Kansas City should encourage charter schools
 By Mark Forsythe The Kansas City PostEducation. It was the primary topic during this last council campaign. Every forum, every questionnaire had a question about education. The question would always be prefaced with "we know city government has no control over public education but..." It was always the "but." But please fix it anyway. The voters have long since given up on the Kansas City School District Board. The anger and frustration shown at some of the candidate forums made that quite evident. Creating commissions or advisory boards seemed to be the answer that pacified people. This makes no sense to me. Just more do-nothing political pandering from politicians desperate for a vote. We already have a commission. It's called the Kansas City School District Board! We don't need a board to advise a board, reporting back to a councilperson, reporting back to the full council. In the end a giant report will be produced. A reporter or two might read the executive summary, and then everybody will break their arms patting themselves on the back. Of course the problems with our public education system will remain. But we can say we tried. Charter schools work. This was not a popular position on the campaign trail. The fact of the matter is they work because they are not encumbered by a blanket district policy that does not address the specific needs of each individual school. Do some charter schools fail? Absolutely. Which is why the concept works. If a charter school is not meeting the expectations of its customers (the parents and students) it closes. Students go elsewhere. What happens if a KCSD school fails to meet expectations? Nothing. It continues to operate. The new mayor has a chance to provide some radical changes to our educational system. We already know that the KCSD is a sacred cow and having the City step in and assume control would be a monumental task. Monumental in both logistics and legality. What we can do as a city government is elevate the profile of charter schools. Give them a seat at the table, so to speak. The mayor should create an education cabinet. Call it a committee, a commission, call it whatever you want. Rather than a do-nothing advisory group, this organization would serve to strengthen the charter schools, rather than isolate them as pariahs and "detriments to our public education system." Each charter school that chooses to participate would have one board member as a representative. A chance to have the undivided attention of the mayor. Best practices could be exchanged. What is working, what isn't? How can the City help? By bringing charter school leaders together and giving them the full attention of the mayor, the City would in a sense be creating its own public school district. Voluntary. Nimble. Not mired in the age old traditions of silos and empire building. Charter schools have chosen to control their own destiny. Rather than try and work with a school system that is collapsing under its own bureaucracy, they have broken free so they can react quickly to changing demographics and educational needs. If city government is serious about helping our educational system, it should choose the path of least resistance. Welcome the charter schools. Foster their growth. Make a difference, one school at a time. |
posted by Mark at 8:31 AM
Comments on "Kansas City should encourage charter schools"
-
Brent said ... (9:52 AM) :
-
patrick said ... (1:59 PM) :
-
joeinkc said ... (10:06 PM) :
-
adrianne said ... (9:27 PM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (10:44 PM) :
post a commentIn the long term, this could potentially help. As more charter schools open, and become available and affordable, more financially viable families would stay in KCMO. By them staying in KCMO, you'd have improved stability in communities, and over the long term, improve your tax base. That's a good start.
The problem is that charter schools are still only an option for the people who can afford them -- which doesn't work for the majority of the people in our urban core (where the schools are a problem). It will take a generation or more for the charter schools, and the increased tax base, to actually start trickling in to help the urban neighborhood schools -- and yet another generation of kids East of Troost will be left behind.
The Charter Schools are a fine part of a solution...but we cannot afford to as a society leave another generation of these kids behind.
Brent,
A small correction: Charter schools are publicly funded and offer free tuition just like public schools.
But I agree with your larger point What good charter schools don't have is the ability to accomodate every child in the school district. And I'm not sure the unbridled growth of charter schools is the solution. Look what happened with the Derrick Thomas Academy run by Edison Schools. The kids there were poorly served by by the school district and Edison.
A charter school operates very similiar to a magnet school. Magnet schools in the KCMO District (Lincoln Prep, Border Star, Holliday, etc..) are open to anyone in the district. The charter schools don't charge, since they are public schools, they are just not under district control.
Unlike bad public schools, bad charter schools shut down. Southwest Charter shut down (I have no idea if it was good or bad). In contrast the district has been trying to close underused schools for years with little success.
I guess it would be crazy for the KCMSD to have a conversation with the more successful charter schools and exchange best practices. There are a few gems in the KCMSD, but their success has not been replicated across the board, nor is that necessarily encouraged.
It is maddening to contribute taxes to a consistently underperforming district. Why aren't more Kansas Citians outraged? You can believe this poor performance wouldn't fly in the suburbs! If we don't get it together and fix our district, someone else will (see: St. Louis Public schools).
I haven't live in KC for ten years now, and gee, KCMO public school district IS STILL FAILING KIDS. Amazing!
The best thing for that district to do would be to be broken down into four different school districts, all of which should offer at least a couple of magnet and charter schools.
I teach in public high school here in Colorado, and even though I earn less here than I would in KC, I don't have to put up with the same kind of scheisse. I worked as a substitute in several KC districts before moving out here and wow, do you guys have a lot of catching up to do! KC district would call me at 7:05 and expect me to be at 18th and Van Brunt at 7:30 (I lived in Waldo at the time). Center district had lost its accreditation at that time and had become a total zoo. Grandview distirct was at least better organized and had administrators who appeared to follow up with the discipline. I can't even imagine what these same districts are like now.
When I did live there, I do remember however, that a lot of people on the school board in the KCMO PSD seemed to be utterly igorant of anything even related to how to educate children.
Well, is it any wonder with your school districts in such a state that people move out to places like Lee's Summit or Parkville? A city with so much potential that lets it slip like grains of sand through one's fingers.