Most arguments that I see, against the Charter School seem to be less and less about how the new school will benefit the attending students, and more and more about teachers jobs, specific deadlines, and other operational details. While I understand that these things are all important, they are all being handled properly by people who know what is REALLY happening. Many people are working very hard to ensure that the charter will open as soon as possible, as a complete and functional school, with as few positions as possible being lost in the process.
These technicalities are not what pro charter vs. anti charter debates should be focused on. The whole point of perusing a charter option should be, and has been, to create a better learning environment for the community's youth. If everyone believes that charter is a better educational route for the schools attendees , there should be no argument. If this is not the case, then please, lets discuss it.
Well said!
ReplyDeleteHowzit William! Charter schools are a great thing, unfortunately they are underfunded in the state of hawaii. With the bad economy, grants are hard to come by and that means that the Laupahoehoe Charter school will not have enough money to provide a top quality education. Many jobs will be lost at the school and i really don't see how our students will get a better education with less money, teachers, staff, equipment, services, etc. Only time will tell, but i think the DOE/BOE would be happy if the Charter School movement closes down our school. At least they won't be the "bad guys".
ReplyDeleteHey Mr. Nagata! Thanks for the reply! I agree with you that the charter budget will probably be tight. However I have seen, first hand, the effect that and more budget cuts are having on the current DOE run, public school. Enrollment is going down (or at least it was a couple years ago when I saw the numbers). Many, if not all, of the vocational arts electives have been cut (i.e. wood shop, auto shop, ag??), as well as Band, and the school librarian. (Please correct me if I am wrong about any of these.)
DeleteThen there were the several years while I was in high school where the DOE was constantly threatening to close the school. As I understand it, the DOE has stated that it will not close the school while we are looking into charter options, but who knows what they would say if the school was left as public.
I feel as though it is time for a change, and charter seems to be the best choice at this point. I, like you, am sure that budgets will not be "peachy", but what money the charter gets, will hopefully be allocated in a more efficient way, ending up with a better overall experience for the students.
As far as the validity for charter schools, it is to provide an alternative learning environment that traditional academia has fallen short of addressing. Here in Hawaii we have isolated populations that simply don't have the means to carry out education in the standard public educational facility. So what is our literate populace to do for the community of tomorrow? Simply sit back and afford the lack of progress to poor transportation and infrastructure? I think charter school development can not simply abide by the constructs put in place by the DOE/BOE as it stands now. It's a known fact that many of Hawaii's school fall below national standard and it is also a fair consensus that most local students don't respond well to a standard curriculum. Of course these things alone don't address the full topic. So does charter school law provide a framework that truly allows for new learning techniques? I would say it does but the implementation of it is saddled by mixed ideologies in board panels, poor financial strategies in charter proposal, and overall bureaucracy. "Waiting for Superman" doesn't just badger poor teachers it addresses the state of education today and wether it's motive's were as genuine as the original schools of thought. I would say it not only pinpoints the preponderance of short felt lesson plans or even lack there of but the sickness which teachers have allowed themselves to part take. So teaching as a "job" is certainly the nature of the business, which perhaps should be more like a lifestyle. I don't blame the teachers and I don't blame the BOE/DOE. The question of wether the charter school administration has realistically addressed the matter of maintaining a particular type of academia with the means they have, which many cultures have done well, and wether the panel is ready to walk into a classroom made of trees, laptops, boat halls, or greenhouses is still a reality when people give out these grants. The sad part is that this all seems like a business transaction with trusts, bonds and investments, but it isn't. In many cases the parents have to spend money to get success in education or take it by the reigns themselves. There have been many successes in home schooling and I wonder why? What distractions does a child face in society? What motivations do teachers have in a job that is not a job but treated as so? Bad teachers should be left to prove themselves not pacified. What learning styles peak the student potential, audible, visual or participatory? How does a family support there child's mental growth and do they have an community infrastructure for that? In some cases children need to be taken from hostile homes and in some cases the school needs be as their home. How does a teacher control for these circumstances when they have no connection whatsoever? The truth is that education is not a one size fits all approach. Charter schools give the plausibility of real connection to the learner but the masters should also embrace and be allowed to embrace their guild in it's vastness. The students will respond when this is the true nature of the topic.
