Editor’s note: See previous letters on this issue below.
To the editor:
I have been reading and thinking but not posting about charter schools until now. As I drill down into the arguments, it seems to me that the progressive view as espoused by Sara Mattes, for example, has at its core the desire to maintain political control over the schools. I see charter schools as a disruptive technology, as creative destruction. With creative destruction, something new comes about that completely changes the old paradigm so much that it destroys the old paradigm and replaces it with something different.
I think that those who are opposed to having more charter schools in Massachusetts see this paradigm shift very clearly. At the same time, I find Jay Kaufman’s letter ludicrous. He says that studies show that better teachers are the answer to better schools. If that is the case, why do we not already have them? Why have the schools in the U. S. showed a very clear decline over the past 40 years? There is the concern that parents choosing charter schools will take money away from the public schools. In Lincoln, people are affluent enough that if they do not like the public schools, they pay for private schools—in fact while still paying the taxes to support the public schools. Impoverished urban parents do not have that luxury. Why punish the people in Roxbury out of a desire to protect the Lincoln schools? Charter schools give them a real choice for a better education and that outweighs every other consideration in my mind.
Sincerely,
Colleen Katsuki
226 Old Concord Rd.
To the editor:
I was raised in a family of public schools teachers and educators. I myself taught in the Somerville public schools. I applaud and support public schools that properly educate their students so they can become productive and contributing members of society. And I also support parents who seek alternatives if their schools cannot educate their children.
That’s what many of us in Lincoln have done, made a choice and moved to a community where we were told there were good schools. The only difference between the 33,000 parents who want the best education for their children through charter schools and many of us is their economic status. Low-income and working-class parents don’t have many choices. I support the parents’ right to choose their children’s education. I am concerned that people who will not be affected by the outcome of this vote could vote no and take away other parents’ chance to do what’s best for their child.
I understand public education in Boston because I have worked with teens from Roxbury, Dorchester, and a low-income Latino neighborhood of Jamaica Plain for over twenty years. When I worked at The Food Project, teens from Boston neighborhoods worked side by side with teens from Somerville, Waltham, Lincoln, Wellesley, Lexington, etc. It was painful to observe the consequences from the profound differences in academic rigor, expectations and exposure. Too many of the teens from the Boston schools had difficulty doing the simple math at the farmers’ markets and struggled with any writing assignment, no matter how minimal. It wasn’t about I.Q. It was about a lack of educational opportunity. To make things worse, most of these woefully under performing teens were receiving good grades, so they rejected our offers for tutoring because they were told by their teachers that they were doing well.
The town of Lincoln participates in the METCO program because its residents already understand that a significant number of the Boston public schools are underperforming. If the kids we bring out to Lincoln every day deserve to get a good education, so do the 33,000 others kids on waiting lists for charter schools. Supporting charter schools means they have a chance to have a quality education near where they live.
It is also important to note that the quality of one’s education is a very significant contributor to our increasing economic inequality. Being poorly educated means being under employed or unemployed. That is a tragedy for the individual, a significant financial burden for society, and is potentially disruptive to our civic order. The financial issues regarding charter schools are specious but the financial and societal consequences of having significant percentage of teens/young adults under prepared to participate in our society are enormous and will, one way or another, affect us all.
If we broaden educational options, not just through charter schools, more children will be better served, and more innovation, diverse perspectives, and cross fertilization of ideas will occur. As Colleen said, the schools in the U.S. showed a very clear decline over the past years. We need to dilute the government monopoly on education—take it back and create new models more appropriate for the 21st century, our rapidly changing society and world.
Sincerely,
Pat Gray
Goose Pond Rd.
Previous letters:
- Letters to the editor on both sides of charter school question
- School Committee urges ‘no’ vote on Question 2
Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Letters will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.