Lately, I have been feeling...confused.
I am a New York City public school teacher. I have been for three years. I believe in public education, and I love my school.
But in the last few months, I have been thinking a lot about…charter schools. The classroom management, the test scores, the presidential attention—how could it not turn a girl’s head?
Wait—relax! Don’t get the wrong idea or anything. I mean, I’m not pro-charter schools. What, you’ve never even thought about it? It’s not like I’m leaving the system to go 100% charter. I’m just, you know...
charter-school-curious.
~~~
All joking aside, I am a teacher in the NYC public schools, and I am curious. In my first two years, I was hesitant to venture beyond the haven of my classroom. Whatever political tensions brewed outside those four walls, whatever drama and uncontrollable circumstances, I closed the door and accepted that all a teacher can hope to do is make a difference with her students in that room, during those (always too-short) minutes. Anyone who has experienced the first year of teaching can attest that this alone poses a challenge.
Now in my third year (certainly still far from being an expert but at least no longer drowning), I find myself feeling that this just isn’t enough. Education is at the center of a political firestorm right now and I want to understand...and sometimes feel like I don’t know where to start.
I have been curious about charter schools for a while now. I’ve read a few books, talked with friends who work in charter schools, read some of the news. But as tensions rise, it feels more and more that a traditional public school teacher expressing curiosity about charter schools is akin to a vegan considering adding an occasional veal chop to her diet.
Let me rewind a bit. For anyone unfamiliar with the increasing “us” vs. “them” situation between traditional public and charter schools, here is a quick run-down...
1. What is a charter school anyway?
According to Merriam-Webster, a charter school is “a tax-supported school established by a charter between a granting body (as a school board) and an outside group (as of teachers and parents) which operates the school without most local and state educational regulations so as to achieve set goals.”
I am primarily interested in the charter school/public school debate in the NYC area. Typically, charter schools have been created here (beginning in 1998 with the New York City Charter Schools Act) to provide alternatives for families in low-income areas with failing zoned public schools.
For the record, charter schools are public schools. Partly for the sake of brevity and partly because the word “traditional” holds other connotations in educational history/philosophy (i.e. “traditional” versus “progressive” education), I often refer to traditional, non-charter public schools simply as “public schools,” but it is important to understand that charter schools are public as well. They do not (and cannot) require tuition and are held accountable to NYS Regents Exams.
2. What are the major differences between charter and public schools?
It can be hard to generalize, but...
-Most charter schools have a longer school day and longer school year than public schools.
-Charter schools typically have a different philosophy/methodology than public schools. In NY, there are several charter school networks (KIPP, Achievement First, and the Uncommon Schools to name a few) that hold a similar philosophy and even use similar phrases, mantras and methods throughout their schools. (I am very interested in this aspect of the charter school movement and plan to explore it through future posts.)
-Charter school teachers are not members of the teacher union (UFT).
-While this statement certainly does not apply across the board, I think it is important to say that in many low-income neighborhoods of NY, charter schools are drastically outperforming their neighboring public schools on standardized tests. Hence what some are calling an exodus from public to charter schools and the overflow of student applications that lead to charter school lotteries.
3. So, what’s the beef?
Charter schools have been receiving a lot of attention lately--admiring visits from Arne Duncan, glowing endorsements from President Obama, news coverage up the wazoo (sp?...What? I can’t help it--I’m an English teacher). What’s more, there is talk of major expansion. Maybe the best way to characterize the heart of the debate is to present a brief play which I shall entitle Charter vs. Public: The Ultimate Smackdown. Curtains up...
The Crusher (Our Charter-School Champion)
The Pulverizer (Our Public-School Protector)
C: What are you even talking about? We do Special Ed. Besides, I wouldn’t say you are doing any of your kids a favor. Here’s a tip--try teaching them how to read.
P: I wouldn’t talk, Charty. There’s plenty of you guys struggling, too. When a charter school goes bad, it goes really bad.
