Charter Schools

Grading Schools: Understanding the various studies by By Jennifer A. Marshall & Kirk A. Johnson.

Tests yield various results. Miss Hoxby isolated "matched" pairs in Charter and Pub Ed:

---snip

To do this, Hoxby looked at virtually all students who attend elementary charter schools and compared them to students who attend the nearest equivalent public school, yielding "matched pairs" of student bodies. She found charter students' proficiency in reading to be 5.2 percent higher and in math 3.2 percent higher than those in their matched public schools.

Further, Hoxby's study shows that charter-school students' gains in academic achievement, relative to their public-school counterparts, tend to increase for more established charter schools. In other words, charter schools are pulling away from public schools in terms of performance

---snip

What is not explained is how and why this is so. Student/Teacher Ratio? Embedded lessons? Yes, these are factors. I'm going to soapbox a bit here. My son is at a charter school. First time. This particular charter school also has the students who've been kicked out of "traditional pub ed". We're talking... 19 years old and reading at 3rd grade levels and with major attitudes and issues. We're talking minority- black and Hispanic. We're talking police being called. We're talking about young people who've begun life with major disadvantages.

We're also talking, here, about superb teachers with a calling. Who the heck else but someone with a genuine calling would work with these students? Be willing to deal with the troubles, the language, the attitudes. I'm in awe of these teachers. And, I tutor once a week at the school.

This has been an investment for my son. He's gotten good teachers; and learned a great deal about "children who've been left behind". He's learned about their fears, how and why they acquire and use the language sets they do, he's learned about the legacy of ignorance these children have inherited. He's learned a great deal about the peer pressure. "Group think", "group talk".

He's learned to talk back. And to stand on his own beliefs. He's a good student: a goody two-shoes, a kiss-up, a suck-up. And he doesn't care when he is called those things. No one has yet directly called him "white". He doesn't speak "white" -- he speaks about J.R.R. Tolkien, the battles between good and evil. He speaks about taking the moral highground, and the battle for one's soul. Of course, we don't mention here that he's a very skilled martial artist. But he always prays he never has to use his skills.

And through it all, I get to see the battles between Lib/Conserv rhetoric and agenda and how it plays in "education" at these levels. The school is small enough that I can observe matters up close.

During the Presidential election: the staff is predominantly Republican -- the student body, predominantly Democrat.

Democrats say that socioeconomics is what beleaguers these poor performing students. To a point, they are right. But they are wrong to overharp on this matter.

Republicans say that freewill and hard work is tantamount to success . They are right. Perfectly so; but they discount the overarching sociologic bad side of the "peer culture". I'm not sure that this is a bad thing they do as I cannot ascertain if there is a way to cut a child free of "wanting to fit in".

"Wanting to fit in" is a socializing, civilizing factor.

I tutored a young man recently. Age 16, from Mexico; been here 5 years. Reading way below level. English is good. A real sweetie! Obese. Major problems in home life. On the table in front of us are 3-6th grade fictional reading books. He is to pick one, and we shall read together.

He likes my son. Says my son is a "good guy, a nice guy". I ask the young man questions about himself -- he tells me he owns two books at home -- his favorites: Return of the King, and the Two Towers (both by Tolkien). He reads these at home. Loves'em.

So, I scour the room and find another book -- school age appropriate, figuring this young man is capable of reading and comprehending Tolkien -- therefore WHY is he reading this lower grade stuff? So, we begin reading this school-age appropriate book; he and I taking turns (Yes, I've turned the session into a fun dramatic exercise for us both). By the 3rd page, I'm ready to through this book in the trash.

I ask the young man -- is this book making any sense to you? He says "no". I tell him that it isn't making sense to me, either. So, we track down a newspaper -- he can't read the print.

I determine this young man needs glasses. He tells me he had a pair. Wore them to school, got teased mercilessly, and now can't find his glasses.


I learned two things.

1. The lower grade books have larger print -- making these easier to read.
2. Most the "reading" book material which is age appropriate is CRAP! It is poorly written, confusing, full of slangisms, and no wonder these students are resorting to lower grade books.

I've perused sufficiently through the years the "award winning" school-age appropriate books, and I'm quite shocked by how poorly constructed, poorly written these are. I keep having to re-read portions, or search back to find clues to explain current page material -- and never find them. Makes me momentarily feel stupid.

It ain't me, Mrs Voracious Reader, who has the problem -- it's these books. The Pub Ed Schools are all using these.

Oh yes, I've recommended to the Principal the student have his sight rechecked. And yes, I will hunt down the classics -- perhaps broken into smaller books (larger print) which tell a story, a good story, and are well written, well plotted, well explained -- for future reading sessions.

My point? There is far more going on at schools than even these "tests" reveal.

While some of these books are written in order to "entice" a reader (and or encourage them to feel better about themselves in faulty grammer, thinking, etc.) what these books ultimately do is simply reinforce faulty grammer, erratic thinking skills. And, of course, leave the reader feeling fairly stupid.

Part of the reason Charter Schools ARE showing improvement in reading skills is due the other subjects -- Science and Math. No scrubby language in these lessons. Herein, IMHO, is why minorities are showing such dramatic improvements in reading.

It certainly ISN'T due the "reading materials" per se. It's because of all the embed lessons in the other subjects. "Civics" for example -- lots and lots of reading is required. Solid language, good thinking skills are encouraged. This here, IMHO, is where and why these students are improving in the "reading" categories.

But reading as its own subject? Left to choose, these students are choosing CRAP to read in free reading periods. There's no motive. And the books are junk material which even the students know is designed merely keep them in a class. What a NEGATIVE way to encourage a student to love reading.

I know some parents are "protesting" the excellent book "The Giver". I wish they weren't protesting this book. It is superb. It is well written, thought out, laid out -- no holes -- except the obvious hole of being a "fiction". The problem in "The Giver" however, is inherent in part of the storyline; our awakened hero must escape (instead of standing and fighting). That's a problem, yes. But for the schools with much higher literacy levels -- this book is absolutely outstanding, and provocative for discussion (thereby improving debate, speech skills).