Veronica Olivares Weber, Princeton
I must confess that we were one of those families that, as Ms. Vega-Malinowski pointed out in a news article published on centraljersey.com on Jan. 10, were seeking a “high quality alternative” in public education at Princeton., For three years, we tried Princeton Charter School under the promise of a better education and teachers committed to improve the academics of our kids. The experience was not exactly as promised, not all kids received the promised great education (especially in the upper school). At the end, PCS made us feel that we were not the right demographics for the school, we ended moving back to Princeton Public Schools., The argument that PCS offers a better and cost effective alternative to PPS is not quite accurate. Most of what PPS provides at no cost PCS charges to parents, which imposes an additional financial burden to low-income families. The greatest impact of this, in a small school like PCS, is that it creates social disadvantages and stigmas to those families and, most importantly, to their children. Furthermore, to fully function PCS relies on family contributions which adds another layer of inequality. Parents that contribute the most enjoy better all-around treatment, especially in the upper school. After all, let’s be reminded that PCS is privately run, but publicly funded. There is no accountability when those who run the school are a small group of influential teachers and parents in the Board of Trustees., The above has had its toll on the impact of PCS in the community. Using data from the New Jersey Department of Education, in 1998 (a year after PCS started), the demographic composition of PPS and PCS were roughly similar and closely mirroring Princeton’s. The percentage of African Americans and Hispanics students were 18 percent in PPS and 12 percent in PCS; census of 2000 shows 12 percent for the town., Seventeen years later, in 2015, these two groups represented 19 percent of the student body in PPS and just 6 percent of PCS, census of 2010 shows that African Americans and Hispanics represented 14 percent of Princeton., The percentages of students in free/reduced lunch show even bigger differences, in 1998 10 percent of students were in the program at PPS while PCS did not have any; by 2015 those percentages increased to 13 percent for PPS and only to 2 percent for PCS. These numbers show that in almost 20 years of its existence, PCS has been unable to provide access to “high level education” to minority groups that have been traditionally marginalized and to low-income families in general., In my opinion and own experience, I strongly believe that the Princeton Charter School does not need an expansion, it needs a serious makeover or a definite shutdown., Veronica Olivares Weber, Princeton
