Charter Schools vs Public Schools

I'm hoping some here are able to help in trying to clarify the pro and cons of charter schools versus public schools , what to look out for and how to compare them? My son is going to 2nd grade next year and the buzz is that a bunch of people are trying to get there kids into a new one year old charter school.

I'm kind of skeptical just on the fact that s a new school and this is going to be there second year open. Can't imagine the kinks will be worked out so quickly.

Can you provide some useful resources or personal experiences in regards to the pro and cons of each. There are alot of articles out there but many appear to be biased one way or another from what I have seen.

I have also received contradicting information from charter school and public school officials. I also know there are good and rotten apples on both, but I'm hoping to understand the underlying budgets and motivation for each to succeed.

I was told that charter schools get gov't funding but not as much as public schools and if they are not non for profit they also have to turn a profit. If that is true than I don't see how a charter school could afford to pay , keep or attract the better teachers with monetary incentives . Of-course money doesn't equate to better teachers but it helps.

In addition, do charter schools have to adhere to public school testing and requirements like the fcats ? Is there a way to compare results between charter schools and public?

Thanks in advance for any help on the matter.

A charter school is nothing more than an alternative learning center that receives government funding, but it's curriculum and standards seem t be mandated by the state, more than the federal government.

At least that how I understand it.

a reply to: interupt42

All schools are different except for public schools which are all now rotten.

The only problem with charter schools (from the perspective of the public schools) is that they allow parents to redirect funds away from standard public schools thus achieving the dreaded "voucher" precedent.

If you can do it, do it. Don't be surprised by the vitriol you will likely receive.

Hopefully the union won't be directly violent against you or your child.

originally posted by: interupt42
I'm hoping some here are able to help in trying to clarify the pro and cons of charter schools versus public schools , what to look out for and how to compare them? My son is going to 2nd grade next year and the buzz is that a bunch of people are trying to get there kids into a new one year old charter school.

I'm kind of skeptical just on the fact that s a new school and this is going to be there second year open. Can't imagine the kinks will be worked out so quickly.

Can you provide some useful resources or personal experiences in regards to the pro and cons of each. There are alot of articles out there but many appear to be biased one way or another from what I have seen.

I have also received contradicting information from charter school and public school officials. I also know there are good and rotten apples on both, but I'm hoping to understand the underlying budgets and motivation for each to succeed.

I was told that charter schools get gov't funding but not as much as public schools and if they are not non for profit they also have to turn a profit. If that is true than I don't see how a charter school could afford to pay , keep or attract the better teachers with monetary incentives . Of-course money doesn't equate to better teachers but it helps.

In addition, do charter schools have to adhere to public school testing and requirements like the fcats ? Is there a way to compare results between charter schools and public?

Thanks in advance for any help on the matter.

I'll list a couple of point for you to research further.

Charter schools can be very different.

One who is organizing this particular charter - a group of parents, or a group of parents getting their direction from a for-profit 'charter school' administrator.

If it's a Montessory or Waldorf Charter - it might be a good choice for your family.

What are the 'credentialing' requirements for teachers?

Is the charter supporting teachers unions or busting teachers unions (the for-profit Charter Administrators).

Are the wages paid to teachers, aides and staff comparable to what local District personnel are receiving.

What is their opinion (and connections) to for-profit testing companies.

What about textbooks?

The basic question is who is this going to profit - students and teachers or for profit education companies.

There is a lot of propoganda in support of this, much backed by questionable backers. So throroughly check all your sources of information especially that coming from the school it'self.

That said, I do know of some fine - truly independent charter schools.

Your kid will be a dip# or all pro based only on your parenting. Spend all the money you want to try to modify this basic fact.

originally posted by: interupt42
I'm hoping some here are able to help in trying to clarify the pro and cons of charter schools versus public schools

Thanks in advance for any help on the matter.

Tt risk of upsetting the mods and making an off topic post, dare I ask what Charter School is?

a reply to: interupt42

A public school has to accept everyone, it's mandated by law. So all the mentally disabled, educationally challenged, behavior issues are put into public school. Charters are private and yes while they accept voucher for reimbursement, can be selective on who they take. Aka the above list doesn't get in. In which case you typically have a higher level of education and better teachers cause the teachers no longer have to teach to the lowest common denominator, but can teach what they want, how they want as long as they get the state minimum in. If you can go charter, I would go, but they are will have a couple years of getting students since their new. That said, your child can have a smaller class and some close friends

Camain

a reply to: camain

Thanks for the info and clarifying that. I will look further into that.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Thank you for the helpful information .

a reply to: Azureblue

www.masonclassicalacademy.org...

A charter school is a public school that receives public education funding and is open to all children in the county in which it is located. In general, a charter school is its own school district, nonsectarian, tuition-free, and governed by a Board of Directors. Minnesota passed the first charter school law in 1991 and saw the opening of the first charter school in the nation in 1992. Since 1991, over 40 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico have laws allowing the creation of charter schools.

