Hey, there! Log in / Register
State approves two new charter high-school programs for Boston; School Committee chairman 'dumbfounded'
By adamg on Thu, 02/25/2016 - 7:25am
The state this week approved plans to add 1,100 new charter-school seats in Boston.
The board of the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education decided Tuesday to let Neighborhood House Charter School in Dorchester add 429 seats and expand to grades 9-12 - and to let the Brooke schools add 691 students and a high school.
School Committee Chairman Michael O'Neill said that when all the seats are filled, Boston Public Schools will lose $17.5 million a year, based on current reimbursement rates.
O'Neill, who attended the board's Tuesday meeting, said he was "dumbfounded" to learn that the board does not consider the impact of new charter seats on the school districts they draw from - the loss of revenue will affect programs for the kids who remain in BPS.
Committee member Miren Uriarte said the effect will be magnified because both Neighborhood House and Brooke have lower enrollment rates of special-education and English-learner students than BPS, which will have to continue its role educating "kids that are perhaps in the most vulnerable situations," with less money, she said.
"You can't keep robbing Peter to pay Paul," O'Neill said. "We need to stand up and say when they're making these decisions, we need to consider that impact."
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Wow, finally the school
Wow, finally the school committee has a backbone and is actually speaking up for the schools they supposedly represent. They used to just sit down and take it. Better late then never I suppose.
So the School Committee
So the School Committee represent 'the schools' and not the residents of the city? That says it all.
That's correct
They are in charge of the BPS schools. Their job is to advocate and provide leadership for the school system that educates 75% of the kids in the city. There's no conspiracy here. The charters specifically exist outside of and parallel to the BPS so outside the authority of the school committee.
?
Seriously? They only care
Seriously? They only care about the money they're losing.
Not sure
The policy on linking outside articles but this piece is a really great read, written by a Notre Dame professor. http://www.mindingthecampus.org/2016/02/how-a-generation-lost-its-common...
Not related at all, and the
Not related at all, and the article was crappy to boot. That professor's point of view is badly skewed, and has nothing to do with charter schools, BPS, or anything under discussion here.
Ok
To each his own I guess as I found very interesting. Might not be related fully, but still a worthwhile read
if you're going to post something as unrelated as this...
If you're going to post something as unrelated as this, it's common courtesy to say "Okay, this is also about schools, but not about Boston Public Schools, or charter schools, or anything else related to the issue here. It's a lament claiming that kids today aren't taught a peculiar subset of historical facts the author thinks are very important, and how the lack of education thereof is causing the moral downfall of society."
That way, someone who might agree with you that this is interesting (because, hey, no accounting for taste) can excitedly click through, and no one else wastes their time.
More related to the results
More related to the results of standardized testing and "tracking the teacher" rather than challenging kids to imagine and explore on their own. So i saw it as tied to the current ed environment and yes, charters feed on these b/c they hang their hats on high test scores.
A friend who is a professor says she often thinks that the kids who get B's are more engaged with the materials, thinking through and having insights while the A students have figured out what the prof wants.
okay, if that's it
This particular rant mostly seemed to be complaining about education which teaches thinking and insights, and would prefer the Victorian-era drilling of Important Dates and Important People — which, actually, lends itself just fine to test scores.
I dunno, maybe we're agreeing, and what you meant was that the linked blog post isn't actually interesting in itself, but interesting as an example of the kind of attitude which charter schools are preying on.
Where would these kids go otherwise?
Are they kids who'd otherwise be among the 20k kids who don't go to BPS? Or are they kids who'd likely attend BPS if they didn't have the option to go elsewhere?
If they are kids coming out of BPS, then the logic holds up to some extent - if BPS isn't educating/feeding these kids then BPS doesn't need the budget for those specific expenses.
If they are kids who otherwise would go outside of BPS, that's a tough question as well. Again, these schools are open to all applicants - they are not exam schools or other limited access schools. So if the goal is to educate as many Boston kids well as possible, then I guess 1.75% of the budget should be tolerable for 1.9% of the student population.
Unfortunately, the city has shown zero ability to actual manage the complexities of the budget. The detectives raise shows that. The fact that the city is acting surprised about BPS budget problems when the rising cost of salaries is an absolute, fixed cost. They should have a very good idea today what the payroll for BPS will be next year but will still act surprised next year when all of sudden there are budget problems.
To paraphrase a hobbit, you won't save the city budget by acting shocked and sad Marty.
BPS Budget
"if BPS isn't educating/feeding these kids then BPS doesn't need the budget for those specific expenses."
Yes, but operational costs can't always be reduced in proportion to the number of students no longer there. If you rented a 2 bedroom apartment for $2K with a friend and your friend left, the apartment would still cost $2K. You would still need to pay the full rent until you chose to downsize or get a new roommate.
