Bill to boost Mass. charter schools is on fast track

Do the Charter Schools take the disciplinary problem kids, truants, poor performers, special education kids (SPED) like the traditional public schools are required, or are the Charter schools interested in just the top performers like a private school?

Charter schools are public schools. Admission is by lottery so there is no selection. And you already knew that, didn't you?

students wrote:

Do the Charter Schools take the disciplinary problem kids, truants, poor performers, special education kids (SPED) like the traditional public schools are required, or are the Charter schools interested in just the top performers like a private school?

Yes - they do. I've volunteered in the classroom at my son's charter school (just like I did when he went to the regular public elementary school), and there are at least as many SPED kids in his class as there were at the public school - in fact, it seems like there are more.
In my experience (and the experience of other parents I've talked to), charter schools seem to attract kids from opposite ends of the spectrum more than those in the middle. There are a lot of kids who struggled in the regular public schools who couldn't get enough attention simply because of the size of the school. There are also a lot of kids at the higher end who were bored at the regular public school because the majority of the instruction was aimed at the middle, with whatever extra attention was available going to those who were struggling. Charters are a wonderful option for kids who just don't fit the mold.

Massachusetts is making a good decision in providing students and parents with more options on where they attend school.

Democarcy can not exist without a strong public educational system. The Charter School bill will allow a two tiered system where poor schools take money from other poor schools. Of course representatives will votes for this bill...especially if they live in a town. Why not give over 30-40 poor schools to this bill. It will bring in money and parents with voice do not have their children in these school. The bill also clearly says to young teachers, "Do not work in urban schools. If we can't find good answers for how to better reach these children, we will offer up the teachers in these school." It is a disservice to all the teacher who have given so much of themselves.

Hi Teacher,

The added choices for where parents can send their children is an important step in moving our broken education system forward. Tiny incremental steps isn't acceptable any longer because we are falling behind.

These statements that you've made must be based on facts? Please provide your sources for these facts.

But don't charter schools essentially "take away monies" that these under-performing public schools could be using? I was always under the impression that these funds are the same funds that the public schools need to put more programs into place to provide MCAS remediation, enhance curriculum, etc
There is only so much $ in the pot right?

I am a new teacher working in Lowell for five years now. I see the situation exactly as you do. I do fear that many highly qualified, hardworking, intuitive teachers will leave the urban schools. The poor schools will only get poorer with money leaving to build more schools, but nothing else changing. Someone else brought up a good question. Will those students with chronic behavioral issues be allowed to attend teh charter schools? So many students from my school with behavioral issues left our school to attend the charter only to return again.

Teacher wrote:

Democarcy can not exist without a strong public educational system. The Charter School bill will allow a two tiered system where poor schools take money from other poor schools. Of course representatives will votes for this bill...especially if they live in a town. Why not give over 30-40 poor schools to this bill. It will bring in money and parents with voice do not have their children in these school. The bill also clearly says to young teachers, "Do not work in urban schools. If we can't find good answers for how to better reach these children, we will offer up the teachers in these school." It is a disservice to all the teacher who have given so much of themselves.

tellas33 wrote:

But don't charter schools essentially "take away monies" that these under-performing public schools could be using?

Let's face it, if a student isn't making progress in a school, he or she is going to leave. Walk around Downtown Lowell during school hours, and you'll see it for yourself. SO many teenagers that clearly aren't earning credits, because they're catching their morning cup of joe at Dunkin Donuts. And when a student decides to withdraw from school (or is administratively withdrawn), that school no longer receives any "monies" to educate that student.

Why NOT provide them options, other than Burger King University? The underperforming school has lost that money already, why not put it to use in a Charter school?

And THANK YOU Gonzo and Chelmsford Mom for speaking on experience, not mere speculation and hearsay.

