Fill the Barrel Before We Lift the Lid

A Boston Globe blogger recently posted the following about charter schools: “very small difference in SPED enrollment between charters and traditional public schools.” Exhaustingly, I often read such postings from the drummers of the charter movement. They consistently beat the rhythm of infallibility casting charters as a panacea to our manufactured public school “epidemic”.

Anyone who WORKS in the field knows that this is not the case. According to “Disability Studies Quarterly” they have concluded that “Urban charter schools in Massachusetts are educating significantly fewer students with disabilities not easily included in regular classes, compared to urban traditional schools”.http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/1374/1541

I don’t need a study to tell me that charters do not teach LAB, ODD, LD, and other substantially separate students (who, by law, receive expensive services from licensed special education teachers, specialists, and paraprofessionals in a small classroom setting). In my field such musings are ubiquitous knowledge.

ELL children are treated the same. Research ELL students at MA charter schools and you will encounter a serious pothole in the middle of our long travelled road of charter infallibility and superiority. The office of civil rights in the US Education Department investigated the MA DOE for failure to enforce ELL laws in Boston charters: (http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/learning-the-language/2011/11/ed_dept_probes_ell_services_in.html

Furthermore, ELLs somehow never make it charter schools (because they are not recruited)! http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/learning-the-language/2011/02/ell_group_urges_enforcement_of.html

According to a META report (: http://www.edweek.org/media/metacharterschoolbrief.pdf ) lifting the cap on charters will do nothing to help close the ELL achievement gap. Just look at these numbers:

“In Boston, for example, approximately 20% of all students are English language learners according to the MA DESE (18.90%). Yet in 2008-09 Boston Collegiate charter school reported 0% ELL students, as did Boston Day and Evening, Boston Preparatory, Health Careers Academy, Match Charter, and Smith Leadership Academy. At eight additional Boston based charter schools the ELL percentages ranged between 0.7% and 3.8%. Only one Boston charter school, Conservatory Lab charter, approached even half the district ELL percentage. This phenomenon is not unique to Boston. The Worcester public schools are 24.3% ELL, the Abby Kelly Foster charter in Worcester is 3.6% ELL. The Holyoke public schools are 24.2% ELL whereas Holyoke Community charter school is 10.5% ELL. In Lynn, 25.8% of district students are ELL, at the KIPP charter In Boston, for example, approximately 20% of all students are English language learners according to the MA DESE (18.90%). Yet in 2008-09 Boston Collegiate charter school reported 0% ELL students, as did Boston Day and Evening, Boston Preparatory, Health Careers Academy, Match Charter, and Smith Leadership Academy. At eight additional Boston based charter schools the ELL percentages ranged between 0.7% and 3.8%. Only one Boston charter school, Conservatory Lab charter, approached even half the district ELL percentage. The bottom line is that in 32 of 40 charter schools located in districts with ELL student populations, the charter school ELL percentage enrolled does not exceed half of the district ELL enrollment percentage.”

However, charter school proponents have “spin” for any evidence that points to fallibility. I’m sure I’ll read of it from the comments of this post. They are masters at manipulating data to “prove” their superiority. Truly, they conduct an excellent and heavily funded PR campaign.

So, if you want to lift the cap because charters have better MCAS scores you need to know why. Charters only teach a certain type of kid. They receive the same amount of public funding to teach cheaper to teach kids. They have outrageous attrition rates for the kids who do not perform, while these seats are not filled after the students leave. They receive millions in venture philanthropy that public schools drool over. They do not have nearly the same rates of ELL or substantially separate students. They MCAS drill instead of educate, while they tend to recruit higher performers.

Traditional Public schools educate everybody. Charter schools do not. We have higher SAT scores because we educate better (http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/state_report/sat.aspx), not just deform education by teaching to the test. Before we lift the charter cap in our quest for “competition”, why don’t charters start by recruiting ELL students, substantially separate students, and actually fill the schools they do have with kids. “Success” through attrition, recruitment policies that leave out high needs SPED and ELL students, and not backfilling seats is a smoke and mirrors show. My school is successful. We teach everyone, even the kids sent to us by the charters. Let’s support lifting OUR financial cap, not filling our schools with charter throw aways as they take over our educational landscape. Otherwise, we have a 21st century definition of segregation. Indeed, this is the civil rights issue of our time. Let’s buck the status quo. Tell charters to fill their current schools before they rob our neediest kids of the resources they deserve.

Colum Whyte
Social Studies Teacher
Joseph Lee School
Dorchester
Boston Teachers Union, local 66

Please share widely!

0

0