One of the claims of charter advocates is that could supply better education for less money.
These claims have not panned out. When charters enroll the same kids, they usually get the same results. Charters range in quality across a wide span, and some achieve “success” by high rates of attrition or excluding difficult kids.
Now we know that charters don’t save money either. Nor do they direct more resources to the classroom.
The latest report from Innovation Ohio shows that charters in that state have higher administrative costs by far than public schools. The weaker the charter, the more it lends on administration.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Please unsubscribe me from all correspondence from this site and all related sites and blogs.i am now innodated with a ridiculous amount of material
Thank ypi
LikeLike
ypi ?
LikeLike
At the bottom of each email post is a link to unsubscribe.
LikeLike
John Kasich has helped to enable these charters to do whatever they please, taking money from public institutions that serve all, and lining the pockets of his “friends” in the end. He has now taken JobsOhio to the level of complete secrecy. No accountability to the public whatsoever. We are so “fortunate” to have this guy as a “governor”.
LikeLike
All for profit privatization schemes that perform functions that the government should be doing will always cost more and more will be spent on the administrative end. Why? Because there is this little thing called profit. By definition profit means having to charge more for services than a non-profit. (I can hear TE howling about now!) Take Medicare/Medicaid. These services spend about 4-5% on administrative overhead (which doesn’t need to include a profit portion) while private health insurance companies spend around 35% for administrative costs (including profit-you ever see a poor insurance executive?). You tell me which one is more effective.
I actually got into trouble (I evidently was brought up in an executive session of the school board without first having been talked with by the parent, who happens to own an insurance agency and is a member of the board and didn’t follow board policy. My principal didn’t like it when I told him I expected him to back me up and tell the board member he was out of line but he wouldn’t-chickenshit) for bringing that point up when we were “comparing and contrasting” health systems in the Spanish speaking world with the US’s-you know part of the “standards” of comparing and contrasting cultural practices between the US and Spanish speaking world.
You see Costa Rica supplies free health service for all, even foreigners, as it is a government run system. A student asked how they could afford it and I told them that Costa Rica doesn’t have a military and hasn’t had one since 1948 so it has monies available to spend on other services. Wow, what a concept-spend the people’s money on life and living and not on death and destruction like US does.
The same thing for services rendered by for profit companies that do functions that the military used to do. How much more does it cost for Halibuton (Why do you think the Dickmeister loves war so much, yep, lines his pockets quite well), XE, etc. . . services compared to what it would cost if the military performed them? Billions each year! Yep, “gotta fight dem der turrorists” just like we had to fight “dem commie pinko reds”. “There’s plenty of money to be made plying the Army with it’s tools of trade” (Country Joe and the Fish-see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hs4s7LrAuMo). “Peace can only be won when we blow them all to kingdom come”.
LikeLike
“ou tell me which one is more effective.” That should be “more efficient” Effectiveness is a different thing and can be debated (as can efficient).
LikeLike
The key word in your statement is “should”. Which things should the government be doing and which not? How do we decide?
LikeLike
Supposedly through the democratic process but that is currently completely corrupted by “big” money. I know which functions I’d like to see the government doing but I don’t have any fungible funds to be able to buy off the politicians so I guess my opinion/thoughts don’t really matter now do they.
LikeLike
Economists generally think about issues that might cause market failure like asymmetric information or the inability to exclude individuals who do not purchase a good from benefiting from the good. We also think about the desirability of excluding consumers based on the impact that one person’s use of the good or service has on another persons consumption.
LikeLike
The health care exchanges are a good example.
Ohio is relying on “choice” to regulate their exchange. The state is run by dogmatic free market believers, so “choice” is always better.
California chose a public sector model, where they regulated the exchange.
California will have higher quality more affordable products on their exchange, they already do, and Ohio will be “running” a deregulated “wild west” exchange where millions of people will be paying too much for health insurance.
But there will be lots of choices in Ohio! 3/4 of them will be a complete rip-off, but CHOICE!
LikeLike
I’m not surprised. This is a business model. It relies on constant testing of students and teachers, expelling or counseling out of students and high turnover of teachers and a top-down adversarial rather than bottom-up collaborative approach to students and
teachers.
That business model requires a lot of managers. Managers have to measure and direct constantly in that model because there’s no trust and staff has no authority to make decisions.
What’s amusing about it is how old-fashioned
it is, and how it goes against personal accountability and not towards it. The students and teachers are simply following directions, constantly. They don’t know why. It’s a recipe for constant supervision.
LikeLike
I’m not surprised. This is called a BUREAUCRACY. A vertical pyramid
power structure. A GRADED authority system of superiority and
subordination. In order to be in the game, you must play the game.
