Arkansas Blog

Little Rock schools are 67% black and they are worried about charter schools promoting more segregation. I'm not sure I get the gist of that. If the latest enrollment figures are correct one of the items that was interestingly missed was the fact that white enrollment continues to decline. The increase was in the 'other' category. So it appears that the LRSD is predominately black with an increasing number of hispanics and a decreasing number of whites. Does that pretty much sum it up? Again, what is the big deal about charter schools? It appears that is one of the few positive things going for the school district.

"every child enrolled in a charter is there because the parents or guardians of the child decided that the charter alternative was better than the LRSD offerings. It is time we started dealing with the issues which are causing parents to go elsewhere."

Thank you Mr. Kurrus. That is really what we charter folks have hoped for. We are not trying to destroy public education. You and Max got a little befuddled with the White flight then Black flight LISA Academy. It really is, "concerned parent flight." No parent should be asked to sacrifice their child to an entrenched system of public education. Choice, you know. Like another, "public option."

----------------

"The Wal-Mart Foundation awards a $250,000 start up fund to each of them and the same financial group does the budget and record keeping for each of them."

Say what? The budgeting and record keeping by WFF is news to me, and I've been watching this for some time. Sure, they give start-up grants. Does LRSD receive grants from other sources? Of course they do!

And, Ms. Mitchell, would you agree that the magnet schools discriminate, by design? Check those waiting lists! Your superintendent seemed to admit as much in your presence at a State Board meeting. (I haven't looked at the waiting lists for a couple of years, but am guessing that little has changed. White, you are in; Black, we've got enough of you.)

President Obama's Sec. of Education, Arne Duncan, loves corporations and Charter Schools. He has threatened to withhold Stimulus money from States that inhibit Charter Schools. The two main beneficiaries of Arne Duncan and President Obama's education policy are Charter Schools and Educational Testing Companies. That is one reason why the WaPo loved "No Child Left Behind" and now Arne Duncan. Kaplan Educational Services is a major player in the corporatization of public education and it is a $2.3 billion a year bidness for WaPo.

A WaPo editorial about Arne Duncan:
(snip)
Mr. Duncan recently put states on notice that they risk their shot at millions of dollars in federal stimulus money if they are not open to public charter schools. As a former head of Chicago's public schools, Mr. Duncan knows firsthand the benefits of charters. Freed from the constraints of union contracts and one-size-fits-all school policy, they've been able to innovate successful new approaches to learning. They give parents an important choice about where their children go to school and, in many cases, are the best bet for a decent education.
(snip)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/21/AR2009062101783.html

An African American perspective on Arne Duncan and Charter Schools:

"The only beneficiaries of President Obama's educational policies "will be the testing and charter school corporations." The president's top executive for educational business affairs, Arne Duncan, is free to treat the nation's schools as his "portfolio." Unfortunately, "children performing below grade level, or in need of special education are not welcome in corporate education land."

HenryS,

Glad to see you admit that charter schools are not a right-wing idea, regardless of the "corporate" influence of WFF. Thank Clinton, Kennedy, and Obama--those right-wing crazies--for charter schools.

Oh, and by the way, why is it that so many charter applications come from African-American nonprofit organizations? Why are so many communities in the delta competing for KIPP schools?

I would guess that the black community on the whole does not have the option of private schools so the only hope of improving their education opportunities are charter schools.

Yep.

Choice, you know. Like another, "public option." Snip from above

Wonder what percentage of parents who favor a 'private option' for their children's schooling oppose a 'public option' for other people's health care? Bet it's close to 100%.

If I had my choice I would abolish public schools and privatize them. The funding that now goes to public schools would be provided to the public to buy private education. If they don't use it for the private school they don't get it.

Stereotypes don't seem to be of much use in dealing with these difficult issues.

The (non-charter) public school my daughter attended for the last three years seems to have equipped her to gain entry into a good college, and I hope she'll thrive there. We're black. We didn't find it necessary to turn to private schools or a charter public school, but I don't fault anyone, of any race, who does.

This is the thing: I think what troubles some of us is a phenomenon I studied thirty years ago in college (way before Malcolm Gladwell's book that bears the same name, but is on a different topic). What -- if any -- is the effect of the Tipping Point? In college sociology it was explained to us as the point at which a neighborhood had such a high percentage of black residents that whites viewed it as "black," and would no longer move there -- no matter how great a value the homes were.

