Re: Joe Bo Question on Charter Schools

[Csubstance@aol.com]

In a message dated 6/20/06 3:15:26 PM, aburke5054@aol.com writes:

<< Charter schools are required 
to adhere to fair and nondiscriminatory enrollment policies, just as 
other public schools.  >>

Etc. Etc. Blah. Blah. Blah...

June 21, 2006

Bullshit.

Charter schools are part of the movement to EMOs (see below) and will have 
the same devastating results for education that their counterparts do if we let 
them.

New Orleans and Chicago are just on the cutting edge of charter school 
hypocrisy and charter school mendacity. If anyone here wants to, Google Chicago's 
charter schools and ask some simple questions (like teacher salaries; how many 
disabled kids go there; and their actual -- as opposed to artificially inflated 
-- test scores). Charter schools in Chicago aren't even audited for grades, 
and there are now rumors of a black market in high school credits from charter 
schools that hire uncertified teachers and then let the kids hang around for a 
few months, then cop a "credit" or two. 

This is a serious attack on democratic public schools, all the glib one 
liners aside.

In Chicago, most charters reject disabled children. Especially severely 
disabled ones.

In Chicago, most charters are located in buildings that are not accessible to 
the handicapped. 

In Chicago, all charters require prospective students to "apply" to get into 
the school. The latest the "application" was required was April. Students are 
then required (often with their parents) to sign an agreement to adhere to all 
school rules. In one Chicago charter (Bunche) parents are required to attend 
"training" or the kid is kicked out of the charter school (er., sent back to 
the neighborhood school).

The most at risk kids in the regular public schools of Chicago are the 
homeless, those from dysfunctional homes, and the disabled kids who suffer from 
various kinds of neglect associated with poverty.

The public schools are for those children, because the charter schools 
exclude those children or kick them out.

Chicago charter schools have even avoided showing their costs in the CPS 
budget up through this budget cycle (hearings going on now). While the public gets 
to scrutinize every public school dollar spent, the charters were lumped into 
"professional and contractual services" (a line of nearly half a billion 
dollars for FY 2007), with no detail. Two weeks ago, the head of CPS budget office 
(Pedro Martinez) told me in an interview that Chicago's charters were not 
itemized in the proposed FY 2007 budget because they were "like IBM" -- an 
outside vendor.

I pointed out that IBM doesn't get free use of public buildings, more than 98 
percent of its revenues from tax dollars, and the free marketing publicity of 
being able to say it was "approved" by the CPS Office of New Schools. 

The charter school attack on public schools and public employees unions is 
clear everywhere there are charter schools. Most are now corporate charter 
schools, with the first generation Ma and Pa store charter schools (the original 
concept, with all that heart warming stuff about parents, kids and teachers 
coming together) being driven out of business by corporate monopolies, ranging (in 
Chicago) from the Chicago Charter Schools Foundation to KIPP. 

Charters are corporate attacks on public schools. They are even now regularly 
discussing what Jerry Bracey ten years ago predicted -- EMOs. If you don't 
know what those are, look up "HMO" in the historical glossary of ruling class 
propaganda aimed at destroying an essential human service and substitute 
"Education" for "Health."

So all that stuff some people are talking about promoting charter schools is, 
as I noted at the onset of this, bullshit.

You can eat shit sandwiches if you like them, but don't serve that stuff to 
others and expect them to say "Thank You".

But what else is new in your stuff?

George N. Schmidt
Editor, Substance
www.substancenews.com