Kilroy never opposed charter schools! He opposes the admission aspects of the charter school law!

Blog grasshopper of the south doesn’t get! School choice is good but in Delaware the poor are alienated. 

The Delaware charter school law was penned by racist minded people who sown in the “specific interest” to appease the affluent community.  

All public funded k-12 schools should have doors that swing the same way for all students. Charter schools applications should be numbered and only handed out by DE DOE. Followed by an open verifiable lottery!

The call for charter schools was meant to address the public school system failure to close the achievement gap. The Godfathers of charter schools encouraged specific interest to serve at-risk students. This was a sick attempt to segregate public school via de facto segregation and it worked. 40 years of data concludes, African-American students are at the greatest risk of failure and low achievement. And lets not forget Red Clay’s magnets schools.      

And as far as my so-called attack on teacher unions! Damn right! They supported the Race to The Top MOU that was laced with Common Core and the Smarter Balance. Markell made a deal unions and district could refuse! But John Young did! And Bec did in Red Clay, the only Red Clay board member to do so! HE pretty much told DOE Dan to kiss his ass! What the pro RTTT agents did was nothing more than a Pearl Harbor on public education!

The days of blaming “the system” are long gone! RTTT was bad and they knew it! 


6 responses to “Kilroy never opposed charter schools! He opposes the admission aspects of the charter school law!

  1. “The Delaware charter school law was penned by racist minded people who sown in the “specific interest” to appease the affluent community. ”

    Stoking more racial fires? It is inaccurate and as bad as yelling fire in a theater. Great for tabloid journalism. Not so good in having a discussion about educational failures. It really is offensive and is a smear campaign similar to hands up don’t shoot. Facts be damned, stoke the racial fires.

    “The call for charter schools was meant to address the public school system failure to close the achievement gap. The Godfathers of charter schools encouraged specific interest to serve at-risk students.”

    -Sorry, but no they were NOT intended to specifically target at-risk students. That is what others, particularly TPS advocates, have projected onto them. The intent was to try alternatives and stress other areas that the TPS’s were unwilling or unable to address. AND THE HOPE WAS TO GET TPS’S TO ADAPT BEST METHODS THAT COULD BE UTILIZED. How many TPS’s have incorporated these methods of higher discipline, phasing, or higher academic demands? TPS’s haven’t been all that receptive to ANY “sauce” other than the kind that says Charters suck.

    From MD: The Maryland Public Charter School Act was passed into law on May 22, 2003. The general purpose of the Charter School program is to establish an alternative means within the existing public school system in order to provide innovative learning opportunities and creative educational approaches to improve the education of students.

    From AZ: Charter schools are established to provide a learning environment that will improve pupil achievement. Charter schools are created to provide additional academic choices for parents and students.

    From UnCommon Schools: A charter school is an independently run public school granted greater flexibility in its operations, in return for greater accountability for performance. The “charter” establishing each school is a performance contract detailing the school’s mission, program, students served, performance goals, and methods of assessment.

    From TX:
    What is the purpose of charter schools?
    Improve student learning. Increase the choice of learning opportunities within the public school system.Create professional opportunities that will attract new teachers to the public school system. Establish a new form of accountability for public schools. Encourage different and innovative learning methods.

    From NEA: Why were charter schools created?
    The main argument initially offered for creating charter schools focused on a desire to create greater flexibility for innovation within public education. It was hoped that successful innovations could be adapted to benefit public education more broadly.

    I’m not seeing a whole lot of “at risk” targeting being touted in many of these definitions. Not to mention MOST other schools evaluate students for placement. We do it for sports, do it for theater spots, band spots and a whole host of other activities. Why this is a foreign radioactive subject to insure the students are receiving appropriate education for their needs is simply stunning. Why that it is perceived as off limits to specialized ALTERNATIVE schools is just hypocritical.


  2. CRICKETS. But I’m not surprised, it doesn’t fit the narrative. CNBC is calling.


    • Publius e decere


      Your point was so obviously on the mark that there was apparently no need to pile on :-). Delaware law clearly states the legislative pupose for creation of charter schools:

      Title 14 Chapter 5 Charter Schools

      “The purpose of this chapter is to create an alternative to traditional public schools operated by school districts and improve public education overall by establishing a system of independent “charter” schools throughout the State.”

      This is what the legislators actually agreed on. An alternative to traditional schools operated by school districts. Independent. Throughout the state. Short, sweet and to the point.

      M Ryder gets it. As do many jurisdictions beyond Delaware.

      Thanks for the tee-up. This one is an easy long-drive from the blue tees. Crickets speak louder than words :-).



    • Publius e decere

      Where is the class(less) clown when we could most appreciate his farce?


    • Jiminy is in the house! I don’t think anyone twenty years ago could have foreseen how much damage the choice movement has actually done in Delaware. This isn’t a knock on charters, but the way the funding apparatus is for local funding to go to charters is a complete disaster. And I highly doubt the choice forefathers could have seen a situation where students were admitted based on certain preferences. And yes, this applies to the traditional choice schools as well. Including Howard, Conrad, and some disturbing things I am seeing unfold within other districts. I wouldn’t complain about alternative schools if there was equal access. But no matter the reason, there isn’t. And that needs to be rectified.

      I was just looking at CSW’s latest board minutes where they announced they have a total of 5 students w/IEPs. 5. Let that number marinate around your heads. Out of the entire student population, only 5 IEPs. I would love to know how many applications they received for students with IEPs. I’m going to estimate a very low figure, and say 20. That would mean they probably took 3 with IEPs. Because they had two last year, so it would stand to reason they took 3. This is just playing with numbers here. Now in Title 14, it says the whole thing about public schools can’t discriminate based on race, ethnicity, religion, et al. So what becomes more important then? Federal law around the Americans with Disabilities Act or a charter school’s enrollment preferences and specific interest? And enrollment tests. I would challenge CSW and any other choice school, charter or traditional alike, to answer these questions.
      In terms of other schools emulating what the charters do, if there is a successful school based on an equitable population, then by all means, have at it. I think sharing of all sorts should happen in Delaware: education, teaching, due process, special education, sports, etc. I also think parents need to be respected by all schools for their parental rights, whether it is opting out of the standardized assessment or giving them the respect they deserve in special education matters. There are far too many school leaders with smug and arrogant attitudes. That needs to just go away. There is no place for that in education.


    • Publius e decere

      I was calling for Johnny K, not Jiminy C. Thanks for sharing.