Newpoint and the Public School/Public Charter School Double Standard

There exists an undeniable double-standard between public charter schools and traditional public schools.  Both types of schools are Public schools, yet the way they are treated when they struggle is very different.

Why is this?

Because the very powerful, very well-funded and very committed bureaucracy that controls the public education agenda does not want competition.  They want all the money to feed their ever-growing bureaucracies, and these same guardians of the status quo are ambivalent about parents stuck in failing public schools for decades.  These “Educrats” (Agency captives, Big Labor, and Big Business/Crony Capitalists that grift off of the taxpayer funded educational trough) have two simple mandates:

1.        ---When a Charter school struggles—the hue and cry shall be “Shut them Down, Now!”

2.        ---When a traditional school struggles for decades, the mesage becomes “We just need more time and resources!”

How are our Traditional Schools Treated?

Generally speaking, a traditional public school like Carver-Century K-8 here in Escambia County is given time, resources, and ever more chances to fix issues along with tons of district support before any serious consideration is ever given to closing them down; such schools are nurtured, supported, and given increased levels of taxpayer cash and staff-time--- in an all-out, pull out all the stops effort to save them. 

In the case of Carver Century, it was only after the school’s own students had chosen to attend other schools--and attendance was down to about 30% of capacity -- that the school was recommended for closure.

And it was a close, 3-2 vote;

that school nearly remained open, despite anemic academic performance for years running and a rapidly declining population making it non-viable financially.  That school was nearly left open despite all the problems, though.

Another example--we have dumped $millions and $millions of dollars into Warrington Middle School over the last 6 years in a desperate attempt to improve that school’s performance—even as the percent of occupancy compared to capacity at Warrington slowly dwindles and now hovers just above 50%. 

And even though performance has been slow to improve, almost sluggish—no serious discussion of closing that school has or will ever take place.  It would be more likely that spontaneous fires would erupt on the Antarctic Ice at the South Pole than Warrington Middles School would ever be recommended for closure.

It will never happen no matter what. 

As a matter of fact, we just keep pumping more money in, and at some point when the amount of dollars and resources pumped in reaches a weird sort of equilibrium with the dwindling student population, with an additional requirement being met that the most disruptive of the disruptive students have all been removed---yeah at this point this (or any/every similar) school will improve. 

We are seeing signs of this phenomenon this year at Warrington Middle.  We spent nearly $500K last year on the consultant that wrote the book “The One Year School Turnaround.”  

This year we’re being lobbied to do another nearly $500K One-Year Turnaround for a second year.

 I have nothing against the consultant, and as a matter of fact I think they are doing good things at Warrington Middle School.  But why do we need to keep them there for year 2 of the 1 year turnaround?

How many consecutive years will we be told we must do another "One year school Turnaround?"

And is this sort of turn-around model sustainable or scalable?  

   

Perhaps it is if we want to starve other needy schools of resources unfairly-- or if we start printing money. 

How are Charters Treated?

Charter schools like Newpoint Five Flags, by stark contrast, are almost on a stopwatch if they start to struggle. 

The only solution we are being offered for Newpoint in general, Five-Flags in Particular, is the immediate vote today for a closure to happen in 90 days.

But as recently as three weeks ago, there was not even going to be a 90-day notice given to Newpoint.  That is a fact that can be verified!

But nope, not now.

Now we have to close them no matter what, in stark contrast to what we've done with our own traditional schools, no matter what the parents say.

With Newpoint it has to be a hair-trigger calculation.

I’m not saying I necessarily disagree with such an accelerated time-frame for demanding either performance or a closing/re-constituting.  But why must we treat them so drastically different? If Warrington gets time to fix their issues--why can't Newpoint?  Why must they close NOW!?

I’ve voted to close charter schools when they could not get their act together, and I'll do it again when necessary.

I'd just rather not do it before all the facts of the investigations are known.

This won't happen in this case, though. 

Because there is a crystal-clear double standard at play.

Why not put all schools on the same “improve or close/reconstitute” timeline?

I happen to think we would be a whole lot better as a public school system if we had the intestinal fortitude to more quickly shutter traditional schools that fail to perform, just like we are prepared to do to charter schools like Newpoint. 

I’d be all for it and I think the average taxpayer and parent would be as well—that is why we’re seeing parent-trigger laws pop up. 

Charter schools are public schools funded with public dollars. 

Charter school students are public school students and these students face the same accountability protocols that traditional schools face.  Their scores and their test outcomes affect our district’s letter grade.  And all schools, traditional and charter, are funded with public taxpayer dollars.

So can we please, for the love of God, at least stop treating them so differently, especially as they struggle and face closure?