To Charter or Not to Charter..not that simple

In order to understand my perspective on the issue, it's important to understand a few premises for my thoughts.

1. What's best for students should be at the center of education conversations.
2. What's best for adults is usually the driving force for policy debate.
3. All children have the right to a quality education, regardless of race, sex, socioeconomic factors, special needs, etc.
4. High performing schools rely on three things: a) strong leadership, b) sound instructions, and c) common culture of high expectations
5. Privatization makes few things better but NEVER a) education, b) health care, c) police services/military
6. Change needs both internal systemic reform and external revolution.
7. All charters are not created equal.
8. Strong charter law can protect children from being the victims of bad charter schools and the replication of current status quo practices.

I have come to these beliefs over the course of my life experiences—a product of homeschooling by two public school teachers, an undergraduate degree from a private college, a master's in teaching from a liberal, public grad school, a year of working as a para in an alternative school, six years of public school teaching in both rural and urban communities, and years of reading, hearing, and living the debates about education in the United States.

Since I believe that all children deserve the right to learn in a safe environment with access to rigorous courses and high expectations, it is essential to me that schools provide this. However, the reality is that we are more segregated in public schools than ever. More children (particularly the poor, people of color, and urban--I've read a few things too about inequalities in very rural communities) are being tossed to the wayside by adults. Sadly, there are too few schools truly addressing the instructional needs of these students which now encompasses social and emotional factors unheard of fifty years ago. With the current economic crisis, schools are are ill-equipped financially but most importantly school boards, district officials, and in often teachers are culturally incompetent and untrained instructionally to handle the increasing diversity of student needs in their communities. To complicate matters, most districts have an insane amount of rules and regulations established to protect themselves against lawsuits. In reaction, union contracts are written to protect teachers on against an unfair district. This lose-lose approach creates the biggest losers—the students. Both groups of adults are so busy worrying about their own butts, they are reluctant, often outright closed, to new ideas, particularly "non traditional" approaches to meeting student needs. We (public education institutions) are doing the same things we've done for decades when our society, communities, and students' needs have changed (quite drastically in my opinion). You cannot do the same things over and over again with the same bad results and see improvement. It doesn't work. If I eat crap and never work out, I will continue to get fatter and fatter. Why am I shocked when I hop on the scale? I have to change something.

In my experience, adults are the most reluctant to change, especially adults in positions of power or those benefiting from the current structure. I am heavily involved in my local and WEA as a whole. I'm on my exec board and attend events, conferences, meetings, etc.--all with the idea that I want my union to represent my beliefs about education, and more importantly, I want it improve the teaching profession. In the last 3 years of union activism, I almost daily encounter teachers, district employees, and others (all adults) who are threatened by anything new. You ask them to try a new food, a new strategy for teaching content, anything, it doesn't matter. They are reluctant to even engage in possibilities.

I work in a school with who I would say are some of the most dedicated people I've ever worked with. We just received a state award for innovation because we are a STEM school that has a robotics program, our math team teaches to standards, and we collaborate regularly. Most of the teachers in my building are a pedagogically sound, no-excuses mentality bunch dedicated to success of all students. That is until you start to watch classroom instruction. Or talk about how to reach the unmotivated ELL kid who is struggling to survive in an English class. Or ask build an interdisciplinary course with another teacher. Or ask a hard question about their grade book. Or discuss what real innovation might look like.This is when the status quo appears. This is when a tiny vision of learning becomes clear. Folks only want to do what makes them comfortable, what fits in an 8hr work day schedule. Administrators and teachers are only open to creativity when it fits in a neat little package.

