This is why the charters need to be based in the community they serve and entrance acceptance needs to be random or biased to families whose parents made poor choices earlier in their life, but who now are willing to make the commitment to do better.
I disagree, because that effectively rewards parents who have "made poor choices" and punishes those who do not. My wife and I have worked to provide a stable and comfortable (but not extravagant) life for our children, and it bothers me when schools designate our children as "privileged" and therefore less worthy of certain educational opportunities.
I agree that Social Justice is as bad as racism.
But.
The original reason for charters and vouchers is because there are many poor areas and minority areas where the kids can be turned around by providing a stable, high-expectations environment for their education. This is done by rewarding the schools that succeed and penalizing the schools that fail.
It is very easy to set up a charter school and cherry pick kids. Its another to do it in the middle of the largest and poorest areas and make it work.
Which is harder - getting a bunch of kids whose parents are college grads and expect them to place in the top 10% of tests or taking kids from the other areas and get them to place in the top 30%? In which case are the expectations higher and the demands on the kids higher - and the comparable demands on the parents higher?
I do not think kids should be deliberately punished for their parents' errors. Every kid deserves to be educated to the best of their abilities.
