Charter Schools: This Debate Is Far from Over

''For-profit schools'' (Cover Story, Feb. 7) did an excellent job of describing the fundamental structural change that charter schools are bringing to the world of education. It described the rich diversity of schools that are achieving success in urban and suburban settings and the passion for educational excellence that parents, teachers, and administrators bring to these schools.

But the question isn't ''Can private companies do a better job of educating America's kids?'' any more than it was ''Can Federal Express deliver packages better than the Post Office?'' or ''Can Japanese companies build better cars than American manufacturers?'' The real question is whether a competitive model is more likely than a government monopoly to improve educational quality.

The promise of school choice is that private companies and others will invest in innovative educational programs and cost-effective management infrastructure to attract students, a.k.a. ''customers.'' School boards will respond to that challenge in order to keep (or win back) those customers. Sort of like the real world.

Michael J. Connelly
Chief Executive
Mosaica Education Inc.
New York


By willfully excluding students who have the greatest needs, for-profit education has left out in the cold the children who need the most restructuring in services. As a school psychologist, I'm appalled by the lack of outrage at taxpayer-funded separatism outlawed decades ago. As an investor, I have shorted these stocks waiting for anti-discrimination lawsuits to send these companies to the grave. This educational fad will also pass.

Craig Varsa
Alexandria, Va.


When I see a for-profit school that teaches the same percentage of learning-impaired, bilingual, attention-deficit-disorder (ADD), and physically/medically handicapped students as the public schools; that offers the same athletic and other extracurricular experiences for all kids; that produces the same facilities without raiding public bond money; and that still manages to show significant gains in achievement, perhaps I'll find more merit to the arguments.

As a parent of middle-schoolers and high-schoolers, as well as being a 19-year veteran high school teacher, it infuriates me to see my tax dollars and school funding siphoned away from the kids who need it most. Most of the schools you featured do not provide services for those with learning disabilities, bilingual education, or support for kids with ADD. They also don't usually offer interscholastic athletic programs, free-lunch programs, or security guards. Why? Because they don't have to. So as taxpayer dollars leave the public schools, required by law to educate everyone, we are left with less and less as we deal with an increasing proportion of students who require more and more.

How about finding public schools that do work, highlight their attributes, and encourage corporations to put money into public schools willing to make these changes? We already know the formula that works: excellent and well-paid teachers, a curriculum with high expectations that addresses multiple learning styles, parent/community involvement, low class size, frequent feedback and communication on students, and a well-maintained facility with adequate technology.

It's pathetic that in the longest-lasting economic boom we've ever experienced in our country, public education should have to go begging for dollars to fund basic programs.

Jennifer Grant Prileson
Tucson


I was dismayed to find that you had not considered Nobel Learning Communities, the profitability leader in the school market. The achievement levels of our students are exceptional, with third-graders at fifth-grade levels, sixth-graders at ninth-grade levels, and eighth-graders at post-high school levels in reading. Also note that our ''first'' charter school was profitable, and we expect all to be. Our administrative costs average only 7% of tuitions, compared with much higher overhead numbers of our competitors. Making a profit while producing students whose achievement levels are above national norms is not a futuristic theory but a reality today at Nobel.


A. ''Jack'' Clegg
Chief Executive
Nobel Learning Communities Inc.
Media, Pa.

Accountants Need Clear, Modern Rules to Guide Them

''If you can't trust the auditors...'' (Editorials, Feb. 7) raises legitimate concerns about independence violations at one large accounting firm. The public has the right to expect accountants to follow the rules. When the rules are not followed, scrutiny is warranted, and appropriate punishment necessary.

But it's nonsense to suggest that the prospect of getting rich quick by investing in Internet startups is causing auditors to ''bend the rules.'' The core values of the certified public accountants--honesty and integrity, objectivity and independence, commitment to quality, and professional expertise--have not changed. Nor has the profession's commitment to ensuring that auditors apply the latest in audit methodology and technology to provide real value to our financial system.

CPAs play a critical role in protecting the public interest and in promoting the smooth functioning of our capital markets. Objectivity and independence are professional obligations we take seriously. However, the profession has the right to expect the rules to remain current and relevant. Many of the independence rules for auditors were created decades ago, before working spouses and ubiquitous 401(k) plans, for example. No one disagrees that auditors must remain independent from the companies they audit, but forcing partners' spouses to divest themselves of their pension plan because it includes investments in an audit client supervised by a partner they don't know 3,000 miles away defies common sense. It's time to write independence rules that make sense in today's world.

Barry Melancon
President and CEO
American Institute of
Certified Public Accountants
New York


Given the self-serving statement by the partners of PricewaterhouseCoopers that their ''conflict-of-interest rules are too byzantine to understand...,'' they have pushed themselves down to the low level of other professionals, i.e., physicians who thought that it was O.K. to cheat the government because the rules were too complex for them; lawyers who have become the butt of jokes about their lack of morals; and politicians who have rightly earned low scores for integrity. I think most Americans believe it is the auditors who are to be relied on to cut through the ambiguities and obfuscations in organizations. Now the auditors claim they cannot even follow their own rules. The last trustworthy profession seems to have lost its focus--and status.

Ray L. Brown
Rancho Cordova, Calif.

Schwab's New Fees Don't Benefit Ordinary Investors

I was disappointed with ''The price is sliced'' (Finance, Feb.14). Charles Schwab & Co.'s online brokerage is slicing prices in half for traders and thus becoming more competitive. The deal is not competitive or advantageous to customers. Actually, many Schwab customers are disturbed and insulted by this supposed price cut and are considering changing to other brokerages.

To reduce the price of their trades, Schwab investors must maintain a minimum of $50,000 in their accounts, which is high for average investors and doesn't apply to more than half of online traders. Also, Schwab, the article claims, cuts its commission ''to $19.95 after an account's 30th trade in a quarter, and to $14.95 after the 60th trade.'' Thus, to achieve this low rate, investors must churn their own accounts.

How is this deal competitive when an investor can, for example, trade with Ameritrade for a mere $8 per trade (roughly half of Schwab's ''special'' rate) with a $500 minimum (as opposed to Schwab's $50,000 minimum) and no minimum number of trades. Ironically, those who maintain a $50,000 minimum to attain Schwab's rate will have to trade frequently. Their profits will be eaten up by commissions to Schwab, which in turn might cause their portfolios to go below $50,000.

Eric Sterling
Montgomery, Ala.

Take a Closer Look at Starwood's Board

We were surprised by your characterization of the Starwood Hotels & Resorts board as ''loaded with insiders and friends of founder CEO'' in ''The best and worst boards'' (Special Report, Jan. 24). These are the facts:

Barry Sternlicht, chairman and CEO, is the only insider on our 15-person board. No insiders are on the audit or compensation committees. In April, 1999, Starwood reduced the size of the board while adding five new independent directors, including former Senator George J. Mitchell and CEOs and board members of other highly respected large-cap companies. Accordingly, we believe an objective assessment would conclude that Starwood has an independent, shareholder-focused board.


F. Daniel Gibson
Senior Vice-President,
Corporate Affairs
Starwood Hotels &
Resorts Worldwide Inc.
New York

At the Citadel, Coeducation Has Turned the Corner

''Storming a bastion of machismo'' (Books, Jan. 31) does justice to the book, In Glory's Shadow, but the book in no way does justice to the Citadel. How could the Citadel be as bad as the book's author, Catherine S. Manegold, would have readers believe and still have produced successive generations of leaders who have served their country and communities with distinction?

When the Citadel first admitted women in 1993, every faltering step we took was broadcast around the world. The story of coeducation at the Citadel since that time is not so sensational but of immensely greater consequence. The 63 young women currently in the South Carolina Corps of Cadets include academic, military, and athletic leaders. Our first woman cadet graduated last May. The young woman in the Class of 2000 is the second-highest-ranking officer in her battalion. Another woman has just become the editor of the campus newspaper. Women athletes are establishing viable teams for Southern Conference competition. Furthermore, our admissions office, which is receiving applications at a record pace, has experienced a 33% increase in female applicants over this time last year.

Our shaky beginnings with coeducation are a well-documented part of our 157-year history, and the turbulence of those days will continue to provide material for enterprising writers. But the unheralded story--that the Citadel has been successful with coeducation--is the real one.

John S. Grinalds
Major General
U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.)
President
The Citadel
Charleston, S.C.

Blacks on the Web: Let's Not Create a Back-of-the-Bus

I find it sad that Roger O. Crockett and B. Keith Fulton would advocate the segregation of the Internet and of Web sites based on skin color (''Attention must be paid,'' e.biz, Feb. 7). While Crockett finds it ''shocking that e-commerce giants like Amazon.com don't have ethnic book sections,'' I find it encouraging. I do not want Internet retailers to set aside a section of the ''Web bus'' where they will make assumptions about which products I want to buy based on the color of my skin.

Howie Swaim
Amissville, Va.