I do want to point out, however, that public charter schools have access to less
money than traditional public schools.
Not exact matches
Icahn's
money would go exclusively to pay for buildings, and there would be less
money spent on each student
than at
traditional public schools.
Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have nothing to add to this discussion other
than a promise to spend more
money propping up
traditional public schools.
Charter
schools get taxpayer
money but have more freedom
than traditional public schools do to map out how they'll meet federal education benchmarks.
Charter
schools draw fire from teachers» unions and other education groups, who say taxpayer
money should be spent to fix
traditional public education system rather
than creating
schools that have less oversight from state and local officials.
The charter
schools model offers a community a way to create a
school that often has lower operating costs
than traditional schools — particularly for employee compensation — and greater flexibility in class offerings, all funded with federal start - up
money and a large portion of the annual per - pupil payment from the state for
public school students.
School choice includes charter
schools, funded by
public money but given more flexibility and accountability
than traditional neighborhood
schools.
Charters
schools receiving a D or F can also qualify for this
money if they prove their students perform as well or better
than nearby
traditional public schools.
They argue the
money could be better spent on bringing innovations to
traditional public schools, rather
than picking «winners and losers» and propping up a specific few nonprofit charter operators, whose «
schools of hope» could essentially replace failing neighborhood
schools.
* In most states, charter
school districts reported spending less
money per pupil
than traditional public schools on instruction, student support services and teacher salaries.
A proposal in the Georgia General Assembly would give more
money to state charter
schools, which get less
money per student
than traditional public schools yet must outperform
traditional schools or risk losing their charters.
The case alleges the way the state funds charter
schools is unconstitutional because less
money is allocated per student
than to their
traditional public school counterparts.
Most district administrators have the mentality that charters are taking students,
money and facilities from the districts and therefore fight charters rather
than appreciate that they serve students that need a different environment from what is offered in
traditional public schools.
By teaching civics in tandem with experiential learning, YES Prep teachers, more often
than traditional public or private
school teachers, were «very confident» that their students learned «[t] o be tolerant of people and groups who are different from themselves,» «[t] o understand concepts such as federalism, separation of powers, and checks and balances,» and «[t] o develop habits of community service such as volunteering and raising
money for causes,» according to 2010 American Enterprise Institute Program on American Citizenship survey.30 As a charter network serving low - income students, its service - centered mission serves both the students and their communities.
Charter
schools are
public schools run with tax
money, but they're allowed more flexibility in their programs
than traditional district
schools.
In the final analysis, Figlio's work indicates that it does not matter whether the private
schools who accept voucher
money are better
than traditional public schools.