out of our already impoverished schools district. They had no curriculum, no teachers, nurses, bus service, no accountability, but still come to struggling school districts with their hands out. Then they transfer that money to a "management company" and you have no say over how it's used.

https://yinzercation.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/12-problems-with-charter-schools/

"Who can forget the scheme by PA Cyber Charter founder Nicholas Trombetta, right here in Beaver County, to steal $1 million in public dollars? Federal investigators filed 11 fraud and tax conspiracy charges against him and indicted others in the case. [Post-Gazette, 8-24-13] And then there is the Urban Pathways Charter School in downtown Pittsburgh under FBI scrutiny for trying to spend Pennsylvania taxpayer money to build a school in Ohio. A related investigation by the state auditor general revealed a history of expensive restaurant meals, a posh staff retreat at Nemacolin Woodlands resort, and payments for mobile phones belonging to the spouses of board members. [Trib, 11-11-13] Not to be left out, Philadelphia just had its eighth charter school official plead guilty to federal fraud charges. "

"The latest national research found that charter students in Pennsylvania cover 29 fewer days of reading material on average, and 50 fewer days of math than traditional public schools. That puts us in the bottom three states in the country"

This is one of the many issues I lambasted the current and prior Administrations for.
To me, this is a more important issue than College education. They keep concentrating on College because it sounds great to talk about it, but K-12 is the Foundation of it all.

I don't quite understand why this continued rush towards privatization of the school system. It boggles my mind, especially since they then concentrate on testing which has become the industry drying up the funds for actual schooling.

Irks me greatly.

They want your children to have the best school you can afford.

it is a disappointment to me when people jump on the band wagon against charter schools....Charter schools provide the best education for their students, have the best of teachers, and the most well-behaved students in the K-12 educational system.

And in favor of the teacher's union. You look at the success of the KIPP academy taking kids who would otherwise be neglected by the public school system and turning them into successes...how could anyone be against that?

I've only ever heard of one charter school that was unionized...Not good, but those who work there will find that out soon.

to the regular public school? How do you choose the students who get to attend the charter school? How many of the students in the charter school are from poor and dysfunctional families who do not at all support the educational process?

If you see my post below, I have a balanced approach. Some charters work. Others don't. I mainly favor special purpose charter schools such as those with a special academic focus or approach because there are students with particular needs and I favor some options. It is why I am a HUGE proponent of vocational and technical education at the high school level.

or the military. Shape up or ship out.

charter schools. Charter schools are not private schools, they don't charge tuition, and are funded by tax money. This provides a charter school the ability to create a free public school that doesn't have to follow the same regulations as district schools.

The biggest myth regarding charter schools is that a charter school results in higher academic standards, and that is not always the case. In fact it is quite variable.

They can hire teachers who are not part of a union, or even credentialed. It depends on the state law where the Charter School is located.

They can be run by private for-profit entities that provide the school's curriculum. K12 is one such company, and here is not too favorable assessment of that by the San Jose Mercury News:

http://www.mercurynews.com/education/ci_29780959/k12-inc-california-virtual-academies-operator-exploits-charter

They can also have an educational philosophy such as Waldorf or Montessori, which determines the curriculum and teacher training.

It is these issues which cause the controversy, why should a Charter school receive public taxpayer money, when they have such a variable criteria?

Charter schools are certainly not out-performing public schools across the board, and in many cases they underperform the public schools from which they're leeching money. Charters are "non-profit" in the same way that churches and the NFL are non-profit, and they're also not very supportive of teachers' unions.

Further, there are many examples of charter schools excluding "problem" students in an effort to boost their performance, as well as tweaking enrollment to favor one group over another.

For that matter, charter schools famously fall short when it comes to educating students with special needs or students who don't speak English. Charters also have the option of dumping problem students back into the public school, which is obligated to accept them.

I have no problem with charter schools as long as they don't siphon money from public schools. If public schools have one problem, it's not a surplus of funding, so the last thing they need is a requirement that they support a drain on their already limited resources.

then she absolutely should praise it. Stop being so dogmatic.

We need more innovation in education, merit pay, and reduction in the influence of the teachers union.

Merit pay? SERIOUSLY?

How could anyone suggest that teachers get paid bonuses for great results! That good teachers get paid more than the mediocre ones and the bad ones get fired! Oh my I'm getting the vapors!

Are teachers in affluent areas better teachers because their students score higher than low income areas? How about within a school building? Are the teachers who have the higher level kids bether teachers than the ones who teach low level kids?

Education is not a business and thtle merit pay idea is absurd!

cannot be accounted for in setting pay and bonuses? My god. You're not against it because of practical considerations like that. Stop fronting.

The overall quality of teachers in this country is poor. If a sliver of the students who go into law and finance went into teaching, and if it were a more lucrative profession similar to the way it is in Asia and some of the northern European countries, the quality of teachers and the outcomes would drastically improve.

With friends like you...

sitting with a special needs children who will never be able to take or pass a standardized test, who have worked their asses off all year just to keep children from underprivileged backgrounds from losing ground. Tell them they don't deserve raises because they haven't turned out enough A+ students. Students are not one-size-for-all widgets that can be turned out at will.

more money for preventing more fires. Let's start paying publicly-funding doctors more money for curing more patients. Let's starting paying prison wardens more money for reducing re-arrest rates. Let's start paying publicly-funded social workers and psychotherapists more money for reducing suicide rates and family dysfunction rates. And we can go on and on.

People who do these public jobs aren't in it for making large amounts of money. Good evaluation systems make sure we have good teachers and other professionals.

You need to stop this paternalistic business model thinking. Kids are not machines that just need to be "fixed" by better "teacher technicians" who will get more money for better "fixing" the kids.

Teachers want to teach. They are not motivated by a desire for wealth.

Even people in government jobs have bills to pay and lifestyles they deserve to get to live.

rich. SHAMEFUL idea. Kids are not little machines with "teachers" who need to learn how to "program" them to pass tests. We need to stop this rotten stinking "business model" approach to teaching kids. That is not what education is or should be.

That said, sure we do need well-trained teachers and good schools that use challenging but doable academic standards.

And the teachers unions all over the country support the right kinds of approaches to good education. Still, TEACHERS UNIONS DO NOT FORM CURRICULUM. They offer their opinions, but they do not make the final decisions AT ALL. They CAN'T. That is done by the administrators of the schools and school districts.

Like ALL unions, they are there to negotiate fair employment contracts. THAT is their main function. And GOOD.

Finally, charter schools are a mixed bag. Some have worked, and others have not. Remember, charters are public schools but often with a special purpose or focus, approach, culture, etc. and I can support some of these UP TO A POINT. This is because there are students who do need alternative environments and approaches. I don't have a problem with a limited number of charters, for example, that focus heavily on the performing arts, or agriculture, or STEM, or alternative approaches for students who have difficulties in traditional settings, etc. We have some of these in my state, and they are quite successful. But they should not be so numerous as to significantly reduce funding for the regular public schools, and we also need to invest in our traditional schools to improve their range of programming.

Charter schools to me has been the 401K of the education system.

It is meant to be supplemental and a means to test out new methods of teaching and improving the general school system.

I don't consider all of them bad, I just find that the purpose of them is lost as it takes away from the investment of the regular public school system where most kids are.

if she keeps this up. Especially if she selects someone like Cory Booker to be her running mate.

The 3rd Way endorses charters because they do that and thereby 'relieve' the government of it's responsibility for the entitlement of public education.

Along with the Right's interest in propaganda based education, and its war on social values, humanities, arts and science, it creates a perfect political storm to destroy public education, one of America's greatest potential equalizers.

must take credit for the ones that are corrupt and failing.

This cannot be triangulated. Charter schools are stealing money from the public fund. Period.

Just asking because many people are choosing online high schools as opposed to standard schools. Keep kids away from so much peer pressure as well as the bullying problem. Many of them are free and those that are not are pretty inexpensive.

who are in special circumstances where this would work better for them.

She said that both public and charter schools should be evaluated to figure out what efforts are effective and which are not, and get rid of the ineffective efforts.

As usual, it's a nuanced position being manipulated by dishonest people with obvious biases, to say something that was never said in the original statement. When did simply mentioning charter schools become "praise" for them?

I do not like charters and not a friend to it at all. I would have to argue her position. And looking for exactly what that position is, I see your post.

Thank you for putting facts out. Happens consistently with Clinton.

this is very disappointing

When she was running for Senator,she gave the best explanation I ever heard for why Charter Schools are not the answer. She spoke of fixing a problem with a temporary bandaid instead of using our resources to make the system better for all.

I am disappointed in her recent remarks.


But I'm with her

Hill yes!

good salaries and benefits.

Some states have public charter schools. What is wrong with that?

See Diane Ravitch's blog and Politico.
https://dianeravitch.net/2016/07/05/hillary-clinton-booed-at-nea-convention-for-positive-reference-to-charter-schools/

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/clinton-charter-school-teachers-union-boos-225117