Here's my uneducated perception:

Public Schools - Where the government tells the public what they what they want us to hear

Private School - Where the rich & powerful tell us what they want us to hear

Charter School - Where the dreamers and idealists prepare the soil and plant seeds

What should we as citizens expect from our public school system?

Greg - If you mean what "should" we get from our government in public schools, I would say that we should expect "truth." For instance, teach our children the truth about history, from all sides, showing what we've done and how it has impacted ALL people. In this day in age, our children need more than simple reading and "rithmetic". Challenge them to think for themselves. My grandson has received a very well-rounded public education at both Skyridge & H. Clarke Powers. He seems to handle it well and be thriving.

I am concerned about the over political-correctness being exercised at these schools. In fact, I see it in church also. Small children these days seem to be not as disciplined as they once were. Perhaps we are being overly sensitive to them. There are alot of brats out there with oblivious adults supervising them ?

Here is a definition I found: A public school operated independently of the local school board, often with a curriculum and educational philosophy different from the other schools in the system. Of course the govenment will want to support these schools because they are still a part of the public school system as far as the money goes.

Observer: why do you have to define private schools as "rich and powerful"? There are small, often poor, little private schools out there operating on very idealistic and sometimes very liberal ideologies. I don't understand how you are often "us against them" when it comes to people with money. Someday you might have a little money and then what? Does that now make you a bad person?

Observer,

I'm just wondering if people are locked into a system where we expect things that I would consider "extras"?

My kids attended a combination public and private schools, and I believe we benefited from both experiences. I also seriously doubt there is a set formula that works for every child and every parent.

Wouldn't everyone love to be able to enroll their child in a school where the kids learn the basic language, math, and science skills that enable them to think for themselves? Wouldn't it be great if, after your child is finished for the day with academic subjects, you could send him/her to another school for additional instruction in subjects of hers or his interest?

Yes, we can do those things now, but a parent would expect to pay for the additional schooling directly out of their pocket. While I believe in paying for what you consume, I also think there is a great deal of money going into public education that could be utilized more efficiently, that would effectively allow for more choices by regular families. Maybe not, but wouldn't it be nice to find out?

My vacation is over and I'm going back to work right now. See you this afternoon. Hopefully by then some of our school teachers and administrators will be able to comment. Hopefully, ChuxxR will be out of his PJ's by then as well. ;-)

Gail - I understand the fear of broad brush strokes, however, I was not using that brush. When I say rich & powerful, I am not referring to saintly and conscientious kings and rulers. I am talking about the bullies. I have been in the company of both and they are quite different in thought & actions. Thank you for encouraging me to clarify myself. :-)

Greg - I agree about the two school's of education. When my son was young, Montessouri was just such a progressive school, or atleast that was my understanding. I have to say that my grandson's schools both seemed to be providing a more mature curriculum. He can sort all of my recycles with knowledge of the coding on the bottom of the bottles, which I still can't do. He learned that at Skyridge. We need, most importantly to teach them about other cultures. They will have a greater understanding when making decisions of their own when they are adults. Those kids are our future and what we arm them with is imperative. I am all for maximizng every dollar spent on our children :-)

The real difference between these three types of schools are the individual parents participation with their kids education. A larger percentage of parents in Private and Charter Schools are more involved in the school and their kids education. Public schools are just fine when the students parents take an active interest in the school and their kids class room work.

Gail, many private schools have a conservative christian agenda. However, I think people in Catholic schools get a better education.

Observer, What some call truth, others call a lie. Children have not changed, it's your perception of them that has changed.

ChuxxR: Yes, and those schools make it clear that they are Christian, or Catholic, or conservative, or arts-based, Montessori, or whatever. Generally people know what they are in for when they sign up for a private school. That is not always the case with public schools, you never know for sure what angle things might be coming from.

Gail, "with public schools, you never know for sure what angle things might be coming from." I have heard it all. Public schools are a communist plot, they teach Satanism, they promote homosexuality, they are brainwashing our children with liberal ideology, they are bad, bad, bad.

Give me a break.

Jon Green, If I may paraphrase your words of wisdom; Parental involvement is vital to a child's educational success.

This is going to take me a few posts:

Public schools are government operated and are available to everyone. The curriculum is set by the state school board using content standards for each subject. Regular public schools are required to teach those standards and are assessed by the state through testing of the student population. Public schools are required to provide an education to all students residing within the school district’s boundaries and must provide alternative education to students who require it in the least restrictive environment. Students may be expelled but the process is restricted. Teachers are required to hold a valid teaching credential in the subjects that they are teaching. Teachers may be terminated after a lengthy process.

Charter schools are given the authority by their charters by a school district to alter their curriculum outside of the limitations of the state directed content standards. Charter schools must provide a valid reason for altering the curriculum. They may require all students to be visual or performing artists or to have additional science education. Some include unique studies such as aerospace studies or marine biology. They are supposed to be available to all students, but these types of schools can be selective based on their admission requirements. Students may be expelled and sent back to the public school system at the discretion of the charter school. Due to the unique nature of the curriculum, a charter school has the option of hiring teachers without state credentials. The process for terminating a teacher is slightly easier that in the public school system.

