S/O School Funding

[amy g.]

The school district here is absolutely failing. A 5th grade teacher is retiring in December and a new teacher won’t be hired. Parents can volunteer or the kids will be added to existing overflowing classrooms.

 

A kid who graduated from the district told me that he had several classes in high school that never had a teacher all year. The kids just had to have study hall or get distributed to other classes, but nothing was permanent. From day to day, it changed regarding if you had study hall or which classroom you went to.

 

They can’t hire teachers because the schools are so bad that no one wants to teach there.

 

I don’t personally know any parents who send their kids to the neighborhood schools.

 

Many working class families only have one kid so they can afford to put her in private school. Other families have gotten transfers to the better neighboring districts. Still others are using the public school service to homeschool.

 

But most of the families I know have their kids in charter schools. We have a very nice science focused middle school and a Spanish immersion elementary school. These charter schools seem to provide about the same level of education as the public schools where we moved from.

 

You might get a better or worse teacher, but the schools are safe and you might not love the textbook adopted but your kid learns to read and do math. You might have to jump through some hoops but there are accommodations for LD kids.

 

It has “suddenly†been discovered that the district has a 12 million dollar shortfall.

 

Everything I have read and heard from everyone I know wants to address this by closing the charter schools and forcing those kids and that money back into the public schools.

 

Here is the part that I actually don’t understand. I can see how that would help very long term, but are parents expected to just sacrifice their individual children’s education? I don’t think their could be noticeable improvement before the kids currently in charter schools graduate.

 

The thing that makes me uncomfortable about this solution is that parents who can afford it will still send their kids to private school and they will be educated.

 

Families who can afford to keep one parent at home can use the public school at home options and they will be educated.

 

But the kids who have been getting a decent, education through the independent charter schools will just be out of luck and these are families who already tend to have fewer resources than the first two groups.

 

I’m not seeing how this is the obvious solution to the district’s financial problems.

 

This is not a JAWM.

 

I’m asking because I feel like I’m missing something important because the answer seems so obvious to everyone I hear from.

[Hilltopmom]

Not sure.

We don’t have charter schools, private schools (except for one catholic school), or online public schools in our area- so everyone is stuck with the mediocre public school.

I’d guess for your area, they’re thinking if they closed the charters that money would cone back to the public schools.

[MinivanMom]

What caused the shortfall? 

 

In most states, an individual school district does not have the power to shut down charter schools and force those students to attend their local, public schools. Charter schools usually fall under the authority of the state board of education. In our state, only the state board can shut down charter schools, and I can't imagine a situation where they would shut down charters due to a shortfall in just one district. I would guess the charter talk is just people complaining and shifting blame. It's easier to blame those charters taking money away from the local district than it is to accept responsibility for mismanaging your funds.

 

I don't think we can really talk about solutions without knowing what caused the shortfall. I would be curious to know why your district has such poor, underfunded schools while surrounding school districts are doing better.

[amy g.]

http://www.timesheraldonline.com/social-affairs/20171208/deep-cuts-needed-for-vallejo-city-unified-school-district

 

Here is a little more info.

[Jyhwkmama]

But won't failing to hire a new teacher put the classes over state class size maximums? How can the district legally get away with that?

[SKL]

If the schools are so bad that nobody wants to work there, how is closing the charter schools going to fix that?

 

Why not close the public school and bus the kids to a better school?  Or are you too far away from every other school to do that?

[happypamama]

If they suddenly close the charters and get the majority of the charter school kids back, won’t they then still have to provide for those students? It’s not like that money is all free and clear, although maybe they can get away with not spending the full amount per each kid. It’s like if we have another child but my husband gets a raise — some of that raise is going to go to cover food, shoes, activities, medical for the new child, so the entire thing isn’t going to be extra money for the current children. But maybe it doesn’t take the full raise to cover the new child. I don’t know how that actually breaks down for the schools though.

 

I think it must be really hard. Part of me says that we learned from textbooks that were a few years old and used chalkboards, so why do schools need iPads and Chromebooks for everyone and so much tech? But then part of me hopes they’ve done some reasonable research as to how those might be cost effective, and maybe they really are. The world is a different place nowadays. It sounds extremely hard to be a teacher in a public school.

[sassenach]

This is interesting because my son's nurse just graduated her daughter out of Vallejo High last year. She was in the Biotech academy and did really well. She's excelling at Sac State this semester. Everything I heard from her mom was super positive.

[sassenach]

One of the things I see a lot of in my county is that districts and individual schools are increasingly drawing on private fundraising to make their schools great. The state funding seems to only cover the bare minimum. The schools with all sorts of great programs are funding them through their own private foundations, which parents donate to. The end result is that (surprise, surprise) schools in high-income areas have amazing programs funded by their private funds, schools in low-income areas have no extras.

 

In our (very wealthy, very high COL) county, the difference between public schools in the low-income pockets and high-income pockets is extreme. One school can't afford arts or PE programs, the other has award-winning programs: same district, maybe 10 minutes apart from each other. 

[Carol in Cal.]

Coming late to this party, but having lived in this state most of my life, what I have observed is:

 

The public school administrators are ALWAYS against the charter schools.  ALWAYS.  I have helped start several of them, and the arguments against them are vociferous and often ridiculous.  This is partly because they do take students away, and generally rather quickly, which does make it hard to plan for the changes in population.  But a lot of it is because the charters are not subject to quite as many rules and regulations as the local school districts, and so the administrators feel that that is giving them an unfair advantage. 

 

Another factor is that generally charters are not in bargaining units with teachers' unions, which are VERY powerful in this state.  So for example teachers might not get raises every year, and they generally do not have the same seniority and job security provisions at a charter than at a regular local school district school.  

 

Another factor is that charters are creative.  That's kind of the point of them.  They are freed from the typical rules so that they can set up a different mindset than the regular schools and see if it would be effective.  For instance, I have cousins north of here whose kids attend a Waldorf-oriented charter.  I have many friends who tried out a project based learning charter (that failed rather quickly).  I have other friends who used academic, one size fits all high school charters.  And of course there are tons of homeschooling charters around here.  These are all subject to state testing and other standards of access, but they are still all extremely different from the public schools.  Some public school administrators find that very threatening, implying as it does that they don't know what they are doing.

 

I have also seen fantastic administrators with determination make over a 'standard' public school into a powerhouse that serves the community extremely well, and shows steady progress in educating kids increasingly well.  I volunteered for a couple of years at a school like that in a very tough neighborhood, and it was wonderful.  But you don't see that very much, and the culture of failure tends to create a self-fulfilling prophecy of downward spirals.  That's why state take overs and complete changes of staff are recommended for failing schools.  

