For-Profit “Charter” Schools

The dumbing down of our children will continue as long s the DOE exists. It's been 'the failure' as far as public education is concerned. Let's get back to local control, discipline and teaching the basics which doesn't include teaching the basics of sex and socialism. Wake up people! Wake up Susan!

I live in Ca. One of the HUGE problems in education is that the money is strictly tied to specialty funding. Every school has several accounts that they can't touch the money in until they have the "special need" for those funds. Charter schools don't have that hassle. Public Schools every child learns from the same book. Charter school changes with the kid. Public schools take more teacher in-service days. Charter is open more often. Public Schools have to teach morals I object to. Charter lets the kids opt out with plenty of advance notice. If I had had access to one of the charter schools when my kid was forced through public, there would have been no contest. Charter!

"If you're serious about real education reform, the name of the game is transforming public schools" . This, I think, is likely the first comment from Susan with which I entirely agree, but perhaps for reasons different from Susan's. The public school system has failed our children and not for want of funds. One simply has to look at property and school taxes. Further, the majority [not all] of public school teachers and school boards are willing co conspirators in that failure by actively engaging in and pushing a leftist socialist, redistributionist, enitlement agenda. Five years ago I along with my wife attended a "Kentucky Derby" party hosted by a public school teacher neighbour. Amongst the other invitees were about another 15 or 16 public school teachers. The topics of converstaion were tenure, their benefits, how to maximize those benefits (by any means), their retirement, how retirement at young age (whereupon they become wards of the State and my furrther financial burden) could not arrive quickly enough and how unfair and unacceptable it was to them to have any job or performance accountability. The actual education of children and preparing them for the real world just did not arise. It was loathsome but not at all surprising. The left via acedamia, via rabid trade unionism, via the deliberate dumbing down of educational standards, via rampant ideological political correctness, via theft of monetary resources to fund unconscionable benefits and pensions, via collective bargaining, via intimidation, via the teaching of revisionist anti American history, via neglecting the teaching of civics, via the abandonment of ethics and morals and so forth has created the situation in which the longer a child stays in public education the "dumber" for want of a better expression and less capable it becomes in relation to children of most other non third world countries. I have three daughters and two sons, none of which for the above reasons ever saw the inside of a public school but attended catholic school. All three have graduated from college (hopefully my sons will follow) and with no assistance from me (small business owner) are entrepreneurs, each running their own separate business,each employing others and each contributing to the economy. I know that had they attended public school they would have been corrupted by the entitlement mentality, by the equal outcome (not equal opportunity) ideology and by the leftist political correctness that is pervasive there and which is destroying this Republic, all as it is intended to do.

The attacks on education by many politicians lately have been based on ideology and not on reality. Many politicians including many state governors have attacked teachers and their unions as the source of the problem. They have moved to smash teachers unions as a means of controlling state spending and blanacing budgets. This approach is wrong and terribly short-sighted. The one asset this country has that can be enhanced is the minds of our children and future workers and, scientists, managers, and professionals. The more educated these young people are, the more likely they will be to be contributing members of our society and msot important, they will be taxpayers contibuting a much higher tax total than their uneducated peers.
It is very unfortunate that many political figures toe the party line and choose not to look fifteen to twenty-five years down the road when it comes to investing in education for the future. An educated public will be a free public and a free society is what we all want for this country. The choice between tax breaks for the wealthy now and education for our students is an easy call that a lot of politicians suddenly do not have the courage to make. It is clear that an investment in education is needed now, not phony austerity programs cutting back funding in education.

Re: robert lipka "The one asset this country has that can be enhanced is the minds of our children and future workers and, scientists, managers, and professionals. The more educated these young people are, the more likely they will be to be contributing members of our society......." One cannot take much issue with that trite observation. The problem is that public schools in America are wholly failing the children of America in that regard and it is not because of lack of funding or educational budgets, it is because of misuse of that funding, and what amounts to theft of that funding by public school teachers unions, collective bargaining, under performing teachers that cannot be fired and corrupt Democratic politicians. Further what passes for education in the public schools sytem is little more than indoctrination in the culture of progressivism, relativism and moral decay. The public schools are not encouraging individuals made free through education but masses in bondage through dependence on the State.

Estrich: "Public education isn't failing because it's easy; it's failing because it's hard. And by the way, we're not trying to make a dime. It has taken generous support from major foundations to allow us to just break even."

