Chapter 6- Local Control, Choice, Charter Schools, Home Schooling, and Commercialism

          This chapter deals with the complicated issues that result from parents not wanting to simply succumb to the endless litany of problems that plague today’s public school system. There are several options now available to parents especially since No Child Left Behind changed the way that voucher systems work. The advent of charter schools is also a point to be discussed, although research has shown that they are no more effective than regular public schools. I have a slight problem with this last statement, but that will be covered further down.

            First I would like to discuss the issue of choosing private schools. While I attended my public high school from 2003-2007, I saw many things that people would consider issues. We went through metal detectors upon entering the building, soft lock downs were a weekly occurrence, and as a safety precaution no student was allowed to carry a backpack. Although there was some fighting and gang affiliation, the school was not a bad place. Most of the student population accepted the rules and got along just fine. A whole host of AP and honors classes were still available to me, and my education did prepare me for college.

            In contrast to my experiences, my best friend attended the private Catholic high school that was only one mile from my own school. She encountered a very different kind of socialization. Instead of obeying a series of strict rules dressed up as safety precautions, her school had almost exclusively elite students surrounding her at all times. However, when uniforms “eliminate class lines” girls in particular find their own form of hierarchy. Constant pressure to have the best shows, purses, and hair styles kept the students competitive, and the constant reminder of who was more entitled to the private school education plagued her. We had and have had since that time several discussions about which trade off was more worth the cost. We both ended up at major universities being very successful, but the types of pressure and interactions that we were faced with made our high school educations far from ideal.

            The reason I being up this point is because the book spends a long time discussing parents wanting to get vouchers to send their students to private schools. There is an assumption made in the text that this will somehow be better for the students. I think it would be a bit more far for the authors to address the fact that even if the private schools are mechanically run more efficiently or have less violence, that does not mean that the students will not encounter a whole new set of problems.

           

            I found the discussion about charter schools especially interesting, because they are not something that I had really had much exposure to before this. I find it interesting that the research suggests they are not performing at the same level as regular public schools and in fact they are sometimes performing lower. Many critics blame this on their lack of accountability and financial irresponsibility as well as their exemption from some pretty important regulations such as hiring very qualified teachers. The only thing I wonder about is whether there have really been adjustments made for similar populations. The drop out rate for charters schools is not very high and to my understanding they typically educate children that would normally be attending very low performing schools where their risk of failure through the fault of the institution would be much higher. If these students who would normally be attending very dangerous schools end up only slightly below regularly performing public school would that not mean that the gap was being closed at least slightly? The book is not entirely clear on this issue, because it does not explain what it means when the statistics are adjusted for “similar types of students.”

            The individualized philosophies behind most charter schools is to use innovation methods of instruction to try and better educate children. I find it upsetting that many teacher’s unions and critics are so harsh on these schools. Of course every type of experiment and innovation is not going to work out, but I do not think that means that we should not always be pushing the envelope when it comes to techniques. I do believe that it is important to be innovative in your own classroom. Therefore, it would be hypocritical of me to criticize a school wide use of innovation and experimentation whose main aim is to help children. Again these might not always work out the way we planned, but many public schools are also not working out the way critics think they should. I would rather send my own students to a school where they were actually trying to adjust the educational philosophies and techniques rather than passively accepting all of the inadequacies of out school system.

            I was also interested in the discussion about the commercialization of schools. My own high school was a “Pepsi school” where all of the vending machines only sold Pepsi products. Their signs and advertisements were all over the school, and there was even a scholarship program that most students were encouraged to apply for if they had the need and credentials. Although the book thinks this is a very negative thing, I do not think it harmed our school environment to have these vending machines in place. Every school has several different vending machines, ours were just consistent and came along with a few posters. Although Spring thinks this is very dangerous, I think it is a far cry from a “world where there are no borders between education, business, and consumption.” In fact, most schools that I see now have vending machines that only have diet beverages available for purchase during the day. While this is definitely not ideal for children, it is still a reality that the commercial companies are still willing to at least take their business philosophies in a slightly more moral direction.