[Carol in Cal.]

PS  In the specific case you described, I agree...very few parents are willing to sacrifice their children's education for the 'greater good', which means that they won't meekly go to the public schools if the charters are closed.  Private schools, parochial schools, and homeschooling will flourish but the public schools probably won't get a lot of help.

 

Looking at the numbers, it doesn't look to me like the charter school losses are the main problem, unless I am reading the article wrong.  I suspect that the administrative costs and/or special needs/special programs costs are unusually high in the local public schools as well.  The state funding that is supposed to cover 'special' stuff is notoriously too low to meet the regulatory requirements, which means that funds are pulled from the standard student population to supplement AND special needs kids are stalled a lot.  Re. administration costs, that's something that needs to be studied carefully.

 

The other thing I would say is, I personally think that it's in everyone's best interests to have good public schools whether they use them or not.  And I would hope that a school district that is having big challenges and has a reputation for poor learning outcomes would be able to be humble enough to ask for help that is not just 'throw more good money after bad' but also would be 'Come and volunteer to staff our library.  Come and tutor.  Come and read to the kids.  Come and help ELL kids practice English.  Come and talk about your career and what education got you there.'  But usually they are so defensive that they don't do those things.  That wouldn't have to stop a local booster club from forming to do those things, though.  Or a nonprofit like this one, started by a friend of mine:  http://www.reachpotential.org/

[felicity]

The district my kids are in (I homeschooled up until 2 years ago) is having a funding crisis as well and some of it sounds similar to what yours is going through. I read the article from your paper and we're in the same state but different areas so some of what I've learned might be applicable.

 

Each school is allocated $X/student each year called LCAP. Then they get an additional amount for their neediest students--foster/homeless, ELL, and one other thing I can't remember off the top of my head. This comes from the recession years to guarantee funding on a somewhat equal basis for every school district. Sounds great and fair, but now the recession is over, things are changing in school districts and we're still getting the same amount of money even though times have changed and schools/cities are doing better.

 

Add to that a change in the amount schools have to have on hand for retirement accounts. It's risen again. My kids' school district is going from having a reserve 2 years ago to being in a $3million deficit this year to $13 million in two years and then it goes up exponentially from there. Our town is getting wealthier (yay, I guess) so the number of needier kids is going down (yay) but that means that we don't have the money that we have the past few years for the school district.

 

Oh, and someone mentioned the number of students in a class. It's limited K-3 but after that it's however many people the fire marshal says is okay in the room. There is no max other than that. I would absolutely not be okay though with any of my kids being babysat by volunteers because the school won't hire a teacher. That's unfathomable to me.

 

Charters get the same amount/student so I'm not sure why they would want to get rid of those unless they were chartered in another district so they are theoretically taking their money to another place. And the charter thing might also have something to do with the ruling in Anderson v Shasta (I don't think that's the right name but it's the key players) that stated a charter school can't have a physical space outside of their chartering district. That's massively affecting charters around here.

 

I won't sacrifice my kids' education for others but I do send my middle schoolers to a school that's 78% ELL so people think I do. (They don't realize that we have funds for a lot of extras because we get Title 1 money from the federal government.)

 

Anyway, these are my thoughts after reading your situation. It's possible that I'm way off base but the sudden discovery of a huge deficit rang some bells with me. It's a crappy situation to be in.

[Carol in Cal.]

You guys already know about Basic Aid and how the system works in the very high property tax districts, right?

 

http://www.santaclarausd.org/m/content.cfm?subpage=144707

 

If your school district has basic aid districts around it, those districts receive most of their funding be from a pool of funds rather than on a per student basis.  Because of that, they tend not to accept inter-district transfers, so that means of optimizing which schools kids can attend is less available.  That reduces another possible option for parents and is worth looking into.  I can't seem to come up with a list of which districts are basic aid right now, but there are a lot of them in the Bay Area.

 

When a school district transfers to basic aid funding, it is because the local property taxes raise considerably more revenue than the state's per student allotments.  That means that these districts are better funded even without donations than the rest as well.  

 

 

Edited December 17, 2017 by Carol in Cal.

[Arcadia]

Everything I have read and heard from everyone I know wants to address this by closing the charter schools and forcing those kids and that money back into the public schools.

 

Here is the part that I actually don’t understand. I can see how that would help very long term, but are parents expected to just sacrifice their individual children’s education?

I am in a Basic Aid district, the one Carol linked to. My district also canvass for sponsorship from the 49ers for their STEM Magnet 7th-12th program. My kids were with the online charter which is administrated from the neighboring San Mateo county. My kids are eligible to enroll in charter schools in my county and the three neighboring counties (Santa Cruz, San Mateo, Alameda) that borders it.

 

My school district has no power (other than intense lobbying) to close a county approved charter school. They definitely have no say in other county’s approved charter school. So we would never have that choice closed to us by our school district.

 

As for school funding, mine is generously funded by property tax in an area where property tax collections are high. Residents also generously fund the PTA of the schools their kids go to whether it is public or private schools. So the schools in the richer areas have more stuff than the poorer areas even though they belong to the same district and get the same per student funding depending on grade level.

 

School funding has always had deficits. It was always in the news. From Mercury News July article

 

“Current and looming money problems beset school districts small and large, from tiny San Bruno Park — deemed by the state to be at risk of insolvency — to the 41-school San Jose Unified, which expects to cut 150 jobs before school reopens in August.

...

“Two-thirds of districts I look at have problems in the third year with deficit spending,†said Ron Bennett, CEO of School Services of California, which advises 850 of the state’s roughly 1,000 districts. About one-third see problems in the second year, and a handful are making big cuts in the first year, 2017-’18, he said.

 

Among them is Cupertino Union, which faces a $5.6 million deficit next year — even after laying off staff and making $2.6 million in cuts this spring, CBO and co-interim Superintendent Chris Jew said.

...

To avoid “draconian budget cuts†in the coming school year, the East Side Union High School District board in San Jose signaled that it is prepared to cut 140 jobs in the two years after that, unless negotiations with employee unions come up with other savings. Otherwise, the district faces being $27 million in the hole in 2019-’20.

...

With a currently healthy state budget, the biggest threat to balanced school budgets is the growing bite taken by public retirement systems — CalSTRS for teachers and CalPERS for support staff. Next school year, those assessments will be about 15 percent of employer payroll. Four years from now, the CalPERS obligation will exceed one-quarter of salaries and is scheduled to continue growing in an effort to enable it to better cover its projected retirement payouts. District payments to CalSTRS will jump up to 19.1 percent of payroll.

 

The increases already have had an effect. In the past school year, San Jose Unified’s contributions to retirement systems were more than 2½ times what they were in 2006-07. It’s a $22.3 million increase.

 

“If the school district gives no raises, our employee costs will still be significantly more year over year,†Deputy Superintendent Stephen McMahon said. “That’s a really tough message for people to understand.â€

 

While the beneficiaries of pensions include local teachers and janitors, secretaries and classroom aides, the costs to districts are set in Sacramento.â€

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/07/02/tidal-wave-of-expenses-in-looming-california-school-budget-crisis/

[maize]

http://www.timesheraldonline.com/social-affairs/20171208/deep-cuts-needed-for-vallejo-city-unified-school-district

 

Here is a little more info.

They're short $10m, if every charter school student came back they would add $1.9m BUT they would have to expend funds to educate all those students.

 

The charter school students do not appear to be either the problem or the solution, the math doesn't work.

[shawthorne44]

Here is the part that I actually don’t understand. I can see how that would help very long term, but are parents expected to just sacrifice their individual children’s education? I don’t think their could be noticeable improvement before the kids currently in charter schools graduate. 

 

 

 

I think that the underlined is a part of your confusion.   Even, if they closed all other options also including private and homeschooling, it wouldn't make the school better.   In fact, it would most likely make the schools worse.   

 

Another thing you have to keep in mind, is that throwing more money at a bad school doesn't make it better.  This has been shown time and again.  But, that is what the school would like.  

[Carol in Cal.]

.

 

Here is what I don’t get: why did the district not shift at least another school to the desired model?????

 

 

 

Right.  In one of the close by towns there is *one* advanced science class that advances through the high school.  The school allows the top 25 kids into that class, out of several hundred.  And that's it.  Ridiculous.  It's one of the most affluent communities in the country, and there is no reason not to open another class full or two.  

[OrganicJen]

In our district they keep coming up with money for new football fields and baseball diamonds but not for academics. I'm not saying sports aren't good for kids but the primary focus of school I think should be academics and if they are failing in academic areas that should probably be addressed before spending millions on a new baseball field. When my disabled child was in public school we were told that the specific accommodations he would need just aren't in their budget yet they came up with millions for a new baseball field.

[maize]

In our district they keep coming up with money for new football fields and baseball diamonds but not for academics. I'm not saying sports aren't good for kids but the primary focus of school I think should be academics and if they are failing in academic areas that should probably be addressed before spending millions on a new baseball field. When my disabled child was in public school we were told that the specific accommodations he would need just aren't in their budget yet they came up with millions for a new baseball field.

And the sports facilities are usually not benefiting the entire school body.

[MarkT]

The school seems like a failure - let it go 

This is from my fiscal conservative side - charters are there to help with "competition"

Personally I think public charters have provided this in AZ (but many still need some more fiscal oversight).

Maybe a successful charter could take over the physical property. 

 

In general, I am opposed to vouchers for private and parochial schools. 

 

 

[amy g.]

I have heard that the school district used to have absolutely no services for gifted students. When parents tried to work with the district to start a program they were told “tough luck.â€

 

Then a gifted charter school was started and the district was suddenly able to get a gifted education program started.

 

So I do feel like they can provide a push to the district to improve.

[catz]

Reversing it though, if these public charters are highly competitive to get into and leave many, many kids on a waiting list year after year, how is that fair?  And I say this as someone who started homeschooling because of this exact reason.  There were spots for 100 1st graders in our district's GT magnet school.  There were like 250 kids that sent in applications.  And the GT threshold in our district is very low compared to others.  Something like 90th on a screening test.  My kid hit the ceiling of that test and that made no difference.

 

I think the whole system needs to be burned to the ground and started over.  In this day and age, we should have a much better ability to target kids as individuals instead of creating a system of boxes that your child is forced to fit into and so much plain old luck determines the quality of experience a kid might get at a public school. 

[MarkT]

1) Reversing it though, if these public charters are highly competitive to get into and leave many, many kids on a waiting list year after year, how is that fair?  And I say this as someone who started homeschooling because of this exact reason.  There were spots for 100 1st graders in our district's GT magnet school.  There were like 250 kids that sent in applications.  And the GT threshold in our district is very low compared to others.  Something like 90th on a screening test.  My kid hit the ceiling of that test and that made no difference.

 

2) I think the whole system needs to be burned to the ground and started over.  In this day and age, we should have a much better ability to target kids as individuals instead of creating a system of boxes that your child is forced to fit into and so much plain old luck determines the quality of experience a kid might get at a public school. 

1) More charter schools were created in our area and most no longer have waiting lists. Also the public elementary schools stepped up and they are good as well!

We have used both.

 

I do believe that charters do NOT do a good job with truly special need students and I hope that the district above has a public school that they could attend.

I have two sons:

one gifted 

one with special needs (non-verbal autistic)

================================================================

2)  I am open to suggestions - start new thread with some ideas - complaining without offering some ideas/solutions is just too easy. 

[catz]

1) More charter schools were created in our area and most no longer have waiting lists. Also the public elementary schools stepped up and they are good as well!

We have used both.

 

I do believe that charters do NOT do a good job with truly special need students and I hope that the district above has a public school that they could attend.

I have two sons:

one gifted 

one with special needs (non-verbal autistic)

================================================================

2)  I am open to suggestions - start new thread with some ideas - complaining without offering some ideas/solutions is just too easy. 

 

I'm glad the system where you are is working for you and your kids.  That doesn't mean it is working for everyone.  I feel lucky we had homeschooling as an option, but many families don't or even have the time or energy to hunt down school programs or advocate for their kids week after week.  I was in the classroom every week my kid went to PS as a volunteer and it became really clear my kid could not be there long term.  And yet the only viable options were highly competitive lottery options or spending 20K a year on private school.   When the public school system fails your child, you do actually have a right to complain about it.  I still financially support local groups trying to get better programming into more schools and I always support school funding programs after spending a year watching the budget and attending meetings.  Maybe count yourself lucky if you're happy with the education your children are getting and not be so quick to be defensive when someone else feels differently.  The onus is not on just parents of failed kids to fix the system.

 

I and I'm sure plenty of others have thoughts about alternative programs.  I regularly teach and lead groups of eclectic kids and teens.  But like you said, this isn't the thread for that. 

[Carol in Cal.]

 

 

I do believe that charters do NOT do a good job with truly special need students and I hope that the district above has a public school that they could attend.

I have two sons:

one gifted 

one with special needs (non-verbal autistic)

 

 

In CA charter schools are required to accept everyone, including special needs children, and to offer an appropriate education to them.

