Hillary Clinton: Most charter schools ‘don’t take the hardest-to-teach kids, or, if they do, they do

[Starry Messenger]

the don't keep them'

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/11/08/hillary-clinton-most-charter-schools-dont-take-the-hardest-to-teach-kids-or-if-they-do-they-dont-keep-them/

"Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, who is running for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, was campaigning in South Carolina this weekend and sat down with journalist Roland Martin for an interview in which she talked about a number of topics, including one that has not featured in any of the Republican and Democratic debates: charter schools.

Martin, host of “News One Now,” a one-hour weekday morning news show on the TV One network, spoke with Clinton on Saturday just before a town hall meeting hosted by the South Carolina Legislative Black Caucus on the campus of Claflin University in Orangeburg. Martin brought up the subject of charters by saying that a poll in South Carolina among black parents found that most of them were interested in enrolling their children in charter schools because they were not satisfied with traditional public schools. He then asked Clinton whether she supported the expansion of charter schools and vouchers.

Here was her response:

CLINTON: I have for many years now, about 30 years, supported the idea of charter schools, but not as a substitute for the public schools, but as a supplement for the public schools. And what I have worked on through my work with the Children’s Defense Fund and my work on education in Arkansas and through my time as first lady and senator is to continue to say charter schools can have a purpose, but you know there are good charter schools and there are bad charter schools, just like there are good public schools and bad public schools.

MARTIN: So let’s get rid of all the bad….

CLINTON: But the original idea, Roland, behind charter schools was to learn what worked and then apply them in the public schools. And here’s a couple of problems. Most charter schools — I don’t want to say every one — but most charter schools, they don’t take the hardest-to-teach kids, or, if they do, they don’t keep them. And so the public schools are often in a no-win situation, because they do, thankfully, take everybody, and then they don’t get the resources or the help and support that they need to be able to take care of every child’s education."

<snip>

Good nuanced look at what the environment of underfunding has done to education and how it has led to the educational reform movement, which coupled itself with parental dissatisfaction with crumbling schools--which has in turn led to its own problems.

[MADem]

1. This is true.

I have a niece who wanted her special snowflake to enroll in a charter school that touted itself as academically challenging, with all sorts of frou-frou, fancy 'add-on' programs. She was shocked to learn he had to "apply" for admission, and go for an interview.

Now, this kid is a smart kid--he was reading well above grade level, spoke beautifully, had a lot of interests, "got" math at an earlier age way better than most of our set, was a quick study--but he was socially immature and he was born with a birth defect that left him slightly disabled. He can't participate in sports, he can't run well or even walk fast, and he tires more easily than the average child. Cut to the chase--he wasn't "accepted" and the niece was quite angered. If I had to guess, it was the "social immaturity" and not the disability that did the kid in. They didn't want anyone who might need a little extra time, who might engage in difficult or attention-seeking conduct; they wanted a sit-down/shut-up test taker that would confirm what they had selected for.

My family has always been a strong supporter of PUBLIC schools, has produced a dozen or more teachers (some of whom worked/work in "underserved" districts) in our extended family, so this relation is a real outlier.

I am of the view that the stronger public schools are, the better the society.

[Starry Messenger]

2. Yep. Lots of teachers have shared stories of students who show up in their classes

halfway through the semester, who were "counseled out" of a charter school--behavior or low test-scores, usually.

(I can understand why parents in underserved communities might find them desirable. If I were a Black parent, I probably wouldn't want to send my kid to Nathan Bedford Forrest Elementary, with no doors on the toilets. The chronic underfunding of schools in minority neighborhoods is criminal.)

I've been a long-time opponent of charters, and big booster of public school. A lot of us thought their structure would lead to these problems (and the disappearing tax money.) But we've got to find ways to have a new deal for public education, and give all kids an equal shot in the system, not build these silos with no accountability about how they accept and reject students.

[MADem]

3. ++++++++++++++++++1,000,000!

I've rarely seen a more succinctly nuanced exposition of the issue. I do dislike the environment that makes it possible for a school to be underfunded, a community to be underserved. I don't think the quality of one's education should be contingent upon one's zip code of residence. I would like to see states level that playing field--but they can't do that without federal help.

What we need, I think, is the WILL to FUND. There are places where governments can economize, I just don't thinks schools are the first place to do this--unless we're talking about giving up the quilted toilet paper for the single ply rough stuff! Beyond that, on issues of quality, we just can't take shortcuts.

[Starry Messenger]

6. Aw thanks!

We totally need the will to fund. This chart only goes up to 2013, but you can see the trend from 2008 to 2013, per state, on inflation-adjusted per pupil funding. (Second chart on page) http://www.governing.com/gov-data/education-data/state-education-spending-per-pupil-data.html

Many of them are negative percentages.

[MADem]

8. I'm glad this is finally on the national radar. Long time coming. nt

[Tommy2Tone]

4. This has always been an issue

These Charter schools are held to a higher standard and they actually recruit.

I also have an issue with vouchers. Say you get an $10K voucher for a school that costs $18K a year to attend. That leaves a working family $8K short and the wealthy a nice gift on their tuition.

[DURHAM D]

10. I have not followed the charter school movement but

is this really true: "These Charter schools are held to a higher standard..."

[mcar]

5. A good nuanced look

Exactly right. This is not a good/bad issue, just like so much in education.

[Cha]

7. Thank you, Starry.

[DURHAM D]

9. Thanks for posting.

I am glad to see these questions asked. Well actually... they are being answered by Hillary.

I can not recall any other candidate being asked about charter schools lately.

[Starry Messenger]

11. Valerie Strauss has been a tireless chronicler of all things ed. reform

So I was glad to see an even-handed and thorough look at the issue from all angles, and Hillary's deep examination of the issue.

Also, this was a good point:

"Every since the 1990s, Clinton has expressed support for charter schools, but in Saturday’s remarks, she said something that is likely to irritate her supporters within the Democratic Party who are avid backers of charter schools as a principal means of reforming public education: that most charters don’t accept those students who are the most difficult to educate, or, if they do, they “don’t keep them.”

She doesn’t directly say these schools push out these children, but charter critics have frequently said that many charter schools — especially the high-profile “no-excuses” charters — counsel out students who are disciplinary problems or who might drag down their school’s average standardized test scores. And they say that charter schools and traditional public schools cannot legitimately be compared in terms of student achievement in part because traditional public schools have to accept all students and charter schools don’t. Many charter advocates strenuously disagree on both points."

This *will* piss off the Whitney Tilson/DFER wing of the Democratic Party, and might even cost her in support and donations. She's bucking a narrative the Serious People have been putting out in the media for years, and this article cheered me up, honestly.

[William769]

12. Kick & recommended.

[Nye Bevan]

13. Hmmmmm. In NYC charter school admission is purely determined by lottery.

Any New York City student can enter a charter school lottery if the school has open seats
in the grade level the student will be entering. Charter schools do not admit students based
on test scores, essays, interviews, auditions or other measures of ability.

http://www.nyccharterschools.org/sites/default/files/resources/LOTTERIES082713.pdf

Is it different in other parts of the country?

[Starry Messenger]

14. There are ways to get around that.

And attending a lottery already takes from a self-selected group of parents, which isn't always representative of the whole population that a public school draws from.

And once the child is in the charter school, several wait until the average attendance money is in hand and then shuttle the child back to public school, without the funding to educate him or her. I'm glad Hillary is highlighting the problems that teachers have observed, it shows she is very well-informed and listens to us.

[Nye Bevan]

15. Wait.... kids who get into the school via the lottery are then kicked out arbitrarily?

That's horrible.

[Starry Messenger]

16. Yes, it's called counseling-out:

It's pretty traumatic for the kid and their family.

https://traue.commons.gc.cuny.edu/issue-2-fall-2013/torre/