Moreover, while the charter school sector has rapidly expanded, research has suggested that charters do not, on average, perform better on student
outcomes than regular public schools.
The rule means charter operators must prove that they can show strong results without «creaming» students, or somehow enrolling an easier - to - teach group of students
than the regular public schools do.
Charter schools, whose leaders increasingly complain of inequitable funding, on average get nearly $ 2,000 less per
student than regular public schools, a detailed analysis of 16 states and the District of Columbia has found.
According to a Washington Post analysis of recent national test results for economically disadvantaged students, D.C. middle - school charters scored 19 points higher
than the regular public schools in reading and 20 points higher in math.
The policy group Save Our States, headed by former state GOP comptroller candidate Harry Wilson, reports that charters in public school buildings cost more than $ 3,000 less per student
less than regular public schools.
An Independent Budget Office study suggested that charter schools actually get more overall
aid than regular public schools when factoring in the free rent or subsidy they receive from the city.
And liberated from traditional school boundaries, Shanker and other early charter advocates suggested, charters could do a better job
than the regular public schools of helping children of different racial, ethnic, economic, and religious backgrounds come together to learn from one another.
Charter schools are more racially
isolated than regular public schools in practically every state and large urban area in the United States, says a report released by the Civil Rights Project / Proyecto Derechos Civiles at the University of California, Los Angeles.
A study by EdSource, a Palo Alto, Calif. - based research group, has found that more classroom - based California charter schools met their achievement goals on state
exams than regular public schools or nonclassroom - based charters.
The result, according to Boston Foundation research, including work done in collaboration with Harvard Graduate School of Education Professor Tom Kane, shows that the charters are performing at a higher
level than the regular public schools with the same population.
Arne Duncan thinks that magnet schools are the answer, yet there is absolutely no evidence that they succeed better
than regular public school despite the inherit advantage of having students of parents interested enough in their children's education to enroll them in one.
Charter schools make a basic promise to students, parents, school districts and the state: They operate with greater autonomy and
flexibility than regular public schools in exchange for increased accountability.
District school records show that charters also have better attendance and graduation
rates than the regular public schools and that their teachers are more likely to fit the city's definition of «highly qualified,» meaning that they have expertise in what they are teaching.
It's quite possible that Aspire's blended learning model produces better results not because it's using computers, but because it has better students entering its
classrooms than the regular public school down the street.
When asked what type of school they would select to obtain the best education for their children, nearly two - thirds of registered voters (66 %) would select something
other than a regular public school.
Although charter schools generally are more independent of their chartering
authorities than regular public schools are of their districts, and are exempt from most of the state's regulations, they must participate in state testing and comply with federal laws.
These achievement gains have come even while California's charter schools are educating a higher percentage of lower - income students and those with learning
problems than regular public schools.
4 Ironically, charter schools held an early promise of becoming more
integrated than regular public schools because they were not constrained by racially isolating school district boundary lines.
Critics of charter schools have often pointed to those schools» ability to expel uncooperative and disruptive students, far more
readily than regular public schools can, as a reason for some charter schools» far better educational outcomes, as shown on many tests.
Uncommon Schools, Achievement First, Harlem Children's Zone, and KIPP (Knowledge Is Power Program) provide as much as 60 percent more time in
school than regular public schools do.
«We are not asking for any more
than the regular public school funding,» said Pullen, who pointed out that the parents involved in the program have raised hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to supplement teacher assistants for each class.
Buried in a new report by the U.S. Department of Education is a comparison claiming to show that charter schools — independently run public schools free from many restrictions — have lower average test
scores than regular public schools.
«I want to make sure people know [about] funding, and how charter schools are more
unique than regular public schools,» said 8th grader Matthew Dukar from Tapestry Charter School in Buffalo.
In some states, charter schools are top performing, but this is not a consistent profile; others have failed spectacularly, sometimes doing
worse than regular public schools.
And yet, «results,» or rather, academic improvement, act more like a fig leaf, especially in light of numerous recent studies that show charter schools, taken on the whole, actually do a worse job of educating
students than regular public schools.
This for a place that promised longer days (an hour
more than the regular public schools), an extra 25 days of school per academic year, tough discipline, uniforms, and rigorous academic standards.