to turn in 3 pieces of paper when he applied and one piece of paper each year to keep him in. My daughter's charter school has a 5 part process every year, including a requirement for a parent to go to a meeting, high pressure tactics for donations, two online lengthy application and two multi-page forms, along with required fees with ridiculous deadlines. If you miss any one of the steps, they can just drop your enrollment. I have missed one every year, but we have an ideal student and we donate money, so they always hold my hand through the process. I've known several students who have left because they missed a deadline and never received an email or phone call. Our charter school was not like that. The only difference between that and the public school was that parents had to have x amount of volunteer hours a year. I can’t remember how much but it wasn’t a crazy amount. And they didn’t have to be done during school hours. I was the treasurer of the PTO and that counted. My ex volunteered with help with construction or Hvac projects. Some of the moms would take things home to do if they struggled with child care (I forget what types of things they worked on). You had to not want to volunteer to not meet the requirement. I’ve never heard of going out of district. Is there a reason he doesn’t go to your home school?
|
|
|
Post by minnesotapaintlady on Feb 13, 2021 21:35:14 GMT -5
Charter schools use the lottery system for student selection. Why would that favor affluent students? Private schools definitely pull the more affluent from the public schools. In my area, the people that can’t afford the prestigious private school but want their kids out of the school district, put their kids in Catholic schools. I do not think the education at the catholic school is any better than the public school. But it does get the kids out of classrooms with disruptive kids. Problem students are booted. Obviously the prestigious private school takes the cream of the crop. Also offers full rides for a few poor kids that are super smart. Transportation and ability to navigate the process are barriers to a lot of lower income and/or ESL families. My son is in a public school, but we are out of district. We had to turn in 3 pieces of paper when he applied and one piece of paper each year to keep him in. My daughter's charter school has a 5 part process every year, including a requirement for a parent to go to a meeting, high pressure tactics for donations, two online lengthy application and two multi-page forms, along with required fees with ridiculous deadlines. If you miss any one of the steps, they can just drop your enrollment. I have missed one every year, but we have an ideal student and we donate money, so they always hold my hand through the process. I've known several students who have left because they missed a deadline and never received an email or phone call. Our charter was nothing like that. We had a one page intent to return form to turn in every year and no requirements for donations or volunteer work and all students in our county public, private and charters share the same bus system. eta: city shares busing, not county. There are other school districts in the county.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 13, 2021 22:15:40 GMT -5
Transportation and ability to navigate the process are barriers to a lot of lower income and/or ESL families. My son is in a public school, but we are out of district. We had to turn in 3 pieces of paper when he applied and one piece of paper each year to keep him in. My daughter's charter school has a 5 part process every year, including a requirement for a parent to go to a meeting, high pressure tactics for donations, two online lengthy application and two multi-page forms, along with required fees with ridiculous deadlines. If you miss any one of the steps, they can just drop your enrollment. I have missed one every year, but we have an ideal student and we donate money, so they always hold my hand through the process. I've known several students who have left because they missed a deadline and never received an email or phone call. Our charter was nothing like that. We had a one page intent to return form to turn in every year and no requirements for donations or volunteer work and all students in our county public, private and charters share the same bus system. eta: city shares busing, not county. There are other school districts in the county. Local school districts have to bus kids to the charter school or private schools if they are within 10 miles of the school district (I think it was 10 miles).
|
|
countrygirl2
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 7, 2016 15:45:05 GMT -5
Posts: 16,889
|
Post by countrygirl2 on Feb 14, 2021 10:13:40 GMT -5
I wish there had been some type of private school for special needs like my DD. Mainstreaming was impossible for her in 11th grade I let her quit. She was an emotional mess. She could not do it, they said she just wouldn't, her vocabulary was good from home so it appeared she was just being stubborn. It was bad so we gave up. I'm sure the ridicule she faced was horrible.
Many of these kids like her can be helped in the right setting and teachers, but I looked and the expense was something we couldn't bear back then. It has taken me years to rebuild her self esteem. But she still is more comfortable at home protected and cocooned and its no answer because we cannot provide this for the rest of her life.
