EFM Roy Roberts Steps Down...

[Wesley Mouch]

Charter school performance is actually lower than that of DPS perfomance, yet we keep closing public schools and replacing them with charters.

And most Michigan charters are for-profit, and receive little scruitiny, yet they receive the exact same amount of state taxpayer funding as the publics. Go figure.

Hammie, consider theses ideas with respect to your statistical point:

1) Education isn't a simple measurement of a static item. Its possible that public schools are improving. Could this be because of competition? I don't know -- but it fits my view of the world where bureaucracies change little unless they have to.

2) The whole idea of charters is to allow innovation and freedom. One should expect that charters are a group won't do much differently than schools in general. But what really matters is whether there are individual schools that are doing better. The entire educational world should then be learning from success, and improving itself.

3) Don't put too much weigh on simple statistics created by someone with a vested interest. You can just as easily find other studies.

[Detroitnerd]

Hammie, consider theses ideas with respect to your statistical point:

1) Education isn't a simple measurement of a static item. Its possible that public schools are improving. Could this be because of competition? I don't know -- but it fits my view of the world where bureaucracies change little unless they have to.

In other words, "I don't have any facts to back up my preconceptions, but I can couch them in such a way to where they fit my preconceptions."

2) The whole idea of charters is to allow innovation and freedom.

Riiiiiggghht. This reminds me of the loosening of regulations on financial institutions, investment banking and "innovative" financial products. That worked out super-well, right?

One should expect that charters are a group won't do much differently than schools in general. But what really matters is whether there are individual schools that are doing better. The entire educational world should then be learning from success, and improving itself.

What is this silly double-talk? What matters is that there are individual schools doing better? There are ALWAYS individual schools that are doing better, under any system. Frankly, charter schools perform so poorly, the lesson the educational world should learn is: Don't privatize public education!

3) Don't put too much weigh on simple statistics created by someone with a vested interest. You can just as easily find other studies.

Speaking of vested interests, you must be aware of the many instances of charter schools falsifying test scores, graduating unqualified pupils, and being unresponsive and unaccountable to the very public they purport to serve.

Frankly, when Bham and I agree on something, it would seem to me the argument is a strong one.

[Wesley Mouch]

I do have my preconceived notions on what works and what doesn't. What we have doesn't work. So let's allow those with new ideas to come in. Conservatives like you who argue against anything new really do make innovation impossible. And the result are the schools that we have in our urban centers.

To argue against innovation because it fails here and there is dangerous. Do you only support things that never fail? Most good things come out of failures. We need to manage our failures -- not to stop failing.

Falsified test scores are not solely owned by charter schools. But you selectively argue so. Bad logic. Again, you choose to see charter cheating as failure, but ignore the Atlanta 2011 scandal? But let's allow that cheating only occurs in charters. Again -- so what. Doesn't mean the idea is bad. Perhaps 1 out of 3 charters deliver quality education -- better that public schools. Why become a reactionary and argue against someone that delivers good to students -- just to favor the current broken system?

I want healthy schools. Don't care how. And don't care who loses their jobs.

Facts? You want I should quote facts? One look at DPS's graduation rates should be fact enough for you to see that something needs to be done. Let go of your hold on the past and try something new.

[Bham1982]

To argue against innovation because it fails here and there is dangerous.

Why do you assume that charters are necessarily innovative? They're basically free of oversight and accountability, but there's nothing inherently innovative about charters per se.

The other major difference between charters and publics is that one is for-profit, and the other isn't.

[michimoby]

Why do you assume that charters are necessarily innovative? They're basically free of oversight and accountability, but there's nothing inherently innovative about charters per se.

The other major difference between charters and publics is that one is for-profit, and the other isn't.

I'm still incredibly confused as to why charters are automatically branded as for-profit organizations. Not every charter is a for-profit.

[jt1]

3) Don't put too much weigh on simple statistics created by someone with a vested interest. You can just as easily find other studies.

Funny, because 'simple statistics' like test scores were Engler's rationale for taking over DPS back when enrollment was high and there was a couple hundred million dollar surplus.

[Bham1982]

I'm still incredibly confused as to why charters are automatically branded as for-profit organizations. Not every charter is a for-profit.

True, not all, but the vast majority in MI are for-profit. To me, that's concerning.

Given the lack of oversight, why are our taxpayer dollars going to for-profit entities that answer to investors, not parents? Their goal is profit, not education.