C: Yeah, but when we get things right, we send entire graduating classes to college while your kids are left in the dust. How do you sleep at night?
P: So, if you think we’re doing so badly, help us get better! Don’t just shut us down. Oh, but I’ve heard that’s how you deal with it when a student struggles, too. Just kick them out. Who do you think ends up taking those kids in?
C: Whatever, man. All you can do is whine. At least we have teachers who know how to put in a real day’s work. Looking forward to your two-month paid vacation coming up?
P: That’s a low blow. We have teachers who work their a**es off, and you know it. Look down your nose at the contract all you want, but do you even know what it was like before the union? You need to educate yourself. A teacher could be fired on a whim. And what chance do you think a veteran teacher had when the same amount of money could buy two novice teachers? Is that cool with you? Work your teachers to the bone and then kick them to the curb when they get too expensive?
C: We hold our teachers accountable. You just throw money at them no matter what they’re doing in the classroom. News flash: In the rest of the world, you get compensated for the quality of work you do, not just for breathing.
P: You are so off-base. But I guess I would be too if I spent all day creating little zombies. You’ve got your kids regurgitating answers like parrots, marching through the halls like they just got labotomized. What ever happened to individuality? Or does that not really matter as long as they pass the tests?
C: Our structures create discipline and success--concepts that may be a bit foreign to you. The bottom line? We are closing the achievement gap.
P: Well, I know you’ve been very busy stroking your own ego, but FYI, we happen to have successful schools, too. Did it ever occur to you to ask them what they’re doing? No, you’ve already written the entire system off. You’re taking over our spaces, sapping away our students and monopolizing more and more government money. But we’re not going to let you take over without a fight.
C: Bring it, Public. We’re the wave of the future, and you better deal with it.
Exeunt.
...OK, so clearly I am having a little fun here and showing the extremes of the argument. But in thinking about what issues are at the heart of this charter/public tension, I have come to realize how much confusion there is on both “sides.” The problem, as I see it, is that there is very little productive, rational communication happening between charter and public schools. This really hit me last night after attending a screening of a new documentary called “The Lottery” directed by Madeleine Sackler.
The film follows four families in Harlem who enter the lottery to get their children into Harlem Success Academy (one of a booming number of charter schools in the neighborhood). I plan to talk much more about the film in my next post, but for now I just want to share the question I found myself pondering as the film came to a close. In fact, I asked the question during the post-screening Q&A with Ms. Sackler.
In my opinion, the film (whether this was the intention or not) comes off as very pro-charter/anti-traditional public school--or, rather, anti-union. After listening to several fellow viewers ask questions that reflected the combative tone of the situation, I asked Ms. Sackler if she knew of any space--a forum of some kind--where charter and traditional public school teachers were having a cooperative and rational dialogue. I explained that as a public school teacher, I wanted to do for my kids what the film showed Harlem Success doing for its children, but that I was feeling increasing pressure to “choose a side.” Ms. Sackler was kind and encouraging in her answer, emphasizing that the film was in no way anti-teacher (I didn’t feel it was), and that she felt that sometimes the UFT and its teacher members were not always on the same page.
But to be honest, that doesn’t really answer my question, does it? To be fair, I don’t think she was being evasive. I think she was unable to point me in the direction of such a dialogue because it has not been happening.
That is why I have started this blog. I would love for this to become a space for that dialogue. A sharing of ideas between teachers in the charter and public schools. A rational conversation about the good and bad, what can be improved and what we need to be wary of.
To be a conversation, people would need to read it and respond to it, I suppose...But until that starts happening, I will have a conversation with myself! There is so much about education that I want to understand, question and reflect on. And it seems only appropriate that an exploration of public education take place in a public forum.
With that, I’ll sign off. I’ve got to go be lazy and incompetent now. Isn’t that what us public school teachers do?
(...just kidding. Obviously!)
No comments:
Post a Comment