Texas charter schools have a graduation rate overall of 62%, nearly 30 percentage points lower than the state’s public school. Results like this help to explain why public support for charters is dropping fast in opinion polls, like that of the pro-choice, pro-charter Education Next. EdNext reported an 11-point drop in public support for charters in just the last year, among members of both parties.
Texas Public Radio reported:
“When the exclusions and exceptions the state grants charter schools are stripped away, Texas charter schools have an average graduation rate almost 30 percentage points lower than the state’s traditional school districts.
“According to a 2017 report from the Texas Education Agency, just 62 percent of Texas charter school students graduated on time in 2016, compared to more than 90 percent of students from traditional school districts.
“The discrepancy doesn’t show up on campus or district level accountability reports, however, because most charter schools with low graduation rates are rated under alternative standards or have high numbers of students excluded from the graduation count.
“But it’s a statistic the Intercultural Development Research Association believes Texas should be paying attention to. The San Antonio-based research and advocacy group released a report last week highlighting the difference in graduation rates.
““A 90 percent versus a 62 percent graduation rate — it’s huge. That’s incredible because charter schools are seen as these kind of rescue schools,” said David Hinojosa, program director for IDRA. “Yet, then when you look at the outcomes for these charter schools and this diversion of resources towards charter schools they’re not paying off.”
“IDRA’s calculation includes the graduation rates of all charter schools, including those that have asked the state to be rated under alternative standards. Under Texas law, schools can ask to be measured under alternative standards if most of their students are classified as at risk of dropping out of school. About 22 percent of Texas charter schools are rated under alternative standards.
“Hinojosa said looking at the graduation rates of all charter schools “offers a fair comparison” because the statewide percentage of charter school students Texas considers at risk of dropping out is about the same as the rate of at-risk students in traditional school districts: a little more than 50 percent.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Unfortunately, the supporters for charters never let the facts get in the way of good mythology. That’s especially true if the mythology is created and supported by kleptocrats.
or profit
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education and commented:
This is good news for the public schools in Texas but largely irrelevant as long a Lt. Dan is running the show and wasting valuable legislative time on vouchers and bathroom bills.
David,
I hope the good people of Dan Patrick’s district elect someone else.
There is a huge effort to prevent his re-election. His position is a statewide elected position. If every educator and person employed by a public school vote against him then we should be able to defeat him.
Dan Patrick is the single biggest enemy of public education in the state of Texas.
Most of his constituents send their children to public schools. They need to know that their elected official doesn’t represent them.
Yes he is the biggest enemy of public education in Texas.
Contact your friends in his district and wake them up
David, I would like to ask you to explain to our community why the Lt. Gov. in Texas is the most important and powerful figure in the state. I think it would be revelation to most readers in states where the position is mostly ceremonial. It would mean more coming from a Texan.
He controls the state Senate. He sets the agenda for the Senate. If he doesn’t support an item then it will never be brought up for discussion.
Reasonable and rational people would see that the grand privatized experiment of charter schools has failed. We, however, are not dealing with reasonable people. Texas and other states have been hijacked by free market and religious ideologues as well as grifters and carpetbaggers. They all need to be shown the door starting with Abbot and Patrick.
Any time that a school fails to deliver, it is not good news. At least parents/students have the ability to bail out of failing charter schools. When a publicly-operated school fails, parents/children are stuck, unless they are wealthy, or can obtain a voucher to pay costs at an alternate school.
Yes, they can always leave a public school and go to a lower performing charter or a voucher school that teaches creationism instead of science.
@Diane- I do not follow your comment. Who are “they”? Do you mean the wealthy, who can afford to pay both taxes and (private) school costs? Do you think that rich people, would deliberately pull their children out of a public school, and enroll the children in a poorly-performing non-public school, and then pay for this move?
I believe the opposite occurs. Middle-income people who cannot afford both taxes and school costs, are compelled to eschew quality non-public schools, and enroll their children in the publicly-operated school, and then just “shut up”, and endure the low-quality public school.
Not all non-public schools teach creationism. A recent article in the National Geographic revealed that over 30% of Americans (surveyed) still refuse to accept evolution, and believe that people (Homo Sapiens) have existed in our current form, since the beginning of time.
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/04/david-titley-science-climate-change-sea-level-rise/
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2015/03/science-doubters/achenbach-text
Since 90% of American school children are attending public schools (where evolution is required to be taught), and then still 30% of the public school graduates, are still believing in superstition, then someone is failing to deliver the reality of evolution.
Myself, I place this failure, square at the door of the publicly-operated schools, that 90% of the students attend.
Charles,
Ha! You always protest that you love public schools. No, you don’t. You despise them. You make gross and inaccurate generalizations to demean them.
