Poll: Should Imagine’s Charter Schools in St. Louis Close?
Controversy about poor performing schools was recently focused on charter schools, specifically six operated by Imagine Schools, Inc:
Mayor Francis Slay called for the closure of Imagine charter schools in St. Louis on Thursday, for the first time singling out the poorest-performing charters in the city.
[snip]
Charter schools are public schools that operate independently of traditional school systems. In Missouri, they’re allowed only in St. Louis and Kansas City as alternatives to struggling school districts.
The Virginia-based Imagine Schools Inc., the largest charter school operator in the country, has six school in St. Louis. They ranked at the bottom among charter schools and most St. Louis Public Schools on the 2011 Missouri Assessment Program. (STLtoday)
Seems unusual to have a mayor calling for school closures. The Missouri Charter Public School Association is also calling for their closure:
MCPSA believes the Imagine Schools’ performance trends reflect most poorly on the management company, Imagine Schools Inc. and is not a condemnation of the teachers and staff within the schools. Often a significant issue leading to such poor academic performance is a lack of resources and supports available to the teachers and staff by their employer. Another issue, often, is charter public school governing boards not being able to execute the oversight authority they are statutorily entitled as the management company has contractually assumed that authority. (Beacon)
So what do you think? The poll is in the right sidebar.
– Steve Patterson
Hey Steve, I am teaching at the Imagine Academy of Careers Middle School. We have a wonderful set of teachers, and a wonderful administration, at least at my school. If we don’t make AYP this year, it won’t be because of us.
This is bigger than just “close these schools, they can’t get it right either!” The Imagine schools may not be making AYP, but we’re still doing better (test score wise) than other SLPS schools with similar student populations in the same areas. It sounds like Mayor Slay is looking for a scapegoat.
If you want, a fellow teacher wrote up a long response to the Post-Dispatch’s article on us. Could we submit it to you, also?
Hey Steve, I am teaching at the Imagine Academy of Careers Middle School. We have a wonderful set of teachers, and a wonderful administration, at least at my school. If we don’t make AYP this year, it won’t be because of us.
This is bigger than just “close these schools, they can’t get it right either!” The Imagine schools may not be making AYP, but we’re still doing better (test score wise) than other SLPS schools with similar student populations in the same areas. It sounds like Mayor Slay is looking for a scapegoat.
If you want, a fellow teacher wrote up a long response to the Post-Dispatch’s article on us. Could we submit it to you, also?
I always welcome submissions from guests.
What’s the AYP? (That’s always the danger of using industry-specific jargon / acronyms in a larger forum.)
I believe AYP = Adequate Yearly Progress. I’m not sure what the formal definition of Adequate Yearly Progress is though.
I always welcome submissions from guests.
What’s the AYP? (That’s always the danger of using industry-specific jargon / acronyms in a larger forum.)
I believe AYP = Adequate Yearly Progress. Â I’m not sure what the formal definition of Adequate Yearly Progress is though.
The charter school movement is only part of a larger effort to privatize public schools. Which in itself is part of a the movement–aided considerably with the (PR)opaganda of corporate and wealthy interests–which would benefit greatly from said privatization of not only schools, but water systems, parking systems, and now, in Pennsylvania, public state parks. This in only the beginning. Charter schools are at this point unproven, with regards to performance and necessity. In addition to that, there is the well-documented problem of the charter schools taking the best and most reliable children, who often have the most dedicated parents who are more active in the education of their children. It has been noted time and time again, any discrepancies in performance amongst poor, middle-class, and wealthy schools can most often be attributed to poverty, parent involvement, and the environment surrounding the school, in addition the actual physical condition of the school itself. Ever read Jonathan Kozol’s “Savage Inequalities”? It’s a great primer on the effects of poverty in education. Let’s not forget, too, that the same problems faced in urban areas with regards to poverty and parental disassociation also extend to suburban and rural schools. Oddly enough, this misinformation campaign to discredit public schools is quite similar the efforts of corporate supranationals like Monsanto and Bayer to lay the problem of food insecurity on outdated farming techniques and a lack of modern–ie, profit centered–farming implements and chemicals. The problem of food insecurity worldwide is not one of lack of food, it’s the corruption, poor and inadequate transportation, war, civil unrest, poor training or absent training in modern soil conservation techniques, amongst others.
Public schools built this country. Without them, and without the educated and well-fed, properly housed, and dedicated families to support them, our country will continue its precipitous slide into ignorance and penury. A perfect atmosphere for the success of demagogues and tyrants.
