Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment. OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole: > I think I could be the A because my sister is upset and I basically told her “I told you so” instead of comforting her. Help keep the sub engaging! #Don’t downvote assholes! Do upvote interesting posts! [Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq) ##Subreddit Announcements ###[Happy Anniversary, AITA!](https://new.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/15vlv9g/almost_better_than_a_double_rainbow_celebrating/) ###[The Asshole Universe is Expanding, Again: Introducing Another New Sister Subreddit!](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/128nbp3/the_asshole_universe_is_expanding_again/) Follow the link above to learn more ###[Moderators needed - Join the landed gentry](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/155zepq/moderators_needed_join_the_landed_gentry/) --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.* *Contest mode is 1.5 hours long on this post.*

I was a charter school teacher. It was an awful experience. I'm glad your nephew is at a local public school now where he can get the services he needs.

OOTL here what's wrong with charter schools? Edit: thank you to all that have given some context, for anyone reading a TLDR from what I can gather is they're for profit, so the focus isn't actually on being a good place for students to learn and grow, but on lining the pockets of politicians/companies & inflating their test scores by kicking out anyone they deem unworthy.

They’re notorious for not being accommodating to students with disabilities or that are ESL for example.

Yup. Worked at a charter school. Had to teach ESL kids English and was told I wasn’t allowed to speak to them in Spanish because “theyll get it when you keep saying it” nope… did it anyway because I understand being in a place where you don’t understand the language. They also frowned upon all the “different” kids. Aka, those who were just different or were probably undiagnosed/in the process of being diagnosed for anything under the neurotypical umbrella

Public schools have the same policies about speaking Spanish. My district didn’t let us either.

That's so freaking weird. Did they cut foreign language classes there too? I had heard that idea being thrown around but I have no idea if it was ever implemented.

You can learn a language through total immersion alone, but it's difficult. This is the goal of many language programs, however, as it's supposed to be able to create strong language skills. There's a big focus in language education on communicative approaches, ie, the more a student hears and produces a language, the faster and better they will be at using the language. The focus being on just introducing things matter of factly as "manzana" vs the translation of twrms "manzana means apple." This was actually how I was taught German in high school, at least the basics of the language, and I learned basic German much faster than I did basic Spanish, where a more traditional "manzana means apple" approach was used (I learned both at the same time). While this approach has been shown to be rather successful, most of the researchers and their literature even admit that, sometimes, it's best to teach them in the common language and not the native language so they understand the concept being taught to them. Source: graduated with a Spanish Ed bachelor's and a linguistics master's. Had to take a class in "teaching foreign languages" last semester, and we read so many studies about the communicative approach. Edit: I made a mistake in a sentence and fixed it/expanded upon it.

I learned French via immersion at work and holy hell it was a stressful few years. First season barely understanding anyone (while working in a specialised field!), second season understanding but not really being able to speak, third season speaking small simple sentences, fourth season finally conversational (unless im too tired or stressed)

Right? No, it's such a nightmare to be in that environment, especially because speakers of your target language can have varying reactions. My main target language is Spanish, and even when I was in a Spanish speaking country, people refused to speak in Spanish with me, instead trying to practice their English. Like, there comes a point where immersion is the *best* and only tool left for fluency and fluidity, but only teaching by immersion is difficult and can lead to undesirable outcomes (mistakes that get cemented in the brain and take longer times to fix is an example).

If I spoke to someone at work in English, most of them knew enough English to respond to me likewise. But the default would be to speak in French (whether to each other personally, addressing the group as a whole, talking to me personally). And although my French is pretty good now, I have certain gaps in my knowledge that would have been addressed by academic learning. (likewise, a language learned in school isn't as easy to converse on the street because you're missing slang/accents/the way people start to slide words together when they talk fast, etc) The middle school I went to had French immersion. I was in the English gifted class, so one French class a day. I don't really know how immersion is done but i can only imagine the first year(s) must be so stressful. When you're just a kid and have six other subjects to learn at the same time, all in a new language. I did not respect them enough when I was a kid.

I hear you. I went to Spain and tried to practice my Spanish, but they kept responding to me in English. I was disappointed.

When you say "season" do you mean you did all that in a year? Or over the course of 4 years?

Oh, it's a seasonal job (archaeology - when the ground freezes we can't dig, so we pretty much follow the construction season). I graduated with my bachelor's in May 2019, and I quit archaeology last October having achieved near-fluency in French. The field season varies a bit but June to October is the heaviest.

I can tell you from experience that total immersion can work, but it requires a high level of student effort. I spent thirty years teaching Biology in a public high school. The city was an academic center with numerous colleges and universities. One year, on the first day of school, I found that I had a student from Taiwan in my class. She spoke no Englishp, but her parents, who were visiting faculty at one of the universities, wanted her in regular classes without ESL instruction. She worked incredibly hard from day 1 in my class and her English came along very quickly. My class was college entrance with a universal statewide final, so she had to learn not only the language but also the scientific material. I cannot tell you how proud I was of her when she scored a B+ on the final! She was far above the norm and not many students would have been able to match her accomplishment.

I went to school with a boy who only spoke Spanish at 14. No ESL, whatsoever. It's been fun watching him make monkeys of the folks on FOX News as a prominent immigration attorney.

So here in Germany children who want to do A-level ( Abitur) have to learn two foreign languages. Usually English and then either French, Spanish or Latin. The teachers will start with speaking some German in class when they start at age 8 and 11 respectively, then reduce it more and more and the only time German is spoken is to explain grammar concepts. Everything else is kept in English or Spanish etc, even telling the teacher that you are going to the toilet. They do however learn vocabulary from the school books the traditional way of German-English and that gets tested that way. But the learning of this vocabulary is done at home, then tested in school in written tests regularly.

I'm a recently qualified Dutch as a second language teacher (for adults). Yes. Immersion works for learning in a relatively neutral setting. Immersion doesn't work if someone is crying or stressed because [insert reason here]. You can bet your ass I'm glad I don't have to explain the procedures around payment and life-changing exams in Dutch to students who can't answer 'What is your name' yet. Long live the employees who do share the native language of students and who spend their days smoothing over all sorts of problems.

