Letter: Confused by opposition to charter school
Original post made on Nov 17, 2008
Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 12:00 AM
on Nov 17, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Considering how poorly some kids do in big schools -- and I've known many in that category -- I too am confused by the district's opposition to these charter schools. Money being diverted from the comprehensive schools program seems to be the biggest gripe, and that's a legitimate concern, although it seems that the scale of the problem is greatly exaggerated by the district.
Am I remembering correctly that a few years ago there was some discussion of breaking the larger high schools down into smaller schools on the same campuses? Did that idea go anywhere? It seems to me that the district needs to put its energy and resources into coming up with creative, effective alternatives to its own one-size-fits-all program so that kids can remain in the comprehensive schools while thriving in environments they're better suited to. What's the district doing to come up with alternatives?
on Nov 18, 2008 at 9:31 am
The opposition to charter schools is very understandable. Even though the idea of a more personal educational experience for our children is very appealing, the fact is that charter schools take away from other schools a disproportionate amount of money and deprive the regular schools some of the scarce funding available these days.
If charter schools cost the same per student as other schools, there probably would not be opposition. The sad fact is that the total cost of educating students goes up, and the amount available to non-charter schools goes down.
on Nov 18, 2008 at 6:56 pm
The Everest Charter (like the Summit Charter) will get significantly LESS funding per student than Sequoia spends per student.