I went to see “The Cartel” at The Peoria Theater over the weekend (it’s playing through Sept. 16). From a technical standpoint, I was immediately disappointed that it was a DVD played over an LCD projector. When I go to the theater, I expect to see an actual film. I recognize that many films today use digital cinematography, but 4K or even 2K digital film resolution is a far cry from a standard-def TV signal output to an LCD projector.
But leaving aside that pet peeve and getting into the actual content, “The Cartel” breaks no new ground. You’ll find the usual complaints against public education in this country — and the usual solutions. Some critiques are better than others. Teachers unions and tenure are criticized for protecting bad teachers and not adequately rewarding good teachers (good critique). Top-heavy administration and patronage hiring are blamed for keeping money away from the classroom (good critique). One of the interviewees claims there’s an inverse correlation between the quality of the school district and the number of luxury cars parked in the administration lot (ridiculous critique).
The film focused almost exclusively on New Jersey public schools, but the filmmaker stated emphatically this wasn’t a New Jersey documentary, but rather a documentary on the entire American public school system. He apparently feels the problems in New Jersey are a perfect example of what’s wrong everywhere. By and large, that’s probably true, although earlier in the movie he had some nice things to say about Maryland public schools, so evidently not all the problems addressed in the film are universal.
As for solutions, there seemed to be an implication that teachers unions have to be busted. But the most overt solution presented was school vouchers. A good part of the film was spent presenting and defending the use of vouchers. He deals head-on with the usual criticisms of voucher systems, and steadfastly defends the redeeming power of free-market forces (if kids get vouchers, the free market will create lots of high-quality private schools, the public school system will improve because they’ll want to compete with the private schools, etc.).
From a film-making standpoint, I thought the music and graphics were good, as was the editing. The movie is broken up into chapters, and each chapter forms a cohesive unit that is well-put-together and keeps your interest. However, the chapters don’t feel like they tell a story when put together. They feel more like discrete issues presented in no particular order. In other words, there’s not a sense of flow to the film. While most of the film was well-argued (whether you agreed with the arguments or not), some parts of the film felt a little too heavy-handed and propaganda-ish.
All in all, I would recommend seeing this documentary. I think it would make a good jumping-off point for discussion on the issues surrounding public education.икони
Vouchers are not about free markets, it is about freedom to choose. People should have the right to choose what school they send their children to.
Once people have the right to choose, the system must respond to them, not the other way around.
The only parents with the right to choose with the voucher system are those who have the money to pay the “extra” tuition to get into the really “choice” schools. Those without the money will be taking whatever is left over and they will be left behind. Of course, that result is the opposite of what NCLB overtly promised, but the result is exactly what NCLB was covertly designed to accomplish. I wondered how soon the voucher system argument would resurface with vengeance. Well, it is.
I don’t think the voucher system would improve public education at all — in fact, the vouchers would take money away from public schools (I’m assuming that’s where the funding for the vouchers would come from). That’d put public schools behind the 8-ball twice: declining enrollment from parents pulling their kids for private schools, and declining revenues from funding going towards vouchers.
The “free-market forces” work in theory, but only when you aren’t hamstringing the public schools in the process. I don’t see any way that allowing the more affluent residents of a community pull their kids out of the public school system at the expense of public school funding will make the public schools any better.
Sharon, there should be no extra tuition… the voucher is what the school gets… PERIOD. The amount of money a school gets would be based on the number of children that attend… the way it supposed to be.
You think there is any school is this country that couldn’t survive on $12,000 per student?
I don’t see how a voucher system forces public schools compete. It seems to me the real issues with public schools is the amount of disruptive kids and the lack of options public schools have available. Private schools can simple kick the kids out for good. Public schools can’t do that. So every year they spend valuable instructional time trying to discipline the same problem kids. Where as with private schools and schools with more parental involvement this isn’t as much of an issue. A voucher system will just stack the better students into certain schools. I don’t see how a school can compete against that.
Charlie, that won’t work–the private schools will still want the power to insure they get the top students, so they will charge more than they receive from vouchers. Everyone responding so far gets it–but I fear that the political powers-that-be don’t care about our opinions.
Who cares about private schools? If the public schools want to compete they better get started. If someone wants to go to a private school that is their business. The reason they want to go now is to get away from poor people… so if they, like Hillsdale College (Rush’s favorite)want to discriminate, they lose their voucher reimbursement.