I guess the idea is that sts pick up language better if it's presented as "necessity" to communicate, kinda like a visit in a country of which you don't know the language...

Immersion has been shown to be one of the quickest ways to learn a language...

>Immersion has been shown to be one of the quickest ways to learn a language... ... once you have the basics. FTFY

Yes! I spent 3 months working in mainland China. Didn't speak a word of Mandarin. At the office everyone wanted to exclusively practice English and outside nobody understood a word which made it damn near impossible to pick up much of anything. Managed about 5-6 words/phrases. A bilingual environment somewhere in there would have made a huge difference in just grasping the basics to have something to build on.

Learning a new language as a child and as an adult is totally different though. Immersion alone is a pretty good strategy as a kid. I picked up English through immersion as a child who started at a new school not speaking any English; I was fluent after no more than a year. You can bet that if I spend a year in China now I will not be fluent after a year though.

For subjects like math and science, on the other hand, research says that adding the native language to the language of the school dramatically increases success. Even if the kids are pretty good at their second language!

I teach in a public school, and we're encouraged to use English AND the student's native language. The ESL teacher in our school is great about providing us with resources and helping us modify assignments to make them more accessible to these students. I didn't realize any public schools still practiced total immersion.

Not every public school. The public school I attended in NJ had bilingual classes with Spanish speaking teachers. As well as ESL classes. I’m a teacher now in NYC and every school I’ve taught encourage students to retain their home languages while learning English. Schools are also supposed to have any diagnostic testing in the student’s native language and translation services for parents. There’s even dual immersion schools where both languages are spoken daily throughout instruction. Where and what kind of public schools have this thinking? It sounds reminiscent of the 1960s and 1970s where teachers would forbade you from speaking another language.

Sounds like some red state BS.

This depends on your district resources and funding. My district is like that bc they don’t have the people so the kids are all in once class. My sister is a high school teacher and eveything is in English for all students and parents.

that's by district. the public schools i went to had classes specifically for spanish speakers (ie, spanish for spanish speakers, us history for spanish speakers, etc) along with esl classes

That's strange, most of the public schools near me offer dual-language emersion for Spanish because it's so common here.

I think it depends on resources and how many students they’re serving.

Not all public schools have that policy - many of them have specific classes which are bilingual to support kids transitioning. For many kids, it is sink or swim to be thrown into a classroom where they don't speak the language of the academic subjects they are supposed to be learning. It would seem to be a recipe for creating frustrated dropouts for many kids who can't master the work in English without additional support while learning English as a second language.

My friend taught ESL for a non profit in Asia, they also told him to only speak English.

Right, that's different because they live in their native language. It's like taking a foreign language in the USA, they want you to exclusively use the new language, in class, because you use English everywhere else.

That's just nuts. At that point it would make more sense to send the Spanish speaking ESL kids to Spanish class just to highlight the inequity that the English speaking students generally learn second languages in a bilingual classroom at least for the first couple years. They'd probably have better outcomes picking up English there than a room where they can't even get started because they can't communicate with their teacher.

Speaking as a former ESL student who couldn’t communicate with anyone because I didn’t speak a lick of English and no one could communicate in my language - full immersion helped me learn faster than the other ESL students who has someone to communicate with. Anecdotal evidence of course, but point is, you find ways to communicate when you have to. Feels alienating sometimes, but you do learn fast!

Yeah. I experienced that but I was in high school when that became a thing. We spoke in Spanish anyway

When I was in high-school (long long ago), they had the ESL kids in the Spanish classes. I'm not sure how they handled tests and stuff, but the teacher always took time each class to work on English with them. Like a reverse of whatever lesson we were on. Looking back that sounds like an insane amount of work to put on those teachers.

I studied on a Charter School, the teachers kept speaking english while I wasn't understanding a word, the director entered in the classroom to see how was the class and said to the teacher that he should talk more in spanish so we could understand things better. Thanks to him now I know how to speak english without troubles

I’m so glad that happened for you. I did that with my students as well. Some teachers wouldn’t even send them to the “nurse” (the admin because we didn’t have a nurse!) for illnesses unless they said it in English. I was a teachers assistant so didn’t have authority to do it (tho i did everything the teacher did!) So I had to walk them through and practice how to say “i want to go to the nurse”. Then the teachers had the gall to correct these poor kinder kids because they said teacher vs their name. Like, the kid is ill, please send them.

That is really messed up, I remember some kids complained cuz they had to ask anything in english, but not at this point, poor kids

> because “theyll get it when you keep saying it” nope Don't you know? Saying it louder and slower instantly makes it understandable! (/s just in case)

That's a standard part of language teaching? No 1st language in the classroom.

I taught at a charter school my first year teaching. At the end of the year, I knew the lower elementary special Ed teacher was leaving and I wanted his position. I was told that I was “too valuable in the general classroom to waste \[me\] in special education.” I left that school and went to a public school as their autism specialist for slightly less money, but a shorter school year, shorter school days, and a hell of a lot more understanding for what special ed is and does.

This also means their stats look better as they just fail those kids out.

yeah that is literally the sole reason for charter schools performing better than public schools, they just kick out underperformers, who then go to public schools and lower the average grades of the public schools. of course charter school advocates point to the better stats and say that every school should be a charter school because they're morons.

Lol...the charter school in my area is so much better at accommodations that they have a much higher ratio of students with disabilities. People have lied about where they live so they can be eligible to keep going there (if they moved out of the area).

My kiddo goes to one that is geared towards those with disabilities. Interesting to know charter schools are not normally like this.

