Negative Effects of Charter Schools on Public Schools (Essay Sample)

Negative Effects of Charter Schools on Public Schools Name Institution Negative Effects of Charter Schools on Public Schools Introduction Charter schools are non-religious public schools that operate on a contractual basis (Haerens & Zott, 2012). A contract is drawn, and it defines everything from the name of the school to the management, curriculum, and mode of operation. Both primary and secondary education is offered in charter schools to students who may eventually sit for state-mandated exams. Charter schools primarily receive funding that is fixed for a particular student. Both for-profit and non-profit charter schools exist in the United States. However, non-profit charter schools are the only ones that are eligible for donations from private sources. The brainchild of charter schools is to give parents the freedom to make a choice on the places where they would like their children to study (Haerens & Zott, 2012). Parents are spoilt for choice on where they feel that their children will have a proper learning environment for improvement of student achievement. Additionally, charter schools are expected to adhere to federal laws. They do not charge tuition fees. Students apply to join these schools and in case the slots available are full, enrollment is done by lottery basis. Public schools, on the other hand, are schools that are supported by public funds. These schools provide education at no additional cost to children of a community or district. In the United States of America, public schools are locally governed. Each of the fifty states in this nation has a Department of Education that is responsible for setting rules and regulations that govern the public schools of that state. The primary sources of funding for these public schools are local property taxes and individual state. A school board invokes the aid of a small committee of people who are either appointed by the local government or elected by the local community in the governance of each school district. Charter and public schools are similar in that they both offer free education. Additionally, both set ups are open to all children regardless of their race, gender, or disability. Both schools do not have special entrance requirements. They admit students based on the availability of space in these institutions (Haerens & Zott, 2012). The major difference between them is that charter schools have the freedom of experimentation. Charter schools, as opposed to public schools, have regulatory freedom in addition to being autonomous to state and local rules (Fabricant & Fine, 2012).  Additionally, some charter schools are out to make profits for individual organizations or persons. These differences put public schools at a disadvantage when compared to charter schools. Some of these adverse effects will be discussed in this paper. Ease of Accountability in Charter Schools As mentioned earlier, charter schools operate by a contract. In the contract are rules and regulations. Additionally, charters spell out parents’ expectations from these schools (Betts & Hill, 2010). Parents are allowed to hold management responsible for anything that goes contrary to what the agreement spells out. Management, on the other hand, is also entitled to demand accountability from parents and students in understanding with the contract. In the case where parents express any form of dissatisfaction with the students’ academic performance, necessary action can be taken with the contract as the guiding factor. Financial management and organizational stability are dictated by these contracts. For that matter, all stakeholders in these schools are highly accountable in their varied departments (Betts & Hill, 2010). In the case of public schools, the level of accountability is different. Parents, teachers, and students work harmoniously to the best of their ability. Academic excellence lies on no particular stakeholder. While some may blame teachers for students’ poor performance, others consider it as the individual responsibility of the student. No one is to blame for anything. Since property taxes pay for most of the cost for public schools, it is hard to follow up on financial management in these schools (Hiatt-Michael, 2010).  Needless to say, it is in these public schools that teachers complain about parental involvement. Most parents do not understand that they too have a role to play in their children's education. More often than not, parents do not follow up on their children's' homework (Hiatt-Michael, 2010). Whenever academic meetings are called in school, parents do not show up. They are full of excuses. Such behavior discourages teachers from following up on some students. The worst part is that there is no way to force parents to become involved. It is a matter of individual choice. Traditionally, states monitored educational inputs such as the number of books in the school library. There was no such thing as the follow up on the effects that these inputs had on performance. In the 1980s, an incentive was introduced for schools that would be willing to account for student performance (Maeroff, 2010). It was proposed that the state provided more funds for public schools that would allow educators to become account for students’ performance. The 2001 Act dubbed ‘No Child Left Behind’ was phenomenal in championing for overall accountability. Thanks to this act, it became increasingly possible to follow up on student performance. Additionally, the overall school set up was considered as the unit for improvement. Schools were required to report publicly achievement results for all to see. Additionally, each state was required to report to the United States Department of Education. Although the public schools are locally governed, the national government also expressed interest and concern in matters to do with education. With all these strategies in place, parents whose students attend public schools are still not assured of their children’s performance (Hiatt-Michael, 2010). Some low-performing schools are yet to reap the fruits of accountability. Rewarding high-performing public schools or improving public schools has left little to be desired. The state may not have adequate resources to intervene in all schools that exhibit low performance. Achievement of accountability in public schools is an uphill task. Evidently, it has been a long struggle for public schools to embrace the element of responsibility. While charter schools have clear-cut rules that define the consequences of failing to be accountable for students’ performance, public schools are battling with the unavailability of funds to monitor this element (Betts & Hill, 2010). Parents and stakeholders get to a point where they lose patience with these public schools and decide to seek for alternatives: charter schools. It is because of this accountability that a higher percentage of students from charter schools are accepted into colleges and universities. It means that the teachers in these schools teach the curriculum to the desired level of adequacy (Betts & Hill, 2010). Parents in these schools are obligated by the contract to partake in their children’s achievements. Most charter schools contracts dictate that parents attend school meetings without failure. It is part of parental involvement in students’ education. The overall result of participation and accountability is the production of a responsible and all-around student. Having considered the accountability factor, it is evident that most parents would prefer taking their children to charter schools. Since most parents desire academic achievement, they are likely to choose charter schools over public schools (Snyder & Wisconsin, 2013). As both parties offer education at no cost, assurance of academic accountability gives charter schools an upper hand. It eventually culminates into small student population in public schools. The recent past has seen parents withdraw their children from public schools to charter schools with their reason being financial and educational accountability. Ease of Curriculum Adjustment in Charter Schools In the past, the teacher was the center of instruction. The ideal picture of a classroom was that of a teacher standing before an audience (students) to impart on them as much knowledge as it was possible. It was the only known way that students could learn. It is no doubt that educational needs of the 17th century are different from those of the 21st century. With the changing times come changes in the educational sector. Nowadays, there are more learning challenges than before. Teachers should become not only purveyors of information but also coordinators of the same. They should be facilitators and guides to these students. It is important for them to allow students to make contributions in class. In this way, total participation on the part of learners and tutors will be made possible. Academic freedom should be embraced in classes. The steps to overhauling the current school curriculum are simple, yet they have proven difficult to achieve. They involve a thorough analysis of the current teaching practices and learning goals. There are certain things that teachers would like to change about student learning in a particular course. For instance, a teacher of mathematics may want to use diagrams to ensure that students understand the concept of fractions. In his analysis, this tool will be the basis of student learning and understanding of the subject matter. Asking students to point to the chart at the mention of an individual fraction gauges their comprehension. Additionally, teachers should set goals for their students. The teaching approaches taken by the teacher should be beneficial in helping the students to achieve the set goals. The structure of the curriculum should be such that it allows the students adequate time to accomplish these aims. The determina...