NJ’s Flunks Charter School Test

Why the constant disingenuous critique of Save Our Schools NJ? You are well aware that SOSnj is not the “anti-suburban-charter organization” you claim it to be. For starters, SOSnj has always lobbied for democracy in the charter approval process for all communities, not just suburbs. You are outright distorting the mission of the organization. Fighting for transparency and accountability in charter schools, and a democratic system for determining which ones will be most beneficial is a far cry from opposing them. In fact, any charter school proponent should want a transparent and accountable system of charter schools if he or she wants them to succeed and grow.

You’ve disagreed with Dr. Sass Rubin’s statement, “we're right up there with the worst in the country in terms of how undemocratic our approval process is,” but your blog offers no evidence to support your claim. Saying, “the state law includes some of the model law’s provisions for transparent charter application, review, and decision-making,” is hardly an argument to the contrary. For starters, “some” means there are still areas lacking transparency. Also, the quality of the model law they reference is debatable.

Your words, “The fact that the bill would also halt development of charters into districts with terrible schools is not a problem for SOS-NJ. Their constituents don’t live there anyway,” is an outright LIE. SOSnj has members in every legislative district, and in suburbs as well a suburban communities and school districts previously classified as Abbott districts. SOSnj representatives have publicly stated repeatedly that “democracy is not just for the wealthy.” Parents in every district deserve to be represented in the decisions affecting their children’s schools.

Furthermore, your constant personal attacks on Dr. Sass Rubin are completely unwarranted. Do you really think that she gave her entire day away from her family and her profession to spend countless hours in Trenton, selflessly fighting against language in the Urban Hope Act, out of what you call her “anti-suburban-charter” agenda? Really? Dr. Sass Rubin has a child enrolled in a Suburban charter school, in a town with one of our state’s high-achieving public school systems.

Not only are your personal attacks petty, they make no sense.

I’ve read enough of your writing to see that you support the idea of a public watchdog; I don’t understand why you don’t think children in charter schools deserve the same scrutiny and oversight of their schools. One thing that has become clear to me, though, is that when you don’t have facts to back up your opinion, you personally attack particular people, schools, and organizations, many times distorting the facts. I don’t think that is productive for any of us, including you.

The only reason this has become a zero sum game is because of comments such as these – creating an opposition where there need not be one. Working for accountable and transparent charter schools should be the job of all people who believe in quality education. We can debate the specifics of a bill, or the best method of implementation but certainly it is in the best interest of all – in particular the children – that we do not let quasi-public schools run amuck with no one watching them.

Whether or not your comments were meant as personal or not, you certainly go out of your way (or perhaps it comes easily to you? I should not assume) to mischaracterize Save Our Schools NJ and paint it in the least favorable light. You seem determined not to take SOSnj at our word – or actions for that matter. It might be a more honest discussion if you just admitted you disagree with our goals – which we are fighting with and for members from all over the state regardless of zip code.

As to the content of your post, I am fairly sure that we are the only state in the nation that allows the DoE complete authority over approving charter schools while forcing the bills on the local district. The pretense of community input has come under great scrutiny and protest and perhaps is forcing the DoE to pay attention. But communities should not have to rise up in protest every 6 months when a new application arrives at the DoE doorstep (many of which have been applying repeatedly and coached to improve their application) that may drain money from dwindling local school budgets.

To fix this problem is not to be anti-charter, and certainly not disregarding of the urban areas which should have the same democratic right to vote as every area of the state. It is to say we have a system that needs improvement, and here are some ideas of how to do it.

Working to fix a problem is not a zero sum game. It is making reasonable arguments, listening to other opinions and moving towards a solution. It just does not seem that you are interested in participating in that discourse by your tone and snide remarks.

You've painted Julia, and more broadly the entire SOSnj membership, as caring only about kids in wealthier suburban districts. I think most people would consider that a personal attack. You have the right to disagree with us about who should decide how to educate our kids (a lone activist commissioner in Trenton, vs. a democratic process that includes parents and taxpayers). However, I do not accept you misrepresenting the mission of our organization.

I understand the quote in my second paragraph is from the study and not your own. My point was that the quote you pulled from the study offers no evidence contrary to Julia's point regarding “how undemocratic our approval process is.”

I hope, in the future, you can be a little more honest in your commentary about SOSnj's positions.

Ms. Waters' antipathy toward SOSNJ is rivaled only by her aversion toward voting as a means of public expression.

Those of us not on the Trenton-Knows-Best bandwagon or—heaven forbid—doubters as to the wisdom of Public-Spirited Hedge-Fund Moguls Now Dabbling in Public Education should beware.