Response to Mr. Frank J. Gaffney's article on The Washington Times

Mr. Gaffney’s article can be best described as unsubstantiated propaganda and blatant fabrication. It is neither journalist nor scholarly and the editors at The Washington Times have chosen to diminish their paper’s reputation by publishing it. Nothing in the article is explained or backed up and one can only assume a prejudicial attitude against Muslims caused him to write it.

What is the point of attacking a group of people trying to open a new charter school? Is Mr. Gaffney unaware that charter schools present a much needed educational alternative for students in this country and overall are seen as a very positive development? Is he unaware that high performing charter schools are often duplicated in various locations and that some of the same educational models they use are employed in regular public school districts? If Mr. Gaffney is concerned about the state of education in America why not look at the real problems like the ever present problem of unequal tax basis’ in the city versus the county leading to resource poor schools versus resource rich; or the skewed emphasis on student testing as the “be all and end all” of school performance.

The article is propaganda because he claims that Chesapeake Science Point had “little or inconsistent improvement”. All one needs to do is look up Maryland Department of Education’s “Charter Schools Annual Report 2011”1 to see Chesapeake Science Point achieved >95% proficiency in Reading/English for 2011 and 93% proficiency in Math/Algebra for 2011; very high numbers. Is it significant that in 2009 the numbers were 97% for Reading/English and 98% for Math/Algebra? Absolutely not. The facts are distorted for the author’s purpose.

The article is slander and fabrication when referring to the Islamic spiritual leader Fethullah Gulen as “supremacist” and “autocratic”. This is a man who Muslims look up to as a beacon of spiritual guidance through his prolific writings urging love and tolerance. Any objective person who looks at the life and books of Mr. Gulen will conclude he is an inspired moderate Islamic scholar. Mr. Gaffney must be more interested in war than love of his fellow man.

Mr. Gaffney clearly knows nothing about Turkey and seeks to spread lies by claiming it is an “Islamist state”. Does an Islamist state forbid women with hijab to work in the government? Truth is that Muslims in a majority Muslim nation have not been able to practice their religion freely for decades and the current government is simply moving in that direction.

The local parents and officials plus education experts are the persons qualified to decide about charter school proposals; not a biased “journalist” with an agenda.

By Charter Advocate

Source: http://www.charteradvocate.org/op-ed/153-response-to-mr-frank-j-gaffneys-article-on-the-washington-times

More Articles:

http://www.charteradvocate.org/gulen-charter-schools/148-universal-schooling-and-gulen-insipred-schools

http://www.charteradvocate.org/gulen-charter-schools/127-showing-charters-as-dangerous-by-connecting-them-to-gulen

http://www.charteradvocate.org/gulen-charter-schools/138-islamophobia-network-targets-top-performing-american-schools

http://www.charteradvocate.org/gulen-charter-schools/85-gulen-charter-schools-myth-flourishes

1. http://marylandpublicschools.org/2011_Charter_School_Report.pdf

Charter schools making headway in communities

Charter schools making headway in communities

It was 20 years ago that Gov. Pete Wilson signed the California Charter Schools Act into law, and California became the second state, after Minnesota, to approve charter schools. With the governor’s signature, the door in the Golden State was opened, creating an innovative educational laboratory. New theories, practices and academic programming could be introduced with the sole purpose of positively impacting students with a specific five-year timeline in place.

The traditional school districts have watched closely as these schools have successfully taken on some of the most resistant students, in some of the toughest neighborhoods. The myth perpetuated by some naysayers would have you believe that charter schools only take the “good kids,” the “successful students,” etc. This is simply not true.

Over the last two decades, numerous charter schools have closed due to financial insolvency or a failed academic reputation. Taxpayers scratch their heads wondering why you can close a failing public charter school, but when traditional programs nationwide have the same issues, these schools are not closed. Communities and their children struggle and suffer as a result of this double standard. We are fortunate in our local community to have some great traditional school models that consistently make academic gains. Families are enjoying the high-quality options available in traditional and charter schools that were not available even a decade ago.

Charter schools have made headway in communities across America over the past 20 years and are now serving 5 percent of public school students. Although the reputation of charter schools is strengthening, there is still a sector of the public that is unaware that charter schools are indeed publicly funded. Over the last two decades, charter schools have gotten a bad rap by having some claim that these schools are the panacea for the public school system. Charter schools are merely educational models established to add to the academic options available in a community to help meet the needs of all students. What is best is when the local school district views the successes at charter schools, understands that these schools are bettering the educational landscape in their communities, and as such, implements innovation and change that benefit students in the traditional public school.

Although they serve public school students, charter schools from their very inception in 1992 have not received per-student funding at the same level as traditional schools. It is true that charter schools are expected to accomplish more with less. The funding gap created 20 years ago continues, and the inequity creates a greater burden on charter schools to produce sustainable positive outcomes with students over the long haul. Charter schools have less in state funds to budget with, and in most cases are required to provide for their own school facilities. Traditional public schools have the benefit of full funding per student and a facility provided for them by the state.

Charter schools have the freedom to operate outside much of the established education code. However, these schools are held to a higher standard when it comes to their academic outcomes and financial management as established in the charter school legislation. For instance, the promise was made that when these schools fail, they will be closed. Charter schools are also held to a higher standard when it comes to public critique. Numerous articles and publications have taken potshots at charter schools at the expense of shifting the focus off the challenges traditional schools face in dealing with 95 percent of public school students.

As the celebration of the 20th anniversary of charter schools culminates in San Diego in March 2013 with the California Charter Schools Association statewide conference, I take great pride as a charter school developer and operator. For almost 13 years, The Classical Academies has partnered with our parents and our students to achieve academic and social success. This experience reminded me of the value our state’s charter schools bring to the community of public education. The students’ successes far exceed the simple test scores we produce or the accolades and awards that have come as a result. Our state’s charter schools immensely benefit those whom we serve and help to improve the educational landscape that is part of the economic development efforts needed to improve our individual communities, and our state as a whole.

Published on North Country Times, by Cameron Curry