Although I believe our public school employees are sincere and dedicated,
it disturbs me to see how crippled our public schools have become. Too
many of the elementary students are rewarded for failure, or punished for
success. At the HS graduation, groups of 4.0 graduates attest to the lack
of standards which have evolved in recent decades.
These are catastrophic conditions for our schools, our city and our
country. While some inane legislation (mostly federal, but also local)
has contributed to this debacle, other factors were also at work. It now
behooves us to attempt to rectify the deplorable situation which currently
exists.
I believe an indispensable component of the solution is competition: we
must eliminate the monopoly of the NEA and "professional educators" and
allow more ideas to enter the marketplace. Charter schools are probably a
preferable option to vouchers, at this time.
On Mon, 24 Nov 1997, Tom Trail wrote:
> Charter School legislation will be introduced this next legislative session.
> Draft legislation would authorize up to 12 charter schools per year,
> distributed geographcially up to a maximum of 60 during the first five
> years. Some of the basic elements of the proposed legislation are:
>
> 1. Funding of schools in basically the same manner as other public schools
> with some exceptions.
This is vague enough to satisfy or offend most anybody.
> 2. Requiring that all teachers be certified and that teachers are employees
> of the legal entity responsible for the charter school.
Seems reasonable; will the charter school have the same leeway in granting
temporary certification as public schools now employ?
> 3.Limiting the number of charter schools which may be authorized to 12 per
> year.
This may be a necessary compromise for the first year or two. I hope we
can emulate Minnesota's success more closely than Arizona's randomness.
> 4. Requiring that presentation of a petition to establish a new school will
> require the signature of at least 30 qualified electors of the school
> district in which the school will be located, and that a petition for the
> conversion of an existing school will require the signatures of at least
> 60% of the teachers at the school to be converted and at least one or more
> parents or guardians fo at least 60 percent of the students currently
> attending that school.
OK, this is the political process at work.
> 5. Requiring charter schools to incorportate as nonprofit corporations and
> secure liability insurance.
I'm not familiar with the contingencies of this, at this point.
> 6. Providing that only local school boards of trustees may authorize a charter
> school, except that if approval of a new charter is denied or if
> conversion
> of an existing school is approved over the objection of 30 or more
> persons
> in the district, then such decision may be appealed. There shall be no
> appeal of a decision which approves a new charter or which denies the
> conversion of an existing school.
Seems like reasonable safeguards.
> All members of the Interim Charter School Committee signed off on the proposed
> legislation, and the compromise legislation appears to have a wide base of
> support.
Good, let's go for it.
> Rep. Tom Trail
Thank you, Tom, for giving your constituency the opportunity to comment on
these proposals, at this opportune step in the process.
*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*
Robert Probasco rcp@uidaho.edu
Computer Science Dept. office 208.885.7076
University of Idaho fax 208.885.9052
Moscow, ID 83844-1010 http://www.uidaho.edu/~rcp