A school with fewer students still costs the same to maintain. Some costs can be reduced (a teacher can be fired if he is no longer essential due to decreased enrollment) but I think it must be difficult to know how to cut costs and still be prepared if more students enroll.
It surprises me that in a city where (higher) education is so valued, the city can't get it together to improve education for kids.
Yes, they mostly would be
These 2 schools opened high schools so their existing students would have a place to go after middle school. So most of the kids who would attend have been in charter most, if not all, of their academic life. I don't see how charter kids continuing to attend charter schools would affect the BPS money.
Especially if you consider
Especially if you consider that a good chunk would go to private school or out to the burbs. BPS needs to get a handle on their high schools. They are so awful that many kids who don't get into exam schools go to private schools or their parents move or fake a suburban address. This has been going on for years, before charters even existed.
So probably we shouldnt so
So probably we shouldnt so things to make it worse.
This is similar to the liquor license issue
While the state should have oversight of standards and requirements it seems wrong that a state board (I am guessing they are appointed, not elected) can decide to add more charter schools to the city.
Appointed
10 governor's appointees
1 student elected by students
Unfortunate timing
Adding more publicly funded high school seats while the high school budgets in BPS are already under such incredible pressure feels really unfortunate budget-wise, because many of the problems in the BPS budget are tied to excess capacity.
But really, this is what is astonishing to me:
I would hope that, whatever your stance on charter schools, you would want the various entities responsible for setting educational policy in the city to be working together to try to achieve the best overall system. Instead, it seems that the state is telling the city that they will push for reform without any attempt at collaboration, and indeed, are willing to disrupt BPS in the process. I would prefer if the city at least had a seat at the table when it came to decisions that are likely to have a significant impact on its schools.
Agree to some extent
The high school seats issue has two sides. Sure, there is excess capacity in BPS currently but that's also because those schools are widely viewed as being bad schools so parents chose other options. The ultimate obligation the city has is to the parents of the students, not to the BPS employees. We know BPS is currently under delivering in that area. Why not try something else to see if it works?
The city should have a voice though, I agree there.
Charters have been tried
and offer mediocre improvements in test scores by booting kids they are not capable of teaching and busting unions.
Oh anon
Do a little research maybe? Spt. Chang specifically noted that attrition was not a real issue at these schools. If you value test scores (I don't really), the Brooke has among the highest in the entire state so not exactly mediocre. But your hot take has been noted.
Are these the attrition rates that they still refuse
To fully disclose? Maybe they'll disclose them when they open the high schools also the age group where they are the highest, but I doubt that. The Brooke has extra special secret to success... Low numbers of kids with disabilities, high suspension rates and a who knows attrition rate. What school wouldn't have high test scores if they could essentially pick the best students? Where's the justice in charter schools for kids with disabilities?
They don't want to work with
They don't want to work with charter schools they just want them gone.
Two more spikes in the neighborhood school
coffin.
I'll tell you this much.
Go to a coffee shop/breakfast place near any Charter High School. You will see students studying before, after and probably during school breaks. You don't see that at places near the public high schools.
Maybe it's because the charters have less space to study, but I did notice it.
Not necessarily healthy
So they have a lot more busywork? No time to be kids?
That is actually not healthy.
No
It's because those kids actually WANT to study, and teachers are actually ABLE to teach, thanks to the school's ability to boot the troublemakers instead of forcing everyone to put up with them and making learning completely impossible.
Maybe it's because charter
Maybe it's because charter schools tend to attract students more interested in learning and schoolwork?
Charter schools have less "English learner students" than BPS
That pretty much says it all. Let's deprive the enthusiastic students and parents of charter schools and decelerate their progress because our open borders policy is flooding the system with "English learners" who need to catch up before others go forward. Most telling is that Ms. Uriarte apparently takes this stance with a straight face. Meanwhile, the "experts" can't understand why Trump is soaring.
So, what you're saying is...
The next charter school should be a language immersion school where the "English learners" can use their native tongue in order to balance it all out?
Why that's very progressive of you, O-FISH-L!
The last thing that Boston
The last thing that Boston students need is more 'pregress.' In the last 50 years, we've already reformed the reforms of the reforms of the reforms. Open classrooms anyone? That was the height of progressive reform in its day. It was ridiculed by conservatives, and the conservatives were right.
What about open classrooms?
Compare the classroom of today with the classroom of 1950 and you'll find quite a few open classroom techniques still in use. Your problem is that you're fixated on one or two of the more far-reaching suggestions like removing walls or having multiple teachers speaking in the same space. Or you're looking at situations where open classroom physical aspects were introduced but the philosophy of creating more student-centric learning was not (thus the learning remained entirely teacher-centric in a open classroom design which was a hybrid bound to fail.
