Representative Cox blogged about a recent Star Tribune article that mentions Northfield’s three Charter Schools, which raised the positive aspects of Charter schools and also concerns that traditional educators have about them. This is especially important in the present mood to under-fund traditional education and the difficulty public schools face, given lack of funding, in their efforts to present a full array of ‘choices’ for students.
StarTribune: School leaders have mixed feelings about adding charter schools
In Minneapolis, dramatic and sudden changes are proposed, in part to recapture the interest of parents and students going elsewhere for education:
Interim Supt. Jennings said he is also trying to change programs to make public schools more attractive to parents who are choosing to send their children to charter schools or suburban schools.
StarTribune: Minneapolis May Close 10 Schools
It’s happening in St. Paul too:
StarTribune: St. Paul Ponders Closing Wilson Junior High This Fall
The other $4 million in program trims is due to district revenues — primarily from the state — not keeping pace with expenses, said Lois Rockney, the district’s director of budget and finance.
I found some of Rep. Cox’s comments disturbing, especially considering the efforts he has made in his blog and in public presentations to convince teachers, school administrators, and school board members that he is on their side and believes that schools need more funding. He says:
Some people, including many in the Legislature, don’t like charter schools. Those same people are the ones that support “business as usual” for most school issues. Our traditional school system is a good one, but I do think it needs to be encouraged to look at new directions and ideas. Charters will help do that.
I hope everyone always remembers that the purpose of our education system is to provide students with the best educational system and opportunities possible within reasonable funding limits. The goal isn’t to employ the most people. . .
What a statement! Who would believe that is what traditional schools try to do? Does he think that traditional schools waste tax payer money on excessive employment? What is he saying?
As an alternative educator, I support charter schools and the choices they offer students, but I don’t agree with the Republican philosophy of ‘improving things’ through competition in a climate of scarcity. All you do is create winners and losers, not ‘improvement.’
Rep. Cox recognizes the necessity of having enough money to do the job, that ‘proper funding’ creates winners:
If the charter school idea is a good one and has student and parent support, with proper state funding support, it should be successful.
That proper funding creates winners also means that ‘proper funding’ of the public schools would create winners, and that improper funding creates losers. That doesn’t seem to bother Rep. Cox as he supports ‘freedom to fail’:
In America, we allow individuals and businesses to be as successful as possible, and also to fail at will. I think schools need to look at some of that same modeling. Charter schools do that. If the charter school idea is a good one and has student and parent support, with proper state funding support, it should be successful. The converse applies also…if the charter plan is not a good one, then it should be allowed to close.
Does he think only Charter Schools deserve ‘proper funding?’ What do his votes reveal about his beliefs about funding the public schools?
Jennings’ proposal to the Minneapolis School Board plainly and unequivocally states that the school system is not adequately funded:
Inadequate federal and state funding makes a difficult situation worse.
The district’s general fund has always filled the gap that exists between the referendum funds and the actual costs of paying for small class sizes. However, years of inadequate funding from the state and federal government for mandated services, leaves insufficient general fund dollars to supplement the cost of reduced class size.
The so-called ‘lower class size’ that the Minneapolis Public Schools are trying to maintain is the ‘current levels of:
K-3 = 22 students; 4-8 = 28 students; 9-12 = 30 students (average).’
Inadequate funding is not only a problem in Minneapolis; it is a problem in Northfield. Rep. Ray Cox recently shared the results of a House Republican Caucus he had distributed to the teachers in Northfield’s public schools, to the school board with his summary. He asked what teachers felt their biggest obstacle or challenge in the classroom was. The primary obstacle or challenge identified by the highest number of teachers was the ‘lack of resources and materials.’ 34% of the teachers in Northfield surveyed reported this to be a problem. And for some reason, Rep. Cox did not mention this answer, either in his written report or in his oral presentation to the Board.
He did mention the next highest response, 22% (students not following through on home work), which he combined with the 19% of teachers who felt that lack of parent involvement was a sign of the importance of family life to student performance. But no mention of the primary concern of teachers – that 34% have a difficult time doing their job due to lack of resources and materials — inadequate funding. If we think about how to reach those students whose families struggle it is difficult to intervene without spending more funds.
When Rep. Ray Cox supports ‘proper state funding support’ for charter schools, does he also support ‘proper state funding’ for traditional public schools?
When Rep. Ray Cox says:
In America, we allow individuals and businesses to be as successful as possible, and also to fail at will. I think schools need to look at some of that same modeling. Charter schools do that. If the charter school idea is a good one and has student and parent support, with proper state funding support, it should be successful. The converse applies also…if the charter plan is not a good one, then it should be allowed to close.
Does he also mean that he will assure proper state funding support for the public schools so that they can be successful? Let’s look at his votes and find out.
Rep. Ray Cox did not author or coauthor a single bill to “assure proper state funding support” for the public schools.
I would put adequate funding of public schools as my highest legislative priority. There is no excuse for the recent and predicted funding cuts to the school districts that have already ‘trimmed the fat’ and which are now forced to surgically remove their vital organs. How many levy referendums were held last November to replace the state funding now that responsibility has been transferred from the state to local governments? How many succeeded? How many failed? How many school districts will be successful? How many will fail? How many can now afford to offer ‘choices’ that parents and students want if they are struggling to maintain merely basic services? Where ‘proper state funding’ is, as Rep. Cox notes, a key element to a successful educational program, it looks like the state has instituted planned failure for the public school system.
How do charter schools fit into the mix? The StarTribune article goes on to quote Ben Kanninen, superintendent of the Burnsville-Eagan-Savage school district.
“The more you create or expand on charters, the harder it is for them to find their market niche,” Kanninen is concerned that there might be a limit to the needs that charters could serve. If the state or other sponsors are not careful in approving schools, their failure could have widespread effects. “That lack of success is paid for by the students, both in the regular system and those within the charter school,” he said.
Ray may not be aware of the effects of charter school failure on students and staff. As a teacher, I have dealt first hand with students who were displaced by the closing of PEAKS Charter School in Dundas, and I know how difficult it can be for students after their schools fail. Failure of a venture of this kind is devastating, even in the world of business or the “little free-market guy” Ray describes himself, as it is devastating to see your dreams fail.
All this makes me wonder how much of an advocate Rep. Cox can be for public schools. I will be curious to see what he does to increase school funding for quality public education, what he will do to help schools be successful. Will he fight against his Governor and his party to increase education expenditures when the Republicans are forcing the cuts? The Governor’s so-called ‘new ideas’ will do nothing to help fund schools. They are tricks and gimmicks meant to distract voters from the real problems schools face – they do not address the primary problem of lack of funding.
I believe in the public school system and would work hard to assure the state provides funding to the schools so that they can succeed, and funding for the students in our schools so that they can succeed. The public schools should be supported by the state, not rely on the districts and local governments with their vastly varying resources. Equitable funding of our schools is my highest legislative priority.