School Choice-What the Research Says, a New Resource from the Center for Public Education
Alexandria, Va. (October 28, 2015) – In its at-a-glance overview, the National School Boards Association’s (NSBA), Center for Public Education (CPE) looks at the various forms of school choice, and drawing upon relevant research and statistics, the effects each has on student achievement. CPE finds that that while many schools of choice do an exemplary job, “the results aren’t universally better than those produced by traditional public schools.”
“America’s public schoolchildren are dependent on us, policymakers and the public, to make informed decisions that will lead to improved outcomes,” said Thomas J. Gentzel, Executive Director, National School Boards Association. “CPE shines a spotlight on education options in its study, finding that not all choices are equal.”
School Choice: What the Research Says succinctly describes the many alternatives to public schools: those within the public school system (magnet schools, charter schools, and within or between district transfers) and without (private schools, vouchers and homeschooling), and also looks at virtual schools which can be either public or private.
CPE finds that:
Nearly nine in ten school-age children in the U.S. attend public school, a proportion that has been fairly consistent for four decades; 16 percent are enrolled in a public school of choice. On the non-public side, 10 percent of school-age children are in private schools, and 3 percent are homeschooled.
Research on the impact of school choice on student learning generally shows mixed results with studies typically showing little or no difference in overall performance compared to traditional public schools. For example, about one in four charter schools outperforms its traditional public counterpart in reading, and one in five does worse. However, benefits seem to be greater for some groups of students, including English language learners, children from low-income families, and students of color.
Private schools tend to outperform public schools on national assessments. But when researchers controlled for students family background and location, they found the reverse – public school fourth- and eighth-graders scored higher than their private school peers in math. In addition, math scores for public school students have increased steadily over the last 25 years, and high school graduation rates are at an all-time high.
“If the research shows us anything, it’s that school choice does not come with a guarantee,” said Patte Barth, director of the Center for Public Education. “Rather, public school leaders should look to their successful programs – charters, magnet, and neighborhood schools alike – and apply the lessons learned to other schools so that the choices parents and students have will all be good ones.”
# # #
The Center for Public Education (CPE) http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org is a national resource for credible and practical information about public education and its importance to the well-being of our nation. CPE provides up-to-date research, data, and analysis on current education issues and explores ways to improve student achievement and engage public support for public schools. The Center is an initiative of the National School Boards Association.
The National School Boards Association (NSBA) http://www.nsba.org is the leading advocate for public education and supports equity and excellence in public education through school board leadership. NSBA represents state school boards associations and their more than 90,000 local school board members throughout the U.S. Learn more at http://www.nsba.org.
CPE’s latest resource on school choice:
At a Glance http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/schoolchoice
Full report: http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Main-Menu/Policies/School-Choice-What-the-Research-Says-At-a-Glance/School-Choice-What-the-Research-Says-Full-Report-PDF.pdf
Contact:
LInda Embrey, Communications Office
National School Boards Association
(703) 838-6737; lembrey@nsba.org
http://www.nsba.org
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Maybe it is up to the learner as much as the teacher,
Here’s a video of Eva Moskowitz’ press conference (Friday, October 30, 2015) in response to the latest “Go to go” list controversy.
Boy, those Success Academy principals — like Candido “Go-to-Go-List” Brown speaking here, and the ones in the background — sure to do cry a lot.
This maudlin display reminds me of Jimmy Swaggart’s tear-filled mea culpa back in 1988:
This Success Academy press conference is just plain weird, and does not move me in the least. I mean, seriously. Does Eva and her handlers really think that, outside of Success Academy’s insulated cult, that such a grotesque spectacle will have any positive effect on the Success Academy image?
Embedded in this non-apology-apology is Eva’s simultaneous fabrication of victimhood — a traitor stabbed us in the back, doncha know?:
( 01:11 – 01:31)
( 01:11 – 01:31)
CANDIDO BROWN: “Someone on my team, who is not a part of that meeting, sent the email to the network because he knew that what the meeting produced (the “Got-to-Go List”) went against our (Success Academy’s) policies.”
Actually, Principal Brown, that person sent it exactly BECAUSE he/she believed that the “Got-to-Go List” was precisely reflective of, and consistent with Success Academy policies. He or she was probably sick of hearing and reading Eva dismissing all such accusations as “crazy talk”, and hearing Eva, in multiple letters, deny the existence of such practices, with Eva, in effect, saying over and over… it’s all lies. If what you say is true, prove it. Show us the proof! But you can’t, because there is no proof… and on and on…
Well, Eva. You asked for it, and now you’ve got it.
Yet Eva, now that both the public and you have the proof—that you previously insisted did not exist—your response is this clumsy, transparent attempt at misdirection, where you order this principal to appear at a press conference, and, reading a script you prepared for him, do the full-on Jimmy Swaggart tear-fest?
What-ever.
Even still, some of what Principal Brown says is nevertheless revealing;
( 00:55 – 01:12)
( 00:55 – 01:12)
CANDIDO BROWN: (In creating the “Go-to-Go List” then kicking out 9 out of the 15 on the list) “I was doing what I thought that I needed to do to fix a school where I can send my own child (i.e. he must implement a ‘Got-to-Go’ list /policy ).”
Principal Brown, that begs the obvious question…
What influences from above, starting with Eva herself — explicit or implied, direct or indirect — led you to the point that you were thought that implementing a policy of kicking out certain undesirable “Go-to-go” children — complete with an actual “Got-to-Go List” — was what “I needed to do to fix a school?”
Tearful as your performance was, for you to claim that all of this “kicking out” and “Got to Go List” stuff came about in a total vacuum — originating wholly with you and not in anyway due to influences from above you, including from Eva herself — does not pass the smell test.
This implies the unlikely scenario that, independent of you, Principals at several other Success Academy schools with sky-high attrition also acted totally on their own and kicked out hordes of children, with again, no pressure or influence from above, or from Eva herself — explicit or implied, direct or indirect.
Such a claim strains credulity. Eva is Nixon-like in this scenario … with her gutless attempt to distance herself from this… laying the blame on rogue agents like Principal Brown.
Can a typical Success Academy principal or other official act on their own this way?
Below are some quotes from the Glass Door, a site where former Success Academy teachers were and are allowed to vent, without fear of Eva, and where they know Eva could not censor their comments:
http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2014/08/citizen-jacks-compendium-of-teacher.html
Here’s a sampling that corroborates the notion that Principal Candido Brown did not act alone, and that others above him, including and especially Eva, bear the majority of the responsibility:
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER: “The (Success Academy) organization runs on a cult of personality that revolves around pleasing (Eva Moskowitz), which makes me skeptical that they can truly scale this model of education.”
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER: “(Success Academy) Leaders rule through fear and intimidation.”
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER: “Students are pushed out of the school if they exhibit any negative behaviors, or if their data is low.
“In either case, management will meet with the family to tell them that this school is ‘just not the right fit for them’.
“If that doesn’t work, they will suspend the child ad nauseum or even push them down into a lower grade, so that their exhausted parents give in.
“It’s absurd that this school is publicly funded when it does not serve the population it purports to serve. It is honestly more a school for gifted students than a school working to close the achievement gap.
“I include this in my review because it contributes to the low morale of the school – your students whom you love are constantly being kicked out.”
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER: — Also, (Success
Academy leaders need to, but do not) “value the children, who are told they don’t belong at our school.
“If we can’t help them, what are we doing in the education business?”
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER: “Teachers openly MOCKED 6-year-olds with learning disabilities, telling them they would (reluctantly) see them in the same grade again next year (i.e. held back, JACK) because they were neither smart, nor hard- working, and hopefully would not be their student again — (and say this) in front of the entire classroom.”
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER: “The feedback (from superiors) is ALWAYS negative, without any sense of ‘you can do it’ or ‘we can do this together’… (instead) it’s ‘Get your f*cking sh*t together!’ ”
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER: “Teachers are kept in constant fear of surprise visits and sample collections for evaluation.”
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER: “(Eva Moskowitz’) direct inferiors are constantly insulted, sent to run on impossible tasks, validated for their submission to her, or ridiculed / fired if not. I had extreme difficulty maintaining any hard boundaries — much less soft ones — during my time there. The literacy team is stressed out beyond belief; they put so much work into what they do, but it is never good enough. It was incredible to watch.
(Success Academy and its leadership resembles) ‘THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA’ — except not funny and you actually can damage hundreds of kids lives in the process.
“Any advice will fall on deaf ears because hers is a method that works well. Google ‘sick system’ and you will find Success, in its shiny, primary colored glory.”
FORMER SUCCESS ACADEMY TEACHER: “When you are leader and you constantly complain about the incompetencies beneath you – well, the apple never falls far from the tree. The culture starts at the top.”
CPE includes charter schools in the public school category. As far as I can tell, the only claim charters in general have to being public is their funding through tax dollars. I guess that means that Halliburton is a public entity since I’m guessing that a large portion of their funding is through tax dollars. Isn’t it time to drop this ridiculous assertion?
Charter schools are not allowed to charge a tuition. They are funded by the public for the public. Charters must accept all applicants, unless they are over subscribed, then must chose students by lottery. Cherry picking is not permitted by law. They are managed by private enterprises (non-profit or profit) which is the only difference from public schools.
In many respects they are identical to the magnet schools run by the public school districts, other than a few specially setup for gifted students. In a majority of states they are public schools according to the laws of the state. Besides they are only 5% of the public schools.
True private schools charge tuition and reserve the right to reject applicants and serve twice as many (10%) students as charter schools. Therefore charter schools are public schools until bloggers here and elsewhere convince the state legislatures to change the law. State laws are applicable to all citizens even if they do not like it.
“Research on the impact of school choice on student learning generally shows mixed results with studies typically showing little or no difference in overall performance compared to traditional public schools. For example, about one in four charter schools outperforms its traditional public counterpart in reading, and one in five does worse. However, benefits seem to be greater for some groups of students, including English language learners, children from low-income families, and students of color.
I see the above conclusion of the study very interesting. Even though this blog and most other blogs similar to this one and cite each other, always put down charters, it does not appear to be that charters are all bad. Study concludes that English language learners, low-income families and students of color seem to benefit more from charter schools. Isn’t this the goal of the state in setting up competition in the public school sector?
Finally the National School Boards Association’s (NSBA), Center for Public Education (CPE) does not appear to be tainted by billionaires or oligarchs.
Cherry picking isn’t allowed, but there are ways to get around that prohibition. Making parents schedule multiple appointments/interviews, fill out a gazillion forms and turn them in waaaaay before the school year starts pretty much guarantees that the poorer, more dysfunctional families are winnowed out.
Charters are not at all identical to magnets. Magnets intentionally desegregate through their admissions formulas, while charters often resegregate. And a recent analysis of the 2nd largest school district in the country showed that magnets outperform charters across the board.
Charter schools are private corporations that collect public funds to perform a job, like Boeing. They are not public schools.
Diane Ravitch,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/02/04/are-charter-schools-public-or-private/
Are charter schools public or private?
After the event, Lamar Alexander clarified further: “Obviously I misspoke this morning. Charter schools are public schools and are subject to the same tests as all other public schools in their state.”
Click to access eotopicj00.pdf
J. CHARTER SCHOOLS
by
Terry Berkovsky, Andrew Megosh, Debra Cowen and David Daume
“Charter schools are considered public schools. What is different is that charter schools generally are not operated directly by the public school district but under a separate charter, a contract with a state or local agency that provides them with public funds.”
Sorry, Raj, but whenever charter schools are sued, whether in state or federal courts, their defense is that they are not public schools. When hauled before the NLRB, they say they are not subject to state laws because they are private corporations. Eva Moskowitz sued to block a public audit and won. The New York legislature amended the charter law to permit public audits of public funds. When two charter founders mis-appropriated $200,000, the California Charter School Association filed an amicus brief defending them on the ground that charter schools are not public schools. Believe what you want; the charters persuaded me that they are not public schools.
“They are managed by private enterprises (non-profit or profit) which is the only difference from public schools.
In many respects they are identical to the magnet schools run by the public school districts, other than a few specially setup for gifted students. In a majority of states they are public schools according to the laws of the state.”
Not true. For one example, charter schools are not held to the same regulations requiring teachers and administrators be licensed. In MA, for example, a special education teacher has to have subject matter competency but not a special education license. They can just pass the state teacher test. And they have a year from date of hire to take and pass the test. http://www.doe.mass.edu/charter/guidance/2007-1.html. Public school teachers have to be licensed by the first day of school.
Diane,
Thanks for explaining to Raj the real truty about what these deforms are all about.