Don raises an important question: when does it make sense to bring in "professionals" to help with the design of a charter school? For a charter founding group, this is one of the big early questions -- should we "make" a school design (that is, develop one from scratch, or cobble one together from a host of existing sources)? Or should we "buy" (that is, bring in a management company, or a comprehensive school reform model, or some other provider who has already worked out an educational program)?
Though there are obvious challenges to the "make" option, "buying" is not always smooth sailing either. A founding group has to find a provider that:
* is philosophically aligned with the founding group's ideals
* has a school design that is appropriate for the specific target population of the founding group's proposed schools
* is capable of providing high-quality services in the start-up phase and ongoing
All of this no mean feat, as many founding groups (and providers) have learned the hard way. Yet, if we think about "achieving quality with scale" in the charter movement, I think we have to envision a lot of "buying" going on. It's just not plausible or, even if it were plausible, a good idea to think of each school building a brand new educational program from scratch.
So how can we make the buy option work better? For starters, we need more high-quality models that are truly geared up to help people start new schools using their models. Parent and community groups could also use help being good "buyers." What else?
Posted as a reply to:
Parents as consumers rather than engineers by Don Crawford
|
|