 

It's not widely enough known, but also charter schools, like other public schools, cannot require parent involvement or donations or anything else as a condition of student participation.  So a charter school, for instance, whose basis is parent participation, cannot actually legally require it.  

[amy g.]

In CA charter schools are required to accept everyone, including special needs children, and to offer an appropriate education to them.

 

It's not widely enough known, but also charter schools, like other public schools, cannot require parent involvement or donations or anything else as a condition of student participation. So a charter school, for instance, whose basis is parent participation, cannot actually legally require it.

I totally did not know that!

[nixpix5]

Here’s the part I don’t get. Our district has a few high schools and middle schools that are open to students only by lottery. I’m out of date at this point, but 8-ish years ago, the acceptance rate was something like 20% at the lottery schools. People had to haul their kids to the schools—no school bus for YOU! And yet there were 5 applications for each accepted student. Siblings were not guaranteed.

 

Here is what I don’t get: why did the district not shift at least another school to the desired model?????

 

And furthermore, I believe it was a lottery like I believe a unicorn lives in my garage. I used to live in the area of the district that had the highest property values—and I never knew a family who didn’t make the 20% bar for student admission. Riiiiiggghtttt.

 

NB: I don’t have a problem with cream-skimming, merit-based private or public schools. They are honest about what they are doing. But for a public school to say school acceptance is based on lottery and then have such skewed results...nope.

So near where I live, which is also in WA state we have a charter that is really high end and amazing. The competition is fierce and they require parent participation in epic proportions. It is supposed to be lottery but like you said, there seems to be a skewed proportion of certain people who make the cut. I would eat my shoe if it was a legitimate lottery. People who apply that say in advance their child has an IEP never make the cut ironically.

 

It is a great school and a model that should be replicated but they seem almost smug and to take pride in the fact that everyone wants in and nobody gets in. We need to evaluate why people are running with haste to private or charter schools to a point that so few can get in.

 

I grateful for the homeschool option. Our older son was able to go to a high end private school in Seattle because at that time we were broke college students and he got a full scholarship. That isn't an option anymore for us. I feel that our only option is homeschool for us.

[Bluegoat]

Isn't there something weird going on when there is money and teachers and will to make charter schools work, but not even to staff the public schools adequately?

 

I don't know, it seems to me that charter schools are clearly not the answer to whatever is going there, and even as someone who might be interested in a school like that, I'd have a hard time justifying letting the public schools become a holding cell for underprivileged kids while funding schools outside the main system.

[nixpix5]

Isn't there something weird going on when there is money and teachers and will to make charter schools work, but not even to staff the public schools adequately?

 

I don't know, it seems to me that charter schools are clearly not the answer to whatever is going there, and even as someone who might be interested in a school like that, I'd have a hard time justifying letting the public schools become a holding cell for underprivileged kids while funding schools outside the main system.

I agree with you, but I think it is so multifaceted. Atleast our area public school is a train wreck. Teachers cannot discipline kids or suspend kids that need it desperately. Bullying is out of control. Even drug use on the elementary campus. Test scores are plummeting because teachers are so busy with a high abundance of mainstreamed kids with delays, mental health struggles, behavior issues or do not speak English that many children are just not getting an adequate education. This makes people who can jump ship do so. This isn't a judgement about what they are doing, far from it. They have a tough job. I just won't put my kids there and many I know who can make other choices also make other plans. Our umbrella school is full of kids with anxiety issues pulled out of PS due to many issues that caused it. I wish I lived in an area with great schools. Many districts in WA are, mine isn't one of them anymore. Teachers tend to leave because they burn out. It is a really broken district from my perspective.

 

My older son went to the top private school in Seattle. A quick Google search will pull it up. He attended with some of the famous locals' kids. We had stars in our eyes but it wasn't all that. It insulated him from some things but opened the door to other issues. I am glad he had the experience and so is he. However, I still think my homeschool is better ;)

Edited December 18, 2017 by nixpix5

[Carol in Cal.]

Isn't there something weird going on when there is money and teachers and will to make charter schools work, but not even to staff the public schools adequately?

 

I don't know, it seems to me that charter schools are clearly not the answer to whatever is going there, and even as someone who might be interested in a school like that, I'd have a hard time justifying letting the public schools become a holding cell for underprivileged kids while funding schools outside the main system.

It's a desperation move, Bluegoat, in a really messed up system that in many places is very top heavy with high administration costs.

 

But here is why charters can be cheaper:

 

1.  Parents of special needs kids tend not to know to seek them out.  Sometimes they are discouraged from applying.  That cuts per pupil costs massively.  (Although it's not right and actually is illegal.)

2.  The families who seek out these schools tend to be ones that support the school in other ways once their children attend.  They are self-selected for parental involvement in education, IOW.

3.  Charters are not bound to normal teacher pay and overtime pay requirements.  They don't necessarily budget giving teachers an annual raise.  I have a friend who teaches at a local homeschooling charter, and she told me that she started at the bottom of competitive pay scales and hasn't gotten a raise in 3 years.  Plus she doesn't get job security after 5 years the way a lot of regular teachers do, and the school is not bound to typical seniority rules in making decisions about teacher retention.  Teachers still want to work in these schools because they are more freed up to do their jobs.

4.  They tend not to be networked into big structures with multiple layers of administration.   The homeschooling charters and maybe the KIPP schools are exceptions, but generally you don't see charters forming into large agglomerations.  This significantly reduces overhead costs.

5.  Behavior problem kids can be kicked out into the regular public school system.

6.  There is often a specific school design that is of interest to the parents, kids, and teachers, that makes them all motivated to work harder than normal to be successful, and that is unique and different from the other public schools.

 

I don't know that an 'all charter' model would actually work, because those points above would not be in play.

 

But I do know that a lot of school districts don't work at all, and in some of them, when something starts working it gets quietly politically attacked and demolished.  Jaime Escalante LOST HIS JOB after a while, Stand and Deliver notwithstanding.  Rafe Esquith took a lot of heat back in the day.  (Not sure that 'they' can touch him anymore, but it was ugly.)  The tough school I used to volunteer at had the fantastic principal pressured out after a while--there was politics involved but I don't know the details.  It was shameful--she was literally saving that whole messed up neighborhood from the vantage point of one elementary school.  In the next town, a wonderful parent participation regular public school was taken apart when a new principal came in.  The 'carve outs' and skunk works in the regular public schools in California are very vulnerable to this kind of stuff.  It's disgusting, and it's why I support the charter system here.  (It does vary from state to state, but in CA it's immensely valuable despite the 'skimming' issues that make it a bit unfair, but that I think could be addressed with parent education.)