I was hoping for some teachers to ring in with their perspective in regards to Charter schools.

originally posted by: Legman
Your kid will be a dip# or all pro based only on your parenting. Spend all the money you want to try to modify this basic fact.

Not sure where that came from but:
1. This isn't about money or babysitting, most charter schools are free tuition.

2. While of course nothing substitutes parenting involvement , the curriculum and methods of teaching are also important.

a reply to: camain

It depends on the school. Some charter and private schools can offer a range of services, but others are very limited. It depends on the funding they have. Each one is different.

As someone who recently did the school search process.

If you are shopping schools for your son or daughter, I'd suggest you look around at the alternatives. Most of the schools looking to lure you in are going to be pretty open because they want you to like them and send your kid there. They may offer round-ups for prospective students or they may simply arrange for you to visit and take tours or sit in on a class to see what kind of the day your child will have.

So look around to see what you like. You should even be able to audit the local public school although they may be less accommodating since they will get your kid by default.

If possible talk to parents or kids or kids in the schools in question about their experience with the school. For the schools with longer track records, dig up their success rates. Any reputable school should keep their records available in terms of just rough stats on how well they've educated their kids. Again, they will want you to being your kid there.

originally posted by: Legman
Your kid will be a dip# or all pro based only on your parenting. Spend all the money you want to try to modify this basic fact.

No - education and schooling are very important even for the very best parents. A child needs to learn to work with others, how to lead, many things that cannot be learned in the home. I'm not talking about sports, or music even, I'm talking about the subtle daily interactions that make life good and productive. You can't learn that in the closed system of a family no matter how large because of conditioning. It's important to interact with teachers and students from a variety of backgrounds in order to learn the needed skills to function successfully in the 'REAL WORLD". It is the major drawback of home-schooling - too narrow of exposure to ideas and people.

It's the trend to narrow a childs exposure to certain "Right Ideas, conclusions and people" and it is hurting our ability to co-exist peaceablity and productively.

Parents and family are important but a well-rounded education creates exceptional human beings.

It's the trend to narrow a childs exposure to certain "Right Ideas, conclusions and people" and it is hurting our ability to co-exist peaceablity and productively.

Parents and family are important but a well-rounded education creates exceptional human beings.

You've been listening to Obama haven't you?

There are not enough children being home-schooled statistically speaking to account for the social decay taking place in this country. But if you don't think that there isn't plenty of good old social engineering taking place in the public classroom to make sure the state is exposing children to "right ideas, conclusions and people," then you also aren't paying attention to what's been going on.

It comes back to the elephant in the room - the family is in decay, and if you don't have strong and healthy famiies, children grow up wounded.

The husband of a good friend of mine is a teacher, and vastly prefers teaching at charter schools. The curriculum can be much more thorough, and the teaching methods much more flexible, as well as they generally have smaller class sizes. Which in turn gives him more one-on-one time per student to assist them better when they have difficulty learning something one way -- he can try a slightly (or entirely) different approach for that kid without it eating up class time for 30 others.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: Legman
Your kid will be a dip# or all pro based only on your parenting. Spend all the money you want to try to modify this basic fact.

No - education and schooling are very important even for the very best parents. A child needs to learn to work with others, how to lead, many things that cannot be learned in the home. I'm not talking about sports, or music even, I'm talking about the subtle daily interactions that make life good and productive. You can't learn that in the closed system of a family no matter how large because of conditioning. It's important to interact with teachers and students from a variety of backgrounds in order to learn the needed skills to function successfully in the 'REAL WORLD". It is the major drawback of home-schooling - too narrow of exposure to ideas and people.

It's the trend to narrow a childs exposure to certain "Right Ideas, conclusions and people" and it is hurting our ability to co-exist peaceablity and productively.

Parents and family are important but a well-rounded education creates exceptional human beings.

And I just lost pretty much all respect for you, thanks for insinuating my kids are bumbling idiot shut-ins as home-schoolers. Their skills in leadership, problem-solving, and interaction with other kids & adults is just as good as the skills of any brick & mortar school kids. Which is better than we can say for some adults who speak out their backside without any clear knowledge about home-schoolers in the first place

originally posted by: interupt42
I'm hoping some here are able to help in trying to clarify the pro and cons of charter schools versus public schools , what to look out for and how to compare them? My son is going to 2nd grade next year and the buzz is that a bunch of people are trying to get there kids into a new one year old charter school.

I'm kind of skeptical just on the fact that s a new school and this is going to be there second year open. Can't imagine the kinks will be worked out so quickly.

Can you provide some useful resources or personal experiences in regards to the pro and cons of each. There are alot of articles out there but many appear to be biased one way or another from what I have seen.

I have also received contradicting information from charter school and public school officials. I also know there are good and rotten apples on both, but I'm hoping to understand the underlying budgets and motivation for each to succeed.

