The Oakland School for the Arts (OSA), a public charter school I founded in 2002, scored a 9 out of 10 possible points on the Academic Performance Index (API). When compared to other schools with similar demographics across the state, OSA scored a "similar schools" rank of 10. The nearest score attained by any other Oakland high school was a 4.

Yesterday I attended an assembly at OSA to congratulate students on their remarkable achievement and encourage them to work even harder. They're a testament to the fact that Oakland kids can achieve excellence when that's the operating principle of their school.

Excellence is a fugitive in many schools, hounded by the shameless votaries of mediocrity. Some would like to see OSA fail because even the mere existence of a public charter school offends them.

At OSA, art provides the foundation for a rigorous, well-rounded academic program. A sister school, the Oakland Military Institute (OMI), uses ceremony, military courtesy and discipline to create a focused academic environment. Across the country, charter schools base their curriculum on everything from social justice to aerospace technology. What is needed today - for all schools - is money and innovation ... and freedom.

OSA is currently recruiting 9th and 10th grade students from all over the Bay Area. Auditions start this weekend. If you know any talented young artists - singers, dancers, painters, writers - please call (510) 836-DARE for more information.

March 17, 2005 | Permalink

________________________________

Charlotte Laws Responds:

I think your heart is in the right place with respect to education in general, and your charter schools in particular.

There seems to be an ever-present chasm between the two camps: the proponents of "choice" vs. the proponents of "inclusiveness," or the advocates of the "it's the teachers fault" vs. supporters of "it's the parents fault." The sometimes central, sometimes peripheral arguments rage on....over teacher salaries, testing, teaching methods, etc. But the "us vs. them," "right vs. wrong" mentality will solve nothing; it will exacerbate the situation.

I maintain that we have a systemic problem with respect to education in this country. No particular person or group is to blame; the fault lies with the bureaucratic "Death of Common Sense" or "Collapse of the Common Good " mentality. There is a lack of control over students. Principals, teachers, parents, politicians and others are helpless to implement meaningful change. This is why private schools and charter schools should expect greater success; they can more readily enforce rules, expel students, require school uniforms, etc. They--and, in turn, their students--also benefit from competition.

The public school system is colossal and unmanageable. Some financial expenditures are not prudent: money may be allocated for one purpose when it would be a better used for another. People are unable to make decisions because there are cumbersome procedures to be followed, forms to be filled out and filed. No one is given true responsibility, so no one takes responsibility.

But there is more bad news. American students have embraced an ideology that promotes nothing more than jumping through the proper hoops, getting ahead, making money. America's students are focused on salesmanship, not widespread scholarship. Look at England. Their students write essays; we rely upon multiple choice. At Oxford—at least when my ex-husband was enrolled (he is 63 now)--there was no requirement for him to attend a class or lecture (other than meeting with his tutor once a week); he simply headed for the library each day of his own volition. Students were held responsible for knowing the subject, and they were tested prior to graduation.

This scenario would be too frightening for American kids; a large percentage would fail because our culture de-emphasizes learning the material. Most students want to graduate... to get the official paper... to get the high-paying job. And these days, a Bachelor's Degree is not all that impressive. So, more study is needed; we must purchase more education to succeed and more and more (a la Illich). The classics, philosophy, literature, religion, etc. are naturally unpopular majors.

This is a controversial statement--and I will be attacked--but not only do I fully support charter schools, but I also support programs to experiment with vouchers (in some form). Why?

a) Partly because I think it is worth undertaking the experiment. Many would say our public school system is irreparable, and it hovers at a very low level. Perhaps it can be likened to an alcoholic. It may have to hit rock bottom before it can lift itself up. In other words, until a majority feel that the educational system is a bona fide disaster, the fear is that nothing substantial will be done. I think the most sensible way to revamp the system would be to introduce choice, such as vouchers, more charters, trade schools, etc. – we have tried so many other things that have not worked.

b) I think parents and children who feel they have a choice about education will participate more. Plus people tend to value that which they have to pay for (I would say this holds even if it is coming from a voucher rather than ones wages).

c) I point to the aforementioned, critical factors: private and charter schools are able to exert more control over students and introduce competition into the equation. My experience is that alternatives to the traditional public school (i.e. home schooling, charter, magnet, other private, etc.) are, on the whole, simply superior (at least as things currently stand and are likely to be in the foreseeable future). I know there are exceptions, but as a rule, this seems accurate.

The latter point can be best illustrated with experience. Real stories by real people often provide greater insights when it comes to solving tough problems that have been bantered about in the "theoretical realm" for years. But if you are bored with my very long post, you should scroll down now because I am again going to talk about my daughter Kayla.

The one mistake I made with respect to Kayla (although she would no doubt point to others) was placing her in public school from 1st to 5th grade. This was not just any public school; it was touted as "the best public elementary in L.A. County." It was situated in a million dollar plus neighborhood with an abundance of funds from the community. That was good enough for me because I figured any "bad influences" upon my daughter would not be an issue until after 5th grade, and I figured the education would be perfectly adequate. Indeed I was right about the "bad influences" - they were not a concern.

But I failed to realize that my daughter would receive an inferior education. When I placed her in private school in 6th grade, she was a year or two behind the other students. She has been struggling to catch up ever since.

Those who have been unable to contrast a "private with a public" or a "charter with a public," are unlikely to understand there is often a very real difference. I didn't know Kayla's public school was inferior UNTIL she started private school instruction (in spite of the fact that I attended a very expensive and elite prep school as a child).

At the start of 8th grade, Kayla's private school was still completing construction (adding buildings), thus would begin two weeks late. So, partly as an experiment--because I was writing an article about public vs. private schools--and partly because my daughter wanted to undertake this experiment to be with a friend, I placed her in the public school on the adjacent street for those two weeks (again this was an institution with a good reputation in an affluent neighborhood).

The good news? My daughter was by far the smartest kid in the class (by both her own evaluation and that of her teachers). It was excellent for Kayla's self-esteem because she had felt intellectually inferior at her private school.

The bad news? Would she learn anything, if indeed she was so far ahead? Plus, her close (female) friend was beaten up on the second day of school and taken to the hospital. There were one to two student fights daily during lunch. The students cursed. The teachers cursed. Kayla's English teacher became so frustrated one afternoon in class that he threw a chair against the wall, and it broke into pieces, frightening the students. Kayla told me kids were dealing drugs and having sex in the parking lot. (The most depressing part? This was supposedly one of the best middle schools in the city! What must the so-called worst schools be like?)

I became quite nervous about having Kayla at this school... even for two weeks! I told her "If you ever feel unsafe, just leave. Walk home." Imagine instructing your child to flee from school! A place where she should be secure!

To those of you who will bring up the cost associated with private school, there are inexpensive options and more would come to the fore with the introduction of choice (in accordance with the principles of free market capitalism).

My daughter's middle school cost $4000 per year (in line with the voucher proposition that was on the CA ballot a few years ago) and her current high school tuition is $5000 per year. Neither school was / is supplemented by a religious institution. There is a private school in my neighborhood which is under $3000 per year (although it is Catholic and financially aided by the church). I simply do not understand why public schools—and I am told they receive around $9000-$10,000 per student in my area—cannot educate sufficiently when a private school can do so for half the cost.

Does the "Death of Common Sense" truly cost more than books and teachers? Do you have any insights into this mystery, Jerry? If so, I am sure others, besides myself, would like to hear what you have to say.

P.S. Link below to an article I wrote eight months ago (relevant to this subject) called Removing Intelligence from America.

Posted by: Charlotte Laws | March 19, 2005 10:26 AM

_________________

Many people come onto the blog after this post and hurl insults at each other about a completely off topic issue.
_________________

Charlotte Laws Writes:

Note to those of you who are off topic and obviously angry with each other:

I see that since my last post, "education" has not been explored at all.

I am a full advocate of free speech, but I just want to say that I think this back and forth between two factions (whoever you folks may be) is disrespectful to Mayor Brown. If any of you think he will be swayed in one direction or another by any of the inflammatory remarks you make against each other or against various Internet blogs, you are disillusioned. I don't know him very well, but I know enough to tell you with certainty a) he does not care about your seemingly "conservative-liberal" disputes, b) he is an independent thinker who is not going to be influenced by petty and inane accusations, c) he is very busy and doesn't have time to read comments that don't contribute to a real discussion about an issue, and d) he might at some point (due to this type of rhetoric) feel inclined to either allow entrance to his blog only by a select number of people (making it more like what I believe the Oakland Table once was) or end it all together.

This blog is an opportunity. An opportunity to convince other leaders of society that this experiment works, that they should set up their own blogs. An opportunity to make your voices heard on important issues. I don't just mean "talking to Jerry." Because search engine placement and hits to this website are so good, I have personally received numerous e-mails of support for my ideas (including people who want to join my nonprofit organization). That alone makes it worthwhile.

Don't blow it for everybody else.

_____________

To see entries on this section of the blog, click here.