Edited December 18, 2017 by Carol in Cal.

[amy g.]

The term charter school†has different meanings and infrastructure in different states so my opinion kind of depends on what the words mean.

 

The thing that burns my bacon is that in the district I mentioned upthread, there are special focus schools—GT, Spanish immersion, IB, International to name 4 that I still recall. They aren’t called charter schools but students out of the area have to apply to attend (or their families move in-area) OR they are district-wide but only handpicked. And there are long lines of people who want to send their kids to these schools.

 

Here’s my bacon burn: why does the district not adapt to the wishes of the constituency—if the IB school is what do many parents want, flip another school to make seats available. If the Spanish immersion is packed out with a wait list—obviously people want this. So flip another school in the district.

 

Why not learn from what is working and implement it across the district rather than grousing about how some schools are doing so well while others are not—and shutting down the successful schools so everything can be equal(ly awful)?

 

I know that one chat board post doesn’t do justice to complexities underlying this, but the premise could still be considered.

Are you talking about public magnet schools? If so, that is what my sister and my friends and I all attended.

 

We auditioned and submitted portfolios and went to school an extra hour a day. We were bussed from all parts of the city and had to conform to academic and behavior standards or we were kicked out.

 

I was surprised to hear some opinions against magnet schools because we had such good experiences with them.

 

There were waiting list, so I can see how some people might see them as unfair.

 

I just don’t think the answer is making every kid who can’t afford private school or homeschooling to go to the failing neighborhood school.

 

Of course, I don’t know what the answer is. That is why I asked.

[Carol in Cal.]

Here’s my bacon burn: why does the district not adapt to the wishes of the constituency—if the IB school is what do many parents want, flip another school to make seats available. If the Spanish immersion is packed out with a wait list—obviously people want this. So flip another school in the district.

 

Why not learn from what is working and implement it across the district rather than grousing about how some schools are doing so well while others are not—and shutting down the successful schools so everything can be equal(ly awful)?

 

 

Well, it sure would be helpful if you could require teachers in a Spanish immersion school to actually speak Spanish.  Can you?

 

I ask because this was an issue in Milwaukee.  A public school had a German immersion mission, but the public school teachers' union successfully sued or appealed or something to enforce standard seniority rules on those teaching jobs, which resulted in teachers applying to teach there who could not speak German, but the school was forced to employ them.  This is the kind of thing that charters sometimes can avoid.  

[maize]

One other way that charters self-select for more involved, often somewhat better off families is that many do not offer bus service. The kids need a ride every day, which is just not something many working class families can pull off.

[Arcadia]

Isn't there something weird going on when there is money and teachers and will to make charter schools work, but not even to staff the public schools adequately?

 

I don't know, it seems to me that charter schools are clearly not the answer to whatever is going there, and even as someone who might be interested in a school like that, I'd have a hard time justifying letting the public schools become a holding cell for underprivileged kids while funding schools outside the main system.

Charter schools can pay a lower salary to their teachers. They also have the right to fire. Promotion and retrenchment is not based on seniority.

 

My school district’s board members are very political and we had a change in school superintendent every two years so that someone gets to retire on a higher pension. So someone was literally promoted to superintendent as he was next in line to retire. He did nothing (constructive or destructive) since he was just biding his time to retirement.

 

When my local district had to retrench teachers during the 2009 recession, the math/science teachers are the ones getting retrenched as they were the most junior in seniority. LIFO did not work by subjects but by the entire district. So some schools lost more teachers than others and teachers who are math phobic have to teach math. In time of financial crunch, subject expertise requirements are waived and it is not enforced even in rosy financial times.

 

The charter school my kids were in had less money per student from the state than my local district has from our property tax. My district actually “makes a profit†when my kids use the charter as they reimburse the charter at the charter’s rate (e.g. $5,600 per k-5th student), not my district’s budget rate (e.g. more than $7k per k-5th student). However if my kids have gone to private school or homeschool, then that leaves more money in the miscellaneous school funds for my district because they still get 45% of the property tax collected for school district expenses regardless of number of k-12th students.

 

Charter school doesn’t provide transport which means those who apply would have a parent, relative, neighbor who can do the driving through and from school. There are some charter schools that are in densely populated areas where students could walk to school quite easily. Charter school is a school choice so parents are vested in the decision to do the paperwork to be entered into the lottery for brick and mortar charter schools. Parents do want their kids charter school to survive and do well so they are more willing to put in time and/or money to the school. We applied to an out of district charter school that offer Chinese as a school time subject. Since we would have saved (close to $4k) on hiring a chinese tutor if my kids had gotten into that school, we were willing to donate that amount saved to PTA.

 

We had to kick a fuss all the way to state level to get my district to transfer my kids from a performance improvement school to a school that is not failing. It is provided in our state’s education code but you basically have to read the riot act to the district office staff stating the relevant dept of education codes and getting the state’s education dept to give them a warning call. So people got tired of all these mess and walk with their money to charter, private, homeschool or move to another district. My neighbors rented out their homes and rent a home in another district so that their kids could have a better school choice without the fight. A school board member told us there was nothing we can do about school rezoning and re-assignment. Parents started to move their kids to another district the day after the announcement by renting there immediately, paying rent at two place for more than a month if necessary. The board members were happy as that reduce the overcrowding problem but the parents who asked for the rezoning were shocked as they didn’t expect the left out parents to move out of district or to move their kids to private schools. Almost all who moved has very high state standardized test scores so the demographics did shift. So it really was a case of be careful what you ask for. People have learned from that mess that the easiest solution if they are unhappy with the assigned public school is to apply for charter school and if the child didn’t get in, to move to another district or to pay for private school as a stop gap. My area’s estimated median household income is around $120k and many families have at most two kids so switching to private schools as a stop gap is still financially tolerable. Vallejo’s estimated median household income is $108,478 so not that low either and people can opt for other choices if their district fails their kids.

[MarkT]

1) I'm glad the system where you are is working for you and your kids.  That doesn't mean it is working for everyone.  2) I feel lucky we had homeschooling as an option, but many families don't or even have the time or energy to hunt down school programs or advocate for their kids week after week.  I was in the classroom every week my kid went to PS as a volunteer and it became really clear my kid could not be there long term.  And yet the only viable options were highly competitive lottery options or spending 20K a year on private school.   When the public school system fails your child, you do actually have a right to complain about it.  I still financially support local groups trying to get better programming into more schools and I always support school funding programs after spending a year watching the budget and attending meetings.  3) Maybe count yourself lucky if you're happy with the education your children are getting and not be so quick to be defensive when someone else feels differently.  The onus is not on just parents of failed kids to fix the system.

