What began as a few skirmishes between politicians and charter schools in urban cities has escalated into a pitched political battle. Each side has developed competing studies that support their narrative. The issue of charter schools is now front and center in many mayoral and gubernatorial contests.
Why the contentious upsurge in interest?
Progressives, the politically sanitized name adopted by liberals, are alarmed at the growth and success of charter schools. In about 20 years, charter schools have exploded on the scene with more than 6,700 facilities in 42 states and the District of Columbia, educating nearly 3 million children.
Those numbers do not sit well with progressive politicians, who are beholden to the National Federation of Teachers (AFT). The union shovel millions into politicians' coffers to protect their members from performance-based pay and promotion. They are hidebound to the status quo.
AFT has political muscle few unions can match. It claims a membership of more than 1.5 million. It dominates union membership in inner city schools, a Democratic Party stronghold. It has more than $100 million in assets and doles out bushels of cash to Democrats, including Hillary Clinton.
Their opposition to charter schools is easily understood. More puzzling is the disapproval voiced by the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), an organization supposedly dedicated to advancing the rights of African-Americans.
Charter schools are mostly located in urban centers with large minority populations. For the record, charter schools are public schools, receiving funding from local, state and federal sources based on enrollment. A few are operated by for-profit private firms, but still get public funding.
However, there are a couple of other important distinctions between charter and traditional public schools. Charter schools are independently run, free from the bureaucracy that hamstrings public education. Teachers do not belong to unions and are paid and promoted based on performance.
Among the biggest supporters of charter schools are minorities. A 2013 poll of black voters found 85 percent were in favor of the government providing parents with as many school choices as possible. More than 50 percent supported charter schools.
Progressive politicians like New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio have discovered waging war on charter schools comes with a price. He ran against expanding charter schools in New York City and won handily. However, he overplayed his hand when he demanded charter schools pay rent.
Black parents fought back. There were rallies in the streets and angry parents demanded charter schools be allowed to co-locate in the same buildings with public schools. De Blasio had good reasons for trying to kick-out charter schools. Charter schools made public schools look bad.
In a highly-publicized case, two New York City middle schools were located in the same building and drew students from similar backgrounds. In the charter school, 80 percent of the students passed the state math test and 59 percent made the grade on the English test.
By comparison, the results were miserable in the public school. Five percent of students managed a passing grade on the math test. The English test had an 11 percent passing rate. No wonder de Blasio didn't want the schools co-located where the comparisons were politically damning.
Charter schools are changing the educational landscape, a prospect unions fear. Charter schools offer innovative curricula. They experiment with new teaching methods. The schools focus on helping every student succeed. Typically, they stress discipline and have no tolerance for misbehavior.
There are waiting lists in every district that offers a charter school alternative, attesting to their popularity with parents. Nationwide, there are more than one million names on charter school wait lists, according to a Manhattan Institute study. In New York City, the wait lists tops 70,000.
Democrats and their accomplices in the NAACP march to the drumbeat of the teacher unions, fighting against the very people (minorities) they claim to champion. Their opposition is strictly a matter of political greed. They value union contributions over children's future.
A national study found that 28 percent of charter school students are African-American, nearly double the percentage for traditional public schools. Without school choice, the families of these students would be stuck inside failing schools with no opportunity for escape.
This election year school choice has been paid little more than lip service. Voters should demand to know the positions of every candidate on charter schools. Those against supporting school choices deserve a failing education grade and are no friends of minorities.
Vote for candidates who want every child to succeed in school with no youngster left behind in a under performing public education facility.
AFT has political muscle few unions can match. It claims a membership of more than 1.5 million. It dominates union membership in inner city schools, a Democratic Party stronghold. It has more than $100 million in assets and doles out bushels of cash to Democrats, including Hillary Clinton.
Their opposition to charter schools is easily understood. More puzzling is the disapproval voiced by the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), an organization supposedly dedicated to advancing the rights of African-Americans.
Charter schools are mostly located in urban centers with large minority populations. For the record, charter schools are public schools, receiving funding from local, state and federal sources based on enrollment. A few are operated by for-profit private firms, but still get public funding.
However, there are a couple of other important distinctions between charter and traditional public schools. Charter schools are independently run, free from the bureaucracy that hamstrings public education. Teachers do not belong to unions and are paid and promoted based on performance.
Among the biggest supporters of charter schools are minorities. A 2013 poll of black voters found 85 percent were in favor of the government providing parents with as many school choices as possible. More than 50 percent supported charter schools.
Progressive politicians like New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio have discovered waging war on charter schools comes with a price. He ran against expanding charter schools in New York City and won handily. However, he overplayed his hand when he demanded charter schools pay rent.
Black parents fought back. There were rallies in the streets and angry parents demanded charter schools be allowed to co-locate in the same buildings with public schools. De Blasio had good reasons for trying to kick-out charter schools. Charter schools made public schools look bad.
In a highly-publicized case, two New York City middle schools were located in the same building and drew students from similar backgrounds. In the charter school, 80 percent of the students passed the state math test and 59 percent made the grade on the English test.
By comparison, the results were miserable in the public school. Five percent of students managed a passing grade on the math test. The English test had an 11 percent passing rate. No wonder de Blasio didn't want the schools co-located where the comparisons were politically damning.
Charter schools are changing the educational landscape, a prospect unions fear. Charter schools offer innovative curricula. They experiment with new teaching methods. The schools focus on helping every student succeed. Typically, they stress discipline and have no tolerance for misbehavior.
There are waiting lists in every district that offers a charter school alternative, attesting to their popularity with parents. Nationwide, there are more than one million names on charter school wait lists, according to a Manhattan Institute study. In New York City, the wait lists tops 70,000.
Democrats and their accomplices in the NAACP march to the drumbeat of the teacher unions, fighting against the very people (minorities) they claim to champion. Their opposition is strictly a matter of political greed. They value union contributions over children's future.
A national study found that 28 percent of charter school students are African-American, nearly double the percentage for traditional public schools. Without school choice, the families of these students would be stuck inside failing schools with no opportunity for escape.
This election year school choice has been paid little more than lip service. Voters should demand to know the positions of every candidate on charter schools. Those against supporting school choices deserve a failing education grade and are no friends of minorities.
Vote for candidates who want every child to succeed in school with no youngster left behind in a under performing public education facility.
No comments:
Post a Comment