Private schools are free to create a curriculum in whatever fashion they choose, but are usually molded to meet the requirements of college admission. They are allowed to add religious studies into the curriculum. Students may be expelled for infractions that are not allowed in the public school system. An example would be a student who is in violation of the religious principles of the school. A state teaching credential is not required, but many private schools encourage their teachers to obtain one. Teacher termination is easiest in the private school sector. As with students, teachers not upholding the religious principles of the school can be terminated. Private school teachers are the lowest paid group.

Acadian, you painted charter schools with a small brush. There are different types of charter schools. Many public charter schools are subject to the same state requirements for admission as all public schools. They must also provide services for those students on IEPs, or other plans. Many public schools obtained charter status just to open up their district boundaries and be able to enroll students outside their district boundaries without the cumbersome interdistrict transfer policies which are a chain around the parents of children in the boundaries of small minded/fiscally strapped/poorly run school districts.

Public charter schools give options to families who cannot afford private education, yet want to be free to choose the best school and educational setting for their child.

Keepingupdated, of the three types of schools that we are discussing, I know the least about charter schools. So I didn't want to write something that I don't know about. I am aware of the charters being formed to circumvent the boundary issue, but my personal feeling is that there has been misuse of this aspect of charter school creation. Some school districts have created charters for the express purpose of tapping into neighboring school districts. But that is getting into a negative aspect of charter schooling and I wanted to remain positive and neutral.

I have a couple of friends who are close to getting their teaching credentials. What they go through and the requirements they now have on them is shocking, although I am not sure it makes them better teachers (?). It is the really creative teachers who stretch the minds of their students, make learning interesting and refuse to leave anyone behind, who have always stood out to me. I was very lucky to have great teachers growing up, especially at Placer High School. We need to take better care of our teachers.

Chuxx - Perhaps you are right, but I still see children being very wound up. Perhaps it is the environment they are growing up in...maybe too much activity and not enough play time?? As rebellious as my son was in his teenage years, he was always the most well-behaved child in public or in other peoples houses. My grandson is the same way. Both have received citizenship awards in school and other parents have told me how well-behaved they have been, so I know it's not just my opinion. Call me old-fashioned but it's all I can do not to walk up to some of these kids, and treat them as I would my own. Catholic schools do have better education. That's why many non-Catholics enroll their children in them.

Jon - You are right about parental involvement... Hard for alot of parents to do these days.

Some Catholic schools in Placer County do not have the academic standards that some of the public schools do.

Greg,

I’ve had the opportunity to work in both regular district run public schools as a teacher and a principal and now as an Executive Director (superintendent) of a Charter School. Much of what Acadian wrote is accurate. What Acadian didn’t say is that Charter Schools are held accountable to the state standards just the same as regular public schools, though as he stated we do have the liberty to get to the standards in a manner that is responsive to the needs of our students. All of the same state assessments apply to charter schools. Most charter schools have student achievement as their main mission and to that end place their resources to take advantage of that specific purpose. It is true that most charter schools exist to offer a curriculum that is not ordinarily found in the regular public schools, though sometimes just an emphasis on the basics is very much different than some regular public schools.

To be continued….

Cont.

Acadian mentioned that it is somewhat easier to terminate a teacher in a charter school, that is not accurate. It is vastly simple to terminate a teacher – they work as “at-will” employees and can be let go without cause. (unless the charter has allowed a union) and every teacher must hold a valid California teaching credential.

The notion that charter schools can easily expel a student is inaccurate. We have to use the same process that regular public schools use, then if the child is expelled they would attend a Community Day School which is just the same process as the regular public school.

A lottery system has to be used for admittance to the charter school. We cannot assess and “weed out” the difficult students as has been suggested by the Bee article. This past year, we had over 300 applications for 60 openings. A quality charter school can create a competitive spirit among the other schools in a city. They can each “raise their game” to encourage student achievement. (Auburn could use a good charter school as an alternative)

The reason that many charter schools are successful is no secret, it is a combination of innovation and parent involvement. Most charter schools require a commitment of hours by parents for their child to attend. We don’t get the myriad of parents that drop off their kids in the morning and pick them up in the afternoon with a “don’t bother me” attitude. They want to be involved and we want their …

Cont..

involvement.

Let's remember that we are all trying our best to serve the needs of our children. There is a lot of propaganda around by some that our schools are failing. Before YOU make that claim, really do your homework and find out what is happening in your local schools and nation-wide. You'd be surprised.

Sincerely,

Robert Capp

I stand corrected Bob. Like I said, my knowlege of charter schools is limited. As far as teacher termination, I was going on the fact that some charter schools bring in teachers from the chartering district and they have the same setup as those still at the public sites. As far as the credentials, I was thinking of the schools that offer such a unique curriculum that finding regular teachers that are qualified might be difficult. A school that is chartered for heavy doses of performing arts comes to mind. I wasn't looking at it as a shortcut. I have a question for you though. How does the pay compare between charter and public schools? When I talk to my fellow teachers who are not afraid of the risk involved in losing tenure (myself included) we would be knocking on the doors of the charter schools in a heartbeat if they were willing to offer a higher pay. Don't you think that great teachers should be given the opportunity to get a higher pay for their talent? And if they can't hack it, so be it.

