How can high - quality charter schools show they are as effective, or better,
than traditional public schools if they don't have comparable data to prove it?
Not exact matches
Here is what we know: students in urban areas do significantly better in
school if they attend a charter
schools than if they attend a
traditional public school.
If conversion
schools were better -
than - average
traditional public schools to begin with, they may be distorting the estimated impact of charters on educational attainment.
Only 18 percent of the
public know that charters can not hold religious services, 19 percent that they can not charge tuition, 15 percent that students must be admitted by lottery (
if the
school is oversubscribed), and just 12 percent that, typically, charters receive less government funding per pupil
than traditional public schools.
Even
if a charter or private
school were no better
than a
traditional forced - choice
public school, the fact that parents and students themselves choose the
school may mean they perceive distinct advantages in it, real or not.
If you look at Figures 1 and 2 in the report on Detroit that I cited from Stanford's CREDO research center, you will see that the city's charter
schools do look somewhat better
than the comparison
traditional public schools, but there are four problems with taking these results literally.
And
if it is truly advocating for people of color, it won't deny Black parents the right to choose
schools that are educating Black children far better
than traditional public schools.
Require that
public charter
schools be free and open to all students just as
traditional public schools are, and that students be selected by lottery to ensure fairness
if more students apply
than a
school can accommodate;
If a charter
school can't prove success, it can be closed much more easily
than a
traditional public school.
Charter
schools are unique
public schools granted some flexibility by the state to be responsive to students» needs and innovative in education, while meeting stricter accountability
than traditional ISDs, because charter
schools can be closed
if there are academic and financial problems for three years running.
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.
Since the average charter
school enrolls 400 students, the average
public charter
school in the U.S. received $ 1,525,600 less in per - pupil funding in 2010 - 11
than it would have received
if it had been a
traditional public school.
If the trends hold, it means that the «market share» for
traditional public schools will for the first time be less
than 60 percent.
The studies come amid a growing debate over the question of whether charter
schools are inadequately funded compared with
traditional public schools, and
if / how they improve student achievement better
than the
traditional schools.
If a charter has a lower percentage of ELL students to teach
than a
traditional public school, its average reported test scores may be easier to raise.
Charter
school officials say they should get just as much funding because their
schools perform just as well,
if not better,
than traditional public schools while educating higher percentages of low - income, minority students.
Although some individual charter
schools have their struggles, the study suggests that students who attend charters generally may be better off
than if they had gone to
traditional public schools in their communities.