User talk:David King

'ello
Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:


 * Be Bold!
 * Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
 * Meet other new users
 * Learn from others
 * Play nicely with others
 * Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
 * Tell us about you

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here!

— Adrian~enwiki (talk) 07:55, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

charter schools
Hi, regarding you edit, I reverted it. Charter schools are *public* schools. In no way are they private. I note from your user page that you're Albertan, as am I. If you check Alberta's rules on charters (see Alberta charter schools for a link), you'll see that charters are granted autonomy, but the schools are owned by the province. At the end of a 5-year term, the province may "re-allocate" the assets as it sees fits, such as giving them (e.g. the school) to a local public or separate school board. While charter's have greater autonomy than other individual schools, they have no more autonomy than a public or separate school board. We don't call Separate and/or Francophone school districts "private" (even very small ones), so we certainly don't call charter schools private. -Rob 08:35, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. In Alberta, the School Act, section 31, says: "31(1) A person or society may apply to the Minister for the establishment of a charter school to be operated by a society incorporated under the Societies Act or a company registered under Part 9 of the Companies Act." That is, in Alberta, charter schools are operated by a society or not-for-profit corporation; they are not operated by a public school authority. In Alberta, a charter school may not use the word "public" in its name. Legally, they are a class of private school.

In addition, the facilities used by charter schools, in Alberta, are not, in any case that I know of, owned by the provincial government. In most cases, the school facilities used by charter schools are owned by a public school or separate school district, and they are being used by the charter school subject to a direction or authorization from the Minister of Education.

The reason we don't call separate and/or francophone school authorities private is that they have a universal electorate within a described population, and the board of a separate and/or francophone school authority is elected according to the Local Authorities Election Act, and may be removed by the Minister according to the provisions of the School Act. The Board of a charter school is not accountable to a universal electorate, it is not elected according to the Local Authorities Elections Act, and the Minister, while he may terminate a charter, may not remove the Board of a charter school from office.

By corporate organization, by exclusion from the provisions of the Local Authorities Election Act, and by freedom from the threat of removal of the Board by the Minister, charter schools, at least in Alberta, are private institutions. A similarly careful analysis of the charter school provisions in American states would lead to a similar conclusion.

David King 23:38, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. I base my view on Alberta charter school handbook (PDF File) page 1.  It states "What is a Charter School?  A charter school is a public school' that provides a basic education in a different or enhanced way to improve student learning."  (my emphasis).   Consitutionally, the province is the sole authority on this matter.   That settles the case.
 * Many things that don't appear to many to be public are deemed so. For instance, we call schools public, even if they refuse admission based on relgion, parental linguistic status, inability to pay high fees, or other non-academic/age criteria.  In Canada we use the term "public" differently than in the U.S.  And Alberta (with charters) use the term "public" somewhat differently than other provinces.  I have respect for your position on what should be called public.  My point isn't to say you are wrong per se.  It's that its a subjective point of view.  The only objective rule we can have, is to cite the sole authority on the issue, namely the province (or state).  We would really be opening a can of worms if we veer off the provincial definition of "public".  There are *lots* of public district schools, which a person could debate how "public" they were.  For example, a school that charges $4000/year to attend, and refuses most applicants based on non-acadmeic reasons.  Or a public district school (not just separate) that preaches Christianity to students every day.  Rather than have debates about what's "really public", we just have to go with what the province says.  We can (in the appropriate places), write about what notable opinion makers have said on these issues (showing all sides).  --Rob 01:58, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply.

I don't have any problem with citing the provincial government as the authority. That said, legislation, written by lawmakers, supercedes handbooks which are written by public servants. No matter what the handbook says, Section 31 of the Act is very clear that charter schools are owned and operated by private agencies. Their board of Directors is not elected according to the Local Authorities Election Act, and the Minister does not have the power to remove the Board of a charter school. (The Handbook itself, in the section on governance, is quite clear in this regard.) The School Act is a superior source of the provincial position, over the handbook. With respect, I don't think my position is in the least bit subjective. I am citing the provincial government as my authority and I am citing legislation rather than a handbook.

That said, you seem to be making a more subjective argument yourself. When you say "we call schools public, even if they refuse admission based on religion, parental linguistic status..." who is the "we" you are talking about? Certainly, I don't call such schools public. Perhaps, at this point, I should ask you to define the word "public". Does "public" in the context of education mean that education which is publicly funded is public education? That would make approved private schools, and home schooling part of the system of public education in Alberta. I would also be interested in your thoughts on how it is that we use the word "public" differently in Canada than in the U.S.

David King 04:48, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * You're not citing legislation that says charter schools aren't deemed "public schools". Rather, your doing your own interpretation of legislation.  In Wikipedia, we try to use secondary sources (like the guide) over primary sources (like legislation) when determing things.  We shouldn't be interpreting/debating law (I'm not conceding your interpretation of the law, just saying its irrelevant, right or wrong, so I don't really need to argue it).  Rather, we should see how a reliable source/authority interprets the matter.  Clearly the province, in the guide, has said charter schools are a type of "public school".  If the province used the term "public school", we should use that term.  If you object to the term "public school" being used for charter schools, then you should go to the province, get them to change it, and then we at Wikipedia can update the relevant articles.  Charter legislation is over a decade old.  We're not talking about an accidental mistake by civil servants in the guide.  I challenge you to find provincial references that explcitly refer to charter schools as a type of "private school".  Seriously, if you're right, why no examples?  How about a published quote from a charter-era Minister of Education.  Frankly, what you're arguing here with me, the districts tried arguing over a decade ago, when they insisted charter schools were not public schools, and took money out of the public system.  That opinion was rejected by lawmakers.  If lawmakers shared your opinions on charter schools, we wouldn't have any charter schools.   Virtually everybody who supports charter schools, including all of the lawmakers who passed the legislation, call them "public schools".


 * Now, some of my comments were subjective, but that was just to show that there's an open debate on what people think is public. I probably shouldn't have gone off on a tagent.    What I think is a "public school" is unimportant.  Rather, it only matters what is called a "public school" by the province.


 * Note, my comments above about asking the province to change the guide's wording were actually serious. Based on your bio, it sounds like you know the system, and who to talk to.  Surely, you can get it fixed if its an error.  If you're right, then the guide has a rather enormous blatant error, and every single charter school in the province, is engaged in wanton false advertising.  --Rob 06:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

David (Thomas) King
Hi again. Regarding David (Thomas) King, you may wish to read WP:AUTO and WP:VANITY, if this article is about you. Also, you should read other policy pages, such as original research, citing sources, and verifiability. It seems as though, some of what you've written is based on personal knowledge, not independent sources. But articles in Wikipedia need to be written based on reliable sources, and not on our own personal knowledge. For instance, David (Thomas) King discusses the subject's (yours?) personal beleifs. If these haven't been written about by others, they shouldn't be written about in Wikipedia. If they have been written about (say in a newspaper), then please say where (e.g. cite your reliable sources). As well, its always best to be very cautious about editing any article you're personally connected to, or unavoidably bias on. --Rob 09:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC)