Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh yes of course, I'm completely inventing the notion that the UFT is against non-unionized charters and have heavy influence over city politics. What was I thinking, obviously if the charters appealed just to the city they would have gotten off the ground, there's no need to bypass those special interests and go to the State level - duh!!!
Guess what? It's not just the UFT against non-unionized charters (and a lot of charters are unionized btw). It's parents of traditional public school students who don't want their kids to lose half their school building to make room for another "school" that is playing by its own rules. It's also citizens who realize how silly it is that charter schools are getting credit for educating kids much easier to educate and free of distractions that come in traditional schools. Rather than finding a way to limit the distractions so all kids get a good education, charters are just taking the good kids with involved parents and saying they deserve more resources because they are doing a job.
Charter Schools have too much freedom, some individuals receive too much pay as staff, and there is no control mechanism other then to totally eliminate funding.
So no justification exist for charter or magnet schools. The cure is overhaul of system and to actually require passing classes which have standards instead of lowering standards so no one is left behind.
It's wrong to not take on the lesser students and claim you are better. Plus public education is supposed to educate all. Charters are acting like private schools only they are using public money. If they can't follow public school rules, they should not get public money. I'm all for grouping kids by ability to make class time more efficient, but you can't deny the "bad" kids education either. Charters are an alternative that is fraudulent and not sustainable.
Best LEGITIMATE argument against Charter Schools in the thread
id just add that Public education IS Supposed to educate all
and if you dont want unionized teachers teaching your kids
send your kids to PRIVATE schools
Best LEGITIMATE argument against Charter Schools in the thread
id just add that Public education IS Supposed to educate all
and if you dont want unionized teachers teaching your kids
send your kids to PRIVATE schools
Charter Schools have too much freedom, some individuals receive too much pay as staff, and there is no control mechanism other then to totally eliminate funding.
Too much freedom? How else are you going to find out what works? DOE schools are generally so regimented and stuck in their ways that it's almost impossible to make fundamental changes, because there's no guarantee of success - so why try. With charters it's generally fresh blood and fresh thinking, implementation of new advances in education. If nothing else, the DOE will be able to point to things that are working in charters and have good motivation to implement them
id just add that Public education IS Supposed to educate all
Absolutely, and charters do educate all. The admissions process is random selection, and no special needs or disabled child can be denied placement. The problem is that a lot of parents are not very involved in their kids education and have no idea there's an alternative to their zoned school. Usually when those types find out, it's time to start school at that ship has sailed. It's not that the kid was denied by the charter, the kid was denied by his/her parent(s)
Absolutely, and charters do educate all. The admissions process is random selection, and no special needs or disabled child can be denied placement. The problem is that a lot of parents are not very involved in their kids education and have no idea there's an alternative to their zoned school. Usually when those types find out, it's time to start school at that ship has sailed. It's not that the kid was denied by the charter, the kid was denied by his/her parent(s)
And if you think they don't find a way to get around that, then I have a bridge to sell you. As for the parents, you are only making the point that it IS the parents and not the schools that fail. So why blame teachers unions and "failing schools"?
And if you think they don't find a way to get around that, then I have a bridge to sell you. As for the parents, you are only making the point that it IS the parents and not the schools that fail. So why blame teachers unions and "failing schools"?
REPPED
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