I was told that charter schools get gov't funding but not as much as public schools and if they are not non for profit they also have to turn a profit. If that is true than I don't see how a charter school could afford to pay , keep or attract the better teachers with monetary incentives . Of-course money doesn't equate to better teachers but it helps.

In addition, do charter schools have to adhere to public school testing and requirements like the fcats ? Is there a way to compare results between charter schools and public?

Thanks in advance for any help on the matter.

This issue is complex, and involves two strident sides who often talk past each other and have evidence that supports their view and ignores evidence that doesn’t support their view.

It involves the politics of school privatization, where our educational institutions (charter schools) will be run for profit where many believe will ultimately be to the detriment of the educational system as a whole and the individual students.

Also the unionized public school systems that naturally are against charter schools mainly and view the concept of charter schools as problematic intrinsically due to issues of privatization, and issues with the profit motive


As bad as some of the community schools are in the long run charter schools may be worst for the reasons of community control and the privatization process, even though some charter schools now are better than public schools.

But that now in many areas is not the case


This insider article breaks down the problematic aspect of analyzing this dilemma.

www.edweek.org...

The most fundamental level of the debate about charter schools is whether they work. A growing amount of high-quality research from independent evaluators examines how charter schools perform academically, including several studies from my organization. The accumulating evidence does little to resolve the performance discussion, but this has less to do with inconclusive findings than from differences in how the discussions are framed. Several studies over the past five years have recognized that, like other public schools, charter schools vary in their ability to move student learning forward. This should not be surprising, given the flexibility that charter schools are permitted. School operators choose to locate in different communities. They differ in their curricular focus and instructional approach. They differ in how they operate their schools. Some school operators make better choices than others, and this is reflected in different performance.

Of course, many people engaged in the school reform debate are unfamiliar with the available re-search. Worse, some who know it well intentionally filter out evidence they don’t agree with (Ravitch, 2013). In such cases, misrepresentation of the facts is both an error of omission and one of commission. Sadly, even leading debaters fall into this trap, which both weakens the discussion and damages the integrity of the policy debate. On balance, the debate about performance is not on the facts themselves but rather in the inference drawn from them. Take the most recent study on charter schools as an example: In June 2013, CREDO released a study of charter school performance in 27 of the 43 states in which charter schools operate. The states in the study enroll more than 90% of all charter school students, and the study examined four years of performance. Thus, the findings were both stable and inclusive (CREDO, 2013).

There are good charter and public schools and bad charter and public schools and some in-between.

I hope whatever you choose turns out to be rewarding for your children

OP, would you like to hear from the perspective of a teacher who taught at a charter school this year? Well, he isn't allowed to say anything since he signed a contract forbidding him to speak of the schools teaching style or anything like that.

As his wife, I am under no such contract and i know most of what went on. It's not pretty. Prior to the start of the school year, he was sent to a two week "training" course to tell him all about how great the school was and why they were better than a public school.

Reality was a bit different. You may think that critical thinking in public schools is poor. This particular charter school that happens to be a chain with multiple campuses through out the U.S. holds the patent on eliminating critical thinking skills. Student led discussions on why the material being taught was relevant was forbidden. Teachers were not allowed to cater to different learning styles. Students were also not allowed to help other students, despite the fact that peer discussion helps with knowledge retention. The schools reasoning was that a student could explain it to another student wrong, therefore the other student was vulnerable to misunderstanding the subject matter. Better not to understand at all, rather than understand it in an improper manner.

I know that my husband is a firm believer in that the best way to judge if a student understands the material is how well they can explain the material. That was completely forbidden. The only way he was allowed to judge whether the students knew the material was though multiple choice tests that looked like this:

What shape is the earth?
A) Mary ran 1 mile
B) The cat drank milk
C) The earth is round

All test questions could be answered correctly due to process of elimination due to the fact that only one answer was relevant to the question.

Even in public schools my husband was able to create lesson plans and design his own tests for the students. However, with this school the entire curriculum and tests where given to him and he was told he had to follow them to the letter. His entire day was planned for him. % minutes spent on one thing 10 spent on the next, and so on. No deviation was allowed. If the students had questions or found a subject matter interesting and wanted to discuss it, nope. My husband would be reprimanded. The principal is supposed to be able to walk in at any given time and know exactly what the teacher will be explaining. Let's say the teacher is supposed to be explaining that chickens lay eggs at exactly 10:55 am and the principal walks in at that time and the teacher is talking about the fact that milk comes from cows, the teacher will be written up.

My husband is far from being a fan of the public education system, but charter schools can be just as bad if not worse. Not to say that there aren't good ones out there, but you have to do your research. What ever you do, don't base it on what the schools says, find out from former teachers, parents and students. He will tell tell you the only thing that school was good at was marketing and P.R. If they put as much into education as they did into marketing, they might have been a fairly decent school.

a reply to: Willtell

Thank you very much for the information and look forward to comb over it.