If public schools are as good as private schools there is no problem is there? If they aren’t, then let’s get rid of them altogether.
Charlie, now who’s being idealistic–who is going to take away that voucher?
Because private schools are not required by law to provide special education services, often the only students left behind in a ‘voucher district’ are students with special needs and the poor. Vouchers don’t cover nearly the entire cost of tuition at a private school. The goal has long been to privatize education…more people will make more money with public education privatized.
charlie, what you are saying is essentially make all schools public and force all schools to only charge the voucher amount. If that is the case, then I am all for this system. However, Sharon said what I think will happen. The “good” schools will justify charging more than the voucher amount and “poor people” will still not be able to go there.
According to the Interactive Illinois Report Card (IIRC) for District 150, “instructional expenditure per pupil (2009-2008)” is $6,518, and “Operational expenditure per pupil (2009-2008)” is $11,398. Add them together, and the per pupil cost of public education at District 150 is $17,916 per child, per year.
For comparison, the annual tuition to Peoria Christian School is $5,256 per year for high school students (lower for earlier grades). Freshman tuition to the University of Illinois is $13,658 – $18,386.
Also according to the IIRC, average 1st grade class size in District 150 is 15.3 students. So, if spending per pupil is $17,916 and the average class size (1st grade) is 15.3, that means one classroom gets $274,114.80 in tax money.
Finally, according to the IIRC, the average teacher salary in District 150 is $55,725 per year. So, for that 1st-grade classroom, if you take $274,114.80 and subtract the teacher’s salary, that leaves $218,389.80.
Question: Where is all that money going? Some of it is going to teacher benefits and pensions. But not all of it. Not by a long shot. Where is it going? Why do teachers have to buy their own classroom supplies? Why do parents have to do fundraisers to buy books for the libraries or provide computers for the classrooms and other things?
Something is wrong, and it’s not that schools aren’t getting enough money.
Where is all the money going?
Let me quote Willian Hawley Smith, The Evolution of Dodd, 1884
“The system has largely lost sight of the grandest thing in all the
world, namely, the individual soul. It addresses itself to humanity
collectively, as a herd. In this it makes a fatal mistake, one that
must be corrected, and that speedily.
And for you, teachers, you who have the destinies of these schools in
your hands, keep your eyes and ears open, and your souls alive to the
possibilities of your profession. Let no machine nor method crush out
your own individuality, and suffer no power to induce, or to force you
to make a business of turning a crank that runs a mill whose office it
is to grind humanity to one common form, each individual like every
other, interchangeable like the parts of a government musket!
Understand, first, last, and all the time, that characters cannot be
manufactured like pins, by the million, and all alike; neither can
salvation be handled in job lots. It is also true that wholesaling
education can never be made a success.
Because, personal character is all there is in this world that amounts
to anything in the final resolution of things. It is not money, nor
governments, nor machines, that are of value in the last analysis. It
is character! It is individuality! It is men!
To secure these things this old world turns over once in twenty-four
hours, and swings around the sun in yearly revolution. For these,
tides ebb and flow, the land brings forth, and the clouds float in the
sky. To these all forces are but servants. For these Christ died.
And like begets like, in the public schools as elsewhere. It is
character in the teacher that begets character in the pupil. The
machine makes after its own kind also, and both it and its products can
be measured with a line.
The soul cannot be measured with a line.
So the ultimatum is personality, individuality, and character, in every
teacher and pupil in the public schools, and freedom of each to develop
in his own way, and not after a pattern made and prepared by a pattern
maker.
If the public school live long, its friends must take these items into
account and act on them. It is its only salvation.”
Hillsdale receives no federal finds (vouchers) because they discriminate based on race and other criteria.
I am saying what CONSUMER would pay extra for something that is just as good as public schools and no better? What would be the motivation to go to the more expensive school? Why do people go to Peoria Christian and Notre Dame now? Religious education??? Don’t make me laugh. They go to keep their kids away from “them”. That would make those schools ineligible for the vouchers.
The G.I. Bill when I returned from Vietnam was a huge success. That was a voucher system. The public colleges seemed to benefit more than the private colleges because they were less expensive. If a school isn’t getting the job done-private or public-it should close.
Why do teachers have to buy their own classroom supplies? Why do parents have to do fundraisers to buy books for the libraries or provide computers for the classrooms and other things?
C.J. just happened to hit on the very subject that I will speak about on Monday night. I believe all that money goes to buy many, many programs that technology has spawned (not to mention Edison and Johns Hopkins)–many of which aid administrators and make their jobs easier and makes it possible to come up with all manner of statistics. I don’t believe that most of this technology is of any or much help to the classroom teacher.
Another probably unpopular opinion might be that it pays for a good many staff members (not in the classroom) who are not busy all day.
C.J., I guarantee you that the average 1st grade class is not 15—I think a FOIA in October or so will give you a better idea of the actual size.
C.J., I hope that we all can find a way to get at the root of your question because I don’t believe for a minute that teachers and benefits are eating up all that money.
I am a bit of a cynic, too, so I agree with Charlie about the motivation to go to a more “expensive” school. Also, I believe the private schools now have to keep tuition as low as possible to make them affordable for the families from which they draw. However, when voucher money is, also, available just watch the tuition go up. I think much the same thing occurred when Caterpillar started offering dental benefits–all the dentists raised their prices to make the cost prohibitive for all those without dental insurance–which did include teachers, by the way.
Charlie sez: “They go to keep their kids away from “them”. ”
I say: EXACTLY!!! In the 60s when I went to Bergan, the school was so ill equipped and short on everything. We barely had enough books and they were old. So, why did parents send their kids there? Charlie knows and so do the rest of you but most won’t admit it.
CJ – don’t add instructional costs and operational costs together. Instructional costs are already included in the operational costs.
nevermind
Jon, what comes out of the education fund–instructional and operational??
Emtronics, count me in on one who, also, knows. The date of the origins of Richwoods, Peoria Christian, etc., is no accident–I was there; I remember hearing the discussions (and the law) that spawned the origin of both.
From the “Definition of terms used in the 2008/2009 school report cards” found here:
http://www.isbe.state.il.us/research/htmls/report_card.htm
“Instructional expenditure per pupil is instructional expenditures divided by the nine-month average daily attendance. “Instruction” includes activities dealing with the teaching of pupils or the interaction between teachers and pupils. Teaching may be provided for pupils in a school classroom or in another location, such as a home or hospital and may include other learning activities. It may also be provided through some other approved form of communication, such as television, radio, telephone, or correspondence. Included here are the activities of aides or assistants of any type (clerks, graders, teaching machines, etc.), who assist in the instruction process. (Capital Outlay expenditures, which are reported separately, are excluded.)”
“Operating expenditure per pupil is the gross operating cost of a school district (except summer school, adult education, bond principal retired, and capital expenditures) divided by the nine-month average daily attendance for the regular school term.”
I wonder how far the district extends the definition of “instructional” I think it is what I said–all manner of programs like 21 Keys, Frontline, Skyward, all the programs and equipment used to create the statistics for the District Dashboard, on and on–and many of these do not directly affect or enhance the interaction of teachers with students.
Without them, District 150 did a great job of teaching young people 50+ years ago. I am sure it’s just a coincidence (no real cause and effect relationship) but it’s curious that educational results started going down hill with the advent of much of the technology.
For instance, how much money do you think District 150 actually contributed to my own classroom and teaching efforts over my 43 years of teaching. My guess: my salary, a desk, student desks (with few replacements), teachers’ manual for whatever textbooks were used, chalk, erasers, maybe 3 or 4 pencil sharpeners, some paper clips, some staples, a couple of staplers, copy paper that was always in short supply, 3 partial sets of encyclopedias that were very old, maybe 10 dictionaries, a screen for movies, toward the end one computer and one printer. That’s about it. Now science classes, etc., would have a more extensive list. But I would say the actual cost of my own classroom was not that great.
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada public schools have long run a choice style public education system in which individual schools make the majority of budgetary/spending decisions. As such, highly differentiated schools have emerged, designed to meet the specific needs of their students.
The system is funded at the school level based on the specific needs of the students who actually attend a particular school. Rather than applying a flat rate per student, for budgetary allocation purposes, individual students are given one of 8 classifications that currently range from $4,634 to $23,807 for students with severe physical or medical disabilities, such as blindness and/or severe pervasive developmental disorders. (There appears to now be a rate of $1,510 for students who are home-schooled).
http://www.epsb.ca/budget/rates.shtml
In 2006, about 50% of the students chose to go to a school outside of their “neighborhood” school. The Edmonton teacher’s union is also a strong supporter of the model. 90% of the spending is decided at the school level, rather than at a central administration. Data driven accountability (beyond mere standardized tests) is also a major driver of the system.
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=7923
C.J. – Interesting post. I support the idea of school choice within the public school realm. I am less than excited about the possibility of taking a publicly paid voucher and going private. Most private schools are simply not equipped to provide special services to those students that require them and the curriculum at such schools does not allow for academic or behavior outliers. So where does that leave so many of the students that comprise urban schools, like District 150? Public education will still be left with the issue of how to educate students with learning challenges, as most will not be able to avail themselves of the voucher system should it come to pass.
Isn’t a large portion of the tax money from our property taxes going to pay attorneys’ fees and settlements (i.e. litigation instead of education)?
Charlie says: “Why do people go to Peoria Christian and Notre Dame now? Religious education??? Don’t make me laugh. They go to keep their kids away from ‘them’.”
Sharon says: “I agree with Charlie about the motivation to go to a more ‘expensive’ school.”
Emtronics says: “why did parents send their kids there [Bergan]? Charlie knows and so do the rest of you but most won’t admit it.”
Conclusion: I guess it’s okay to be bigoted as long as you’re bigoted against the “right” people — in this case, parents who send their kids to private/religious schools.
Jon — Okay. Just recalculate based on operational costs alone. It’s not much better.
C.J., please don’t ask me to accept some other view of the history that I witnessed up close and personal. However, I may want to clarify my comments a bit. I don’t see how anyone can deny that the origin of some Peoria private and religious schools (and Richwoods) is rooted in the backlash to Brown vs. Brown. Catholic schools were already well-established, so their origin preceded integration. However, the Catholic primary schools were neighborhood based, so they were as integrated as were the neighborhoods until high school.
The desire to establish Peoria Christian probably gained some impetus after Madeline O’Hare (sp. and name?) took religious education and prayer out of the public schools (that occurred during or shortly after my high school years–I graduated in 1955). I was around for those discussions and those with racial overtones (sometimes very loud tones)–I don’t think you’re old enough to have heard them, but I did.
In those years I went to a church where almost everyone,including me, had a Scofield Bible that stated that black people were under a Biblical curse (curse of Ham, if I recall correctly), and in my youth I probably believed it, too. (I know that I just about jumped out of my skin when, many years later, one of my black students told me that he had been taught that black people had been cursed into slavery by God).
Integration of the races in school or any place else was not an accepted concept. And that church and/or its members were exceedingly instrumental in the establishment of Peoria Christian. I have often wondered how some very good people could have some of these views and motivations without ever questioning whether or not God was really blessing their efforts. I have struggled with that all my life and still do.
However, that was then and this is now. I do not believe that parents who send their children to Peoria Christian today are bigots. The extreme racial views of which I have spoken are part of another generation–and are certainly worse when held up to the light of today. There are vestiges of those views left (who am I kidding; there are sometimes much more than vestiges)–but it grieves me greatly when I hear them coming from those who call themselves Christian.
Personally, I believe that the public schools would have been so much better off if everyone had stayed put–but that’s just what I wish would have happened. I have always, then and now, had friends who have sent their children to Peoria Christian–I do not label them as bigots at all. I did jump on Charlie and Emtronic’s bandwagon a bit hastily without some qualifications. Do I believe that some, maybe many, people (probably more past than present) choose religious and private schools to avoid black children? Yes, I probably do believe that. However, I believe there are just as many or more parents who send their children to these schools for the best of reasons–the welfare of their children and, in the case of religious schools, because they want that influence in their children’s lives. Also, I have shed many of my previous attitudes because I know that in some cases District 150 is not doing its best to provide a safe, learning environment for all students.
C.J., you can call me a bigot I readily admit I have a difficult time tolerating racial bigotry–it just upsets me. I struggle with it all the time. Right now I grit my teeth every time my elderly aunt from North Carolina sends me all those internet communications that are filled with racial bigotry–just opened one when you posted this topic, so I was probably not in the best of moods. I hate it that all of that is still “out there” and still so close to me.
