Deseret News | Could charter schools privatize?

Reader comments
Could charter schools privatize?

Dalesse | 5:17 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

GO Carolyn! I think PUBLIC Charter Schools are the best education experience my kids ever had in our years in Utah. Having moved on to another state, I can say that the charter school setting helped my children's transition into a new school environment go much more smoothly in our new state! Thanks to all the staff at APA for a job well done!

Utah Republican | 6:15 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Tomorrow, we kill vouchers. Wednesday, we begin to dismantle charter schools. No more wasting time on "parental choice". What really need is simply more funding for our neighborhood schools.

Tim | 6:48 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

You asked the question backwards. The real issue is could PRIVATE schools charterize? That is actually a way to avoid the whole voucher debate. If they could charterize either totally or in part for the state supported studeents, that would place them into the state accountability system etc... A much better option than what you list AND much better than vouchers.

Comments continue below

James | 6:55 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

A quick reading of the law makes this a non-article. All assets have to be returned to the state. So a charter school can convert but would start out with basically nothing. They would need to start over.

Then throw in that while this voucher maxs at $3,000 per student, the anticipated average is around $2,000.

So if a charter school did convert they would be starting over again from a logisitical point of view and then they would be cutting their operating revenue by almost 60%.

Functionally, it won't happen.

Moot point | 7:47 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Vouchers are going down big time!

Privatize All Schools | 7:53 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Charter schools are private schools. It is amazing to me how much a charter school is a private school. When you have a private management team controlling a school, it is private. However, it becomes quasi when it has to meet all the rules and regulations..many of which are unneccessary for it to operate.

Charter schools have proven to increase student performance, a perfect barometer for what more private schools can do for Utah. Public schools are a failure when one looks at their experience in the business of educating, funding, and resources. People need to wake up and stop viewing them as a sacred cow.

The only problem with charter schools is that they are run by a few parents and mistreat employees. In fact, charter schools need more competition as well!

Let's move to privatize education, then we'll see some truthful improvements!

Anonymous | 8:24 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Utah Republican, charter schools are here to stay. I happen to be a charter school teacher (highly qualified, according to NCLB), and I love the charter school where I teach. I teach at an early college high school, and it is a wonderful opportunity for students from all ethnic and economical backgrounds (this is the most diverse school I've ever taught at) to have a chance at both getting their associate degree when they graduate from high school and having their next two years of college paid for by a New Century scholarship. We are one of the schools that has a waiting list. I love the fact that we have a specific mission, but we are still a public school with open enrollment (by lottery). A well run charter school is a great alternative for a child who's struggling in his/her home school, and it's free. Who needs vouchers?

Across the Universe | 8:44 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Yep, charter schools really are what I thought they were: publicly-supported private schools. If it is even being discussed that they could be converted to private schools, then they really must be private schools within the guise of the public school system. They certainly are allowed to do things that public schools are not. I personally would not object to charter schools if public schools could do what charter schools are allowed to do: limit their class sizes.

My neighbor who had been sending his kids to Challenger jumped at the chance to enter his kids into a charter school. What a boon it was. Save enormous amounts of tuition and still get that elitist private school experience for his kids (which he has basically stated as such). And of course once he got one kid past the lottery, the rest were given priority and followed. I know, I know, I could do the same for my kids, but the elementary school they go to is the top-rated elementary school in the Alpine School District and there really isn't any reason to send them elsewhere.

Shamed | 8:55 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Utah Republican. How embarrassing for you and me. I am almost hesitant to say I am a republican after your ill conceived words. Do away with charter schools? Are you out of your mind? Charter schools are the most positive step taken for education in this state for many years. I do not have children in a charter school, but that is only due to the fact that there are so few charter schools at the high school level. My children have been and are in public schools, and I can tell you that funding is not the issue. More money alone will not solve anything. My son recently was not able to take A.P. Biology his senior year of high school because he had to take a graphic arts class to meet the state requirements for graduation. This was a kid planning to go to college with a 4.0 and an almost perfect ACT score who had to take Art to graduate. What is going on in the schools is shameful. Yes, I want a choice for my children!

The True Utah Republican | 8:54 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

(It's nice to know there's more than one Utah Republican who cares about kids more than power and money. So - huzzah! I shall now be known as the "true" utah republican.)

Vouchers aren't a bad thing. They're just bad in their current state. I would vote for a voucher that required certification, accreditation and respected Utah's constitutional prohibition of publicly funded religious instruction. The current voucher law fails those tests and has to be discarded.

Charter schools are what they are, just like district schools. Some are wonderful. Some are dreadful. That's the nature of things.

A benefit of the dichotomy between charter and district schools is competition - true competition on an equal playing field.

School choice exists. District schools have an obligation to become the schools of choice. If charter schools and district schools choose to feed off one another's success, we get a continually raising of the bar and an ongoing improvement in excellence.

Hmmmm | 9:08 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

If Ms Sharette would never leave the realm of charter schools and if this is her "baby", why is she such a strong supporter of vouchers?

Improve All Schools | 9:22 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

How to improve public schools?

First, terminate tenure, but retain due process/cause contracts for teachers.

Second, terminate the SAU..a waste of money. Empower the district school principal.

Third, have multiple accrediting authorities.

Fourth, Approve vouchers-competiton with public schools continued funding without the students..this is a great deal for them.

Fifth, only allow legal residents into the public school.

Private schools should have NO government interference/regulation. The problem with public schools is government, hence the word, "Private."

