Bruce Baker of Rutgers has found many examples of urban charter schools that cherrypick their students, leaving out the students who are costliest to educate and boasting of their success when they enroll notably more advantaged students than the local public schools.
He decided to do a similar check on the Princeton Charter School, located in an affluent township with many excellent private schools. What he found was a charter school that enrolled students with only the mildest disabilities than the public schools. In effect, what he learned was that:
Put bluntly, these figures show that the parent population of Princeton Charter is obligating the parents of much less advantaged children, including parents of children with special education needs, subsidize their preference to have a school more like the private day schools along Great Road.
While I’m still not entirely sure what to make of this… it does concern me.
It also ought to raise questions for leaders of private school alternatives in these communities. On balance, I’ve never seen the charter school movement as a particular competitive threat to private independent day schools, as charters have often been primarily urban, serving minority populations and employing “no excuses” strategies that most parents in leafy suburbs would not find palatable for their own children.
Urban charter schools have arguably taken their toll on urban catholic school enrollments, but that’s another story. But, to the extent that state charter policies permit the type of school establishment and segregation going on in Princeton, more an more parents may find ways to organize quasi-private-elite schools to serve their needs – effectively seeking taxpayer charity to support their country club preferences. This indeed may pose a threat to financially less well endowed private schools.
In a twisted sort of way, it’s rather like asking your local public parks department to pay for your membership to the local private country club – thus reducing the quality of services to others who really don’t have access to the country club (even if it proclaims it’s open to all comers).
Much more to ponder here… but the numbers on Princeton Charter School certainly raise some serious red flags.

We are starting to see this even in the City here in St. Louis, MO.
LikeLike
The country club analogy is a good one.
If we could get away from all the testing, perhaps schools could factor diversity into their lists of attributes and schools who shy away from it would then lack that attribute. I know that it was trendy in the last decade for elite schools to advertise diversity, and hence recruit representatives of different ethnicities and cultures, even if the culture of the school did not ultimately change.
I really thought we were past the era of avoiding diversity (even diversity of ability ranges and physical limitations). It is particularly strange that a University town like Princeton would be this way—although I guess they do have high end shops and so forth on their little downtown strip. I have always been a Princeton fan (having been raised Presbyterian). . . but lately I am not so sure; notice the leadership it has produced in regards to education lately: Wendy Kopp and look at these two http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/04/princeton-reform-group-st_n_948553.html
What is it about Princeton?
And that’s where ETS/Praxis headquarters is.
LikeLike
“In a twisted sort of way, it’s rather like asking your local public parks department to pay for your membership to the local private country club”
So what we have now is a system of exclusive parks, that are only open to those who live nearby. These parks do not have fences, but if you get caught using them you could go to jails. Some areas even opening more exclusive gated parks with the best park rangers and the most beautiful facilities, but they only allow in only the best of the best and deny admittance to most of its own residents (i.e., magnet schools).
Of course everyone in the state helps to pay and maintain those parks and highly exclusive gated parks.
Charters are parks that anyone can use. Period.
LikeLike
“Charters are parks that anyone can use. Period.”
That period should be a comma. After that comma you can put, “as long as they live in the district, are able to apply, can get through the lottery, and can manage the structure, workload and discipline.”
LikeLike
Just like a park, you need to be able to drive to it, physically able to use the equipment, and there is a limit to the number of people who can use it at the same time, but yes, Period.
So no comment about those highly exclusive gated parks?
LikeLike
“Charters are parks that anyone can use. Period.”
At best a misstatement/misunderstanding. At worst an outright LIE! And my bullshit detector (and I just got it back from it’ 100,000 lie checkup, being recalibrated especially for edudeformer utterances) indicates “LIE”!
LikeLike
Maybe that mountain park, water park, or park for dog lovers is not a fit for everyone, but at least it is open to all.
LikeLike
No, Cw, it is not “open to all”, that’s the lie. The application process is a skimming process. And I can walk into any charter right now and enroll my child and they will be accepted, right?? He/she would start in the classes tomorrow, right??
LikeLike
Let’s see, my local school district asks for when applying…
1. Proof of Residence
2. Certified State Birth Certificate
3. Verifiable Medical Proof of Immunization
4. Withdrawal Form from Previous School
5. Current Custody Paperwork
6. Valid parent/guardian ID for student registration
Is this skimming? Do most charters ask for more than that?
