In 2015, three distinguished researchers at Duke University studied charter schools in North Carolina and found that they serve a population that is less diverse and whiter than those who attend public schools. In addition, most of the charter schools are segregated. The Duke study was cited in a report written for Legislature by the state Department of Public Instruction. The DPI report was withheld by the Lt. Governor’s office, who said it was too “negative.” Lt. Governor Dan Forrest wants the report rewritten to show the good things about charters. He is tired of so much criticism. Forest joined the state board of election three years ago, and he constantly hears criticism of charters. (Wonder why?)
The report shows:
More than 57 percent of students attending charter schools in the current school year are white, compared with traditional public schools’ 49.5 percent, the report said.
The proportion of African-American students is about the same across both types of schools. A little more than 8 percent of charter students are Hispanic, while enrollment at traditional schools is more than 16 percent Hispanic.
The report also references an April 2015 study by Helen Ladd, Charles Clotfelter and John Holbein of Duke University that showed little integration within individual charter schools. Student populations at individual charters, their study found, are predominantly white or predominantly minority.
The state is trying to suppress the report, to try to spin it to get a positive outcome, but it won’t work. The authors of the report, distinguished academics, are not going to change their findings to please politicians. The next post links to the full report.
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article53438435.html#storylink=cpy
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Hey, when you don’t like the facts contained in a report, just order it rewritten as if those “negative” facts don’t exist.
Problem solved!
LikeLike
a la Soviet apparatchik style, eh!
LikeLike
Lt. Gov. Dan Forest argued that the report, intended for the legislature and full of data on charter school enrollment, demographics and costs, was too negative.
“The report, to me, did not have a lot of positive things to say,” he said.
Oh, you know the rules by now. Anyone can say anything negative about public schools- people can run whole political campaigns bashing public schools- but charter schools are off limits. That’s how ed reform rolls. “Negative” is just for public schools.
Compare what happened when Hillary Clinton made a mild criticism of charter schools to what happens when someone like Chris Christie or Jeb Bush conduct entire campaigns around bashing public schools. Not a peep out of ed reformers when public schools are bashed by politicians- in fact, they support it! Not so when we’re talking about charters.
Criticism of public schools is “bold truth-telling”, criticism of charter schools is strictly forbidden.
LikeLike
Peter Greene is also on this, chiming in about this “striking example of ‘how the sausage is made’ and how public officials make sure that the sausage carries a nice chartery taste.”
http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2016/01/nc-covering-charter-butts.html
PETER GREENE: “And just in case you’re thinking maybe (NC governor) Forest is just concerned that charters aren’t getting the job done and he wants to shape them up and that’s what he’s responding to…
“Once the board issues reports, Forest said, ‘that is the fuel the media uses for the next year to criticize whatever we’re doing.’
“And so Forest sent the report back to the drawing board, even though the deadline for acceptance of the report is January 15. Forest said that he would ‘run interference’ with the legislature if anyone complained about the missed deadline.
“Helms offered her own analysis:
” ‘I was among the reporters present. The brief discussion struck me as an unusually blunt demand to make data more politically palatable. ‘
“Will you be surprised to learn that Forest is a big-time fan of the charter industry? His General Counsel and Policy Director, Steven Walker,who sits on NC’s Charter School Advisory Board and was presented the Charter School Champion Award last summer from the Charter School Initiative of North Carolina.
“What did Forest not like about the report? Well, as it turns out, since the report was submitted to a public meeting, a copy (what I guess we must now consider the rough draft) is online for the reading.
“Let’s take a look!”
Click to access EICS%207%20-%202015%20Annual%20Charter%20Schools%20Report_49263syv1sqpwq1uzuckfzbieel2z.pdf
——–
Peter then goes into a summary and analysis of the report.
LikeLike
This is Jeb Bush on public schools- remember, he’s a a hero of ed reform and a person Arne Duncan consulted with regularly during the his tenure:
An ideal system, he said, “wouldn’t start with more than 13,000 government-run, unionized, politicized monopolies, who trap good teachers, administrators and struggling students in a system that nobody can escape.”
Mr. Bush is talking about your child’s school there. For some reason this is completely acceptable in ed reformland, even encouraged, while there can be no criticism of charter schools whatsoever without a huge response.
What gives with that? Why is public school bashing part and parcel of ed reform but even mild criticism of charters inspires 500 lobbyists to write screeds complaining about Hillary Clinton? Do they agree with Mr. Bush? Is that the difference?
If a high profile politician said something like that about charter schools, what would happen? Would that politician be welcome in elite ed reform circles? You know they wouldn’t.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/florida-politics-blog/sfl-jeb-bush-blasts-public-school-monopolies-20141120-post.html
LikeLike
That is why I am glad to see Jeb wallowing in single digits.
LikeLike
That clarifies the situation.
LikeLike
For the sake of more complete context, the News & Observer published a follow up piece the following day:
Charter advocate calls report’s poverty numbers ‘garbage’
LikeLike
wdf1
This also shows that the state does not really care about accurate data gathering from charter schools or audits of the data.
LikeLike
Laura H. Chapman: good catch.
And the key to understanding why the Schmerelson amendment presented to the LAUSD BofE has a tough road ahead of it: why go to the trouble of gathering data when (if it displeases the rheephorm supporters of the status quo) will be at best unwelcome & unused and at worst a bother & hindrance?
Thank you for your observation.
😎
LikeLike
Yet the state DOES care about test data that isn’t an accurate representation of the students, teachers, or schools
LikeLike