[Clarallel]

Free-market boosters, including Betsy DeVos, promised that a radical expansion of charter schools would fix the stark inequalities in the state’s education system.

Michigan Gambled on Charter Schools. Its Children Lost.
By Mark Binelli

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/05/m...dren-lost.html

[scarabchuck]

That article definitely seemed a bit biased. It mentioned that the Bloomfield Hills school district spends $10k per student, but failed to mention that DPS spends close to $14k per student.


I support Charter schools. It seems to make sense to me. Apparently they don't seem to be working as well as I thought they would...at least here.

[Coldjensens]

While not all charter schools are great, when a district has charter schools, usually the best schools in the district are charter schools. This is true in Detroit. The only chance Detroit kids have at a decent high school are Renaissance, Cass Tech and DSA. I am pretty sure all three are charter schools (I know Renaissance is).

Where we used to live (Santa Ana CA) the only good high schools were the charter schools. In fact, one of the charter schools was in the top ten in the county, despite being located in an 88% minority and substantially lower income City in an otherwise extremely wealthy county with mostly high performing schools.

Charter schools give kids at least some chance to attend a decent high school, where otherwise they woudl have no chance.

Some of them are not well run and bring down the average. Some of them cater to poorly performing students and will also obviously bring down the average performance wise.

It is true that the high performing students get skimmed out of the bad schools and make their numbers even worse, however it also means the high performing students have a real chance, rather than being dragged down by under-performing students at the regular public schools.

It is silly to try to make some sort of simple comparison. There are too many other issues that need to be considered. As is typical for political based "studies" This takes a massively complex issue, ignores the facts that make it complex and the directs statistics that will support a political point without acknowledging the "study" really shows nothing at all (except that someone knows how to cherry pick statistics in order to try to support their political position).

Party politics needs to stay the heck out of schools and education (and I wish seduction industry woudl stay the heck out of politics). Playing games with kid's lives and well being is immoral and should be criminal; and party politics is nothing but games playing with no concern for the benefit or harm to people.

Although I think they are also massively oversimplifying a complex issue, here is another article which responds to the one linked above.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...-the-data.html

Their point is that charter schools in general work well but Michigan's unregulated system works terribly because it results in only marginal improvements when it could be creating more substantial improvements (maybe, possibly, perhaps, but no one really knows). It is not clear what they re trying to say about the performance of Detroit charter schools at the end of the article. Perhaps they are only pointing out that the claims flip flop.

[monica1982]

In an ideal world, all private schools would made illegal and funding would be standardized across all districts. One of the things that bothers me a great deal is when politicians vote against funding schools while at the same time putting their own children through what is often very expensive private school.

[jaynarie]

Originally Posted by Coldjensens

While not all charter schools are great, when a district has charter schools, usually the best schools in the district are charter schools. This is true in Detroit. The only chance Detroit kids have at a decent high school are Renaissance, Cass Tech and DSA. I am pretty sure all three are charter schools (I know Renaissance is).

They are magnets, which are completely different than charters.

[Coldjensens]

Originally Posted by jaynarie

They are magnets, which are completely different than charters.

I am not sure there is any meaningful difference.

When we were looking at renaissance, they told us they ere a charter school.

However, Detroit aside, the fact remains if you look at generally bad school districts the schools that provide students with the best and sometimes only opportunity for a quality education are charter schools.

The problem with most public schools is the obsession with begin fair. that means they want to avoid having any school perform above the median. In other words they want no high performing schools - it isn't fair.

[chricurtis]

[quote=Coldjensens;52510478]While not all charter schools are great, when a district has charter schools, usually the best schools in the district are charter schools. This is true in Detroit. The only chance Detroit kids have at a decent high school are Renaissance, Cass Tech and DSA.

As I recall, Cass Tech was a pretty good school before it was aCharter School.

[craig11152]

Cass Tech and Renaissance are NOT charter schools they are magnet schools and there is a significant difference. As magnet schools they are part of the DPS and run by the DPS. They have academic and other requirements to get in.
In Michigan charter schools are their own school district .They are not part of the public school district they reside within. They deal with transportation and assorted extracurricular activities on their own. If more students want in than they have room for they fill spots with random drawings.

[Coldjensens]

Originally Posted by craig11152

Cass Tech and Renaissance are NOT charter schools they are magnet schools and there is a significant difference. As magnet schools they are part of the DPS and run by the DPS. They have academic and other requirements to get in.
In Michigan charter schools are their own school district .They are not part of the public school district they reside within. They deal with transportation and assorted extracurricular activities on their own. If more students want in than they have room for they fill spots with random drawings.

Charter schools are also part of DPS. Office of Charter Schools - Detroit Public Schools

Some charters have academic requirements to get in some magnet schools have academic requirements to get in. Some don't. Apparently in Detroit, they do not and are not allowed to.

Normally charier schools are essentially the same as a magnet school and the two terms are often used interchangeably. Apparently in Detroit, they do nto allow Charter schools to have admission standards - as a result, we are not going to see any high performing charters here, instead we call them magnet schools, which are the same thing as charter schools elsewhere, they just bow to the school board instead of a charter board.

[jaynarie]

Originally Posted by Coldjensens

Charter schools are also part of DPS. Office of Charter Schools - Detroit Public Schools

Some charters have academic requirements to get in some magnet schools have academic requirements to get in. Some don't. Apparently in Detroit, they do not and are not allowed to.

Normally charier schools are essentially the same as a magnet school and the two terms are often used interchangeably. Apparently in Detroit, they do nto allow Charter schools to have admission standards - as a result, we are not going to see any high performing charters here, instead we call them magnet schools, which are the same thing as charter schools elsewhere, they just bow to the school board instead of a charter board.

Detroit can issue a charter, but the school is not run by DPS. It is it's own entity. USUALLY charters are issued by universities. By issuing a charter, they are providing a curriculum and agreeing to ensure it is followed. Everything else is monitored by their own individual school board and administration.

Outside of very few areas (California being the main one), charters and magnets are nothing alike. Magnets are schools within a district that don't have typical boundary lines. They can pull kids from anywhere within the district (hence the term 'magnet'). They usually have a specialized curriculum and strict admission guidelines.

Charters are just bad for everyone in the majority of the country. They are often filled with less experienced teachers (or teachers who are sub-par and couldn't make it in a traditional school). They are often for-profit and ran with a profit in mind. There are typically less extra curriculars. Their nature promotes transience, which is terrible for a kid's education. People think they are better because they have a choice, but in reality, schools would be much better if the government stopped funding them and invested more into the public school system.