You must NOT breach the ordained demeanor of prostrate obedience
(viable to the system). To continue the current economic order,
cogs are “shaped”, one at a time, for the bureaucratic machine.
LikeLike
The Carpetbaggers are here!!!!
LikeLike
Not surprising since we know charters are run like business organizations and most of the money is spent at the top in theses organizations. So much for more funds going to the classrooms. By the way, what’s the average per pupil expenditure at charters v public schools? If its more, that’s where the extra money is going. Administrators must love charters.
LikeLike
I think politicians like charters because it lets them off the hook for running a school system.
A privatized “portfolio” of schools is a mayor’s dream. He or she can completely outsource “running public schools” to private operators.
It’s a hell of a lot easier to write a check than it is to run a public school system.
LikeLike
Are politicians especially good at running a school system? If not, this seems like a good argument in favor of allowing student choice to help regulate K-12 education.
LikeLike
Even when the check is bigger?
LikeLike
Until 2010, the year Gist came to RI, The RI Department of Ed. used to publish financial information about per pupil expenditure, including breakdowns by socioeconomic indicators, regular education, special education, administration, etc. Where is that information available now? http://infoworks.ride.ri.gov/school/blackstone-valley-prep-middle-school
Blackstone Valley Prep is listed as having a much higher per pupil expenditure than the rest of the Cumberland schools but I can’t find a break-down.
Click to access FY11%20PPE%20Summary%20by%20PPE.pdf
I guess with the highest paid Commissioner of Education in New England the many layers of transparency make seeing impossible.
http://www.wpri.com/dpp/news/local_news/mcgowan/gist-highest-paid-education-commissioner-in-new-england
LikeLike
If school reform industry lobbyists are bound and determined to run schools on a business model, could we at least get a GOOD business model, instead of this discredited 1950’s model?
Why doesn’t it surprise me that the same people who thought Michelle Rhee was a great manager because she threatened and humiliated staff adopted a top-down, manager-heavy model?
Here’s a tip, reformers. If you’re micromanaging employees, threatening them, and constantly watching them, YOU’RE DOING IT WRONG.
LikeLike
It’s a nice theory, teaching economist, tgat “choice” will “help regulate” schools, except facts get in the way.
I live in Ohio. We have had privatized schools for 15 years. They don’t do any better than district schools. We’ve poured hundreds of millions of dollars into “choice”. It’s not a theory.
“Choice” proponents keep moving the goalposts. When choice failed, a decade ago, they simply said “there isn’t enough choice!”
That’s dogma. Choice can’t fail, it can only be failed. They’re at 80% privatized in New Orleans, with absolutely no hard evidence that “choice” is working. Thecresponse from reformers? “More choice!”
LikeLike
I’d be curious to know how many school reform enthusiasts were ACTUAL business people prior to discovering this nifty new market.
I know the donors are CEO’s but what about the charter school operators?
We’re getting the worst of both worlds. They don’t “believe” in a public entity model and they don’t know how to run a private entity.
I see this with Arne Duncan, actually. He might be the best example of “worst of both worlds”
A person who rejects a public sector model and is a horrible private sector manager.
These people baffle me. If you want to run a business, go do that! That way, you won’t just be giving yourself silly titles like “CEO of schools”. You could really BE a private sector CEO! The real thing!
LikeLike
Ms. Ravitch,
We all know that you are smarter than this, why act dumb just to toss red meat to your reader base?
For the rest of you, charter schools pay rent\lease for their facilities from their operating budget, while district schools live in rent free facilitates paid for directly by the local taxpayers. Comparing administrative costs is apples and oranges.
LikeLike
Nope. Administrative costs are different than operating costs.
This is the second state study that has found this.
MSU did a study on Michigan charters that fpund the same thing.
The reason the costs were higher in Michigan was because charter operators were outsourcing administrative functions to for-profit companies.
It’s something to be aware of when looking at charter schools. “Non profit” can be deceptive If a “non profit” charter outspurces operations to for-profit companies they are “non profit” in only a strict legal sense.
LikeLike
Chiara: thank you for not falling for an old debaters’ trick, i.e., when you find you can’t make your case then muddle and redefine the discussion by shifting it to something else.
Presto changeo! Your weakness seemingly disappears and you seemingly appear strong!
Except when someone like you points out that that the coin never left their hand.
Sleight-of-hand artists hate people like you. But we debunkers love it!
🙂
LikeLike
Have a look here under State and Fed. for Administration costs.
http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/tax-calculator
Do Charter Schools have all those “Layers” as well?
LikeLike