OPINION: State Senator Rodney Tom Responds to Charter School Critics

There's been a lively discussion on my previous blog post, "". I thought I would share with you a letter I received from one of the charter bills sponsors, Sen. Rodney Tom.

Nancy,

I’m surprised by the ferocity of the pushback on charter schools. We’ve been very upfront in that they are a very limited component to improving our education system. Why ten new schools per year out of 2271 schools would be such a threat to the system is a telltale sign how engrained we are with the status quo. Let me address the most  common concerns regarding charter schools one by one:

1) We already have innovative schools: That’s true, but most of them are not focused on economically disadvantaged areas. In fact, of the state’s 22 innovation schools recently recognized by OSPI, only five had free and reduced lunch concentrations greater than 50%. I would also say that since we already have innovation schools, what would 10 more schools per year hurt? Public education needs to be centered on the needs of the students, not the adults in the system. No one entity should have the sole monopoly to rule over our public schools. Parents of children in persistently failing schools should have options; charter schools give them one option.

2) The bill has a fiscal note when we’re already underfunding our schools: Most of the fiscal note is associated with the transformation zones portion of the bill, not charters. A transformation zone is probably the most cost effective mechanism we have to give these students in persistently failing schools the opportunity for a program of education that was mandated in McCleary. The McCleary decision didn’t’ mandate that the state just pour more money into an antiquated system; it expects the legislature to use its common sense and provide the most cost efficient use of scarce resources to give every child an opportunity for a great education. Transferring control of our 10 to 20 persistently lowest performing schools makes a lot more sense than continuing to empty our coffers on an administration and staff that has proven year after year they can’t improve student outcomes after years of self-directed effort.

3) If it’s appropriate to waive rules for charters, why not waive them for all schools: We’ve tried for years to deal with basic placement issues, and those efforts have been consistently rejected. Charter schools give a very limited number of schools the flexibility to see fit what they think is in the best interest of the students. We’ve taken the qualities of the best charter schools, those that usually have waiting lists to get into, and designed our charter program around them. President Obama, 41 other states, plus the District of Columbia can’t all be wrong. What are you afraid of, it’s only 10 new schools a year out of our existing 2271 schools.

4) Charters won’t have the same level of accountability: That’s true, charter schools will have a much higher level of accountability. A charter school that doesn’t meet its stated goals can be shut down, when was the last time any of our persistently failing schools were shut down?

For me the debate over charter schools is much more than about charters, it’s about real education reform. When Washington State comes in 32nd out of 36 states in the Race to the Top contest designed by a democratic administration, it should be more than a wakeup call that we’re behind the curve on education reform. Charter schools just give parents and students one more option in a system where one size does not fit the needs of all. In the end, this is about student achievement, not about the adults in the system.

Think Peace!

Rodney Tom

State Senator

360.786.7694

800.562.6000 hotline

rodney.tom@leg.wa.gov 

http://www.sdc.wa.gov/senators/tom/