Re: Dbyates on CA Charter Schools

MBYeager@aol.com
Sat, 1 Feb 1997 16:31:58 -0500 (EST)

Hi, all:

It seems to me that the idea of a Sudbury-model Charter school is an
oxymoron.

Don Yates writes of the requirements for a charter in California: << The
second requires a definition of the outcomes from the school. The third asks
how these are to be measured. >>

Implicit in the notions of "outcomes" and "measurements" is testing; testing
has to have a basis; does this not almost certainly imply a "curriculum"?

Friends who are in public education administration (and who are supportive of
the SVS-model) have explained clearly to me that in any instance where public
education funds are spent, there will be required an accountability, a
determination by a public agency, that those funds are being spent on said
"education" as defined by the state codes. Therefore it seems that this
would go beyond the determination of the local district, right up to the
state, and that the Charter, if initially granted, would not be renewed in
the absence of testing (CLAS or otherwise).

Dale also writes: <<If your board approves and a certain percentage of
teachers in the district approve having a charter - not this particular
charter (and it is written to make it easy to get this percentage) the school
is in business. ... Once they have this, the school is exempt from ALL
requirements of school districts. That means curriculum, bargaining, even
earthquake safety requirements.>>

Does this take subterfuge to some extent? Are licensing requirements (#
adults per # children, square footage, handicapped access) also voided? Do
Staff members of Charter schools have to be credentialed teachers/union
members for the charter to be approved by the critical percentage of the
district's teachers?

Looking forward to more information --

Marge Yeager