Sentences with phrase «worse than traditional schools»

Both fully online (virtual) schools and blended learning schools included in the report tended to fare worse than traditional schools on state assessments of quality.

A recent study found that the majority of charter schools perform no better or worse than traditional schools.

In the most comprehensive examination to date of online charters, CREDO found that more than two - thirds of online charter schools had academic growth that was worse than traditional schools.

Ohio, where most charters are worse than the traditional schools, gained a reputation as the «Wild West» of charter schools because it exercised almost no oversight.

Not exact matches

But though 80 percent of the charters in her home state perform worse than traditional public schools, DeVos — a billionaire whose family has also opposed workers» rights, gay marriage and has contributed heavily to a variety of other right - wing causes — has led the way in resisting any attempts to regulate or improve Michigan charter performance.

«Our findings reveal that, across all grades and subjects, students in online charter schools perform worse on standardized assessments and are significantly less likely to pass Ohio's test for high school graduation than their peers in traditional charter and traditional public schools,» said McEachin.

The results from this study showed a number of charters (17 %) doing significantly better (at the 95 % level) than the traditional public schools that fed the charters, but there was an even larger group of charters (37 %) doing significantly worse in terms of reading and math.

The heart of the piece is the claim that Detroit has experienced a dramatic increase in charter schools, but those new schools are no better or often worse than the traditional public schools.

The Times editors fault DeVos for supposedly supporting «legislative changes that have reduced oversight and accountability» for charter schools — a charge that treads a thin line between exaggeration and falsehood — and laments that DeVos wants to expand school choice in Detroit, where supposedly «charter schools often perform no better than traditional schools, and sometimes worse» [links in the original].

(See Table 7 on p. 44) To claim that half the charters perform the same or worse than traditional public schools is a grotesque distortion of the study's findings.

It alleges that a review of the research on charter schools leads to the conclusions that, overall, charter schools: 1) fail to raise student achievement more than traditional district schools do; 2) aren't innovative and don't pass innovations along to district schools; 3) exacerbate the racial and ethnic isolation of students; 4) provide a worse environment for teachers than district schools; and 5) spend more on administration and less on instruction than public schools.

As the article puts it: «But half the charters perform only as well, or worse than, Detroit's traditional public schools.»

Sixty percent of the charter schools studied performed worse than their traditional public school counterparts.

Like other skeptics, Carter seized on a 2010 report from Stanford University's Center for Research on Education Outcomes that portrayed many charter schools as doing no better, and indeed sometimes worse, than traditional schools nationwide.

The study found that only 1 % of Detroit's charters performs significantly worse than the traditional public schools in reading and only 7 % in math.

And on the specific claim the article makes that «half the charters perform only as well, or worse than, Detroit's traditional public schools» this is what the Stanford study has to say: «In reading, 47 percent of charter schools perform significantly better than their traditional public school market, which is more positive than the 35 % for Michigan charter schools as a whole.

[1] For a long time, the debate over charter schools has revolved around the simplistic question of whether they are better or worse than traditional public schools.

On average, charter schools in Arizona do no better, and sometimes worse, than the traditional public schools.

Known as the CREDO study, it evaluated student progress on math tests in half the nation's five thousand charter schools and concluded that 17 percent were superior to a matched traditional public school; 37 percent were worse than the public school; and the remaining 46 percent had academic gains no different from that of a similar public school.

A recent study of virtual schools in Pennsylvania conducted by the Center for Research on Education Outcomes at Stanford University revealed that students in online schools performed significantly worse than their traditional counterparts.

But some note that many charters perform the same as or worse than traditional public schools.

This is the fifth time in as many months that state oversight officials have taken some kind of disciplinary action against virtual schools — which some research has shown perform markedly worse academically than traditional district schools.

A 2009 Stanford University report, lauded as most authoritative research yet on the issue, concluded that 17 percent of the charter schools studied outperform public schools and 37 percent «deliver results that are significantly worse» than those expected of traditional public schools.

So when the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), the nation's second - largest teachers» union, published a study in August 2004 that found students at charter schools performing worse than their peers at traditional public schools, more than a few hopes were dashed.

