The state Supreme Court recently heard arguments in a challenge to Washington’s charter school law. The Seattle Times editorial board advised the court “to end this legal battle and allow the charter system to show it is making a difference for Washington children.”
Three other editorial boards have also announced their support for charter public schools.
The Walla Wall Union-Bulletin (yes, we included it in the Friday Roundup, but later decided to highlight it) writes,
At this point, only the Supreme Court justices have an inkling of how they will rule. Yet, the arguments made in favor of allowing charter schools seemed sound…
Jalen Johnson, an 11th-grader at Summit Sierra charter school in Seattle, told the crowd the commitment of his teachers helped turn him from an average middle-school student who had little thought of attending college to a thriving high-school junior who hopes to study urban planning at the University of California at Berkeley, according to AP.
“This is how every school should be,” he said. “Our success should be the norm, not the exception.”
Yes, success should be the goal. While traditional public schools work well for most students, it doesn’t mesh with some. This is exactly why options are needed.
The Daily Sun editorial says, “High court should side with charter schools.”
And The Columbian editorializes, “Leave charter schools be.”
Washington’s public charter schools are governed by a well-designed system that should be allowed to establish roots and flourish.
That possibility rests in the hands of the state Supreme Court, which last week heard arguments in yet another legal attack upon the schools. Since being approved in a statewide vote in 2012, charter schools have been targeted by a coalition of opponents led by teachers unions. Those legal battles have distracted from a reasonable evaluation of the schools and the role they can play in improving student outcomes…
As approved by voters, Washington’s schools are held to high standards. Schools must meet strict criteria for fulfilling the needs of students who often are poorly served by traditional schools, and there are provisions for shutting down schools that do not meet that criteria. The National Association of Charter School Authorizers has given high marks to Washington because of that accountability…
Charter schools offer a valuable alternative for many students, and Washington’s system specifically emphasizes the needs of low-income students in low-income schools. Rather than being viewed as a threat to traditional schools, charters should be considered a worthy experiment that can cultivate methods for better serving students.
There’s little to add. The editorials are right. The court should agree.