connieb
Senator
run by Unions for Unions. The great Union Charter Experiment.
Now of course, other charter schools go bust all the time. Enter the Charter that Jeb Bush helped to start in Florida. But, the interesting thing in this is that the school was so bad, that its charter wasn't even going to be renewed. Its not like they just ran out of money - i mean - their biggest overhead - a building- was free as they shared a building with a public school.
This failure brings up a couple of interesting things... First of all, perhaps those whose skills are teaching, should not also be administrating. Maybe this school's problems and others like Liberty City - show that you need people who know how to run things - i.e. negotiate leases, handle money, budgeting and finance and HR issues. But in school districts across this country - those who run the schools are almost always former educators. Maybe this isn't a good mix and part of the problem. I know from experience in my line of work - you either understand how to do those things, or you don't. And, if you don't you best find the qualified professionals to do it for you. Would the management of our schools be more efficient, if the professional educators focused on curriculum and training and improving techniques and the business people ran the business of the school? Dealt with HR, managed facility issues, made budgets etc.?
Secondly, they attempted to prove that it wasn't unions that cause the problems in failing schools. Yet, their failure would seem to contradict that. They couldn't keep educators, they had horrible turnover, and the educators they did have, showed movies and had kids color maps instead of real teaching. PRESUMABLY these teachers would have had a vested interest in proving the very worst stereotypes wrong about them, but they did not.
Personally I am a fan of charter schools. We are looking into one for our kids, and I am working with group of parents to try to get a HS charter going in time for my second grader to get there. But, I think their success and failure is a microcosm of our bigger school problem. You have people in charge of the checkbook who aren't experienced business people. And, the school for all its goals, is still a gigantic business AND - parental/family involvement makes the difference. Successful charter schools are successful when the kids come ready to learn, when they are supported by parents who want them to learn.When their parents are "THAT" parent by other school standards. And, it proves that unions - aren't particularly helpful for our children's education. it certainly doesn't establish quality or elite as unions once did.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-union-charter-flunks-out-1425685352
connie
Now of course, other charter schools go bust all the time. Enter the Charter that Jeb Bush helped to start in Florida. But, the interesting thing in this is that the school was so bad, that its charter wasn't even going to be renewed. Its not like they just ran out of money - i mean - their biggest overhead - a building- was free as they shared a building with a public school.
This failure brings up a couple of interesting things... First of all, perhaps those whose skills are teaching, should not also be administrating. Maybe this school's problems and others like Liberty City - show that you need people who know how to run things - i.e. negotiate leases, handle money, budgeting and finance and HR issues. But in school districts across this country - those who run the schools are almost always former educators. Maybe this isn't a good mix and part of the problem. I know from experience in my line of work - you either understand how to do those things, or you don't. And, if you don't you best find the qualified professionals to do it for you. Would the management of our schools be more efficient, if the professional educators focused on curriculum and training and improving techniques and the business people ran the business of the school? Dealt with HR, managed facility issues, made budgets etc.?
Secondly, they attempted to prove that it wasn't unions that cause the problems in failing schools. Yet, their failure would seem to contradict that. They couldn't keep educators, they had horrible turnover, and the educators they did have, showed movies and had kids color maps instead of real teaching. PRESUMABLY these teachers would have had a vested interest in proving the very worst stereotypes wrong about them, but they did not.
Personally I am a fan of charter schools. We are looking into one for our kids, and I am working with group of parents to try to get a HS charter going in time for my second grader to get there. But, I think their success and failure is a microcosm of our bigger school problem. You have people in charge of the checkbook who aren't experienced business people. And, the school for all its goals, is still a gigantic business AND - parental/family involvement makes the difference. Successful charter schools are successful when the kids come ready to learn, when they are supported by parents who want them to learn.When their parents are "THAT" parent by other school standards. And, it proves that unions - aren't particularly helpful for our children's education. it certainly doesn't establish quality or elite as unions once did.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-union-charter-flunks-out-1425685352
connie