 

I and I'm sure plenty of others have thoughts about alternative programs.  I regularly teach and lead groups of eclectic kids and teens.  But like you said, this isn't the thread for that. 

1) Charters are certainly not perfect in any way. The reason I ended up hanging out in the hive is that the charter schools my DS attended had deficient Math programs because they rushed the students to higher levels than they could handle and then the teacher was forced to slow-down/dumb-down the whole class. I ended up after-schooling Math with DS from after 7th grade (Algebra 1) to after 10th grade (Precalc).  Finally for Calculus, (11th and now 12th) he had a very good teacher and I could confidently turn the reins over. The hive was extremely helpful in finding the correct textbooks to use for this adventure.

 

2) Homeschooling was never a viable option for our family - it was hard enough doing the after-school Math. You folks doing full-time homeschooling are quite incredible.!

 

3) Life is a compromise!  I was never totally thrilled with either boys' education. Please re-read what I wrote. I "believe" I was strongly stating my opinion (this is a chat board) not trying to "put  down" the OP.  Insightful public debate is the sign of an open society which seems to be slipping away into fiefdoms or silos these days.

 

Peace on Earth, Goodwill Toward Mankind

 

Mark

[MarkT]

Are you talking about public magnet schools? If so, that is what my sister and my friends and I all attended.

 

We auditioned and submitted portfolios and went to school an extra hour a day. We were bussed from all parts of the city and had to conform to academic and behavior standards or we were kicked out.

 

I was surprised to hear some opinions against magnet schools because we had such good experiences with them.

 

There were waiting list, so I can see how some people might see them as unfair.

 

I just don’t think the answer is making every kid who can’t afford private school or homeschooling to go to the failing neighborhood school.

 

Of course, I don’t know what the answer is. That is why I asked.

Magnet schools are another good choice if available!

[MarkT]

One other way that charters self-select for more involved, often somewhat better off families is that many do not offer bus service. The kids need a ride every day, which is just not something many working class families can pull off.

Some of the AZ charters in lower wage areas do provide some transportation

 

for example:

http://www.southgateaz.org/transportation.html

[Bluegoat]

I agree with you, but I think it is so multifaceted. Atleast our area public school is a train wreck. Teachers cannot discipline kids or suspend kids that need it desperately. Bullying is out of control. Even drug use on the elementary campus. Test scores are plummeting because teachers are so busy with a high abundance of mainstreamed kids with delays, mental health struggles, behavior issues or do not speak English that many children are just not getting an adequate education. This makes people who can jump ship do so. This isn't a judgement about what they are doing, far from it. They have a tough job. I just won't put my kids there and many I know who can make other choices also make other plans. Our umbrella school is full of kids with anxiety issues pulled out of PS due to many issues that caused it. I wish I lived in an area with great schools. Many districts in WA are, mine isn't one of them anymore. Teachers tend to leave because they burn out. It is a really broken district from my perspective.

 

My older son went to the top private school in Seattle. A quick Google search will pull it up. He attended with some of the famous locals' kids. We had stars in our eyes but it wasn't all that. It insulated him from some things but opened the door to other issues. I am glad he had the experience and so is he. However, I still think my homeschool is better ;)

 

I can't argue with this - I homeschool my kids in part because I'm not crazy about elementary education here, and it isn't nearly that bad.

 

As a taxpayer though, and voter, I do feel like when I make decisions about supporting or promoting policy, I need to look beyond what might be good for my own family.  I don't think I could support an alternate system sucking out public funds like that and leaving the main system under-served.  I'd never consider doing it with healthcare, and I can't see a real difference with education.  

 

There is just never going to be much motivation to tackle the problem if people who have a little money and ability to advocate can opt out of the effects of their decision.  

[Carol in Cal.]

.  

 

There is just never going to be much motivation to tackle the problem if people who have a little money and ability to advocate can opt out of the effects of their decision.  

 

I really doubt that you would be as sanguine as this sounds if you had to send your kids to a drug-ridden, gang-infested, dangerous school and couldn't opt out.

[Carol in Cal.]

 

 

2) Homeschooling was never a viable option for our family - it was hard enough doing the after-school Math. You folks doing full-time homeschooling are quite incredible.!

 

In a lot of ways it is much easier to homeschool than to after school.

Mainly, when you homeschool you get your kid at his best, which after schooling absolutely does not.  

[DawnM]

Well, it sure would be helpful if you could require teachers in a Spanish immersion school to actually speak Spanish.  Can you?

 

I ask because this was an issue in Milwaukee.  A public school had a German immersion mission, but the public school teachers' union successfully sued or appealed or something to enforce standard seniority rules on those teaching jobs, which resulted in teachers applying to teach there who could not speak German, but the school was forced to employ them.  This is the kind of thing that charters sometimes can avoid.  

 

Most immersion schools require something l like 75% of the day to be in the language.  So, some subjects could be exempt from that.....say, English class for example.  And good luck finding German, Japanese, or Korean PE teachers, Art teachers, etc.....

[maize]

Most immersion schools require something l like 75% of the day to be in the language. So, some subjects could be exempt from that.....say, English class for example. And good luck finding German, Japanese, or Korean PE teachers, Art teachers, etc.....

My son's Chinese immersion school does 50/50; he has English in the morning but switches to Chinese class before lunch. His Chinese block time is longer because it does include the time the kids spend in specials (library, PE, etc. with non Chinese speaking teachers).

 

This school does language arts and social studies in English for K-3, science and math in Chinese. For 4-6 they switch to science and math in English, language arts and social studies in Chinese. They do have reinforcement built in in whichever language is not the primary one for a given subject each year.

[DawnM]

The school district here is absolutely failing. A 5th grade teacher is retiring in December and a new teacher won’t be hired. Parents can volunteer or the kids will be added to existing overflowing classrooms.

 

Parents can volunteer to teach?  They aren't requiring teacher certification or degrees or anything, parents can just go in and sub for the day?  Who would coordinate that to make sure every single day is covered?  Who would lesson plan to make sure they all stay on track and within the given curriculum?

 

A kid who graduated from the district told me that he had several classes in high school that never had a teacher all year. The kids just had to have study hall or get distributed to other classes, but nothing was permanent. From day to day, it changed regarding if you had study hall or which classroom you went to.

 

They can’t hire teachers because the schools are so bad that no one wants to teach there.

 

But you said they dont' want to hire anyone, right?  Or is it that they can't find anyone?  I am confused.

 

I don’t personally know any parents who send their kids to the neighborhood schools.

 

That's too bad.  

