« Cop Fired on in Aftermath of Rally at Grand and Putnam Ward's Bakery: SWO But Well Beyond Salvation »
May 22, 2008
Six New Charter Schools To Open in Brooklyn
At least six new charter schools are expected to open in Brooklyn within the next two years. Park Slope's Brooklyn Prospect Charter School has already been reported by the Daily News, but applications for four other K - 8 charter schools were approved by SUNY on the same day, all to be managed by Uncommon Schools. Mini "scholars" at the four schools can expect rigorous instruction from 7:30 a.m. until 4 p.m. Excellence Charter School for Girls, in the Bed-Stuy school district, and Leadership Preparatory East New York are scheduled to open this fall. Leadership Preparatory Flatbush and Brownsville are scheduled to open the following school year. Uncommon Schools also announced plans for their first charter high school in Crown Heights, located at 1485 Pacific Street at Kingston Avenue. Uncommon Schools spokeswoman Megan Zug said the organization purposefully chooses low-income neighborhoods "to close the achievement gap between low-income and high-income students."
The private and publicly-funded high school designed by Robert A.M. Stern Architects would have "four floors of brand new classrooms, science labs, art studios, a library, a technology center, a thousand-seat 'cafetorium,' several full-size gymnasiums, and a rooftop playfield," according to the announcement. Up to 1,600 students from four existing charter middle schools would attend. One of those schools, the Excellence Charter School for Boys in Bed-Stuy (pictured), had SUNY's third-largest difference from its local district in proficiency on the standardized English Language Arts exam, at 94 percent proficient versus 48 percent. In Math, 100 percent of the students passed versus 72.1 percent in the district, according to a SUNY annual report. Almost all charter schools fared better than their local district counterparts in the report, which detailed some pretty crisis-level proficiency rates. Do you think charter schools the solution to this crisis? What about the long days for elementary and middle school kids? Are they necessary, or should the kids be getting more downtime?
New Brookyln Charter School Recruiting Students for Fall '09 Opening [Daily News]
Teaching Boys and Girls Separately [NY Times]
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/4938
Comments
This is another step towards privatizing public services. It's a shame that public schools aren't going to get the shiny new labs, art studios etc.. Perhaps public schools aren't thriving because a businessman, not an educator is in charge of it. And no, I'm not a teacher, but a parent and grandparent who was born in NYC and educated in the city system.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 10:47 AM
do you have to be poor to go to a charter school?
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 11:22 AM
I work in another city, but with a similar population to that described here. I think it is fine for kids to be there for that long, so long as they are not working for eight hours. That is an adult's standard workday, and not appropriate for a six year-old. I hope they have a chance to have more than one recess and other opportunities to take a break during the day.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 11:32 AM
So kids should suffer just to prove a point, 10:47?
The old system is broken and choked by the unions so we figure out a new way to do things. The goal should be to get low income kids a better education and better prospects in life. Not to be political.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 11:36 AM
"do you have to be poor to go to a charter school?"
I was thinking the same thing. It's like college from the start where you have to be either filthy rich or poor enough for scholarship money to go. The middle class is lost. So will people from middle neighborhoods like fort greene, prospect heights, and PLG have to send their kids into the war zones of crown heights and bed sty to get a better education? That's what they paid so much for their homes to avoid.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 11:41 AM
I thought Uncommon Schools is a non-profit partially funded by the Robin Hood Foundation. It's a for-profit business?
Yay, more corporate welfare.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 11:48 AM
why can't they go to school where they live in fort greene, prospect heights and PLG?
OR, maybe NOT pay so much for your home and put it towards your kid's education?
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 11:51 AM
"do you have to be poor to go to a charter school?"
No. These are PUBLIC charter schools that are open to anyone. They are located in traditionally low-income neighborhoods and give preference to students who are residents. They do not exclude anyone from applying or attending. Admissions is often done by lottery.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 11:52 AM
I've never understood why parents with school-age kids or soon-to-be-school-age kids would move to an area with bad zoned schools -- unless you can afford private. I mean, this was the FIRST thing I looked for in a home.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 11:55 AM
11:55 again -- I meant to add that I think these charter shcools are great and are probably right where they should be. I just don't have a lot of sympathy for people paying $1mm+ for a home and then complaining about not getting their kids into a charter school.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 11:57 AM
You do not have to be poor to attend a charter school. All you have to do is take your kid to the school and get an application. If you live in the school district where the charter school is located you get an automatic preference for a seat. If there are more applicants than there are seats a lottery is held. The lotter still requires the preference to be upheld for school district children and siblings, so its possible that for really popular schools, classes of incoming students will only be filled from those two groups.
CHARTER SCHOOLS ARE PUBLIC SCHOOLS! The only difference is that they are given LESS money than other NYS public schools and they are run by folks that are not part of the DOE. They still must meet all Education Law requirements, testing requirements, etc. And they can and will be shut down if they fail to do so.
Before you start bitching about how this is yet another way white folks are getting screwed, do a little bit of research. There are plenty of folks trying to open new school. Why not ask them to come into your neighborhood, instead of complaining about how little Sophie might have to go to school in "the war zones" of Bed Stuy and Crown Heights. Help them find buildings that could house a school. Work with them to get neighborhood support. Charters are supposed to be driven by local needs and desire. A lot of that is changing, because only large corporations that have the economies of scale can support the tremendous undertaking that is required to get a new charter. Brooklyn Prospect Charter School is going to be located in PS and is bucking that trend and there are plenty of others out there that are trying to do the same thing. Find them, and work with them and stop complaining.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 11:59 AM
"I've never understood why parents with school-age kids or soon-to-be-school-age kids would move to an area with bad zoned schools -- unless you can afford private. I mean, this was the FIRST thing I looked for in a home."
We chose a less expensive house precisely for that reason, so we could afford private schools which we prefer no matter what neighborhood we're in, and very importantly could afford college later. We weren't going to pay a huge mortgage and a college tuition at the same time. Who wants to do that. Travel abroad is important to us too. If we were house poor we couldn't do that.
Everybody's choices are different. Because you were asking 11:55 (and making assumptions and judgements) I felt compelled to share why we made our choices.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 12:03 PM
11:41-Your "war zone" comment is very disrepectful. "Middle neighborhoods" like Fort Green, PLG, and prospect heights are to some, "Low neighborhoods".
Like 11:55 said if you have the money to pay for those 1mil + homes, pay another couple of K's for private schools and stop whining.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 12:06 PM
What if you only have 1M and not the 3M you need for a home in an area with a good school? Are you supposed to move into the worst neighborhood so you can get your kid into one of these schools? It's the middle class people whose kids get screwed.
You can't say that a school gives preference to kids from the neighborhood and also say it doesn't exclude kids from others. Yes, the kids from the middle class neighborhoods can apply for the lottery but that's how they have to try to get in - by chance. So kids from the middle class have a lottery chance at a good education.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 12:10 PM
for 1mm you can buy a very nice place in Cobble Hill, Brooklyn Heights or Park Slope -- all with excellent public schools.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 12:16 PM
Where's the park slope school going to be?
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 12:16 PM
I don't understand 12:03. You can afford private, you plan on private ... what is the problem?
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 12:18 PM
if you can afford a million dollar home, you are NOT middle class, sorry. Avg household income in NYC is under 50k. Get a grip.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 12:20 PM
"for 1mm you can buy a very nice place in Cobble Hill, Brooklyn Heights or Park Slope -- all with excellent public schools."
Listing of home big enough for family please.
"if you can afford a million dollar home, you are NOT middle class, sorry. Avg household income in NYC is under 50k. Get a grip."
You need to get a grip. What do you want to call the people who cannot afford a neighborhood with good public schools like park slope or cobble hill, but do not qualify for public assistance. People in these areas are the middle class. You can call them whatever you want, but they cannot afford private schools and shouldn't have to. They pay their taxes and should get to send their kids to decent public schools.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 12:27 PM
Charter schools can be a great relief for overcrowded neighborhoods or persistently poor performing schools. They have more freedom to innovate and tend to be more flexible. It is too bad the regular public schools are not give the same level of freedom.
While charter schools run the gamut from traditional to progressive, the ones that open in inner cities tend to be of the highly scripted, highly disciplined style with a lot of rote learning. Many have great results both on tests and in keeping kids in school and getting disadvantaged kids off to college.
Posted by: trudylou at May 22, 2008 12:34 PM
New to this discussion, but:
dude, you can get a large 2 br/2ba with den in that new fancy Brooklyn Bridge Park condo place for under 1mm. I saw them this weekend. and this is the kind of place with putting greens and refrigerated storage. you suffer through living there , I'm sure.
or, if you search on corcoran (and only them) in CH, BH, and PS for 3 bedroom places for under 1mm you get 17 choices. I saw one that only needs cosmetic work on frickin' Pierrepont Street.
I guess you're saying you want to own a townhouse in NYC and send your kids to charter school. In which case: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 1:08 PM
Charter school preferences are not neighborhood based, they are district based. So for example, District 13 in Brooklyn includes parts of the following neighborhoods: Bed-Stuy, Clinton Hill, Ft Greene,Crown Heights, Prospect Heights, Downtown Brooklyn, Brooklyn Heights, Park Slope, and a sliver of Cobble Hill. District 14 is Bed Stuy, Ft. Greene, Clinton Hill, Greepoint, Williamsburg, and Bushwick. Excluding kids from outside of the district is not the same as excluding kids from any particular neighborhood. And, in fact, charter preferences use the same district lines as NYC public schools, so your child is applying to schools in exactly the same area as they would if they were applying to public schools.
And again, living outside of that district does not automatically mean you will not get a spot in the school. There are a variety of factors that drive enrollment. Preferences are just that, but if not enough children from the district apply, other seats can be filled by any child who is a New York State resident. So, if there is a charter school you might be interested in, put in an application. Its no worse than the process for applying to private schools, and its free.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 1:18 PM
Only on Brownstoner would people complain about the kids of Brownsville getting a charter school. "Wha! Wha! What about me!"
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 1:19 PM
You're not wrong, 1:19.
Posted by: Heather at May 22, 2008 1:57 PM
where is the complaining about that? please point to the post.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 2:39 PM
the guy who is complaining that you have to be poor to go to these schools. I guess you feel that way abotu food stamps and medicaid too!
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 3:34 PM
that guy asked if that was the case, he wasn't complaining. Unless you see everything through those spectacles.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 3:54 PM
why do all brownstoner "discussions" go the same way?
feel free to interpret my comments to fit your personal prejudices everyone.
except you, liberal natural mediator guy, you say something reasonable that everyone will ignore.
Uh oh, here comes pissed righteous female
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 5:24 PM
I'm a grade school teacher and am only going to comment on the length of the school day. Expecting children to remain focused and on task for 8.5 hours a day is not "rigorous" it's completely unrealistic. Even taking into account a 45 minute lunch break. Do they expect five to eleven year olds to really be learning for such an extended period of time. By 2pm every day I'VE lost my energy( I can only equate teaching to being on stage, you're "on" for seven hours) and and so have my students. Extended time in school does not equate academic success.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 6:05 PM
to this male, it sounded like a complaint.
Posted by: guest at May 22, 2008 6:17 PM
And as per the other thread, the teachers make less money, correct? And work longer hours? And... that attracts quality staff how, exactly?
I know there was some charter school in Manhattan offering $120K to start or something, but I'm assuming that's an anomaly.
Posted by: Heather at May 22, 2008 8:24 PM
Most charter schools pay MORE than DOE, not less. Except for the ones that are union schools, then they aren't allowed to pay more.
6:05: As for a longer day/year not equating to academic success, how would you explain that many charter schools out perform their neighborhoods, districts, and the city over all? You can definitely credit the excellent teachers, engaged parents, and high expectations, but it's silly to think that spending more time learning doesn't equal more learning.
Posted by: curiositykilledthecat at May 22, 2008 9:06 PM
Oh, I didn't know they all paid more. Do they offer comparable benefits as well? I'm not anti-charter school, although I have some reservations... in Williamsburg, for example, there's a whole pack of parents afraid to send their kids to the local schools who want to start charters...it'd just be nice if all kids in a community got the same opportunities, that's all. Then again, in neighborhoods where the publics are really failing -- I get that it's complicated.
Posted by: Heather at May 22, 2008 11:22 PM
Heather, are you talking about the williamsbrug school that the recent "immigrants" tried to change (i.e. increase standards at) and where the established parents fought against them? So they then pushed for the charter school?
You can't win.
Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 8:48 AM
No, although that's another example. I read some of the PR written by both sides of that one. PS 86, correct?
And no you can't. What I have a lot of trouble understanding though is why elementary education has become so complicated. My concern about charters is I'm afraid they'll go the way of HMO's -- while they start out offering affordable care for everyone, they'll end up dividing kids into tranches.
Posted by: Heather at May 23, 2008 9:52 AM
The only tranches that charters create is between kids who have a caring adult that is interested in their well being enough to fill out an application for a school, and ones that do not.
Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 10:17 AM
1. Charter schools generally pay teachers more in salary, but no pension. Also the school hours are longer and they get less time off (in the summer and also in 'sick and personal' days off)
2. Many private schools pay less than DOE and get better teachers who are attracted to better facilities and a more engaged parent pool
3. Most countries have longer days and longer school years and the kids thrive.
Posted by: guest at May 23, 2008 11:24 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.