Bob, this is worth repeating;

"There is a lot of propaganda around by some that our schools are failing.

Before YOU make that claim, really do your homework and find out what is happening in your local schools and nation-wide.

You'd be surprised."

It would be a surprise for many who claim public schools are not performing.

Chuxx,

Oh no - we agree again! Certainly the apocalypse is upon us and the sky is falling!

;>)

Robert Capp

Wow, ChuxxR, way to take what I said and stretch it to the limit. I never said a word about Satanism, homosexuality, etc.,. You would never put your kids in a Christian school and I think that is OK, its your choice. Why do you get to make that judgement call, and I don't? Instead you assume I am talking about all kinds of off-the-wall topics like Satanism. I think you have this picture in your mind of conservative-Evangelical-Christians that you need to re-think and not apply to everyone.

Acadian,

Yes, there are district charter schools that maintain the teacher contract - though they are few. Most have a sponsoring district (state mandate), but maintain their own independence or sovereignty.

The salary schedule for teachers can be varied. Some are based on performance only. Some on education beyond the B.A. and length of service. Some are a combination of both. Creativity is always an option. I do believe that teachers should get the pay that they deserve based on performance criteria and extra curricular involvement. The reality of the pay for teachers is that there is no easy answer since so many variables exist. Generally, teachers in charter schools make a little less than a unionized public school teacher.

The beauty of the charter system is that you don't pay sub-par teachers less and great teachers more, you just don't keep sub-par teachers and find more great ones.

Thanks for asking,

Robert Capp

JonGreen,

I appreciate what you said about parental involvement with their kids. It sounds so easy and it should be a priority, but sadly that isn't always true.

If school districts can bring in additional students from outside their district boundaries, then I can see why they would do that in a heart-beat.

I believe Bowman (Ackerman School District) has engaged in this exact tactic.

Thanks to Acadian and bcapp1 for their input. I appreciate you two gentlemen and the information you brought forth.

Thanks Bob and thank you Greg for an interesting topic.

Greg,

One last word (from me) on Charter Schools.

Recent studies have shown that high-performing charters have a longer school day and year; more time devoted to studying English; pay for performance, and not simply based on seniority and credentials; a clear academic mission with a laser like focus on student achievement; and a moderate disciplinary policy of both small rewards and small punishments (meaning that behavior issues—good and bad—are attended to on the spot).

Bob

Our kids have been out of school for quite a while. Having had six of them and all having gone through public schools I can truthfully say that none of our children ever had a bad teacher and that we were constantly in contact with the teachers. I'm not going to speculate whether it was luck or that teachers were very different then. I truly believe that you get out of school what you put into. I think that teachers being human beings will put more effort towards children whose parents show an interest in their education.

I really don't have much recent experience with schools other than what I hear or read about.

Observer, parental interest and involvement have never been easy but it seems like people today don't seem to want to put the effort it takes, let's face it, the TV set spends more time with children than some parents.

One thing I have to say. My hat is off to teachers, they have to contend with more garbage than any other profession with perhaps the exception of Law Enforcement.

Loomis - I was actively involved on a daily basis with my grandson's formal education from pre-school through the second grade. I could see the good that was doing. He changed schools when his father started back to school and seems to be doing well in the third grade.

When I was raising my own son, I was selfish and ignorant of proper parenting concerning school issues, most likely because I was sadly unprepared to be a single parent and struggled just to find some sense of stability on my own. I know how to do it wrong and how to do it more correctly :-). I have to praise the young parents I have seen who willingly are actively involved, but I believe it is easier for many of them because they have the stability and resources they need to be all they can be towards their children. Time is valueable in this busy world and even those who are well grounded, don't have much quiet time. There are many single parents out there with little or no support, who are absolutely not ready to raise children. I would suppose the answer is to, if possible, extend ourselves to help those who cross our paths. What's that saying "It takes a village to raise a child"

You are right about it not being easy. This is why I marvel at those like yourself who have raised six children. What you say has much merit and is worth listening to

Single parents can do a great job raising their children, with a tremendous amount of personal sacrifice and effort, but it is so much better, in my humble opinion, when there are two parents.

My parents were divorced when I was six. They were both wonderful people who spent a good amount of time with me. But, by the time I reached jr. high age I began to rebel and when my mother asked me why I was cutting school in 7th grade, I couldn't really give her an answer. I didn't really like being a let-down to my folks, but it didn't really bother me that they were disappointed. That fact alluded me until I was in my 30's.

Finally, I realized why it didn't matter to me if my parents were disappointed with me. It seems that the divorce was so traumatic that I had sub-consciously decided that my parents didn't care about my feelings when I was six, when I really needed both my parents support and unconditional love, and, in turn, didn't care about theirs when I was thirteen.

I wish I had come to this revelation many years earlier so I could have at least confronted them with my feelings. But, I'm glad I finally figured it out and now I tell everyone who will listen to please consider the gut-wrench you will be putting your kids through when you divorce one another.

That consideration alone will shape their future more than anything else you might do that you think will be so good for them.