I am always glad to see you address education issues on your show, and at least you had the decency to include a teacher on your panel (more than I can say for many other TV discussions of this topic). This is a major issue--not just in presidential election years--and I do hope in your future discussions of it you will include a broader range of teacher leaders and parent activists who have been dealing with this for many years. Great places to find some of those: National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (whose work should be getting MUCH more air in the edreform discussion); Teacher Leader Network sponsored by Center for Teaching Quality; and any of dozens of other teacher networks and organizations (many of which are on the web). There's been so much discussion about the "bad teachers" or the "bad teacher unions"-- So why aren't more people talking and listening to the "good teachers" about how to move public education forward? It might help dispel the numerous myths about our schools and those who work in them.

I'm disappointed that Megan Behrent was not allowed more speaking time. She's a teacher; she knows what's going on. And she probably knows what's best. Why was Alter even on the panel?

This is the problem with education reform. No one listens to teachers. The passage of NCLB is proof that teachers were not being heard.

Hi Melissa, always enjoy your show - the absence of Black and Brown voices in today's opening Education segment was unfortunate - this topic bears representation from folk who look like those impacted. Asking the right questions must include the elimination of symbolic thinking (as noted in Edgar Ridley's book, The Golden Apple: Changing the Structure of Civilization) evidenced in traditional pedagogy; you are correct that this inequity goes back well into history. Only by thinking symptomatically are we going to obtain the change that we seek!

I don't think it was made clear enough that the problem is that while charters take select the "BEST" students, the public schools are left with the least interested, least behaved students, with less parental involvement.

If public schools had the same option of excluding students for behavior, or excluding students with low parental involvement (only parents who are interested/involved enough to begin with will petition for their child to be in a charter), you would see the exact same results you see in the most successful charters.

I've been involved in graduate research on public schools such as Green Dot, which performed well when they could drain the "best" from the local public schools, but when they took over the local public school (Locke in LA), had to take ALL STUDENTS, and converted it into several charter schools, the average performance in those schools wasn't better (it dropped in some) than it was before because they were dealing with the same students. Putting the label "charter" and funneling public money to private companies is not the magic bullet.

If there are any things charters are doing that are successful, then we should apply that to public schools. However, the only thing that most are successful at doing is picking and choosing "the best" from the public schools. If and when ALL public schools become charterized, we will see that things will not improve.

There are deeper, cultural, social, and motivational issues within our society, when students realize that while taking shots and clubbing, "Snooki," earns, per episode, what it takes an average hard working teacher over three years to earn. If we want to fix our schools, we need to attract good teachers and change the way our culture and our leaders talk about education; we need to stop glorifying ignorance.

.

Let's blame the teachers, if they hadn't put NCLB into play, they wouldn't be blamed for it's failure. All that money wasted and nobody listened and still don't. Obama included.

I have taught in Texas public schools for 35 years. I have taught in a minority big city school, a small town school and a suburban school. I have taught special education classes of fewer than 10 students and Pre-AP classes of 30+. In all environments, my biggest obstacle to teaching was the student who did not want to learn and actively tried to disrupt the class.

Every teacher has these kids. The competent teacher can deal with most of these students, but why should we have to? Why should the other students have to? How well would you be able to do your job if your work was constantly being interrupted? How sad that students rejoice when their disruptive classmate gets sent to in-school suspension for a few days and groan when he returns. American schools put-up with far too many disruptive students for far too long before taking any meaningful steps to remove them from class.

I am a regular viewer of your show. I would like to try to comment as briefly as possible on this piece on public education. I have taught in the public school system for 40 years. I have taught in high socioeconomic schools and very low socioeconomic schools. In this country there is a need for social change. Whether a student comes from a high or a low socioeconomic school (generally speaking) has no bearing on that student's overall public school opportunities and chances of success in the school. What really makes a difference is whether or not the home environment values education and participates in this process with the school. It also matters whether or not that student has outside opportunities such as field trips, sports, music and art enrichment. Looking at other countries, those at the top of the charts show that families are very committed to the importance of a good education and believe they need to be an integral part of this process. Here, more and more, families seem to leave the entire educational process to the schools. Over the years we have been expected to teach the basics, then more and more is required, things that should be the responsibility of the homes. If and when this isn't possible, then dollars need to be spent helping families learn and understand their part in the educational process. Where some students get outside music, art, and sports opportunities, other students do not. All these things seem to make the difference in helping students be successful in school. It's not public vs private, it's not better or more committed teachers (although there is need for reform here being able to get rid of a few bad teachers), it's not necessarily more money, but it is educating families and training families to know how to support their students, how to help them at home, chances to give their kids outside of school opportunities, hold them accountable for attendance, homework, after school activities, participation in their child's school, and holding their kids accountable for doing their best in school, etc. Parents who are totally committed to their child's education have more successful students. And that's the truth.

