School Choice. Well, something like that.

In the first reading from Chapter 8 of Power and Control in American Education, Local Control,

Choice, Charter Schools, and Home Schooling, the author Joel Spring has us readers examine the

questions "Who controls American education?" and"Who decides what knowledge is of most worth

to teach to students?" (Spring, 219)  He also asks, "Do you think public schools should let parents

decide what should be taught to their children?" (Spring, 220) These are questions I have nor really

spent too much time examining and dissecting as a general thought with the exception of looking at

what is taught in my subject area of Foreign Language. However, I find these questions extremely

essential and looking deeply into them is crucial to move forward in education. We must look at

representation as the chapter points out, and we must remember to represent all to the best of our

ability in the public realm.

In addition, Spring has us think about the financial aspect of education by asking us even more

questions about where money should go for students attending certain types of schools such as

religious schools, charter schools, for-profit schools, private secular schools, etc. Should the money

follow the student regardless of their destination?

The article draws our attention to the "order of operations" where the top-down elected school board

officials, superintendents (mostly dominated by whites), and principals in charge are not meeting the

needs of the parents and students district-wide. This helps explain why parents choose paths away

from traditional education. Prior to having this "school-choice" many of the schools were classified

as failing schools without competition. The chapter lists the different types of school choice plans:

public-school choice, public-private choice, failing-school choice, and low-income private school

vouchers. "Schools are like any other product in the marketplace. If a large number of parents don't

choose a particular school, then that school would be forced to either change or shut down." (Spring,

225)  He even goes on to further say, "Imagine the production of cars. If no one buys a particular car

model, then the company must either discontinue the model or improve it." (Spring, 225) I have

never thought about schools truly in this business-like fashion, but this reading opened my eyes to

the sad reality we are facing. Each school-choice model is thoroughly explained in the reading, and

we see that school-choice is a quick and easy phrase but the process of school choice is not so simple.

As easy as it sounds to transfer schools, the process can be difficult due to the rules and requirements

for students and schools.

Something I found positive about the charter schools that were examined was how each school

focused on an environment that was "safe and supportive" and "each of these public charter schools

has drawn on its location, student needs, and school mission to create a thriving school culture."

(Spring, 232)  This concept of focusing on location and culture really reminds me of bringing the

community into schools how we have spoken about and read about in previous weeks while looking

at the works from Blank, Johnson, and Shah. Bringing the location and community into schools is

crucial, and focusing on student needs first helps educators be more culturally responsive, as we

discussed and read about in Villegas and Lucas' work.

Some aspects of the KIPP (Knowledge is Power Program) charter schools seem to incorporate

rigorous academics and character development, working on developing the student holistically. This

mirrors some of our Social and Emotional learning discussion we had in our symposium and also

Ginwright's reading, The future of healing: Shifting from trauma informed care to healing centered

engagement. Though this idea is positive, the negative way in which it is presented to students limits

its success. It "reflects a belief that low income students lack character traits needed to be successful

in school and around the world." (Spring, 234)  It does not take into consideration their own

experiences and perspectives on the world, and if forces their character-curriculum onto the

students.

The article continues to examine for-profit, homeschooling, online and distance learning and the

reasons for choosing these paths. With so many options, I wonder the same question that Spring

asks, “Will distance learning/online instruction replace brick and mortar schools?” (Spring, 241) As a

teacher, it is kind of a scary thought, but I do see that as a possibility in the future.

In summary, the politics of the content of learning in public schools is evident. What can we do to

help ensure positive, culturally responsive, community, holistic education for our students?

http://voiceofdetroit.net/2015/08/31/10-years-after-katrina-new-orleans-all-charter-school-system-has-proven-a-failure/

In Race, charter schools, and conscious capitalism: On the spatial politics of whiteness as property

(and the unconscionable assault on Black New Orleans) by K. L. Buras, we take a look at education in

New Orleans post hurricane Katrina and policy ecology and its effects on communities of color. We

examine "whiteness as property" and its a"strategic assault on black communities by education

entrepreneurs." (Buras, 296)  Can I just say, I had no idea this was going on. The article "reveals a

strategic and racially exclusive pattern of educational policy making at the federal, state, and local

levels." (Buras, 297) It talks about how whites capitalized on black schools and neighborhoods to

build charter schools. This reminded me of the white savior complex we discussed in class. After a

devastating Hurricane Katrina hits, whites come in to save the day and school children!  

My first few years of teaching, a group of colleagues and I had decided we were going to design and

work towards creating a new Rhode Island Charter School. I thought of all the amazing and new

innovative things we could do for our students. I was presented with the idea and I ran with it. I

thought there was nothing better than our plan and our vision for our charter. However, after

teaching 13 years in a public school, going through several years of teacher's union contract

negotiations, my opinions have changed. And interestingly enough, our charter fell through and we

were left to continue on in traditional public school realm. At the time, I did not know much about

charters, and after this weeks readings, I am much more well informed than ever before.

After reading about the state takeover of schools in New Orleans, the firing of veteran teachers, the

dismantling of the district, and the breaking of the unions, I am just plain disgusted. I can not believe

that this took place and that people took such advantage of a natural disaster. After fighting a good

union fight with my former teachers union, I can not imagine if I were a veteran teacher in New

Orleans going through such an unfair process. I also find it unfair to students as they do not all get

the opportunity to go into successful charters, with many having the lottery process. I posted below

the trailer of the movie Waiting for Superman, where children are so hopeful for their future based

on a lottery, but some who do not get in are left with the feeling of failure before they even start

school.

The leaders of the reconstruction claimed this was going to be a wonderful brand new school system

with more opportunities for all and smaller classes and less poverty yet, the contradictions remained.

They were experimenting with young lives. They were taking away veteran educators and replacing

them with first or second year teachers. Politically, they were replacing blacks with whites. They were

making decisions strictly because they had power, not data, power, without any input from the

people who were there before. Although this was being portrayed as innovating and new, the

opposite was happening. Were they really perpetuating segregation? Were whites given too much

authority over public schools primarily attended by African American students? Were these schools

going to produce the kind of young adults needed for the workforce or college, etc.? How did the

enrolled students differ from the former schools (not allowing special ed students in, offering the

choice to some but not all)?  

I was happy to read the suggested principles that could reform schools in New Orleans offered by the

author. They support what we have discussed each week in class and provided me with a sense of

closure from reading all of the history in New Orleans schools. As Buras reminds us, we have to

really think about what educational equity is and what we must do in order to get there for our

students.