MA: Charter Lessons
There have been plenty of pieces that dissected the victory for public education from the public education advocate side of things. But I found some interesting points to note in the Boston Globe, just one of the media outlets that was shoveling coal for the charteristas. How did this loss look to the losers? What lessons can be gleaned? Here they are, in no particular order:
Who wants charters?
Charteristas tried hard to sell the narrative that selfish wealthy white suburbanites were denying non-wealthy non-white city dwellers the chance to get great schools. This turned out to be hugely wrong and exactly backward-- the only areas that voted in favor of 2 were the wealthy white suburbs. Even the neighborhoods of the lowest achievers voted against charter expansion. The Globe has half a clue here:
But civil rights advocates say families of color yearn for something deeper: A robust commitment and plan to improve the quality of education in the city’s school system so they don’t need alternatives.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. People don't want choice. They want what they want. People mostly don't want a selection of schools; they want their school, the school they already have, that already serves their community, to be a good school.
And they want to work in partnership with policymakers rather than having outsiders coming in and proposing a solution.
Folks are starting to catch on to the heart of the charter deal-- "we will give you our idea of a good CURMUDGUCATION: MA: Charter Lessons: