Regarding your recent story on Baltimore City school closures (“As Baltimore prepares to close more schools, many worry about the communities they anchor,” Dec. 27), I understand arguments for combining student bodies to have more efficient use of space, and I understand arguments to the effect that some schools cannot be repaired or maintained.
I do not, however, understand arguments for closing schools based on poor academic performance. Surely, academic performance comes from a combination of students, teachers, parents and education resources.
What do those factors have to do with a building? It is truly odd to factor student performance into these deliberations, since closing poor performing schools seems more like a tactic to mask the problem by transferring it elsewhere. Solutions to poor performance are better addressed by facing the matters of people and circumstances, not by deciding whether to keep a school, even a charter school, open.