The most startling of these reports indicated that students who used school vouchers performed much worse on standardized tests than those who remained in traditional public schools.

Last fall, multiple research studies found that virtual charter schools yield significantly worse academic results than traditional public schools.

The study of charter schools in 15 states and the District of Columbia found that, nationally, only 17 % of charter schools do better academically than their traditional counterparts, and more than a third «deliver learning results that are significantly worse than their student [s] would have realized had they remained in traditional public schools.»

«In her blog, Weingarten states, «A well - regarded Stanford University study found that charter school students were doing only slightly better in reading than students in traditional public schools, but at the same time doing slightly worse in math.»

A 2011 study of Pennsylvania cyber schools found that students in online charter schools performed worse in most measures than their counterparts who spent their days in traditional classrooms.

While the report recognized a robust national demand for more charter schools from parents and local communities, it found that 17 percent of charter schools reported academic gains that were significantly better than traditional public schools, while 37 percent of charter schools showed gains that were worse than their traditional public school counterparts, with 46 percent of charter schools demonstrating no significant difference.

Even the rabidly pro-charter school Chicago Tribune reported that «New data suggests many charter schools in Chicago are performing no better than traditional neighborhood schools, and some are doing worse.»

He pushed for the states to drop the cap on charter schools even though research studies indicate they are no better than traditional public schools, and sometimes worse.

Along with the shift in goals, the public policy rhetoric changed from an emphasis on how charters could best serve as laboratory partners to public schools, to whether charters as a group are «better» or «worse» than traditional public schools.

Studies on vouchers show that many voucher students perform worse than traditional public school students.

A study conducted at Stanford University's Hoover Institution presents evidence that students in only 17 percent of charter school show greater improvement in math and reading than students in similar traditional public schools, whereas 37 percent, deliver learning results that are significantly worse than the student would have realized had they remained in public schools.

Instead they are required to navigate the education marketplace, choosing between neighborhood schools that have been creamed of their best students and the new experimental start - ups that on average perform worse than traditional public schools.

A recent Detroit News analysis found charter high schools in Detroit performed worse than traditional public schools.

The most authoritative of controlled studies showed that 37 percent of US charter schools have worse student outcomes than traditional public schools, less than 50 percent are on a par with them, and only 17 percent provide a superior education for their students.

The most authoritative study on the issue — out of Stanford University in 2009 — found that only 17 percent of the charter schools studied outperform public schools and that 37 percent «deliver results that are significantly worse» than those expected of traditional public schools.

Stanford's Center for Research on Education Outcomes, or CREDO, found that students at online charter schools saw dramatically worse outcomes than their counterparts at traditional, brick - and - mortar schools.

In DeVos» native Michigan, for example, children in the fourth and eighth grades in the state's charter schools did worse on a national reading and math test than those in traditional public schools.

In April 2017, In the Public Interest released a report revealing that a substantial portion of the more than $ 2.5 billion in tax dollars or taxpayer subsidized financing spent on California charter school facilities in the past 15 years has been misspent on: schools that underperformed nearby traditional public schools; schools built in districts that already had enough classroom space; schools that were found to have discriminatory enrollment policies; and in the worst cases, schools that engaged in unethical or corrupt practices.

Another report from Data First, part of the Center for Public Education, stated that «the majority of charter schools do no better or worse than traditional public schools.»

A well - regarded Stanford University study found that charter school students were doing only slightly better in reading than students in traditional public schools, but at the same time doing slightly worse in math.

When the American Federation of Teachers published a study that found students at charter schools performing worse than their peers at traditional public schools, more than a few hopes were dashed.

At best, it appears that some charter schools perform very well, but that the majority perform no better, or even significantly worse than neighboring traditional public schools.

But Ms. Weingarten, the union leader, cited another study this year from the Center for Research on Education Outcomes — also at Stanford — that looked at charters in 16 states and found that half did no better than traditional schools, and more than a third performed worse.

Despite its blind editorial support for charter schools, the Chicago Tribune reported today that «New data suggests many charter schools in Chicago are performing no better than traditional neighborhood schools, and some are doing worse.»