So, not only do open classroom philosophies and techniques continue to be used (clustered desks, free movement within the classroom, areas of the room dedicated to specific topics, etc.) but your recollection sucks on how "right" the conservatives were.
Removing walls?
How about removing disruptive "students" instead? They don't want to be there in the first place, why force them and ruin everyone school for everyone else?
Sooo......
Where do you want to put them? Direct to prison?
That's not the point
That is not the point that is being made at all.
The point is that because the charter schools accept fewer students who require expanded assistance (due to their English language skills or other reasons) the public schools in that district are impacted.
The public schools that are already cash strapped have to provide education to a student body that now has a greater percentage of students who require expanded assistance.
ya vol herr commandant
You're a couple hundred years too late.
"Few of their children in the country learn English... The signs in our streets have inscriptions in both languages ... Unless the stream of their importation could be turned they will soon so outnumber us that all the advantages we have will not be able to preserve our language, and even our government will become precarious," --Ben Franklin in 1753
Neighborhood House
I don't feel qualified to wade into the charter debate, but I will say, my kid went to neighborhood house for four years, and I think it's wonderful that they are adding a high school. We left the city, but the ONLY thing that we regretted leaving was the school. I wanted to send my kid to BPS and tried as hard as I could--she was assigned to a (now closed) school in our district that would have meant putting her on a bus for over an hour at age four, and had insane hours that no working parent could possibly accommodate. Her assigned school had no afterschool options for K1 and K2. We were so lucky to get a spot at NHCS that offered reasonable school hours and afterschool care. No one ever talks about these kinds of practical reasons for eschewing BPS, but they are important, especially if you have working parents with young kids. I know not everyone has a positive experience at charter schools, and my daughter did not need any sort of special intervention so I can't speak to some of those criticisms. I do know kids on IEPs that have flourished there, and if we were still there I would be very relieved to have an option that would take the pressure off getting into an exam school. It's really easy for parents whose kids have a spot at Henderson or Haley to judge charter schools and parents who choose them, but often schools like NHCS do a better job of meeting the needs of entire families, not just the kids. BPS should pay attention to that if they want to be the top choice for parents.
I think those are all valid
I think those are all valid points and I too think that Neighborhood house is a shining example of what a good charter school can be. However, the issue is the money. If we could this quasi private schools with less public money then there wouldn't be a lot of the issues and debates. Instead, the drain money from public schools that are already in need of money and the state doesn't reimburse the public schools fully. So yeah, expanding NHCS is great, but we can we do it without taking money away from traditional public schools?
Money is not the problem for BPS
You can give BPS all the money it thinks it needs and it would still fail.
The elephant in the room is that the bar for becoming a public school teacher is really low. Until that changes no amount of money in the world is going to fix BPS.
The bar for becoming a teacher needs to be raised. The process for firing teachers that are not getting it done needs to be easy. As easy as any private sector job. The process for giving teachers raises should be based on merit, dedication, putting in long hours..etc.
Basically the teachers union needs to be abolished so these processes can be put in place.
teachers union = teachers first, kids last.
Nope
The elephant in the room is entirely the product of your inebriated imagination. Go look up the qualifications for licensing in MA before you belch more stupidity.
If you think that getting a master's degree in education on top of a master's and bachelor's degree in a subject is a "low bar", you must be spending an awful lot of time at some awfully low bars.
I do volunteer work at BPS
Cute but the bar should be the same as it is to become a doctor.
Masters in Education at any college is a joke.
From my volunteer work I see teachers in action. If those teachers have masters degrees than they are worth isht.
I do see wonderful teachers there that should be making 150K but they can't because of the teachers union.
I call BS on Sobo
Where does the 150k come from? And how does BTU interfere w that? Doubt any Sobo Yuppie works at BPS.
Definitely a troll
Honestly, I think the poster is maybe a college kid who created a character or something. All the under informed conviction of a 20 year old philosophy student...
Please read my post again.
I said I do volunteer work (reading mostly) at BPS.
Never said I worked there.
Only if you pay what doctors get
You're education clearly isn't worth shit, either.
Yes!
Let's pay teachers the same as doctors. That will weed out the riff raff that become teachers because the bar will be raised to earn that salary.
I think the real elephant is
I think the real elephant is the effect of poverty on students. Good teachers can turn problem kids around - but only with a ton of intense 1:1 and relationship building, leaving the rest of the kids out. How do you manage 30 kids at once while also intensely babysitting 2 or 3 high needs, poor behavior, disruptive, doesn't want to be here kids who are 3 or 4 grade levels behind?
It's tough.