The charter school movement is only part of a larger effort to privatize public schools. Which in itself is part of a the movement–aided considerably with the (PR)opaganda of corporate and wealthy interests–which would benefit greatly from said privatization of not only schools, but water systems, parking systems, and now, in Pennsylvania, public state parks. This in only the beginning. Charter schools are at this point unproven, with regards to performance and necessity. In addition to that, there is the well-documented problem of the charter schools taking the best and most reliable children, who often have the most dedicated parents who are more active in the education of their children. It has been noted time and time again, any discrepancies in performance amongst poor, middle-class, and wealthy schools can most often be attributed to poverty, parent involvement, and the environment surrounding the school, in addition the actual physical condition of the school itself. Ever read Jonathan Kozol’s “Savage Inequalities”? It’s a great primer on the effects of poverty in education. Let’s not forget, too, that the same problems faced in urban areas with regards to poverty and parental disassociation also extend to suburban and rural schools. Oddly enough, this misinformation campaign to discredit public schools is quite similar the efforts of corporate supranationals like Monsanto and Bayer to lay the problem of food insecurity on outdated farming techniques and a lack of modern–ie, profit centered–farming implements and chemicals. The problem of food insecurity worldwide is not one of lack of food, it’s the corruption, poor and inadequate transportation, war, civil unrest, poor training or absent training in modern soil conservation techniques, amongst others.
Public schools built this country. Without them, and without the educated and well-fed, properly housed, and dedicated families to support them, our country will continue its precipitous slide into ignorance and penury. A perfect atmosphere for the success of demagogues and tyrants.
Playing devil’s advocate, the response would be that charters are public schools. Just ignore the out of state corporation that manages the school instead of an elected board from the community. Corporations are people too, right?
Playing devil’s advocate, the response would be that charters are public schools. Just ignore the out of state corporation that manages the school instead of an elected board from the community. Corporations are people too, right?
The two big advantages charter schools offer, from my limited perspective, are the ability to avoid union contracts and pension obligations and the ability for parents or activists to have more direct control over the curriculum. The traditional public school generally offers their employees better pay and benefits, but limits the amount of input parents have in how their children are educated. Personally, I’m no fan of too many specialized schools or direct input from parents – I know most parents think their kids are special and above average and should be treated with kid gloves, but I come from the old school of letting the professionals decide what should be taught, hopefully uniformly well – that’s why we have elected school boards in the first place!
The two big advantages charter schools offer, from my limited perspective, are the ability to avoid union contracts and pension obligations and the ability for parents or activists to have more direct control over the curriculum. The traditional public school generally offers their employees better pay and benefits, but limits the amount of input parents have in how their children are educated. Personally, I’m no fan of too many specialized schools or direct input from parents – I know most parents think their kids are special and above average and should be treated with kid gloves, but I come from the old school of letting the professionals decide what should be taught, hopefully uniformly well – that’s why we have elected school boards in the first place!
I’d prefer to judge a school based on measuring how much a student has grown since they arrived. If a student starts in August, and is tested in March, I only know how they perform on that given day in March. Did that 5th grader come to the school on a 2nd grade level, and in March they are on a 3rd grade level? That’s progress…slow, developmentally appropriate progress, however still lower than they should be. So that school is labeled failing, even though they are moving kids. The articles I have seen have compared ONE of the 6 charters in question to the AVERAGE public schools scores, which by the way are WAY under appropriate standards. I’d like to see a comparison of that charter to the schools of equal size and similar locations in the public district. I find it irresponsible of the Mayor to use this particular charter organization as a pawn in his reelection talk. He needs to criticize education, but he cant talk about the city, because during his tenure they were taken over by the state. He can’t talk about his own sponsored charters which (of charters) the same age, are also failing. Where are the kids in this arguement?
I’d prefer to judge a school based on measuring how much a student has grown since they arrived. If a student starts in August, and is tested in March, I only know how they perform on that given day in March. Did that 5th grader come to the school on a 2nd grade level, and in March they are on a 3rd grade level? That’s progress…slow, developmentally appropriate progress, however still lower than they should be. So that school is labeled failing, even though they are moving kids. The articles I have seen have compared ONE of the 6 charters in question to the AVERAGE public schools scores, which by the way are WAY under appropriate standards. I’d like to see a comparison of that charter to the schools of equal size and similar locations in the public district. I find it irresponsible of the Mayor to use this particular charter organization as a pawn in his reelection talk. He needs to criticize education, but he cant talk about the city, because during his tenure they were taken over by the state. He can’t talk about his own sponsored charters which (of charters) the same age, are also failing. Where are the kids in this arguement?