I hate to burst everyone's bubble but the Lowell Community Charter School's test scores are the same as the public schools in Lowell. I think you will find the same pattern in many "urban" charter schools. I'm not criticizing them, but to say that a charter school is going to make all the difference for students in the inner city is just not true. It might be worth spending more money to discover why socioeconomic status and poverty seem to be highly related to test scores.

tellas33 wrote:

But don't charter schools essentially "take away monies" that these under-performing public schools could be using? I was always under the impression that these funds are the same funds that the public schools need to put more programs into place to provide MCAS remediation, enhance curriculum, etc
There is only so much $ in the pot right?

Maybe the answer (here it comes)is that under-performing school needs to be replaced by a school that will perform. We have businesses in the USA that cannot find appropriately skilled help at a time when our unemployment rate is quite high. That leads to only one conclusion...our education systems didn't provide the training for the skillsets needed by our businesses.

The gap is getting worse. We have many people out of work because they do not have the skillsets needed by our employers that do have jobs. Our educational models aren't doing the job anymore and the school systems aren't changing quickly enough to handle the needs.

This is part of the reason that some jobs have gone "out of country." These jobs must be filled by qualified people, and companies will do what they must to get appropriately trained people.

so what are you saying:

All this money goes to the poor districts (?minorities) tough neighborhoods dur.....

This is stupid... All schools in all the towns need this support and money... not just the elite poor gettos etc.

Distribute the money to ALL the towns in MASS..

Lets be fair to ALL the children in Mass no segrating.......

tellas33 wrote:

But don't charter schools essentially "take away monies" that these under-performing public schools could be using? I was always under the impression that these funds are the same funds that the public schools need to put more programs into place to provide MCAS remediation, enhance curriculum, etc
There is only so much $ in the pot right?

First, to say charters 'take money' away from public schools is simply not true. Charters assume responsibility for educating students who enter through a lottery, and they receive the funding for those same students. Regular public schools do not receibe the funds for specific students because they NO LONGER HAVE THOSE STUDENTS IN THEIR SCHOOLS.

Second, the MCAS results speak for themselves (www.boston.com/news/special/education/mcas/sc... ). Many charters outperform even top public public districts such as Carlisle and Lexington. Charters must be rechartered every 5 years; if they do not perform they are closed down.

The union does a lot of good things, but sometimes they get in the way. Regular publics should be open to learning what they can from charters, and vice-versa.

Lastly, let's not forget parental involvement is the single most important factor to a child's success. We can continue to blame unions and charters all day, but if parents aren't involved we all lose - especially the child.

If charter school teachers went union, teachers unions would immediately reverse their position and welcome them into the fold. This is not about educating kids, its about protecting the union.
The reality is the vast majority of charter school teachers are 'highly qualified' according to MA DESE, most were former public school teachers looking for more control over their curriculum.

The fact that charter school parents actively enter an enrollment lottery implies the kind of involvement in their children's development that makes a big difference. Involved parents who value education raise successful students.

No Gonzo. I did not know that Charter Schools pick kids by lottery.

That means they are NOT required to take truants, poor performers, disciplinary problems , SPED kids UNLESS they APPLY( which they dont).

Public schools ARE REQUIRED to take EVERYONE.

How many trouble makers and SPED kids apply? my guess- close to NONE. Why dont you tell me how many SPED kids are enrolled.

Ergo, Gonzo: they are a pseudo- private rich kids school that the public pays for. But you already knew that.

Whenever someone disagrees and has no particulars except generalizations , they ask the others where there " facts are". Since you did not provide any "facts", the teacher who actually works in the system everyday as opposed to you does not have to either.

Charter Schools divide the budget money and leave less for both systems - probabley want a statistical spreadsheet to prove it , right?

Whether the teachers are union or non-union is immaterial. the operative point is that tight budgets are divided. When the Charter teachers get trashed, they'll form their own union.

It's an elitest private school paid for by scarce public funds.

Charter school divide the scarse money. Economies of Scale- 2 libraries, 2 sports programs , 2 buildings, 2 janitors, etc.

Those that apply are mostly the premier students with active parents - Public schools are left with the poor performers, disinterested parents.
No one 'applies" to a public school as they do to parocial, private and charter schools- it's a two-tier system for the elite paid for with public funds nice scheme.