Do We Need more Options in Plainfield for our Students?

There has been much discussion about how charter schools are "destroying" the Plainfield Public Schools. First, charter schools are public schools of choice that are state-funded but privately operated. There is no tuition for attending a charter school. The uninformed statements by educators and elected officials that charter schools are taking away from "public" schools is misleading and well, let me be blunt, incorrect. It is yet another way to distort truth and facts for a particular agenda. 

The idea that here in Plainfield the rise in the number of charter schools has led to downfall of the district's schools is also misleading. The district's schools have been in a downward spiral during the past decade. Both middle schools are up for restructuring because they have failed to make academic progress for many years. Basically the students are not learning or progressing as they should be. Based on Dan's post, the district administration does not seem to have a clear cut plan to deal with these schools or the tenured teachers that are ultimately responsible for the many years of failure. Shouldnt this be a priority of the Board?

That is why I believe that without local educational choices other than a failing school district our parents will be forced to keep their children in the district's schools and basically have them trapped in a system that has proven time and time again that is unable to properly educate their children. They has also been unable to do so despite having the largest budget in the City and having received millions of dollars during the same period either through Abbott or the recent Stimulus funding.

Those that argue against charter schools and giving our students more educational choices are arguing FOR the status quo. From the local teacher's union that protects ineffective and incompetent teachers many of which have been in the failing schools year after year, to a seemingly innefective Board that is more concerned with who gets hired and gets what contract, our district schools under the current structure have shown that they are unable to educate our students. This is a priority that should be shared by teachers, administrators, and members of the Board. Obviously, it is not. Many of the comments that I have received reveal a system that is more concerned with power, control, and revenge than the education of students. It continues to not seem like a place for reform and innovation when it comes to education of students. Is this the case?

For example, Plainfield High School has long been considered an institution of failure when it comes to preparing students for college and employment. This is not my opinion as I have looked at the state data for Plainfield High School School. Based only on graduation rates alone, the school has failed for the past decade. This is a failure on the part of everyone, but mainly teachers that have been teaching at the school for years and in some cases decades, but have become comfortable with the school's failure. From everything that I have read teachers are mainly responsible for students learning.

I am glad that there is now a charter school serving high school students which will give more parents a choice when it comes to sending their children to a high school in the community. This will further push the high school  to improve. On another note, the high school principal now seems to being pushed out despite having not been evaluated as required by law and despite making gains in the school, notably the graduation rate which should be a critical marker for high school success. I hope that this isn't the case.

The argument against charter schools in Plainfield is not an argument based on education. It is an argument that is steeped in squabbles over money. Those in the district would rather fight to keep more money for high paying administrators, contracts for friends and cronies, large lawsuit settlements, teacher and administrator raises in a down economy and decreasing revenue rather than use the threat of increased charter schools to improve their own system which will eventually improve education for all students in Plainfield.

When will the fight and argument be based on what is needed to provide a better education for our students?

When will the question also be asked about how charter schools do more with less and have teachers, principals, and boards that keep education as the number one priority?

Charter schools have the freedom to set their own rules with regard to curriculum, teaching styles, and flexibility with hiring, salary and benefits and are usually free of the politics of local school districts and boards such as what we have here in Plainfield

There are other advantages of charter schools which can be valuable in improving our school district and giving better options to our students that are currently trapped in the failing Plainfield Public Schools.

Should we fight to stop charter school in Plainfield? If so, why?

Do you think our district is properly using resources to educate our students for the 21 century?

Is the Plainfield school district focused on education as it should be?

Why have our students been failing over the past decade?

What role do teachers, principals, parents, administrators, and board members have in the documented failure of many of our schools?

When charter schools fail, they get shut down. What should we do with a failing district?

Send me your thoughts.