So, as a scientist, you think children should be taught creationism with our tax dollars
I have never said that I “love” public schools. Be Fair. I am proud of the public schools here in Fairfax County VA. I am so impressed, that I have registered, and been accepted as a substitute teacher here.
The fact is that SOME public schools (in fact, most of them) are doing a terrific job, under terrible restraints. SOME public schools, are not delivering a quality education to their students. (Our nation’s capital comes to mind).
I always vote for every bond issue, and I push every chance I get, for the quality schools here in Fairfax. Let’s put that issue to bed.
Nevertheless, we can agree, that our nation’s public schools, are deserving of some “tough love”. We need to hold all public schools accountable to the communities. We need to air our problems and scandals out in public. (Prince George’s county, Maryland comes to mind).
When a public schools is failing to deliver, teachers and parents should be demanding the changes necessary, to get the failing school back on track.
The silence surrounding the failing public schools, in WashDC is deafening.
No silence about DC schools. Half the kids are in charters, a small number have vouchers.
Choice is a failure in DC.
Q So, as a scientist, you think children should be taught creationism with our tax dollars END Q
I am an engineer, not a “pure” scientist. I do NOT think that creationism should be taught as reality, in any school, public or private. When superstition is taught as reality, the student is robbed of the most valuable possession that he could ever own. He/she is robbed of the truth. When this theft is financed by tax dollars, the taxpayers should be appalled.
If schools were teaching that 2+2=5, then our society would be outraged. Where is the clamor, when 30% of our nation is still believing in the religious nonsense of “creationism” (Two Hebrew-speaking naked adults, and a talking snake!)
Nevertheless, I believe strongly, that comparative religions and religious traditions should be part of any school curriculum. I am appalled that a young person can go all the way through high school ,and still get no instruction in Islam, which is the third-largest religion in the USA, and the religion of 20% of this planet.
Academician Stephen Prothero, has advocated religious literacy as a requirement for education, for many years. Look him up on the web, and see if you agree.
“We must learn to live together as brothers, or we will surely perish as fools” – Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Then I assume you would not permit public money for vouchers for schools that teach creationism. DeVos funds creationism from her personal fortune
Q Then I assume you would not permit public money for vouchers for schools that teach creationism. DeVos funds creationism from her personal fortune END Q
You assume incorrectly. I trust parents. I trust parents to make the correct educational choices for their children, until the children become emancipated adults. I have more trust in parents, that people who wish to perpetuate the public-school monopoly have.
At the turn of the century, many (not all) of the nation’s public schools, were experiencing an influx of immigrant children, who were Roman Catholics. (Primarily from Ireland, Italy, and other Roman Catholic nations). The school boards mandated the instruction of the King James Bible, and attempted to “protestantize” these children. This started the movements to set up Roman Catholic schools in our nation. The school boards, and the (Protestant) citizenry had no qualms about using tax dollars to teach the Protestant version of the Christian religion in the public schools. (Many perpetuators overlook this unpleasant fact). Public schools had Christian prayers conducted by teachers, up until the Supreme Court blocked this unconstitutional practice. ( I participated in teacher-led prayer up until 1962)
Here is a compromise. How about limiting the redeeming of vouchers, only to schools which have obtained accreditation? An independent accrediting agency, could certify that the curriculum in the non-public school, meets a standard, that includes the omission of teaching religious superstitions, like creationism or “intelligent design”. Schools that teach witchcraft, or other esoterics could be eliminated from the program.
And as far as what the SecEd does with her personal fortune, that is her own business, and none of my concern. If she wishes to bankroll a group of Californians, heading down to Guyana, to drink the Kool-Aid, i will not say her nay. Go for it.
When a publicly operated school “fails”, the public has a chance to fix it. That’s how democracy works. Honestly though, public schools do not “fail”. Public schools do an amazing job of educating people who’ve been thrown under the bus by an oligarchy that evades paying taxes to help them live in security. “Failing” is the way oligarchs and the dupes who worship them label people living with low wages and scarce opportunities for financial advancement.
Now, publicly financed private schools (sometimes called charters) fail to meet their promise of improving education, and often do worse, often do harm, and often do crime. There is little the public can do about it. That’s how free market capitalism works. Now that’s what I call failing.
Of course the public has the “chance” to rescue a failing (public) school. How often does this happen. (I live in metro WashDC). The publicly-operated schools in our nation’s capital have been failing for many years, and there is no huge stampede of people rushing in to repair them.
If you think that public schools do not “fail”, you are wrong. There are schools all over this land, that are not delivering a quality education to their students. This is why there is such a demand for alternatives. Over 1.1 million children are home-schooled (exact statistics are hard to obtain).
Around 50 percent of WashDC school children attend non-public schools (this includes charters and other schools). The public has every right to insure that the non-public schools are delivering education, why would anyone think otherwise?
Charles, I can’t believe that no one has any ideas to fix the type of public schools you believe are failing. I’m sure lots of ideas have been tossed around, some worthy of consideration, but have been rejected due to lack of funding.
I know in Buffalo a group of teachers from each school met each year to write up doable (meaning no cost) ideas to involve parents and provide learning opportunities for the students above and beyond the classroom. We did our best to implement them, tweaking the ideas from year to year.
I also know that one of the low achieving high schools put together a proposal which the superintendent thought was fantastic but too expensive to implement. He also rejected a charter school takeover (when it became common knowledge that the charter just wanted the building and not any of the current students). In the end the district did implement some changes working with a nearby university.
I’m no longer in the know (retired), but I’m well aware that improving the educational experience for inner city youth is a constant work in progress.
Rheely failing.
Thank you for this InService, the point cannot be made often enough. When a public service is directly connected to the public vote, the democratic system provides a pathway to change. This is true regardless of how things are going, what are the odds, etc. This is not just a nice or idealistic feature, it’s imperative. Otherwise you have taxation without representation. It is disingenuous for Charles to say “the public has every right to ensure that the non-public schools are delivering education.” That is an abstract idea which is true only if implemented democratically. One can actually see the principle embodied in the Netherlands school choice ed system, where legislation, regulation, funding, and public representation at every level make it so.
By their nature, private schools don’t want regulation.
I spoke at Norte Dame a few years ago and warned that vouchers would eventually subvert religious schools. It’s a bad deal for money if you value your freedom and autonomy.
Q By their nature, private schools don’t want regulation.
I spoke at Norte Dame a few years ago and warned that vouchers would eventually subvert religious schools. It’s a bad deal for money if you value your freedom and autonomy. END Q
Although true in the abstract, when a private institution (college or pre-K) accepts federal dollars, the institution must accept federal regulation and oversight. (With government “sheckels” come government “shackels”).
Notre Dame, BYU,Catholic University of America, Southern Methodist, Ohio Wesleyan, and Islamic University of Minnesota, etc. all accept federal money, and the regulations that accompany the funds. Notre Dame has an ROTC program, and students attending the college get federal money in the form of grants,etc. Notre Dame would find it difficult to exist at all, without the torrents of federal money which flow into the institution.
Your contention that public money flowing into religious institutions, is totally bogus. Has Notre Dame had to fire all of its instructors who are Roman Catholic priests? Has the federal government ordered the institution to shut down its confessionals?
Higher education is not K-12.
In New York, the Catholic colleges that state money removed their religious symbols and called themselves “colleges in the Catholic tradition,” no longer Catholic Colleges.
@flos56
Q Charles, I can’t believe that no one has any ideas to fix the type of public schools you believe are failing. I’m sure lots of ideas have been tossed around, some worthy of consideration, but have been rejected due to lack of funding. END Q
According to the US Census Bureau (my former employer):
The District of Columbia spent
District of Columbia $979,040,000 (total) $19,396 (per student)
on education in 2015. see http://www.governing.com/gov-data/education-data/state-education-spending-per-pupil-data.html
Of course, there are many ideas floating around, on how to repair WashDC schools, and ensure that the students are receiving a quality education.
Ideas are “dust in the wind”, since very few of these ideas will ever see the light of day.
One problem that WashDC does NOT have, is lack of funding. The amounts that are spent (and this includes federal contributions, people in Wyoming are subsidizing the education of WashDC children) are astronomical. The results of this spending are pitiful.
I do not “believe” that the schools in our nation’s capital are failing, This statement is an empirical fact.
Only 1 in 10 students who graduate from the DC public schools, is college ready. (This is according to the Washington Post, a liberal paper, which is opposed to school choice)
Read this and weep:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/one-in-10-dc-students-score-college-ready-on-new-high-school-math-test/2015/10/27/7d188a84-7c11-11e5-b575-d8dcfedb4ea1_story.html?utm_term=.f0ce400a8afd
Charles,
Keep using DC as your example of failure. Half the kids are in charters, and there is a failing voucher program. It has been controlled completely for a decade by Choice zealots.
Q Higher education is not K-12.
In New York, the Catholic colleges that state money removed their religious symbols and called themselves “colleges in the Catholic tradition,” no longer Catholic Colleges. END Q
Education is education, money is money. When any government spends money on education, regardless of the grade level, the government is going to push regulations on the recipient.
If Catholic schools in New York have chosen to remove their symbols, that is the “price of the train ticket”. As far as I know, Notre Dame still has their symbolism intact. BYU still has beehives. Islamic University of Minnesota, has the Islamic Crescent prominently displayed.
“You have turned my father’s house into a den of thieves” – