Off the Charter

Judge Welch's Decision

2010-08-30T10:38:00.001-04:00

I am well aware that I haven't posted in months and I apologize. Things have happened--mostly summer, three children and getting back to the real work of improving our schools.

I encourage anyone who is still considering sending their child to the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School to read Judge Welch's decision in its entirety, especially the following paragraph:

"As the court stated at the hearing on this matter, the calculus regarding preliminary injunctive relief changes markedly during the next academic school year. At that time, the traditional Gloucester public schools will suffer significant financial harm. The GCA cannot claim any justifiable reliance regarding financial commitments/staffing if this court reconsiders the injunctive request early enough to allow planning by both sides for the next academic year. Likewise, any student who chooses to attend GCA this September will be aware of the inherent uncertainty involving the next academic year. Therefore, should this case not reach a beneficial resolution before next year, this Court will hold a hearing on any renewed motion for preliminary injunction (should the plaintiff file such a pleading) in early January 2011."

gloucesterdecision

Thank you for stopping by.

Jane Cunningham

Welcome Readers

2010-03-05T14:19:00.007-05:00

I posted a link at the Gloucester Daily Times and have been sharing the address for Off the Charter with those who want it.

Thank you for taking the time to learn about the process by which this charter was granted and about the way in which the board of trustees of the GCACS presses on no matter--with little to no oversight from the state.

If you are visiting this blog for the first time, please check out the following:

Why?

Open Letter to the People of Gloucester

Do Not Recommend Document for Gloucester Charter School as created by the Charter School Office of Massachusetts

Paul Reville's "Tough Pill" E-mail

IG Letter to Governor Patrick

Letter

2010-03-05T13:14:00.002-05:00

Amanda sent a letter to the editor of the Gloucester Daily Times on Tuesday, March 2. The letter was not printed in Wednesday's paper. On Wednesday the GCA board signed a lease. Amanda sent an updated letter to the Times, but the original letter was printed instead.

Here is the updated letter:

I am writing to express my continued opposition to the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School . In the beginning, I was concerned about the effects the school would have on the majority of Gloucester ’s students. As time passed I was infuriated by the lack of democratic process and how many rules were broken in granting the charter. Now, as the school is working toward opening, my opposition is strongest.

I do not believe this school can open and run successfully. To date the GCAC has no head of school. The Board of Trustees has canceled five scheduled meetings and has met only once since January 13. They have signed a lease for a building in an industrial park-- a far cry from the downtown location which is the basis of much of their curriculum.

I have attended the six information sessions the GCAC has offered thus far and have found a total of fifteen families interested in the school.

The mismanagement and inefficacy of the Board gives me cause to believe this school may fail. In the information session, a good amount of time is spent on an example project from the Lowell Community Charter School . As strong as the example is, it is important to note that the school it comes from has failed. At its five-year review the state wished to revoke the charter, only to find that after adjusting to the loss of students, the public schools of Lowell were not able to accommodate all of the students returning in one year.

Our children get only one chance at their education. If the GCAC fails, we can not give back those years of learning. The rest of Gloucester ’s students will be hurt first by the cuts made to accommodate the loss of students and, if need be, by the sudden influx of students from a failed school.

This is not a victimless experiment. The GCAC will be spending $2.7 million tax-payer dollars a year. In five years we get to see what they have done with it. We deserve to know what they are doing with the money. To date there has been little to no oversight from the state.

Since the charter was granted in February of 2009 the Board has nothing to show. The risks are too great to let them have the next five years to figure it out.

Amanda Cook
Gloucester, MA

Of Tough Pills and Medical Centers

2010-03-05T13:00:00.002-05:00

Charter school signs lease
Former Medical Center building to house school
By Patrick Anderson
Staff Writer

The Gloucester Community Arts Charter School has signed — and this time the landlord has accepted — a lease that will allow the school to open its doors in the Blackburn Industrial Park building recently vacated by the Cape Ann Medical Center.

The building at 2 Blackburn Drive was the charter school's second choice location, targeted only after a deal to lease space in the William G. Brown Building on Pleasant Street fell through in January.

Like the proposed deal for space in Brown's Mall, the former medical center building lease will be for 15 years with an average annual rent of around $406,000.

But unlike Brown's Mall, the Blackburn space does not fulfill the goal of charter founders to be downtown and within walking distance of the city's primary cultural institutions.

The main advantages of the new site are for drivers.

A lack of off-street parking and a dedicated bus drop-off were major concerns for the Brown's Mall location. Blackburn is built for automobiles and charter officials yesterday promised plenty of parking and easy pick-up.

The Blackburn site will also allow the school to provide plenty of outdoor recess space for students and a larger gym than Brown's Mall.

After weeks of rumors that they were close to a deal, the charter school board of trustees announced they had signed a lease for Brown's Mall.

But it became clear within a few days that the owners of that building, the Montagnino family, had not signed the deal and negotiations were stalled over the cost of renovations and parking.

In early February, charter officials confirmed that the deal for Brown's Mall was dead and they had turned to a second choice "close to downtown," widely assumed to be the former medical center.

"I think it allows us to do a larger multipurpose space and there will be lots of outdoor play space here," said interim charter school Executive Director Matthew Gallup about being in Blackburn yesterday. "And parking is not an issue."

Finish reading here.

Common Sense

2010-03-03T14:37:00.000-05:00

To the editor:

Your Feb. 17 Times editorial exhibits common sense about the proposed Gloucester Community Arts Charter School.

Adding a new school to our district will very likely mean closing one of our existing elementary schools. That's a significant step. Given this proposed school's history and recent track record, we should ask if that would be an acceptable price to pay.

Finish reading.

PETER DOLAN
Gloucester

Applying to the GCA Charter School?

2010-02-11T09:20:00.001-05:00

My View: Applying for charter school? Think of what we know
Jason Grow

Every responsible parent wants to make the best decisions they can for their children.

One that is especially important is where and how your child is educated.

Recently, the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School began accepting applications, and while it may be tempting to toss your child's name in the hat, take a moment to make an informed decision by looking at what we know about this school:

We know that the application submitted was deficient enough to warrant a "Do Not Recommend" rating by the professionals at the state Charter School Office charged with vetting proposals.

We know that the approval process by which the charter was granted was deeply flawed, including a violation of the regulations governing the public hearing process. And we know that there is enough concern over the legality of the process that the state inspector general and now the attorney general are investigating.

We know that the community input submitted to the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) ran 10-1 against the creation of this school and that most if not all of the "partnerships" originally outlined in the application have subsequently been withdrawn.

We also know that Commissioner of Education Mitchell Chester informed the BESE that community opposition was not a factor the board should consider in its decision counter to its own guidelines that community acceptance is a critical component of a school's chance for success.

We know that, prior to the vote, Education Secretary Paul Reville penned a midnight e-mail to Commissioner Chester urging him to push the GCACS as the best of three poor applications calling it a "tough but necessary pill to swallow" in order to move forward a larger agenda.

Finish reading.

Where the GCACS Board Stands Today

2010-02-06T08:39:00.002-05:00

February 6, 2010
Charter arts school bids for students
Registration bid comes with interim leader, but still no site
By Patrick Anderson
Staff Writer

A year ago this week, a series of late-night, long-distance e-mails between top state officials about a proposed Gloucester charter school sowed the seeds of one of the state's most enduring education controversies.

On Wednesday, with the controversy still very much alive, that school began recruiting students despite a string of setbacks that have left it without a building, a permanent head of school and — after at least one resignation this week — a key founder.

The Gloucester Community Arts Charter School is seeking 120 fourth- through seventh-graders to sign up for the school by March 10, five days before a scheduled lottery to choose students in the event of over-subscription. An enrollment report to the state is due after the lottery.

Finish reading here.

The Love Song of GCA Charter

2010-02-05T08:44:00.005-05:00

In honor of the anniversary of the "tough pill" e-mail written by Secretary of Education Paul Reville, Amanda Cook has written a parody of The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock by T.S. Eliot.

In case you have forgotten what it is that Paul Reville wrote one year ago, I give you the following excerpts from his infamous e-mail:

"Our reality is that we have to show some sympathy in this group of charters...Frankly, I'd rather fight for the kids in the Waltham situation, but it sounds like you can't find a solid basis for standing behind that one. I'm not inclined to push Worcester, so that leaves Gloucester."

"...It's a tough but I think necessary pill to swallow." E-mail here.

The Love Song of GCA Charter
by Amanda Cook

for Jane Cunningham

Let us go then, you and I,
When the District’s budget is spread across the sky
Like a patient etherized upon a table;
Let us go, through certain reduced-lunch streets,
Through car-radio beats
Of restless nights in our own downtown,
Upon which future doctorates frown:
Streets that fill with working men
Of generations spent
Who do not stop to ask the question…
Oh, do not ask, “What is it?”
Let us go and make our visit.

In Malden they stop and stoop
Bending down to interest groups.

The pink light of sun rising over City Hall,
Over neighborhood schools, one and all,
Licking its tongue, its learning of language,
Lingering in classrooms filled with Fundations.
Let us look upon small learning communities
Filled with parent groups and activities.
And seeing there was little oversight,
They made an application, and started a fight.

And indeed there will be time
For the pink light that guides the morning buses,
Rumbling yellow backs along Washington Street;
There will be time, there will be time
To prepare a statement for the faces you meet,
There will be time to write letters and debate,
And time for phone calls and meetings and plans
Time for Van Ness and Amy,
And time yet for a hundred indecisions,
And for a hundred visions and revisions,
Before the chatter in the state committee.

In Malden they stop and stoop
Bending down to interest groups.

And indeed there will be time
To wonder, “Do they dare? And, “Do they dare?”
Time to reapply, when it is fair,
With a Board that is barely there—
[We will say: ”How the Board is growing thin!”]
Their curriculum, innovation lifted from within,
Their science, walks to where the water’s been—
[We will say: “But where’s the building they’ll be in?”]
Do they dare
Disrupt the District?
In a year there is time
For decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse.

For I have known them already, known them all—
Have spent the evenings in cold meeting rooms,
Have measured them out in doom and gloom,
Have seen them ignore their own bylaws
While Mitchell and Chester fester in their own rooms.
So how should I presume?

And I have known the flaws already, known them all—
The hearing with no-one from the state,
And when I am angry, fuming over injustices great,
When I call the governor, and call, and call,
Then how should I begin
To justify emails written so late?
And how shall I presume?

And I have known the players already, known them all—
Players like Chester who doesn’t play fair
[But the committee! There was no approval there!]
Is it power, like a cloak
That affects these folks?
Players that lay blame, and refuse responsibility.
And how should I presume?
And can the school begin?

. . . . .

Shall I say, I have countered each misstep with letters
And waited for justice from the men in power,
And what from the Governor, hiding out in his proud room?...

Their community of civics, their own bylaws
Cast off like lost sailors on a silent sea.

. . . . .

And the Board has acted so slowly!
Cancelled meetings for personal commitments,
Asleep… or incapable… or malevolent.

Played out in the papers, the globe and GDT.
Should I, having read the email of Paul Reville,
Have contented my self to swallow that bitter pill?
But though I have made note and attended, called and engaged,
Though I have seen my community [grown weary with disillusion] served upon a platter,
I am just a citizen—and that doesn’t matter;
I have seen chances as resolution given,
And I have seen the Men of Education driven, by games
Of political expediency. I was betrayed.

And would it have been worth it, after all,
After the email, the do-not-recommend,
The calls from all sides to make this mess end,
Would it have been worth while,
To let them proceed with a smile,
To have drained from the budget a good part of it all,
Without asking the overwhelming questions,
And say “The GCAC is Lazarus, come from the dead,
They know better than all, they will tell us all’—
If, once the school opened, those who meant well
Should say “This is not what we meant at all.
This is not it, at all.”

And would it have been worth it, after all,
Would it have been worth while,
After the hearings and the protest and the cardboard bitter pills,
After hours at a meeting, Ballin wouldn’t take questions from the floor—
And this, and so much more?—
It is impossible they say what they mean!
But as if a genie had come and signed a lease:
Would it have been worth while
If, finding some brown-site not quite downtown,
The board should turn to each other, and say:
“That is not it at all,
That is not what I meant at all.”

. . . . .

No! I am not some naysayer, nor was meant to be;
I want change and improvement , and will do
What I can for progress our schools,
For all Gloucester’s children, not just a few,
Deferential, glad to be of use,
Political, cautious and meticulous;
Full of honest anger, and wanting justice;
The men in Malden think me ridiculous
And play me, at times, the Fool.

Votes are sold… votes are sold…
The truth about the Charter process remain untold.

Shall I still support Patrick? Do I attempt another speech?
Do I argue there are no tide pools on Pavillion beach?
I have heard them talk of art and science, each to each.

I do not think they will integrate me.

I have seen the GCAC Board riding forward on the waves
Quieting rumors of no building, the head of school they lack.
They push forward and we push them back.

We have lingered in the chambers of their meeting halls
Gloucester girls, political and strong,
Until justice comes, and they are gone.

MA Ed Board Brushes Off Lawsuit Threat as Gloucester Charter Flap Grows

2010-01-26T20:13:00.001-05:00

Ed board brushes off lawsuit threat as Gloucester charter flap grows
By Kyle Cheney/Statehouse News Service
GateHouse News Service
Posted Jan 26, 2010 @ 05:39 PM
BOSTON —

Even as lawmakers threatened prolonged legal action and investigation, members of the state board that approves charter schools insisted they had no legal authority to shut down a Gloucester school that has become mired in political controversy and infuriated residents of the coastal community.

Members of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education stood by their decision to approve the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School last year, a decision that has now drawn the eye of Attorney General Martha Coakley, who said Monday she is looking into the flap.

The board’s staunch defense led to an immediate countercharge from Inspector General Gregory Sullivan who accused board members of making “patently inaccurate” statements about the school. He vowed to release a follow-up report to an early-January report that found flaws in the charter school approval process.

But board members brushed off his claims and dismissed a call to ask the attorney general for guidance.

“I resent the assertion that somehow there’s a grand scheme … to deceive people and do it in a way that is not in the best interest of the public,” said board member Dana Mohler-Faria.

The Gloucester school has been under a microscope since September, when emails from Education Secretary Paul Reville to Education Commissioner Mitchell Chester surfaced indicating that the school’s charter should be approved, in part, to appease charter school proponents. The revelation sent Gloucester into an uproar and led to calls for the school’s revocation by local lawmakers and, eventually, Gov. Deval Patrick and Reville too. Republican lawmakers harnessed the controversy to call for Reville’s resignation.

The six-hour board meeting brought Reville face to face with Rep. Ann Margaret Ferrante and Sen. Bruce Tarr of Gloucester, as well as Inspector General Sullivan, each of whom lambasted the approval process and called for the revocation of the charter.

The packed room fell silent as Sullivan described February 2009 emails between Reville and Chester, as well as between other staff members of the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, that he said indicated that Chester was pressured into approving the school over the negative recommendation of his Charter School Office. The inspector general also pointed out that the department’s own policies, as listed on its website, indicates that the commissioner shall not recommend approval of any charter school that fails to meet established criteria.

Finish reading.

My Dog Ate My Homework

2010-01-05T18:22:00.003-05:00

Records missing on Gloucester charter school approval
By James Vaznis, Globe Staff

State education officials apparently enacted a policy of destroying virtually all documents related to the evaluation of a controversial charter school proposal in Gloucester, the state inspector general's office said in a report released today.

One key document that the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education has failed to turn over to the inspector general's office since it began its investigation in November is a 29-page evaluation form, which would have specifically outlined which criteria the proposal met or fell short on, the report said.

At least two of the education department staff members who reviewed the proposal for the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School revealed in interviews with the inspector general's office that they may have shredded their notes, the report said.

Inspector General Gregory Sullivan said the reviewers' "detailed evaluation records are an integral part of the charter approval process. These records provide accountability and transparency for any determination about whether the applicant met the stated criteria."

More here.

IG: Ed chief misled lawmakers, destroyed charter documents
By Patrick Anderson
Staff Writer, Gloucester Daily Times

State Education Commissioner Mitchell Chester is accused of misleading lawmakers probing the approval of the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School in a new set of findings from the state's inspector general that also fault the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education for destroying key documents.

The latest findings from Inspector General Gregory Sullivan, released today, come on the heels of his initial report to Gov. Deval Patrick that concluded that the Gloucester charter should be considered legally "void" because the process that approved it did not follow regulations.

In the latest findings, Sullivan says Chester's account of how he recommended approval of the Gloucester charter to the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education last winter against the advice of his own charter school review group, is contradicted by documents and testimony.

Chester last summer told legislators on the Joint Committee on Education gathered in Gloucester for an oversight hearing that the recommendation from the education department's Charter School Office not to approve the Gloucester charter was only the beginning of deliberations on the issue.

But the Inspector General said that no other education department staffers interviewed recalled any further discussion on the issue between the time the CSO issued its recommendations and the time Chester endorsed the school.

More here.

IG Letter to Governor Patrick re GCACS

2010-01-03T12:49:00.001-05:00

IG Letter to Governor

Gloucester Charter School Approval Faulted by IG

2010-01-03T09:12:00.001-05:00

Charter school approval faulted
Gloucester vote in error, inspector general rules
By James Vaznis
Globe Staff / January 3, 2010

Inspector General Gregory Sullivan has determined that the state improperly approved a controversial charter school in Gloucester last year and believes the board should void its vote, according to a letter his office sent to the governor yesterday afternoon.

The state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education has not nullified approval of any charter school since the independently run public schools were created under the 1993 Education Reform Act.

The Gloucester Community Arts Charter School is scheduled to open in the fall.

It was not clear yesterday whether the board and its agency’s commissioner will comply with Sullivan’s findings because they have not seen a copy of the letter yet, according to a spokeswoman for the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

“We don’t have any comment,’’ said spokeswoman Heidi Guarino. “We need to review it with our legal counsel.’’

However, Colin Zick, an attorney who represents Gloucester Community Arts, said he disputed the inspector general’s interpretation of the rules and regulations and believes the commissioner does have the authority to overrule his own in-house specialists. “This does not automatically revoke the charter,’’ said Zick, who had not yet seen the letter.

The inspector general’s office plans to release a report on its findings to the two legislators who requested it, Senator Bruce Tarr and Representative Ann-Margaret Ferrante.

In his letter, Sullivan said that Mitchell Chester, the commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education, recommended approval of the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School last February in violation of the agency’s own rules and regulations, which he says forbids a commissioner from giving a favorable recommendation against the advice of its own experts.

The department’s charter school office determined a few weeks before the board’s vote that the school’s application did not meet the approval criteria.

Finish reading here.

DO NOT RECOMMEND

2009-11-19T08:48:00.003-05:00

Charter Recommendation Summary_DESE

Tough Pills

2009-11-16T19:13:00.003-05:00

Tough Pills to Swallow

Ongoing

2009-10-02T08:57:00.010-04:00

I started this blog on December 16th, 2008 hoping to shed some light on Gloucester's charter school debate. 10 plus months later, I have gone from opposing a specific charter that would greatly affect my schools and my city, to wondering how anyone can have faith in the Massachusetts charter application process.

