The Negatives of Charter Schools in LAUSD School System - Research Paper Example

The negatives of Charter schools in LAUSD school system The Board of Education approved New Los Angeles Charter School in April 2008 (Fuller 12). The board of education approved the school’s charter for a period of five years. The school provides learning opportunities to a diverse community of students who have passion for learning and engage in their communities. This is manifested in its mission. It has the vision of developing future civic leaders by using a rigorous and project based learning that centers on social justice and other skills. It is located in board district 1, local district 3, South Burnside Avenue, at 5100 Wilshire BLVD, in Los Angeles, CA. it serves approximately 300 students in grade 6-8. Charter schools have brought about criticism in education system especially in Los Angeles. The race of schools to provide quality education and maintain a position at the top has increased the support for charter schools in Los Angeles (Jack Buckley 3). The current struggle seen between LAUSD school board and union over charter schools represents the thirst for quality and top position. The quality of schools in Los Angeles is very low. They do o respond to the educational needs of the Los Angeles community. This observation clearly shows that something has to be done to bring a desired change. Despite the fact, that t it is clear that schools in Los Angeles need radical change, charter schools are not the answer for the required change (Jack Buckley 3). Charter schools have been criticized for not meeting the requirements of the change required to solve the problem of low quality education in Los Angeles. Critics state that charter schools provide the best in terms of educational performance but still ignore important aspects of the society. The problem about charter schools started at the same time that charter schools began (Whitney 194). Charter schools were initiated as a response to the inability of public schools to adequately address educational problems. They were viewed as institutions of learning that would help in improving the quality of education. Indeed, the have realized this purpose. However, they have been criticized because of failing to address certain issues such as equality between and among races. For instance, in a report compiled by UCLA civil rights project in 2003, Gary Orfield noted that people had an early concern with regard to the ability of charter schools to represent the minority (Whitney 95). They were concerned that charter schools would admit white students as they would escape diverse public schools. Others noted that charter schools would compromise public schools further to offer poor education to those who would not afford to pay for charter schools. In addition, this would result to discrimination of students based on the schools they occupy and consequently their social class in society (Whitney 195). Other people criticized charter schools stating that they are more business oriented than education oriented because they get their funding from a variety of sources that includes private investment. Private firms are allowed to fund Charter schools and can get profits when these schools perform. The schools are managed for profit. However, when charter schools fail to realize its target private investors leave for other business viable places. This means that the schools are closed thereby depriving students a right to continuous education (Jack Buckley 43). Therefore, some argued that the schools would promote profit-making ideals as opposed to educating children. Others argued that the profit would assist those schools achieve success. The government as well as private investors fund charter schools. They are funded through the federal categorical funding. They are opposed by teacher unions, antiracial groups and activists, private researchers and parents and students who favor public school system(Jack Buckley 43). According to Grading the Chartering Organizations, 2003, most states had a few resources for oversight of schools and revocation of charters for educational failure compared to financial problems (Nordquist 19). The center for education reform in 2009 argued that since 1992 less than 100 charter schools had been revoked because of failed academic goals. Charter schools are funded based on average daily attendance of all their students. However, they do not get all those funds. For instance, CER estimates that charter schools get 61 percent of funding as compared to public schools. Therefore, a charter school pupil gets 6,585 dollars compared to a public school student who gets 10, 771 dollars (Nordquist 19). Charter schools were established as emerging alternatives to traditional systems of education. They fit in between public and private schools. They receive public funding except for the purchase of their facilities and equipment. They were established as alternatives to public schools. A private group of individuals can submit their request and be approved by the board of education to establish their own school. They do not subscribe to regulations, rules and statuses that bind public schools but have to produce better academic results or set targets. If they fail to do so, the charter is revoked and the school is closed. They are small and are schools of choice to parents, teachers, students, and administrators. The history of charter schools can be traced back to the 1970s when the concept of charter began. This is credited to Ray Budde who was a New England educator. He had suggested that groups of teachers should be given funds to try out new educational techniques and approaches. In the late 1980s, the idea came to America through Albert Shanker who was the president of the American Federation of Teachers. The first charter schools were in Philadelphia in the late 1980s (Jack Buckley 1). Minnesota followed suit and developed its own in 1991 based on opportunity, choice and responsibility. California came next in 1992 and other states followed the race (Jack Buckley 3). In 1995, the charter schools were 19 and by 2004, they were 42. In 2006, President Bush requested for 219 million dollars for the support of 1200 existing charter schools. The first charter school in Los Angeles is said to have began in 1977, the Los Angeles open charter school. Today, Los Angeles has more than160 charter schools more than any other city in the United States of America (Jack Buckley 3). The success of charter schools is partly because of their selective nature and the fact that they do not accept the neediest students. Real school reform would address the needs of all students. Charter schools have the freedom to determine their choices of rues and requirements. They choose the best students in order to achieve high-test scores and avoid closure. For