Yes, tuition at Peoria Christian is $5,256. However, that’s not the cost to educate the students. Here’s some data for Peoria Notre Dame, taken from their website:
http://www.peorianotredame.com/node/80
The cost to educate one student for the 2010-2011 school year is estimated to be $7,608. Total income breakdown is as shown:
Tuition and Fees . . . 66.9%
Parish Subsidy . . . 11.8%
Third Source, PND Foundation and Fundraisers . . . 10.5%
All other income . . . 10.8%
Applying to Peoria Christian the same tuition/cost to education ratio of 2/3 yields a similar $7,800 cost to educate. I’m sure that’s not exactly correct, but it is in the ballpark, so we’ll just use the Notre Dame figures that are provided. So, now instead of comparing $5,256 to $17,916, we’re comparing $7,608 to $11,398. That’s still a pretty big difference – what do you think are some of the reasons for that? Here’s a couple of what I think are the bigger ones:
1. Special needs – autism, blindness, severe emotional issues, etc. Very high costs – most all fall to the public schools as private schools aren’t equipped to address their needs.
2. Other state and federal requirements either not provided by private schools or not at the same levels – busing, free and reduced lunch, Title IX sports programs, not to mention the extra regulation and scrutiny for a public program.
3. Plain ole’ bureaucracy in a system that can’t and hasn’t had to control itself.
Yes, public schools don’t operate as efficiently as many private schools. The bigger problem, it seems, is that the higher costs (U.S. is #2 or #3 in spending per pupil) aren’t yielding better results (U.S. is 15th, 21st and 25th in reading, math and science compared to the 30 OECD countries).
P.S. – 95% of the students at Peoria Notre Dame are Catholic, but hey, there must be some other reason they all go there 🙂
Nice post Jon. Referencing your example of ND. It is difficult for me to discern whether they are offering a better education than Richwoods, or simply one free of interference.
Sharon, I absolutely believe you are correct that the impetus for Richwoods and the rise in popularity of private school education was once rooted in bigotry. I think (hope) much of that is behind us now. I think the greater motivating factor for the exodus from 150 over the last decade is the desire to escape from schools filled with poverty-level students and all the issues that brings to the classroom.
Frustrated said this:
“the desire to escape from schools filled with poverty-level students and all the issues that brings to the classroom.”
but it still equals this:
“They go to keep their kids away from “them”.
Most people who can afford a choice for their children want to get them away from the poverty-level students and the problems that brings to the classroom. Some parents simply feel that a school with a religious background is a better education. Some parents simply want their children away from “Them”.
Isn’t that what vouchers are all about? To level the “playing field” so the average maybe single parent who works but just couldn’t afford that private religious school could?
To bad public schools aren’t as good. Wait, they are, just some more than others. District 150 did an excellent job with my kids. What schools do your kids go to CJ? Anyway you look at it CJ, people choose these schools because they don’t want their children in our public schools, not because the education is less quality, but because of the element involved. Since I notice this, does that make me a bigot?
You are correct Emerge, it is just a different kind of “them.”
Emtronics – for some that have all the right stuff (except $$) it may improve their educational opportunies but, in the aggregate a voucher system will still leave those currently on the very bottom on the same rung of the ladder.
Emtronics says, “Anyway you look at it CJ, people choose these schools because they don’t want their children in our public schools, not because the education is less quality, but because of the element involved.”
How do you know that? Are you clairvoyant? Have you personally interviewed all private school parents? Or are you making assumptions and stereotyping?
Is it possible that parents might look at the test scores on things like the Interactive Illinois Report Card and conclude that the education at D150 isn’t as good as private schools or other surrounding school districts? Is it possible that parents might want their children to have an education that includes religious instruction? Is it possible that parents might like the curriculum at a private school better (e.g., they want a curriculum that includes phonics, foreign language, a stronger emphasis on fine arts, etc.)? These reasons have nothing at all to do with the students, but with the quality and type of education the parents are seeking for their children.
Even in those cases where parents do want to get away from a certain “element,” isn’t it possible that the “element” they want to escape is one of bullying or physical abuse? Not too long ago a family left Glen Oak School because of bullying that wasn’t adequately addressed by the district. Is it wrong for parents to seek the physical welfare of their children?
C.J., of course, I have to agree with your last statement because I’ve been harping about the discipline problems in District 150 for a long time. I understand the new kind of “them” argument–I just have a feeling that the new “them” still conjures up images of black children. Also, I can add that many more affluent black families are choosing private schools, etc., for the very same reasons that cause white families to leave 150. Of course, many families of both races (or more) are still sending their children to 150 schools, where they are having extremely good educational and social experiences. However, District 150 needs to change its philosophy that allows its young people to behave in unacceptable ways.
All that said, C.J., I don’t think you can brush away the bigotry of a considerable number of people by offering them excuses that just aren’t their real reasons for fleeing from District 150. When you ask Emtronics if he is clairvoyant, etc., to know that, I have to believe that you, just as I do, hear the racial views that make you cringe. Frustrated, I appreciate your take on the subject. I wish I could believe that bigotry is behind us, but what I read on blogs, especially from those who respond to PJS articles, I would say that we still have some huge racial divides. Personally, I believe racial bigotry is a sin (rooted in slavery) that still plagues our nation and that it is not pleasing to the God whom many of us serve and to many who have other good reasons for believing bigotry is wrong. I will go even farther, I believe that it is the sin that could easily bring about the weakening of this country. I am sure that I am opening this argument to the whole reverse racism arguments that we often use to make us feel better. Racism is wrong, but when I see that white racism has ended, then maybe I will use the rest of my short life to work on black racism. 🙂
LMAO, CJ, I’ll bet you very few of those parents who can easily afford to send their kids to private schools instead of District 150 looked at the schools report card. Yes the element you mention, is bullying and physical abuse and gangs and guns and drugs and safety and on and on.
Nope, with the spewing of negativity on District 150 around here, nobody wants their kid there. I, on the other hand, see no problem with the education at 150. Good teachers and the education is there if one wants it.
I do know a few “parents” who simply won’t send their kids to 150 because of the “element” they believe is there. Hell, they never heard of let alone seen a school report card. (Not saying no one has for God’s sake) but CJ you are too damn cerebral to think on the lower level I guess.
Do you analyze your breakfast in the morning?
I am sorry, but I am with Sharon on this one. I know that ND has raised its game in the last few years, but in the past, the academics it offered were in no way on the level of Richwoods – i.e. very few AP classes offered and an overall curriculum not near as demanding as the IB Program. And though, C.J., I would agree some truly do select parochial schools for the other spiritual training offered, just as many select it for the exclusion it provides. And frankly, I understand parents motivation in this regard. I just wish the District would get a clue and begin offering more choice programs to better meet the educational desires of the many fleeing the public education system.
I am hearing that some students are fleeing the charter school because they found that they wanted more than just math and science–they want the arts and the other extras offered by 150 schools.
What are “the arts and the other extras offered by 150 schools” that aren’t offered at Qwest? How about “Art” itself? Do all the D150 middle schools (since that’s all Quest is at this point) such as Coolidge, Von Steuben, Lindberg, for example, offer Art, as Qwest does? You do realize the Quest charter school offers “more than just math and science”?
Maybe you’re referring to music and chorus, or drama? Nope – Quest doesn’t have that for the middle school.
Hey, if I wanted music, chorus, drama and visual arts – and not more math and science – I’d probably want to go to Roosevelt Magnet. And if I wanted band or chorus (but no Art or Drama), well then Von Steuben would probably be a good choice. And if I wanted more math and science, as well as computer technology AND Art, then I guess I’d go with Qwest.
See, not everyone wants the same thing. And it’s economically unfeasible for every school to offer everything. It’s why specialization and choice works.
Jon, Jon, I was just repeating what I heard. The truth is the kids left the charter school, so go argue with them and their parents. Obviously, some of the kids didn’t like what they saw when they got there. Quite honestly, I haven’t delved into its curriculum yet. However, I am truly curious as to your involvement with District 150. No matter what question is asked, you have all these answers and statistics. It certainly seems that you spend many hours a day gathering data. I am amazed.
May some of leaving Quest because the study of math and science involved a lot of effort.
As usual, Sharon, you missed the point entirely. I have no desire to argue with kids or parents who left the charter school. I respect not only that it is their choice, but also that the District has provided the ability to choose.
What I don’t respect are baseless statements (or recitations of baseless statements) seemingly meant to criticize and harm. Rather than post bad information (about the curriculum) wouldn’t the honorable thing be to actually learn about the curriculum first?