If this is your first time visiting this site, I encourage you to read some key posts to help you get up to speed with the current debacle that is Secretary Reville's February 5th e-mail. Do not be fooled by the Secretary's insistence that this e-mail was taken out of context. From where I sit in Gloucester with two children attending public school and one soon to be attending, the context is very clear--it is the city of Gloucester that the Secretary intended to throw under the bus.

1. Why the People of Gloucester Should Ask the State to Reject the GCA Charter Proposal

2. Open Letter to the People of Gloucester

3. Office Urged Nixing Charter

4. Oversight Hearing--June 8, 2009, Gloucester, MA

5. Reville's Bitter Pill E-mail

If you are reading this and have become incensed by this particular chain of events and how the process affects children in Massachusetts, take a minute to send a letter to your local newspaper, to the Globe, to Commissioner Chester, to Governor Patrick and to Secretary Reville himself.

The Boston Globe
Letters to the Editor
Boston Globe
P.O. Box 55819
Boston, MA
02205-5819

or

Boston Globe

Commissioner Mitchell Chester
Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
350 Main Street
Malden, MA 02148

or

Commissioner Chester's E-mail Address

Governor Deval Patrick
Office of the Governor
Office of the Lt. Governor
Room 280
Boston, MA 02133

Governor Patrick's E-mail Address

Secretary Reville's E-mail Address

Letters matter. Our voices matter. Change matters.

Thank you for reading.

Sincerely,

Jane Cunningham

Kathy Clancy's Letter to the Editor of the Boston Globe

2009-10-02T08:55:00.000-04:00

Gloucester feels prod of political agenda
October 2, 2009

YOUR SEPT. 24 editorial (“A mistake, but nothing more - education chief should stay’’) confirms that Education Secretary Paul Reville was placating what he called “moderate allies’’ like “the Globe and the Boston Foundation’’ in pushing for a charter school in Gloucester. And it seems that action paid off with an editorial that lacks any attention to the long history of events and irregularities in the approval of the school. The Globe seems to subscribe to the same theory as Reville: The end justifies the means.

Furthermore, you praise Education Commissioner Mitchell Chester’s independence and credibility, yet the only documentation on this matter is a “do not recommend’’ report from the Department of Education’s own charter school office experts and Reville’s clear e-mail to Chester on Feb. 5th. The unfavorable recommendation said, “The founding group is not recommended to be chartered because overall they did not meet the criteria for the final charter application.’’ The report listed numerous weaknesses in the application and doubts about the school’s chances for success.

Chester claims that he had numerous discussions with his staff after the report, yet none are documented. It appears that the political agenda as stated in the Reville e-mail is the only motivation for approval, not the best interest of educating Gloucester’s children.

Our state and the city of Gloucester deserve much better.

Kathleen Clancy
Gloucester

Link to Kathy's Letter

And another letter:

Reville seems to have lost sense of the mission

Charter School Tornado

2009-10-02T08:51:00.002-04:00

A political swirl on charter schools
E-mail points to Patrick’s agenda in Gloucester pick

By James Vaznis
Globe Staff / September 22, 2009

The Patrick administration urged approval of a controversial Gloucester charter school earlier this year, over the fierce objections of city residents and the advice of state specialists, based not on its merits but because it would further the governor’s political agenda, according to a recently published e-mail.

In the e-mail, Education Secretary Paul Reville told the commissioner of elementary and secondary education that rejection of the Gloucester charter school proposal, along with the probable rejection of two other pending charter proposals, would send the wrong signal.

“Our reality is that we have to show some sympathy in this group of charters or we’ll get permanently labeled as hostile and that will cripple us with a number of key, moderate allies,’’ Reville wrote on Feb. 5. “It really is a matter of positioning ourselves so that we can be viable to implement the rest of our agenda. It’s a tough but necessary pill to swallow.’’

Finish reading story by clicking here.

Paul Reville's Fumble

2009-09-20T12:39:00.004-04:00

This story appeared Saturday in the Gloucester Daily Times.

Please read to the end of the story to view Mr. Reville's e-mail in its entirety. It's time to call the whole thing off--this charter school and its tainted application process.

Start over. Do it for the sake of a fledgling school. Do it for the sake of the Charter School Office and its credibility. Do it for the sake of schoolchildren in Gloucester. Do it for the sake of the future of charter schools in Massachusetts. Do it because it's the right thing to do.

Charter OK based on 'agenda'?
E-mail shows education chiefs' mindset on Gloucester school deal
By Patrick Anderson

Gov. Deval Patrick's office lobbied the state education commissioner to endorse the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School out of a fear that its rejection would alienate powerful allies and potentially derail the administration's school policy agenda, according to documents obtained by the Times.

Secretary of Education Paul Reville, Patrick's top aide on schools, asked Education Commissioner Mitchell Chester in an e-mail to support the Gloucester charter, which faced vehement local opposition, eight days before Chester gave it his thumbs-up Feb. 13.

Chester's endorsement of the school came against the advice of charter school experts in his own office, which had recommended that the Gloucester application "not be approved," along with the two other charter bids this year.

In his request to Chester, acquired by the Times through the state's public records law, Reville warned that rejecting all three charters would get the Patrick administration "permanently labeled as hostile" to charter schools, something that would "cripple us with a number of key, moderate allies like the (Boston) Globe and Boston Foundation,"

"My inclination is to think that you, I and the Governor all need to send at least one positive signal in this batch, and I gather that you think the best candidate is Gloucester," Reville wrote in the e-mail, sent Feb. 5 at 11:54 p.m.

Then he asked: "Can you see your way clear to supporting it?"

The other two charter applications, for schools in Waltham and Worcester, were not recommended by Chester and never voted on by the state's Board of Education.

Finish reading article here.

Charter Schools See More Attrition

2009-09-16T08:47:00.000-04:00

Fewer students are graduating, union study finds

By James Vaznis
Globe Staff / September 16, 2009

Fewer than half of the students who enrolled in Boston charter high schools as freshmen over the past five years made it through to graduation, usually departing for other schools, according to a new study that will be officially released tomorrow at a legislative hearing on charter school expansions.

The Massachusetts Teachers Association, which conducted the study, said the exodus reinforces its longtime assertion that charter schools systematically push out academically weak students in an effort to boost their college acceptance rates and MCAS scores.

“This is outrageous,’’ said Thomas Scott, executive director of the Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents, who had been briefed by the union this week on the findings. “You are not bringing kids to their full potential if you are cutting them loose.’’

Most charter school leaders did not dispute the numbers yesterday, but disagreed with the union’s conclusions about what they meant. Many students, charter leaders said, choose to leave to dodge high academic standards, returning to city-run schools where getting a diploma is often easier. Only in rare circumstances, they said, did a charter student quit school without subsequently earning a diploma.

Finish reading story by clicking here.

Globe Opinion Page

2009-08-12T09:06:00.001-04:00

The new educational divide
By David Segal
August 3, 2009

AS THE OBAMA administration touts its $5 billion “Race to the Top’’ fund and uses it to promote charter schools, it is time to acknowledge that we are encouraging a new split within our public school system. The old divides along lines of race and class persist, but are now overlaid with a different segregation: one tier overwhelmingly composed of relatively advantaged students whose parents are active participants in their education, and one whose students are relatively disadvantaged and lacking in such support from adults.

Critics of charter schools have long expressed concern that charters tilt toward students with certain advantages over their peers in traditional public schools. To matriculate at a charter school, a child typically needs to be entered into a lottery of all those students seeking admission. This requires having a parent or guardian who is highly involved in a child’s education - enough to know about the possibility of his or her child attending a charter, to conclude that to do so would benefit the child, to apply to enter the lottery and follow its proceedings. Charter parents must also frequently agree to substantial participation in the child’s schooling.

Children of parents who play this active role in their education will tend to perform better in school than children of less-involved parents. The effect of such parental involvement has been measured: Controlling for race, gender, and socio-economics, students with involved parents will tend to achieve at about the 75th percentile - well above average.

Surely, most parents want their children to excel in school, and beyond, and will work as well as they can toward those ends. But for any of a variety of reasons - health, language barriers, constraints from employment, or, sometimes, lack of concern - some children simply do not have stable adult guidance in their schooling. Parental engagement in education should be strongly encouraged, but having involved parents should never be a prerequisite for a child to gain access to the best opportunities. That would mean many kids - those who are already somewhat disadvantaged - would unfairly miss out.

Charter proponents have retorted that parents seek out charters for children who are languishing in traditional public schools, and that charters therefore serve, on average, underperforming students. But that’s not what the broadening body of evidence says in many jurisdictions.

Food for thought. Finish reading here.

Charter Schools Lag in Serving the Neediest

2009-08-12T08:40:00.002-04:00

Charter schools lag in serving the neediest
Disparity widens rift with districts

By James Vaznis
Globe Staff / August 12, 2009

Governor Deval Patrick has touted his proposed expansion of charter schools as a way to help students who face the greatest academic challenges, such as language barriers and disabilities. But a Globe analysis shows that charter schools in cities targeted by the proposal tend to enroll few special education students or English language learners.

That imbalance raises questions about how much expertise these schools can offer and about their efforts to recruit such students, whose academic needs are generally greater than those of other youngsters.

In Boston, which hosts a quarter of the state’s charter schools, English language learners represented less than 4 percent of students at all but one of the charter schools last year, although they make up nearly a fifth of the students in the school system. Collectively, the 16 Boston charter schools taught fewer than 100 students who lacked fluency in English; six schools enrolled none.

While Boston charter schools had a higher representation of special education students, more than half still lagged at least 6 percentage points below the school district’s average of 21 percent. In urban districts statewide, special education enrollment was 10 percent or lower at about a third of the charter schools.

The figures highlight a long, divisive debate about charter school success that has grown louder in recent weeks: Are many charter schools achieving dazzling MCAS scores because of innovative teaching or because they enroll fewer disadvantaged students?

Finish reading Boston Globe article here.

2009-08-07T09:10:00.004-04:00

Thank you Pamela Campbell for in-depth analysis and coverage of this issue in the Cape Ann Beacon. Readers, please support this paper in whatever way that you can.

UPDATE: Governor intervenes in Gloucester charter; state education officials vow to stick by vote
By Pamela Campbell/Correspondent
Thu Aug 06, 2009, 06:04 PM EDT

Gloucester -

Stunning many citizens on both sides of the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School debate, Gov. Deval Patrick has decided to intervene in the process that had been considered a done deal, asking the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education to reopen the process for community discussion, and to take another vote.

Equally stunning, his request has been refused, with the same Department of Education leaders who have been accused of ignoring proper procedure and statute requirements throughout the charter process now citing procedure and statute to justify a refusal to reconsider the issues.

“Because it is essential that the community has utmost confidence in the transparency and integrity of the process, I am writing to ask you to reopen your process and reconsider your decision,” Patrick tells Maura Banta, Chairman of the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, and Mitchell Chester, Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, in a letter sent July 27.

“The proposed charter for the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School has caused deep division within the Gloucester community at precisely the time when we need people to come together,” Patrick continues.

He cites as reasons for his action concerns about the process raised by Gloucester’s two state legislators, Rep. Ann-Margaret Ferrante and Sen. Bruce Tarr, in a July 6 letter to him, along with concerns voiced and written by other Gloucester citizens, complaining that the process has been flawed and that the community’s objections to the charter on its merits have gone unheard.

Specific flaws in the process were found to be valid by a legislative oversight committee that visited Gloucester in June. That legislative committee recommended to Chester and Banta that another hearing be held but stopped short of recommending that the February vote results be reconsidered.

Chester and Banta refused that recommendation as well, stating that the oversight hearing itself, in which speakers were cautioned not to address the charter on its merits but to keep comments limited to the process, would suffice in retrospect as the public hearing (in the presence of board members) on its merits.

That declaration places the February vote before the June public hearing, technically violating state statute.

Click here to finish reading.

More News

2009-08-06T08:34:00.002-04:00

Patrick questions charter school OK
By James Vaznis

Controversy over a new charter school in Gloucester is emerging as a flashpoint in a statewide debate over a proposed expansion of charter schools that is now pitting the state’s education commissioner against the governor.

Governor Deval Patrick took the unusual step last week of sending a letter to the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education asking its board to reconsider its approval of the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School in February, after Gloucester officials and residents deluged him with complaints over the approval process.

In that letter, the governor expressed concern that the “deep division within the Gloucester community’’ was erupting at a time when people need to come together to support his efforts to expand charter schools and launch other efforts to overhaul education.

“For any of these innovations to launch successfully, it is important that the community members feel that their concerns have been heard,’’ he wrote.

But on Tuesday, Mitchell Chester, the state’s commissioner of elementary and secondary education, and Maura Banta, the board’s chairwoman, rejected the governor’s request for a revote, arguing that it would be illegal under state law.

Because the charter was granted, the only action the board could take would be to revoke the charter for cause, such as a material misrepresentation of facts, according to the letter, which was obtained by the Globe.

Chester and Banta did not respond to requests for interviews.

Finish reading Boston Globe article by clicking here.

Board: Gov. off base on charter
Education panel: Patrick's call would violate state statute
By Patrick Anderson

State education officials have refused Gov. Deval Patrick's call to reconsider the approval of the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School, saying that such a move is illegal.

When Patrick's call for charter nullification was made public Tuesday, Education Commissioner Mitchell Chester and state Board of Education Chairwoman Maura Banta responded with a letter, acquired by the Times yesterday, arguing that his suggestion would violate statute and further inflame tensions over their controversial February vote.

They said legally, once approved by the board, the charter could not be reconsidered, only revoked for cause.

Chester and Banta said they would, as suggested by the governor, schedule another public hearing in Gloucester on the charter "as expeditiously as possible."

The fledgling, arts-focused independent public school in Gloucester, whose founders have been looking for a downtown site and executive director, has appeared this week to fall in the middle of a larger political battle over education policy in Massachusetts.

Finish reading Gloucester Daily Times article by clicking here.

News....

2009-08-05T11:52:00.002-04:00

Gov. calls to nullify charter vote
By Patrick Anderson

Responding to months of community outrage here, Gov. Deval Patrick has asked the state Board of Education to nullify its approval of the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School and begin deliberations on the charter again.

"The proposed charter for the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School has caused deep division within the Gloucester community at precisely the time when we need people to come together," Patrick wrote in a letter to state Education Commissioner Mitchell Chester and Board of Education Chairwoman Maura Banta, and received yesterday by the Times. "Because it is essential that the community has utmost confidence in the transparency and integrity of the process, I am writing to ask you to reopen and reconsider your decision."

As of yesterday, neither Chester nor Banta had responded to the letter. Jonathan Considine, a spokesman for the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, would say only that "we are taking this matter very seriously" and "will respond in a few days."

The letter calls for a new Board of Education hearing in Gloucester on the merits of the charter school to replace the Nov. 11 meeting at Fuller School which no board member attended, a perceived slight and central bone of contention among locals who said it invalidated the process.

On top of his call for reconsideration, Patrick has also ordered Secretary of Education Paul Reville, his top lieutenant on school matters, to meet with stakeholders in the Gloucester charter debate to try to "get to a point of agreement that will be mutually beneficial to everyone," a spokesman for the Executive Office of Education said yesterday.

To finish reading click here.

In the news...

2009-06-15T13:22:00.002-04:00

Due to too many frustrating Gloucester Daily Times editorials (frustrating not just because I disagree with them) that fail to represent the voices of the community I have been turning my attention to the Cape Ann Beacon.

From last Thursday's Beacon:

GLOUCESTER - The first such public hearing of its kind in the history of the Massachusetts Legislature took place at Gloucester City Hall Monday night, before a packed audience of parents, residents, and city officials concerned about the state’s approval of the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School.
Responding to an unprecedented request that the legislature step in and review the process of an executive state board that has already acted, on the basis of that process, to approve a charter school for Gloucester, a panel of lawmakers co-chaired by Rep. Martha “Marty” Walz (D-Boston) and Sen. Robert O’Leary (D-Barnstable) convened in Gloucester to look into allegations that the process contained many irregularities that raise doubts about why and how it resulted in a decision to grant approval to the charter.
Three hours of testimony, including questions raised emphatically by Rep. Ann-Margaret Ferrante (D-Gloucester) and Sen. Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester) as initiators of the investigation, deepened emotions on all sides. Many more questions were raised than answered, leaving the panel with a lot to digest as it considers what was said.
Though it was not clear what exactly the next step will be — since this is an unprecedented situation — Ferrante said she intends to meet with Walz by the end of this week, and to keep the pressure up for resolution of some kind as quickly as possible.

To finish reading the article click here.

Oversight Hearing, Gloucester, MA

2009-06-15T12:57:00.003-04:00

The oversight hearing that took place on June 8th in Gloucester, held to investigate the application and approval process of the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School, will air on Cape Ann TV tonight at 8:00 p.m. on channel 12.

Link to Cape Ann TV Schedule

The hearing can also be viewed on youtube in 10 minute increments. Take a close look at Clip 19, in particular, during which Commissioner Mitchell Chester addresses the audience at the end of the three hour hearing.

Oversight Hearing on youtube

Office Urged Nixing Charter

2009-06-07T09:54:00.008-04:00

Gloucester Daily Times story here.

It should be noted that the charter office consists of individuals who are hired by the state to rigorously and vigorously review charter applications. Members of the charter office attend public hearings, attend applicant interviews and review applications. The charter school office recommended not to recommend the GCA charter in late January or early February of 2009.

Before this recommendation was made the 3 1/2 hour public hearing had taken place on December 11, 2008 (2 members of the charter office attended along with the assistant commissioner--no voting Board of Education member attended our hearing), 151 letters opposing the school and 16 letters supporting the school had been received by the commissioner/charter office, a charter applicant interview had transpired and the January 27, 2009 Board of Education meeting had taken place during which the board voted to retroactively waive the requirement that a voting board member be present at our hearing.

In short, the charter office did not make a recommendation in a vacuum. Between January 30, 2009 and February 13, 2009 Commissioner Mitchell Chester chose to dismiss the charter office's recommendation. How can his recommendation to approve the GCA charter be explained?

Please attend the public hearing on Monday, June 8th--5 p.m. at City Hall--being held by state legislators to draw attention to possible procedural errors in the application and approval process for the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School.

Welcome...

2009-05-21T13:53:00.004-04:00

I posted a link at the Gloucester Daily Times. Welcome visitors.

The first link (blog archives) explains why I, and others, oppose the GCA Charter School.

The second link (archives) sums up the flawed charter school application process.

Why

Open Letter to the People of Gloucester

The debate continues....

2009-05-21T09:00:00.002-04:00

To the editor:

Mr. Baird, board member for the proposed charter school, says in his column (The Times, Monday, May 18) that he feels bullied by the overwhelming, passionate, and vocal commitment of public school parents, teachers, elected representatives, and other residents of Gloucester, who oppose the charter.