instance, an article on Chicago.com, in 2008 showed the disappointment with charter schools on their practice of destroying neighborhood schools by taking bright students. In addition, in cases where enrolments are high, charter schools give admission on lottery(Fuller 15). Charter schools do not hire experienced teachers because they require more pay. They save money hiring the least experienced and lowest paid teachers in the district. This cannot last. These questions arise. What will we do with the higher-earning, more experienced teachers? In addition, do not we want experienced teachers in the classroom? (Fuller 17). Lazarin’s report, Charting New Territory indicates that charter schools in Los Angeles and Philadelphia have recorded an increase in uncertified and inexperienced teachers. Therefore, the more experienced teachers remain in public and private schools or leave the profession. Most charter schools are profit-making bodies, which want to make much profit while spending little. Therefore, employing inexperienced teachers is one of their strategies (Murphy and Shiffman 216). Charter schools do not allow teachers unions. Teachers can be fired, or not have to be asked to renew their contracts, for any reason including that they make too much money or that the principal does not like them. Their teaching performance may not factor into the decision. Teacher performance should be the basis of hiring and firing teachers but charter schools do not consider this issue(Murphy and Shiffman 276). Charter schools are much influenced by principles of business. You cannot quantify student success like the one you quantify whether or not a car’s seat belts work. Students are not products. This does not create an effective learning environment. The sponsors of charter schools are business-oriented people. This means that they value profits than the successful and effective learning outcomes for students. As a result, students get a raw deal being trained on how to pass exams as opposed to quality and effective learning (Murphy and Shiffman 248). However, Charter schools are smaller, which makes it easier to implement innovations. Funds are allocated for the education o each student as an individual. Charter schools are not weighed down by the bureaucracy of LAUSD (Fuller 17). They accommodate few students making it manageable in terms of coordination and use of resources. The lesser the students the more resources they get and the more attention they get from their teachers. They do not have overcrowding problems. They are under the watch of the government as well as other private stakeholders. This makes it hard for charter schools to foster forms of bureaucracy. This is the advantage with charter schools (Fuller 17). In conclusion, the rush of schools to provide quality education and maintain top positions in terms of performance has increased the support for charter schools in Los Angeles. However, charter schools have not been effective in addressing the problems facing education, but have instead created other problems. Charter schools have led to racism as well as unequal representation because of their selective nature as manifested in the lottery admissions. Their form of funding that have business-like foundations, such as private investor funding have put charter schools in jeopardy and threat of closure when they under-perform. The lack of employment qualified and experienced teachers has also led to poor educational standards in charter schools. The fact that they are small makes them better in terms of educational delivery because of resources. However, it does not address the entire problem. Therefore, charter schools have not been of much help in addressing the problem of education in Los Angeles and other cities in USA. Works cited Annotated Bibliography Fuller, Bruce. Inside charter schools: the paradox of radical decentralization. London: Harvard University Press, 2002. Bruce fuller is an educational writer from the USA. This book helps the reader understand the problems or difficulties that have faced charter schools since their establishment. The book addresses issues of funding and criticisms of the shortcomings of charter schools not only in America as a whole but also in cities such as Los Angeles. Fuller has addressed this issues without bias and presents issues as they are in the real world Jack Buckley, Mark Schneider. Charter Schools: Hope Or Hype? New York: Princeton University Press, 2009. Jack Buckley and Mark Schneider have contributed to educational issues in USA through their works. This book addresses the issues about the establishment of charter schools. It looks at charter schools in terms of the reasons for their establishment and whether it was a well-thought decision or it was a decision to address the problems of public schools in a shorter perspective. Buckley and Schneider have been on the forefront looking at the educational system in America. Their perspective shows the shortcomings and ineffectiveness of charter schools. Murphy, Joseph and Catherine Dunn Shiffman. Understanding and assessing the charter school movement. New York: Teachers College Press, 2002. Murphy, Joseph and Catherine Dunn Shiffman are USA citizens who primarily developed under teaching profession. This book also presents a criticism of charter schools. It assesses the importance and effectiveness of charter schools. The book shows a deeper look at all issues surrounding charter schools and their ineffectiveness to contribute to quality education. Murphy, Joseph and Catherine Dunn Shiffman present an analytic study into the issue with a well thought argument. Nordquist, Joan. The privatization of public education: charter schools and vouchers : a bibliography. New York: Reference and Research Services, 2000. Joan Nordquist is an educational researcher in USA. Her book mainly looks at the administration and sponsorship of charter schools. It looks at it in terms of private sponsorship where private investors support charter schools as a business entity. It also looks at the voucher system of selecting students. This is an unfair way of selecting students. However, Nordquist looks at it as the best available way that charter schools can select students in cases of flooded applications. Whitney, Fiona. The Los Angeles Private School Guide: 2005 Edition. New York: Tree House Press, 2004. Fiona Whitney is an educationist from Los Angeles. Her book looks at the development and running of the charter schools in Los Angeles. It has particularly looked at the aspects, advantages, problems and criticisms of charter schools in Los Angeles. Whitney gives the reader a guide to charter schools in Los Angeles that can offer them information. Despite the fact that it has not captured all schools as single units, it has an excellent exploration of charter schools in Los Angeles. Read More