The last six years, I've obsessively read up on the subject of public charters. I've worked in a middle class ruralish school, an alternative school, and a high poverty/urban school. For "fun" on my days off I visit other schools to see what they are doing to meet their students' needs and change their communities. I regularly kick it with teachers who teach in the Lincoln Center--a school withing a school who've modeled their program off of high performing charter school strategies. In the last six months, I've had the privilege of attending two different field trips--one to Houston and one to NYC to see an array of public charters in action. I saw KIPP, Yes prep, Green Dot (national org that is unionized--contract at the bottom of the page), Harlem Success Academy, Apollo 20 (public school that was converted, still works within district contract), and several others. After confirming my belief that high performing schools don't have to look the same, it dawned on me that there are three consistent elements that these schools have in common. These three characteristics of high performing schools functions like a three-legged stool. Their success relies on 1)Leadership, 2) Instruction 3) Culture

The leadership at these schools is amazing. It is shared--teachers and administrators (who often are called team leaders or some other name that changes the power structure of the relationship) and parents are teams. They actually work together. They fight for the same causes, together. They function under a social contract that all parties sign--usually to the effects of "we will work our hardest to ensure your child excels, blah blah blah". It's not just lip service, they do it. Together. This leadership model is the foundation for their philosophy about instruction. They utilize high-yield strategies. They differentiate for each kid. They expect all kids to achieve. They help all kids achieve. Together. Teachers watch other teachers. They have time to plan interdisciplinary instruction. They make time to address the social and emotional needs of their students. Building leaders are in the rooms of their teachers daily. When a teacher is off track, they call them out--in a straightforward, yet loving way. Why? Because it's about the kids. Not them. Not their comfort level. Not a contract that says everything must be written down and only certain things can be said to a teacher. This brings me to the last leg of this stool--culture. The culture of these schools is insane. There isn't a "gotta" culture amongst the leadership (teachers and principals). The buildings (in some cases schools are in one hallway or trailers!) radiate with positive messages about student achievement. Each policy, disciplinary practice, lunch schedule, extended day model, extended year model, and all the other boring stuff in a school that often gets blown off, is intentional. Every adult in that school has agreed to support that culture. My building is a classic example of lip service and limited action. I'm stressed out, over worked, and fighting for change within a system that pretends to give a shit. There are caring hard working adults just like me in my building but we are all spinning our plates alone. We meet as a team and try to problem solve but at the end of the day, few of us are carrying the load for the entire team. We are balancing a child's future on a one-legged stool. This is unsustainable and prevents true progress.

So back to the essential question I hear often--why can't this be done in a traditional public school? It can. But it takes all three of those elements in full force to make it happen. It takes adults who buy and promote a common culture. It takes parents, teachers, and building leaders to work as a team. It takes hard work, a desire to improve, a determination to grow, a willingness to push buttons, and uncomfortable conversations about measurements of learning.

This brings me to premise #6, how change works. Generally, people who want to improve a system work for reform from within. You organize, team with others, try to get involved in all kinds of committees/power structures, etc. But what happens? You beat your head against the same damn walls that aren't going anywhere. So the next option is to go outside the system and try to bring actual revolution. Break the Egypt analogy or anarchist comparison or whatever. What happens there? Sometimes true change happens, sometimes it doesn't, sometimes it goes back to the way it was.

In all cases, to bring true reform or revolution there must be a catalyst to start this change. Revolutions begin as a festering wound, an unsatisfying reform; the failed promises of leaders who pacify the masses with trite freedoms—the bandaids for this wound. I see high performing charters as a catalyst. I view charters as approaching change internally and externally. It's working "in the system" in terms of educating students, hiring quality teachers, using external measures (state tests, etc) to determine success. It also works "outside the system" by removing some of the bullshit of the district, parents, and teachers who are in it for their summer vacations. It forces other people to go stop and go hey what are they doing over there? Can we do that here? It allows teachers who actually want to make a difference make a significant difference!

When it comes to a charter law in WA state, here's what I won't support.

1. More segregation of marginalized populations.
2. Middle class/upper class kids getting more resources and fancy ass schools where they can be artsy (boutique schools as Nate calls them)
3. The working class/poor, etc being left with the dregs in public schools--institutionally and financially.
4. Privatization of education
5. No accountability to state/federal education mandates (think for second language learners, special education, etc)
6. No option for unionization if staff wants it
7. Gate-keeping applications (I hate the idea of a lottery but it seems more equitable)
8. More mediocre schools that are failing to meet the emotional, social, and mental needs of children and youth

And probably a couple other things I'm forgetting. I've seen the charter bill that is being proposed. It takes care of the above concerns I have. Is it perfect? Is there no way for douche bags to manipulate it? Nothing is perfect. There are always holes that someone will find but does that mean we shouldn't examine it with a critical eye or accept it with reservations? Not to me.

In case you are interested in another perspective. Here is a veteran teacher who agreed to travel to NYC to entertain the idea of innovative ways of doing things in education. Check back in his blog history--he was extremely against charters a few years ago and I think he offers some unique experience/perspective.

Let's be real--some of the research comes from think tanks is questionably biased and funded by for-profit entities. However, their points are thought provoking and much of their research actual research. Robin Lake looks at the issue from a variety of angles. Additionally, this report focuses on the issue at the federal level.

If you've made it this far, congrats and thanks for reading. This is a hot button issue and I'm not out there to change minds. I'm more interested in open dialogue and hashing through issues than making it a for/against debate. Bottom line, I'm tired of adults making excuses at the expense of kids.

Overwhelming Demands

I've always been a teacher.

From bossing my sister around, to sitting on the front steps explaining the story of Moses and the red sea out of my picture Bible to our neighbor—teaching is in my blood.

I leave school to go home and brainstorm ways to make school more engaging for Angel who was falling asleep 4^th period or Louis who won't stop rapping lyrics to songs he shouldn't know. I read articles on the latest strategies to make my tests more fairly show how much Jessica truly knows despite the language barrier. I contemplate a better way to prepare you for your future. I even use “personal” days to go visit other teachers and see what they are doing to make myself better for you.

Yes, I can teach you about World Wars in terms you can relate to. I can show you how to draw a conclusion or give you key words to look for to make an inference. I can give you strategies to craft an argument, making a claim with supporting details. I can even help you connect what we just read to the your life today.

What? You need me to inspire you to achieve? To motivate you to do better? To give you feedback so you can change and grow? To grade you based on actual learning not on behavior? I got you.

Excuse me? So you need me to provide a safe environment, call your family when you are struggling, ask a question in a different way because you really do know the answer? I can do that.

Say that again? You need me to be your college and career counselor to assist you in choosing the best college? You need me to have peanut butter and jelly sandwiches stashed in my frig because you didn't eat today...again? You need me to be your mom, to guide you like a father, mentor you like an aunty, to love you like a grandma, to lecture like your pastor, grill you like a drill sergeant and discipline you like my own? I will do that.

I can try my best to teach a child to be the best thinker and articulate speaker AND raise them in the ways they should go, but can I do them all well? Alone?

“ It takes a village to raise a child” But where is this village? My village is busy working 3 jobs because we are in a recession. My village is deployed fighting wars in foreign lands. My village is suffering from PTSD—not just post traumatic stress disorder but prolonged traumatic stress disorder. My village is spinning wheels, trying to take care of their 90-150 students. My village has leadership that is too worried about district meetings they don't get into classrooms to evaluate effective instruction. My village leaders complain there isn't a way to remove the lemons of the town but don't fight hard enough for practices, policies, and funding to make a difference in this village. My village is busy defending themselves against outsiders who don't understand the calling that is teaching. My village needs money. My village needs support. My village needs a doctor, a social worker, a coach, a college counselor, and a therapist.

My village needs a revolution.

Back for good...or at least until I get bored

Clearly, I've been too busy crafting my skills as a teacher for the last six years to blog.

I made it past the 3 year teacher quitting stage. I've moved from a suburban to an urban school district. I'm now actively involved in my education association, a leader in my building, and an eduction activist through organizations like League of Education Voters and Teachers United.

I'm back now and motivated as ever. You are welcome to join in the discussion on education issues in Washington state by commenting on posts and sharing anything you read that you enjoy.

Thanks for joining me on my journey!