An Education

*note: this information pertains to the northernmost quarter of Utah.  Although I did a lot of research and interviews, take this with a grain of salt, especially if you live in another state.

This issue, suggested by a friend who wishes to remain anonymous, is traditional public schools versus charter schools. For this entry, I had to do more than just research; I interviewed a lot of people and really had to think about what I thought.  I'm very neutral on this subject, so it's not going to be an opinion piece; it's a report.

Here's the scoop on charter schools, for people who aren't in the know:

Charter schools are schools which are funded by the state, but function like private schools.  Each charter school has a different focus; my sisters go to an IB school (which you can find here), my brothers go to an IB school focused on the Founders (which you can find here), and there's a school in Logan, Utah for teens who are slipping academically (which you can find here); and they're mostly sort of selective.  There's a lottery system instead of a traditional enrollment system -- if your name doesn't come up in the lottery, you can't get in.

Okay, now that the infodump is over, I can get down to the real issue.

I interviewed ten people; two children, three parents, and five college students.  The responses I got from my interviews were overwhelmingly in favor of charter schools; nine out of ten preferred charter schools, and the person who chose traditional public schools had never heard of charter schools.  Without releasing any names, I'll write some responses.

One of my college students told me that the issue with schools in general was that they needed to focus more on core subjects; students are there to learn, after all.  He added that teachers needed more leeway for discipline, because they are there to teach and guide their students.  These days, they're so restricted that they can't even try to help a troubled or floundering kid without getting accused of something.  He said that in traditional public schools, the standards are too low; because of the No Child Left Behind Act, instead of pushing their students, the teachers just lower the bar.  (This is different in charter schools, because -- although they are still held to NCLB -- they essentially govern themselves, and most of the teachers are non-union.  This means they push their students rather than letting them slide by, and the result is better education and more driven students.  It's not "no child left behind;" it's "all children moving forward.")

One of the mothers told me that she likes charter schools better because of the involvement of teachers and parents; she shared a story with me about the principal coming, on a Saturday, to a ballroom competition and socializing with the parents.  Since parents are required to put a certain amount of hours into the school, they have a much better understanding of the things their children learn, the way they're taught, and the way the classroom works.

Another spin on charter schools was given to me by a college student with nieces and nephews in the Logan charter school, Fast Forward.  She seemed pretty ambivalent at first; on the one hand, when her niece transferred from Logan High, she was ready to graduate early, but at the end of the year she was behind in her classes, smoking pot, and generally being a delinquent.  On the other, her nephew is doing very well at Fast Forward -- much better than he would be at a traditional public school.  After talking with her, we decided her niece had problems because of her friends, not because of the school.

(Unrelated note: I know that if 'niece' were spelled 'neice,' it would sound like mace with an n instead of an m.  Still, when I spell it correctly, it looks wrong.  Anyone else have this problem?)

Both of my charter students told me that they liked charter schools better; they like the uniforms, the way they're taught, and the amount they're taught in comparison with the traditional public school they previously attended.

My older student explained more than my younger student; she spent more time at traditional public school and is therefore experienced enough to make comparisons about more than just bathrooms and recess and how nice the teachers are.  She told me that in traditional public school, she learned very little because "the whole class had to stop and wait for the kids who weren't doing anything, and sometimes the kid never caught up so we didn't do anything.  They didn't even have any tutoring."  Then she explained that her new school had tutoring systems for the kids who struggled or fell behind; this is, I'm sure, the point of NCLB, but according to almost all of my interviewees, this is not how it's done in traditional public schools.  A quote: "I've tried every kind of school; public, private, home school, and charter, and charter school is the best."

She also mentioned that she gets to go skiing every Wednesday.  How friggin cool is that?  Traditional public schools don't have weekly outings like that.  Just saying.

I would write what the others said, but it's more of the same; all of the parents said more or less the same things, and the college students were on the same page (again, except for the girl who didn't even know what charter schools were).

My conclusion: if I was crazy enough to adopt some kids right now, I'd want them in a charter school.  If I were ever to use this blog to spread awareness, this is the topic.

Questions?  Comments?  Concerns?  Challenges from proponents of traditional public schools?  I'm all ears and eyes.