 

Many working class families only have one kid so they can afford to put her in private school. Other families have gotten transfers to the better neighboring districts. Still others are using the public school service to homeschool.

 

But most of the families I know have their kids in charter schools. We have a very nice science focused middle school and a Spanish immersion elementary school. These charter schools seem to provide about the same level of education as the public schools where we moved from.

 

You might get a better or worse teacher, but the schools are safe and you might not love the textbook adopted but your kid learns to read and do math. You might have to jump through some hoops but there are accommodations for LD kids.

 

It has “suddenly†been discovered that the district has a 12 million dollar shortfall.

 

That is crazy!  Someone better lose their job over this one!

 

Everything I have read and heard from everyone I know wants to address this by closing the charter schools and forcing those kids and that money back into the public schools.

 

Here is the part that I actually don’t understand. I can see how that would help very long term, but are parents expected to just sacrifice their individual children’s education? I don’t think their could be noticeable improvement before the kids currently in charter schools graduate.

 

Yes, and no.  The "greater good" says that good kids from good families will bring the test scores up and help the failing kids.  But we all know that most good kids from good families are not going to sacrifice their own children in the process.  I am not!  I do not for one minute appologize for sending my kids to one of the best schools in the country (rated in the 200s for the nation according to US News and World Report) while working in a school that is not even ranked.  

 

The thing that makes me uncomfortable about this solution is that parents who can afford it will still send their kids to private school and they will be educated.

 

Families who can afford to keep one parent at home can use the public school at home options and they will be educated.

 

But the kids who have been getting a decent, education through the independent charter schools will just be out of luck and these are families who already tend to have fewer resources than the first two groups.

 

Yeah, it is unfortunate, but charter schools are often seen as "the enemy." Around here several have closed due to not meeting testing or stated purpose goals.  I think there is a feeling that they are hard to monitor by the state and it takes a lot of effort to monitor them (and there are some bad ones!)  Whereas, PSs are standardized and have specific guidelines.  I am not sure I am explaining that well....

 

I’m not seeing how this is the obvious solution to the district’s financial problems.

 

This is not a JAWM.

 

I’m asking because I feel like I’m missing something important because the answer seems so obvious to everyone I hear from.

 

My comments in red.  

 

As far as the 12M shortfall, I don't really understand all that happened there.  Schools have set budgets dictated by the state.  In CA, 50% of the budget had to go to teachers and support staff.  There is no getting around it.  Then there was a set building and maintenence amount, student services amount, etc.....it was pretty clear.

 

There were even guidelines as to what teachers you hired.  Principals had to show that they had a certain percentage of veteran teachers, a certain percentage of mid-career teachers, and a set number of new hires.  One principal I worked for had to file exceptions every year because teachers didn't want to leave, so she had a disproportionate amount of veteran teachers.  I really enjoyed working there.

[J-rap]

That's difficult.  It reminds me of our one high school in our small town in some ways, except here the school is well-loved;  there is just not available funding.  So, very few extracurriculars, just two AP classes, no gifted programs, mostly just the basics.  Parents step in to fill in a lot of the gaps.  The school has been able to add a few more classes by doing televised classes through larger schools in other cities.  So, the classroom has a camera and television in it, and students watch and participate in a live teacher-led class in another district.  Students also have the option of going to the library during class times and doing an on-line class of some sort during that time.  (The school helps arrange it.)  Many students take advantage of the television and online options.  This is how most language classes are taught, as well as many others that aren't core.  It seems to work.  

 

Of course, that's still very different than your situation.  I'm just kind of brainstorming ideas.

[Carol in Cal.]

My comments in red.  

 

As far as the 12M shortfall, I don't really understand all that happened there.  Schools have set budgets dictated by the state.  In CA, 50% of the budget had to go to teachers and support staff.  There is no getting around it.  Then there was a set building and maintenence amount, student services amount, etc.....it was pretty clear.

 

There were even guidelines as to what teachers you hired.  Principals had to show that they had a certain percentage of veteran teachers, a certain percentage of mid-career teachers, and a set number of new hires.  One principal I worked for had to file exceptions every year because teachers didn't want to leave, so she had a disproportionate amount of veteran teachers.  I really enjoyed working there.

 

All budgets require operating assumptions.

Those assumptions include how many pupils of various categories will be served in which grades in which schools.

And they also include which teachers will retire, and when, and how many administrators will be needed, and all kinds of other things.

When those assumptions turn out to be incorrect, the administration has to adjust their spending or run over or under budget.

In this case, they are arguing that the charter school is responsible for a catastrophic loss of revenue that made their budget assumptions incorrect, but the numbers that I see don't bear that out--so I interpret that as a deflection of their own responsibilities in that area.

 

Regarding the 'guidelines about what teachers you hired', as you mention there are exceptions to them of some sort.  For instance, locally when the 20 student class size law went into effect, experienced teachers in tough or medium schools applied to 'good' schools, and left the tougher ones in such quantities that one local school district had 57% of its teachers be emergency certification ones--the ones that took the CBEST test and jumped in as permanent substitutes, despite have backgrounds in non-education-related fields.  Ironically, 20 student class sizes were a disaster for the schools in rough neighborhoods around here.  The law of unintended consequences, always prevailing it seems.

 

I have a friend whose daughter spend over half of her first grade year with such a teacher--an enthusiastic but ignorant young woman with a degree in public relations and no idea how to teach or even what to teach and how fast.  And that wasn't even in a rough neighborhood, but a medium one; but it was at the time of the teacher shortage due to the implementation of that rule.  The original teacher of that class had wanted to teach 4th grade, so a few weeks into the year when a fourth grade class opened up he jumped.  He took all his classroom materials and decorations with him, since he had paid for them with his own money.  So the new 'teacher' had no clue, no stuff, and no idea what to do.  This should never ever happen, but it's the kind of thing that happens all the time in districts where money is short and/or prioritized over students.

[Bluegoat]

I really doubt that you would be as sanguine as this sounds if you had to send your kids to a drug-ridden, gang-infested, dangerous school and couldn't opt out.

 

I doubt I would send them, as I said, I homeschool for lesser reasons.

 

But I am still not going to vote for a system that benefits me by screwing over other people.  That just institutionalizes the problem further and does nothing towards solving it.

 

But I think to a large degree this is why these problems become unsolvable, people "opt out" and build the means to do so into the system, and nothing improves.  How could it?  

 

There's a reason you get stronger, more effective social institutions where people are more likely to try and make the institutions work for everybody.

[nixpix5]

I can't argue with this - I homeschool my kids in part because I'm not crazy about elementary education here, and it isn't nearly that bad.