In response to our opposition, he has published a flood of derisory labels for this ever-expanding community, which evidently offends him with its expressed concern for the charter's impact.

Many people have come forward to protest the charter school plan and the shabby neglect of Gloucester residents during and following public hearings. They have come from so many quarters and so many backgrounds that Mr. Baird is in danger of running out of derogatory names in his efforts to criticize them all.

Thus, in his columns and letters he has called one parent a Democratic aparatchick, another a Bush-like Republican. The rest of us he calls "bullies," "attack dogs," "mad dogs,""barking dogs" (Mr. Baird is evidently no more fond of dogs than of his neighbors), "witch-baiters," "fear mongers," "foot-stampers," "cadre of defenders of the system,"and, oddly, "ministers of the system."

These parents have, according to Mr. Baird, undertaken a "despicable smear campaign." (That's right. "They", not Mr. Baird, are undertaking a "smear campaign"! Can we spell "projection"?)

Click here to finish reading Roger's letter.

Roger Garberg
Gloucester

To the editor:

Peter Van Ness, spokesperson for the GCA Charter School, has made the claim that the people who signed the first page of a petition making no mention of the financial impact of the charter school were harassed.

While Mr. Van Ness may have convinced some with his clever, yet questionable PR tactics, he hasn't convinced everyone.

Having been a contact person for 62 of the 151 people who wrote letters of opposition to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education in December, I have been told directly by community members that they were not as informed as they could have been and simply distracted when they first signed the petition. Many have asked that their names be removed — without prompting from people opposing the school.

I have also witnessed firsthand the tenor of the opposition's campaign in the form of incredibly passionate letters written by the people of Gloucester. While I cannot speak for all of the actions of the people who oppose this school (many do not belong to a formal group), I know from the discussions, phone calls and e-mails of the people with whom I've worked closely that our interactions have been civil and intended to help people get correct information about a critically important issue.

To finish reading my letter click here.

Jane Cunningham
Gloucester

Serious Entertainment!

2009-05-14T08:23:00.006-04:00

Some of you might recognize the name Hugo Burnham; he's drummer for rock band Gang of Four. He also has an opinion about the GCA Charter School. Read on.

To the editor:

I must, unusually, take exception to some part of your editorial concerning the proposed charter school. (The Times, Monday, May 11)

The "get over it, he won" dynamic is uncalled for, and reminds me uncomfortably of the aftermath of the national elections of 1999 and 2003.

Peter Van Ness has consistently appeared to be anything but transparent, which, with his oft-noted arrogance in content and tone has caused much of the distrust and fear running through our community. How many times has he said how his charter will somehow teach us all — parents, teachers and school district alike — how to better educate the city's children? Yet not once has he been specific about the magic bullet loaded in his charter gun, other than field trips to the Heritage Center.

Wonderful. Will those be weekly or daily?

He goes on about the arts as if our schools have none, that our teachers and students are Philistines all. I take exception to that.

In the editorial, to say the superintendent told "... a prospective arts instructor there would be no tolerance ..." for a school district employee showing support for the proposed charter school, is hyperbole and incorrect, certainly as far as the direct quote in your own front page story. The superintendent said only that it would "... be troubling ..." to him, and that it would only be considered in breach of legality if such support was active whilst on the clock. What part of that is "no tolerance" harassment?

Van Ness' secret list of supporters demands true transparency, and the whole city deserves as much — not least because so many people are distrustful of its veracity so long after its inception. If he believes it to be truly indicative of adequate and firm support, then a new petition should be distributed, especially now that we all are more informed about the facts, despite much being still unclear; not least the facts about the economic impact to the district, and facts about the options for the charter school site, most likely in a downtown location ... so well known for terrific parking opportunities and enormous open space available for children to be outside running around and playing, something every parent acknowledges the absolute need for.

Click here to finish reading Hugo's letter.

Hugo Burnham

High Street, Gloucester

Support Representative Ferrante's Amendment

2009-04-30T08:50:00.008-04:00

Representative Ann-Margaret Ferrante will introduce an amendment to the House as early as today. If the amendment passes in the House and then the Senate, the charter school will be prevented from opening as the current population in Gloucester is below 30,000.

The amendment reads as follows:

Ms. Ferrante of Gloucester moves to amend the bill by adding at the end thereof the following section:
“SECTION____. Subsection (i) of section 89 of chapter 71 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2006 Official Edition, is hereby amended by adding the following sentence:- No new commonwealth charter school having been approved by the board, but not yet begun its initial year of classes, shall begin classes in any community with a population of less than 30,000 as tallied in the annual list of residents pursuant to section 4 of chapter 51, in its initial year of classes, unless it is a regional charter school.”

Please take a few minutes to show support for this amendment. E-mails and calls can be short and sweet. Identify yourself as a parent, grandparent, teacher, concerned citizen of Gloucester...... Mention the census numbers and the difficulties that our small city will face if we must finance the GCA Charter School.

Call and write:

Speaker DeLeo
Speaker of the House
617-722-2500

Chairman Murphy
House Ways and Means Chairperson
617-722-2990

Representative Ferrante
617-722-2425

Pass this on. Numbers matter. Thank you for all that you do.

Jane

Ray Lamont's frustrating editorials....

2009-04-02T10:08:00.003-04:00

Do Ray Lamont's Gloucester Daily Times editorials represent the voices of our community? You decide.

April 2, 2009

Click here to read the editorial and responses to it.

This from Iceman:

The founders of Community Arts Charter School are not GPS's "colleagues." They are a very small group of people with no training or experience in education.

And no, the debate is not "over." When a tiny handful of people manages to make off with public money -- against overwhelming community opposition -- to fund their fantasy liberal arts college, then you can expect a debate. You think "overwhelming opposition" is hyperbole? Look at the DESE's own reporting about the run-up to the charter school vote.

Looks like the GDT argument is no longer the standard, business-model "healthy competition" garbage? They are now hoping for "an opportunity for more collaboration, rather than competition" between the schools? They'll contort themselves and invert their metaphors in any way in order to avoid framing the GPS as anything other than a cantankerous old union member one inch from retirement. Maybe they should actually enter one of our schools and report on what they actually see.

February 26, 2009

Ed Shoucair of The Gloucester Education Foundation

2009-03-25T10:14:00.000-04:00

March 25, 2009

To the editor:

I am writing on the topic of the charter school in Gloucester.

I admire the supporters of this initiative and their sincere wish for an excellent education for children of Gloucester admitted to the new school. However, I ask that they reconsider the approach they are taking. I have read their materials, heard their leaders speak, and am aware that they feel sure they are doing a good thing for Gloucester by creating an alternative school.

In my mind, the call for a charter school has provided a valuable public service by adding to the discussion on how to improve Gloucester's schools. A number of the charter school programs, such as "responsive classrooms" and the addition of more art into the curriculum, are good ones. In many instances, these programs and other initiatives in the charter school proposal exist in one form or another in Gloucester's public schools. But there is no question that these successful programs should be expanded and made available to all the students in the District.

The major shortcoming I see in the charter school is that the zealous belief in the benefits of a charter school prevented many of its supporters from seeing the alternative school's benefits will be dwarfed by the damage it will do to the larger school community. I also believe that the growing awareness of this fact is the reason for the loss of a number of the charter school's original individual and organizational supporters.

From the beginning, the charter school's leadership has claimed that there will be no or minimal negative financial impact on the existing system of public education in Gloucester. This is false. The truth remains that after an initial transition period, more than $2 million per year will be taken from Gloucester's public schools serving more than 3,300 students to fund a school serving 240.

At the February hearing before the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, the president of the charter school asked for approval for its proposal stating that there was "widespread grassroots support for the charter school." He gave evidence of this by saying the Gloucester Daily Times had written several editorials in favor of the charter school, and that "just the day before, the editor of the Times called and encouraged me to go before State Board and speak." Putting aside the impropriety of the editor's phone call, the Gloucester Daily Times editorial page is not evidence of widespread community support. Not on this issue. Letters and phone calls to the governor from those in Gloucester opposing the charter school ran nearly 10 to 1.

To finish reading Ed's letter click here.

ED SHOUCAIR
Washington Street, Gloucester

Frieda Grotjahn's visit to O'Maley

2009-03-20T10:20:00.000-04:00

March 20, 2009

Because my oldest son, a fifth-grader, had been talking with his friends about O’Maley School, I made an appointment with Principal Michael Tracy to visit. I, along with two other parents from my son’s school, met with Dr. Tracy on a windy, cold Monday morning last December. I saw some trash around the rink, but with the wind I was not worried and did not pay particular attention to it as I was more concerned about what I would find inside of the institution looming grey and cold in front of us on this dark winter morning.

Dr. Tracy welcomed us into his office and we had a chance to ask a lot of questions about the curriculum, the contents and the appearance of the school, which he answered in a competent and friendly way. He spoke about the after-school program, which is funded by the Gloucester Education Foundation. Languages, robotics, flight simulator, CAD, video-film and more will be offered. He spoke about the new science lab, which will be funded through the collaboration on curriculum development with the MIT-Edgerton center and about the chance for middle school students to go to MIT for two weeks in summer. He explained that this collaboration was again made possible by the GEF and will provide sustainable improvements to science and technology education.

To finish reading Frieda's letter click here.

Frieda Grotjahn
Blake Court

Pamela Campbell: When the story hits a nerve

2009-03-12T09:02:00.001-04:00

GLOUCESTER - It’s always a balancing act, trying to be objective in community journalism when the community you’re covering is the family heirloom. Gloucester is my home, my roots, my heritage, my point of view: in five years of living outside Chicago, it was my steadfast identity. That first winter out there, my 4-year-old son made snow angels while singing Daisy Nell songs at the top of his lungs, into the Illinois sky.

