charter school co-locations in crown heights/prospect heights??

I fear that existing public schools believe that they are "entitled" to any growth in student population that is expected in their zone.

In reality, no entity owns those future students. Those students and families are going to get to choose where they attend.

When one designates funding (or classrooms) in advance of their choice, their ability to actually choose becomes less real.

Everyone loves to accuse the charter schools of being exclusive, and selective. The charter schools seem to be taking it in stride.

Sponsored by KIPP:

You're invited to KIPP NYC's Diversity Speaker Series featuring

Lisette Nieves

Wednesday, September 25th

5:30 PM - 8:30 PM

1224 Park Place, Brooklyn, NY [Directions]

SIGN UP NOW as space is limited:

http://lnk.kippnyc.org/divspk13

We all know that college completion rates for students of color and students from low-income communities in the U.S. are roughly half that of their more privileged counterparts. But why? And what can be done to eradicate this gap?

http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=5e3f2b5235584d5ae12cb8667&id=cd1cacb58c&e=d657f23ad1

Faced with a policy that would cause them to have to pay NYC rent, the charter schools show their might:

http://nypost.com/2013/10/09/thousands-rally-against-charter-school-rent-plan/

DeBlasio, are you ready?

In other cities, charter schools are maligned as being "white". I think that tactic is not used by opponents in NYC because it doesn't fly.

Attempting to paint them as being wealthy, and thus not needing public money, is really the only card they have.

It has become clear to me that the opponents of charters genuinely fear that they will be left with the worst of the students, and teachers. However, the public school advocates (charter school opponents) are smart enough to know that if they were to campaign on these genuine fears, very few would listen.

In other cities, charter schools are maligned as being "white"

My experience in large urban school systems has been that the vast majority of charter schools serve overwhelmingly minority populations (LA, NYC, DC, New Orleans). One of the big complaints is that when parents are given "choice" they often choose schools that have homogeneous populations. I think this plays out in the selection of public schools as well, its just a lot easier to make the argument that the reason for this choice is everything but race.

This article describes some of the issues of charter segregation in the Twin Cities. Important takeaways:

Moreover, for a variety of reasons, white, middle-class parents often gravitate to schools populated by those who look like them, Perry says.

“Middle- and upper-middle-class families have always tended to—in my opinion mistakenly—connect quality with sameness,” he said. “It could be an explicit effort to segregate, but it’s more likely a result of this notion that diversity is a sign of poor quality.”

It isn’t just white families that self-segregate. Black families are still more likely to enroll in racially isolated charter schools than white families, Miron said.

Frankly, I think those successful charters in NYC are doing a much better job bringing together communities that mirror the neighborhoods that they are based in. However, I know that there are plenty of people moving into this neighborhood that would never consider enrolling their child in a charter school. So once again, fights over things like co-location are really just a smokescreen for issues we don't want to discuss.

But educators and policy makers are divided over the significance of the trend: Charter critics say the movement has fostered a rise in the number of racially isolated schools while others maintain that schools like Seven Hills are symptomatic of enduring self-segregation throughout America’s education system now manifesting itself through parental choice.

“We have a long history of families and communities segregating themselves,” said Andre Perry, the associate director for educational initiatives at Loyola University’s Institute for Quality and Equity in Education in New Orleans. “It’s somewhat wrongheaded to say that charter schools are an impetus for segregation. The people are the impetus for segregation.”

actually, in NYC, most charters are not serving populations similar to the districts where they're located. and it's not only the choice mechanism - it's the fact that charters don't have to accept kids to fill vacant spots like a district school does.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. Is it that charters are choosing not to fill a vacant seat rather than fill it with someone who they don't want? Or are you saying that charters don't have to take every student that applies? My experience has been that charters either have not enough students to fill seats or are oversubscribed and use their lottery and waiting lists accordingly.

Not having to backfill is one of the main ways in which charters are able to exclude.

It eliminates the kids who have such unstable homes that they have to change schools due to eviction, and being bounced from one foster home to the next.

Parents know this, and it is part of why they perceive charter schools as more attractive.

Even when charters are lousy at implementing their ability to exclude, the parents are unaware. Hence the charters tend to attract parents that want (and actively pursue) what they believe is best for their kids. This makes them different from some public school parents.

In general, parents are much less likely to pursue larger social goals at the perceived expense of their own children, then school employees are with other people's children.

I'm surprised you didn't include this one from the Times as well:

Why Don't We Have Any White Kids?

He has spoken to white parents trying to comprehend why the local schools aren’t more integrated, even as white people move in. “They say things like they don’t want to be guinea pigs,” he said. “The other day, one said, ‘I don’t want to be the only drop of cream in the coffee.’ ”

Homeowner-

I have a little time on my hands tonight, and will use it to give some more attention to the issues you are raising.

Yes, white parents are very hesitant to send their kids to a predominantly black school. In most cases this is because such schools are rated poorly, and they do not believe their child will be well received by the other students. As a result, public schools tend not to be racially or economically integrated.

There are, however, exceptions:

Sometimes (especially in neighborhoods undergoing radical racial and/or economic change), you find public schools that appear integrated at first glance, but when you look closer, you find "special places" are created for those who are "different".

For example, in my high school, an AP program was created so the children of college educated parents would also be likely to go to college. These classes were for the kids who were "different", which in my school meant they were almost exclusively white or asian, and had a household which consisted of two, salaried parents.

The AP program helped the area maintain families that were wealthy enough to own their homes, yet not wealthy enough to afford private schools. It gave these parents the "power to exclude" that I discuss above.

When a neighborhood becomes predominantly such families, you tend to see a different phenomena. In this situation, the majority places the "different" students in Special Education. In most districts in the US, these kids tend to be from lower income families, whom have only one parent, and are black or hispanic.

Needless to say, none of this is "news".

NYC Charter Schools, however, put an interesting twist on all of this. They have arisen, in part, because the families who select them feel they provide "them" with a chance to escape students and families whom they feel will impede their child's learning. Like the schools I attended, this subset of parents perceives themselves as a minority in the school district and wants a place to be "different".

A racial analysis is insufficent, and until we get to a point where it doesn't confuse the average taxpayer that they are "all black, yet don't see themselves as the same", we will continue to debate charter schools.

All of which brings me to film below. Until we get to the point where we can commiserate (yet not agree) with both sides depicted in it, we will be in this boat.

The film takes a full hour to watch, and is for adults. Although filmed in 1976, in my view, it speaks exactly to the issue we are discussing, yet (in this case) the motivations play out racially.

It is thought provoking to the degree that it is likely WAY BEYOND the level it can adequately be discussed here. I'll get together with anyone who wants to discuss it in person.

Sadly, we rarely get such well made films in 2013.

While there are many racially integrated schools in NYC, the charters are thriving in areas in which the schools/neighborhoods are not racially integrated.

As discussed above, the charters are thriving on the perception that some students are not present, and/or will be eliminated and not replaced.

In my view, the drive to get the best for your child is merely a fact. It is neither good or bad.