The path to recovery, so to speak, should begin with the acknowledgment that, indeed, public education *is* failing. Estrich gets points for this.

Having said that, Estrich's 'executive summary" is an over-simplification which ignores reality. Here are some useful and realistic reasons that public education is failing:

1. Inefficient school management and oversight extending from local school boards to federal government bureaucracy.

2. Excessive, suffocating regulation of almost every aspect of school operation.

3. Teacher unions (and the politicians who are elected by them, and who enable them) which resist efficiency and change, at any cost (to the taxpayer).

4. The corruption of the schools systems from education to indoctrination.

5. The stripping of all power and influence from the "customers" of the education system: parent. Without parental choice and authority to influence the school system, the school system is accountable to the wrong people (if at all).

Estrich's essay is rife with logic which is flawed on many levels. Worse, it is drawn from a vision of the public education system which bears no resemblance to reality, and therefore defies all reason.

- Bob Elkind

Re: robert lipka
The problem withyour analysis is that it unfairly represents both sides.
By making the children into The Issue, you sidestep the complaints people have against how the teachers are performing. Your effort to tie yourself to the children as a shield against criticism is illegitimate.

Re: robert lipka
The problem withyour analysis is that it unfairly represents both sides.
By making the children into The Issue, you sidestep the complaints people have against how the teachers are performing. Your effort to tie yourself to the children as a shield against criticism is illegitimate.

Re: joseph wright
Your comment is excellent. I would add one thing. There is a reason why the home schooling movement has grown so strongly - because the education of children, today, is precisely as you describe. The amount of effort that goes into teaching the topics you described, specifically focused at undermining the values and influence of the parents is astonishing. My own neighbors, who homeschool their own children, have kids who are bright, friendly, cheerful, very well-spoken, able to carry on serious conversations with adults, and interested in everything around them. The contrast to public school kids is marked.

Schools under increased federal control and indoctrination, are not good for children. There is a reason why mass shootings happen in schools - they have become like cultural re-education camps with prison guards and inmate-led sub-cultures. In these camps, freedom and Christian values are supressed by the warden, the guards prey on prisoners and the prisoners prey on their fellow inmates.

For a time in my life, I worked as a teacher at a Christian boarding school. One of the things that shocked me was that many of my fellow teachers did not have their teaching credentials. Four of the teachers had previously been fired from jobs in public schools and one was alleged to have had sexual contact with a student.
It is a myth that private schools are better. In many cases the teachers are accepting the lower salaries that private schools pay because they are not qualified to get the higher paying public school jobs. I accepted the teaching job while I was still in college as a means to pay my last year of tuition. One of my college professors recommended me for the job. Thankfully I moved on to owning my own business in the private sector after teaching for two years in public school. Of the two experiences , It was clear to me that public schools at that time were clearly superior to private schools. I see nothing that has changed that and it is a myth that private schools are better. As for charter schools, when you have the ability to pick and choose your students, of course, you pick the brighterst. This does not challenge a teacher at all. It ends up not serving the public very well either as so many are turned away and they then have to watch their tax dollars being used to fund something that they cannot take part in. A form of taxation without representation. The proper course of action is to strengthen the public schools and stop sidetracking public money for experimental schools that often are fronts for discrimination.

Re: robert lipka Same tired old mantra re teaching credentials as if such credentials evidence anything at all about an ability or desire to teach and to educate. Robert as always rehearses the cliches and pointedly ignores the fact that the so called credentialed public school teachers demonstrably cannot teach or worse will not teach. They can con, can demand and receive outrageous benefits for a two thirds of a year employment, can and do become pensioned wards of the State at early age, can and do foster low standards so as to hide incompetence and are failing our children. These are the facs. The public school system has entirely failed for all of the reasons I have previously set forth and no amount of throwing good money after bad will cure it.

First, we need to get the name correct. They are not “public schools” … they are “Government Run Schools”.


“Private” schools are open to the public school. But I understand why Democrats wish to avoid the more accurate name.


The US government does nothing as well as the private sector.


The USA does not own one bomb factory or one weapons plant. Yet the USA has the best bombs and weapons on the planet. Why? The entities that make our bombs and weapons are run by the private sector, not the government. Restated, the USA pays the private sector to build them.


Why then do we allow the government to own and run our schools? CONTROL.


If those in power really cared about the education of children, they would pay the private sector to run schools. The US government would not own a single school or employ a single teacher.


