10/25 Letters: Charter and public schools should collaborate

In response to the series of articles on charter schools, I am inspired to share something I learned about last week while attending the Independent Charter School Symposium in New York City. In a session called “District-Charter Collaboration: Walking the Walk,” panelists – all participants in a program established in 2016 in NYC, the District-Charter Collaborative (DCC) – shared their experiences working together across the district-charter divide. The DCC facilitates exchanges of ideas and mutual school visits between teams of leaders and teachers from four schools, two districts and two charters, so that they can learn from each other how best to serve students.

It was moving to hear two principals talk about what they learned from each other. They didn’t say it was easy; in fact, the program begins with a session, led by a mediator from the DCC, in which all concerned get their misconceptions about each other out in the open so that they can then work together productively. The extent to which they inspired each other was palpable. I would love to see a District-Charter Collaborative in North Carolina.

Not a ‘10’

With 80 percent of Puerto Rico still without power President Trump rates his handling of this catastrophe a ‘10.’ Beg to differ. I would also rate his effort a ‘10’ – below zero.

Of course anyone who dares to challenge him would probably be met with the usual ‘fake news’ retort. Good grief, can’t anyone in this sorry excuse for an administration get through to him?

Amendment claims questioned

In the letter to the editor “Second Protects First” (Oct. 19), the writer points out that the Second Amendment effectively ensures the First by preventing the government from disarming its citizens. This sounds reasonable, but I wonder why the framers chose the words “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” If protection of the First Amendment was foremost on their minds why didn’t they say something like “In order to preserve the sovereignty of the First Amendment, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” or words to that effect?

Instead, they qualified the Second Amendment with stipulations of “a well regulated milita” and “security of a free state.” Some historians contend these caveats reflect the framer’s intent to preserve for individual states their right to form armed militias. In any interpretation, the use of the term “militia” is making reference to a right of a group rather than an individual. It seems possible the framers did not craft this amendment specifically to guarantee individuals the right to keep and bear arms.

This story was originally published October 24, 2017 at 6:00 PM with the headline "10/25 Letters: Charter and public schools should collaborate."