Wednesday, October 22, 2008
School Choice?
In the past 2 decades, public demand and interest in "school choice" in the form of charter schools, magnet schools, schools within a school, academies, and vouchers for private schools has increased. Many believe that our educational system should mirror the business model of free enterprise, therefore with "competition" public schools would not take tax support for granted and provide better services to students. Please share your professional experiences as an "insider" of a non-traditional school model and its effectiveness, or share your opinions about how you anticipate these models will affect your reform efforts as a public school principal. Would you view school choice options differently as a parent than as a school administrator?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
37 comments:
I belive that having school of choice creates a huge problem. Students go to schools that they should not be at and slide throught the cracks and get into schools they should not be at. I believe the intentions were good when they started the schools, but the system has been abused for the benefit of principals or athletes to make hemselves look good. Wanting the numbers to look good and to bring in money for the school.
The Chapel Hill-Carrboro City School District maintains a LEAP (Learning Environment for Advanced Programming) program. At Smith Middle School, this highly-competitive program challenges one class (approximately 25 students) per grade level with academic rigor not typical of the other academic teams within the building. To enter the program, students must apply after having met very high test score standards and procuring teacher recommendations. On the one hand, I fully support the LEAP program as it offers experiences and challenges which might not readily be available given the wide range of academic ability in our average classroom and the limitations of our gifted program. However, establishing such a program within a traditional school means that these students are often (in the disjointed nature of the program) viewed as different, the smart kids, and treated differently. All of these stigmas come with both positive and negative connotations. As a parent, I would certainly support the most rigorous curriculum for my child, but the various differences between equity and equality will make my role as administrator very difficult.
One of the problems I have seen with school of choice or magnets is that subsequently it creates “school of junk”. That is schools where the “rest” of the students in an area go. A system is set up where students, mostly African American and Hispanic, are bused past one (magnet) school about 10 minutes out of the way to another school. This school then has a very diverse population, making AYP a hard goal to reach. (10-15 sub-groups more than the school up the street)
During my student-teaching, one of my field experiences was working at a Glasser-model alternative school that was remarkably effective at capturing the attention of a very needy population, including a significant population of students with disabilities, emotional issues and kids who were getting lost. It was also on the other side of a reinforced steel door from the other alternative school in the district, housing students who had been long-termed, expelled, or otherwise reassigned due to violent or disciplinary behaviors. My experience was that the school was unique in helping those students to be successful. It was a small population with a caring faculty that was committed to the model.
Insofar as schools with a focus are able to attract students and a faculty with a greater investment in the particular approach, and are serving a broad spectrum of kids, it can be effective.
However, in my opinion the failure of so many of these "alternatives" is transportation. Choice can work if we provide transportation to them, and open them for broader enrollment.
But, my greatest fear is that we will further fragment already tenuous bonds to local communities. Schools, like churches, can be the hub for a variety of services that neighborhoods and localities depend on. I would advocate for offering more alternatives within a single school through technology and other avenues than breaking up the community into smaller factions. If your school is a part of your community, your investment of time, money, pride and attention will remain in the community and school where you live.
A friend of mine is the principal of one of Durham's newest 'school's of choice'. His school is an alternative model for students that do not fit in well in a traditional setting. His model is an online setting where kids work at their own pace but have teachers to supplement the curriculum. I have heard of the many successes and feel that this is beneficial for the students that take advantage of the program.
As a parent, I would have loved having a school voucher. We chose to enroll my son in private school so we could have more of a voice in his education. Having money to help pay for it would have been nice since his local district was using the money that he was not there to benefit from.
As a former business owner, I know that competition is vital and I don't feel that our principals are threatened by competition in the least. Many of them are thrilled to have the kids go somewhere else. If we took money away, I believe they would act differently.
Niko makes a few valid points. If we are going to have a successful alternative system, we have to be able to provide a way for students to attend. Perhaps a solution would be to house more alternatives under a single roof. Working with CTE, I can see the viability of alternatives for students that will be going to work after high school. We need to make schools work for every type of student whether that be traditional or alternative.
