5 Devastating Facts About Charter Schools You Won't Hear from the 'National School Choice Week'

[xchrom]

http://www.alternet.org/education/5-devastating-facts-about-charter-schools-you-wont-hear-national-school-choice-week

1. There are no data that support the idea that charter schools are superior to public schools.Even using data from the high-stakes tests school choice folks admire so much. According to Data First, an initiative of the Center for Public Education, on math assessments 17% of kids in charter schools perform significantly better than their peers in public schools. But 37% perform significantly worse. For the rest (46%), scores were comparable. According to a national study by the Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO), “less than one hundredth of one percent (<0.01 percent) of the variation in test performance in reading is explainable by charter school enrollment.” Not exactly proof of a winning formula, no matter how you slice it.

2. Unlike public schools, charters can pick and choose their students. Children with special needs are not chosen. Children with behavior problems are expelled. According to Julian Vasquez Heilig, “KIPP and other charters faced a federal lawsuit in New Orleans for not serving special populations and/or doing so poorly.” According to Diane Ravitch in her book, The Myth of the Charter School, some charter schools “counsel out” or expel students just before state testing day. Lower-performing students tend to mysteriously drop out. Throws that “better performing” 17% into serious question, doesn’t it?

3. Children who are better resourced with more family support are the winners in the school choice game. Children from disorganized families don’t even enter the lottery. Children with significant special needs are not well served in charter schools that lack the appropriate resources. The privatization of our schools puts public schools at a huge disadvantage, stranding the least advantaged and disabled in underfunded, under-resourced schools. Much like Lady Liberty, public schools welcome all who end up on their shores:

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me….”

4. It’s family income, stupid. Ravitch and many others have pointed out numerous studies linking income and test scores. One study demonstrates how SAT scores favor students from wealthy families. Another study at Washington State University confirms the correlation between parental income and ACT and SAT scores, while a different article on the widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor shows how the gap between children from high- and low-income families is roughly 30 to 40 percent larger among children born in 2001 than among those born twenty-five years earlier. In fact, though good teachers are important and account for 10-20% of student achievement scores, University of Washington economist Dan Goldhaber has shown that nonschool factors such as family income account for 60% of achievement. That’s a mighty high percentage to try to overcome with uniforms and sustained eye-contact.

[chervilant]

1. This:

Children with significant special needs are not well served in charter schools that lack the appropriate resources.

I have to wonder: is this an unacknowledged reason why people with money are pushing for charters? To give their relatively well off children an educational edge?

[Pacifist Patriot]

2. I think there are probably quite a few unacknowledged reasons.

With each family having their own unique mix of motivations.

I had the misfortune to overhear a conversation in a store near my son's high school (well deserved excellent reputation) quite recently where two parents were talking about the charter school down the street. One parent freely admitted they were hoping their child would go to the charter school because "there are just too many minorities at ___ High School." And the other mom conceded the point! I have no doubt they are not unique and its another avenue for legalized segregation depending upon the community.

[hatrack]

3. They've found a way to transplant the "Christian Academies" of the post-integration Deep South

But you don't dare say that, because it's all about the grift, uh, all about the children.

[YarnAddict]

4. The charter school here in my small town

turned out to be a very good thing.

I've posted about this before. When we moved here in 1992, the public schools were terrible. The kids tested 50% "satisfactory" on the MEAP standardized test, and it was seen as a huge accomplishment. I couldn't believe this was touted as a good thing, so to clarify, I asked my child's principal if that meant that 50% tested "unsatisfactory," and he said yes. I was appalled.

There was a book on the library shelf entitled "Someday Man Will Walk on the Moon." They bitched about money constantly, but it wouldn't have cost anything for someone to pull that book. The problem was that no one cared. The (unionized) library aide would just say, "That's not my job." So, it remained, as a monument to apathy.

The administrators sat on their fat asses, collecting their salaries, and knowing that they had a great thing going for themselves. The educational fad at the time was "inclusion." I sat in a PTA meeting where one of the teachers proclaimed that "all kids are the same. They are the same in the classroom, and they are the same on the playground." Wait, what? Observing any elementary playground would tell you that no, no to kids are the same, and they tend to seek out others with the same interests and skills, and if you were to put that concept into the classroom, you would find you could help those who need help, and challenge those who wanted to learn. Instead they took the lazy way out and taught to the middle.