So I was thrilled to be able to reconnect with my hometown by contributing pieces to the Beacon. Slowly finishing a long-overdue degree in English, hoping to teach locally when I’m done, I figured, why not? And it has been such a wonderful way to delve into the community, learn new things, meet new people, and write.

When asked if I’d cover the Gloucester schools for the Beacon, I said, sure. I am a product of the Gloucester schools: Beeman for six years, Central Grammar for two. I also worked as a classroom aide in Debbie Goodwin’s first kindergarten class at Fuller in 2002-03, and was one of the last-hired staff to be cut when the ax fell that fateful “No Child”/federal funding year. It’s what sent me back to school for the ever-elusive degree.

But the charter school story has struck a very deep nerve, and it hurts.

To continue reading Pamela's column click here.

Ongoing letters to the editor of the Gloucester Daily Times

2009-03-12T08:48:00.005-04:00

Peter Van Ness' insistence that he and his group (the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School) have enjoyed a broad coalition of support in their efforts to bring their charter school to fruition is puzzling.

The public record paints a contrary picture of his inflated "re-vision" of public enthusiasm. According to the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 16 letters of support were received — of which seARTs, Montserrat College of Art in Beverly, Lesley University in Boston and Councilor Jackie Hardy all subsequently withdrew their endorsement. At the only public hearing, where members of the community were able to voice their concerns, the Gloucester Community Arts Charter School group could muster only 17 supporters (of which seven were founding board members) to speak in favor.

Conversely, 151 letters in opposition were received by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and, of the 94 people signed up to speak in opposition, half were denied the opportunity because of time constraints. Many people who intended to speak against the application did not bother to sign up because the opposition list was already so long.

To read the rest of Jason's letter click here.

JASON GROW
City Councilor, Ward 1
Gloucester

When people care enough to become involved in their community, we assume that they do so to improve the quality of life for all. We have many intelligent and informed community members and elected city officials who try hard to make decisions based on this assumption.

For me, the most disturbing aspect of the charter school situation is the involvement of members of our own community who do not seem to share this assumption. These community members apparently gave up trying to work within the confines of the local process and were willing to further diminish the core educational opportunities that the majority of children in Gloucester receive in order to satisfy their dissatisfaction with the status quo.

To read the rest of Simon's letter click here.

SIMON PADDOCK
Mount Pleasant Avenue, Gloucester

Open Letter to the People of Gloucester

2009-02-26T10:09:00.011-05:00

Dear Friends,

On Tuesday the Board of Education narrowly decided 6-5 to grant the Gloucester Community Arts School a charter. Here is a summary of the past few months. I want people to know that our efforts were extensive and that they did not go unnoticed--though it feels like they did. It is unfortunate that the charter application process is as flawed and undemocratic as it is. The fact that 6 individuals who do not intimately know the needs of our town or send their children to our schools can decide whether or not we need this school in the face of huge community opposition is unconscionable. Please take a few minutes to stroll down memory lane with me and take note of what we have been up against and what we have accomplished.

1. The school district released projections of how the charter school would affect approximately 3200 students--while 240 would enjoy capped classes of 20. One or two school closings and more teacher and staff cuts resulting in larger class sizes were projected.

2. The GCA applicants claimed to have cost-saving measures for the district; they had created a budget based on information given to them by Christopher Farmer. When it came time to reveal this budget, they would not produce it. People who have been paying attention to money in the city know that there is no "magic" budget.

3. On December 11, 2008, the state held a 3 1/2 hour (the longest the state has seen) public hearing during which 17 people spoke in support of the charter school. 7 of those people were founding board members. 48 people spoke out against the charter and 46 people were unable to speak due to time constraints. NOT ONE voting Board of Education member attended the hearing. At the 1/27/09 Board of Education meeting the board voted to waive the requirement in 603 CMR 1.04(3)(b) with respect to attendance by a member of the board at the public hearing.

4. By January 5, 2009 151 people opposing the school had written letters to Mitchell Chester at the Board of Education. 16 people wrote letters in support of the school. These numbers are especially important to take note of. Applicants claimed--after the hearing--that a lot of supporters were afraid to speak at the hearing because of the hostile reaction by a large number of people in the community. Letters, however, are different because the state does not reveal names. If our community was as desperate for a choice as the applicants say, founding members should have been able to get hundreds of people to write letters. They got 16 people, most likely including themselves as demonstrated at the public hearing. This is disgraceful. Whether applicants needed community support or not, they should have sought it. This is the spirit of community. This is the spirit of reform. This is the spirit of "together we can." To see a summary of the letter content and public hearing as produced by the DESE go here:

Summary

5. Mid-January, AFTER the letter writing deadline had passed, The Boston Foundation released a study about the Boston Public School System. THOUSANDS of charter school proponents statewide cited this study--irrelevant to Gloucester--when asking the Governor, the Secretary of Education and Commissioner Chester to lift the charter cap and approve the charter schools set to open in 2010. The well-oiled machine that is the statewide charter school lobby group is large-scale. Paul S. Grogan of the Boston Foundation is a major pro charter player. Our opposition group, small in comparison, fought on. We wrote letters to the Governor, to Secretary Reville and to the Commissioner again--even though the period for public commentary about the proposed charter had closed.

6. On February 13, 2009 Mitchell Chester issued a statement of recommendation for the GCA charter school while choosing not to recommend two other charter proposals. Many citizens of Gloucester were astonished as the GCA proposal had been misleading and dishonest. Why was the Commissioner unable to see this? Residents started calling the Governor's office and the Commissioner's office. They called again. And again. And again. By Monday afternoon, 2/23/09, the aides working at the state constituent's office were saying, "I'll add your name to the list. Yes. It's a long list. We've been getting calls all day."

7. After the successful pro charter lobby in January, Deval Patrick stopped waffling about charters and discussing problems with funding and issued statements in support of charter schools. On Tuesday, both of the Governor's men on the Board of Education voted in favor of the GCA school: Secretary Reville who wasn't actually present and Dana Mohler-Faria, President of Bridgewater State and Patrick's special advisor to education and instrumental in leading the Commonwealth's readiness project, quietly voted "yes."

8. I was told on Monday evening that--after meetings and letters and phone calls--8 board members would most likely be voting yes and 3 members would be voting no. I felt sad and defeated. I chose not to attend Tuesday's Board of Education meeting.

9. Tuesday morning I learned about the final vote: 6-5. I was stunned. Two board members had changed their votes. 5 of 11 board members dismissed the Commissioner's recommendation to only consider the school's viability and voted no. They heard us--our collective voices. This is no small victory.

I'm sure that I've left out things. Please let me know what I've forgotten. Mainly, though, I want to say thank you for your efforts. Before I got involved with the process of opposing the charter, I was of the mind that most people don't have time or energy or motivation to act. It's difficult to get people to write letters. It's difficult to get people to care--especially with all the demands that are placed upon people every day. But you showed me. You showed me again and again how much you care about all of the children in our city.

The applicants may have their school (we'll see if the state writes a check), but they've lost credibility within their own community. They attained victory by riding on the backs of the statewide pro charter lobby, by participating in a seriously flawed application process that failed to produce a record of 400 petition signatures or more than 16 letters in support of the school--and by refusing to acknowledge our many voices; this is a hollow victory at best.

I am proud of all that we have accomplished in spite of serious deficits. I am proud of how hard we have fought for the district's children. And I am proud that I live in Gloucester with people willing to ask hard questions about class and inequity and a charter lottery system that favors involved and culturally and financially advantaged parents. I'm proud of the foundations that have been established to supplement our schools and make things better for all of Gloucester's students, especially those who most struggle to pass the MCAS. I'm proud of the teachers who are always innovative--who have been implementing the ideas in the GCA application for years. I'm proud of the teachers who are constantly trying to reach as many children as possible in as many creative ways as possible--though class sizes continue to grow. I'm proud of everyone who goes beyond what is expected of them. I'm proud of people who don't lose hope in the face of an enormous setback.

Thank you for all that you have done, all that you do and all that you will do for our community.

Sincerely and with great admiration and appreciation,

Jane Cunningham

Call, write, call, write, call, write...

2009-02-18T11:56:00.003-05:00

Please. In the next few days--and before Tuesday.

Call, write, call, write, call, write....

Today I've spoken with staff members from Governor Patrick's office, from Senator Tarr's office, from Representative Ann-Margaret Ferrante's office and from Commissioner Chester's office. All staff members encouraged calls and e-mails--though I recommend focusing efforts on the Governor's office and the Board of Education as Senator Tarr and Representative Ferrante are already taking action.

First I called Governor Deval Patrick. I have sent two e-mails in the past that have not been answered. His staff representative was able to look up my name and see the status of my e-mail. It is *being considered.* I got a kick out of this. He encouraged more calls from Gloucester and assured me that our messages would be passed on. Let's make his day/week and rock his world by calling, calling, calling. And writing, writing, writing.

Massachusetts State House
Office of the Governor
Office of the Lt. Governor
Room 360
Boston, MA 02133

Phone: 617.725.4005
888.870.7770 (in state)
Fax: 617.727.9725

http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=gov3utilities&sid=Agov3&U=Agov3_contact_us

Next I called Commissioner Chester's office. JC is the spokesman for the Board. He suggested sending e-mails with testimony to this address:

E-mail: boe@doe.mass.edu

If you want to call or write:

Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education
75 Pleasant Street
Malden, MA 02148
Phone: 781-338-3102
Fax: 781-338-3770

Also, letters can be sent to individual Board members. Addresses at website:

http://www.doe.mass.edu/boe/edboard.html

Next, I called State Senator Bruce Tarr to ask that he make noise about opposing a charter school in Gloucester. His staff representative told me about a letter that Senator Tarr wrote yesterday in which he again states his opposition to the school. Please call or write and let Senator Tarr know how you feel.