I am currently teaching at a magnet middle school in Wake County. Our magnet focus is leadership and university connections. Our middle school is located on NC State campus and benefits from many of the university’s resources. We have a large number of NC State tutors who work with students, professors who teach interactive lessons, and resources, such as the gym, science labs, etc. available for our use. This model has provided many opportunities for students they might not have otherwise been exposed to in their “base” middle school. One down side to magnet schools is the transportation issue. Many of our students are on the bus for over 45 minutes coming to and from school. Another down side is the issue of overcrowding. Wake County utilizes a lottery system to determine which students are able to attend various magnet schools. Overall, I think magnet schools can offer students more opportunities as long as the logistics of the system are worked out.
I agree with Lisa about the idea of giving money to private schools and giving parents choice, as loong as my taxes don't get raised and I am affected. I say this because we already have a lottery that is supposed to help pay for education but we are abusing what we are doing with this money. I believe that if we are smarter with how our money is utilized in hte state we could do a lot more to educate our students.
I see the benefits of magnets and school of choice; however it has to be done correctly. In several of the Elementary schools in Durham, it is done all wrong! The magnet schools are offering great opportunities for their students, while sending some “walk zone” students miles away. The students being bused are in my opinion the ones who would benefit most from the “special programs”. I wish all schools were able to gain the funding and at least one “special program”. This would give them all a “claim to fame” and focus. I know this would cause more work with lottery entry and trainings. However, kids and parents would buy into a program they are interested in and devoted to.
As an educator the idea of "school of choice" is one of those, "good ideas...bad ideas" situations. I understand going to the place that will offer your child the best education but essentially it creates the "white flight" phenomenon. I teach at a school where years ago there was a balance in socio-economical status, races and ethic groups. But after Durham put in the policy of "schools of choice"; I essentially teach at a segregated school. There is no balance, no diversity.
Now as a person who will be a parent one day, of course, I would like to have a choice in where my children go to school. I actually attended private school and received an outstanding education growing up; and I am sure my parents would have loved money to have paid for that education. However, if the public school system was better in the area that I lived in, then they could have saved their money. Why not try to improve schools by providing balance?
The questions is, in some cases, is it about being in the school that provides the best education or being in a school that doesn't have so many minorities and poor kids in it?
I taught for 12 years in one of the first school systems in North Carolina to adopt a policy of school of choice. A student can attend any school in the system. However, if the student choses a school outside of the assigned attendance zone, the student is responsible for providing for transportation.
My experience with this model is that school of choice becomes a codeword for segregation both racially and socio-economically. Schools of almost one race began to appear and have and have-not schools began to appear. I felt like lip service was paid to the idea of diversity and economic equity, but the reality was that the system and the community has allowed inequality to become norm. Politically, I think the idea of schools of choice sounds great. I just don't know how to actually implement the idea without creating a school system in which the weakest members of the society are left behind.
Even after reading other posts, I am still on the fence regarding this issue. I can argue advantages and disadvantages, leading me to believe that the root of this notion must have been well-meaning. If programs are enacted to better serve our students, then I am all for them, but not at the cost of other students' educations.
Likewise, choice is a major concern when choices are not equally distributed for whatever reason (transportation, accessibility, etc.) I am reminded of a recent article reporting that Chicago is hoping to open a gay-friendly, "School of Social Justice Pride Campus." Again, I see valid points worth arguing on both sides of this individual instance, suggesting to me that it might be best to weigh each school within each district separately as to determine effectiveness. To paraphrase a very wise, elderly, teddy-bearish gentleman with an off-center goatee, "Practices can be effective in some places and some times and in some situations," or something like that.
