[RSCT] Charter Schools Might Not Be Better

[S. Kashdan]

Charter Schools Might Not Be Better



 U.S. News and World Report, June 18, 2009



httpccnewsddyahooddcomstsstusnews/blebjjijfah/tsusnewsstcharterschoolsmightnotbebetter



 On average, charter schools are not performing as well as their traditional
public-school peers, according to a new study that is being called the first
national assessment of these school-choice options. The study, conducted by
the Center for Research on Education Outcomes at Stanford University,
compared the reading and math state achievement test scores of students in
charter schools in 15 states and the District of Columbia--amounting to 70
percent of U.S. charter school students--to those of their virtual "twins"
in regular schools who shared with them certain characteristics. The
research found that 37 percent of charter schools posted math gains that
were significantly below what students would have seen if they had enrolled
in local traditional public schools. And 46 percent of charter schools
posted math gains that were statistically indistinguishable from the average
growth among their traditional public-school companions. That means that
only 17 percent of charter schools have growth in math scores that exceeds
that of their traditional public-school equivalents by a significant amount.
In reading, charter students on average realized a growth that was less than
their public-school counterparts but was not as statistically significant as
differences in math achievement, researchers said.  "We are worried by these
results," Margaret Raymond, director of CREDO and lead author of the report,
Multiple Choice: Charter School Performance in 16 States, said at a news
conference. "This study shows that we've got a 2-to-1 margin of bad charters
to good charters."  Charter schools, free public schools that operate under
their own mandate ("charter") rather than the overall district policies, are
a staple of education reform agendas across the United States. Supporters
say they improve public education by giving parents options and forcing
schools to compete for students. The Stanford report already is riling up
these schools' most ardent advocates.  The Washington-based Center for
Education Reform disputed the findings, saying that they're based on
uncorrelated variables, contradictory demographics, and a virtual
methodology. The organization said that comparing the test scores of
charter-school students to their "virtual" peers in regular public schools--
students who match the charter students' demographics, English language
proficiency, and participation in special education or subsidized lunch
programs--is simplistic and is a fundamental flaw in the research because no
two students are the same.  "More than 16 years of charter school research
and analysis from CER shows that charter schools are outpacing their
conventional public school peers with fewer resources and tremendous
obstacles," the nonprofit group said in a news release.  The CREDO report
identified five states--Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Louisiana, and
Missouri--where charter schools had significantly higher learning gains than
traditional schools. But the report contended that if charter schools are to
flourish, their supporters must be willing to establish accountability in
exchange for flexibility. The reluctance to close underperforming charters
because of powerful community supporters hurts students and reflects poorly
on charter schools as a whole, the report said.  The research comes on the
heels of a recent pledge by President Barack Obama's education secretary,
Arne Duncan, to use $5 billion of the $100 billion in federal stimulus funds
for education to press states on charter schools. "States that don't have
charter school laws, or put artificial caps on the growth of charter
schools, will jeopardize their application" for federal grant money, Duncan
said in a call with reporters last week. Currently, 10 states lack laws that
allow charter schools, and 26 others cap their enrollment.  The Stanford
report may offer some encouraging news for charter schools: Students in
poverty and English- language learners outperformed their public-school
peers in both reading and math. However, learning gains for black and
Hispanic charter-school students were significantly lower than those of
their traditional- school twins. But critics said those results demonstrated
the flaws in the Stanford research: The overlap between low-income
English-learner students and blackstHispanic students is so great, CER said,
that it should be impossible to get such contradictory results.