LikeLike
No, CW, asking for valid ID’s, proper imminuzations records etc. . . does not constitute “skimming”.
Yes, they do ask for more. And that’s only at the start. What they ask for in terms of parental time commitment, monies, etc. . . act as filters to weed out the undesirables.
And then the public schools have to, you know are required to, it’s mandatory that they, take those undesirables after thye are weeded out by the charters.
Stop with the lies and obfuscations, please!
LikeLike
“Yes, they do ask for more.”
I’d like to see some studies that would back up that assumption. I don’t believe that what you have stated is true.
LikeLike
Cynthia,
Try the movie waiting for superman (the pro charter propaganda film).
I believe there was a lottery to attend the charter.
So, no, every child who wanted to attend could not attend. Thus it was not “open to all”, even according to their own propaganda.
Then check out the contracts the kids and parents have to sign at many charters, agreeing to do various things (donate to the school, come on saturday, behave, etc.) . Again, asking for more than a regular public school.
Charters have a great track record of filtering out the “undesirables”.
They are not open to all.
Many are open to those who will raise their test scores.
LikeLike
Ang,
YEP!
LikeLike
Does every child that wants to attend New Trier high school get to attend New Trier? There is a lottery for those students as well, the only difference is that there is no winning ball if you live outside the district lines.
Test score, of course, are of vital importance if a students wants to attend Thomas Jefferson or Stuyvesant High Schools. I thought it interesting that Dr. Ravitch supported these qualified admission high schools that draw the brightest students out of the neighborhood schools.
LikeLike
CW @ 2:58,
TAGO!
See here for details: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5P5eQiKNQs
LikeLike
CW I personally witnessed local handicapped and special ed children being counseled out of my previously public school after it became a charter. The lottery system for admission is manipulated to accept only high scoring students, and those who don’t score well / have behavior issues / can’t pony up donations and free labor as volunteers are kicked out. Real public schools must take all comers. If charter were truly public schools and not exclusive tax supported private schools, then charters would have to TAKE and KEEP all comers too. We have a school system where public school taxes are being used to discriminate, and charters are the vehicle for doing so.
LikeLike
I think CW’s point is that zoned neighborhood schools take all and only students in the catchment area.
Are qualified admission schools like Thomas Jefferson not real public schools?
LikeLike
This is certainly the case in Boulder Valley School District (headquartered in Boulder, Colorado). Two district charters, constantly cited as examples to emulate, are the whitest, richest schools in the district with virtually no special ed or English languge learner students.
LikeLike
SSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!
LikeLike
The skimming problem exists in suburban charters but is a much greater problem in the low-SES/inner-cities.
By “skimming”, I do not mean actively screening out undesirable applicants or expelling poorly-performing students. Rather, I mean passively screening out undesirable applicants via the enroll-via-application system to populate the charter. This passive screening is a huge — and rarely noted — problem in charters serving the low-SES/inner-cities.
Start with the premises that — on average — children of concerned/functional parents will be more motivated/better behaved students than children of unconcerned/dysfunctional parents and that this will hold true across all SES levels. Start with the additional premise that low-SES parents will — on average — be much more likely to be extremely unconcerned/dysfunctional than middle/high-SES parents.
If these premises are true, then it follows that a charter that serves a low-SES-area/inner-city and that enrolls via application will necessarily have a larger percentage of motivated/well-behaved students than the neighborhood public school. In order to successfully enroll a child in a charter, the parents have to be concerned enough to learn about the charter and have to be functional enough to complete the application (often requiring access to a computer and computer literacy) and to provide the daily transportation often required by the charter. In the low-SES-areas, there will be some parents who are this concerned/functional; some will send their children to the charter and some will send their children to the neighborhood public school. However, there will be many parents who are not this concerned/functional but instead are extremely unconcerned/dysfunctional; virtually all of these parents will send their children to the neighborhood public school. Bottom line: The charters’ enroll-via-application and provide-daily-transportation requirements will insure that, in low-SES areas, charters will have a much higher percentage of motivated/behaving students while neighborhood public schools will have a much higher percentage of unmotivated/misbehaving students.