The comment just before mine also shows why it is so important for the families/parents to be involved and accountable for their child's education. They should not be allowed to disrupt the learning of others. Teachers and other professionals spend much of their time on one or two students like this.

A couple of points that are constantly overlooked:

TEACHERS Over the years, there have been a large number of college students who flocked to the teaching profession because of their inability to find a job. They did not graduate with a teaching degree. Teaching, to me should be "a calling" like the clergy. Therefore, you will always, like any profession, find people who lack the skills or ability to do a stellar job in their chosen field.

PRINCIPALS Who then is, and should be, responsible to evaluate these workers? I believe, it should be the "Department Head/Supervisor", in the case of teachers, the "Principal". Not the union, the chancellor or the mayor. Herein lies the problem, at least here in NY - in the urban areas, we now have incompetent, inexperienced Principals running our schools. When Bloomberg came into office 10 years ago, he solicited individuals (w/no education background) from the corporate world to be a part of his "Principals Academy". (Leave the corporate world, train for 6 weeks and he will put you in charge of a school.) This plan insured school failures and led to his justification of closing down public schools and leading the way for charter schools. Many principals were "forced out" of the NYC system. We lost some of the best principals who were running high-performing schools. (Ex. Prof. Turmbull of Boys Choir of Harlem, Frank Mickens of Boys & Girls HS). Bloomberg knows that to ensure success in any business, the head of that dept. or corporation must be competent to lead those he supervises. What he did, guaranteed failing schools in NY. These children matriculated though a failing system that was on his watch. This is his legacy.

CURRICULUM Also, when Bloomberg came in office, he changed the "curriculum" in the urban areas. The "test prep" model was forced upon teachers. With his "academy principals" breathing down the backs of the teachers, forcing them to change their teaching styles, NY lost thousands of teachers who were not only experienced, but who knew how to handle the urban student.

SEGREGATION NY is more segregated now because Mr. Bloomberg believed that our children should attend schools in their own neighborhoods. Therefore, he removed the ability for parents to utilize a "waiver" to send their child to a better performing school outside of their district.

As an active parent with three children who unfortunately had to spend some years in the NYC public school system, this has been the part of parenting that I thought I would enjoy the most. It has been a disappointing journey.

Melissa, your comment at the end of the education discussion was telling, when you said you would be continuing the discussion on later shows. You said, quote, I have so much more to say about this, end quote. You interrupt your guests to argue with them. Repeatedly. It seems your guests are just a foil for you to express your own opinions. You act as though they have nothing to teach you. You should study the way Chris Hayes interacts with his guests. He lets them have their say before arguing with them, and he is clearly willing to learn from them. If you do not change, we will stop watching your show.

Does anyone know the cuban music playing just before the break that was just before the segment about Cuba and gay rights?

As always - great show today! I did want to comment though on Melissa's frustration with Obama touting the spending chart that shows he has actually spent at a slower rate of GDP than any president in 60 years.... Obama's economic plan moving forward involves 'investment' (what the Reps call 'spending'). He's demanding higher revenues from the top 2%; cuts to defense; and closure of tax loop holes to 'invest' it in education, infrastructure and renewables (the Jobs Act). If America buys into the Reps nonsense that he is an 'out of control reckless spender', they can't trust him with our tax dollars going forward - hence - the chart!

The chart shows Americans that quite to the contrary of right-wing-nut spin, he is a fiscally responsible President, who's plans for our tax dollars can be trusted - that smart investments lead to productivity! Without the chart to prove he's not stupid with our money, the American people have only the Reps propaganda pundits (Romney) to fill their heads with misinformation and outright lies!

