Split opinion on NYC charters, thoughts on test prep?
In keeping with the news of the week from Washington, we asked readers what they thought of charter schools. The short report: There’s no groundswell of opinion — in any direction. Click here to see the results.
About 30 percent of poll respondents support more charter development, while 23 percent each felt that charters threaten traditional publics or that charters were both good and bad (much like traditional schools). Notably, about one in four people said they just didn’t know enough about charters to offer an informed opinion; for those with questions, check out this basic guide, DOE’s charter info, and the state’s Charter School Institute, for lots of detailed information on established and new charter schools. (And rest assured, we’ll be covering charters going forward, and will gladly respond to reader questions and comments.)
This week marked high season for standardized testing; whether your child is in elementary or middle school, or a high-school student facing the Regents, we’re curious about their experience getting ready for the tests. We’d also love to hear from teachers and administrators about their school’s test-prep practices — please, weigh in on the poll, and share your thoughts in the comments string, too.
Subscribe to 
Toolbar icons by 
Today I would like to state my opinion on the charters schools being housed in the space of Public School buildings, quit frankly it is Unacceptable. Today I sit as a parent of a public school student and I really don’t see the benefit as to how and why their are two charter schools housed in my childs school building. This is clearly a matter of space between the principal, staff, students and parents. This is an issue that hurts both sides. In my presence as an active parent on school premises I get to witness first hand the cahos that ensues with the many different classes moving about the halls at the same time with not enough time given to one school to complete their class transfers. It is Unaccepatable for all students to have to share the gym, auditourium, play yard, library and lunch room. With this being the actual norm for the students they don’t relize how much education they are missing out on such as a science, art, music, dance rooms. Why is it that the DOE does not see this as a problem for my childs public school? It seems that no one wants to hear the cry of the public school parents in Harlem on this issue. This again is Unaccepatable. The DOE wants and needs to step up to the plate when it comes to fixing the problem of having charter schools housed in public school buildings by taking accoutablity for the after effect it will bring to the public school students already housed in the building. The DOE has been failing the parents of Harlem on this and many other issues to which effect the children of District 3. To the DOE I find this Unacceptable.
Comment by LaShawn Pressley — March 13, 2009 @ 5:33 pm
While I too am conflicted about charter schools in some respects, I have to disagree with the above post. Space problems in City schools are not caused by Charters. They are caused by overcrowding and an inadequate number of school buildings. My children’s school in another neighborhood shares a building, though neither school is a charter, and we have the same issues of scheduling and shared spaces. The children who go to charter schools are NYC public school students and they will take up space regardless of whether they are in a traditional school or a charter school. The DOE needs to find the resources to provide a sufficient number of classrooms to educate all the City’s students despite the economic downturn.
Comment by a parent — March 13, 2009 @ 9:21 pm
Crowding and building-sharing are challenges for all public schools, not just traditional schools that share buildings with charters. I know school buildings shared by four (or even five) separate schools, and many where two or three schools, often of different levels, share a structure. In the best cases, principals learn to collaborate and the schools run smoothly, but that ideal is often elusive, and turf struggles and administrative conflicts end up hurting the kids. What’s not much discussed: Schools that share a building often do NOT share a school-management partner — undermining their ability to pool resources, share purchasing decisions, and plan strategically for their schools going forward. But it’s not just charters. While the frustration voiced by Ms Pressley above is legitimate and real, her questions pertain to all shared facilities, not those only shared by traditional and charter public schools.
Comment by helen — March 16, 2009 @ 8:34 am
Do we have to accept the terms “traditional” as opposed to charter schools? Thankfully, many public schools are still far from traditional.
Comment by brooklynmom — March 16, 2009 @ 12:58 pm
Nomenclature suggestions cordially welcome, brooklynmom. I agree that ‘traditional’ doesn’t quite fit, but what do you propose as an alternative? Words like ‘conventional’ and ‘ordinary’ don’t work, either — far from accurate. Do we go to jargon-land, and say non-charter publics, charter publics? (Does that then set up ‘charter’ as the default? That’s not right, either.)
I would love to have another word to differentiate public schools that aren’t charters. If you have thoughts, please share them.
Comment by Helen — March 16, 2009 @ 1:55 pm
Shut them down! They are modern day jail house
Comment by Parent — March 18, 2009 @ 3:14 pm
I think that Charters serve a purpose (I have a child in one) but space is a big problem. The DOE grossly underestimates what each school really needs. They need to take into account that there needs to be 2 of everything. Sharing common spaces should not be a huge problem but it some times becomes a bigger issue when the principal of the public school feels that they “own” the school building and act like the gate keeper for every little activity. It’s also hard when both school have totally different styles of teaching and you have to worry about discipline the other schools students.
Since charters only get a fraction of money per student, some of them don’t fair as well if they don’t have a great board or foundation.
Overall I think that it’s good that parents have school choice. I do wish that charters could screen or have an entrance exam because some parents use it a last resort for troubled kids and that results in a concentration of disorderly kids.
Comment by Sandy — March 18, 2009 @ 8:26 pm
Midtown west school preps them in no way and in fact encourages the status quo- no imagination, no make believe, no humor. Many of their teachers are over 68 years old and are ‘old school’ – its disgusting – we are removing our child.
Comment by stephanie — March 19, 2009 @ 6:29 pm
It’s clear from these comments that charters stir strong feelings, especially if, as Stephanie writes above, the school is harsh enough to warrant removing a child. But some parents love their child’s charter school; plenty of lotteries are oversubscribed with families who’d grab a seat, if offered one. Truth is, charters are a growing force in public education. Many take a traditional, ‘rote’ approach to learning, and others don’t. Their variety (in curriculum, in teaching style, in philosophy and culture) makes generalizations difficult. But the issues of school-sharing and space demands will only become more important if more charters need to be accomodated within the city’s already-limited public school buildings.
Comment by Helen — March 19, 2009 @ 11:59 pm