In the suburbs, by contrast, there are relatively few low-SES parents and even fewer extremely unconcerned/dysfunctional parents. Virtually all of the suburban parents will be sufficiently concerned/functional to complete the charter application and provide the daily transportation. Accordingly, in the suburbs there will be fewer unmotivated/misbehaving students and the enroll-via-application and provide-daily-transportation requirements will screen out a much smaller percentage of the unmotivated/dysfunctional students. The charters’ enroll-via-application and provide-daily-transportation requirements will still give the charters a slightly higher percentage of motivated/behaved students, but the difference in this regard in suburban charters will be much less than in the low-SES/inner-city charters.
LikeLike
“Start with the additional premise that low-SES parents will — on average — be much more likely to be extremely unconcerned/dysfunctional than middle/high-SES parents.”
I’d like to see some studies that would back up that assumption. I don’t believe that what you have stated is true.
LikeLike
That was my reaction too, Duane. High SES parents can get away with being unconcerned/dysfunctional. It is better hidden, and the schools are generally well resourced and high performing. If a student “messes up,” there is a substantial safety net. Who can deny that it much harder to “make it” when you start from the bottom? Good people are not defined by their income.
LikeLike
Duane — Let’s be real world here, not politically correct.
Being unconcerned/dysfunctional does not mean a person is a morally bad person, it means that — for a wide variety of reasons — focusing attention on your child’s education, completing a computerized application, and providing daily transportation is difficult/impossible.
Pretty much all middle/high-SES parents are able to do these things. Some low-SES parents can do these things, but many low-SES parents cannot do these things.
What would tend to prevent a parent from doing these things? Having to work two or three jobs; being a single parent; having dropped out of high school yourself (so you have to work long hours at low wages to attain even a minimal income and so you probably place less value on education), not speaking English, not having access to a computer, not being computer literate, not having access to a car (to provide the daily transportation), having drug or alcohol problems so serious that routine daily activities are often neglected, having serious untreated mental illness, and having serious untreated physical illness. The list goes on and on.
Certainly, some middle/high-SES parents have one or more of these problems and some low-SES parents do not have any of these problems. But, common sense/experience strongly suggests that the low-SES parents will, on average, have more of these problems than the middle/high-SES parents. The existence of these problems is probably the reason that the parents are low-SES and are living in a low-SES area.
LikeLike
Almost all the roadblocks you listed Have nothing to do with being dysfunctional or unconcerned. Perhaps it seems just being politically correct to you but it sounds judgmental to me. I failed to see how not having a car or computer makes one dysfunctional or unconcerned. Ditto for working more than one job or not speaking English.
LikeLike
LL,
Nothing to do with being “politically correct” or “real” world (wherever that may be). Like Carlos Mencía I consider myself “políticamente incorrecto”. And your “common sense” may not be so common or make any sense. I asked for some studies, that’s all. It seems to me that I’ve seen studies that indicate those types of problems occur throughout the SES levels on a fairly even basis. I just wanted to you to show me otherwise.
Thanks in advance for posting some.
Duane
LikeLike
Do you think that “skimming” is seen as a problem by those students who are “skimmed”?
I think Dr. Ravitch is correct that there are important peer effects that result in a better education for those that are “skimmed”. I also think that the process runs in reverse: not allowing “skimming” will result in a worse education for those that would have benefited from being “skimmed”. The issue of “skimming” or not “skimming” seems to be one of deciding who gets a better education.
LikeLike
“The issue of “skimming” or not “skimming” seems to be one of deciding who gets a better education.”
Exactly, and that is what this blog is about: How to get that “better” education for all and not just some.
This country has enough wealth to accomplish that task but lacks the ideological, and therefore political will to get it done.
LikeLike
I have stated my point badly. It is that having a system that “skims” is better for student A and worse for student B. Having a system that does not “skim” is worse for student A and better for student B. As Dr. Ravitch has pointed out in the past, not “skimming” does not get you a “better” education for all, only a better education for some and a worse education for others.
LikeLike
TE,
Don’t know that I agree with your analysis in this instance. Public schools (for the most part do not skim, yes I understand about magnets that do, and I’m not sure I can agree with magnets unless we were to have enough different “magnate” schools so that all students could “specialize” at that point in their schooling careers) by law have to take all, charters by definition do not. I don’t think your analysis really takes into account the myriad factors that go into a “good” education for all.
