Can any liberals on here explain to me why most liberals are anti charter schools?

Can any liberals on here explain to me why most liberals are anti charter schools?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_school
washingtonpost.com/local/education/charters-not-outperforming-nations-traditional-public-schools-report-says/2013/06/24/23f19bb8-dd0c-11e2-bd83-e99e43c336ed_story.html?utm_term=.1517a4dbc86e
youtube.com/watch?v=UXKIYXa3CFQ
businessinsider.com/college-essay-high-school-senior-into-every-ivy-league-university-2014-4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Because they take funding from public schools and have no proven benefit, many of them even perform worse.

Teachers unions are subversive

>they take funding from public schools
it is a public school.

Because then how will they brainwash children with white privilege lessons?

Its because Charter schools are the closest that ivory tower liberals ever get to large government programs fucking people over and burning taxpayer money.

Because they take money away from teacher's unions and public bureaucracies.

i'll take a blue pill for a second

do these guys teach kids on "scientific" creationism or other obvious anti-science shit for taxpayers moneys?

try again sweetie

This. Its not even like they pay better than public schools, which would give teachers a reason to hate them. They pay equal or worse and the staff have to work longer hours.

The overall issue is they soak up funding from every district in a given city as a flat percent. They are then expected to accept students from every district so that everybody gets a shot. Obviously, only certain parts of the city end up having their kids accepted.

Harder to implement thought control and collectivization when schools operate individually and autonomously

undermines another level of government control

no clue, considering most of my super liberal friends all graduated from the same charter school

They don't put up with the teacher's union bullshit and leftists get alot of money from the teacher's union.

No, they're not.

>A charter school is a term for a school that receives government funding but operates independently of the established public school system in which it is located, and in some cases are privately owned.[1][2] Charter schools are an example of alternative education and public asset privatization.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_school


Also it's not so much charter schools that are the problem as it is the idea of school vouchers in general, which takes money away from public schools and often gives it to private Christian schools instead. That's a bigger problem than giving it to charter schools, because private Christian schools can teacher whatever bullshit they want (evolution don't real, etc.), and can discriminate against people at will.

Did John Oliver tell you that?

It varies. One of the largest organizations of charter schools in America is Gulenist. Most are just normal schools though

Do you know how charter schools operate? They're known for having very high expulsion rates.

They "overperform" because they kick out the students who underperform, and even then not all of them "overperform".

washingtonpost.com/local/education/charters-not-outperforming-nations-traditional-public-schools-report-says/2013/06/24/23f19bb8-dd0c-11e2-bd83-e99e43c336ed_story.html?utm_term=.1517a4dbc86e

>washingtonpost

>Gulenist
wow, it sounds even worse then

No, I work in a fucking school. I've watched the best students get sucked out of my class and into a charter school. Kids learn from their peers and leaving me with a class of dipshits doesn't help. While that is minor, the funding issue is real and you see it in play. Meanwhile, public education has to rely on performance based grants. Charter schools do not. But hey, tell me about all that money my school doesn't have.

the idea is if you centralize all authority and money in public schools then they'll be better. it's like their idea if you give the government all your money the things will improve.

another thing is charter schools don't have the teacher union and actually teach the students real subjects. in public schools you've got hordes of niggers ruining the class for the people who want to learn and you can't remove them. in charter schools you can kick them out.

i went to a few different charter schools and they were better than public ones. the couple public schools i went to were total shit while the charter schools were pretty decent and a focus on education.

They're citing a study done by Stanford University.

There's no demonstrable evidence that charter schools are better at educating our students than public schools, they just get better averages because they kick the stupid kids out to make themselves look better and thus boost their profits.

Some charter schools are in fact public schools. In Georgia, only like three districts aren't labeled as "charter" because it's a free pass for flexibility with money. There's little reason NOT to do it in GA.

Nailed it.

He nailed it, but at the same time, I don't really like GSE's. I guess it's necessary step tho.

Your own article proves you wrong.

>The overall issue is they soak up funding from every district in a given city as a flat percent.
you're saying they take more money per student? they get their money through enrollment. Just like public schools.

This is a problem how? Kick out the niggers and spics who don't want to learn to public schools and everyone else goes to Charter schools. So again, what's the problem?

