logo
Microschools aren't the problem. They're the response to the problem.

Microschools aren't the problem. They're the response to the problem.

The Hill21-04-2025

A progressive think tank recently argued that microschools lack oversight and should be held to the same standards as public schools. It's a familiar critique — one that overlooks why microschools exist in the first place and whom they are actually serving.
I have taught in Title I public schools and well-resourced, established progressive independent schools. I know the system from the inside, and I know it wasn't built for children who look like mine.
For millions of non-white and low-income students, public education has never been safe, affirming, or effective.
The statistics are grim: Only 35 percent of U.S. students are proficient in reading and math. Black students are suspended or expelled three times more often than white students for the same behaviors. And the list goes on.
These aren't outliers. They're outcomes of a system that consistently underfunds, over-polices and underserves marginalized kids. When your only neighborhood option is a school with metal detectors, zero-tolerance policies and overcrowded classrooms, you start searching for an alternative. And when you don't find it, you build it.
Microschools aren't avoiding accountability, either. Accreditation is typically a three- to five-year process, just like traditional private schools undergo. In Georgia, where our microschool is based, schools must be accredited to accept vouchers. No accreditation, no funding.
We assess student growth with nationally normed tools, descriptive reviews and formative benchmarks because we believe in rigor and reflection. Our educators often hold advanced degrees and are trained in trauma-informed, culturally responsive teaching.
Microschools are acts of survival, created by educators and parents who refuse to wait for systems to change, not boutique experiments.
Another misconception is that microschool founders are unqualified entrepreneurs. Let's be clear: We don't start microschools because it's trendy or lucrative. We start them because we've watched public schools fail our children, year after year.
Many of us are public school educators who left the classroom because we could no longer protect or support our students within the limits of the system. We are women of color, immigrants, single parents and former social workers.
We are not running hedge funds. We're organizing carpool lines, washing snack containers and tutoring third graders in Spanish. This is not Silicon Valley. It's survival work.
Critics also claim microschools can't serve students with disabilities. The reality is more complex.
Many public schools are under-resourced and unable to meet even basic Individualized Education Program goals. Families of neurodivergent students are often the first to seek us out, not because we offer more bells and whistles, but because we offer more flexibility.
We co-create learning environments that center relationship, regulation and responsiveness. Inclusion isn't a mandate — it's a starting point.
This isn't about public vs. private. It's not about competition. It's about access. It's about trust. It's about who gets to build something better, and who gets funded to try.
At The Morgan Oliver School, where I am founder and head of school, we've built a fully accredited K-8 learning environment centered on justice, wellness and academic excellence. We aren't asking for a free pass. We're asking for fairness and recognition that microschools are often doing more with less, for families who've had the fewest choices.
Until public schools work for all kids, we will continue to build the schools our children and our teachers deserve.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Activists: FIFA should protect World Cup attendees from immigration enforcement
Activists: FIFA should protect World Cup attendees from immigration enforcement

Miami Herald

time3 hours ago

  • Miami Herald

Activists: FIFA should protect World Cup attendees from immigration enforcement

A coalition of community organizations convened on FIFA's doorstep in Coral Gables on Monday afternoon to urge the soccer world's governing body to protect attendees at World Cup events from 'overzealous immigration enforcement.' About a dozen activists gathered on the sidewalk outside the gold-toned metal spirals that embellish the main entrance of FIFA's new legal and compliance division office, holding signs reading 'FIFA, eyes on the ball, ICE off the field!' and 'FIFA, the world is watching!' Speakers said recent actions by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials had provoked increasing concern over the safety of local residents attending the Club World Cup games this summer at Hard Rock Stadium. The stadium will also host seven World Cup matches next year. 'We've long been concerned about ICE at sporting events under this administration, but our concerns have been heightened by irresponsible statements from ICE and CBP,' said Thomas Kennedy, an immigrant rights advocate with the Florida Immigrant Coalition. Kennedy highlighted a June 10 post by Customs and Border Protection on social media site X that said the federal law enforcement agency would be 'suited and booted and ready to provide security for the first round of games.' The post was later deleted but not before arousing the concern of immigration rights groups in South Florida. The same day, NBC Miami reported that ICE had advised, in a statement regarding enforcement at Club World Cup games, that 'all non-American citizens need to carry proof of their legal status.' When asked to clarify, ICE told the Miami Herald: 'As is customary for an event of this magnitude with national security implications, ICE will be working alongside our Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice partners to help ensure the safety and security of the event.' The following night, on June 11, a celebration of the upcoming World Cup hosted by Spanish-language television network Telemundo aboard a boat in Biscayne Bay was abruptly canceled following a surprise inspection by the Coast Guard, alongside at least one border patrol agent. Miami-Dade County Mayor Daniella Levine Cava, who was aboard the boat at the time, said in a statement that the inspection was 'deeply troubling' and 'should not have happened.' Coast Guard spokesperson Chief Petty Officer Nicole Groll told the Herald that the inspection 'was not a targeted immigration thing.' On Monday, Kennedy told the crowd outside FIFA's offices that his group had confirmed that federal immigration agents had been present at recent Club World Cup games. But Kennedy said his organization had not witnessed immigration agents at the games indiscriminately detaining attendees or demanding they provide proof of residency. 'FIFA has an opportunity to use the power of the game and culture to help us meet this moment,' said Laura Muñoz, the civic engagement director for the Florida Student Power Network. 'Soccer has the power to bring us together, and that's what we need the most right now — that's what we're asking for FIFA to do.' Muñoz told the press conference that FIFA needed to recognize that many of Miami's soccer fans were staying home and out of the bleachers because of fear over immigration enforcement. 'Especially for undocumented youth, they can't feel safe going to a game,' Muñoz said. 'This situation has gotten out of hand.' FIFA did not provide a formal response to the press conference as of late Monday, but a June 17 press release from the organization highlighted the 'record crowds and unmatched passion' of the matches at Hard Rock Stadium. The statement also said fans from over 130 countries had purchased tickets, traveling from across the globe to attend the games. 'FIFA is proud of the unique and multicultural atmosphere and support this new competition has already generated,' FIFA President Gianni Infantino said in the statement. 'FIFA Club World Cup continues to grow into the undisputed pinnacle of global club football.'

‘I'm really worried.' With the state's hotel shelter system closing, families struggle to find places to live
‘I'm really worried.' With the state's hotel shelter system closing, families struggle to find places to live

Boston Globe

time5 hours ago

  • Boston Globe

‘I'm really worried.' With the state's hotel shelter system closing, families struggle to find places to live