At the same time it is incumbent upon the student to make the most of whatever situation they find themselves as we don’t always have ideal life situations-the ol make lemonade out of lemons idea.
LikeLike
Diane – It is terrific to have you back on the side of public education. When I was first writing and speaking about concerns related to public school choice and high stake testing back in 1984, there were very few national education leaders in agreement. I wrote the book, “Myths of Educational Choice” in 1990 and continue to worry about the future of our democracy if public schools are destroyed. Keep up the good work!
LikeLike
Judith,
Where might we find your book?
Thanks in advance,
Duane
LikeLike
http://www.texastribune.org/2013/10/18/new-generation-charters-buildings-jewish-ties/
Don’t know if people are seeing this where they live, but we’re seeing it in Ohio.
Existing religious schools converted to “public” charter schools with no change in management, staff or student population.
The Texas Tribune is a non-profit news source that is doing actual investigative reporting on public school privatization, BTW. One of the few news outlets available. I wish we had them in Ohio.
LikeLike
Are ed reforms in Princeton improving existing public schools in Princeton, or is this yet another instance where we’re funding ed reformers dreams of starting charter schools, and damaging existing public schools?
The public was sold ed reform with the promise that this would improve public schools.
Are public schools in Princeton BETTER as a result of the public investment in ed reform? If not, ed reform was either marketed dishonestly or has failed.
LikeLike
Why would charter schools improve the real public schools? They do not work in cooperation with the district schools, a charter school is almost like a separate school district unto itself and charter schools drain funds and resources from the district schools, especially in this age of defunding the public schools and slashing of school budgets. Isn’t it true that most charter schools don’t have to accept pupils throughout the whole year as the district schools must do?
LikeLike
I went through the whole Princeton school system K-12 many eons ago. I was in the same classes with the children of millionaires and the kids of PU professors, Princeton Theological Seminary professors, The Institute for Advanced Study staff, the Choir School teachers. I was in the same science classes with the children of world renowned scientists some of whom had won Nobel prizes or would. Robert Oppenheimer’s son went to Princeton High School. The elite of Princeton did and still do send their children to the real public schools.
LikeLike
White charter schools have been happening for a long time, as documented by the Civil Rights Project in 2010:
“Patterns in the West and in a few areas in the South, the two most racially diverse regions of the country, also suggest that charters serve as havens for white flight from public schools.”
http://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/choice-without-equity-2009-report
In olden times when I was just starting teaching in 1971 (second year for desegregation in Georgia), private Baptist academies sprang up overnight to keep the white children safe. Today in Georgia, academies are called charter schools, and they are of two sorts, both paid for by taxpayers: 1) poor and minority, and 2) white and middle class.
Recently in the Memphis suburbs, when it seemed as if the Courts might intervene to keep 6 boutique municipal school systems from forming in leafy Shelby County, the munis responded by threatening to create charter systems, thus sidestepping state and federal mandates entirely.
Socioeconomic integration, by the way, is still the biggest bang for the buck in raising achievement for all. Arguing for smaller class sizes in segregated schools or classrooms indicates an acceptance of social injustice as a way of life, which is as intolerable as testing or corporate meddling. Everyone who has not read James Coleman or those who have forgotten his work should revisit it. Achievement is determined more by who your classmates are than your teacher or the school budget.
We have a section on Coleman’s significance, too, in TMoE.
LikeLike
Jim,
What is TMoE?
Thanks,
Duane
LikeLike
In the state of Michigan the charters are used more by minorities than any other group. They are used by black and Asian children rather than white children. You can look at the demographics and whites are often the minority in these schools. White students appear to stay in public schools and minorities, especially black children, appear to go to charters. They really do seem to be causing segregation.
LikeLike
Given the ability of minority students to choose to stay in the public schools, perhaps it would be more accurate to say that African American families are causing segregation.
LikeLike
Why does a successful school district like Princeton need a charter school in the first place? I thought they were for places where schools did not meet the basic needs of the students. Public schools in NJ are trying to integrate all students into regular classes. that includes the disabled as well. Charters are a way for suburban parents to segregate themselves from the mandates. Corporate charters are carpetbaggers to the schools systems.
LikeLike
And then there is Bullis Charter School in Los Altos.
LikeLike