Parents who go through the effort of placing their children in a charter school are also very likely to be more involved in their child's education and development than those parents who simply dump their kids off at the public school and wash their hands of the whole business. This means that as more of the children with good home lives attend charter schools, the public schools become more and more concentrated with shitty students who have shitty parents. No one in the public schools wants to move in that direction.

>charter schools remove all the niggers who go to school for the free lunch, to socialize, and avoid the law for skipping and we can't allow this. unless hordes of niggers are ruining the class for the white students we won't be happy

In the US all charter schools are privately managed and are not subject to the same government regulations as public schools.

There's no reason to have them because there's no evidence that they actually perform any better than public schools.


Again though, the bigger problem with a school voucher system as Trump is in favor of is religious schools, not charter schools. If charter schools were the worst of our problems it wouldn't be that big of a deal.

All schools should be charter schools or none of them should. There should be no in-between.

Most aren't like that though. In general charter schools are pretty decent. The Gulen schools are exploiting the charter school system like crazy though. Apparently Michael Flynn wants them investigated.

Separate but equal never quite works out.

Though tangential to your point, Georgia also has no teachers union. Teachers sign individual contracts with their school system. There is no collective bargaining here. So they can't strike over charter schools or anything else.

This is segregation and perpetuates inequality.

You complain about black people being/acting uneducated, but you don't want to properly educate them. You complain about them using welfare, but you don't want to give them the educational tools to rise out of poverty.

Do you not see the problem with this?

Do charter schools take up a disproportionate amount of funding for their # of students? Or would that same money just go to public schools with those same # of students regardless?

I went to one for four years. They changed the program of studies every year. Had to do some gay ass final project. SJW teachers made us read native son and hick Finn and forced us to say Nigger in class. Native Son is a good book but I failed her class, ended up dropping out after they changed the graduation requirements for a fourth year in a row. Still have no high school diploma at age 22 but it hasn't mattered much. My boss is impressed be me at my new job and while I'm a bit fucked up I think I will at least make it out of parents house in a year or so.

Not all charter schools are shit but the one I went to sure was.

catholic schools are better than public schools. the only education i got was from catholic schools growing up while the public schools were worse than dog shit. it was basically just daycare instead of a school.

Charter schools wouldn't like that as they wouldn't be able to kick out underperformers

They actually get far less funding. Like half per student.at least the one i went to did.

No amount of money will fix their genetic shortcomings.

>You complain about black people being/acting uneducated, but you don't want to properly educate them. You complain about them using welfare, but you don't want to give them the educational tools to rise out of poverty.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't force it to drink. Blacks that want to learn go to Charter school, niggers who are only going for free lunch can go to public schools. You want equality of outcome, not of opportunity.

No, I'm literally explaining how it works in GA. I work in a public school that is labeled under a "charter system." Look it up. It's not privately managed--we have a superintendent and school board.

The real reason liberals want centralized education

Religious schools are hit and miss. Most Catholic schools and mainline Protestant schools are good but there are tons of evangelical schools that are terrible. Not because of the religious aspect but because they aren't able to even teach basic language and math skills. Even community colleges sometimes require students from those schools to pass the GED because they don't consider the diplomas to be valid.

The problem is that charter schools are selective more often than not. If it were truly equality of opportunity then black underperformers would be let in so that they could have a chance to succeed in a better school environment.

Just kick them over to a shittier charter school that needs attendance numbers.

they are for profit schools that recieve public taxpayer dollars per child. in cities charters are places for resegregation, allowing parents school choice rather than historical models of building communities around local public schools. since they are "charter" they are also exempt from the oversight of public schools and discriminate against special needs students

>the public schools were worse than dog shit

Because public schools are underfunded, a problem which will be made even worse by a school voucher system.

Religious schools are also not subject to any government oversight and can thus teach whatever bullshit they want (evolution isn't real, etc.) which will hurt the US scientifically/economically after a generation or two.

They're also free to discriminate against LGBT kids, kids with disabilities, etc. which will unjustly hurt those kids because they'll then have no other option except the now even worse public schools.


The solution is to improve public schools, not abandon them altogether.

You eventually get a terribly shitty school with subpar education since all the good teachers wouldn't go there.

>The problem is that charter schools are selective more often than not. If it were truly equality of opportunity then black underperformers would be let in so that they could have a chance to succeed in a better school environment.

Define black under performers?