 

As a taxpayer though, and voter, I do feel like when I make decisions about supporting or promoting policy, I need to look beyond what might be good for my own family. I don't think I could support an alternate system sucking out public funds like that and leaving the main system under-served. I'd never consider doing it with healthcare, and I can't see a real difference with education.

 

There is just never going to be much motivation to tackle the problem if people who have a little money and ability to advocate can opt out of the effects of their decision.

I hear ya. I feel similarly but I have the "my kids won't be the guinea pig" mentality. Having worked in schools as a counselor has given me a different perspective than most. I love the kids I work with and ache for their back stories but don't actually want my kids in class with them. I know how scary and dangerous some of these kids can be. I know this sounds bad and I will probably get flamed for my honesty. Yet, the most important charge I have been granted is my children. I used to have more optimism than this but unless we can intervene at the levels of the families our intervention with their kids isn't enough. I have watched our area school go down in flames over the past 15 years. It started when we were zoned for apartments and some low income apartments. They went up crazy and now encompass an entire lined street. The school was a high rated school at that point. Now that street isn't safe to wall down at night. The school is failing and most people that can, as I said, have fled. Those that own houses in the area just opt for alternative schooling options. We too are going to flee the area within the next 2 years. Our car is constantly prowled, our mail and packages stolen, the sex offender map looks lit up like a Christmas tree.

 

These are the issues we deal with. It was once a beautiful area with high property value. Not anymore. Even our neighbor who was the principal of the school quit his job, sold his house and moved his family out.

 

So in theory I believe in supporting only those things that improve lives over time. Yet, as I am admitting red faced, I just won't let it be my family. I think many, to include our policy makers, feel similarly about their families.

[Bluegoat]

I hear ya. I feel similarly but I have the "my kids won't be the guinea pig" mentality. Having worked in schools as a counselor has given me a different perspective than most. I love the kids I work with and ache for their back stories but don't actually want my kids in class with them. I know how scary and dangerous some of these kids can be. I know this sounds bad and I will probably get flamed for my honesty. Yet, the most important charge I have been granted is my children. I used to have more optimism than this but unless we can intervene at the levels of the families our intervention with their kids isn't enough. I have watched our area school go down in flames over the past 15 years. It started when we were zoned for apartments and some low income apartments. They went up crazy and now encompass an entire lined street. The school was a high rated school at that point. Now that street isn't safe to wall down at night. The school is failing and most people that can, as I said, have fled. Those that own houses in the area just opt for alternative schooling options. We too are going to flee the area within the next 2 years. Our car is constantly prowled, our mail and packages stolen, the sex offender map looks lit up like a Christmas tree.

 

These are the issues we deal with. It was once a beautiful area with high property value. Not anymore. Even our neighbor who was the principal of the school quit his job, sold his house and moved his family out.

 

So in theory I believe in supporting only those things that improve lives over time. Yet, as I am admitting red faced, I just won't let it be my family. I think many, to include our policy makers, feel similarly about their families.

 

A lot of the time when people describe these kinds of areas and neighbourhoods, it seems to me like these are communities that are failing in a basic way - the fabric of the community, the political and social leadership, the social institutions at every level.

 

The school problems seem more like a symptom of a failing state or society.

[Carol in Cal.]

I doubt I would send them, as I said, I homeschool for lesser reasons.

 

But I am still not going to vote for a system that benefits me by screwing over other people.  That just institutionalizes the problem further and does nothing towards solving it.

 

But I think to a large degree this is why these problems become unsolvable, people "opt out" and build the means to do so into the system, and nothing improves.  How could it?  

 

There's a reason you get stronger, more effective social institutions where people are more likely to try and make the institutions work for everybody.

 

By homeschooling, though, you ARE opting out.  Just like parents who send their kids to private, parochial or charter schools are.

 

By voting for a charter law like the one here in CA, you're enabling some kids from nonaffluent families to have opportunities to be rescued from dismal failures or to get a fresh or more suitable approach to their educations than before.  That's not necessarily opting out, more like opting over, and more like giving improved opportunities to those whose circumstances won't allow homeschooling or private/parochial schooling.

 

 

[nixpix5]

A lot of the time when people describe these kinds of areas and neighbourhoods, it seems to me like these are communities that are failing in a basic way - the fabric of the community, the political and social leadership, the social institutions at every level.

 

The school problems seem more like a symptom of a failing state or society.

You are dead right. Something is amiss. What they are doing right now isn't working. I think a combination of programs meant to lift people out and some level of accountability is in order. Unfortunately, this isn't the program we have now it seems.

 

Our area dumps so much funding into programs for the disadvantaged and it just isn't doing any good here in my specific area at least. It could be the way it is being done, I don't know. For example, we have a house on our street that was bought and provided to a low income family. When they moved in I thought how awesome they had this opportunity. We introduced ourselves, took them baked goods and welcomed them to the street. 5 years later I wish they would go away. They never mow their lawn, have had to call cops for noise, domestic disputes and so forth. Their small kids flip people off when they try to drive into the neighborhood. They are a menace. If you try to speak to them about it nicely they scream and yell. They own the house, nothing we can do. I am sure sometimes these programs work fine, but this family doesn't seem to actually have jobs. There are so many people that stay there, cars parked all over the street. There is a part of me that every time someone tells me that people just need a leg up where I think about my neighbors and my blood boils. I used to not feel that way. I grew up a city girl but now I would do anything to have jobs that would allow us to move out to a small country town and breathe.

 

So if I am feeling this confused, frustrated and tired, I can only imagine many others do too and it does nothing to make any change.

 

This is far off the beaten path of charter schools or choice schools but it is part of the reason people vote for them. They are not thinking about other people's kids, they are thinking of their own. In Washington it is pretty easy to send your child to a private school if you don't make much. That is how we did it with the olders. It is when you become middle class it gets problematic. Not enough money to make those financial choices but too much to qualify for any help. So this ends up making charters look highly appealing.

 

It sounds like California has a decent way of utilizing charters for everyone. Washington seems to use them to funnel wealthier kids out of area schools. As was said before, their lottery doesn't appear to be such.

 

Then we have areas in Washington State like Redmond that have upper middle class neighbors with an HOA and their own neighborhood public school that functions like a private school. When the topic of bussing in kids from other neighborhoods come up, things get quite vocal.

 

I feel defeated and tired just thinking about it, hence homeschooling. So much easier to just insulate and put my fingers in my ears and say "lalala" I know it is the wrong way to think, I just want to provide my kids with an education experience that won't cause life long mental health issues. Sounds dramatic I know. I just know too much from my years in the trenches.