State House
Room 313-A
Boston, MA 02133
Telephone: (617) 722-1600

Bruce.Tarr@state.ma.us

And finally, I called Representative Ann-Margaret Ferrante.

617-722-2425

I spoke with her aide who encouraged calls to the Governor and to the Board.

A phone call only takes a few minutes and you'll get a live person (a pleasantly live person) on the other end of the phone line.

I appreciate all that you are doing.

Jane Cunningham

"Don't take the legs out from under O'Maley..."

2009-01-24T08:24:00.005-05:00

As I was flipping through this week's Cape Ann Beacon I found this:

O'Maley Outlook: Young writers come together

Voices Within the Ocean is a group of students interested in publishing. They meet on Mondays and Tuesdays at O'Maley Middle School with their advisors, Ms.Ziergiebel and Ms. Ware. The group publishes poetry, stories, photography, drawings and reviews of music, movies and books.

The Beacon dedicates an entire page to their writing.

More here.

This project has arts and community participation and collaboration written all over it. If you are reading this and know about noteworthy happenings in our public schools, please send an e-mail to janecunningham8@gmail.com.

Thank you.

Jane

Actions...

2009-01-17T15:10:00.011-05:00

The Boston Foundation recently released a study about the Boston Public School System. Charter school proponents are citing this study when asking Board of Education Commissioner Mitchell Chester, Governor Deval Patrick and Massachusetts Secretary of Education and voting Board of Education member Paul Reville to lift the statewide charter cap and to approve the three proposed charter schools to open 2010. The GCA charter application, in all of its misleading glory, is receiving renewed attention as a result of this study. This is unfortunate as the Gloucester Public School System is not the Boston Public School System. Our challenges, demographic and size are different from that of the BPS and it is illogical to use the findings of this study to push the GCA charter forward. Furthermore, the weaknesses (as argued in earlier blog posts) of the GCA charter application are as alive as ever. Gentle reminders:

1. Gloucester does not need this charter. The GCA charter application is about imitation, not innovation. Our district has been struggling with staff cuts, program cuts and growing class sizes since 2002. Our district will be devastated by more cuts, more school closures, larger class sizes should this charter pass. It is as important as ever to make noise about the weaknesses of the GCA charter application.

2. Gloucester's elected officials and hundreds of parents, teachers and students do not want this charter. Hundreds of people wrote letters to Mitchell Chester asking that the GCA application be rejected. Now that the period for public commentary about the proposed charter school has closed, there has been a statewide pro charter letter writing campaign. Of course people can write letters at any time about issues that are compelling to them, but the fact that the Boston Foundation study was released AFTER the Board of Education 1/5/09 letter writing deadline raises questions about the lobbying methods of charter proponents. Had Gloucester letter writers been able to respond to the Boston Foundation study, they would have pointed out the obvious problems with using this study, limited to Boston, to make the case for a charter school in Gloucester.

3. Please use the links and addresses to take a few minutes to write to one or more of the following. Please ask that the GCA charter proposal be considered independently of the recent Boston Foundation findings. Ask that the GCA charter application be appropriately analyzed, citing misinformation where necessary.

Governor Deval Patrick

Secretary of Education Paul Reville: paul_reville@gse.harvard.edu

Reville says that he is reading the letters sent to him.

Lt. Governor Tim Murray: jen@timmurray.org

Senator Bruce Tarr

Board of Education: boe@doe.mass.edu

Thank you for your efforts.

Best, Jane

Classy

2008-12-24T14:37:00.004-05:00

Will sent me in search of The Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell as part of our ongoing discussion about class and how it figures into the charter school debate. Here's a bit about this book:

Successful people, he avows, are “beneficiaries of hidden advantages and extraordinary opportunities and cultural legacies that allow them to learn and work hard and make sense of the world in ways others cannot. It makes a difference where and when we grew up…. It’s not enough to ask what successful people are like, in other words. It is only by asking where they are from that we can unravel the logic behind who succeeds and who doesn’t.”

Put differently, “Success is the result of what sociologists like to call ‘accumulative advantage.’ ”

His book sounds interesting enough, but I wasn't overly impressed with what I read about it. However, in the process of looking into that book I found this one:

Unequal Childhoods by Annette Lareau. Here's a bit about her book:

"Lareau's work is well known among sociologists, but neglected by the popular media. And that's a shame because through her close observations and careful writings — in books like 'Unequal Childhoods' — Lareau has been able to capture the texture of inequality in America. She's described how radically child-rearing techniques in upper-middle-class homes differ from those in working-class and poor homes, and what this means for the prospects of the kids inside."—David Brooks, New York Times

The most compelling reason, in my opinion anyway, that the GCA charter proposal be rejected, is that this school for self-selected students of parents with cultural and financial resources will exacerbate the class divide in Gloucester.

I have a hard time with the applicant claim that all types of Gloucester parents will apply to this school--mostly because every parent I've talked with who is or was interested in the GCACS is college educated, resourceful, engaged (some parents do not have the time, money or social wherewithal to be engaged in the way that many of the parents I've spoken with are). According to Peter Van Ness, the school will (hopefully) reflect the diversity of the district. According to Annette Lareau, there are poor parents who will not be attracted to a school like the GCACS for all kinds of reasons.

Let's take a hard look at those reasons and then figure out how we can best serve all of Gloucester's kids. Let me know if you've read either book--I'd be interested in hearing your opinions and reviews.

Best,

Jane

Jim Dowd's Call to Action

2008-12-17T11:32:00.007-05:00

Who is this Jim Dowd person? Inquiring minds want to know.

Jim and his lovely wife Bo were originally part of the charter school group. They left specifically because of the funding impact on the rest of the school system.

Jim Dowd began his adult working life as an experiential educator with Outward Bound and Project Adventure. Somehow, he still doesn't really know how, he left that career to become a technology strategist. He has worked with numerous fortune 500 companies, a good collection of startups, the Tech Boston Academy and today is the co-founder of HelpGuest.com an online marketplace for skills that launched in October 08. He has one child thriving in the Gloucester Public Schools and one who will begin kindergarten in September 2010.

TOP 5 THINGS THAT YOU CAN DO TO MAKE NOISE ABOUT THE GCA CHARTER PROPOSAL

1. Write a letter expressing your objections to the Board of Education.

Letters should be sent to:

Mitchell D. Chester
Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
350 Main Street
Malden, MA 02148

Or

charterschools@doe.mass.edu

by JANUARY 5TH, 2009

2. Write a letter to Governor Patrick asking for a moratorium on new charter schools until the financial crisis is resolved. Follow the link for e-mail and snail mail addresses.

Contact Governor Patrick

3. Talk to a friend who you know supports the GCA Charter School proposal. Give them the address to this website.

www.offthecharter.blogspot.com

Urge them to use the resources available to get informed. Ask charter school applicants to prove, demonstrating thorough budget analysis and understanding, how this charter school can be funded without disastrously affecting the rest of our school district. Ask hard questions. Wait for answers. Find out the truth about the school budget and the charter school funding.

4. Write a letter to the Gloucester Daily Times expressing your objection.

Click here to write a letter to the editor of the GDT

Scroll down the "contact us" page until you reach the section called "Submit Your News." Contact editor Ray Lamont at the GDT if your letter is not printed a few days after you submit it.

5. Organize the other people you know who care about education for all of Gloucester's kids, send them to this blog, get them to follow the above steps.

Why the People of Gloucester Should Ask the State to Reject the GCA Charter Proposal

2008-12-16T17:17:00.031-05:00

1. The GCA charter school plan isn't fair. 240 of 3600 students will enjoy mandated, capped class sizes of no more than 20 students. Charter school proponents and district officials agree that keeping class sizes down correlates with effective teaching and learning. Class sizes for the rest of the district's 3,360 students will not be capped. When staff is cut to accommodate charter school funding, class sizes will increase for the remaining students in the district. Why should some students have small, capped class sizes while some students try to learn in classes as big as 25 or more? This is not consistent with the MA Education Reform Act of 1993 that states that all students should have access to a high quality education.

2. The GCA charter application is a faulty, misleading document. On page 5 of the document applicants state that, "A charter school will bring the innovation that the district desperately needs and has shunned. Attempts by parents, teachers, volunteers, and others actively advocating for change have largely fallen on deaf ears...At present no schools in Gloucester offer arts-integrated curriculum--or any of the alternative approaches we intend to use." These statements are simply not true and the innovative approaches taken by Gloucester's teachers were demonstrated over and over again by teachers, parents and school administrators at the 12/11/08 public hearing officiated by the state. Teachers in Gloucester have been required to teach using the MA frameworks since 1993 (link to frameworks in sidebar). This has involved curriculum development using alternative approaches to teaching. Teachers in every school in Gloucester have been applying Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences since at least 1998. Furthermore, it is insulting to suggest that the district's teachers and principals have not been implementing alternative teaching strategies, especially since the state requires that all teachers have master's degrees and that graduate programs teach students about the MA frameworks and how to develop curriculum using said frameworks. I graduated from Tufts University with a Master's of Arts in Teaching degree in 1998 and applied the "new and innovative" approaches described in the charter application at Gloucester High School, as did other teachers at GHS and throughout the system, 10 years ago.

Is it true that some teachers should be using better alternative approaches? Yes. Is it true that the district could do a better job recognizing and recording the efforts of its innovative teachers? Absolutely. Most teachers can and want to do better and we should give them this opportunity. Instead of making false claims about lack of innovation in our district, show teachers exactly how and when and where they can be innovative by citing numerous examples of the groundbreaking work that is taking place around our city.