I don't think that throwing more money at a school makes it provide a better education. The school system in general is fucked. Kids of different kept from interacting, buildings shaped like prisons, regimeneed schedules, a lack of exercise, terrible for boys who later on get pills shoved down their throat for not sit ting still for 8 hours. Not that charter schools are much better.

Different *ages

Black students performing below average consistently.

Because they can't force your kids to their indoctrination centers anymore

The simple act of going through the trouble of applying to a charter school puts the child and parent ahead of the worst shit public schools have to deal with. The only way to make it "fair" would be to randomly select students and give them no choice. Ultimately without parental involvement and a good foundation in the home for a large percentage of students, public schools will continue to have problems.

I did phenomenally well in a charter school:

1. I finally understood high school math, and actually excelled at it, even coming to enjoy college algebra and statistics
2. The assignments were more interesting and I never felt like I was just doing busy work to fill a goddamn seat
3. I wasnt subjected to the nightmare social environment that my regular school was for me.

Charter schools scare liberals because they are not uniform. They allow for choice and innovation, experimentation even, and the chance that one child might get a better education than another. This terrifies them. Just look at California where, when I was growing up, anything BUT public school was all but illegal.

When I have a child they will NOT be damaged by public education. Whether charter school or one of the many homeschool co-ops here, they will actually learn and grow.

False

I also work in a school where the per-pupil cost is over 30k USD and yet teachers have to buy their own supplies. If dollars are not trickling down to the classroom level, your funds are likely soaked up by a disgustingly inefficient administrative layer.

youtube.com/watch?v=UXKIYXa3CFQ

Why would you prioritize underperformers?

Even if their school system was a literal dirt shack a child who is truly willing and able, in this day and age, can overcome this and excel. From Libraries to the Internet they could prove themselves.

Yea, but its not hard to kick people out of good ones that are properly managed because there will always be shitty people with stupid kids who need a place to be.

Teachers Unions.

If parents move their kids out of garbage public schools to other schools, the teacher unions fear the public school systems will want to start firing bad teachers, as a means of making changes to the public school system to compete. Fired teachers mean less teachers in the union paying dues.

It is that simple. Teach unions are very large contributors to elected officials. Because they don't want charter schools, most politicians have been against it.

Implying that blacks don't get into charter schools. I went to one (it was pretty gay) and probably 15% of the students were black.

I can actually answer this.

They take public funding, but are considered at a higher tier, and can choose who to admit. This means that they get better students who would perform well anywhere they go as well as preferential funding.

The issue then becomes that the worse and generally poorer students are stuck in shittier schools with worse funding. So while you are making education better for some, you are making it worse for others.

Republics and democracies function properly only when the baseline of the people are smart enough to think for themselves, which is specifically why the left has grown so goddamn powerful, because the education system is shit everywhere.

We don't need charter schools, private schools, or voucher programs, we need public schools with lots of funding while creating an oversight committee that makes SURE that schools teach things without a shitty slant.

All of the school issues go back to LBJs Great Society. He increased funding for schools dramatically and also scholorship opportunities and government grants. This means that we need new teachers. Where do you get teachers? From colleges. Who goes to college for non-stem degrees? At the time it was predominantly minorities and their sympathizers due to the fact that JFK introduced Affirmative Action just 3 years before the Great Society initiative started.

>JFK provides quotas and benefits for colleges to take in minority and liberal students as well as scholarship opportunities for those minority students being recruited
>3 years later (when those minorities and liberals have flooded the school programs AA created) more funding is put forward to expand education
>all of the new students then become the teachers because of the new job opportunities and increased wages LBJ created in the education sector

It was genius, really, it was.

Schools are mirror imagines of the communities they serve. Schools don't fail. Communities fail. The white kids going to charter schools are just trying to get away from the minorities dragging down their public school system. If charter schools are such failures, then why the hell are they oversubscribed everywhere they crop up?

As far as segregation in education is concerned, if white lefties had ever bothered talking to black people down south they'd know that back in the 60's and 70's the black parents didn't want to send their kids to schools with white kids any more than white parents wanted to send their kids to school with black kids. What the black parents wanted was equal access to resources. This is where the federal Department of education comes into play to ensure equity in the distribution of resources.

Good lad

Because unions give a lot of money to the Democratic party.

Charter schools undercut janitorial, bus driver, and teachers unions.

They also don't subsidize fire art and kinesiology/exercise science degrees since they don't hire art or PE teachers.

I went to a public high schpop in suburban Indiana. There was a charter school in the city over for "gifted students." I saw at one point it was ranked seventh in the nation per some paper's rankings.

In high school I participated in academic/math team and we went head to head with them a lot and routinely kicked their asses, even though we're just some dumb hick public school to them.

Charter and private schools are nice in theory but in reality they don't really teach students to think and succeed, they teach students how to pass standardized tests so they can keep their ranking. Case in point, that "7th in the nation thing"? Turns out being the 7th "best" school in the nation meant percentage of students who TOOK an AP or IB exam. Not even pass; just take.

I am sure there are some phenomenal charter schools out there, but usually you're better off just finding a district that has good public schools (and they do exist, just not in mega-urban areas or the boonies).

I know this is all anecdotal evidence but just some food for thought before you send your kids to a shitty school because it has "charter" or "private" as a designation.

>I don't think that throwing more money at a school makes it provide a better education.

Except that's basically exactly how it works.

What we really need most is a reform of how schools are funded. Under the current system schools are funded by property taxes, which means the wealthy kids who live in wealthy neighborhoods will go to wealthy schools and get the higher quality education they need to become wealthy engineers and lawyers and continue the cycle, while poor kids will go to the school where they've got three periods of gym a day and the teachers don't understand the basic concepts of their subject.

On that note, raising teacher salaries is important too because it makes the field more competitive and respected, which means we'll have better quality teachers overall. Right now if you're really knowledgeable about math or science (or any field honestly) there's absolutely no reason to go into teaching because you can always make more money or have an otherwise more rewarding work experience elsewhere. So we get stuck with inept people who couldn't actually cut it in their fields of choice. Salaries need to be more competitive to avoid that.

Ahh yes, more state control over children and less parental freedom is what we need.
Gas yourself

you see liberals are dumb fucking mongoloids that think throwing money at problems fixes them. So when beaners, white trash, and niggers do horribly in school it must be because the school isn't funded well enough. Therefore, charter schools are bad because they are taking money away from poor dindus who don't want to learn anything in the fucking first place at schools that can't be bothered to use their money responsibly.

Thus we eventually get to the conclusion that a publicly funded charter school can't be fair in any way as it would either be a lottery which by definition would be random or selective and would sweep under the rug anyone they though would impact grades
I'm not prioritizing, but I acknowledge that generally those that perform well in school are more likely to commit crimes in adulthood due to low education and thus low opportunities
Lumping the shittiest with the shittiest only creates a situation where you have anyone that starts to slip academically being plunged into a school where they can't get a good education due to it not being given as generous a funding as other publicly funded schools.
Not saying they don't but if you'd rather see low IQ blacks manning registers or sweeping floors rather than shooting guns and selling drugs then I'd suggest we pay more attention to the young black males who fall victim to criminal behaviors.

>They also don't subsidize fire art and kinesiology/exercise science degrees since they don't hire art or PE teachers.

Oh, the irony. Charter schools care way more about music and feminist dance therapy than (good) public schools do since they still buy into useless IB garbage.

Another tip to anyone figuring out if they're sending their kids to the right school: most colleges laugh at IB credits/diplomas and won't take them seriously at all. AP math and science credits are accepted nearly everywhere.

Did that control for inflation?

>poorer students are stuck in shittier schools with worse funding
The opposite is true. Shit tier schools frequently cost the most to run. Refer to any inner city public school system in the US.

>we need public schools with lots of funding
This is the status quo.

hopefully those kids go on to do great things like not be a public school teacher

>This means that they get better students who would perform well anywhere they go as well as preferential funding.
Higher performing students shouldn't have to sit in class with a bunch of idiots who do nothing but disrupt and prevent the school from forming an environment conducive to good education.

Its the same reason why there are "special" education classes.

>another thing is charter schools don't have the teacher union and actually teach the students real subjects. in public schools you've got hordes of niggers ruining the class for the people who want to learn and you can't remove them. in charter schools you can kick them out.

The real reason why liberals are anti-charter..

The theory is that the kid who would do well in a dirt shack doesn't need access to the same resources as the dullard whose mother smoked crack during pregnancy. Underperformers should be given additional resources so they can perform at the mean level rather than resources going to the top performer to make them deviate even further from the mean. This is the actual stated policy in some places.

>local community

Or

>a nice middle class neighborhood with section 8 housing forced in by HUD

this is bullshit.

I remember that when I got to college, the kids who came from private and charter schools were way ahead of me at school.

I only took Calc 1. This other fucks had already gotten a waver on Calc 101 since they had taken Calc 2 and APs up the asshole.

Public schools are shit education.

They enroll better students, but they don't produce them.

Are we talking about black students who refuse to learn and only go to school because they legally have to or black students who want to learn but can't because of some mysterious force? Because if it's the former, fuck them and send them to public schools. If it' the latter, what do you want people to do?

I mean, blacks already get positive discrimination as it is when it comes to schooling. You should have seen some of my English 101 black partners papers, looks like it was written by a retard and yet, he got an A on every paper. In order to get an A as a black student, all you have to do is show up and do the work. Don't believe me, see for yourself

businessinsider.com/college-essay-high-school-senior-into-every-ivy-league-university-2014-4

This is the reason I always think it's funny that my brother who goes to a private school repeats liberal garbage, it makes me think "what makes you an authority on black America when I was the one that went to school with them?"

>anyone that starts to slip academically
So you are saying it creates an environment where young people are not systematically encourage to be state sponsored failures because if they fail, they are given a lesser position in life and they are not taught that they are just as good as those who succeed?

>I remember that when I got to college, the kids who came from private and charter schools were way ahead of me at school.

Hint: It's not because the charter schools themselves were better. It's because they take students who already would've performed that well at any other school.

Once again, it's your school district, not public schools in general. I went into college with calculus 1/2, physics 1 and about 9 hours of free elective credit. Good public schools offer high level AP courses. Shitty public schools don't.

If you want your kid to feel like a retard in a STEM major... send him to a public school.

They'll indoctrinate him in SJW bullshit and give him some social science education but nothing worth a damn in STEM.

This is a 100% bonafide fact.

You want your kid to be a doctor, engineer, architect... don't send them to a public school.

I went to a public school and took BC calculus and 7 other AP courses. It really depends on the district.

Maybe there are some state-level differences at play here but this is definitely not the case in the NYC-metro area. Shitty inner city districts suck up most of the tax dollars from surrounding towns, even from other parts of the state. They cost the most to run, they have all the best equipment, and they still suck.

I went to public school and did all AP shit. No normies and I got tons of college hours.

We don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

What we need is better education for all Americans. We also need to teach real critical thinking though. Enough teaching for tests bullshit.

Found the pedophile

these kids had access to classes my school didn't, literally.

Public schools are trash.

> those that perform well in school are more likely to commit crimes in adulthood due to low education and thus low opportunities

I'm going to assume you missed a 'dont' in there somewhere. The problem i'm having with your argument is basically a chicken and egg scenario.

There exist, unequivocally, children who have no will to learn, to excel or to succeed within the educational system. By your logic simply throwing more money at them would change this fact, where i believe it simply would not.

Why expend energy / resources trying to save a drowning man who doesn't even want to kick his feet when there are others clamoring for the lifebouy?

>thinking creationism is wrong
God created the universe in 6 24-hour days, and if you disagree you are bluepilled

>The overall issue is they soak up funding from every district in a given city as a flat percent
the money goes where the students are. Unions want all the money to themselves.

Money isn't the issue. Zuckerberg hurled $100 million at Newark public schools a few years ago (which are already overfunded from New Jersey equalization payments) and the system still sucks.

Meanwhile, school systems in countries like Taiwan and South Korea manage to operate for a fraction of the price while getting far better results than $20,000+ per-pupil public schools in places like Chicago.

Charter schools are useful to the extent they can get teachable kids away from the savages so that the teachable kids can actually learn.

Otherwise, they are nothing special. If you just replicate the student population of a shitty public school inside of a charter school, you end up with a shitty charter school.

Remember - students make the school. Not the other way around.

You can supply a million dollars worth of resources on each nigger and it won't do jacks shit if they don't care about school and don't want to learnl. The money should be spent on those who will actually benefit from it.

>Implying that ghetto kids actually have "parents" in any real sense.

Precisely. A lot of white lefties FEEL so much but KNOW so little. They separate themselves from the people and the causes they claim to represent. Those of us who went to public schools and know the problem aren't impressed with people who live in a world of theory over experience.

Charter schools, vouchers for private schools, etc...are wonderful because they provide choices. The public sector has consumers just as the private sector does and choices always makes a system stronger. How the public sector is leveraged is a conversation that should be had more often.