Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday September 07 2015, @06:17AM   Printer-friendly
from the public-money-for-private-profit dept.

Common Dreams reports

The Seattle Times reports that

The ruling--believed to be one of the first of its kind in the country--overturns the law [I-1240] voters narrowly approved in 2012 allowing publicly funded, but privately operated, schools.

Teacher and author Mercedes Schneider offers more on the Act:

As is true of charter schools nationwide, the charters in Washington State (up to the current ruling) were eligible for public funding diverted from traditional public schools. Charter schools were approved via a November 2012 ballot initiative (I-1240, the Charter Schools Act) in which charters were declared to be "common schools" despite their not being subject to local control and local accountability. And also like America's charters in general, Washington's charters are not under the authority of elected school boards.

Thus, Washington voters had approved to give public money to private entities--a one-way street that provided no means for such funds to overseen by the public.

[...] The new ruling (pdf)[1] states that charters, "devoid of local control from their inception to their daily operation", cannot be classified as "common schools," nor have "access to restricted common school funding."

[...] "The Supreme Court has affirmed what we've said all along--charter schools steal money from our existing classrooms, and voters have no say in how these charter schools spend taxpayer funding," said Kim Mead, president of the [Washington Education Association], in a statement.

"Instead of diverting taxpayer dollars to unaccountable charter schools, it's time for the Legislature to fully fund K-12 public schools so that all of Washington's children get the quality education the Constitution guarantees them," Mead continued.

The Associated Press reports that the state had one charter school last year, and eight more have opened in the past few weeks.

I pity Ms. Schneider's students if she routinely starts sentences with conjunctions--especially consecutive, redundant conjunctions.

[1] I had trouble with the connection.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by aristarchus on Monday September 07 2015, @08:55AM

    by aristarchus (2645) on Monday September 07 2015, @08:55AM (#233192) Journal

    Camel's nose private schools, that is what they are. Charter Schools (which, after all, are businesses) probably couldn't care less (hey! got the idiom right!) about unionization, but that was not my point. Teachers, on the other hand, really do not see themselves as working class unionists, until they are faced with politicians and business persons intend on destroying education for the sake of profit. Then they reluctantly form unions for the sake of their students>. Charter school teachers would do the same in a second, they are, for the most part, professionals, except for the fear of termination that the quasi, or pseudo-private nature of charter schools makes inevitable.

    Charter schools are not private schools. If they were, they would not be chartered, like corporations are chartered. Time to go back to public school, frojack! It will be good for you!

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Troll=1, Insightful=4, Total=5
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Monday September 07 2015, @04:41PM

    by Nerdfest (80) on Monday September 07 2015, @04:41PM (#233334)

    Good teachers help sell schools. Better pay will attract better teachers. If you chase out all the good teachers by driving down wages you put yourself out of business. Good pay and the ability to get rid of bad teachers (which most unions make exceptionally difficult to the point of near impossibility) will balance out. For these schools to work they need to be perceived as being better than public schools.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 13 2015, @03:26PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 13 2015, @03:26PM (#235901)

      I moved my son from the public school to a charter school.

      The Public school:
              Decent teachers
              Union that didn't want teachers working over hours for free
              An administration focused on keeping costs down
              Administration that didn't teach
              Focus on making sure certain hires didn't work the hours needed for benefits
              Teachers taught how administration wanted
              Doesn't allow the vo-tech to recruit at the schools because it reduces the school's funding.

      The Charter school
              Decent teachers
              non union
              got paid less then the public schools
              Administration all taught classes too
              Teachers had input into teaching
              Parent involvement is required (we had to at least put our kids in the lottery)
              Low emphasis on sports

      I think the teachers are roughly the same. I think the administration is better in the charter and motivates teachers more.
      The culture at the charter school is different; it seems like its all band or theater club type kids. The kids are self motivated learners. Kids participate in sports, but they'd be JV, not varsity.

      I like that I have a choice. One size doesn't fit all. Otherwise there would never be special ed classes. For some students, I think the town's public schools are quite good. We recently built a new high school and I've liked what I see there.

  • (Score: 2) by BK on Tuesday September 08 2015, @05:26AM

    by BK (4868) on Tuesday September 08 2015, @05:26AM (#233621)

    ...do not see themselves as working class unionists, until they are faced with politicians and business persons intend on destroying education for the sake of profit. Then they reluctantly form unions for the sake of their students.

    BS.

    Teachers form unions for the same reason everyone else forms unions.

    1 - In the public sector, everyone does it...
    2 - More pay & benefits
    3 - Protect retirement
    4 - Easier for everyone if a district has one negotiation instead of hundreds or thousands
    5 - Shield against political dismissal

    All of these are legitimate reasons for a union btw. But "the sake of their students" is maybe # 20 on the list and a stretch even there. Learn to recognize marketing when you see it.

    --
    ...but you HAVE heard of me.
    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @05:50AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @05:50AM (#233632)

      I infer from this that you do not know any teachers. These are people who pay for supplies out of their own salaries, and accept abysmal wages, and get disrespected by the vocal majority of Americans. Of course they are not like other unionists, they are professionals.

      • (Score: 2) by BK on Tuesday September 08 2015, @11:05AM

        by BK (4868) on Tuesday September 08 2015, @11:05AM (#233706)

        Right. But that isn't _why_ they formed unions.

        --
        ...but you HAVE heard of me.