THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, January 31, 1995 TAG: 9501310010
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Opinion
SOURCE: By MICHELLE EASTON
LENGTH: Medium: 92 lines
In the current debate over charter schools, we need to get ``back to basics.'' I don't mean we should re-emphasize reading, math and science (though I'm in favor of that ``back to basics'' as well). I mean that we need to return to fundamental questions, questions like: ``What are charter schools?'' and ``How do they operate?''
I say this because I've just finished reading a ``legislative alert'' from the Virginia School Board Association which suggests to me that some education leaders in Virginia wouldn't recognize a charter school if it came over and sat in their laps. Here's what the VSBA Alert said: ``Several bills will be submitted to establish charter schools, which are believed by some to be innovative schools free of certain laws and regulations. The VSBA recommends a `special schools, special treatment' approach that accomplishes all the governance and academic opportunities promoted by charter-school advocates without the controversies related to using public funds to support private education, elitism and resegregation.''
Anyone who has taken the time to read a Virginia newspaper recently should know that charter schools are public schools. They are not private schools. In fact, the VSBA description of their own preference for ``special schools, special treatment'' is a vague but accurate description of precisely what a charter school should be. (And speaking of ``back to basics,'' maybe it would help if the VSBA wrote ``Charter schools are public schools'' on the blackboard 500 times.)
If I sounded irritated, it's because I am. Too many educational leaders in Virginia are insensitive to the needs of Virginia's educationally deprived children, too preoccupied with money and power. They have the mentality of the lords of a medieval castle - always worried about enemies on the horizon, always quick to raise the bridge and flood the moat. Thus, when a new idea comes riding over the hill, they sound the alarm without considering the possibility that the stranger might be an ally. (Charter schools are public schools.)
What's so special about charter schools, and why are people genuinely interested in the education of children willing to try this approach? First, a definition: ``A charter school is a semiautonomous public school which operates under a results-based contract, called a charter. Like all public schools, charter schools are non-sectarian and do not charge tuition. They are subject, of course, to all federal laws affecting public schools, but they are granted a waiver from most state and local regulations.'' This is the definition in the Interim Report of the Governor's Commission on Champion Schools, and in these three sentences the phrase ``public school'' appears three times.
So how do charter schools work? Well, in different ways. And that's the whole point of the approach - to give administrators, parents and teachers room to redesign their schools to meet the specific needs of their students. Let me give you one example of how this approach worked in Chicago, where the system was in such bad shape that the court established independent governing boards for each of the schools - ``local school councils'' composed of teachers, parents and community leaders. One of the first problems the councils faced was overcrowding, and three schools came up with workable solutions to this problem - three different solutions.
One council instituted a policy of year-round education, reorganizing the school calendar to provide staggered schedules for students.
A second council persuaded the school board to build five new schools in its area.
A third council converted an oversized library into several classrooms and redistributed the books among all classrooms, each of which then had its own small, age-appropriate library.
The jury is still out on the Chicago experiment, but one thing is certain: Three schools solved their space problems - problems they'd inherited from the professional educators. Charter schools in Virginia would not necessarily choose any of the varied approaches adopted by the local school councils in Chicago. Virginians would be free to design schools that fit their own needs and student population. If parents wanted a well-disciplined academic atmosphere, free from such educational sidelines as sex education, peer mediation, conflict resolution and gender- equity classes, then they could create such schools - perhaps in the very same building where their children are now being indoctrinated with the social gospel of the current educational establishment. Such schools could receive a charter to operate as long as they improved the performance of students.
As for charter schools being ``elitist,'' affluent parents already have the luxury of influencing the course of their children's education simply by moving into the ``right'' neighborhood. Isn't it time we give poor parents the opportunity to participate in choices to improve their children's schooling?
Finally, no one is about to ``resegregate'' the public-school system. Hasn't the Virginia School Board Association heard? It's unconstitutional. And, by the way - charter schools are public schools. MEMO: Ms. Easton is a member of the Virginia State Board of Education.
by CNB