Piotr Redlinski for The New York Times Democracy Prep Charter School in Harlem. Two recent New York Times articles have described opposition to the thriving charter school movement in Harlem. An influential state senator, Bill Perkins, whose district has nearly 20 charter schools, is trying to block their expansion. Some public schools in the neighborhood are also fighting back, marketing themselves to compete with the charters.
This is a New York battle, but charter schools — a cornerstone of the Obama administration’s education strategy — are facing resistance across the country, as they become more popular and as traditional public schools compete for money. The education scholar Diane Ravitch, once a booster of the movement, is now an outspoken critic.
What is causing the push-back on charter schools, beyond the local issues involved ? Critics say they are skimming off the best students, leaving the regular schools to deal with the rest? Is that a fair point?
- Geoffrey Canada, Harlem Children’s Zone
- Richard D. Kahlenberg, Century Foundation
- Jeffrey Henig and Luis Huerta, Teachers College, Columbia
- Michael Goldstein, Match Charter Public School
Schools Are for Kids, Not Adults
Geoffrey Canada is president and chief executive officer of the Harlem Children’s Zone and president of the Harlem Children’s Zone Promise Academy Charter Schools.
I have been heartbroken as I have watched generations of black and Latino students failed by our public school system, then descend into unemployment, drugs, crime and, often, untimely deaths. This has been going on since I was a public-school child myself in the South Bronx in the 1960s, so I am baffled that the opponents of charter public schools claim that charters caused this problem.
The only threat charter schools hold is to the myth that poor students cannot succeed academically.
For me, this is not an intellectual debate. This is quite literally about saving young lives. For parents in devastated neighborhoods such as Harlem, the decision to send their child to the local failure factory or a successful charter school is no choice.
Charter public schools offer an innovative approach to fix some aspects of the education system, which is broken and has been for decades. They are not a panacea. There are many examples of good charter public schools that should be replicated, and there are lousy ones that should be closed.
Missing: The Teacher’s Voice
Richard D. Kahlenberg is a senior fellow at the Century Foundation and the author of “All Together Now: Creating Middle-Class Schools through Public School Choice,” and “Tough Liberal: Albert Shanker and the Battles Over Schools, Unions, Race and Democracy.”
Charter schools have long basked in the glory of “bipartisanship,” but like the No Child Left Behind Act, charters are finally experiencing some push-back and deservedly so.
Teachers in charter schools do not have a voice.
On one level, charters offered something for everyone. Liberals liked
providing choice for kids stuck in bad schools that stopped short of private school vouchers. Conservatives liked the union-free environment found in most charter schools. Newspapers featured glowing reviews of high performing charter schools like KIPP.
But as the evidence comes in, the bloom is coming off the rose. Three communities are fighting against the bipartisan consensus: academics, teachers and civil rights groups.
The Economic Vise
Jeffrey Henig is professor of political science and education at Teachers College, Columbia University. Luis Huerta is an associate professor of education and public policy there.
Concern about charter schools has been simmering, but until recently New York City had been spared some of the high-octane political battles that have marked the national debate.
Competition for resources is creating friction between public officials and new education “outsiders.”
One reason is that Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein have aggressively welcomed charters, while in other cities school boards and local superintendents have led the charge against them. Another is that charters in New York made their initial inroads during a time of economic growth and high investment in the local schools, defusing fears that they would drain resources from the traditional school system.
The state level cap on the number of charters also dampened resistance; as long as the cap was in place, the prospects of a major shift of students and revenues away from the traditional system was restrained by policy.
So why are challenges to the local charter movement bubbling to a head now?
How to Insure Fairness and Financing
Michael Goldstein is the founder of Match Charter Public School in Boston.
Why is charter school friction reaching a boiling point in Harlem? Are the anti-charter concerns driven by fair-minded policy analysis, or simple fear of Harlem parents voting with their feet?
The Boston charter story is instructive.
The bickering blocks important discussion of how to improve the charters.
In the mid-1990s, some charter critics made three predictions: Boston charters would “cream” off the white students and serve fewer black ones; they would attract “motivated” kids from well-to-do families and fewer poor kids; and they would fail to deliver academic performance.
But Boston charter founders recruited heavily in community centers and black churches. As a result, the charter school student body here is about 60 percent African-American, compared with about 33 for the district as a whole. And the proportion of poor kids in charters, while not identical, is very close.
Nationally, charter critics have a legitimate point in terms of quality. It’s mixed. But certain areas, like New York City (and Harlem in particular), and like Boston, have powerful empirical evidence showing charter teachers generate huge gains for kids who attend.
Six authors read favorite passages from books they would never discard. 