Vouchers are scholarships for families, not paid to schools. The parents choose.

Parents know what is best for their kids, not the State. Why would any Republican ever think otherwise. If so, that person should be a democrat.

Steven Jarvis | 10:15 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Charter Schools elitist?

My classroom at OCS last year had as diverse a class as one could get in Utah. I had a third minority, a third special ed but and one multilingual (ESL) student. As a school we had a twenty-five percent poverty rate, but we also had a few millionaires.

This isn't a non-article either. I am glad it was written because this has been discussed. With more facts out it seems unlikely any board will jump save maybe to open a second school privately, and that is a great thing.

big picture | 10:18 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

The real answer to our problems in education has to do with forcing children to go to school when they don't want to be there. Many speak of parent's choice, but forget that it is really the child's choice that matters. Kids are not little extensions of their parent's ambitions. While parents support, encourage and direct to some degree, ultimately it will be the child who decides. We should spend our time finding ways to teach our children how to choose and giving them viable choices.

Steven Jarvis | 10:27 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Improve all schools,

Your proposal is replete with flaws. Tenure should not be done away with, but should be earned because it protects academic freedom. It currently seems to easy to obtain tenure. It should take a national certification or something along those lines to get tenure not just years of service.

Superintendents are critical in each district, and multiple accrediting authorities already exist.

Vouchers are flawed legislation as they lack standards for education and achievement.

Disallowing children into school for any reason other than expulsion is one of the worst ideas I have read. It would also likely be illegal at either the state or federal level. And how would you go about finding out who was legal and who wasn't? Many kids are citizens but the parents are not.

Private schools need more regulations. They should only use licensed teachers and be accredited by some agency.

Vouchers are flawed.

Parents aren't perfect.

The Republican party has left its roots and core values going in the direction of big government programs such as vouchers. They in a sense became liberal. I am a staunch conservative and I firmly oppose liberalizing private schools with vouchers.

J. Ferrin | 11:01 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

Across the Universe errs about charters and districts. District schools could limit their class sizes just like a charter if they wanted to. And why not? Their funding per pupil is about the same as a charter school. And, districts have local taxing authority. Perhaps A the U confuses class sizes with total school enrollment. Charters CAN and DO limit their school enrollments. Districts can't. Charters are granted for only a specified number of studnets. But, is this an "unfair" advantage? Is this an "unlevel" playing field? No. Of course not. Not when viewed in the totality. So, here's a policy question. Would A the U, or anyone else, want to "level" the playing field with these policy changes? 1. Grant open charters allowing unlimited enrollments. 2. Give local taxing authority to charter schools. 3. Give charter schools a state guarantee for their bonds and other indebtedness. 4. Give charter schools eminent domain authority so they can condemn your property and build their school there. Do this and you'll have a "level playing field" and you can argue about charters limiting student enrollments. Short of this policy change, however, the "charters limit their enrollment" argument is without substance.

Charter parent | 11:14 a.m. Nov. 5, 2007

To Utah Republican:

Charter schools are a huge benefit to public education. They reduce class size in the district schools, they follow states rules, certified teachers, and they have incredible parental involvement, etc.

I am happy to be a charter school parent. The voucher debate would be non-existent if we could build more publicly-funded charter schools. (Law currently limits to 5 charters approved in Utah each year. This should at least be changed to 15 or so or the limit eliminated.)

Until this changes, I will continue to vote Democrat in Utah. Utah Republicans have lost their way. (Examples: ReAL Salt Lake Stadium, Transit funding priorities, vouchers, public ed, the list goes on and on.) They are completely out of touch with their constituents.

Thank you.

Re: Utah Republican | 1:34 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

I don't see why anyone would be offended that Utah Republican claims to be just that. UR seems to be the type of person who wants to anonymously throw out some ridiculous comment and hope people waste their time responding.

UR could have said they were Elmer Fudd. Just because they said it, doesn't make them Elmer Fudd.

Jarvis Antithesis | 1:44 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

1. Tenure protects poor teachers. It also enables a teacher to defy the principal and to ignore parents. Cause contracts protect those who perform.

2. Supts. are not needed and the amount of paperwork is absurd. This is simply more red tape and money NOT spent in the classroom. Capable principals can manage each school with their own staff. The SAU is simply a creation of the social democrats, another waste of taxpying dollars.

3. This is the most outlandish liberal statement so far. Private schools are excellent and they do so with accountability to parents and academic results. I'll take this over your government "standards for achievement" anytime.

4. If you're not a Legal Resident, you have no business recieving taxpaying dollars. How can you be against vouchers due to "public money" yet favor taxpayers to fund illegal residents?

5. Vouchers are inherently far more constitutional than a federal system of education.

6. Parents are far more capable of making the right decisions for their kids than the State.

7. The only "big government" program is the public school system that, in many cases, is the biggest employer.

Anthithesis | 4:35 p.m. Nov. 5, 2007

You show your ignorance of so much in your responses.
Which constitution are you talking about? Federal leaves education to the state constitutions.
He said nothing about giving money to Illegal residents he said ï¿½how do you go about determining who is and who is not. (recommend you watch 12 Angry Men again, great communistic movie)
You also have not been in a school, because your argument about parents knowing best does not last through a day or dealing with them. I am assuming youï¿½re a parent by your comments also.
(By the way your spell check did not pick up some of your grammatical mistakes and homophones a good public education teacher would have caught them but you did not listen when you were in school, and you do not listen now.)

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.