Jack Kirkpatrick
05-02-2009, 05:00 PM
It seems to me that the underlying and unspoken reason Everest Charter School wants a campus in Redwood City and not East Palo Alto, is based upon a form of institutional and economic racism, ("Charter school backer may sue district," TDN, May 2).
Everest argues for a Redwood City campus that has equivalent facilities. Its unspoken reasons are that RWC offers a better lottery draw from the economic middle class located in the Sequoia Union High School District and is centrally located to a better draw of students from economically progressive homes; however, East Palo Alto should really be the logical choice for a high school because it has none since Ravenswood closed in the 1976!
EPA is now a city and according to the 2000 demographic census reveals it has a population of 32,000 with an ethnic diversity of 75% White, 12% Black, 13% Hispanic or Latino...! The median household income is $45,006 and may be the lowest in the district but that should not preclude it from having Everest located where it is really needed in the district.
The city has transformed itself since incorporation through an invasion-succession population movement that is not uncommon in California. The four traditional public high schools of the Sequoia Union High School District - located from the north to the south -- Carlmont, Sequoia, Woodside, Menlo-Atherton; the only charter high school is represented by Summit Preparatory located in Redwood City!
Although the campus offered to Everest may seem inadequate, the "novelty" of a charter school is their persuasion that a traditional school does not meet the needs of diversity and one size does not fit all and students are motivated for different reasons. Motivated students can learn almost anywhere and that has been supported with the busing of EPA students as far north as San Carlos. If the campus' main administration has to be off campus, that is not a good enough reason to preclude EPA. These classroom are reasonable equivalents to other temporary classrooms on many of our campuses in San Mateo County. Someday, those classrooms will likely be rebuilt into permanent facilities. Many schools started out as one room schools.
The real reason that Everest staff doesn't want to be in East Palo Alto is to cherry pick their population, closing off opportunities for poor minority students who reside in this community-in-need, its reputation as gang infested, criminally oriented people and not a safe community to live in. The latent reason is the base economics of the community - the higher the income the better class of student they are likely to draw from.
I have a hunch, that residents of EPA will join the lottery in droves and Everest knows that its performance will be in question - poor performance will be blamed on the students, not the quality of the charter school. In the 1980-90's, a Community School was at or near the location on Green Street that I visited at least weekly meeting with Lee Chic, the teacher; the population make-up was different on the street and in the school but real learning was going on and successful. The school also contributed to a safer environment on Green St. and gave it a sense of community.
I also urge the EPA and RC City Council, the Board of Supervisors, the County Office of Education and the school district have a united front in placing Everest Charter in EPA. The school district should not have to use tax dollars to defend a lawsuit simple because Everest Charter thinks they are a cut above our traditional educational options and build a foundation in a community where no high school exists.
The myth is that no campus is perfectly equivalent!
Everest argues for a Redwood City campus that has equivalent facilities. Its unspoken reasons are that RWC offers a better lottery draw from the economic middle class located in the Sequoia Union High School District and is centrally located to a better draw of students from economically progressive homes; however, East Palo Alto should really be the logical choice for a high school because it has none since Ravenswood closed in the 1976!
EPA is now a city and according to the 2000 demographic census reveals it has a population of 32,000 with an ethnic diversity of 75% White, 12% Black, 13% Hispanic or Latino...! The median household income is $45,006 and may be the lowest in the district but that should not preclude it from having Everest located where it is really needed in the district.
The city has transformed itself since incorporation through an invasion-succession population movement that is not uncommon in California. The four traditional public high schools of the Sequoia Union High School District - located from the north to the south -- Carlmont, Sequoia, Woodside, Menlo-Atherton; the only charter high school is represented by Summit Preparatory located in Redwood City!
Although the campus offered to Everest may seem inadequate, the "novelty" of a charter school is their persuasion that a traditional school does not meet the needs of diversity and one size does not fit all and students are motivated for different reasons. Motivated students can learn almost anywhere and that has been supported with the busing of EPA students as far north as San Carlos. If the campus' main administration has to be off campus, that is not a good enough reason to preclude EPA. These classroom are reasonable equivalents to other temporary classrooms on many of our campuses in San Mateo County. Someday, those classrooms will likely be rebuilt into permanent facilities. Many schools started out as one room schools.
The real reason that Everest staff doesn't want to be in East Palo Alto is to cherry pick their population, closing off opportunities for poor minority students who reside in this community-in-need, its reputation as gang infested, criminally oriented people and not a safe community to live in. The latent reason is the base economics of the community - the higher the income the better class of student they are likely to draw from.
I have a hunch, that residents of EPA will join the lottery in droves and Everest knows that its performance will be in question - poor performance will be blamed on the students, not the quality of the charter school. In the 1980-90's, a Community School was at or near the location on Green Street that I visited at least weekly meeting with Lee Chic, the teacher; the population make-up was different on the street and in the school but real learning was going on and successful. The school also contributed to a safer environment on Green St. and gave it a sense of community.
I also urge the EPA and RC City Council, the Board of Supervisors, the County Office of Education and the school district have a united front in placing Everest Charter in EPA. The school district should not have to use tax dollars to defend a lawsuit simple because Everest Charter thinks they are a cut above our traditional educational options and build a foundation in a community where no high school exists.
The myth is that no campus is perfectly equivalent!