Several of my collegues have mentioned the idea of school vouchers. On the surface, I can see why people don't have a problem with them. However, the money for that school voucher came from somewhere. If that money is coming out of the budget of the public schools, I have more of a problem. I see the potential of robbing Peter to pay Paul. If money is going to be pulled out of public schools for vouchers, then are we creating a self-fulfilling prophecy by removing resources from the public schools and making more people want to leave. I am old fashioned enough that I see public schools as the foundation of democracy.
At the same time, I want my child to have the best education possible. I grew up in a region of the state where the public school systems were not fair and equitable. My parents were in the position that they could chose a residence in the better of the public school districts. I know everyone cannot make that economic decision. As I bring my rant to a close, I will leave with the decidedly uncommitted phrase that I am very uncomfortable when I see society give up on the public schools. Not just for the sake of my job security, but for the sake of democracy and equal opportunity for all citizens. Instead of abandoning public schools, why not create a better public school system.
Let's imagine, for a moment, a voucher to private schools program that actually was put into practice. Let's assume that the money allotted for a student in the public schools was the amount the private schools had to accept for admittance. The rest would have to come out of the private schools' pockets. How long do you think it would take before they were in the same boat as the public schools? We know there is a direct correlation between school success and economic status. We know that lower functioning schools do not attract the highest qualified teachers. We could say, instead of school choice for students, there should be a lack of choice for teachers. Teachers would be put at the most needed schools in relation to their qualifications. A promotion to the highest level in your district would be an assignment to the worst performing school in the district. I know this is a bit off topic, but it's not any more ridiculous than the private sector taking up the slack for our low functioning schools. Let's face it, we are social creatures; if school choice is limited to the public schools in a district, diversity is lost.
One of the questions that I have, as a future school adminstrator, is how do I find balance and equilty with regards to school of choice. It seems like that is out of my hands and even harder to make the good intentions of it a reality. It's so political.
This arguement has come up several times among various groups of friends and colleagues (and it always gets ugly).
As an educator, it appears to me that "schools of choice" should be relabeled "schools of ability." Within my limmited frame of reference, it seems that while the system permits any student to attend any school, the parents with money and transportation become the only ones able to take advantage of this "freedom." The parents who can, take their students to the school with the best reputation leaving the lower socio-economic families isolated in small pockets of schools.
The issue created by this situation stems from these well to do parents. These parents are the ones who typically make change and have connections to central office or the school board. By taking their children, and therefore their focus, away from these schools, these isolated students loose a voice and an advocate. This chain of evenets severely limits the ability of these schools to change the culture of their learning environment.
While there may be better education in magnet and specialized schools, their exclusivity prevents the remaining schools from providing their students with the best resources and education available in the system.
Unfortunately, these arguements are easy to make as an educator in one of those "isolated pocket schools." The fact of the matter is if I were a parent, and it were my child's education at stake, I would probably be part of the problem and not part of the solution. (Thankfully, I am a long time away from being a parent)
I have only worked in public schools so I am basing my opinions on my limited experience and the "stuff in my head" as Dr. Schainker puts it. First of all, I would like to have the data on the "many" are who believe that our educational system should be based on the business model of free enterprise and competition. I think that competition should be within the school, not against other schools (except sports or clubs). If schools compete against each other then public schools would lose. I believe that private schools receive more funding from the interest group that finances them (like the church). Not to mention the rules for entrances. Public schools take all students equally. Private schools can pick who attends their school and they can say no to a student. I don't like generalization statements such as "public schools would not take tax support for granted and provide better services to students." I believe that the population is rising and public schools are broke. How could they take the tax support for granted? The tax support barely keeps the schools running.
As a parent, I would like the school choice or voucher model especially when many public schools have high student populations and most people do not want their taxes raised.
As an administrator, "it all depends." If I was leading a school that was receiving all of the vouchers, I would worry about rising student population and losing my budget.
Lastly, if we were discussing reforms and empowering students at the middle school level to make a choice on what type of high school they would like to attend then I would be 100% all for choice. I believe that the current high school model "one size fits all" is very, very bad. I think that the high schools should be busted up and students should be selecting their career choices earlier and the high schools should specialize in content such as academics (college bound), sports, trade, or technology. Students could switch at any time as long as they made up the differences in credits. This would eliminate the choice model that is based on wealth and focus on student careers.
I enjoyed Tony's LEAP program because it does promote healthy competition within the school. I would like to see more pull-out programs that select students who are competative academically to help push the content to another level. I bet that the teachers enjoy these classes as well because they can push their curriculum to higher levels in more detail.
I agree with many of you that have stated that a one size fits all policy is not a good one. We have to make sure that education is relevant to all students not just those that are going into the university setting.
Racquel points out: "The question is, in some cases, is it about being in the school that provides the best education or being in a school that doesn't have so many minorities and poor kids in it?"
I think this is true all too frequently, and is a part of the private shame of many a choice-advocates. It certainly plays an unspoken part.
It, of course, works both ways, as students who identify in the minority, or as poor, do not want to have these facts rubbed in their faces minute-by-minute. Oftentimes we have students choose Hillside because they think they will never feel like a minority, or feel poor.
At the heart of this are questions about what kind of education we are providing for our children. Are we, as Steven alludes, charged with a higher purpose of providing democratic socialization and education? Are we a nationalist nation that demands that all students receive the same education to fulfill the needs of the government--all students WILL? Are we a country that is prepared to take choice away from the individual and place it in the hands of a social engineer, a superintendent, a principal? Is this democratic, and how do we know who to entrust with these responsibilities?
Most importantly--who is the best judge of the education my child will receive, and what gives anyone else the right to make that choice for me?
Too often we have limited options to "opt out" of systems we do not believe in, or believe are hurting us.
The implications of any stance are dangerous and must be adopted with care.
I advocate choice, but not at the expense of other individuals or the greater good. I believe the greatest good is served when we improve all public schools and expand opportunities for all students, empowering students and families make choices within that system, rather than outside of that system.
I taught at a GT Magnet in Raleigh. In this model the students are taught the core subjects by one teacher, in a condensed time frame, and then they go to 2-3 electives per day. I think that the model is excellent for students who are working at grade level, and is really benefited my students who were AIG. The students who were struggling learners or were one to two grade grade levels below were lost in this system. There never seemed to be enough direct intructional time to help these students grow let alone begin to catch up with their peers. What also was frustrating was the students who were typically struggling the most were the students that had to go to this school because it was their base.
As I finished reading the posts the idea of "white flight" made me think of the school I am currently at. There was a new node of students that was placed in our school that came from a poor socio-economic part of town. With this influx of students we saw some of the more affluent families in our school sign up for the newly set up charter school. In talking with my principal about this he said, behind closed doors, that many of those families wouldn't admit it, but they left because of that population of students. I just kept thinking of this scenario, and thought it fit in well with many of your posts.
In the past, my visceral reaction to the issue of school choice has been to take the stance that so many other public school educators have taken. The most widely-held argument is that the introduction of school choice, vouchers, etc. will destroy the public school tradition, drain off needed funds and diminish the quality of those schools while leading to re-segregation.
During a sabbatical in 1997, I spent several months teaching in four different public schools in Buffalo, New York. Two of those schools were magnet schools. Buffalo has an extensive Magnet Program which began back when I was in high school there. (Yes, that long ago!) I also had an opportunity to see the system from another perspective (as the parent of a fifth grader enrolled at an elementary science magnet).
My short experience there was positive overall. The teachers in the magnet schools campaigned hard to get their positions. They chose their school because they were very much interested in or had expertise in the specialty curriculum offered there. Most of the students came in through an extensive application process. There were a certain percentage of students from the surrounding neighborhoods. The attitude of some of the staff at the neighborhood schools was different. Many had lost hope and settled in to wait for retirement. Resources were scarce. The magnet schools appeared to have access to additional resources. That included personnel as well as materials. I did not note much difference in the demographic population of any of the schools. The city schools had an majority African-American and Latino population. The introduction of magnet schools did little to change that.
