Kirp On Union City, And The High-Class Charter Problem In Washington, D.C.

Interesting David Kirp op-ed in The New York Times.  Raises some hard questions: What’s a reasonable timeline for improvement?  When does urgency become unrealistic?  And why are so many places so far behind this in terms of even basic political consensus around improving schools?

Speaking of urgency and pace, another good Washington Post look at the growing market share for charter schools in Washington, D.C. and what that means. In general I think it’s good news but it’s not without complications – some of which charter advocates and critics are just beginning to seriously wrestle with.  But we should also acknowledge that it’s a high-class problem to have. It wasn’t that long ago that a fast-growing sector of urban public schools with abundant support from parents was a wonk’s fantasy.  The excitement shouldn’t obscure the challenges, but should be recognized alongside them.

One Response to “Kirp On Union City, And The High-Class Charter Problem In Washington, D.C.”

  1. Linda/RetiredTeacher Says:

    The Kirp article shows that we are coming to our senses in education, just as I knew we would. For those who truly want to improve education for the poor, the answers have been there for many years: high quality preschool, health services, excellent and experienced teachers, parental involvement, and developmentally appropriate and rigorous instruction (as opposed to test prep). Also on the horizon is open enrollment in all tax supported schools – the end to “education by zip code.”

Leave a Reply


2 − two =