Jon, in answer to your question, I certainly hope the school, at least, offers English. 🙂 as you know, I haven’t been a fan of the charter school, so I don’t feel obligated to defend it. I will allow you to do that though. I am assuming that the lack of sports, etc., also, has something to do with why students left. Frustrated, I don’t know if rigor has anything to do with it–interesting speculation though. Many well-connected people in Peoria have invested in this school, so I am sure they will do everything in their power to keep it afloat. I am curious to know what happens to the per pupil money turned over to the charter school if the enrollment goes down during the year. Jon, I love, the “as usual you’ve missed the point”–when I miss it I am always certain that you will stick it to me, so to speak. 🙂
Jon, I almost missed the point of your litany of choices in District 150. You said if I wanted this I’d go here; if I wanted that I’d go there. Since when did Von Steuben, Calvin Coolidge, and Lindbergh become “choice” schools? I believe that the students who left Quest went back to the school in their attendance area–no choice there. I forgot to add that I trust that the charter school will be emphasizing English just as much as math because they, too, will have to take the NCLB tests.
Sharon:
If the school in your attendance area is a failing school, you have a choice to go to other schools via a waiver. For some Von Stueben, Calvin Coolidge or Lindbergh may be a better choice than Glen Oak, Columbia, Trewyn or Sterling.
… and if people are “fleeing” the charter school because of the math and science, they should have never put their name in the lottery, because the school clearly said they would focus on MATH AND SCIENCE.
Some attrition is to be expected and is necessary. If the folks who didn’t go there for the math and science find out they want something else, the program will only be better for the students who truly want to excel in Math and Science.
“May(be) some (are)leaving Quest because the study of math and science involved a lot of effort.”
If your intent is to read minds, perhaps that is best saved for parlor games. Math and Science take no more effort than Art and English.
Sorry Charlie – but science and math in the higher MS grades and HS require more effor for most students, than other subjects do. Perhaps you are just gifted.
Emerge, the “if your school is a failing school”–lots of luck in trying to get a waiver in District 150. Also, I don’t know any of these students personally–don’t know anything about them. First of all, do we know for sure that this charter school is offering advanced math and science for middle school students. Secondly, do we know how many students who are ready for advanced math and science actually applied to go to the school? The school is still an “If.” I am not ready to declare it a success until it’s proven itself to be such.
Charlie – I’m know at least one person for whom I’m pretty sure English takes much less effort than Math. It probably has to do with the interest (or lack thereof) in one subject over the other.
I suppose the actual amount of effort required to simply drink a protein shake compared to the effort required to drink a beer is the same, but somehow it seems like, for me, drinking the beer comes a lot more easily 🙂
Sharon, I didn’t claim that Von Steuben et al were choice schools. However, to a certain degree, almost all schools in D150 are choice. If you have the option to go to another school (Roosevelt or Qwest, for example) but don’t in order to stay at your neighborhood school, you’ve effectively chosen that neighborhood school – and that’s good if you’re happy with that choice. I would prefer that there simply be more choices available to all students/parents – and for that process to be much more transparent.
Also, I understand how you don’t feel obligated to “defend” Qwest and that you are not “ready to declare it a success”. That must be a relief to you, as I can imagine all of the people knocking on your door for you to do just that. However, do you feel the obligation to investigate something – to educate yourself – before criticizing it, or do you prefer to just throw anything up against the wall to see what sticks?
On a side note, what do you mean by the “lack of sports”? Are you saying Qwest has no plans for sports this year, next year, or ever?
From the charter school application:
“Sports ?? MSTCS will have sports teams and compete in the appropriate leagues.
MSTCS will first seek its teachers to coach the sports teams. The school also will
reach out to members of the community and involve partner organizations to
provide in?kind services, coach, sponsor events, and provide facilities for the sports
programs. MSTCS is planning to have basketball, baseball, volleyball, track and
softball teams when the school is at full capacity. Teams will be developed as the
school grows in number of students based on the levels of student interest.”
Sure, they don’t plan on having as many sports as most other D150 schools do (I guess they just anticipate having more academic extracurriculars, such as Science Olympiad, MathLeagues (American, Continental), Lego League, Spelling Bee, Extreme Challenge
Team, Robotics Team, and Power of the Pen).