Charter schools.. they're not bad

I'm a teacher and I like charter schools. I know that I'm often in the minority regarding this feeling, especially in my new home here in Washington. Recently, the state supreme court declared that charter schools are unconstitutional. This headline surprised and concerned me... at first.

Having recently moved here from Alaska, I'm kinda new to the local ed world. Up in the AK, our district included 6 alternative learning schools. Some were charter schools, some were magnet schools, and others still just fell in the "alternative" learning category. Our kids went to a charter school that focused on place based education. Specifically, the teachers created a curriculum that used the surrounding watershed as a source of educational enhancement. The school was very hand's on, and great for the active learner.

In all, there are 3 elementary options and 3 high school options beyond that of the traditional model of public school. These options are super popular, highly sought after, and completely funded by public school dollars. How is that? Well, all of these schools fall under the school district umbrella. They may have their own board of parents, but THE school board had to approve the charter and set the guidelines. They are public schools just without the "brick and mortar" feel of what a public school is typically like.

As a father of 5, I see first hand how incredibly different my kids are from each other. They have different interests, sensitivities, and learning styles. My oldest thrives in a traditional education setting. He needs the structure, but has the self drive to make it work. Our second in command needs more freedom. She's our artist with a strong hint of stubborn that won't just sit there and do a worksheet. She would thrive in a less traditional model, something that a charter school offers.

In our new district, there are no alternative learning systems (aka schools of choice or charter schools) in place for elementary and only 1 for secondary students. I know that at least one of my kiddos would benefit from something different, so it's frustrating knowing that option just isn't there. Thankfully, the district is building a team to discuss a new magnet/school of choice to be build for high school students.. and yes, I'm doing all I can to be a part of that team.

So now back to the headline. When I read deep into what the vote was about, I realized that what was unconstitutional were private charter schools. Schools that were not under a district umbrella, but self regulating, and set up by board members not voted on by the public or community. This ruling was not about my understanding of charter schools from my Fairbanks time, but was about the issue of public dollars going to a private school (albeit not a religion based school entity). This is about the constitutionality of vouchers, and a family being able to use public dollars to go to a non-public school. You can read my feelings on vouchers here, hint: I again side skew of my teaching peers.

The take-away of all this, is that charter schools or schools of choice give kids options beyond that of the traditional school setting. School was such a boring place for me to be. I did well only because I hated letting people down, and I hated feeling stupid. These schools are so important to the ever changing learners that we have, and allow for creative collaboration that most people need anymore. Please take the time to watch the video below. It about an amazing school that I wish was available to my oldest daughter. She would thrive in an environment like this!

And don't forget to follow me on my new facebook page! 

https://www.facebook.com/theteacherdad

And on twitter!

https://twitter.com/Ken_TeacherDad

A teacher-dad's thoughts on vouchers

My baby cousin messaged me last week to get my opinion on vouchers. Her college Econ class was discussing its impact on education, and she wanted my teacher thoughts! (Not so much a baby anymore, huh?). I will admit that I've always had a hard time connecting to economics, but from what I know, this is a great topic for a class discussion! Kudos to her Econ professor!

I will admit that my thoughts on the matter may be different than that of most teachers. As a teacher, I work hard to be the best, and expect the best of those that work with me in my school. I believe that I work in the best middle school in our area, and it would be foolish for any parent not to send their kiddo to learn with us. That said, if a parent thinks otherwise, why shouldn't they send their child to the school that is a better fit? Isn't learning about making kids comfortable, and teaching to their interests and strengths? If my classroom, or school isn't making a connection that will help a kiddo learn and grow, I think it is fair that the student leaves to go to the learning environment that is a better fit. I want to have that option for my own kids, and as a person passionate about opportunity for all kids, this just makes sense.

That said, we have to be realistic with what this means. I live in a small community. We are isolated in the center of Alaska, and even though we are the 2nd largest "city" in the state, our educational options are more limited. So, let's say we do vote-in a voucher system and everyone wants to use vouchers to go to our local Catholic school. The trouble there is Monroe is limited in space and resources. So, as demand goes up, and supply/space is limited the value increases. So, now this private school might have to raise tuition further beyond what the voucher covers to balance the demand, thus putting the school back in the same place it was (a school for the more financially secure). This is great for them, because maybe they can expand to take in a larger population of kiddos. But what if then the quality goes down? How will they manage the influx of students and maintain the high quality educational product? These questions apply to all of the private schools in our town.

Or, let's say my school's reputation becomes more widely known, and everyone wants to come to my school. Again, we have limited space, and we can't duplicate the success of individual teachers forcing others to be like us, because it's our unique personalities that make us the strong educators that we are. It's the leadership of our school that gives us the umbrella of comfort to teach our students the way we do. But, when our population increases compared to the other middle schools, won't they have to at least shift what they are doing? Won't their "product" have to improve? Isn't this creating a competitive edge that will start to drive improvement? Or at least shouldn't it?

In my opinion, the problem with education is that there isn't a worry about competition. Students in your neighborhood will go to the local school regardless of the quality. Unless, we throw down piles of cash to go to a private school, but that isn't much of an option for most of the population. Parents can also choose to stress about a charter lottery system to avoid going to their zoned school. In the end, many parents feel stuck. If we throw in a system that drives schools to work in the best possible way for the kids, then we will start seeing a shift in teacher quality, and more importantly education leadership. Principals will become more focused on mentoring teachers to improve the quality of the staff. Districts will have to start listening to what the parents are saying to understand what the community sees as the qualities that make a successful learning environment. If money is being thrown at private schools, then it would force the public education system to figure out why. Is it the lack of required state testing? Is the teacher quality that much better? How is it is better? If the vouchers are being applied to on-line education, how can our district better meet that demand? How can we better our value? Or, do we focus our efforts to be the best education option in another way?

All of these questions drive a concept of increased competition that, in my opinion, would lead to school reform and improvement. Schools would have to focus on what is best for the students from the kis' eyes and more importantly their parents' eyes. It's time to take away the idea that legislators and districts know what's best for all kids, and give that power back to those that truly know best, the parents.

I understand the issue of keeping state and/or federal money away from religious organizations. But this isn't necessarily about religion. This is about educating our youth. And if a community has an excellent school that is private and religion based, how can we say the dollars set aside to educate the kids in that district can't go to that school? We are giving recognition to a school for working at a high level, it just so happens that the school has a religious foundation. If the local public school doesn't like it, then it is up to them to buck up, and provide a better educational quality. A quality centered on students, and not on new standards and the test that supports them.

In the end, I spent over an hour catching up with my 20 year old cousin. Her opinions on education and life were so refreshing. I left our conversation knowing that if she represents even half of her generation, we're going to better off. We have to support opportunity for all kids to grow in learning environments that are best for them and their unique differences, instead of this one size fits all system. We both agreed that a little competition would be good for public schools, so I'm open for giving vouchers the opportunity to create that competitive spirit. And hopefully, help drive us to a better public education system.