Comments on: Fast In Indy…Slow In NOLA http://www.eduwonk.com/2007/10/fast-in-indyslow-in-nola.html Education News, Analysis, and Commentary Sun, 21 Mar 2010 04:26:12 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: Elojp http://www.eduwonk.com/2007/10/fast-in-indyslow-in-nola.html/comment-page-1#comment-11485 Elojp Wed, 01 Oct 2008 09:14:21 +0000 http://www.eduwonk.com/wordpress/2007/10/fast-in-indyslow-in-nola.html#comment-11485 Thanks for the helpful information.. Thanks for the helpful information..

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.eduwonk.com/2007/10/fast-in-indyslow-in-nola.html/comment-page-1#comment-64 Anonymous Tue, 30 Oct 2007 22:17:00 +0000 http://www.eduwonk.com/wordpress/2007/10/fast-in-indyslow-in-nola.html#comment-64 There are charter proponents and there are charter ideologues. Charter proponents praise effective charters and damn ineffective ones, support accountability and take a close look at the data. Charter ideologues praise all charters for being charters, support accountability for other public schools and view data selectively. There are very few charter proponents. Like this bog, there are mostly charter ideologues. Charters often actively exclude children with disabilities, take fewer children with serious disabilities, and often discriminate against children who are second language learners or children who exhibit the slightest behavioral problems. For charters, those groups are "public school kids". The test score comparisons that dominate the charter school superiority industry very rarely control for the demographics of their respective populations, making their assertions of superiority both selective and useless. As for New Orleans experiment, I will grant that it is only in its second year and that the pre-Katrina schools were terrible. They should be given a chance to succeed. If the AFT wants to prove poor performance, and identify charters that game the system by excluding the very children who one would expect them to welcome with open arms, they should come to California. There are charter proponents and there are charter ideologues. Charter proponents praise effective charters and damn ineffective ones, support accountability and take a close look at the data. Charter ideologues praise all charters for being charters, support accountability for other public schools and view data selectively. There are very few charter proponents. Like this bog, there are mostly charter ideologues. Charters often actively exclude children with disabilities, take fewer children with serious disabilities, and often discriminate against children who are second language learners or children who exhibit the slightest behavioral problems. For charters, those groups are “public school kids”. The test score comparisons that dominate the charter school superiority industry very rarely control for the demographics of their respective populations, making their assertions of superiority both selective and useless. As for New Orleans experiment, I will grant that it is only in its second year and that the pre-Katrina schools were terrible. They should be given a chance to succeed. If the AFT wants to prove poor performance, and identify charters that game the system by excluding the very children who one would expect them to welcome with open arms, they should come to California.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.eduwonk.com/2007/10/fast-in-indyslow-in-nola.html/comment-page-1#comment-63 Anonymous Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:49:00 +0000 http://www.eduwonk.com/wordpress/2007/10/fast-in-indyslow-in-nola.html#comment-63 Isn't it ridiculous for the union to call for comparing charter schools to performance before the flood rather than compare the charters with the performance of traditional public schools sinc 2006.<br/><br/>What makes no sense to me is the union's knee jerk desire to return to the governance structure that pre-dated Katrina and the fact that they are convinced the new arrangements will fail. Didn't the pre-Katrina system have 90 years plus to prove itself a failure? Now in 2 years they expect the open-enrollment charter framework to show results? That seems a little shall we say, unfair if not laugh able. Isn’t it ridiculous for the union to call for comparing charter schools to performance before the flood rather than compare the charters with the performance of traditional public schools sinc 2006.

What makes no sense to me is the union’s knee jerk desire to return to the governance structure that pre-dated Katrina and the fact that they are convinced the new arrangements will fail. Didn’t the pre-Katrina system have 90 years plus to prove itself a failure? Now in 2 years they expect the open-enrollment charter framework to show results? That seems a little shall we say, unfair if not laugh able.

]]>