1 / 16

Charter Schools in the Local Context

Charter Schools in the Local Context. EDS/Soc 126: Topic 10 Part 2. 35 charters 13,000 students (10% of SDUSD) 30 of 35: South of 8. Notables: KIPP High Tech Hi King-Chavez UCSD Partnerships with Preuss, Gompers. Some Quick Facts about Charters in San Diego. Dimensions of Reform.

holden
Download Presentation

Charter Schools in the Local Context

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Charter Schools in the Local Context EDS/Soc 126: Topic 10 Part 2

  2. 35 charters 13,000 students (10% of SDUSD) 30 of 35: South of 8 Notables: KIPP High Tech Hi King-Chavez UCSD Partnerships with Preuss, Gompers Some Quick Facts about Charters in San Diego

  3. Dimensions of Reform • Structural/Technical Changes--add resources, such as equipment, teachers, modify school day, class size, school size (Gates) • CulturalChanges--address educators’, citizens’ beliefs about reasons for performance (race, ethnicity, gender) (Oakes, Turning Points) • Political--mobilize constituencies to assist with change effort (civil rights struggles) • Some Reform Efforts deploy only one; others lead with one, activate the others • Question: Which “theory of action” do charters use?

  4. Goals/Purposes of Charters • Possibilities • Increase parental choice; level the playing field--participate in contest mobility system (Turner) • Develop a critical consciousness among youth through critical pedagogy (Nash) • Actualities: Increase parental choice; level the playing field--participate in contest mobility system (Turner)

  5. Reminder: Advocates CLAIM Charter Schools: Reduce bureaucracy Stimulate competition among public schools--public schools will improve or close Improve students’ academic performance Are more innovative than public schools Will be held accountable

  6. EVIDENCE about CLAIM that SD Charters Reduce Bureaucracy • San Diego Charters, like all charters do report about compliance with State and federal laws, standards and accountability (annual API scores) • San Diego charters can and do hire teachers locally (local control vs. tenure/union issue)

  7. EVIDENCE @ CLAIM that SD Charters Stimulate Competition Like the national situation, very little evidence Local case: Lincoln HS attempts to adopt Preuss practices of modified block schedule, on-site teacher professional development Constraints: SDEA rules and regulations

  8. EVIDENCE @ CLAIM that SD Charters Innovate • Preuss/Gompers: Based on research on schooling and cognitive development • Universal development (Cicourel&Mehan) • Detracking: rigorous curriculum + scaffolds (Alvarez&Mehan) • HTH: Based on Dewey/Meier—inquiry and project-based learning

  9. Preuss/Gompers Theory of Action • Structural • Only college prep track • Longer school day, week, year • Advisory periods • Teacher Professional development in school day • Range of assessments-portfolios, exhibitions

  10. Preuss/Gompers Theory of Action • Cultural • GCMS: “Culture Camp” to instill common high expectations, predictability • College teams • signs, banners, uniforms to signal “college going culture” • UCSD students serve as tutors, role models

  11. Preuss/Gompers Theory of Action • Political • UCSD: Contentious debate led to CREATE & Preuss • Gompers: Also contentious: Activist parents + Sup’t + community groups led to charter

  12. Other Local Innovations: HTH, KIPP Range of academic calendar (zero periods, contracts, periods of varying, longer school year) Local personnel decisions Embed teacher professional development in school day Project based learning (hands-on, tie students’ experience to disciplinary concepts) Range of assessments—not just standardized tests—including portfolios, exhibitions HTH: offers teaching credential!

  13. EVIDENCE @ CLAIM that SD Charters ImprovePerformance • Preuss: 4-year College Enrollment • 2004: 80% (N=55) • 2005: 84% (N=75) • 20O6: 78% (N=87) • 2007: 87% (N=78) • 2008: 87% (N=87) • 2009: 93% (N=93) • Preuss: State-wide Tests (API) • 2004: 2nd in County (844) • 2005: 1st in County (861) • 2006: 2nd in County (879) • 2007: 1st in County (877) • 2008: 1st in County (881) • 2009: 1st in County (894) GCMS

  14. EVIDENCE @ CLAIM that SD Charters ImprovePerformance • School2007API2008API • Preuss 877 881 • HiTechHi 807 785 • SDHS IB 783 800 • SDHSLEADS 637 717 • C’fordIDEA 570 573 • Hoover 562 578 • Lincoln n/a 540

  15. EVIDENCE @ CLAIM that SD Charters ImprovePerformance • School2007API2008API • Preuss 877 881 • TorreyPines 852 849 • La Jolla Hi 829 818 • HiTechHi 807 785 • Scripps 785 820 • Pt Loma 672 709

  16. Summary • Local Charters have better record than US average: • Bureaucracy • Competition • Student achievement • Educate all students? Or promote more segregation?

More Related