- Connect
- Login
- Print Subscription
|
Welcome,
| |
| |
- Most Commented
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
- Most Emailed
- Popular
- Popular
« Opinion
So what’s wrong in Ohio?
So what’s wrong in Ohio?
A report issued by a Stanford University economist recently is being seized on by charter school proponents as proof that their preferred method of educating young Americans is superior to traditional public schools.
In her latest report on charter school performance, Caroline M. Hoxby found that students who entered lotteries and won spots in New York City charter schools performed better on state exams than students who entered the same lotteries but did not secure charter school seats, Her findings, she said, debunked other claims that charter schools do better than public schools because they attract cream-of-the-crop students.
Here and there
This is great news for charter schools and scary stuff for public schools — in New York.
Unfortunately, it says nothing about the state of education in Ohio — and in Youngstown — where there is little evidence that charter schools are doing anything but siphoning students and public tax money from public schools into charter schools that perform no better, and often worse.
It’s possible that New York is seeing some success because charter schools there are truly an experiment. There are only 30,000 charter school students in a district of 1.1 million students. New York is now in a position to pursue the growth of charter schools with some solid examples of what works and what doesn’t work.
By contrast, Ohio legislators were intent on pursuing a school choice program that was plainly hostile to a public school model that had worked for generations. To be sure, the failure to perform by public schools, especially in urban centers, couldn’t be ignored. But instead of considering serious reforms, Ohio legislators seized on charter schools, which they billed as an experiment. Then they pursued a policy that expanded charter schools and, more recently, voucher programs, without any consideration of whether the experiment was working.
Meanwhile, in an effort to deflect the attention of the Ohio Supreme Court away from questions about whether the state was meeting its constitutional mandate to provide an “efficient:” education for all students, the General Assembly poured billions of dollars into public school building programs.
The result is that Youngstown will have spent $190 million, most of it in state money, on new buildings, while its enrollment base is being swallowed by under-performing charter schools and, increasing, vouchers to private, primarily religious, schools.
Compare and contrast
And while a relatively small number of students in New York charter schools are outperforming their public school counterparts, Youngstown’s oldest and largest charter school, Eagle Heights Academy, remains in academic emergency and has been ordered closed by the state at the end of the academic year. Don’t count on that happening. School officials say they’ll fight the order, and why wouldn’t they? They saw what happened the last time an under-performing charter school was ordered closed in Youngstown. Summit Academy Community School for Alternative Learners was ordered closed at the end last school year because it had been in academic emergency for three straight years without showing improvement. But instead of closing, the school received approval from its Lucas County sponsor to change its description and its name and to expand its operation.
So to answer the question posed in our headline — what’s wrong in Ohio? — ideology trumped pedagogy. The initial sponsors of the charter school movement, many of them indebted to campaign contributors tied to the for-profit charter school movement, weren’t committed to improving education. They were only committed to change, whether it worked or it didn’t And in Ohio, with few exceptions, it hasn’t worked.
- Requires free registration.
Comments
The public school model is outdated and impedes education. The environment for students is not conducive to learning, massive amounts of classroom time are wasted, and the financial resources are not well spent.
My suggestions (offensive to the powerful NEA, I'm sure):
1. K-12 converts to a secondary education model, where students choose their schedules, pass classes and not grades, and can advance at their own pace.
2. Schools open year round on a quarter system. Students can take a quarter off (summer perhaps) every year if they choose, or can spread out their classload if they choose.
3. Large schools that offer diverse classes, but maintain small class sizes.
4. Abolish athletics. These can be pursued privately and not drain needed resources. It diverts the focus and mission of the school.
5. Offer a combination of on-line and classroom teaching.
6. I've got more, but probably everybody's stopped reading long ago.
http://nces.ed.gov/pubSearch/pubsinfo.as...
http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/20...
The idea of passing classes, not grades is a really sound suggestion.
We take it for granted that a group of 10-year-olds may grow at different rates, enter puberty at different times, and develop athletic ability differently (or not at all), yet we expect them all to read and add at the same pace and memorize the same facts and dates at the same rate. The expectation is unreasonable and detrimental to overall cognitive growth. I'd rather my son learn at his own pace than not at all because the class passed him by.
However, I think abolishing athletics would be blatantly unfair to all students below middle-class whose parents can't afford the price of private sports. It's been proven over and over that students who play sports, especially girls, perform better academically, are at less risk for drugs and alcohol abuse, are more likely to attend college, have higher self-esteem, score higher on standardized tests, and are less likely to get into trouble. If anything, extracurricular activities should be mandatory.
The main point though, is that Ohio needs fundamental educational reform that does more than offer a variety of sub-standard options to the students most in need of help.
Good post NS! I like it!
I think both of you have good points. My opinion of the sports issue is that a lot college jocks are kept in school for their athletic skills only. Admit it or not, it has in some cases carried over into high school.
I am sure some of you remember the Washington redskin lineman that admitted that he could not read. This was after graduating from high school and using up his college eligibility. It is my opinion that the old saying, "the bigger the ball, the lower the IQ of the player" is very often true.
city-dweller, I agree that your comments about those who participate in sports is true in most cases, if you eliminate the "brown ball" entries. Yes there are exceptions but be honest!
Brown ball in most cases pays for the other sports programs so treat it for what it is, a cash cow.
Actually, the "brown ball" cases are by far the exception. Far more athletes -- including football players -- excel in high school and college than are carried by their skill on the field or court. And many of those who do not perform well in college come from under-performing high schools and probably never would have seen a campus had they not been able to play. The number of cases like that Redskins player are a minuscule minority, and doing away with athletics across the board based on those cases is like shutting down the whole stock market because of a few people like Bernie Madoff.
city_dweller, I beg to differ with you, you are somewhat naive. Of course you backed up my claim whether you know it or not with your comment about some players not performing well in college.
Now get real, after listening to some of these "Brown Ball" players speak, you know that they are in college sports because it is a business not because they earned the right academically.
Have a friend who was a defensive back on the last University of Miami national championship team. After the championship game he was informed that his scholarship was over and if he wished to continue at Miami he would need to cough up some money. Wasn't even allowed to finish his four years. He was no longer earning any money for the school.
Schools have already jumped on your idea #5, non.
The degree to which they use online materials varies with the computers available, in the school or at home.
When we enact reforms, we need to keep in mind what will be lost, as well as what will be gained. Small schools have often been advocated, for the same reasons that elementary schools place children in classrooms. It creates a family-like atmosphere that is comfortable for young children.
They really do identify with their own teacher and group. I don't think we should ignore developmental stages of children.
This article reminds me of a recent report released by Policy Matters Ohio on charter schools, entitled, "Ready to Learn: Ohio assessment shows charters, magnets get head start." The report found that children entering charter and magnet schools in several of Ohio’s urban school districts performed significantly better on the Kindergarten Readiness Assessment-Literacy (KRA-L), which is taken as students begin school and reflects preparation for school rather than outcomes from school.