“Taxpayers pay billions to fund parallel charter school systems that lack public oversight, exclude our neediest children, increase segregation, starve existing schools and decimate communities. As a nation and a state, it is time to question whether this price is too high to pay for an average of eight days extra in reading.””
Matt Di Carlo here reviews the new national CREDO study of charters.
The findings are not much different from those of 2009, mainly, that charters vary widely in their ability to produce higher test scores and that on the whole the test scores of students in charters are not significantly better than students in public schools.
Ever the patient social scientist, Di Carlo is impressed that the charters seem to be getting better results than in 2009 (but could it be because of the number of low-performing charters that were closed? What happened to the students in those charters? Did they get sent back to the public schools? Is there “survivorship bias,” in which only the better charters survive?).
Di Carlo scrutinizes the data about test scores in math and reading. But he does not address the questions that Wendy Lecker asked when she reviewed the same study. Lecker, a…
View original post 347 more words