[Detroitnerd]

I do have my preconceived notions on what works and what doesn't. What we have doesn't work. So let's allow those with new ideas to come in. Conservatives like you who argue against anything new really do make innovation impossible. And the result are the schools that we have in our urban centers.

To argue against innovation because it fails here and there is dangerous. Do you only support things that never fail? Most good things come out of failures. We need to manage our failures -- not to stop failing.

Falsified test scores are not solely owned by charter schools. But you selectively argue so. Bad logic. Again, you choose to see charter cheating as failure, but ignore the Atlanta 2011 scandal? But let's allow that cheating only occurs in charters. Again -- so what. Doesn't mean the idea is bad. Perhaps 1 out of 3 charters deliver quality education -- better that public schools. Why become a reactionary and argue against someone that delivers good to students -- just to favor the current broken system?

I want healthy schools. Don't care how. And don't care who loses their jobs.

Facts? You want I should quote facts? One look at DPS's graduation rates should be fact enough for you to see that something needs to be done. Let go of your hold on the past and try something new.

Nice little speech. Comical, in fact. Full of childish equivocation, rhetorical pussyfooting, faulty reasoning, buffoonish grandstanding and amateur straw-manning.

It reminds me a bit of that speech from Animal House:

"You can't hold a whole fraternity responsible for the actions of a few sick, perverted individuals. For if you do, then you have to blame the entire fraternity system. And if the entire fraternity system is guilty, then is this not an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, Greg! Is this not an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do what you want to us -- but I am not going to stand here and listen to you bad-mouth the United States of America!"

[Detroitnerd]

True, not all, but the vast majority in MI are for-profit.

In the beginning, charter schools were one thing, a way to offer slightly different curricula with greater accountability. The "education industry" saw a great lever to apply pressure on and open up that $600 billion to speculation and "investment," and in doing so have taken charters and turned them into something that suits their desires.

Think of LLCs. A lot of people think LLC stands for limited liability corporation, because they so often behave like corporations. But they're not, technically. Except when they pretty much behave as corporations. Not all LLCs are for-profit, though that might surprise a lot of people....

[Wesley Mouch]

Why do you assume that charters are necessarily innovative? They're basically free of oversight and accountability, but there's nothing inherently innovative about charters per se.

The other major difference between charters and publics is that one is for-profit, and the other isn't.

They aren't necessarily innovative. I'm sure many charters don't innovate. But they can. [[And in at least some cases, do -- see Green Dot's unionized schools in LA.)

You actually hit it on the head -- They are 'free of oversight and accountability'.

Who do you think should provide oversight? Me -- I think we should empower the parents. Charters do that. If parental oversight tells them that the school isn't performing -- they can leave. That's much better than 'oversight' and 'accountability' from the usual suspects: administrators, school boards, politicians as well as the profit-taking evil corporations that monopolize text books and make propaganda machines like Channel One.

I don't like monopolies. They usually deliver crap salad.

Back to innovation... it is possible under charters. That's their main value. Here and there good ideas will sprout. Until charters existed, all we could do was enjoy crap salad.

Down with oversight and accountability from those would would deprive us of the opportunity to fail -- and to succeed.

[Wesley Mouch]

Nice little speech. Comical, in fact. Full of childish equivocation, rhetorical pussyfooting, faulty reasoning, buffoonish grandstanding and amateur straw-manning.
...snip...

Glad you enjoyed it. And you noticed by rhetorical pussyfooting. That's sweet of you.

[Wesley Mouch]

True, not all, but the vast majority in MI are for-profit. To me, that's concerning.

Given the lack of oversight, why are our taxpayer dollars going to for-profit entities that answer to investors, not parents? Their goal is profit, not education.

Aren't the parents able to decide? The investors can only make money if the parents so choose. Sounds All-American to me. I'm not going to let you badmouth the United States of America.

But the 80% for-profit is something that bears discussion. It not troubling by itself -- but it is cause for concern. Are there not enough non-profits? Are there qualified non-profit charter operators not being allowed to enter the game? I'm OK with for-profit schools -- so long as we're not chasing out the non-profits. As said earlier today, I hate monopolies. We need diversity. Public, charter, private, corporate, charitable, religious.

[Locke09]

Charters have not increased competition, they have driven out the competition. Charters and their false promises drove most parochial schools out of business in Detroit. A few charters opening in Detroit might have accomplished the"competition" that many felt was needed. But now the city is overly saturated with charters and still looking to have the ability to open more.

Why are we continuing to open up new charters when the population of school children is steadily decreasing? Over-saturation has just led to more empty buildings and diluted resources.