That would fix the problem . . . but the Liberals would not be in full CONTROL of brain washing the children.


Additionally, such would eliminate votes for Democrats. In short, Democrats do not care about our children's education; all they care about are votes to keep their sorry butts in power. In fact, the less educated our children the better for those in power.


The average public school teacher is worthless and would not be employable under any high level private sector job. The same goes double for the average College professor; Leaches on society, most of them.


There are exceptions: those that teach unbiased economics, engineering, medicine.


Second, PROFIT is not a dirty word. People making Profit off their work is what keeps sorry individuals like College professions in a job at a pay level they do not deserve.


Consider this, WHO/WHAT save the Whales? Was it a tree hugging liberal? Was it a bunch of Greenpeace Liberals? Was it hand wringing liberal college professors worried about profit? Was it elitists in government passing laws?


NOPE. It was a “robber baron” – John Rockerfeller. Restated, free market capitalism saved the whales.


America was the world's leading whaling nation. According to James S. Robbins's article, "How Capitalism Saved the Whales," appearing in The Freeman (8/92), with 735 whaling ships in 1846, we did 80 percent of the world's whaling. In the first two decades of the 19th century, whalers killed an average of 15,000 whales annually to produce 4-5 million gallons of sperm whale oil, 6-10 million gallons of train oil and 1.6-5.6 pounds of bone. These products lighted lamps and provided, soaps, paint, lubrication, candles, perfume, corset stays, buggy whips and other useful products. When whaling finally stopped at the turn of the 20th century, there were an estimated 50,000 whales left. Surely, if an average annual kill of 15,000 whales a year continued, whales would now be extinct. What saved the whales? Was it a triumph by Greenpeace or early animal rights wackos? If you say yes, put on the dunce cap.



Whales were saved by the self-interested motives of the much-maligned "robber baron" J.D. Rockefeller. The first step was made by Dr. Abraham Gesner, a Canadian geologist. In 1849, he devised a method whereby kerosene could be distilled from petroleum but it took Rockefeller to make kerosene production a commercial success. With his partner Samuel Adams, Rockefeller set up a network of kerosene distilleries that would later become known as Standard Oil.
As kerosene became cheaper and available throughout the nation, our whaling fleet fell from 735 in 1846 to 39 in 1876. The last American whaling ship left port in 1924 and grounded on Cuttyhunk Island the next day. Spring steel came to replace whalebone in corsets, automobiles replaced carriages and the demand for whalebone buggy whips and wagon suspensions collapsed. In 1879, Edison began marketing the incandescent bulb. As our country became electrified, both whale oil and kerosene were driven from the illumination market.




Whales were not the only beneficiaries of Rockefeller's activities. The Galapagos turtle was nearly driven to extinction as sailors on whaling ships killed them for fresh meat. With the decline in whaling the turtles were able to survive. Oil-drilling in Pennsylvania helped restore lakes that had become contaminated by natural petroleum leakages.



You might say, "Rockefeller didn't mean to confer these benefits, so it doesn't count!" If one takes that position, nothing counts. After all, we all have cars, houses and food, which I think is wonderful. But I doubt whether producers of these goods labored for our benefit because they cared about us. A better explanation is they cared a lot about themselves. That brings up another Adam Smith quotation, "I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good." In other words, most good done in the world is done by people pursuing their own narrow selfish interests. Ironically, most world evil is done in the name of good. [Thanks Walter Williams – a brilliant man]



Restated, Liberals are evil, not out of design or what they claim to set out to do. Liberals are evil because of the results of their actions. When a person consistently performs deeds that result in evil being done, intent no longer matters and that person becomes evil.




When you hear a Liberal whine about “Profit” remember they are hyprocrates and ignorant.

First, we need to get the name correct. They are not “public schools” … they are “Government Run Schools”.

“Private” schools are open to the public. But I understand why Democrats wish to avoid the more accurate name.

The US government does nothing as well as the private sector.

The USA does not own one bomb factory or one weapons plant. Yet the USA has the best bombs and weapons on the planet. Why? The entities that make our bombs and weapons are run by the private sector, not the government. Restated, the USA pays the private sector to build them.


Why then do we allow the government to own and run our schools? CONTROL.


If those in power really cared about the education of children, they would pay the private sector to run schools. The US government would not own a single school or employ a single teacher.