The agenda to end public education is clear. New York City continues to close neighborhood schools, leaving middle school drop outs who cannot find a school to attend for months, and elementary school students attending school outside of their neighborhood. The school system in NYC has always been segregated and now it is even more so. Segregation within segregation, bright kids segregated ffrom struggling students, whites and minorities attend their own segregated charter schools. When will we ever learn that all children need the same thing-- a good education, no matter the color of their skin or the environment into which they were born. MSNBC did it again this morning. How do you justify having an all white panel to discuss the problems in poor black neighborhoods. One individual even stated that we must bring bright people like themselves together to solve the problems of the failing school system. The mayor destroyed the system when he took it over, thinking himself to be smarter than all of the great educators in this city. He did not involve parents, educators and community leaders in any real sense of rhe word. Mr. Mayor, school is not a business. We do not manufacture widgets, we motivate academic, social, physical and spiritual human beings, giving them the capacity to think, image and make sound choices no matter what background they come from. MSNBC, the next time you have a discussion about education please involve a diverse group of people who have no vested financial interest, only what is best for our children and maybe then NYC can begin to really educate all children .

Dear Professor Harris-Perry:

I'm writing to ask you to take a broader look at charter schools --- a broader look that includes independent charter schools like SICCS.

Staten Island Community Charter School (SICCS) received its charter from New York State in 2009, welcomed its first kindergarten students in 2010, and will begin its third year this fall. The first and still the only K-8 public charter school in this New York City borough, SICCS is community-based, -focused and -run.

Over the course of 3 1/2 years before we submitted our application to the state, SICCS drew volunteers and support from the community that included parents, grandparents (my wife and me, for example) and others in the neighborhood who were excited about the possibility of creating a really effective local public school. The charter school movement was the means to an end; it provided the structure within which to build an institution whose core assumption is that, with adequate time and resources, every child can succeed.

The really effective school we envisioned and are working toward is not run by a charter-school management organization and is not the pet project of a multinational corporation or a generous benefactor. SICCS is run by a board of trustees, most of whom --- including an elected parent representative --- live in the same neighborhoods our students do.

Our program is not an off-the-shelf model promoted by a corporation. It is based on the Yale School Development Plan and the work of Dr. James Comer; as well as the Resolving Conflict Creatively Program (RCCP), which promotes a school culture based on cooperation, not competition; and stresses the benefits of community and social responsibility.

We were fortunate to have on our founding board a lot of volunteer talent, some of it in education-related fields; others in communications, facilities management and fund-raising. We solicited and received support and collaboration from community institutions and encouragement from our political representatives.

Once SICCS trustees secured a location, the local painter's union contributed a team of apprentices who transformed the facility, using paint supplied free by the local Sherwin Williams dealer. Local architects worked free of charge to help us evaluate our options.

In the months preceding its most recent lottery, SICCS received 657 applications for 33 kindergarten seats. We do not bar any age-eligible New York City resident from application or admission, and that includes those with Individual Education Plans (IEPs) who need special education services; English Language Learners (ELLs); and Students with Limited English Proficiency (LEPs).

During the application and start-up process, SICCS had expert help from several knowledgeable consultants and a lot of support from the New York City Charter School Center. In the two years since, the school has developed much greater internal capacity and looks forward to its third year in operation --- the first time SICCS students' performance will be measured by the NYC Department of Education and compared to the performance of traditional public schools in the district.

To learn more about Staten Island Community Charter School, please visit the SICCS website at www.si-ccs.org.

Please don't invite Mr. Alter back on your show. He talked over everyone else and, IMO, was rude and disrespectful to you, your other guests and your viewers. I will not watch any future shows when he is a guest of yours.

Why isn't the debate on Charter schools inclusive of talking about vocational schools for adults and youth who missed out on the first go around with education? You never stop learning so why are we worrying whether or not we can reform what is? Some of us should use the concepts of Charters to focus on reentry of what Michelle Alexander talks about in her recent book about the New Jim Crow treatment of young blacks who should be the targets of Charters if we're going to allow them to rejoin society as contributors. Why call it K-12 when it should be training and developing even if it comes out of the halls of Charters. Let's expand Charters for everyone then society benefits and the new education/business sector won't be cherry picking the best.

“The whole people must take upon themselves the education of the whole people and be willing to bear the expenses of it. There should not be a district of one mile square, without a school in it, not founded by a charitable individual, but maintained at the public expense of the people themselves.”

- President John Adams

Funny, the Tea Party would swift boat a Founding Father for saying such crazy things in 2012.