I don't want to see normal and above normal kids suffer and I don't think mainstreaming is the answer. But I don't want to see the kids like her with some learning potential put in a class where so many are not able to use any of the learning presented to them. No easy answers. I helped her as much as I could and it did help.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,393
|
Post by thyme4change on Feb 14, 2021 10:26:39 GMT -5
Transportation and ability to navigate the process are barriers to a lot of lower income and/or ESL families. My son is in a public school, but we are out of district. We had to turn in 3 pieces of paper when he applied and one piece of paper each year to keep him in. My daughter's charter school has a 5 part process every year, including a requirement for a parent to go to a meeting, high pressure tactics for donations, two online lengthy application and two multi-page forms, along with required fees with ridiculous deadlines. If you miss any one of the steps, they can just drop your enrollment. I have missed one every year, but we have an ideal student and we donate money, so they always hold my hand through the process. I've known several students who have left because they missed a deadline and never received an email or phone call. Our charter school was not like that. The only difference between that and the public school was that parents had to have x amount of volunteer hours a year. I can’t remember how much but it wasn’t a crazy amount. And they didn’t have to be done during school hours. I was the treasurer of the PTO and that counted. My ex volunteered with help with construction or Hvac projects. Some of the moms would take things home to do if they struggled with child care (I forget what types of things they worked on). You had to not want to volunteer to not meet the requirement. I’ve never heard of going out of district. Is there a reason he doesn’t go to your home school? Our district school isn't well rated. I've known enough people who went, and they did well - but very few kids around here go to that school. We have often said that if we all got together and enrolled there, we could change the trajectory of the school, but since nobody goes there, nobody wants to go there. The school many kids in our area go to has a great reputation, and since everyone goes there, everyone wants to go there. My son wanted to be with his friends. It is a good school and they have open enrollment. All the public schools in our area have open enrollment. My kids had literally a hundred options for school - most of them public or charter. It was exhausting deciding what was the best fit for each of them. Neither of my kids are great with change, so I felt like I had one shot to get it right. I do know kids that went to 6 different schools. Seems crazy to me, but people do their thing. Volunteering is common around here for charters. It can also be a barrier for some families. One friend had a difficult child and her volunteer hours, somehow, didn't always get recorded, so they kicked her kid out. Luckily, she knew how devious schools can be, so she had documentation of every hour she put in, and they had to take her kid back. I feel like I sound like a real pill about this. I love that my kids could find the right place for themselves, and that there are options. Learning is so personal, so the previous one size fits all system we had was problematic to many. I have just heard too many horror stories about the games that get played. No system is perfect.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 14, 2021 10:46:45 GMT -5
Our charter school was not like that. The only difference between that and the public school was that parents had to have x amount of volunteer hours a year. I can’t remember how much but it wasn’t a crazy amount. And they didn’t have to be done during school hours. I was the treasurer of the PTO and that counted. My ex volunteered with help with construction or Hvac projects. Some of the moms would take things home to do if they struggled with child care (I forget what types of things they worked on). You had to not want to volunteer to not meet the requirement. I’ve never heard of going out of district. Is there a reason he doesn’t go to your home school? Our district school isn't well rated. I've known enough people who went, and they did well - but very few kids around here go to that school. We have often said that if we all got together and enrolled there, we could change the trajectory of the school, but since nobody goes there, nobody wants to go there. The school many kids in our area go to has a great reputation, and since everyone goes there, everyone wants to go there. My son wanted to be with his friends. It is a good school and they have open enrollment. All the public schools in our area have open enrollment. My kids had literally a hundred options for school - most of them public or charter. It was exhausting deciding what was the best fit for each of them. Neither of my kids are great with change, so I felt like I had one shot to get it right. I do know kids that went to 6 different schools. Seems crazy to me, but people do their thing. Volunteering is common around here for charters. It can also be a barrier for some families. One friend had a difficult child and her volunteer hours, somehow, didn't always get recorded, so they kicked her kid out. Luckily, she knew how devious schools can be, so she had documentation of every hour she put in, and they had to take her kid back. I feel like I sound like a real pill about this. I love that my kids could find the right place for themselves, and that there are options. Learning is so personal, so the previous one size fits all system we had was problematic to many. I have just heard too many horror stories about the games that get played. No system is perfect. Wow, you have great options where you live! That’s what I think everyone should have. In my are (as I’m sure in most) the schools in the poor areas of a district do not do as well as the wealthier ones. And it isn’t money as they all get the same since they are in the same district. It really does come down to the kids and their family life I was just speaking to one of my old neighbors in my affluent mountaintop neighborhood. They closed the 3 neighborhood high schools and have consolidated into one huge high school. The problem is that two out of three of those high schools were horrible. Not just bad grades and poor graduation #s, but actual gangs in the school. She is paying $12k a year in property taxes and is now forced to spend even more money to send them to private school. There is no option to switch districts. And she is lucky because she can afford it. They want to sell there house and move to a better district but who is going to want to buy it and be in the same position? I believe in school choice. Poor people do not have the same ability as the wealthier to just move their kids to a private school (the prestigious private school by me is $20k a year for high school). I guess I’m not understanding why you are against school choice (or seem to be) since your kids benefit from it.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,393
|
Post by thyme4change on Feb 14, 2021 10:58:09 GMT -5
One of the benefits of living in a city is a large variety of services! We are near downtown, so there are just a lot of people here, hence a lot of schools. Also, when people are looking for schools for their kid, they may include the area close to the parent's office. We know a few kids who live very far away, but commute in with Mom or Dad. That is probably true everywhere, but downtown has the largest concentration of offices, so a school close to downtown has a large population to draw from.
