stork38 t1_jdhx5mp wrote
Is there something wrong with this?
AnacharsisIV t1_jdhy83k wrote
To me it feels a bit like they're "double dipping". Charter schools already get funding from the state government without needing to meet the regulations of a public schools, now they're charging public schools rent which ultimately means they're taking money from the state twice.
mdervin t1_jdi7p9p wrote
"Double Dipping" is charging twice for the same service/item. Hotels charging a mandatory "resort fee" is double dipping. This is providing two different services and getting paid for each of them.
You may not like the existence of charter schools (and there's plenty of reasons not to like them), but if you are renting a building to the city, it's not some great crime for the city to pay you market rent.
​
EDIT: This is a serious concern,
>DOE is paying entire cost of the lease rather than per pupil amount, totaling nearly $43 million in FY 2023 – and in these cases, it is unclear if the rent charged to DOE is inflated or assessed at fair market value.
AnacharsisIV t1_jdi8p7z wrote
I actually, broadly, am in favor of charter schools. The problem I have is that, well, charter schools are a quasi-business and there are market forces at play for them that public schools have no control over, but still effect them.
When a charter school in an area does well, parents pull their kids out of local public schools and put them in the charter. I don't have a problem with that, though I also acknowledge that it quickly creates a stratified system where the only kids in charter schools speak fluent English and have no developmental disorders, and would also come from more moneyed families, leaving the public school in the area to basically be nothing but ESL, Special Ed and desperately poor students (who often fall into one of the other two categories, either). This creates a feedback loop; no parents want to put their kids in the public schools, the schools' funding dries up, and the schools start being closed down or downsized such as having to share buildings with charter schools.
Now, we have a new dynamic; the charter schools aren't renting space from the BoE to share a building with a public school anymore, they're now profiting from the public schools becoming shittier. It creates a perverse incentive, in my opinion, where the charter schools can now make money by diminishing the local public school to the point where they have to rent from the charter.
mdervin t1_jdiiaow wrote
You are factually wrong.
In NYC, charter school placement is done by lottery. Preference is obviously given to returning students, siblings of students and local residents.
White kids make up only 4% of Charter School Students, the majority(52%) go to private school, with the rest to public school.
20% of Black kids, 9% of Hispanic kids and less than 2% of Asian kids go to Charter schools, which means Charter schools are about 90% Black and Hispanic.
We can easily assume those numbers would be significantly higher Black and Hispanic kids if there were more charter schools.
So just to be clear, you are telling People of Color that they are wrong for sending their children to charter schools.
https://www.schools.nyc.gov/enrollment/enroll-in-charter-schools/how-to-enroll-in-charter-schools
https://www.manhattan-institute.org/complex-demographics-new-york-public-private-schools
AnacharsisIV t1_jdijh8t wrote
Where did I say anything that disagrees with what you're saying?
I never said charter admission wasn't based on lotteries. I never said they were substantively white, nor that they weren't full of black and Hispanic students. I never said I was against charter schools or that parents were wrong for sending their children there.
You seem like you're so used to arguing with anti-charter posters you just regurgitate the same facts irrespective of whether or not they prove your point.
mdervin t1_jdikb0a wrote
OK, Fine.
Do you believe publicly funded charter schools should exist?
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdiosiq wrote
When you lift caps on charters, your city’s school system becomes Philadelphia. Public schools become repositories for kids whose parents don’t care or don’t have the wherewithal to get them into charters (minus a couple of high performing magnet schools), and every parent who has the time and inclination to fill out an application sends their kid to a charter of decidedly middling quality. You get to break the union, you burn through every young teacher three years out of college, and your public school system is destroyed. And twenty thousand union members with a passable quality of life go looking for greener pastures. That’s what you’re looking for?
mdervin t1_jdiravx wrote
Do you think the Philadelphia Public School system was properly educating Children of Color before charter schools existed?
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdis0l2 wrote
Problems are exacerbated by the existence and growth of charters.
mdervin t1_jdisflf wrote
Citation needed.
bittoxic00 t1_jdmg6h7 wrote
He means if you take away all the good kids then bad kids become a higher percentage of students and the problem is worse (more visible). He’s upset he’s not teaching geniuses like in the movies he watched as a kid that inspired him to become a teacher and now has a difficult work environment
mdervin t1_jdmu36z wrote
Why should poor parents who give a damn about their child's education and future be forced to go to school with bad kids? Especially with an unresponsive (at best) educational bureaucracy?