So I think some of us wonder (but will never know) whether *some* of the attraction of some charter schools is that they are not so, errr, "black" as most public schools. And if that is an unspoken underpinning, I think anyone can see how it would be offensive to black people, in a visceral way.

And we perhaps wonder, hypothetically: if x-YZ charter school had the same percentage of black students as, say, Forrest Heights or Hall High -- but the very same discipline, curriculum and emphasis on parental involvement -- would it be as attractive to white parents? And if it would not, is that a muted variety of white flight?

As usual, I have questions, not answers.

I see that you acknowledge that 'white flight' exists. Many of your compatriots on this blog don't. I think that most parents want their children to get a good education regardless of whether it is public, private or charter. Unfortunately, the reality is that private schools on the whole provide a better education. It is just too costly for many. Charter schools offer some hope for people who are locked into the public school system. I'm for anything that improves the education of American children. We ALL will suffer if our kids can't compete with kids in other countries. I'm am not optimistic when I see idiots like Katherine Mitchell put in positions of leadership when all they have are hidden political agendas that have nothing to do with education.

TAP, my kids have been in private school, home school, and public school. I prefer public, to make them better prepared to be contributors to their community. But anything that can improve public is welcome. It appears that Mr. Kurrus recognizes charter schools might put just enough competitive pressure to make them better.

And TypeKey still sucks.

There was a time that the LR Schools could compete with private schools. When that was true Little Rock had very few private schools----primarily catholic schools. The growth of private schools in Little Rock and other communities is testimony to the degradation of those public schools. Charter schools offer some hope and I commend them but nut cases like Katherine Mitchell will do what they can to deep six even those meager efforts.

I think this statement from M. Daugherty says it all: "When I took my Oath of Office it was to the Little Rock School District. I have dedicated my time and my action to doing what I believe is in the best interest of the District and hope those who serve with me do the same. I also believe the actions of our attorneys are in the best interest of the District and will support them one hundred percent."
M. Daugherty thinks the most important thing is what is best for the district but not a word is said about what is best for the children. I think it is time members of the board should realize that they are not offering the product that parents want. Parents want a good education for their children and not all the excuses the Little Rock District keeps giving out.

"The growth of private schools in Little Rock and other communities is testimony to the degradation of those public schools."

No, it isn't.

It's due to entrenched racism, fear of diversity, frightened insularity, anti-educationalism and "small-town values."

All the factors that keep Arkansas bobbing at the bottom of the barrel.

Still, Central High's doing fine.

Is your EVERY WORD A LIE?

So far, yep.

There are two kinds of Hope for Arkansas' kids.

Stay here and pick a career that conforms to the good-ol'-boy network (Law, say, or Politics) . . . or say, "Fuck you very much," when you graduate high school and move as far away as you can from this nonsense to fulfill your own ambitions and dreams in the larger world outside -- an outside world that rewards, not bullies and strangles, individuality and smarts.

Dear Mzz Bates: You might be more persuasive if you could rein your rudeness and bitterness (which in truth seems a common affliction on this blog). You imagine yourself superior to Arkansans, who you say are products of "entrenched racism, fear of diversity, frightened insularity, anti-educationalism and "small-town values." Look at yourself, ma'am. You may not have the life you wish you had, and it may not be your fault, but it's not the fault of everyone around you.

It's really amusing watching people explain why "white flight" doesn't have anything to do with white bigotry.

Don't kid yourselves--the point of "school choice" is to unlink the fate of the privileged from the fate of others, and to accept that some schools will not give the children to attend them a good education. That is why I am against school choice.

When I was a kid in SWLR, I watched as nearly all my family's neighbors engaged in white flight, moving to Benton, Bryant, and other such towns in the 1980s and early 1990s. I know it was white flight because they said as much. They wanted to move away from our neighborhood because "the blacks" were moving into it, and they didn't want to live around "those blacks." My family stayed put, and I'm glad we did.

Even though I've seen white flight up close and know it to be real, I don't think that every person who pulls their kid out of an LRSD school does so because of racist issues. I know it's not the case with my decision to send my son to a private school.

