actualtext t1_j9i2ts3 wrote
Reply to comment by Neoliberalism2024 in Parents fume over Governor Hochul’s charter school expansion proposal | amNewYork by barweis
Because it creates a situation where you are taking an unequal amount of tax funds but leaving public schools to deal with the undesired students. The situation will never get better for public schools. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying you need to just throw more money at public schools and get worse results but this isn't going to improve things at all for public schools.
If the argument is that charter schools are better because they aren't government run then let them play the same rules as government run schools do.
WickhamAkimbo t1_j9jsoxw wrote
> If the argument is that charter schools are better because they aren't government run then let them play the same rules as government run schools do.
Let the government-run schools play by the same rules as the charter schools. Remove disruptive students (after numerous instances of misbehavior) from the general population to schools that specialize in handling children with major behavioral issues. Only when those issues are properly addressed can they be re-integrated into the general population. Leaving them in the general population with no consequences is a one-way valve; they can do vastly more damage to everyone else than any good done to them in that environment, and I'm pretty sure the vast majority of union teachers in the city agree with that from firsthand experience. Here's a teachers union that advocates for removing antisocial students to specialized intensive programs: https://www.aft.org/periodical/american-educator/winter-2003-2004/how-disruptive-students-escalate-hostility
You have to have consequences for antisocial behavior or you put these people on a fast track to jail.
PuzzleheadedWalrus71 t1_j9kj7mw wrote
Why does the DOE choose to do the opposite though? It seems they want to see public schools fail.
supermechace t1_ja45twm wrote
Not sure if they purposely doing these things vs symptoms of dysfunctional government. From what I understand it's basically down to the byzantine politics and dysfunctional infighting and competing priorities. One of the easiest issues to understand is from what I hear is the poor relationship between teachers and "management"(principles and DOE). Then the other is that DOE management doesn't appear to be a promote from within culture based on performance, the real decision makers are political appointments who basically redo everything from scratch when they're in. Maybe the best analogy is that the school system is as dysfunctional as the MTA except the definition of success is made even muddier. Then in my opinion I feel that the system has grown so big that more authority should be given to local schools and local elected officials. The DOE and political appointee are too far removed from the neighborhoods which are basically cities onto themselves population wise.
Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9kv97s wrote
Because Mayor McSwagger doesn’t care. He just wants to give his buddies high-paying cushy jobs.
PuzzleheadedWalrus71 t1_j9kxtvo wrote
It didn't start with him, though.
Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9kvdb7 wrote
> Remove disruptive students
You can’t just kick out a student. Federal law requires minors to go to school.
KaiDaiz t1_j9kvzt4 wrote
they can go to a school that can better tailor to their needs and socialize them just like high achieving students, special ed etc students are served by going to specialized schools.
Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9kxog0 wrote
You know you could easily accomplish this by funding public schools and giving them the tools to build such an environment, right?
WickhamAkimbo t1_j9l4ibu wrote
New York public schools have the highest spending per student in the country. You need specialized schools to handle kids with behavioral problems and that need much more individualized attention.
Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9lbbtf wrote
no shit? We’re the biggest city in the country. I’d be surprised if we didn’t spend that amount per student. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t fund them further.
KaiDaiz t1_j9kz848 wrote
What you think NYC DOE been failing all these yrs...their failures is what driving the need for charters and parents desire to put them there vs their local failing unscreened school. We wont be having this discussion if they were doing such a great job
Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9kzyt0 wrote
That’s such a counterintuitive method though.
Our schools are struggling, so instead of giving them some administrative TLC, we… throw the money at schools that aren’t statistically any better at giving kids a good education and aren’t accountable to anyone? All you’ve accomplished is made everything worse without any avenue for making things better.
KaiDaiz t1_j9l0g0j wrote
Our public schools are grossly overfunded by any budget standards and failing to deliver what parents want. Its funds are simply grossly mismanaged. Parents of all color want their kids tracked. Its not a question. Parents of all colors want that non performing student spot in a screened school for their own kid for a chance to shine and rise above their non screened local public option.
View it from parents perspective especially the poor underserving communities. Continue sending their kids to the failing non screened public they too came from or take their chances with the charter in their neighborhood. ofc many will want the later.
Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9l44wl wrote
Overfunded how? Did you forget we live in the largest metropolitan area in the country? I’d be more shocked if we didn’t have this amount of money for a student body this big. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t continually invest in it. Whatever happened to the free market with you people?
> View it from parents perspective especially the poor underserving communities. Continue sending their kids to the failing non screened public they too came from or take their chances with the charter in their neighborhood. ofc many will want the later.
Imagine those same people’s’ reactions when their kids come out no better and that they were just royally scammed through their tax dollars.
KaiDaiz t1_j9l4l64 wrote
our education budget is like 40% of our city budget... go to any alpha city...its absurdly high for the results we get from it. plenty of higher cost of living and larger metro areas around world spend way less vs we do % wise.
Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9lb4qt wrote
> our education budget is like 40% of our city budget...
Again, we’re the largest city in the country. I’d be surprised if it wasn’t. If you’re still pissy about it, lobby the city to raise taxes and further fund the system.
> plenty of higher cost of living and larger metro areas around world spend way less vs we do % wise.
All of those places have national control of education though, so thanks for the advocacy for further federal control of education in this country 😉
KaiDaiz t1_j9lc1ld wrote
Largest does not justify the % allocated. Its natural for larger budget to spend more dollar wise but still within the typical % allocation of budget. Even among US cities, % wise is out of proportion.
Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9lf2pa wrote
Absolutely it does. The problem won’t be magically solved by cutting spending per student.
KaiDaiz t1_j9lg5uz wrote
If you have a large budget with most of the money not making to classrooms as evident by teachers buying supplies with their own money...its clearly a sign of mismanagement and bloat up top. The money is simply not properly allocated. Tossing more money into the pit is not going to make it any better. NYC DOE needs a reform and get their act together to provide and perform what parents want. If it takes diverting the best and promising students and funds into charters since more students are switching to them then yes the charter budget should increase for NYC DOE to realize they need to get their act together then so be it.
Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9m8yjf wrote
> If it takes diverting the best and promising students and funds into charters since more students are switching to them then yes the charter budget should increase for NYC DOE to realize they need to get their act together then so be it.
Lmao that’s never going to convince the DOE officials. They’re getting paid either way.
KaiDaiz t1_j9m9smf wrote
Charters and traditional public share the same overall education budget. As more students flock to charter...the NYC DOE share of the budget for public decrease. Less money = less jobs to support.
Also if we are to believe the charters cost per student at 18kish (bit too low imo) vs 28k+ for the reg public, they are more cost efficient
Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9mb7ek wrote
Except they aren’t shown to do any better than public schools, so it’s not more efficient.
KaiDaiz t1_j9mc8em wrote
If we compare charter to unscreened public schools, charters will have them beat and possibly beat the screened publics in near future due to how weak the incoming classes now are due to admission changes.
Charter vs unscreen local are better comparison bc that's what's really available right now in disadvantage communities.
We already seeing more students flock to charters especially the asian demographics due to screened school admission changes.
Evening_Presence_927 t1_j9mda67 wrote
Lmao not even close to being true.
Those poor Asian students are going to get scammed
[deleted] t1_j9ln5tn wrote
[removed]
Curiosities t1_j9i7frb wrote
>If the argument is that charter schools are better because they aren't government run then let them play the same rules as government run schools do.
Yep, this is the only way to get a fair comparison between regular public schools and charter schools. No discrimination against disabled kids/kids with IEPs, poor kids, kids that need remedial resources and additional classes, kids who aren't scoring at grade level. It's not a legitimate better chance unless it's operating under the same rules. It's just discriminating and lining business pockets. All while treating teachers worse without unions.
koreamax t1_j9ig4ag wrote
I feel like people here think Success Academy is the only Charter. Many of them are not like that
mikevago t1_j9jyni5 wrote
Success Academy is the biggest example of "one guy ruining it for everyone" since someone put a razor blade in a piece of Halloween candy in the '70s.
My kids went to a charter in Jersey City, and not one of the knee-jerk criticisms the previous comment rattled off apply. My son had an IEP and they lavished support and resources on him. The school was more than 50% reduced lunch, they had special ed kids, they only expelled one student in my kids' 10 years there (and he was stalking and making threats against another student), and they did it all with less per-student funding than mainstream public schools and the state didn't pay for busing.
And I have no idea what business' pockets are being lined — like every charter in New York and New Jersey, the school is run by a nonprofit board. But the facts will never stand in the way of good talking points, and the "all charter schools are a corporate plot" one will never die.
PuzzleheadedWalrus71 t1_j9kjnur wrote
>the state didn't pay for busing.
Who paid for busing? Usually students with IEPs have the right to special transportation if they need it.
johnniewelker t1_j9i8ryx wrote
I agree that ideally charter schools have the same admission requirements… however, the main reason charter schools exist is because they reject the “problem childs.”
The level of violence a kid can be subjected in the bad public schools is insane. The government has failed the public in education. Charter schools are just band aids
Longjumping_Vast_797 t1_j9jv1g9 wrote
Maybe public schools should enact a zero tolerance attitude for bad behavior, instead of leaving dead beat punks in the classroom. Then, maybe they'd attract higher talent.
We have no obligation to keep a disruptive student in the classroom to destroy others' education. The opportunity is there, it's those misbehaving students' choices to bypass an education.
GET. THEM. OUT.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments