Published January 12th, 2011
This was a very interesting, short article. I like the idea of the parent trigger law in California that allows parents to make a decision about what happens at a school after it fails to meet AYP for three consecutive years. Parents can choose between converting the school to a charter school, replacing the principal and staff, changing the budget, or closing the school entirely. It makes sense to me that if school administrators and staff can't fix a serious problem within three years, then it's time for someone else with a different perspective to step in and make some changes. I also agree that parents should be more involved in the educational process. Not all parents are uneducated and uncaring, as many teachers I know believe.
I attended a Japanese program, when I was in middle and high school, that has recently converted into a charter school. Part of the reason the parents and staff pushed for the transition to the charter school was so that their funding would be more secure and couldn't be re-allocated on the whim of district administration. The transistion to a charter school also required the establishment of a board comprised of parents. The charter school has been highly successful and I believe that is in large part due to high levels of parent involvement.
I read in the article that nine other states are considering similar legislation. I'd love to see Oregon move inthat direction too!
I agree that parents need to be involved with the process are at ground level of the education process. They are in a unique position to see the effectiveness of a school and give immediate feedback.
ReplyDeleteAs far as charter schools go, everyone knows I am a huge supporter of that model but I have also come to realize that there is a lot of uncertainty around these programs. They don't always have continuous funding and they do have to rely on the district for support. They also don't get much priority from the district.