2012 senior class photos
2012 West Carrollton graduation
Home of the Week
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2006 > April > 04 > Entry
The death of a school
The New York Times Monday told the story of one New York charter school that failed — the managerial missteps and overblown idealism that brought it down and the heartache and headaches that resulted for the kids who attended.
And the story makes that case that chaotic school closings are a byproduct to be expected when you introduce market effects into education.
Here in Dayton, where a higher percentage of kids attend charters than in any other city, we’ve only seen a few schools fail. And only one crashed and burned in such an unsettling manner.
But that was under the old rules. With Ohio’s new approach to managing charter schools, there’s a chance there could be more school closings. The question is whether the new system will mean less dramatic cases of upheaval when schools don’t make it.
There’s no doubt that school implosions are bad for everyone. When I wrote about the closing of a charter school here in 2001, teachers were unsure they would be paid. The school’s lunch vendor cut off services for non-payment, leading to hastily-made peanut butter and jelly sandwiches for lunch. The school ultimately closed mid-year and kids had to find somewhere else to finish the school year. That’s disaster for everyone — especially the kids.
Charter opponents argue that regular public schools, even when they are troubled, are at least reliable. Rarely, if ever, has an Ohio public school closed mid-year.
So the question posed by the Times story is if these sorts of collapses are simply to be expected in a market-based education system, even if it’s potentially harmful to kids. After all, this is what happens in business. Sometimes even good ideas are poorly executed or fail to catch on, causing even a well-financed new business venture to fail. And that’s what most charter schools are — new business ventures.
Many proponents of charter schools think it’s fine when bad charter schools fail. To them, it’s the market doing it’s job by weeding out the weak and it makes the remaining options that much stronger. I’ve heard charter guru Checker Finn say many times that it’s good when bad charters close.
But most would agree that a school implosion mid-year isn’t good for anyone. The key to avoiding such a meltdown is probably monitoring. If someone is watchdogging a troubled school, they should be able to take action before disaster strikes. If a school must close, it could be closed at the right time — the school year’s end — to allow everyone to adjust and find new schools.
Ohio’s new sponsoring system leave monitoring and oversight largely in the hands of non-profit “authorizers.” Charter proponents believe these sponsors will be more invested in the success of their schools, less tolerant of repeated failure and better attuned to the day-to-day issues of their schools.
Now the first schools are losing their sponsors under the new system and are in danger of closing. So we should get a chance this spring and summer to see if this leads to less chaotic school closures or if new issues arise as schools that were not renewed scramble for new sponsors.
What do you think? Are sudden school closings an acceptable trade off for the promise of market-based education?
Permalink | Comments (7) | Categories: Charter Schools and School Choice
Comments
By Oldprof
April 9, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
Scott is not an old prof, he’s a young newshound. And my point is this: while formal credentials do not always ensure competence—and conversely, while a lack of credentials does not absolutely indicate incompetence—if I were gamling, I’d always bet on the side of the credentials. AND I’d take all your money, if you were betting the other way.By Scott Elliott
April 8, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this
FYI, I only post comments using my own name, never under a pseudonym.By Mary
April 8, 2006 8:39 AM | Link to this
Is old prof a pseudonym for Scott? Actually, I do not understand your retreat comment. My point is credentials are not always rightly established. While some would like to spin that credentials protect the consumer, student, or public, credentials are many times being misused to protect the financial and job security interests of the credentialed.By Oldprof
April 6, 2006 10:15 PM | Link to this
So Mary, you’re now retreating from your original comment that people with no college degree might be trusted as teachers? The point isn’t whether credentials automatically make someone good—it’s whether you want someone with NO credentials to do that surgery that you will one day need. Would you trust Scott Elliott with your appendectomy? Keep in mind, he’s a sharp guy!By Mary
April 6, 2006 7:04 AM | Link to this
Dear Old Prof, as pointed out in the book “The Last Well Person” written by a medical doctor educated at Harvard and Yale, credentials are also over used in the medical profession to limit competition and misapply medicine. That is not to say there should not be some standards and credentials in every profession - even though credentials do not solve all problems. Some surgeons with credentials have been incompetent or under the influence of drugs while operating. However, I consider education, teaching and learning a more common,mainstream human experience. We are all in the classroom for many years of our life. We are all doing some form of lifetime learning and teaching as parents, siblings and friends. I have never had or want surgery. But if ever I have surgery, I would not feel comfortable just because of credentials. Having an education degree as the main credential with little passion for math, science or social studies does not trump another person with a college degree and experience in the field who does, especially when dealing with older and brighter students.By Oldprof
April 5, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
I’m sure many people who have no medical degrees would make outstanding surgeons—there have even been cases where imposters were successful as MDs for a time. Similarly, many who have no legal education and who haven’t passed the bar exam would do well as lawyers. So, is that the way we want to gamble with our health care, our legal representation—OR our children’s education?By Mary
April 4, 2006 1:37 PM | Link to this
My sense in these discussions is there are a lot of intertwined philosophies, some wanting charter schools to fail. I agree it might be good to get day to day oversight of charter schools outside ODE and over to “sponsors”. It was perhaps conflicted to have probably ex-public school employees employed by ODE oversee charters. I wonder why charters have to have “certified” instructors? I thought the concept of charters was to do away with some bureaucratic constraints on education. I could see others with college degrees, and even those without, being effective as teachers, particularly in the higher grades or with older students.