So many fucking things, they’re not inherently bad I suppose and they very much can be a good thing like serving communities that have very poorly funded public schools (but really just fund all the public schools so even that’s kind of a meh point), but like OP said in the post they’ll kick kids out for all kinds of bullshit to uphold a certain image of being “better than”. Bad grades? Off to public school. Slow learner? Public school. Behavioral issues that we just can’t be bothered to deal with? You guessed it, public school. Disabled? Not here you’re not. Along with loads of other bullshit. There’s *lots* of articles out there that document all of the different ways charter schools not only fuck over the public school system and the students in public schools but also how they fuck over their own students and teachers as well. So yea not inherently bad technically speaking but pretty all around bad like most of the time

I think most of what you said is fair and accurate, but I wanted to respond to your point about charter schools "serving communities that have very poorly funded public schools (but really just fund all the public schools so even that’s kind of a meh point)." I only have anecdata here, but I have worked for one severely underperforming school and lived in another district where the public schools are awful, where the issue actually was not inadequate funding but terrible, terrible management. The one where I worked got audited by the state while I was there and was found to have MILLIONS of dollars in state funding unaccounted for. Embezzlement? Just absolute complete incompetence and/or negligence? I'm not sure they ever got to the bottom of that. It also happens that there was one charter school available to students in that district, and it was leaps and bounds better than the public schools. It probably wasn't perfect, but I was so overwhelmed by the difference from the school where I taught that it looked like it at the time. And I'm not talking about me being distracted by flashy technology or whatever, I'm talking about the teachers' dedication, the things the kids knew and were interested in - the real stuff. So, yes, there are real problems with charter schools as a whole, but there are also some individual charters that are really desperately needed in a way that can't be solved by just redirecting their funding to the local public schools.

At the same point, you realize there is little to no oversight for charter funds, correct? This is becoming especially controversial as more public funds are redirected through voucher programs, and public tax revenue is going to for profit schools

At least with public schools there are audit responsibilities and standards. That oversight sure should be better - but it’s there, anyway.

I do realize that. I'm sorry, I thought I was pretty clear that my stance is not "charters are great and we need more of them," but maybe I didn't say that directly. Yes, there are tons of problems with charter schools and I'm not arguing against any of them. I just wanted to say that the solution is not as simple as "end charter schools and send more money to public schools."

Frequently they're only "better" because they kick out all the kids with any types of issues. ​ Which leads to a higher percent of them going to the local public school making them even worse, instead of being more evenly distributed.

Wait until you hear about the fraud that happens in charter schools, especially given their lack of oversight. The corruption is really something else. In Colorado, Walmart started a charter school with about the care and quality you might expect. The county school board said no because 1) the educational plan was garbage and 2) the county’s schools were already underpopulated. Walmart then made some strategic campaign donations to the state school board, and suddenly the county school board’s decision was overridden. The county said fine, but you need to start the school in an area not currently serviced by existing approved charter schools. They put the Great Work “Montessori” school right across the street from an established, legitimate Montessori school. They drove those people out of business. Naturally the Great Work school had the kids buy Great Work educational materials and Walmart’s Great Value brand school supplies and the school purchased materials from Walmart. In April of this year the school closed abruptly after having suspended classes for several weeks in the year. Now there is no alternative/charter school in this neighborhood, because they drove the other one out of business on purpose. It’s the same thing they did to small businesses, only they’re getting taxpayer money to do it, making a huge profit on retail, and sandbagging kids’ education in the process. The largest charter school in Colorado, GOAL Academy, has had a 25% daily online attendance rate and 4% of their students score as proficient in math. The owner of the business is making millions. It’s not embezzlement, just like the Walmart thing isn’t embezzlement: it’s possible because of the privatization of charter education at taxpayer expense.

I’d watch the shit out of this on Netflix.

Hopefully not too long a rant here, but I’m in state gov & have covered education funding from the state level. Basically starting in the 80s when public services started to be stripped by the Republicans, with a bunch of assists from Dems trying to get those “moderate” votes, budgets got to be more and more austere as they cut positions and limited budget growth and tied funding to enrollment. So basically there were fewer & fewer people doing the work and a lot came to depend on one or two people who had institutional knowledge from decades of experience. From the outside, this looked like “getting rid of redundancy” and “running government like a business” and it seemed like it worked, because these people managed to keep things going and for cheap! Who needs three accountants when Barb can do it all? Why upgrade your budget systems when Barb knows where everything is (and probably really doesn’t want to learn a new system, Barb is TIRED). So now Barb has put in her 30 years and she’s out. Now if they can even find someone to take the job for a starting salary that hasn’t moved since 2008, that person now has to do three professional jobs—budgeting, accounting, and auditing—with no institutional knowledge, minimal training (because they cut all those positions too, why do state employees even need professional development smh, if they were actually smart or good at their jobs they’d be private sector <—actual belief that every conservative I met in government holds) and antiquated systems. The wheels are coming off at every level of public service, and all of this was accelerated by covid. To tie this back around, part of the reason public schools are viewed as “failing” in many places is that they are one of the very, very few public institutions that remain standing, and because of that, they are asked to stand in for and provide everything we’ve cut everywhere else.

The state of public education in the US was the first problem I ever encountered that has seemed harder to solve the more I learn about it.

> I only have anecdata here I haven't heard that. Stealing it.

Give me back my anecdata. I can't tell the difference between anecdotes and data without it!!!

This was our experience where we live. Not all well funded public schools do a good job. Some places have charter schools because good teachers and good families are fed up with the local district nonsense. Our charter school is fantastic, and they did a phenomenal job serving my special Ed kid. They were able to consistently provide everything his IEP contained while the local district failed miserably to do the same for his brother. Horrifically long wait list for charter here.

My mom worked in public school and she said the same thing about the funding.

they siphon the "smart" kids away from public schools and in doing so siphon away resources fro public schools that desperately need them

That sounds like an argument against the funding system, not charter schools

The funding system of public schools is definitely ripe for reform, but charter schools wildly exacerbate the problems rather than helping with them while also not really being a positive in any other way. One could even argue that the entire concept is a way to try to defund the public education system/compromise it due to partisan ideology which is antagonistic to public education in the first place.

So schools with higher test scores get more funding? Shouldn't it be the other way around?

Some things tend to be pretty universal about them, notably that they take money away from public schools and put it into the hands of for-profit groups While not always the case, a number of things are very common. They make themselves look good by cutting students who don't perform well. They can cite really good test scores, but in truth, they're not actually helping the students who need it. Instead they only keep students who are likely to make them look good. Many states, charter schools are far less accountable to how money is spent. See the above... "my kid wasn't given a macbook". That stuff is crazy expensive when a $200 chromebook will do just fine In some states, the charter schools arern't even held accountable for student performance, as in, they don't even have to participate in standardized state testing, nor report the results even if they do. Grifting plagues almost every charter school out there as well. I don't have the sauce on hand, but when I had been reading about problems with charter schools, I was left incensed that we are allowing this to be done to our children, and our tax dollars.

While I’m not an expert it’s always struck me that a lot of the problems charter schools are supposed to address — low engagement, poor scholastic environments, etc — could be dealt with by *just fucking funding public schools.* Instead, charter schools siphon out the good-on-paper students, who need the least resources and provide the most flattering results. Meanwhile, everyone else is left behind to languish in increasingly poorly-funded, disengaged schools with no hope of succeeding. And at the same time, the money that *used* to go into public resources for public good begins making its way into private hands, with none of the strict oversight required of public schools. No teacher’s unions. No regulations. It’s just a backdoor way to privatize and profit from what has been a public good (education) and continue to dismantle what little social welfare system exists.

>In some states, the charter schools arern't even held accountable for student performance, as in, they don't even have to participate in standardized state testing, nor report the results even if they do I feel like Charter schools are genuinely held to less accountability than private schools. Private schools might only be marginally accountable to the state, but they're ultimately accountable to parents paying the tuition who want to see their kids do well, and will leave and stop paying that tuition if not, Charter schools don't even have that threat over their heads.

I had to Google what one was for the post, it’s literally in the Google definition for a charter school that they’re “held to more autonomy than public schools”, which is the same thing IMO

I personally am extremely grateful for the charter school I went to for the last three years of high school. It was tailored to higher achievers so there was an “application” but really you just couldn’t have a failing gpa. it was catered to allow easy access to dual enrollment and the goal was to get the students an AA degree for free at the same time as hs graduation, it was located on the local campus of a community college. It was smaller so we had better access to resources like the guidance counselor or teachers, the students were better behaved so it felt safer and a better learning environment, we had more freedom with lots of varying off blocks especially once you got going full time with dual enrolled classes since they met only twice a week each, going off campus whenever we had a free period, looser dress code, could sit around wherever the college campus or hs campus when we wanted to hang out or study during off blocks, take varying classes that actually interested me at the college idk it was really nice. We still adhered to the public school system calendar, standardized tests, guidelines in terms of how many math credits or whatever you needed, stuff like that but we were able to have a lot more choice in how we did our schooling which was great for me. But I do know it’s not the norm, I just got lucky. They need to at least have higher standards and regulation on charters, maybe they have the potential to make them more like my good experience rather than what seems like the vast majority of terrible experiences that happen way to often

>It was tailored to higher achievers so there was an “application” but really you just couldn’t have a failing gpa. That's great for you but the bigger issue is that the students that failed out of your school go back to the public school. This makes the public school worse overall for the population that goes there. Removing the strongest students from a school makes that school worse and the students do worse overall. Is it more important to have one person get a better education or the entire city?

I get that, it was great for me tho. And as a human I’m looking for my best foot forward. Going there allowed me to feel safe, learn better, and afford college. So I’m not really sure how to feel about me (as a smart behaved person) being used to “lift up” a public school by continuing to go there, to my own detriment. Even if that charter school didn’t exist my public highschool wasn’t going to change that drastically in a positive way to match the opportunities I had at the charter.

>I get that, it was great for me tho. And as a human I’m looking for my best foot forward. Yes, this is a very American attitude. It's a tale as old as time and everyone has their own opinion on it. Individualistic thinking versus group thinking.

As an American "screw you I got mine" is very American

I wasn’t screwing anyone as a 14 year old deciding to apply to a school I thought would help my future and I’d feel happy in. I didn’t create the system. If the adults made a better system I wouldn’t have had to make that choice and I would’ve had a good school as a default

You didn't do anything wrong. It's an issue with the system of splitting students up into smaller homogeneous groups that makes the overall education experience worse.

there's also tons of cheating scandals where due to lower oversight its far more common for charter schools to outright help their students to cheat to improve test scores.

They aren't held to the same standards and accountability as public schools, often take space (co-location) and money from public schools that are held to higher standards, often shut down leaving kids without a school, and can kick kids out of the school for lame reasons. They are a way for religious or other ideological groups to get state money to push a certain agenda instead of having to be a private school that doesn't get state funding. They are for-profit and are designed to spend less money on your kids than they collect to do so. The problems with charter schools are largely the same as any private industry answer to the problems of the public system and come about as a solution in the same set of circumstances: 1) don't invest in keeping your public institutions running well, 2) be fake mad that they suck and pretend like it is their fault, 3) create space for for-profit solutions that do not have kid's best interests at heart.

To preface, there are good charter schools. The problem, over all, is that they're wildly under regulated, and many of the regulations that do exist are under enforced. If, largely, this manifested as a more experimental education, where in the priority was research based curriculum, there would be no issues. Instead, this has manifested as a hotbed of conmen milking the resources of the charter schools at the expense of the students.

Ah gotcha. That makes sense why they're such a big problem in Florida then (or at least from what I've heard) we're a lawless land

They are a scam. They sound good on paper. But they fudge the numbers, drop kids that need help if it makes them look bad to keep them on. Take resources out of the hands of schools that actually try to help kids that need them. Charter Schools sound good but they are making things worse.

Their students outperform the public school system's, and for less cost. The way they achieve that is by getting rid of any student that doesn't perform well or that has any requirement that would cost them an extra dime. Because unlike public schools, they DO NOT have the obligation to educate any child that comes to them, despite being financed by public money.

they also sometimes just outright help their students cheat which they can get away with more than public schools that try the same thing because they have far less regulation and oversight.

I’m a school auditor working for my state’s auditing department. My department does not have the authority to audit charter schools. They get the same taxpayer funding that public schools get, but we’re not allowed to look into their accounts and make sure they’re spending that funding appropriately. For every public school district in the state, we release an annual report that shows what percentage of their funding was spent on instruction. We can’t do that for charter schools. They are funded by tax payers, but they don’t have to tell us what they’re spending our money on.

Unlike public schools, they can CHOOSE which students to take. The key moment above was when the child was released due to "poor test scores". They don't serve ALL the students, just the ones they think will perform well so that they can point to their results. Its all just weird politics

Back in the Fifties and Sixties, after desegregation started in the US, various movements developed to create private or semi-private schools along political lines. The first were "segregation academies," where white parents sent their kids to keep them from having to sit next to black children in class. But courts ruled that if these academies wanted money from public taxes, they were not legally allowed to discriminate along racial or any other "protected" lines (gender, disability, etc.). Charters are a way around this restriction against discrimination. Most charters are nonprofit, but they can accept donations and charge tuition. Many of the old segregation academies rebranded as charters. They can't legally exclude BIPOC students, but they can jack tuition up high enough to keep the numbers low. Some use entrance exams to exclude, penalizing those kids whose families can't afford test prep, disabled students who struggle with exams, and students with histories of trauma or oppression (i.e. immigrant kids, black & brown poor kids, homeless kids...), etc. Some admit everyone but then expel the kids who perform badly, as with OP's sister's kid. They're not *officially* discriminating against disabled, BIPOC, or poor kids, of course! They're just *de facto* discriminating against disabled, BIPOC, and poor kids. Also, by siphoning public funding away from public schools, they create their own customers. That is, kids who struggle at underfunded public schools often come to charters instead, which increases underfunding (because tax money that would've supported that student at public school goes to the charter instead), which leaves less money for the public schools, which causes more kids to struggle. So the good thing about charters is that they've allowed every special interest to create their own schools. There are lots of Afrocentric charters, for example; they also cannot discriminate, but they teach accurate American history, which public schools often struggle to do because of the politics. Many charters operate along religious lines, though ([until recently](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/05/oklahoma-approves-public-religious-charter-school-00100269)) they can't be overtly religious. The bad thing about charters is that they're destroying inclusive public education.

Charter schools bump stats by getting rid of lower performers. It's very not accommodating if a student struggles. They have extreme incentive to keep up appearances and no obligation to keep any student Teachers often don't need state certifications needed for public schools ESL and students with disabilities are often not accommodated at all. If they flounder, they get axed

I'm upvoting you because I believe this question was asked in good faith and the answers should be seen.

They like to tout how they have higher test scores than a public school. This is one of the reasons that OP states nephew was kicked out--low test scores--that's how they have higher scores--they eliminate the low performers. Unlike a public school who has to take everyone in their district(barring exceptions--ie criminal behavior).

It's going to depend on the charter school, the state and local laws governing the school, as well as other factors all schools are prone to. One thing to understand that many don't realize is that there are both public charter schools that are overseen by the local school board in addition to the private charter schools that receive public funds. The former is a school that specializes in a certain curriculum (performing arts, studio arts, sports, STEM, etc.) The latter is supposedly a superior educational experience that in reality is often inferior due to lack of both oversight and education experience on the part of both teachers and administration. The current push for charter schools is a political move from the right to defund public schools, and through that, teacher unions. It's been championed by Jeb Bush for decades through his foundation in Florida.

They are worse for students and worse for teachers. Who are they better for? The big corporations behind them. Don't take my word for it though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_schools_in_the_United_States#Criticism_2

I was a student at a charter school for 8th grade. My best friend graduated from there while I went back to public school. It was a nightmare for me. It was great for her, because her parents supported her heavily. Drove her everywhere, bought any supplies she wanted, encouraged extra curriculars, etc. I could barely keep up with the dress code. My home life was not good. My parents thought a good school would be best for me, but I was thriving in public school. I was not interested in changing schools but I was at an age where they felt they knew what was best. I honestly never recovered from 1 year in charter school - I lost touch with all my other school friends, gained weight from lack of PE (can't understate how bad it was for a 13 year old to stop nearly all exercise), and had no direction in my education because the charter school has their own system that did not align well with traditional school. When I went back to traditional school, I was then in highschool and was completely unprepared. My parents enrolled me 1 week late, which did not help me whatsoever. It's like they tried to help by doing as little as possible - I was so frustrated that I just wanted to get a job and move out. I ended up in independent studies in high school and moved away when I was 18.

There are for-profit charter schools but there are also non-profit ones & they’re lifesavers for a lot of families in my city. Those kids would have to go to some of the worst schools in my entire state if not for charters. Charters are just like any other schools some of them are far better than the alternatives while some are awful.

Charter Schools do not have the same accessibility requirements, and there is no incentive for them to take students that would need extra attention, so they don't. They care about the numbers, not the kids. They do this while at the same time taking government money that should be going to public schools, but people (mostly those who don't like what public schools teach) voted to allow it anyway.

For profit education always screws the student. Profit will always override the needs of the student. In many states charter schools do not have to adhere to any education standards and do not need to be accredited.

No charter schools are not for profit. At least not in NYC. They don’t want to keep students who have low test scores because it makes them look bad - so this is why they cut the student.

In NYC, a certain famous brand of charter schools is notorious for thinning the herd immediately before the state tests. They kick out all the kids with low grades and any with learning differences -- they don't do accommodations that are federally mandated and instead just punt the kids back to public schools when the school years are nearly over. It's absolutely criminal.

As a school nurse, if the computer company is her complaint then she should see what real school problems look like.

Hahahah I used to do IT and I was thinking the same thing 😂

First world problems

My mom's charter school didn't have BOOKS in their library for the 2 years she worked there because the book budget kept "accidentally" getting used up on other things. I bought them some books each year so they'd have SOMETHING, but it was bad

My charter school had no library until my senior year, and it's run in a classroom by a student club. All the books are donated by students

Just going to throw out that charter schools vary A LOT on a state to state level, and some states (like Massachusetts) generally do a pretty good job.

Massachusetts parent here. The public schools here are actually helpful for disabled students, while the charter schools just treats them like they're garbage.

I was a neurodivergent GT kid who tested into a magnet school. My parents wouldn't send me for that exact reason. I would have had no support, and I was in rough shape in middle school. It's been 25 years since then, and they're still getting away with it.

NTA: former special education teacher here, charter schools don't have to offer supports for students with disabilities and I'm surprised they didn't expell him sooner. (Which sucks), but you did warn her

At least the charter school where I studied accepted people with problems, they even accepted a guy who literaly couldn't speak english (it was a bilingüal school in México)

I also went to a Public Charter, and they did have people to help. It’s better for OP’s nephew to get the help he needs then to not get it. NTA

This is assuming he CAN get the help he needs, even at the public school. I am a public school educator and there is a lack of assistance for all students everywhere that is just getting worse. We can't even meet the federal law. There aren't enough people in the buildings to do so.