That would fix the problem . . . but the Liberals would not be in full CONTROL of brain washing the children.


Additionally, such would eliminate votes for Democrats. In short, Democrats do not care about our children's education; all they care about are votes to keep their sorry butts in power. In fact, the less educated our children the better for those in power.


The average public school teacher is worthless and would not be employable under any high level private sector job. The same goes double for the average College professor; Leaches on society, most of them.


There are exceptions: those that teach unbiased economics, engineering, medicine.


Second, PROFIT is not a dirty word. People making Profit off their work is what keeps sorry individuals like College professions in a job at a pay level they do not deserve.


Consider this, WHO/WHAT save the Whales? Was it a tree hugging liberal? Was it a bunch of Greenpeace Liberals? Was it hand wringing liberal college professors worried about profit? Was it elitists in government passing laws?


NOPE. It was a “robber baron” – John Rockerfeller. Restated, free market capitalism saved the whales.


America was the world's leading whaling nation. According to James S. Robbins's article, "How Capitalism Saved the Whales," appearing in The Freeman (8/92), with 735 whaling ships in 1846, we did 80 percent of the world's whaling. In the first two decades of the 19th century, whalers killed an average of 15,000 whales annually to produce 4-5 million gallons of sperm whale oil, 6-10 million gallons of train oil and 1.6-5.6 pounds of bone. These products lighted lamps and provided, soaps, paint, lubrication, candles, perfume, corset stays, buggy whips and other useful products. When whaling finally stopped at the turn of the 20th century, there were an estimated 50,000 whales left. Surely, if an average annual kill of 15,000 whales a year continued, whales would now be extinct. What saved the whales? Was it a triumph by Greenpeace or early animal rights wackos? If you say yes, put on the dunce cap.


Whales were saved by the self-interested motives of the much-maligned "robber baron" J.D. Rockefeller. The first step was made by Dr. Abraham Gesner, a Canadian geologist. In 1849, he devised a method whereby kerosene could be distilled from petroleum but it took Rockefeller to make kerosene production a commercial success. With his partner Samuel Adams, Rockefeller set up a network of kerosene distilleries that would later become known as Standard Oil.


As kerosene became cheaper and available throughout the nation, our whaling fleet fell from 735 in 1846 to 39 in 1876. The last American whaling ship left port in 1924 and grounded on Cuttyhunk Island the next day. Spring steel came to replace whalebone in corsets, automobiles replaced carriages and the demand for whalebone buggy whips and wagon suspensions collapsed. In 1879, Edison began marketing the incandescent bulb. As our country became electrified, both whale oil and kerosene were driven from the illumination market.


Whales were not the only beneficiaries of Rockefeller's activities. The Galapagos turtle was nearly driven to extinction as sailors on whaling ships killed them for fresh meat. With the decline in whaling the turtles were able to survive. Oil-drilling in Pennsylvania helped restore lakes that had become contaminated by natural petroleum leakages.


You might say, "Rockefeller didn't mean to confer these benefits, so it doesn't count!" If one takes that position, nothing counts. After all, we all have cars, houses and food, which I think is wonderful. But I doubt whether producers of these goods labored for our benefit because they cared about us. A better explanation is they cared a lot about themselves. That brings up another Adam Smith quotation, "I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good." In other words, most good done in the world is done by people pursuing their own narrow selfish interests. Ironically, most world evil is done in the name of good. [Thanks Walter Williams – a brilliant man]


Restated, Liberals are evil, not out of design or what they claim to set out to do. Liberals are evil because of the results of their actions. When a person consistently performs deeds that result in evil being done, intent no longer matters and that person becomes evil.


When you hear a Liberal whine about “Profit” remember they are hyprocrites and ignorant.

It would appear the problem with education in the nation is the Federal Government.

It always amazes me how liberals portray making a 'profit' as a bad thing. Yet, to them, there's nothing wrong with not just teachers getting very nice salaries (plus they get three months off a year and holidays!) but then you have a huge bureaucracy (state and federal) that is also taking home nice salaries and unbelievable benefits. Who exactly is making a profit?
At least with a business or corporation trying to make a profit (in education or any industry) there is some accountability. If they charge too much or fail at properly educating their students, parents can take their children elsewhere. If you don't have the money to send your children to a private school you're stuck with the schools in your district. And like most government institutions, there is zero accountability. Does Susan realize how hard it is to fire an incompetent teacher?