My son attended an LRSD school his first year of school, and we were quite pleased with it. His teacher--an African-American woman, by the way--was fantastic, and he enjoyed going to school. At the same school the next year, his teacher--an older white woman--was a terrible teacher who seemed unable to manage her classroom. My son hated school, hated his teacher, and was miserable. The principal at the school wouldn't deign to speak to us about our concerns, despite several requests.

I was able to move him to a private school, so I did. I didn't make that decision based on race but instead because of frustration with a bad teacher and a bad building administrator. I keep him at the private school because it offers a curriculum that no public school offers, I can speak to the principal pretty much whenever I want, and, most importantly, my son's quite happy there.

Now, I don't mean to suggest that race is never a factor in such decisions. But the issue is a bit more nuanced than some people see it. Within the past 15 years, I have been an LRSD student, employee, and parent, and I know firsthand that the LRSD is lacking in several areas. Those areas ought to be the focus of the board, not trying to force kids unable to afford private school to attend undesirable schools. After all, we aren't going to enlighten racists, but the LRSD can certainly do a better job.

The growth of private schools is "... due to entrenched racism, fear of diversity, frightened insularity, anti-educationalism and "small-town values."

That's a pretty broad stereotype to apply to the thousands of diverse people with a kid in private school. Spending $600 - $700 a month for college prep school tuition is anti-educational?

".... or say Fuck you very much," when you graduate high school and move as far away as you can from this nonsense to fulfill your own ambitions and dreams in the larger world outside -- an outside world that rewards, not bullies and strangles, individuality and smarts."

That's actually an argument for private schools, since public schools are where individuality and smarts are bullied and strangled -- or at least when I attended them. The anti-intellectualism just about ruined me.

I'd love to be able to put my kid in public school, but my experience growing up in Arkansas public schools was so bad that the main condition I placed on my wife when she wanted to move back here was that our child wouldn't attend them.

It's a sad thing, because when 80% (or whatever) of parents in WLR have their children in private school it cannot possibly be good for the city.

"Charter schools do not have to abide by the same rules as public school. Public schools can not just "kick" students out when they exhibit behavior problems or have disabilities that must be addressed."

That, from Ms. Mitchell, is pure BS. Problem kids are kicked out to Felder Alternative Learning Academy on Pecan Ave. or Hamilton Learning Academy on Bryant Street or the Accelerated Learning Center on Scott Hamilton.

Are kids being expelled from charter schools, as Ms. Mitchell suggests? I would bet the public schools discard a much higher percentage of the misbehaving and misguided. A lot of what Ms. Mitchell says is baloney. This is just one area where I have some personal experience having mentored a young man sent off to Hamilton for fighting. (I was impressed with the job the educators do at Hamilton by the way).

And as far as race and charter schools go, at e-Stem the majority of the students are black. Academics Plus is in mostly white Maumelle so I am guessing the racial makeup of that school reflects the community it serves. Other charter schools are almost entirely black. I agree that the flight to charter schools...if that term must be applied...stems from middle to lower class parents concerned about discipline, safety, quality of instruction, finances and district leadership. Play the race card if you must, but that is not the issue. Not even top 10.

Let me say that I'm torn between the two camps and I'm not sure which side sees best into the future. Looking at Heller's submission, in theory, it looks like he has put together one of the best legal arguments possible to show that charter schools are a detriment to desegregation, public schools, and possibly education.

However, it's the reality of the situation that makes me lean more toward the view of Kurrus and Fox. Not only are some of the cows out of the barn, but the fence is torn down and the rustlers have run off with most of the strays, and the local constabulary is turning a blind eye to the whole situation.

LRSD is at a critical juncture regarding student achievement and the NCLB laws. Heading into this unfriendly and somewhat uncharted limbo, it might be best to be focused on the more immediate needs of district survival and meeting the educational needs of the district's children. The choice is between taking a "de jure" route to fight something that will be nearly impossible to stop even if you win (counter-suits, etc.) and choosing a "de facto" route to achieve something that will make the possible continuance of the district more appealing to clients and the public.

It is more likely that the solutions needed are to be found in classrooms, not in courtrooms.

I want a voucher to help me pay for the private school my children are in. I'm paying the taxes for education, it seems fair that I should get to use my dollars too. Anyone disagree????