|
|
gs11rmb
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 12:43:39 GMT -5
Posts: 3,303
|
Post by gs11rmb on Feb 14, 2021 12:48:04 GMT -5
I'm torn on charter schools. On the one hand, they can spark innovation and encourage school districts not to get complacent. On the other, they often pull the most affluent students from district schools and they're not always better at actually educating students. If the kid is happier and getting a better education at the charter school then they would’ve had the regular public school, can you really say that’s a bad thing?The fact that the public schools are getting stuck with the expensive to educate kids isn’t a charter school problem. It is a school funding problem. Saying that charter schools are bad because the district has a moronic way to allocate funds dumb. You are playing into the hands of the people who care more about their bottom lines than the education of children. Not at all, which is why I said I'm torn.
|
|
gs11rmb
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 12:43:39 GMT -5
Posts: 3,303
|
Post by gs11rmb on Feb 14, 2021 13:01:26 GMT -5
I'm torn on charter schools. On the one hand, they can spark innovation and encourage school districts not to get complacent. On the other, they often pull the most affluent students from district schools and they're not always better at actually educating students. Charter schools use the lottery system for student selection. Why would that favor affluent students? Private schools definitely pull the more affluent from the public schools. In my area, the people that can’t afford the prestigious private school but want their kids out of the school district, put their kids in Catholic schools. I do not think the education at the catholic school is any better than the public school. But it does get the kids out of classrooms with disruptive kids. Problem students are booted. Obviously the prestigious private school takes the cream of the crop. Also offers full rides for a few poor kids that are super smart. Charter schools present many of the same problems as School Choice. We use our local zoned school, which is part of the district's School Choice program because it has a Montessori track. It is a Title I school and draws from a few middle class neighbourhoods and a couple of huge apartment complexes where the poorest students live. The rest of the seats are awarded via lottery to School Choice applicants. No transportation is available so parents need to be able to drive. I know plenty of School Choice parents and I can't think of one family that I wouldn't describe as middle class. My youngest daughter's best friend is School Choice because their zoned school was (at least when they enrolled their older son in 2010) the third worst performing elementary in the state. Not the district, the state! So every single family that was able to do so didn't enroll their children in that school. Now, I totally understand that because I don't want my children to be a social experiment. At the same time, I also understand that when all of the affluent families leave, a school continues to sink, and the remaining children suffer. There's no easy answer and I appreciate that our school is good and that if it were not, we have the ability and the financial resources to choose something else. But rather then tackling the problem of truly dreadful schools both the charter school and the School Choice movements have stripped out the highest performing students and given the big FU to those that remain. And they are already the most vulnerable students.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 19:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2021 13:15:30 GMT -5
A district where my great-nephew lives in SC tried something interesting. His standardized test scores were off-the-chart high and there was one school with a gifted program. He applied and was accepted to that program. In making the final decision, my niece and her husband did more research and found that it was sort of an "island" program in the same building as a troubled school with miserable test scores. They were apparently trying to increase the average test scores for the school! They chose not to send him there.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 14, 2021 17:32:57 GMT -5
Charter schools use the lottery system for student selection. Why would that favor affluent students? Private schools definitely pull the more affluent from the public schools. In my area, the people that can’t afford the prestigious private school but want their kids out of the school district, put their kids in Catholic schools. I do not think the education at the catholic school is any better than the public school. But it does get the kids out of classrooms with disruptive kids. Problem students are booted. Obviously the prestigious private school takes the cream of the crop. Also offers full rides for a few poor kids that are super smart. Charter schools present many of the same problems as School Choice. We use our local zoned school, which is part of the district's School Choice program because it has a Montessori track. It is a Title I school and draws from a few middle class neighbourhoods and a couple of huge apartment complexes where the poorest students live. The rest of the seats are awarded via lottery to School Choice applicants. No transportation is available so parents need to be able to drive. I know plenty of School Choice parents and I can't think of one family that I wouldn't describe as middle