Why are you so willing to sacrifice the future of poor kids?
bittoxic00 t1_jdnhq34 wrote
I think for one no teachers would line up to teach a room of terrible kids who might assault or otherwise shoot them as we just saw a 6 year old do.
mdervin t1_jdoagn1 wrote
And you want to put those teacher-shooting kids in the same classroom as kids who want to learn? What kind of monster are you?
bittoxic00 t1_jdohqyx wrote
Just for the record, no, they need to have better methods to teach and handle specific children
mdervin t1_jdokvqe wrote
What are those methods?
bittoxic00 t1_jdon39g wrote
Specialized attention to their needs, therapy, remedial math and English. Have you seen the stats on what percentage of students can perform either at their grade level?
mdervin t1_jdrr40z wrote
That doesn't seem so difficult to do. I wonder why the Board Of Ed won't do it?
bittoxic00 t1_jdrziiw wrote
It would cost additional teachers and funding
mdervin t1_jdsce4s wrote
So because you don't want to pay more in taxes, you want to force poor kids to go to shitty schools with dangerous kids? Once again, what kind of monster are you?
bittoxic00 t1_jdsd3v8 wrote
Lol, who said I paid any taxes
mdervin t1_jdsiai7 wrote
and now we know why the schools are underfunded, because of people like you.
bittoxic00 t1_jdsisqv wrote
Last year I didn’t pay my 3 billion in tax, I figured why do it
AnacharsisIV t1_jdikm5g wrote
Yes? I literally said that in my last post.
EDIT: To restate the thesis of my first post; I have no issue with the existence of charter schools, my issue is specifically them being landlords to public schools, because I would rather they dedicate their attention to educating students rather than split their attention between education and real estate.
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdi92jo wrote
Isn’t it? It’s taking money from the city to pay for the education of a number of children. It’s taking the excess and purchasing a building. Then, it’s charging the city to educate other children in that same building.
mdervin t1_jdije6t wrote
No. terms have meaning. Let's say for example you work for the city, you save up a bit of money buy a building and the city comes to you and says "We'll rent that building from you." Are you double dipping from the city? No of course not.
Now, let us say you are a lazy incompetent worker, show up late, leave early, shoddy results, but you still save enough to buy a building and the city still rents from you? Is that "double dipping?" Once again no.
Now let's say in the rental agreement with the city it's stated that you are to provide handyman and general repair service included with the rent. A window is broken, you repair it, you send a bill to the city for the materials & labor to repair that window. Is that double dipping? Yes!
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdil2nk wrote
Money that’s earmarked for educating children should not generate profits. Those profits should not be used to purchase a building that generates further profits. That building should not take further money from the city’s coffers through charged rent.
mdervin t1_jdimdoq wrote
So you don't think teachers should profit off their labor? Textbook Publishers? Janitorial Supply companies shouldn't make a profit off what they sell to the school?
edit: NYC spends about 30K per student. Archbishop Molloy charges 11K per year tuition.
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdin0vw wrote
I don’t think charter schools should exist. They’re fundamentally different from all other individuals and companies you’ve mentioned. Want to start a school? Great. Go use your own money.
mdervin t1_jdir28u wrote
So now do you think NYC public schools are giving Children of Color a proper education?
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdiruf9 wrote
I think NYC schools vary widely in quality, just as charters do. The more charters that exist in the system, the more resources, student talent, and tenacious parents flow out of the public system.
mdervin t1_jdisn5a wrote
So you want to force students of color to stay in schools that fail them?
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdithth wrote
Straw man.
mdervin t1_jdivlyx wrote
That's not what a straw man is. You just aren't willing to accept the decisions Parents of Color make for what they believe is the best interest of their children's education.
Black and Hispanic parents want classes where their children are place with students with the same academic level. Black and Hispanic parents want disruptive and dangerous students kicked out of their children's class. Black and Hispanic parents want the school to be able to fire underperforming teachers.
You want them to sacrifice their children to your ideal of a public school regardless if those ideals help Black and Hispanic Children.
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdiyf9v wrote
No, that’s exactly what a straw man is. You’re arguing against a false opponent that you e created, not my actual argument.
You’re all over this thread arguing for charters charging the public rent on buildings bought with public funds intended to educate children. This is so obviously a money grab by organizations less and less accountable to those parents you claim to represent. Stop it.
I’m done here.
mdervin t1_jdj6bhr wrote
And those funds were used to educate children. The Board of Ed is riddled with grifters at all levels, a company with basic financial controls and discipline can make a substantive profit educating children. Once again.
The Catholic High Schools educate their kids at 1/3rd and the grade schools at 1/4th of what we spend on public school students.
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdi70hx wrote
They’re taking your tax dollars, burning through inexperienced teachers, overpaying board members, kicking out students with disabilities or behavioral problems, using the spare cash to purchase buildings, and then stealing more tax dollars by being the public school system’s landlord.
You should be mad.
bittoxic00 t1_jdi7ghq wrote
What’s wrong with kicking out students with behavioral problems
bat_in_the_stacks t1_jdi83w3 wrote
They are legally mandated to be taught. The charters, which are publicly funded, kick out the problem cases. The kids go back to regular public schools. Then the charters advertise how their test scores are higher and their graduation rates are higher than regular public schools. They use this to justify funding more charters. As this cycle progresses, they suck up more and more of the public school funding due to the unfair playing field.
bittoxic00 t1_jdia283 wrote
I grew up in the public school system, there were problem kids that really affected classes. The only way past it was moving to another district. These children will still be taught but I just don’t understand why some children can’t flourish in nyc without leaving their neighborhood or shelling out 50k for a private education
AnacharsisIV t1_jdi9ta8 wrote
I didn't go to a charter, but I went to a SHSAT school that also didn't have to have ESL or special ed classes or students and my experience going from middle to high school was night and day. Do you understand how much a boon it is to your mental health to no longer worry about being bitten by your fellow student, or to go to a class and everyone is there to actually learn instead of acting out in class? If charter schools are the only way other students can get the experience I had, fucking let them.
Children who need special resources and care are entitled to them, and I hope public schools continue to be able to give that to them, but there is absolutely no reason why other students have to be subjected to them and have their quality of education be attenuated.
Slime_Giant t1_jdiiasm wrote
Lolol, is your point here "public schools should only be for the freaks"?
AnacharsisIV t1_jdijt5e wrote
If the government isn't going to make public schools better, that's what's going to happen regardless of whether or not I want it.
What I do believe is that it's entirely just and fair for parents and students to choose who they learn with, as long as the state curriculum is followed (IE, don't just put your kids in a religious school and refuse to teach science and math). Unfortunately, too many American families and students don't have that choice.
GoRangers5 t1_jdipb4u wrote
The “freaks” should be allowed to do something else because conventional schooling doesn’t put them in a position to succeed.
bittoxic00 t1_jdj98te wrote
Silver
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdildym wrote
Philadelphia gutted its public school system in favor of charters. So did the entire state of Louisiana. You should check out how they’re doing.
bittoxic00 t1_jdj4ka3 wrote
Because all levels were mixed again, people need to be taught to their ability. If someone is struggling they should get remedial help instead of social promotion and disruption
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdk987g wrote
Career educator? No? I thought not.
bittoxic00 t1_jdka7xq wrote
So instead of holding someone back or getting them a more suited education the trick is to push them to the next grade onto a different teacher who now has to deal with both disruptions and retreading material wasting every other students time and then eventually dumping them on the world, uneducated and unprepared for all but the lowest prospects
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdkaw65 wrote
So many members of the public believe that they’re experts in education because they went to public high school. You’re not.
You’re also arguing against a position I have not espoused. Please just stop.
bittoxic00 t1_jdkbbfq wrote
I’m not a helicopter pilot but if I see one in a tree I know there’s been a critical error
_the_credible_hulk_ t1_jdnmuhs wrote
Have you actually seen the tree, though? When was the last time you set foot in any public school in NYC, let alone more than a single one?
bittoxic00 t1_jdj95dv wrote
All these parents want their kids to be forced into classes with children they would tell their kids to stay away from after school
Linoose t1_jdj9yhp wrote
Charter schools and nyc public schools get there funding based on their enrollment on 10/31 of each year. In November, a significant number of behavioral students are removed from charters and returned to public schools. Charters keep that money and public schools serve the students.
bittoxic00 t1_jdjg5be wrote
Seems like that’s a one timeish maneuver, if it’s 7-12, 6 years of whittling enrollment would hurt them overall
brownredgreen t1_jdjz45e wrote
Its an every year manuever, what are you on about?
bittoxic00 t1_jdk13yw wrote
So if 7th grade there are 100 kids and attrition is 10% then it’s 90 kids in 8th grade, 81 in 9th, 72 in 10th, 65 in 11th and 59 kids in 12th?
It’s probably the latter
brownredgreen t1_jdk1yfd wrote
You're not thinking about this smartly
Each year, 10% attrition from all grades
They also have transfer students? So if the 100 became 90 (due to 10 getting booted) next year, the class could become 95 as new kids join.
Think harder.
bittoxic00 t1_jdk6jct wrote
You’re approaching this from a position hate, be open minded, do you think class sizes half 7 through 12?
brownredgreen t1_jdk71ly wrote
My graduating class in 12th was definitely smaller (like by 200+) than the 9th grade class. I dont know exact numbers.
You are also ignoring my broader points:
They kick some kids out of every grade, AND, they can add new kids to a grade at years start. Students transfer.
Your not trying.
bittoxic00 t1_jdk7tl5 wrote
I can play your game too. First off it’s, “you’re”. Secondly 200 means nothing giving your class could be 201 or 3000. Each class of graduates advancing would be treated independently given an entering class unaltered from a previous year would displace a graduating class. We can debate but if you’re being mean spirited just go join the George santos re-election committee
brownredgreen t1_jdka3rn wrote
Oooh you spotted a grammar mistake?! You must win!
Wait... No
Petty nonsense
Block
Metapod_Used_Hardon t1_jdhza56 wrote
All the properties the DOE and City own and we need to lease property for schools? Seems wasteful.
stork38 t1_jdidg9s wrote
Do they really own as much as you think? The huge legacy schools are all 50 plus years old and there isn't a lot of land to build new schools.
Rottimer t1_jdjwjrg wrote
If the charters are overcharging on rent (charging full lease instead of agreed upon per student rent) and using this money to pay for above market rates that they negotiated, then they're enriching someone on state/city tax funds, possibly illegally.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments