Re “A View from the Charter School: X-raying and Answering District Objections”
In the 20 years since charter schools became a national educational phenomenon, not one has broken through Culver City’s iron barrier, the School Board.
The most frequently heard accusatory refrain is that charters consume money and students that public schools regard both as their exclusive territory.
Based on members’ comments at last night’s Board meeting, melded with historical evidence, the losing streak for charter schools is not likely to subside within the lifetimes of Board and School District officials.
A petition for an alternative type of charter school submitted two months ago – a virtual school uniquely serving professional children and at-risk students – was strikingly rejected with a warning label attached:
Charter schools are unwelcome because they represent competition, largely but not exclusively financially, to the established standard public schools in the District.
Jessica Jacobs and Florina Rodov, the founding directors of the Innovatory School for Professional Youth, ISPY, and two of their allies asked the Board to postpone a vote until they had an opportunity to address the 15 pages of objections.
The Board hurdled the plea without acknowledgement.
With succinctness, Board member Laura Chardiet’s opening response established a tone for the stern reactions, and unanimous rejection vote, that followed.
“My concern,” Ms. Chardiet said, “is that when a charter school submits a petition, we need to use District resources to respond, and that troubles me.”
Said Pat Siever: “I don’t think we have enough information to vote for it. I did not see enough objective criteria, such as the number of students they will have.”
Paspalis in Charge
In the absence of Board President Karlo Silbiger, Kathy Paspalis, the vice president, led the meeting. Calling the ISPY petition “the weakest charter school application I have seen,” Ms. Paspalis criticized the petitioners’ perceived lack of response on matters that make their school distinctive. They should have explained in detail, she said, how they will handle students who lack access to computers and who are unfamiliar with their usage. “That is basic for an internet-based school,” she said.
Keenly disappointed by the outcome, Ms. Rodov, one of the ISPY founders, complained that “Board members weren’t listening” while she and Ms. Jacobs made their presentation (See nearby story.) “This was evident in their comments afterwards,” Ms. Rodov said, “and it was obvious to the audience. They were laughing at the Board members' incoherent responses.”
She said that attorneys for the Innovatory School for Professional Youth “are investigating the Board's possible violation of the Brown Act throughout this process.”
Since the atmosphere for potential charter schools in the District has been described as ranging from chilly to foreboding, Ms. Chardiet this morning was asked how petitioners ever could earn a green light.
“I think we would have to be so bowled over by the application, really convinced that they were going to serve the needs of a group whose needs were not being met in our School District,” she said.
“There is a place for charter schools in larger school districts, like LAUSD. But in smaller districts, I am more skeptical.”