In my opinion, school choice has had minimal effect on the public school system as a whole. In the states where it has been instituted, funding for public schools has continued to increase. School choice has not motivated neighborhood schools to work harder because of competition.
As a parent, I viewed school choice as a viable alternative to the decaying neighborhood schools of the inner-city. As an administrator, I’ll be responsible for providing parents with the information they need to make informed decisions about their child’s education.
Niko's point about advocating for more alternative programs within a single school through technology and other avenues rather than breaking up the community into smaller factions." is one that I think merits further consideration.
I believe that the more alternatives you can offer in one school building, the more attractive that school will become to the community at large.
There are models such as the Chapel-Hill-Carrboro LEAP Program in place around the country. Even though the students in the programs are in self-contained classrooms, they remain a part of the school as a whole. My esteemed classmate, Tony, feels that this sets up a situation wherein the students are treated differently. I feel that this might actually increase the chance that these particular students will have opportunities to engage in positive social interactions with students from the general school population.
I believe that this can diminish the likelihood that these students will be seen as strange or different.
Like many of my classmates have stated, I believe that there are pros and cons to school choice. School choice offers a way out of low performing schools, educational innovation, and match parent and child needs. However, students in schools of choice may have fewer opportunities to learn from students of different backgrounds, and vouchers take funds away from already underfunded public schools. The formation of charter schools, private schools and voucher programs sends a loud message that public schools are not meeting the needs of all of our students. We must examine what those needs are and how public schools can do a better job of meeting those needs. If I were a parent, I know that I would like the option to send my children wherever I believe that they could get the best education possible.
In regards to this topic one particular student comes to mind. This student was a middle class Caucasian in a school that is highly populated by minorities with free/reduced lunch.
This student went through 6th grade in a pilot all male class. This class was on a two teacher team, of which there was no math/science teacher for the first two months. The boy class was filled with EC students, and he went unnoticed because he had no behavior problems.
His parents would later tell me that they discussed switching schools on a daily basis. The following year, he ended up with teachers that focused on his leadership abilities, and he began to thrive. He grew academically and socially. Due to his experiences as a minority in a minority school, and overcoming his own disabilities, the student is almost guaranteed to find success in whatever he chooses to do. Had his parents used their resources to place him in another school, he might have once again fell under the radar and not be in the great position he is in today.
I agree with a lot of you that school of choice is OK if it is monitored by the district to ensure equality and balance in terms of socio-economics and race. If not, we will be back into the separate but unequal era. I have seen different schools that people identify as the “haves” and the “have-nots” within the same school district. This may be a result of parental, political, or financial support, but it is a problem with school choice. District administrators and school board members must have the courage and zeal to protect the opportunities of public education by regulating school environments. All school should have generally the similar demographics.
I agree with Ted and the connection with school choice and "white flight". For some it is a hard pill to swallow, but the reality is it occurs. Eventhough I support school choice, I agree with educational opportunities as a reason, not to avoid certain racial groups.
I believe school choice produces the white flight affect. However I believe charter schools produce an environment of competition, funding equalization, community centralization, and the opportunity for specificity. If there were enough charter schools to choose from in an area with different curriculum models then people could begin making a choice based on education goals not demographic makeup of the school. The major problem is the inability of a single charter to provide the number of services a district does based on economies of scale. I believe technological advances in instructional delivery as well as transportation could alleviate these concerns in the future.
Cory Draughon
I agree with Racquel so much. There is an environment of white flight, and the district puts up with it. Because those in the lower soci-economic rungs do not hold as much influence or don't create enough of a complaint. Education is supposed to be the great equalizer but so far it has not helped those who need it most. I hope in the future things will look very different.
Cory Draughon
As a parent, I believe in school choice. I want my child to receive the best possible education there is. Afterall, I'm paying for it either way. As a teacher, I believe in the public school system. I know as a teacher, I work hard to make sure that I am teaching my students what they need to be successful. I can only speak for myself. I do believe that students should go to the school to which they are assigned. If parents aren't happy with that school, then there is always the option of private or charter schools. I know as a principal, I would work hard to improve the overall educational effectiveness at my school, but I also believe that there are many other outside factors that contribute to academic success. Again, it all revolves around cultural capital and learning to remove or reduce it.
I have to agree with Cory. I believe that school choice does lead to "white flight." It reminds me of that case that we did with Schianker a few weeks ago. If parents see that a school is not performing like it should, they are likely to find another alternative for their child. I have a friend who took their child out of her assigned school because of the low performance grade and placed her in another school, which just so happens to have a much different population. "White flight" is one of my main concerns with school choice. I do believe that this issue does increase competition among schools, which is good, if it stays healthy. I believe that there should be a healthy balance in all schools.
Vouchers are a short-term solution to a long-term problem. Ideally, we need to have all schools reaching high expectations so the need for school vouchers and school choice is not such a pressing issue. As a teacher in a magnet school, it is apparent the majority of students attending our school instead of their base school are the students from middle and upper class homes. It is discouraging to only see the middle and upper class students able to take advantage of the magnet/school choice system. As Tony mentioned, a major concern is that school choice is not equally distributed due to transportation. Although society promotes a notion of school choice, in reality most parents are unable to provide transportation; therefore in reality the “choice” is unavailable.
I think that it is important to point out that all school alternatives are not created equal. I stand with many of you in agreeing that having a system with schools of choice is dangerous and leads to leaving other students in worse situations. I actually teach at a school that many students "choose" to come to, even though we're technically a school that you could also choose not to go to. I've worked with students who I'm so happy found a way to get to our school, because I worry that they would have gotten lost in a less supportive environment. However, then I think of all of the students who are still in that environment whose parents weren't able to drive them to Forest View every day, and I know that something needs to be done to fix what is broken at that school.
To me, that issue is separate from the idea of magnet schools. Again, I agree with many of you in seeing the benefit that a magnet school with a great fit can have for a child, especially with students with high emotional/behavioral needs, but also with students who have special interests that are nurtured by the magnet focus. But what I like about these schools is that (to the best of my knowledge?) students are allowed in on a fair and equitable lottery system, and then are provided with transportation.
On a personal note, as a parent and an employee in my school system, I can transfer my kids to any school in the county. It comes down to convenience for our family. My wife teaches at an elementary school in the county and I at a high school. My son goes to a charter school near my high school and will repeat kindergarten with my wife. One of my daughters goes to my wife's elementary school and my oldest daughter attends my high school. my point is that there would have to be one heck of a magnet for us to give up this convenience. I don't think my reality is that much different from most people. Long bus rides, long days, and late nights will usually take precedent over an assumed better education.
Dave's post brings up what's been a reoccurring theme on this blog; that a parent's perspective on this question might be very different than that of a teacher or an administrator. It is easy for me to say, "Don't pull kids out of this unsuccessful school, instead we need to fix what's wrong," but as a parent, I imagine I wouldn't want my child to wait around for those problems to be fixed. But several other people touched on the idea that sometimes people might opt out of a school not because of the actual practices taking place at the school, but because they don't want their student to be a minority. Among other problems with that, such actions can turn a school that is doing well, into a school that is not because of reduced funding and reduced parent involvement. (Which could in turn lead to reduced funding, then to more students opting out, then to reduced funding...)
I agree with Kimberly and with what others are saying that the answer to this question depends alot on whether you have kids of your own.
However, I am one of those that adamantly believes that there should be NO choice. You should go to the school that corresponds to where you live. Choice just brings all the problems that have been mentioned above.
A public school system should be a privilege and not a right. I think that many students and parents abuse this privilege. Instead of having the 'good' students leave by choice, we should force those 'bad' students out. There is no reason why a student that does not want an education should be wasting taxpayer money.
Post a Comment