'I'm really worried,' Amparo, 37, said in Spanish in an interview on Monday. The change, she says, 'is a big burden.' She doesn't have a full-time job, so for the time being, she can't afford rent, even though a state program could subsidize some of the costs, she said. Her children are ages 15, 10, and 9, one of whom has special needs. 'At the hotel, we knew the system, and life was a little easier,' she said. Now, one question runs through her mind often as her family is shuffled from one place to another. 'Will we keep being able to be in a shelter or have to go to the street?' On Monday, as the state moved another step closer to fully shuttering its hotel shelter system — which at its peak last year saw more than 128 hotels open — a number of these facilities across Greater Boston appeared largely desolate. The number of families requesting housing in the state's shelter system has dropped dramatically from a year ago. The Emergency Assistance shelter system was sheltering about 7,500 homeless families at its height last year, but as of last week, 3,740 families were housed in the system, according to state data. Advertisement Ed Augustus, secretary of the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, said in a statement last week that, 'Now, costs are going down, we are closing all hotels, and the number of families in EA shelter is below the level when we first took office.' Advertisement He acknowledged the Healey administration 'inherited a surge in families and an Emergency Shelter System that was not equipped to handle it.' In Danvers, the parking lot of a Motel 6, once bustling with residents, was nearly empty, with just a few workers moving boxes and mattresses. In Chelsea, at the former soldiers' home, which was converted to a temporary shelter more than a year ago, barely a handful of families were coming out of the building. In Peabody, a former Holiday Inn which previously housed dozens of families, including Amparo and her children, showed no signs of the families who had lived there just a few days earlier. The closure of these hotel shelters has raised questions about where exactly families will be living — and if the available housing options provide a sustainable future for their families. On Monday, 11 hotel shelters closed, a spokesperson for the housing office said, and in total, 24 hotel shelter programs have closed this month. As of July 1, only four hotel shelters will remain, and all hotel shelters will be closed by July 31, according to the state. 'Providers and on-site case managers have been working closely with all impacted families to help them identify secure housing before the closing date,' the spokesperson said. Governor Maura Healey had planned to phase out the use of hotel shelters by the end of the year, but she Advertisement Advocates and the state have been looking to relocate many of the families through Andrea Park, an advocacy director at the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute, said that some housing providers were 'really caught off guard' by how quickly the timing was changing. 'For providers, it's extremely difficult to try to provide a meaningful opportunity to set families up for success, under an artificial time deadline,' Park said. 'We are concerned about families who are being set up to fail.' In Revere, rumors about shelters closing were swirling at the former Quality Inn, which appeared to still be in use as a family shelter on Monday. Some residents said they were concerned about what the other hotel closures could mean for them. 'It's scary, not knowing,' said Alandra Abreu as she pushed her 1-year-old in a stroller in the parking lot. She has been at the Quality Inn for about a week, but said she hasn't heard from the staff about what's next for the facility. 'They haven't said anything to us,' Abreu, 25, said. Some shelter residents and public officials have reported concerns about the safety inside state shelters, where more than 1,000 serious incidents, including more than a dozen alleged sex offenses, Advertisement Still, these facilities became a lifeline for thousands of families with children who had arrived in Massachusetts from countries across the Caribbean and Latin America — especially from Haiti —who fled violence, poverty, and extreme economic instability. Pastor Dieufort Fleurissaint, who goes by his nickname Pastor Keke, said that the nonprofit he founded, True Alliance Center, has been working to help connect hotel shelter residents with housing through the HomeBASE program. Many of the families True Alliance works with are Haitian and formed part of the tens of thousands of recent arrivals who sought housing in the shelter system in recent years. Though Pastor Keke said he had not received any calls on Monday from residents unable to find housing as the hotels closed, he is particularly anxious about what will happen to the immigrant families placed into HomeBASE, who may have their legal status and work permits revoked under recent Trump administration directives. The administration recently announced that Temporary Protected Status for Haitians WelcomeNST, a volunteer organization that helps resettle immigrants and refugees, has interviewed around 20 families living in hotel shelters for resettlement in towns across New England, said Elizabeth Davis-Edwards, the founder and CEO. Davis-Edwards has spoken to people who held full-time jobs while living in the shelters, only to lose their employment after being transferred to another facility out of commuting distance. 'There has to be a clear path to that family being able to stand on their own feet,' Davis-Edwards said. Advertisement So far, the volunteer teams in three towns have signed up to help families leaving the hotel shelters to access housing there, but Davis-Edwards is eager to recruit more volunteers. 'It doesn't mean it's easy, but every time, a team will find housing for a family,' Davis-Edwards said. Samantha J. Gross and Stephanie Ebbert of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Giulia McDonnell Nieto del Rio can be reached at

In major escalation, the U.S. will sanction foreign companies supporting Cuba's military
In major escalation, the U.S. will sanction foreign companies supporting Cuba's military

Miami Herald

time6 hours ago

  • Miami Herald

In major escalation, the U.S. will sanction foreign companies supporting Cuba's military

