Uh oh: one of the policies being pushed to improve education for tribal youth in South Dakota is charter schools. South Dakota News Watch reports that NDN Collective leader Nick Tilsen plans to lobby hard to finally get the Legislature to authorize charter schools in South Dakota:
“We want to have flexibility for Indian education to be able to innovate and create, and charter schools allow for that,” said Nick Tilsen, head of the NDN Collective that is advocating for the charter-school legislation, at a meeting in Rapid City in October. “It’s a choice that doesn’t exist in South Dakota but does exist in other states.”
South Dakota is one of five U.S. states that do not permit formation of charter schools (the others are Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota and Vermont.)
…Tilsen said the failure of the South Dakota public education system to adequately teach Native American students makes it imperative that legislation open the door to Native-focused charter schools in South Dakota.
“It can create opportunities for our kids and use public education dollars the way they were meant to be used to help Native American children succeed,” he said.
NDN Collective has hired Ross Garelick Bell as a lobbyist and created a subgroup called the South Dakota Education Equity Coalition to push charter-school legislation in South Dakota [Bart Pfankuch, “Charter School Legislation in S.D. Seen as Path to Improved Outcomes for Native Students,” South Dakota News Watch, 2019.11.20].
I understand the argument that South Dakota’s public schools aren’t getting the job done for American Indian communities, so we need to try something different. I’ll even acknowledge the research Pfankuch cites that charter schools have shown some benefits for poor and minority children that don’t accrue for white kids in charter schools.
But I remain puzzled as to why whatever secret sauce the charter schools bring to bear can’t be applied in regular public schools. Charter advocate Todd Ziebarth tells Pfankuch that charter schools can provide extra support for minority students and hold them to high standards. Why can’t public schools do that? If there is some level of autonomy in school decision-making not currently practiced, why not simply remove the restrictions that prevent public schools from exercising that autonomy?
Creating a subset of public schools that don’t follow the same rules as other schools is an unnecessary and unfair complication. Valid educational and administrative practices should be practiced in all schools, not some strangely favored class of institutions playing by different rules with public dollars.
Related Reading: President Bernie Sanders and President Elizabeth Warren would ban for-profit entities from managing charter schools.
Cory says: “But I remain puzzled as to why whatever secret sauce the charter schools bring to bear can’t be applied in regular public schools.”
Exactly. In fact, it would be far better to work through public schools because a charter school is not going be able to serve all the Native students. Charter schools are generally small so they can innovate faster, but that means they become exclusive enclaves for a few students, and can’t reach the broad swath of students that might benefit.
A far better model would be to establish “charter programs” or “pilot programs” within public schools, so you have the benefits of innovation combined with the benefits of established practice.
One of the main issues with education of Native students has been mobility, and I don’t see small charter schools being able to address that. It may make it worse. Instead what you really need is to design programs that track individual students in a better way.
I do not like that “charter” has become perceived as the only pathway for innovation. Local schools, ANY local schools, under the direction of their elected school board can be as innovative as they choose. For as much as standardized tests (used in a test-and-punish regime) and standardized curriculum have crushed teachers, they have also made school boards think their job is to push conformity not innovation.
Charters not rooted in local school boards suffer by seeding all the power, decisions, and responsibility away from the community. Schools will never truly be successful when disassociated from their community — their students, their parents, their teachers, their elected officials.
I would also bet that any rule deemed so awful that a charter would set it aside is also so awful that ANY school ought to set it aside.
Yes, “o.” Totally agree. I do think there has to be a way to get more Native representation on school boards and on committees/task forces that districts might appoint. When I was in Rapid, there was an underrepresentation of minority voices, so I understand the frustration with this. I think there has been some improvement since I left.
The main issue is going to be $$. The state can’t adequately fund education with one system. How are they going to fund it with two systems? I think they have a better shot within the public school system, just because it would be easier and cheaper to do.
I’m surprised SD doesn’t have charter schools as it is a business in which both the cost and risk are fully funded by the taxpayers. Should the profit be less than expected, close the school and move on. They are also allowed to use hidden discrimination thru a strict admission policy. Only the best need to apply.
This is a limited trial endeavor that is being driven by local, community-organized residents who are trying to make a bottom-up reform in the way their kids are educated. Given how state- and federally-mandated institutions have failed them, they deserve a chance to give it a try. I appreciate and agree with much of what you say, Cory, but I think this is a good chance to see how things work out when local folks try to get control of their own destinies.
Charter schools are a racket to get lots of accountability-free money and undermine public schools. Just review the actual record (not the fluffy PR successes) of grifters such as Michelle Rhee.
John’s post makes me have another question: are the schools looking to innovate (have a charter) state, federal, or tribal? It seems like when dealing with Native Americans, the schools’ governing entities are not all the same.
If we are not talking about a state public school, why is state legislation needed? Does NDN Collective even need any permission from anything other than a local school board to get involved to innovate and change the model of education in a school to be better? Has NDN Collective come up against a regulatory road block not allowing their proposed reforms?
John, I think it’s a good idea for the local community to get together an propose ideas for better education. I would like to see something done. I think a pilot project would be good, but you don’t need the charter school to do that. And charters kind of poison the well. Mainly what you need is money, and that’s in short supply in Pierre. You can get it done through channels that are already there.
Not saying that it’s true among the posters here, but I do believe there’s an underlying fear that if these work on the rez, expanding them is inevitable. As to success rates, here’s a piece that sees both success and failure. https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/ed/17/05/battle-over-charter-schools
I don’t think there is any fear. There has been no public school on the Pine Ridge Reservation. It’s been federal government schools or parochial education. The recent efforts to develop a public school is to be praised. And if the schools develop good structures and methods for learning, I think everyone would want to incorporate those structures and methods. But you don’t need to re-invent the wheel in places where there is public education.
Good link John, thanks.
I thought survey results showed that charters were on par with public schools and it seems that is approximately correct.
“An undiscerning authorizer is the main root of weak charters.”
That’s been the case in Minnesota. It seems like every time a charter is closed, that’s why. Authorizers are key.
There are some charters specifically aimed at struggling immigrant populations that are meeting with greater success. I believe there is a Hmong school in St. Paul near the fairgrounds that’s doing well.
As the article says, charter school results are very much a mixed bag. I urge you all to read that Harvard article before you argue any further.
Let’s innovate, then. Stop judging Indian students by white man standards. Indian culture is the most valid culture within South Dakota. Nurture it before it becomes extinct. Plains Indian people are mobile people. Also, highly creative and artistic. Forcing a German centric school paradigm on Indian kids is why the Indian kids are meh about learning. Innovate and set aside the white man model.
Porter has some good points. Where I live there are several programs that use more experiential ways to teach. It’s not exclusive to one culture. Some kids, no matter what culture or race, are more experiential learners, and could benefit. It’s a matter of adjusting the approach you use to each individual student.
Porter, I also agree. I just do not see the need to tear down the entire institution of public education to do that. I still have not seen the argument that charters are needed to allow this to happen.
There are schools in Minnesota that use a variety of learning techniques too. I lived near one that was across the street from a big nature center. They were there daily and in various areas of the playground where they created mini biomes. It was great. Oh, it’s a public school, not charter.
The tribes may have bigger concerns than schools.
The thugs determined to push through pipelines have this to say,
“US law enforcement officials preparing for fresh Keystone XL pipeline protests have privately discussed tactics to stop activists ‘by any means’ and have labeled demonstrators potential ‘domestic terrorism’ threats, records reveal.”
is.gd/1CZ3pz
The ACLU correctly labels that unfounded bull crapola. The agencies like the BLM and local law enforcement talk like they’re preparing for war. What they’re preparing for is 21st century Manifest Destiny. The tribes are not shocked.
It’s incredible what the GOP government is doing. Eminent Domain is just a warm up. You farmers better just step aside if they want your land. Or go to prison.
This is one of the alternative high schools in my little town. My daughter went her senior year to one with a twelve to one student to teacher ratio. Her boredom disappeared and she reached more of her potential. This one is a one to one teacher/student ratio.
WHY A ONE-TO-ONE EDUCATION?
Fusion is an accredited middle and high school with just one teacher and one student in each classroom. Unique? Yes. We customize teaching and curriculum for each student’s unique strengths and learning style. Teachers and staff are committed to building positive relationships to encourage and inspire students to grow academically, socially, and emotionally.
IS FUSION RIGHT FOR YOUR CHILD?
Our education model is ideal for students with the following backgrounds:
Learning Differences Such as ADHD
Students with challenging schedules
Accelerated or Exceptional learners
Transitioning from boarding school or treatment programs
Learning Differences Such as ADHD
Students who are bored or just not motivated
HOW IT WORKS
Some of the things that make a Fusion education unique.
Teacher – Mentor
Teachers build trust with students through positive, mentor-based relationships with each student before learning even begins.
Homework Café®
Between class sessions or at the end of the school day, homework happens in our Homework Café® – a relaxed and comfortable space where students can complete assignments with teacher assistance and meet quietly with other kids.
Customized Scheduling
All +250 classes are accredited, and taught in a personalized way to meet each student’s individual strengths and learning styles.
Art, Music & Wellness
Students can express their creativity in a state-of-the-art recording studio, mixed media art studio, or take a wellness elective to learn a range of healthy habits.