class. My youngest daughter's best friend is School Choice because their zoned school was (at least when they enrolled their older son in 2010) the third worst performing elementary in the state. Not the district, the state! So every single family that was able to do so didn't enroll their children in that school. Now, I totally understand that because I don't want my children to be a social experiment. At the same time, I also understand that when all of the affluent families leave, a school continues to sink, and the remaining children suffer. There's no easy answer and I appreciate that our school is good and that if it were not, we have the ability and the financial resources to choose something else. But rather then tackling the problem of truly dreadful schools both the charter school and the School Choice movements have stripped out the highest performing students and given the big FU to those that remain. And they are already the most vulnerable students. I understand what you are saying. But I also acknowledge that I wouldn’t leave my child in an underperforming school. I think the bigger question is why do schools in poor areas do so poorly? In my area, prior to consolidation of the three high schools this year into one, there were three high schools in the same district and all had the same funding. Two were hell holes and one was a food school. The only difference is the one serve the affluent areas and the other two served our city that has completely demographics than the other area. Why does poverty cause bad schools? The funding is the same. The teachers all get paid the same. Now they’ve closed all three and stuck all kids into one huge high school. Property values have been hurt, parents than can afford to put their kids on private school have. I just feel like it’s a social experiment that is going to bring them all down to the lowest common denominator
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 25, 2024 19:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2021 18:35:16 GMT -5
I think the bigger question is why do schools in poor areas do so poorly? In my area, prior to consolidation of the three high schools this year into one, there were three high schools in the same district and all had the same funding. Two were hell holes and one was a food school. The only difference is the one serve the affluent areas and the other two served our city that has completely demographics than the other area. Why does poverty cause bad schools? The funding is the same. The teachers all get paid the same. Now they’ve closed all three and stuck all kids into one huge high school. Property values have been hurt, parents than can afford to put their kids on private school have. I just feel like it’s a social experiment that is going to bring them all down to the lowest common denominator Yeah, the people in the hierarchy LOVE consolidation. It's an excuse to build a new Taj Mahal building with all the frills and claim "it's for the children" because they'll have more course choices- of course they're now leaving home an hour earlier and getting home later because it's further away. But now you've got new opportunities for principals and vice principals and assistant vice principals and their admins- woo-hoo! As for the under-performing schools- in addition to the death spiral of involved parents taking their high-potential kids out of the school, a study I once read concluded that the major variable affecting kids' school performance was parental involvement. Parents in the poorer areas may not speak English well, they may be single parents, they may be juggling multiple jobs, they may not place a high value on education.. and of course they may have emotional or substance-abuse issues. It's not just a matter of funding.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Feb 15, 2021 13:05:20 GMT -5
Charter schools use the lottery system for student selection. Why would that favor affluent students? Private schools definitely pull the more affluent from the public schools. In my area, the people that can’t afford the prestigious private school but want their kids out of the school district, put their kids in Catholic schools. I do not think the education at the catholic school is any better than the public school. But it does get the kids out of classrooms with disruptive kids. Problem students are booted. Obviously the prestigious private school takes the cream of the crop. Also offers full rides for a few poor kids that are super smart. Transportation and ability to navigate the process are barriers to a lot of lower income and/or ESL families. My son is in a public school, but we are out of district. We had to turn in 3 pieces of paper when he applied and one piece of paper each year to keep him in. My daughter's charter school has a 5 part process every year, including a requirement for a parent to go to a meeting, high pressure tactics for donations, two online lengthy application and two multi-page forms, along with required fees with ridiculous deadlines. If you miss any one of the steps, they can just drop your enrollment. I have missed one every year, but we have an ideal student and we donate money, so they always hold my hand through the process. I've known several students who have left because they missed a deadline and never received an email or phone call. The charter school my son attends has a disproportionately high number of low income children and children of immigrants. But my area has so many charter schools, along with good public schools, that the charter schools can’t afford to play these games. We also have an absolutely enormous school district, that covers many income groups. It isn’t just the fact that the school funding is evened out. The district knows that they can’t get away with much because the more involved parents will make a stink. In St. Louis, every economically segregated town at its own school district. The state kicked in funding for some of the poor school districts, but most of it went to graft and corruption because the parents there weren’t paying attention. Those poor kids never stood a chance.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Feb 15, 2021 13:55:45 GMT -5
Charter schools present many of the same problems as School Choice. We use our local zoned school, which is part of the district's School Choice program because it has a Montessori track. It is a Title I school and draws from a few middle class neighbourhoods and a couple of huge apartment complexes where the poorest students live. The rest of the seats are awarded via lottery to School Choice applicants. No transportation is available so parents need to be able to drive. I know plenty of School Choice parents and I can't think of one family that I wouldn't describe as middle class. My youngest daughter's best friend is School Choice because their zoned school was (at least when they enrolled their older son in 2010) the third worst performing elementary in the state. Not the district, the state! So every single family that was able to do so didn't enroll their children in that school. Now, I totally understand that because I don't want my children to be a social experiment. At the same time, I also understand that when all of the affluent families leave, a school continues to sink, and the remaining children suffer. There's no easy answer and I appreciate that our school is good and that if it were not, we have the ability and the financial resources to choose something else. But rather then tackling the problem of truly dreadful schools both the charter school and the School Choice movements have stripped out the highest performing students and given the big FU to those that remain. And they are already the most vulnerable students. I understand what you are saying. But I also acknowledge that I wouldn’t leave my child in an underperforming school. I think the bigger question is why do schools in poor areas do so poorly? In my area, prior to consolidation of the three high schools this year into one, there were three high schools in the same district and all had the same funding. Two were hell holes and one was a food school. The only difference is the one serve the affluent areas and the other two served our city that has completely demographics than the other area. Why does poverty cause bad schools? The funding is the same. The teachers all get paid the same. Now they’ve closed all three and stuck all kids into one huge high school. Property values have been hurt, parents than can afford to put their kids on private school have. I just feel like it’s a social experiment that is going to bring them all down to the lowest common denominator Bad parents make bad schools. Being poor doesn’t necessarily make one a bad parent. I saw this at my sons school, where the parents who lived in the trailer park next-door showed up for every single parent teacher conference. But there’s a lot of overlap between the things that make you poor forever and the things that make you a shitty parent. Immaturity, laziness, past trauma, mental illness, inability to delay gratification, drug use.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Feb 15, 2021 14:02:30 GMT -5
I understand what you are saying. But I also acknowledge that I wouldn’t leave my child in an underperforming school. I think the bigger question is why do schools in poor areas do so poorly? In my area, prior to consolidation of the three high schools this year into one, there were three high schools in the same district and all had the same funding. Two were hell holes and one was a food school. The only difference is the one serve the affluent areas and the other two served our city that has completely demographics than the other area. Why does poverty cause bad schools? The funding is the same. The teachers all get paid the same. Now they’ve closed all three and stuck all kids into one huge high school. Property values have been hurt, parents than can afford to put their kids on private school have. I just feel like it’s a social experiment that is going to bring them all down to the lowest common denominator Bad parents make bad schools. Being poor doesn’t necessarily make one a bad parent. I saw this at my sons school, where the parents who lived in the trailer park next-door showed up for every single parent teacher conference. But there’s a lot of overlap between the things that make you poor forever and the things that make you a shitty parent. Immaturity, laziness, past trauma, mental illness, inability to delay gratification, drug use. I don’t disagree with you. What I don’t know is how having kids from good families is supposed to turn a school around. The kids from the bad families are still going to come from the bad families. That’s why I never understood why everyone gets upset that affluent families remove their kids from bad schools. You aren’t going to change the bad parents to suddenly have them care. Yes, scores will go up because the kids from good families will do better. But I doubt the kids from bad families are going to suddenly do better
|
|