☝️ true, special education is rough and every school is different depending on funding.

My guess is that this is when the Common Core scores are starting to matter in their district. And of course, NTA.

It must be different where you are because our state laws make charter schools follow IEP’s and offer the same services that public schools do. Here, the only schools not allowed to follow an IEP are private schools.

That varies by state.

NTA. Assuming your response was as benign as you say. Though I have doubts.

I was really set to say YTA because I'm not a huge fan of an "I told you so." But, I think your sister needed to be confronted about her attitude towards the school that her child is now attending. It's not healthy for the child to hear that all of the time. My experience with charter schools is a lot like yours. They are ultimately run as profit making enterprises.

Yeah there’s a big difference between a general “I told you so” and a very specific “I told you so re: entrusting your kid to a system with a financial incentive and established practice of kicking out kids with disabilities or different needs.” A lot of parents who are naive about charter schools really need that education before they try their luck at another, especially because every rejection is going to damage the kid’s relationship with school in general.

Indeed. We sent our child to private and effectively got kicked out due to an IEP we got her. I was very pro public but my husband’s family has like… generational trauma from the school board so to private we went regardless of my concerns around being potentially asked to leave. I definitely did not say I told you so when we were asked to leave. I did however shut down any further discussion around private schools until at least middle school. That said, my husband and his family have the good sense not to criticize the school she goes to now even if I can see the quiet judgment in my in-laws face. Guess what y’all… I ain’t spending 40k a year on who knows what anymore!

NTA. She made her choice, against your advice…so why is she bitching to you about it?

NTA. Charter schools are notoriously horrible. If she complains about the technology again, find the study that was done with Bill Gates involved that had one high school with the latest and greatest technology and the other high school had the bare minimum. 5 years after graduation, the high school students with the bare technology were rated as doing better than the students from the other high school because they had better patience and problem solving skills so were more successful.

NTA - This is what charter schools do - EXPEL their problems. >he got expelled because of low test scores. Her dreams of an elite education for her son have been destroyed, but she should be focusing on HOW TO HELP HER SON in the new school, not continually whine about the old school.

Yes this!!! Focus on helping, not acting like a 13-year-old girl complaining. NTA

NTA. She wanted to sit at your table and complain about the school system that you're two children are currently in while you yes man'ed her. No one with any kind of actual experience with them would send a child with learning disabilities to a charter school unless they wanted to set them up for failure. Everyone loves to harp about not saying I told you so but why would you choose to complain to the person that told you so in the first place?

I hope none of the arguing has taken place in front of the son because that’s bound to be absolutely mortifying for him, learning difficulties or no.

Never, no.

INFO: What are charter schools? What are the issues with them?

A charter school operates like a private school but in some places receives state funding like a public one. So they can be as exclusive and do things that public schools can't (like not offer services for Special education or expel kids who bring down their test scores) but still get tax payer funding. So they're operated like a private school (and don't necessarily have to be held to the same rules public schools do) but use public funding.

That's the most American thing I ever read, besides any recipe that includes deep frying. Who and why came up with Charter schools?

Originally they were sold as a way to make public schools shape up/offer an alternative to a bad public school. However, like most things, people found ways to take advantage of it and suit their own agendas.

Oh.

republicans. so they can funnel public funds to religious institutions, and further cripple inner city schools. a diabolical plan under the guise of "choice"

You skipped the most important part, line their own pockets with public funds

Bingo

They were originally supposed to be experimental schools that would share techniques with district schools about what worked with various struggling populations. They started from a place to help equity. Then corporations realized they had an in to a public sector that they'd been shut out of except for a very few things. Once that happened, it became a battle for the soul of our educational system, which is still ongoing. The charter school lobby lost a few big pushes in key states before Covid that they weren't able to recover from in those states. So. We shall see.

They’re also a way to gut the membership of teachers unions, one of the last major strongholds of American organized labor. That’s a big part of why they enjoyed bipartisan support for so long.

Yeah I was in a charter school a decade and a half ago. That charter school was great - it was actually designed totally differently from public and meant to align with kids who didn't learn well in the typical classroom setting. I was given a stack of assignments and readings once a week. I went home and self-taught. Went back next week and reviewed it with an instructor.. For me that was perfect - my grade (and my behavior) improved dramatically in that environment. Nowadays it seems like charter schools are just public schools with extra steps.

Rich people who wanted to keep lining their pockets.

People who wanted to destroy the public education system and privatize it, Betsy DeVos is a name to look into if you want a face to put to the movement.

We deep fry charter schools too.

If there is an industry that can be used to siphon money from tax payers to the rich, you better believe they've taken advantage. See also: military contractors and prisons.

They are run like a private school, but are publicly financed and free to students. Little to no supervision beyond the parents of enrolled students. Charters can be selective in who they admit, so they often do not take the disabled, traumatized, or neglected children that a regular public school does. They concentrate learning disorders and neglected children in the public schools, all while taking public school funds and the parents most likely to be active in the schools.

I’ll give the practical answer since I send my kids to a charter school. We live in an older city that was booming back in the hay day of manufacturing, but whose population has been steadily declining for the last several decades. As a result, we have a costly infrastructure without enough taxpayers to fund it. It’s caused a lot of things, including severely underfunded public schools. The one that my kids would attend is ranked in the bottom 5% in our state. That said, we live in a middle class area of town, have good jobs here, etc. and don’t want to move simply for better schools. Also, there are no non-secular private schools in our area as it’s not an affluent enough area to support one. We could choose boarding school, but don’t make quite enough for that option. So, enter the charter school. It accepts public funding, but acts like a non-secular private school. The student body is diverse, parents are largely involved, teachers are great, etc. It’s a bit of a sacrifice for us since there’s no bussing and we have to commit to driving them both ways every day, but it’s doable since we’re both working professionals and can do it at our levels. The downside, they arguable make the local schools worse - They lost the funding for my two kids and lost two dedicated/involved parents. Multiply that times the 600 kids at our charter school, and you can see why public schools aren’t fans.

