By Derek Viger
Recently, Chris Queally wrote an editorial against gubernatorial candidate Eliot Cutler‘s support of charter schools in Maine. Mr. Queally’s arguments against charter schools are flawed. I would like to address some of his arguments and set the record straight.
Charter schools have not been an educational magic potion, this is true. Any one reform will not solve our country’s education problems. However, the success of charter schools is not as limited as Mr. Queally suggests. Charter schools can be found in every state except Washington, Montana, North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Kentucky, Alabama, West Virginia, Vermont, and Maine. Many of the states who allow charters are not urban or southern. Charter schools can be especially helpful in rural states and areas. Many of our rural schools could have converted to charters under the previous charter school legislation, LD 1438. This would have opened the schools up to a wide variety of reforms and much needed funding. LD 1438 also included a provision for “virtual charter schools”. Think of the huge advantage that would have presented to students scattered across this sparsely populated state.
Mr. Queally’s comment “most of that money that comes in does not go to public education” represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the charter school concept. Charter schools are public schools. The difference is that charter schools are schools of choice. They operate free of regulations that handcuff teachers in public schools. Charter schools do not operate free of oversight; they must seek authorization. In Maine, local and regional school boards, colleges and universities that award 4 year degrees would have been able to authorize applications for charter schools. They would also monitor charter schools. If you don’t trust those organizations to do that responsibly, than it’s hard to trust that them to do what they are doing now.
The cost concerns are unfounded. Charter legislation would not have created more schools to support. Under LD 1438, school districts would pay charters a per-pupil amount equal to the state’s Essential Programs and Services funding per student. 88% of Maine’s school districts already spend above EPS. Charter school buildings are funded privately, negating any extra costs to taxpayers. Since public schools would also have been allowed to apply for charter status, the fracturing of our school system some worried about would be mitigated.
Maine’s alternative schools are not charter schools, though many believe they “count”. Alternative schools are primarily for “at-risk” students and function under their school board and district’s governance. Charter schools are open to all students, within 10% of a district’s students. Charter schools in Maine would have held a lottery if there were more applicants than open spots, canceling “skimming the best” worries many have. Operating outside normal district regulations, charter school teachers would be allowed to explore a variety of teaching methods, such as Montessori or Sudbury. Charters could operate with specific goals in mind such as art, science, or environmental studies. The possibilities are only as limited as operators’ and teachers’ minds.
One must also question the validity of Mr. Queally’s arguments when he believes the Maine Education Association to not be “particularly strong”. MEA leadership has strongly opposed charter schools. MEA leadership accused charter school supporters of wanting to destroy the public school system by draining limited funding and “attacking the hard work we do in our public schools.” Both of these assertions are false, though Mr. Queally seems to have bought into them however – yet he doesn’t believe the MEA is strong in Maine. In the previous election, the MEA came out heavily against TABOR II. The MEA contributed $129,738 to Citizens Unified for Maine’s Future and $245,516 to Citizens Who Support Maine’s Public Schools. The MEA was also a driving force apart from fundraising. As one MEA member told me, without the MEA there would have been no anti-TABOR campaign. I wonder if he believes raising the sales tax is a good way to close the budget gap as the MEA leadership does.
Would you set out to do handy work around your home without all the tools you could use? Of course not. Why do we continue to ask Maine students to do the same? Charter schools are another one of those tools. Maine needs to show the world we are ready for the 21st century and committed to making our children ready as well. Now is the time for Maine to embrace “Dirigo” in education. Now is the time for the courage to try something new.
Give Charter Schools A Chance
by derek viger on 11. Dec, 2009 in Commentary, Education, Featured, The Maine View
Recently, Chris Queally wrote an editorial against gubernatorial candidate Eliot Cutler‘s support of charter schools in Maine. Mr. Queally’s arguments against charter schools are flawed. I would like to address some of his arguments and set the record straight.
Charter schools have not been an educational magic potion, this is true. Any one reform will not solve our country’s education problems. However, the success of charter schools is not as limited as Mr. Queally suggests. Charter schools can be found in every state except Washington, Montana, North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Kentucky, Alabama, West Virginia, Vermont, and Maine. Many of the states who allow charters are not urban or southern. Charter schools can be especially helpful in rural states and areas. Many of our rural schools could have converted to charters under the previous charter school legislation, LD 1438. This would have opened the schools up to a wide variety of reforms and much needed funding. LD 1438 also included a provision for “virtual charter schools”. Think of the huge advantage that would have presented to students scattered across this sparsely populated state.
Mr. Queally’s comment “most of that money that comes in does not go to public education” represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the charter school concept. Charter schools are public schools. The difference is that charter schools are schools of choice. They operate free of regulations that handcuff teachers in public schools. Charter schools do not operate free of oversight; they must seek authorization. In Maine, local and regional school boards, colleges and universities that award 4 year degrees would have been able to authorize applications for charter schools. They would also monitor charter schools. If you don’t trust those organizations to do that responsibly, than it’s hard to trust that them to do what they are doing now.
The cost concerns are unfounded. Charter legislation would not have created more schools to support. Under LD 1438, school districts would pay charters a per-pupil amount equal to the state’s Essential Programs and Services funding per student. 88% of Maine’s school districts already spend above EPS. Charter school buildings are funded privately, negating any extra costs to taxpayers. Since public schools would also have been allowed to apply for charter status, the fracturing of our school system some worried about would be mitigated.
Maine’s alternative schools are not charter schools, though many believe they “count”. Alternative schools are primarily for “at-risk” students and function under their school board and district’s governance. Charter schools are open to all students, within 10% of a district’s students. Charter schools in Maine would have held a lottery if there were more applicants than open spots, canceling “skimming the best” worries many have. Operating outside normal district regulations, charter school teachers would be allowed to explore a variety of teaching methods, such as Montessori or Sudbury. Charters could operate with specific goals in mind such as art, science, or environmental studies. The possibilities are only as limited as operators’ and teachers’ minds.
One must also question the validity of Mr. Queally’s arguments when he believes the Maine Education Association to not be “particularly strong”. MEA leadership has strongly opposed charter schools. MEA leadership accused charter school supporters of wanting to destroy the public school system by draining limited funding and “attacking the hard work we do in our public schools.” Both of these assertions are false, though Mr. Queally seems to have bought into them however – yet he doesn’t believe the MEA is strong in Maine. In the previous election, the MEA came out heavily against TABOR II. The MEA contributed $129,738 to Citizens Unified for Maine’s Future and $245,516 to Citizens Who Support Maine’s Public Schools. The MEA was also a driving force apart from fundraising. As one MEA member told me, without the MEA there would have been no anti-TABOR campaign. I wonder if he believes raising the sales tax is a good way to close the budget gap as the MEA leadership does.
Would you set out to do handy work around your home without all the tools you could use? Of course not. Why do we continue to ask Maine students to do the same? Charter schools are another one of those tools. Maine needs to show the world we are ready for the 21st century and committed to making our children ready as well. Now is the time for Maine to embrace “Dirigo” in education. Now is the time for the courage to try something new.
Tags: Alternative Schools, Charter Schools, Citizens Unified for Maine's Future, Eliot Cutler, LD 1438, Maine Education Association, Public Education, Taxes, Taxpayers Bill of Rights