In a significant step in the 'tough Cuba policy' promised by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the Trump administration will punish foreign companies that do business with military companies in Cuba as part of a maximum pressure campaign on the communist-run island. A source with knowledge of the executive order told the Miami Herald that the sanctions will target any company providing 'direct or indirect support to companies directly or indirectly owned by the Cuban military,' effectively expanding U.S. sanctions to affect companies from third countries. The Cuban Revolutionary Armed Forces control much of the island's economy through a conglomerate known as GAESA, which is already under U.S. sanctions. GAESA owns several hotels, many of which are leased or administered by foreign hotel chains, plus most grocery stores, warehouses, logistics companies, gas stations and other profitable businesses. Cuba has been under a trade and financial U.S. embargo for almost as long as the Castro brothers' rule, but those restrictions affect entities under U.S. jurisdiction. The new regulations are known as secondary sanctions, which are designed to prevent third countries from trading with nations or entities under U.S. sanctions. Despite the economic pain, the Cuban government has been able to circumvent the U.S. embargo and buy supplies from several countries, hold bank accounts overseas and partner with foreign companies in joint ventures. GAESA companies carry out a significant portion of that economic activity. That, in turn, will make most foreign companies doing business with Cuba a target. The list of business interactions that could expose a foreign company to the new sanctions is vast. For instance, the Spanish hotel chain Meliá manages 33 hotels on the island, some of which are in partnership with Gaviota, a tourism company under the GAESA umbrella. Foreign companies with businesses in the Mariel Port Special Development Zone, which falls under GAESA control, or using Mariel port facilities managed by Almacenes Universales, GAESA's logistics and freight company, could also be sanctioned, the source said. Also targeted: foreign companies using cards issued by Banco Financiero Internacional and Fincimex, two of GAESA's financial institutions, which are needed on the island to buy gasoline or groceries. The measures will likely stir a diplomatic storm, as companies from several European and Western Hemisphere allies have a presence on the island. In 2023, Spain became Cuba's second-largest trading partner, surpassed only by Cuba's close political ally, Venezuela. China follows in third place and Russia in sixth, but the top 10 list of trading partners include several other U.S. allies like Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Germany, the Netherlands and Italy. Investing on the island, however, has always come with risks. Last month, the Cuban government froze the bank accounts of foreign companies and imposed restrictions on the repatriation of their foreign currency earnings, citing financial hardship. In the short term, the effect on Cuba's economy will be significant if the few foreign companies with investments on the island leave to avoid sanctions. The country's supply chain might suffer disruptions from foreign exporters refusing orders out of fear that they could be found supporting the military. And foreign banks, already spooked by the possibility of massive fines imposed by the U.S. Treasury Department on banks violating its sanctions policies, will be even less inclined to process transactions that might involve Cuban companies that could be later found to be controlled by the Cuban military. Last November, Cuba's minister of Foreign Trade and Investment, Oscar Pérez-Oliva, said there were 328 businesses with foreign capital on the island. Only 62 were businesses wholly owned by foreign companies, while 112 were joint ventures with the Cuban government. The rest, 184, were international economic association contracts, the preferred business relationship used by foreign tourism companies that administer hotels in Cuba. Several U.S. companies, including some owned by Cuban Americans from Miami, export authorized food and medicines to Cuba that fall under embargo exemptions. Many have also received special authorizations to export other goods to the Cuban population or private enterprises. It is not entirely clear whether the new regulations would also apply to those U.S. companies. Still, to continue operating they are likely to invoke those licenses or the exemptions written into law. The Trump administration seeks to tighten the screws on the Cuban regime at a critical juncture for the Communist-run island. With Raúl Castro turning 94 this year, a power transition seems likely. Still, it might not necessarily be a transition to democracy, as the island's military appears to be the real decision-making power behind the scenes. Under Raúl Castro, the military has accumulated vast economic and political power, mostly at the expense of the Cuban people. A Miami Herald investigation earlier this year found that Gaviota had stashed over $4 billion in its bank accounts out of reach for Cuba's central government at the time the population was suffering shortages of food and medicines and enduring daily energy blackouts. The Trump administration will also have to deal with the consequences of the new measures on the population of an island just 90 miles from Florida, already facing near failed-state living conditions. Even if the sanctions target military companies, they are likely to contribute to the deterioration of the living conditions of Cubans on the island, given GAESA's large economic footprint and how it siphons the foreign hard currency reaching the island away from the government's spending on social services. If the new sanctions work as planned to restrict further the country's ability to trade and partner with foreign companies, the Cuban government would face urgent pressure to rein in the Cuban military and return some of its business to civil entities. However, Cuban leadership, mostly comprised of generals who have resisted reforms and clung to power for decades, might likely choose instead to continue leaning on political allies like Russia, Iran or Venezuela. Still, the latter option is no longer a guarantee for the regime's survival since those countries are also struggling with their economic woes, and even allies like China, also under communist rule, have all but demanded that the Cuban government to embark on substantial market reforms before they make significant investments on the island. In 2023, Russia, China and allied countries accounted for only 16% of Cuba's overall trade.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store