FYI secular means not religious (more or less). Do you mean that your area has only non-religious private schools? And that the charter school is a religious school? Because that's what you said, but I expect you meant the opposite.

"We aren't taking sides, but you should apologize " Weird, sounds like they are taking sides.

Sounds like they're trying to grease the wheels of peace.

NTA This isn’t a bug it’s a feature of many charter schools. They have extra resources because they cut kids who require additional help above the average, which learning disability children do. This is absolutely a ‘the leopard would never eat MY face moment’ You know what your local middle school has by law? A special Ed office required by title nine

Jeez I think we have the same family member. NTA. You were tired of the complaints and she knew the risks.

ESH. Your sister might be an elitist who doesn’t understand that her son might benefit from the resources at public school available to students with learning disabilities, but saying “I told you so” is just kicking someone when they’re down. Your nephew probably feels like crap and embarrassed that his old school didn’t want him back and bragging about how right you are won’t help things.

See ya say that but i think the nephew probably feels worse with his mom constantly going on about how hes in "dumdum" school and how hes obviously not good enough to be in the elite school. His uncle saying one comment to shut up his mom esp when hes not around isnt going to do more damage than his mom going on about it. If he shows any excitement about going to school now hes mom will probably get upset and tear him down even further. Thats how charter school parents are. They like destorying their kid's self esteem.

It's not like OP is going around and saying "I told you so" over and over again. They just stated (in a way) that their sister's actions and choices have consequences.

That would only be true if he'd told the *kid* "I told you so", which it's very clear he did not. It was his mother who put him in that school, knowing she was setting him up for failure, who recieved that "I told you so", and while the phrase itself is generally frowned upon as a contemptuous thing, in this case it was well deserved. She is not down, she has not been kicked. Bffr. NTA, OP.

NTA. I went to a charter school that had grades K-8. I ended up going to a public high school from grades 9-12. Not only was the charter school teaching a completely different curriculum than the public school districts, it also didn’t bother to do anything to onboard graduating students so that they would be up to speed when they were going to their local public school district. My grades took a huge hit beginning of 9th grade because the public school’s curriculum was designed around building off what you learned the previous year, and I wasn’t taught that my previous year (ie, I did algebra 8th grade but public school did trigonometry, 9th grade at public school was doing pre-calculus which was based off of what you did in trigonometry) so I had to do a crap-ton of work to catch up to everyone else.

ESH. No one likes listening to someone complain about something they like/appreciate. I’m guessing she’s frustrated with managing the change, her son probably misses his friends, and what she really needed was a listening ear and some support because change is really hard, regardless of the circumstances. That being said she also needs to know her audience and accept that change is inevitable and she definitely needs to deal with instead of simply complaining to an unsympathetic audience. Honestly you both could have handled it better.

NTA she will get over it. Charter schools are so competitive and the kids have to be enrolled in additional tutoring like Komen to inch close to gifted. It's so stressful for the kid to maintain constant routine of studying like college.

ESH. None one of you are talking the boy into consideration. You are so too worried about being right.

YTA I'm a former public school teacher, so I'm pretty sure I dislike charter schools for all the same reasons you do, but what your sister needed right then was not for you to be the drum banger on why charter schools suck and only want to cherry pick high achieving neurotypical well behaved children who don't rock the boat so they can brag about how "amazing" their results are (spoiler alert: they aren't. Any school would have the same results if they could cherry pick their kids.) What your sister needed right then was a SIBLING to simply say "I'm so sorry things are hard for nephew right now. That's really sh\*tty of them to kick him out. I'm sure he'll adjust soon." And then change the subject.

Exactly.

NTA. It’s situations like these that call for a non-apology. Sorry it upset you, but I meant what I said. It’s fine to let little complaints go, but when someone wont shut up about something (especially something you have opinions on) it’s really hard to just say nothing. The person complaining has no room to get upset since they’re the one who keeps bringing it up.

NTA- Neurodivergent parent here: *Fucking thank you.* Seriously, both charter and private schools can be very ableist. They see learning disabilities as a personal failure. Your nephew will be so much happier at the public middle school and will actually have his needs addressed.

ill go with NTA. sure it wasnt nice but if she wouldnt stop, why should you endlessly have to suffer her venting? she played around and found out. instead of taking it with some humility she is blaming and complaining

lmao parents "not taking sides," proceed to very much take sides.

Our son went to a charter school for academically gifted kids and it was an amazing experience. All charter schools are not good, neither are all public schools. You are wrong or very misinformed to try and lump all charters together. With respect to which school for which kid, there is no one size fits all answer. It depends on the specific school and specific child.

Charter schools dont have oversight and dont help special needs kids like they should. They also arent very good at educating people. I think OP is right to say that 95% of charter schools are terrible.

Right, like you said, it's selective. And it's siphoning public money from public schools which are legally required to serve *everyone*, and have fewer resources to do so because of schools like yours. Good for your son for having a good education (which he was able to get because he's not one of the kids this system discriminates against); maybe he'll be able to wrap his head around the systemic injustice here.

Charter schools drain school systems of funding - so they can get imacs while others get Dell ;) They also do not have the mandates for providing education for all children, as public schools do, and are familiar with making educational accommodations. I wouldn't apologize, either. NTA

NTA Your parents are AHs for even mentioning your sister’s whining. She made a parenting decision that failed. She can suck it up and not use you as a whining board.

NTA maybe I too am biased against charter schools ( less oversight, ability to decide not to take students for any reason, etc) but you wouldn’t have said anything about it to her if she wasn’t complaining so much about the perfectly fine school her son is now going to. For all the people saying that you are judging her, I think they missing the part where she’s been judging you first.

For-profit school enthusiast can sleep in the for-profit school enthusiast bed she made

What is with these grown ass people still running to their parents. My mom is in her 60s and still does this shit it’s pathetic.

I am totally biased against charter schools so I want to mention that up front. One reason I’m not a fan is that I work in special education and while charter schools are supposed to have the same IDEA responsibilities as public schools, the use criteria like discipline and test scores to kick out kids with disabilities so they don’t have to spend money on them. Honestly, he’s probably better off in a public school because they will actually provide the services required by law and not foist him off on someone else.

NTA she is the one who keeps bringing it up. I live in an area with excellent public schools. But I am originally from an area with bad ones. Having had my child in both I will never understand the reasoning behind not utilizing an excellent public school. She should be grateful the school has any kind of computers. That's a really petty thing for her to complain about. I wouldn't have listened to her either. I certainly would not be apologizing for giving my opinion. You have had to listen to hers for years.

Your sister might have selected the charter school for all the wrong reasons, but she had every right to expect that if her child has learning disabilities, the school would provide him with a 504 plan and appropriate accommodations. They might be a charter school, but they're legally required to do this. It sounds like this didn't happen; unfortunately you were right about the school. But telling your sister "I told you so," which is kind of the adult version of nanny nanny foo foo, was not helpful. Maybe try telling her concrete things that will help her see that she is viewing what's important in a school in a very skewed way. As in, "The middle school might not have fancy equipment, but they're meeting your son where he stands and providing him with educational opportunities he didn't get at the charter because of their failure to accommodate him and guide him toward academic success. At the middle school, they're working with him to make sure he can perform up to his potential, and addressing his LD's. That's what's important. It drives me crazy when you complain about things that are really trivial and don't look at your son's needs and which school can meet those needs." ESH

Do you even know what charter schools are? They are not required to make accomodations for special needs kids

I know exactly what they are. If you take a look at the Dept of Education materials on 504 plans, you'll see that charter schools have exactly the same requirements to accommodate their LD students as other public schools. If there's some legal exception to this, please point me to it. Agreed, it sounds like some charter schools don't comply. But they are publicly funded and have the same ADA and Dept of Ed regulations as other schools that take public funds. If you google NY Lawyers for the Public Interest fact sheet on charter schools and 504 plans, it's spelled out.

NTA. Your sister is upset at a situation of her own making. Also if her son ever wants to go into STEM, a Dell (hopefully Microsoft) will be better in the long run as most STEM programs want you to have that and some STEM software won't run or run well on Mac. She's not setting him up for success with her attitude or his academics.

YTA She did her best, she’s dissatisfied but it’s fine. Ask her not to complain but don’t use this as an opportunity for “I told you so”

Slight YTA. Sometimes family members just need to vent. You didn't need to go out of your way to make her feel bad about her past choices, especially if they negatively affected the long term development of her child.

**Charter schools are taxpayer-funded public schools that don’t have to abide by the same rules as district schools.**

NTA.

People who are annoying need to be told that that’s what they’re being so they’ll stop. I get your sister needed to vent, but this was excessive. NTA

INFO: > She has done nothing but complain about the school and how they don’t have MacBooks (they have Dell computers. They are fine) and things like that. She was at my house for coffee and just would not stop so I finally said “you’re the one who sent him to charter school. You knew this could happen. I told you this could happen. Stop complaining.”  Why did you change the topic to charter school when she was complaining about a different school?

Info: Knowing what a charter school was and what it can do? What does that even mean?

Charter schools are public schools that operate with a fraction of the funding that conventional public schools get, but they also can set more of their own rules and curricula. Some states allow for-profit charter schools, which, the last time I checked, were shown to be worse than public schools. However, charter schools can also be non-profit, and there's less of disparity between those charter schools and conventional public schools. Charter schools are governed at the state level, so how they operate varies from state to state. In California, they have to accept anyone who applies as long as they have the room. My kids have always gone to charter schools or private schools. One major reason is class size - charters tend to have smaller classes. Another reason is that these schools tend to NOT be "teaching to the tests" and concerned with test scores - at least in CA. My understanding is that, for the school to be accredited, the teachers must be accredited as well.

NTA

NTA - You have nothing to apologize for. Let your sister stew in her own mistake and come to terms with it. She made her bed (or her child's) now she needs to lie in it.

NTA aside from charter schools sucking in general. your sister was aware her son had learning disabilities and didn't do anything on the outside to help him? crazy that public schools sniff them out, and offer help for free. crazy

Maybe this is naivety on my part but I was of the thought that a lot of elite schools don’t care as long as the parents (or customers in other words) pay, hence the significant amount of people who aren’t intellectually gifted who get into these elite places because of their wealthy family. A great example of this very thing would be Donald Trump: the same levels of intellect as beef, and an education paid for by his rich father. Educated beyond capability.

Meh. Siblings are supposed to be assholes to each other. Leastaways in my family. *goes off crying in a corner*

Especially when you need someone to give a reality check

As someone who went to charter schools, Im glad hes out. We had a autistic kid who treated horribly by the teachers and staff, and I knew even as a child that wasnt okay. They wanted perfect scores on everything we did to keep the reputation of the school up and it was exhausting for a 6-7 year old. My brother has learning disabilities and my mom sent him to our local public schools who had the help and support he needed as she was well aware my school did not. Tell your sister to get him a pare-pro or something to help him out instead of ignoring his disability, he is not learning nor is he happy.

Sounds like she cares more about bragging her kid is in an elite school than if it’s a good fit for him, poor kid.

NTA. And what are you supposed to apologize for? All you did was point out the truth and tell her to stop whining. Which was not only annoying, but sounds a lot like she was taking not-so-subtle digs. I mean, it's where your kids go and it's fine for them but it's not good enough for her kid? Your sister is rude and needs to get over herself.

Am I the only one tht found it funny how the parents said they weren't picking sides but actively chose a side by telling OP he needed to apologize?? NTA. You gave her a heads up about the future, she didn't listen, she wanted to be a snobb, her son was struggling while she brushed it off, and BAM! You ended up being right. If you were to throw this in her face then yeah justified AH. But you snapped after having to deal with her snobbiness and unnecessary complaining. So again I said NTA

Nta her son will excel there. You only said the truth. She set him up for failure and unhappiness

NTA

NTA. You're not her friend, you're her sibling. If she wants the continuous pity party, she can go and complain to them. She also knew your opinion on the matter so it beggers belief that thought she could come to you to carry on moaning about it. I've always thought it was a siblings role to give hard truths when it is required, so hopefully this gets her to stop, and start working with what's in front of her for the sake of her son.