So when the charter school started, it got such unforeseen interest that they expanded it from the proposed K--4th to K--5th.

It shocked the crap out of the local administrators!! Guess what? For the first time EVER they had to become responsive to the concerns and wishes of the students and parents!!! They instituted AP classes for the first time. Previously that concept hadn't fit in with their "inclusion, teach-to-the-middle" philosophy. They offered some on-line classes, to expand course offerings for interested students. They promoted academic competitions, like Science Olympiad. They hired some younger, more dynamic teachers.

Even though the charter school ultimately failed, it was the best thing that ever could have happened to the public schools here. Competition is not a bad thing, particularly where the public schools are known to be failing.

[jehop61]

6. Well done sir or madame

You managed to get all the sterotypes into one small paragraph. Unions, incompetence and lazy teachers. (sarcasm)

[YarnAddict]

7. Thank you!

(also sarcasm)

Can't help it if it's the truth. Every. Single. Word.

Let me ask you: Do you have children? How would you feel about them having to languish in a boring, mediocre class in a failing school? Would you do whatever it takes to improve their educational circumstances? Or, would you sacrifice their futures for the principle of the abyssmal failure that public education is in a whole lot of places?

[Darb]

34. No, it's not the "truth".

It's your obviously slanted interpretation of a particular reality. Your language gave you away like a flashing red light affixed to the top of your head.

[m-lekktor]

11. your precious anecdotal story aside

when the profit motive is the priority and not education (similar situation with medical insurance, profit over healthcare provision), it is only downhill from there. charter schools are a right wing/ republican thing and Democrats have no fucking business promoting this vile horseshit.

[YarnAddict]

14. You don't like my "precious" anecdote

It is also the "precious" truth for lots of kids stuck in failing schools. You can choose to sacrifice your children's futures for the "precious" principle of failing public education, but not everyone will. And, good for them.

[Darb]

35. You have no solutions and could not care less about one.

Unless of course it is a tiny slice solution, like for say..............your kids?

Ammiwrong, ammiwrong?

[ND-Dem]

46. seems it was the charter that failed

[YarnAddict]

49. The charter school failed

because the public schools became more attractive to the students and parents it served, which only happened because the charter provided an alternative to previously trapped students. The charter did what it was intended and then some: It improved the education for everyone in our community.

[Recursion]

32. Can you name me a single for-profit charter school, anywhere in the US?

Seriously. Any city and state. Just name it.

[ND-Dem]

47. are you kidding?

1. whether a charter is supposedly 'non-profit' or not, there are all sorts of ways to profit from them. one of the easiest is to set up separate for profit companies and bill the charter for their services -- such as for the school property, suppliers, etc. Or you can get a little more complicated:

Virginia-based Imagine Schools Inc. recruited and manipulated the local school board, according to a federal court ruling, then profited from a “double-dealing” lease scheme.

The local board “was in fact a captive of Imagine Schools both by design and by operation,” U.S. District Judge Nanette K. Laughrey wrote in her decision Dec. 18.

The local board did not know, the court determined, that Imagine Schools was using a finance company that it owned — SchoolHouse Finance — to sell the buildings on Renaissance’s two campuses to obtain lower lease rates.

Imagine Schools benefited from the lower rate but continued to collect the higher rate from the local board, the court said.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article8166348.html#storylink=cpy

Teach for America loves to expand its reach, and so it has again, this time partnering with the controversial Imagine schools, the nation’s largest for-profit charter school network.

That’s an interesting pairing.

Imagine is based in Arlington, Virginia, with some 75 schools in more than a dozen states, including Maryland, and the District of Columbia. The for-profit charter operator has been investigated in some states for the way it exercises control over the schools it manages, essentially ignoring the boards of trustees that are supposed to really run the schools.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/teach-for-americas-new-partnership-with-largest-for-profit-charter-network/2012/03/13/gIQAbsfrLS_blog.html

Imagine has a for-profit and a non-profit arm.


I don't vouch for these stats, but:

67 percent of all charter schools are independently run non-profit, single site schools; 20 percent are run by non-profit organizations that run more than one charter school; and just under 13 percent are run by for-profit companies.

http://www.publiccharters.org/get-the-facts/public-charter-schools/faqs/

[Orrex]

5. Charter Schools were never intended to provide a quality alternative to public education

Their two goals are:

1. To redistribute public money to private, wealthy hands

by

2. Inflicting a slow, strangling death upon public education


I'm sure that there are some glowing examples of charter schools nobly fulfilling the educational needs of a diverse range of children, but such schools are extreme anomalies. As an institution, charter schools are a pure money-grab.

[YarnAddict]

8. Competition is good

See my response above.

[Orrex]

10. That's a red herring.

HONEST competition is good, but charter schools in general aren't interested in honest competition. Dishonest competition is simply cheating the system, and in the case of charter schools it's cheating in order to grab profits.

I'm pleased that your community has benefited. The charter school in that case, as I noted above, is an extreme anomaly.

[YarnAddict]

13. What is the more important question, IMHO,

is whether the school district we moved into was also an extreme anomaly. I am afraid there are far too many families and children trapped by circumstance in schools and districts where mediocrity is accepted as the status quo, and any challenge to it must be quelled.

There is no simple answer to improving public education for all students. The single biggest predictor of educational success is parental involvement in the schools, and that is where charter schools have the huge advantage over regular public schools: They often require that parents volunteer their time.

[Orrex]

21. The problems you cite won't be corrected by leeching money from public schools

Nor will they be improved by having charter schools cherrypick the better-performing students while excluding the more challenging students, as is a common practice.

Incidentally, creationists also love to push their agenda in schools by singing the praises of "competition" and "choice," so you should be conscious of the way your arguments resonate with the slogans of those groups, too.

I am afraid there are far too many families and children trapped by circumstance in schools and districts where mediocrity is accepted as the status quo, and any challenge to it must be quelled.

That's a slogan taken straight out of the privatization playbook. And I guarantee you with 100% certainty that charter schools don't welcome "challenges to the status quo" nearly as readily as you seem to believe.

No doubt they accept "challenges" of a certain type and within a certain framework, but they're profit-generating machines that don't, ultimately, tolerate challenges to the bottom line. Under-performing students will be booted back to the public schools, and the charters will re-declare the superduper achievements of the students who survive the cut.

The single biggest predictor of educational success is parental involvement in the schools, and that is where charter schools have the huge advantage over regular public schools: They often require that parents volunteer their time.

That's another lovely slogan, but it's simply a formula for restricting access to this much-touted resource. You claim to advocate for children "trapped by circumstances," but you're simply not seeing reality: A single mother with two jobs and a brilliant child won't be able to volunteer at the school, so her child will be excluded.

You're arguing, in effect, that it's ok to trap low-income children in very circumstances of mediocrity that you claim to decry.


Parents who wish to enroll their children in private schools with distinguished records of performance are free and welcome to do so, but neither they nor the charter schools have any business stealing money from public schools in order to subsidize that effort.

[Darb]

36. That poster does not want a solution, just seems to want to spew

right wing talking points about unions and false "concern" over children.

Houseplant.

[Recursion]

38. Charter schools most places are filled by lottery. Hard to cherry pick that.

Again, if you look at DC, charters have less input in which kids they get to take than neighborhood schools, because the neighborhood schools have a certain reserve bank of non-neighborhood seats that in theory they fill first come first serve, while in practice...

Now, some charters counsel out disruptive students, while the process for neighborhood schools to do that is more onerous (though that also still happens, hence "alternative" schools for behavior problems). We should probably find a way to make that process easier for neighborhood schools so that the remaining students are a little less terrorized.

but they're profit-generating machines that don't, ultimately, tolerate challenges to the bottom line

I'm still waiting for one example, anywhere in the US, of a for-profit charter school. Some of them use for-profit EMC's, but then again so do some neighborhood schools (those curricula don't write themselves).

[Orrex]

40. None of what you've written refutes anything in the OP

The charter school that attempted to infect my local district was certainly a profit-minded enterprise. I attended several open meetings held by the prospective administration, and at least two school board meetings where they aggressively made their sales pitch, and NOT ONCE did they ever describe themselves as non-profit.

I myself asked point blank in the second school board meeting where the money would go, and they hemmed and hawed about an open-format "art infused" curriculum. If there was ever a time to declare their non-profit status, that was it.

I simply don't believe that my experience is unique.

Charter schools most places are filled by lottery. Hard to cherry pick that.

Not entirely true. The charter that sought to start in my district had X number of slots that were to be filled on first-come-first-served basis, with a remaining number of slots filled by lottery.

Further, while they might fill the roster by lottery, they sure as hell don't keep it filled by lottery. By selective pruning, they can (and do) easily weed out the undesirables, so that they're left with a student body that's effectively cherry-picked on the back end.


Look, I get that you think charters are the best thing since privatized bread, but it's not my responsibility to convince you that they're bad; since they're the petitioning party, it's up to them to convince me that they're good. As long as they siphon off money that would otherwise have gone to the existing public school, then they're already fairly far into the "bad" end of the spectrum.

They have a long way to go to correct that.

[ND-Dem]

48. Big Profits in Not-for-Profit Charter Schools

Currently, there are approximately 2.5 million students enrolled in publicly funded charter schools in the United States. These charter schools are operated by both profit-making companies and "not for profit" organizations. In New York City every charter school is operated by what is known as a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. In New York State, only 16 out of 209 charter schools are operated by for-profit companies. In other states, particularly Michigan, Florida, and Arizona, for-profit companies dominate the charter school movement. In Michigan, about 65% of the charter schools are run by for-profit educational management organizations.

However, operating non-profit charter schools can be very profitable for charter school executives like Eva Moskowitz. Moskowitz earns close to a half a million dollars a year ($485,000) for overseeing school programs that serve 6,700 children, which is over $72 per student. By comparison, New York State Education Commissioner is paid a salary of $212,000 to oversee programs with 2.7 million students or about 8 cents per student. In other words, Moskowitz earns about 100 times more than King for each student enrolled in a Success Academy Charter School. Carmen Farina, New York City School Chancellor is paid $212,000 a year to oversee 1.1 million students or about 19 cents per student.

Charter school operators are not the only Not-for-Profit or social entrepreneurs making money off of public schools. Charles Best created DonorsChoose.org so that public school teachers can raise money to pay for class projects. Best and his non-profit organization have received support from Oprah Winfrey, Stephen Colbert, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and has been a featured speaker at a Forbes magazine summit on philanthropy. A former public high school teacher in Bronx, New York, he would have been making about $85,000 a year if he remained as a teacher. As a not-for-profit entrepreneur, he makes about three times as much, almost $250,000a year from Donorschoose.org plus whatever he earns from lucrative speaking engagements.

I have one misgiving about publishing these figures. Once Eva Moskowitz sees what CEOs are earning at KIPP, Our World, Harlem Village, and Bronx Prep, she will probably be demanding even more money to run her non-profit charter schools.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/charter-school-executive-profit_b_5093883.html

[Recursion]

9. Charter schools have comparable results with much poorer and less-white students

Which is why ultimately I have to say they're a good idea.

Charter schools are much poorer and much less white and English-as-first-language than neighborhood schools, but they perform comparably. Good on them.

[Orrex]

15. As long as they don't siphon any money from public schools, then more power to them

Public schools have 99 problems, but over-funding ain't one.

Any charter-based solution that pulls money away from public schools is part of the problem.

[Recursion]

16. Charter schools are public schools

I'm not even sure what a "private" charter school would mean; it's a contradiction in terms.

[Orrex]

24. They are profit-generating machines in the guise of public schools

They siphon money away from existing public schools to the detriment of those schools. If they can be funded without taking money from existing public schools, then that's another matter, but it sure as hell isn't the way things work so far.

Countless public schools have closed nationwide due to budget shortfalls. By what logic would we open new, privately-owned corporate schools while closing down public facilities? The primary (and indeed, only) motivation is to funnel money into private hands.

Charter schools that pull money from public schools are a drain on resources. They even refer to the existing school district as the "host" school, an explicit acknowledgement of the parasitic nature of the role played by the charter.

If a school can be private, then a charter school can be private. It's only a "contradiction in terms" if we insist that it must be.

[Recursion]

26. Well, no; I'm pretty sure in every jurisdiction they are required to be not-for-profit

Do you know of a jurisdiction where charter schools are allowed to be for-profit?

[Orrex]

29. Where does the money go?

[Recursion]

30. Where does it go in neighborhood schools? Mostly salaries, maintenance, and transportation

Same place in both cases.

DCPS spends more per pupil than Fairfax Country, remember.

[Orrex]

33. Public schools have to foot the bill for a lot of services leeched by charter schools

It's not uncommon, for instance, for a charter school to usurp such public school resources as school buses, nurses, and special needs eductors, all funded by the "host" school of which the charter is a parasite. This is theft.


Regardless, none of what you've written refutes in any way the observations in the OP. Rather than bicker about which particular resource a particular charter has stolen from its host, I'd be more interested to hear your addressing of those damning and straightforward facts. Facts which were, I hasten to add, easily predicted by pretty much anyone who looks honestly at the charter school business model.

[Recursion]

39. Public schools using public resources is "theft"?

Again, I can only speak directly to DC, but there any facilities use comes out of the charters' budget. The biggest complaint I keep hearing is that it's not fair that Cesar Chavez charter pays the city hundreds of thousands of dollars to use the same playground that the neighborhood school across the street gets to use for free.

[Orrex]

41. Charter schools moving in and usurping scant resources is, effectively, theft

As noted elsewhere, if established public schools are closing because of budgetary constraints, and charter schools are swooping in to siphon off a chunk of the remaining budget, then they're a cancer. And they sure as hell don't employ union teachers, so that's another reason to suspect them of a more nefarious longterm agenda.

it's not fair that Cesar Chavez charter pays the city hundreds of thousands of dollars to use the same playground that the neighborhood school across the street gets to use for free.

Am I to infer that the playground is the property of the public school? Did Cesar Chavez build the playground out of its allotted budget? Does Cesar Chavez maintain it?

I'm not going to engage in a battle of anecdotes because it's pointless to do so, and if you lose traction with one anecdote then you'll simply toss out another. If you've found the extreme anomaly, then that's terrific, but examples abound of corrupt, mismanaged charter schools stealing funds otherwise intended for public schools.


Do you really believe that privatization corporatists are pushing so hard for charter schools because they're passionate about quality public education?

[Recursion]

42. Quality public education

Do you really believe that privatization corporatists are pushing so hard for charter schools because they're passionate about quality public education?

Most charters I dealt with were started by the educators working at them and/or parents, so...

[Orrex]

43. That answer is meaningless.

I have learned two things about you from this exchange:

1. Charter schools can, on balance, do no wrong.
2. Evidence to the contrary is and must be ignored.


I'm done here.

[Recursion]

44. Odd thing to "learn" since I don't think either of those are true

[HappyMe]

17. This is exactly my problem with charter schools.

Sucking money and resources away from public education. They can have all the damn charter schools they want. Just find your own building, pay your own utilities, buy your own books, pay your own teachers. Not a penny of public education money should be spent.

[GummyBearz]

31. They have those...

Those are called private schools and they pass the cost on to the students. I came from a middle class family and there is no way my parents could afford a private school for my sister and I in elementary/grade school. And I had the problem of being a white minority in where we lived, and got plenty of ass kickings for no reason between 4th-6th grade. Then a school slightly further away became a charter school, and I went there 6th and 7th grade without any more fights.

And just to be clear, the charter school still had a dominant Hispanic student population... they just were decent kids who didn't feel the need to pick fights with the one white kid in class.

Now, I will admit I am not up to date on current charter school events, as this was 20 years ago. But I have no idea why money comes into this equation... there was no "tuition", they would accept anyone who would otherwise go to public school, and there was obviously a desire by some to go there. The teacher quality was roughly the same as the public school I started with, more schools in general means lower class sizes, more student/teacher interaction, and my case I got out of a situation where avoiding violence was a daily routine.

[Pisces]

12. I don't disagree with your list about charter schools, however, when you can't afford private school

and you want the best for your children, you make the selfish choice to go to the better school with less problem students.
It is true that problem students get kicked out, but that also makes the environment at school safer. Your kid is not going
to be bullied when bullies are kicked out of the school. Is this unfair, absolutely, but until we find a better solution parents
will continue to do what they can to ensure their children get the best alternative available.

This list is nothing new and isn't convincing any parent to take their children out of charters. What are the solutions, any
suggestions to change get knocked down. It always appears to an outsider that complaining is more important than action.

Your list all point to more money and more time for parents to participate. This is not going to happen for most, therefore,
we need to adapt to help the children currently in the system. We have had this problem forever, i.e.. the Plebeians and
the Patricians. We have to work with what we have. More teachers, and more flexibility. Before and After care that includes
tutors. Preschools for 4 and 5 yr olds that are part of the school system, preschools that are at the job site.

It has to be easier to leave your kids in a safe environment. Low student to teacher ratio is a must in the elementary grades.
Focus on making the kids feel successful instead of like failures by only seeing red marks on papers. I don't think spelling should be a focus until 4th grade. Writing answers phonetically or giving verbal answers to tests is more important that spelling things correctly. Engaging the child and making them feel successful builds a love of learning. Unfortunately public schools have neither the time or personnel to handle this way of teaching. I don't think that charter bashing is going to change the current trend, we need to make radical changes at the school level. Trying to change poverty, parental involvement is word salad. This will never change, we need to focus our energy on the only thing we can control. Just my 2 cents.

[Starry Messenger]

18. Anyone who touts charters for "the poors"

should take a walk around Oakland some day. I don't mean read a paper on charters in Oakland--I mean actually walk around and look at the buildings they are housed in.

I have.

[Recursion]

19. Or look at DC, where they educate 45% of the students

And are doing a pretty damn good job



Charter schools are public schools. I dislike this fictitious dichotomy between them.

[Starry Messenger]

20. How is that at all responsive to my post, Recursion?

Have you visited Oakland and walked around on a jaunt back from India?

[Recursion]

22. No, but I tutored at multiple schools in DC back when I lived there

You're offering Oakland as an example; I'm offering DC as a counter-example.

[Starry Messenger]

23. I asked if you'd walked around the physical buildings in Oakland

The grimy storefronts and old portables and abandoned old banks with the signs barely scratched off, with a sad banner proclaiming such and such academy. Buildings with bird shit ringing around the roofs.

I wasn't looking for counter-examples, I was asking if anyone had gone to Oakland and looked at the physical manifestation of how little the charter policy makers give a shit of where poor children spend their day.

When you come visit, I'll be happy to guide you on a walking tour.

[Recursion]

25. And I'm asking if you've walked around the charters in DC

Have you?

[Starry Messenger]

27. Let me know when you're back for a visit, Recursion.

Unlike others, I cannot afford travel. My politics are local.

[Recursion]

28. You too!

I'd love you to see what education in the nation's capital is like.

[chervilant]

37. Fictitious dichotomy?

So, you think Ravitch and other professional educators are wrong? Besides, I think you are missing the key issue:

Circling back to that fancy website with its cute dance, I want to encourage us
to be more critical in our evaluations of what is good for our children. Yes, it makes charter schools and voucher programs look shiny, happy and successful. But it’s worth remembering that School Choice Week is basically a giant commercial, paid for by a huge list of corporate sponsors. It’s pushing a product. Like all ads, I know it is a misrepresentation designed to make me want it. But just because I can buy it, doesn’t make it worth having. And I’m not buying.

Poverty remains the single most important obstacle to effectively educating our younglings.

[spanone]

45. k&r...

[BrotherIvan]

50. YAY! Anti-union, anti-public education posters on DU!!

And in a smidgen of segregation and a whole heaping truckload of "It's all the teacher's fault!!" and we're just about there!