ReplyDeleteSo in retrospect of the many tangents veered into I would say that charter schools have a great purpose in Hawaii and many parts of the country. So don't push them to the wayside because of mere doubt, fear or hard to come by funds. The point is that you shouldn't have to build a public school the same way and call it a charter. Does the program work and does it fit the criteria for success? If so then don't lock the funds for enthusiastic teachers and school administrators?
Thanks for presenting an excellent view of how charter schools can benefit a location such as this!
DeleteWill, I am so impressed by the caliber of discussion here! It is exciting to be creating new educational opportunities here in Laupahoehoe. Critics of the budget for LCPCS gave not really shown where the alleged gaps are so its hard to take these complaints very far. People seem to forget that as a conversion school & the only school in the district, the facilities & their maintenance are paid for by DOE. Ask any charter director what their biggest expense is & they will invariably say its their facilities costs. One charter school pays $40k a month in rent! The budget has been analyzed by charter school budget experts & they say that the budget is viable & sound. So let's focus on the future, building on the progress that tge school has made & figure out how to make it work! Sorry for the typos but I can't seem to edit very easily on my iphone.
ReplyDeleteBTW, any current LHES teacher who wants to teach at the charter school when it opens in July 2012 needs to get a Letter of Intent & their resume to the LCPCS office by February 15. They can go to www.laupahoehoecharterschool.com for more info.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the union and the DOE, no teacher should have to apply for their job during the transition year--it's their job already. If all the ILSB wants is to know what teachers are going to leave and who is willing to stay, that deadline needs to be extended to after March, since the first transfer period for the DOE doesn't even start until Feb. 27. Many teachers will stay if they are unable to get transferred (they really don't have a choice)--but why make them decide before they know all their options? Seems like a pretty poor way to "play nice," and just leads to more teacher resentment. They already feel like their opinions in the charter issue have been ignored for the last year and a half--now they're being ignored again.
ReplyDeletePlease see my more recent post, "Clearing Up Confusion". No one is forcing teachers to decide before all options are known. The February 15 date is an application deadline, and has nothing to do with when teachers will have to decide to accept or reject positions offered. If you might want to teach at the charter, you turn your application in.
DeleteI think you may have a hard time trying to portray that teachers have been ignored when teachers have been welcomed and encouraged to attend many meetings held in the past. Unfortunately, It seems that many teachers may be spending too much time worrying about what the DOE will think of them if they attend charter meetings, and not enough time informing themselves about the future of the school, by attending such meetings.
My husband and I attended many, many charter meetings at the beginning of this school year. At one point, I was told to "be quiet," since I was not on the board, and therefore had no right to speak. (I was told this, by the way, by someone who was not on the board either, and was speaking quite frequently.) Certainly, the teachers have been invited to charter meetings...unfortunately, nobody listened to them when they spoke. Eventually, they just gave up and stopped going...leading to this current state of quiet resignation. The ILSB did not then and does not now show any inclination of welcoming the ideas, points of view, or concerns brought up by the teachers...I realize that everything on the charter school website looks beautiful, and that the ILSB has the best of intentions...but the reality has, sadly, been quite different.
DeleteI did attend last night's meeting, and I'd have to agree that the board didn't exactly seem welcoming. I can't really speak about the rest of the board, but the person who was responsible for running the meeting seemed more concerned about getting through the agenda than about hearing the visitors concerns. I guess since it is a board meeting, we are supposed to get ourselves onto the agenda if we want to speak, but I just expected a more relaxed approach to public input, since it is public input they claim they desperately want. Do you know if there is ever a time when the public can just come and ask questions and hear what each other and the board has to say about them? That would seem a more likely way to get people on board in this community.
DeleteReply to Feb 15 comment:
DeleteI am sorry to hear that you felt unwelcome at the meetings. This should not be the case. We must keep in mind that the public board meetings are still in fact board meetings however. This means that there is an agenda, which needs to be followed. It is possible to be added to an agenda if there is something specific you would like to bring up. But the best way for the public to give input and ask questions at the board meetings is during the "Public comments on Agenda Items" item at the start, or "Public comments on Non-Agenda Items" item at the end of board meetings (whichever is relevant).
I think the best solution for being told to be quiet may have been to simply ignore the interrupting person (if they were not on the board).
If the board does not hear your concerns, then this is the perfect place to get teachers involved in bringing these concerns up! I am trying my hardest to find correct answers to questions, and direct ideas to the right people. I am always happy to add a new post for discussion of specific topics. Just contact me.
Reply to Feb 16 comment:
While I noticed this somewhat as well, I believe that this was mostly due to the fact that it was Valentines day, and everyone wanted to get out of there as quickly as possible. I am hoping for an improvement with a little more emphasis directed towards the "public" part next meeting. That said, you are quite correct that this was a "board meeting", following a specific agenda, which generally does not provide much flexibility.
I know there have been public non-board meetings in the past (with a LOT of public attendance from what I have witnessed). These indeed were much more relaxed, and basically the board members were there to answer public questions and hear public concerns. Apart from some expected "unintelligent" comments, the meeting was very civil and educational. I think these are a great idea, and will see if I can find out if there will be another in the near future.
As always, thanks for contributing!
unfortunately, in my experience, the "public comment" section is at the beginning of the meeting, which means that the public cannot actually comment on anything that is on the agenda, since the specifics are not known before the agenda items are discussed during the meeting (even at the end, it is "public comments on NON-AGENDA items). Doesn't this kind of make the public comments irrelevant?
DeleteSo maybe it is time for another public non-board meeting where anyone can come and ask questions without being on an agenda. Or maybe this has to wait until all the information is back from the union, or whoever is figuring out what's up at the moment. Or maybe the board could just keep a record of questions that people send to them, and could answer them publicly at the next public board meeting. People who sent them in could be there or not, but the question period could be on the agenda anyway.
DeleteReply to Feb 17 comment:
DeleteI do see what you mean about agenda item comments not existing until after the agenda items are heard. I will try and address your concern to the ILSB. However, I would not go so far as to say that your comments are irrelevant. I think that the idea is to address the board with concerns about agenda items ahead of time. This way they can be addressed when the board moves to the item of note.
Reply to Feb 18 comment:
I think it IS necessary to have another one of these in the near future, but I fear that the planning of the upcoming "First Annual Fun Fest" will be taking over most of this month. Maybe we can try to get one on the agenda for April.
Here's the most recent "news" from the ILSB, concerning the "transition year" which, at the outset, was described as a "status quo" year, where teachers could take the charter on a test drive to see if they wanted to stay with charter and resign from DOE, or to transfer schools and stay DOE. Apparently it's not too much of a "transition," since, unlike originally stated, teachers do NOT keep their jobs, but must apply along with everyone else, and hope to get hired.
ReplyDelete"The ILSB and it's Deputy Attorney General find no legal support for the proposition that current DOE employees already have positions at Laupahoehoe Community Public Charter School for SY 2012-2013."
By the way, we have ag, high school art, small engine repair, metals, and ceramics this year...we had woodshop last year.
ReplyDelete...we also have ukelele...although we don't have band, it's simply because we could not find a teacher willing to make the drive to LHES.
ReplyDeleteIt's great to know we have gotten some of these important classes back again at the school! We spent too many years loosing more and more classes such as these.
DeleteAfter re-reading this post, I realized I'm quite in agreement with your point. I agree that the student's welfare and quality of education should be foremost. If some teaching positions are lost during the transition, while I sympathize with their plight, if it works out better for the kids in the long run I think it's a good idea.
ReplyDeleteOnce problem that I, as a homeschooler, have seen with the public school system is that it's way too easy to get tenure. I can't begin to count the number of times I've heard of bad and unfit teachers get set up with a cushy post and no real responsibilities because the big bad teacher's union would sue if they were fired. That's one reason the public school systems never seem to have enough money; when a crunch comes, rather than cutting the bloated salaries of the people in charge (or, heaven forbid, a job or two) they cut classes and extra-curricular activities. Whose welfare is really being looked after at these schools, the kids or the uppity-ups?
So while I don't really know much about the charter school, if it allows parents more say about how their money is spent, and the ability to actually fire unfit teachers, I say go for it!
You need to understand that at this point, teacher's jobs have not been "lost"--teachers have simply had to relocate to a DOE school or risk losing everything they have accrued over the past years. I know that there's a push for a removal of the tenure process for teachers--but remember that in almost every job, seniority is important when bidding desired positions. Many teachers are heartbroken that it is no longer feasible to work at Laupahoehoe (in addition to loving their jobs, teachers also have to do what is in the best interests of their own families, and still need to pay their mortgages.) And certainly, "bad and unfit" teachers get an awful lot of free press, just as "bad and unfit" pastors get a lot of free press. Unfortunately, the public does not generally hear about the large majority of teachers who are skilled, caring professionals with an enormous amount of education and knowledge at their disposal--teachers who stay long after the bell rings and come long before any students arise. As for "bloated salaries"--teachers have solidly middle class salaries, even though many have master's degrees. Laupahoehoe has already cut the fat in its budget, and still manages to offer high school, middle school, and even elementary school extra-curricular activities, including robotics last semester and many sports continuing into this semester. A lot of these activities are run by people who volunteer their time and effort. You say you "don't really know much about the charter school"--it sounds like you don't know much about the current status of Laupahoehoe High and Elementary School either. If the welfare and quality of education is really foremost in the minds of everyone, why does the ILSB not make a greater effort to reconcile with the teachers? After all, these are the very teachers who have helped bring enormous gains to the current school. Apparently, legally, the charter school does not HAVE to hire any of the teachers...but it would have been a small effort to push back the arbitrary "application deadline" to reflect the timing of the DOE posting period, and a small effort to tell the teachers that they are welcome to a job during the transition year, rather than requiring them to put in an application and resume to continue in the same position that many of them have already had for years. Instead, the teachers get a legal opinion further exacerbating the feeling of alienation and lack of concern they already feel from the ILSB.
DeleteFirst off, I would like to point out that Daniel was home schooled in a completely different state. I believe he was simply reading my post and giving his general opinion on the current status of the education system. He knows very little about Laupahoehoe school, let alone its transition to charter.
DeleteIn between firstly and secondly, I am not aware of anything saying that teachers "risk losing everything they have accrued over the past years". They simply stop adding to it.
Secondly, the application deadline has absolutely nothing to do with the date at which teachers must accept or reject an offer. Therefore the posting period of the DOE is completely irrelevant. If there is a chance in your mind that you may want to teach at the charter school next year, simply submit your application. You can decide whether or not to accept a position when the time comes.
Keep in mind that the charter school will not get any information out of the DOE about teachers. This means that they would have absolutely know idea of the credentials and experience of the teachers that you presume they should simply welcome in with open arms. I have covered all of this, and more, in a more recent post titled: "Clearing Up Confusion"
from http://doe.k12.hi.us/personnel/movementofteachers/110121%20Revisions%20to%20Guidelines%20Memo.pdf
ReplyDeleteAll teachers who work for a public school MUST fill out a form resigning from the DOE.
--for DOE tenured teachers accepting a charter school position (this is after the transition year--at the end of the transition year, you can try to go back into the DOE without penalty, but after that year, these conditions apply)
--"PCS teachers seeking re-employment with the DOE after two years from their resignation date, must reapply as a new hire (new application and screening interview required) through the Department's Teacher Recruitment Section."
From what I read of the document, it seems to matter whether or not you reapply within the first posting. What is this first posting?
DeleteIf this comment is a reply to my comment:
"I am not aware of anything saying that teachers "risk losing everything they have accrued over the past years". They simply stop adding to it."
Then you misunderstood me. Teachers surely must not lose what they have accrued. It is just as if they are retiring from their current job. Which is essentially what they would be doing. It seems understandable that you would have to reapply for a job that you left.
This is just my opinion. DOE policy really needs to be taken up with the DOE if there is concern. I am afraid I do not know enough about it. Sometimes it just may be worth taking a risk for a new (and possibly better) job.
Laupahoehoe girls volleyball just came back from a 2 set deficit to take the best out of 5 against Makua Lani. Great TEAM PLAY. Excellent job girls!
ReplyDeleteCongratulations Seasiders!! Great job!
DeleteLaupahoehoe lost a young man with a kind soul and a beautiful smile last night. John you will be missed and remembered.
ReplyDeletePaula Dickey
Tragic loss. My condolences to everyone who was close to him.
Delete