Reville Op-Ed

Today, Paul Reville had an op-ed in the Globe promoting Governor Patrick's education plan.

Here's the part on charters:

"We seek to build on the success of high-performing charter schools to reach a larger number of students, especially those with special needs and those who are English Language Learners. Currently, charter schools serve only 2.6 percent of the state's total public school population, and typically educate fewer special education and non-English-speaking students than their sending school districts.

However, the governor has proposed lifting the cap on charters in Massachusetts, specifically in low-performing districts that are nearing their caps, so proven charter operators can serve our most challenged student populations who have not been well served. The governor's "smart cap" proposal lifts the district spending cap from 9 percent to 12 percent in those low-performing districts when providers commit to work with the neediest students. This cap lift will ensure that successful charter school operators have the ability to expand their contributions in school districts where the need for innovation is greatest."

How do they plan to do this without corruptingthe open lottery process that is currently used by all charter schools in the state? The details are still missing on this point.

He continues:

"Further, to encourage innovation and expand access to a greater number of students, Patrick has boldly called for the creation of Readiness Schools, autonomous, in-district, charter-like schools designed to give experienced educators increased discretion to operate schools under performance contracts with school committees. Readiness Schools will attract universities to operate partnership schools and empower educators, charter providers, and others to take responsibility for not only running schools but improving student achievement. One form of Readiness School will be offered in situations where outside providers will be invited in to operate chronically under-performing schools under new rules."

1) These Readiness Schools sound a lot like pilot schools, which we just saw in the Harvard study to be not nearly as successful as charters. Why rely on this model that doesn't seem to work so well?

2) What exactly does this quote mean: "empower educators, charter providers, and others to take responsibility for not only running schools but improving student achievement." As it applies to charter providers, does it imply that they only run schools but don't currently work on improving student achievement. That's not true in the schools that I am familiar with. They are singlemindedly about improving student achievement. If that's already true for charters, why try to set up another class of schools that needs to be convinced of this goal. Since charter schools already believe it, so support their expansion first.

Of course, we all know the reason that Readiness Schools are being pushed. It's the same reason why pilot schools were pushed in the first place. It give districts that are bound by union rules a chance to try to compete with charters. We all know it's easier to start fresh with new schools than to try to turnaround a disastrous existing school.