The analysis of MCAS data in the document is misleading and leaves out essential analysis and information regarding Gloucester's demographic. Our district's low income population is 26% and our special needs population is 21% (see "selected populations" link in sidebar). Substance abuse, domestic violence (HAWC--number of restraining orders issued each year in Gloucester), mental illness, heroin use (AGH--methadone clinic and waiting list) and its persistence in Gloucester are not analyzed by the applicants thus showing a lack of understanding of the complex needs of our community. There are factors that a school, despite outreach and education, cannot change. Evidence that the applicants considered these factors when analyzing test scores cannot be found in the charter application.

Visit the links in the sidebar to help you understand how special populations compare in neighboring districts such as Rockport, Manchester/Essex, and Ipswich, districts to which students from Gloucester are "choicing" into for obvious reasons--smaller size, more money, fewer complex needs. Information about how much a district spends per student, how much teachers get paid, as well as size of a district can also be found at the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education website (was DOE, now called DESE).

3. Our city's recent efforts at change need to be given time to take hold i.e. a school closure and redistricting efforts to more equally distribute Gloucester's poorest students. The small, neighborhood school model has proven effective in many districts. Give Gloucester's small, neighborhood schools a chance to strengthen and grow. Other changes are underway in our schools. There is qualitative and quantitative improvement regarding O'Maley. The word on the street is that fewer parents have concerns about O'Maley. "Don't take the legs out from under O'Maley," pled John Doyle, a parent in the know at the 12/11 hearing. The word from the state is that there has been significant recent O'Maley test score improvement. Principal Tracy reports, "O’Maley Middle School made AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress--No Child Left Behind) in ELA (English Language Arts) and Math in the aggregate this past year and 76% of our 8th graders were in the advanced and proficient categories for ELA-the highest percentage of advanced and proficient designations in the district. MCAS results for Gloucester have numerous examples of longitudinal trends from Grades 3-10 that demonstrate the shrinking gap between Gloucester Public School students and their state level peers— the same students heralded by the Commissioner for leading the nation and ranking alongside some of the highest performing nations in the world. But standardized test scores are just one measure of a student’s progress."

4. The city doesn't have the money to fund the charter school. The argument being made by GCA charter school proponents such as founding member Kate Ruff is that we'll find the money; schools don't have to close. I implore you to attend city council meetings, talk to building principals, talk to well-informed people who work on city budgets and ask where this so-called money can be found. In order to understand the school budget making process, it is necessary to understand how fixed costs and special education mandates affect a budget. Analyze the answers you receive in context of what is happening in our city and state. Fire stations are closed. We're in need of money to make major infrastructure repairs--our roads and public buildings. Deval Patrick recently announced the need to make 1 billion in cuts. The "bloated budget" argument doesn't fly. Do we have 2.4 million identified ways to save a dollar (without cutting staff and closing schools)? The answer from city officials and proven budget visionaries alike is a resounding NO.

5. It is dangerous for the state to override a city's elected officials without excellent reason to do so. The GCA charter applicants do NOT make the case for this kind of intervention. See item two on the list.

6. The application does not focus enough on Gloucester's poorest children. Where is the outreach? There is a clear lack of understanding of social dynamics in Gloucester on the part of the proponents. There is an assumption that poor families will want to leave their schools--underestimating the power of community in each of Gloucester's schools. The charter applicants and letter supporters, as demonstrated at the public hearing, are a college-educated, homogenous group. This applicant group and "arts school" will attract a certain type of student. Because the school is so small (240 students), because the low income population is so large--approximately 900 students--and the applicant group is as homogenous as it is, the school stands little chance of helping the city's poorest children. How might the applicants have better targeted the subgroups performing most poorly on the MCAS?

Jim Dowd's guest post

2008-12-16T16:33:00.010-05:00

We have this thing in the tech industry called "vaporware." A project is considered "vapor" when the people selling it get beyond the realistic expectations of what they are creating can provide. I think this is an apt comparison for what is going on with the charter school proposal right now.

You won't believe the kind of crazy crap that gets passed off as serious tech once it hits the vapor realm. Actually you would:
Remember "Clippy" the tremendously annoying paperclip in Windows Office from 1997-2003? Clippy, which is now considered the greatest failure in the annals of programming history, started from noble origins, Bayesian algorithms, and the idea that the computer should do the technical stuff and the people should only have to add the content. Somehow, though, it got sold as the thing that would allow every person on Earth to easily use a computer regardless of proficiency, age or language barriers, something that Bayesian algorithms could never, never do. In the end it wound up sucking worse than anything had ever sucked, not because it didn't do what the engineers who designed it expected, but because somebody (I'm looking at you here, Melinda) over-promised then spectacularly failed to deliver.

Another great example is the Segway, which was kept as a secret project of Dean Kamen, noted inventor. They merely promised before it was released that whole cities would be redesigned around Segways and that their product would change the way we work, live, play and love. Ok, not the last one, but you get the idea. They sort of pushed the envelope. A lot. In the end it was a three thousand dollar dorky scooter. I actually worked on some of the initial marketing of the Segway, after the disastrous launch. Even once it was crystal clear that beyond airport cops and meter readers there would never ever be a large market for it, they kept telling us how amazing it was, and blamed us for not getting the public to share in this view. There is nothing harder to deal with than true believers refusing to face the brick wall of reality.

But there is also nothing more fun than selling vapor at the early stages. It is all good times. You don't have a price, you
don't have any limitations, you don't have what we in the industry call "speeds and feeds." Everything is pure, high-grade potential.

Q: "Does it work underwater?"

A: "You bet it does! It's at its best underwater, unless you are using it on land, where it also overperforms!"

Q: "Will it be able to interface with our legacy systems, which were written by drunken Eskimos who broke into our server farm and coded everything in a language that we think they made up on the spot?"

A: "What's amazing about this product is that it seems to naturally understand intoxicated Aleutian Islanders as if they were having some kind of mind-meld...."

You get the idea. Man, it's fun selling stuff that hasn't been made yet. It solves all your problems, doesn't cost but instead makes money, works in both good economies and bad, shines the floor while doing your taxes...

The proposed Gloucester charter school has sailed hard into the fog of vaporware. The promises the founders and advocates are making at this point are way beyond reasonable. Think of what the founders of this school are promising to do, and see if you might detect a whiff of vapor: They claim they are going to stop people from choicing out, even though the people who are leaving are going to established, well-funded schools in rich nearby towns with real track records, not a risky charter school with no definable outcomes. And school choice kids take 1/2 of what a charter school student takes from the budget. Not exactly apples to apples.

I heard one of the founders promise that the charter school would make people move to Gloucester because we will become "an educational beacon" to the rest of the Commonwealth. Vapor talk. I used to hear it every day- pure, unhinged vapor talk. We're in the midst of a significant economic downturn, housing prices have cratered, local industries here are laying off people by the hundreds and we're losing the fishing industry. I don't think, "Gloucester has a nifty charter school, let's move there!" is going to motivate anyone before some of those other factors are taken care of, even if the charter reaches significant levels of niftiness.

The list of promises is long. I heard actual testimony that the charter school is going to rebalance the unequal opportunities given to kids from richer neighborhoods and less well-off ones. We already did a lot of that in the Public Schools with the districting, but to take them at face value you have to assume that numerous families from less well-off households will want to send their kids to an "arts focused school" with no athletics and where their friends don't go. Why does my Spidey sense tell me that when you advertise your school programing as inviting students to create performances and plays merged tightly with the Gloucester Historical Museum and the paintings of Fitz Hugh Lane, you are going to wind up with kids from richer, college educated households, probably with NPR as a radio preset in the imported family wagon? Just an instinct, there, not data based.

My favorite particular strand of this vapor sale has been watching the charter school adherents talk about their ideas to "save the district money." I have heard more than once as a response to "Umm, it sounds like this charter school proposal of yours will wind up costing crazy amounts of money..." the reply:

"Don't worry, Peter Van Ness has some great ideas on how to save the district using quantum-efficiency techniques he learned studying advanced management theory at a Lamaist monastery in Himalayan Bhutan" [paraphrasing]. Peter Van Ness may be a smart guy, he may be a good guy overall, I don't know, but I can assure you he is of mortal-kind. A lot of very smart people work on the district budget, not just from inside the public school system, but people who used to work at Bell Labs, people who do budgets for huge government institutions. There simply isn't some big pile of cash sitting in budget waiting to be redistributed. But a classic problem with vaporware is that it gets mixed-up with big personalities. Kamen is a smart guy, a genius, even. But the Segway was never more than a scooter and a really freaking dumb idea to drop on the general public (hence the multi-million dollar losses).

Which brings us to outcomes. Projects that come out of vapor are typically, on the merits, worthwhile in the end. One just has to greatly re-calibrate realistic expectations from the hype. If you have trouble walking, or are a mall cop who just doesn't get enough ridicule, the Segway is the device for you. And the backsystems that made up Clippy have gone into making user-interfaces better overall, just without the annoying cartoons. Neither wound up as the panaceas they promised, but both were useful technology at the core.

The charter school is probably the same way. It would end up as a reasonably useful thing to a very narrow slice of Gloucester students. The question then becomes, is it enough of a useful thing to risk the developments and improvements we're trying to make in other areas?

When one really looks at the realistic possible returns from a charter school, by looking at other similar charter schools and what they've been able to accomplish, the answer is simply no. Not now, not with the budget the way it is, not with the limited scope of the innovation they are proposing.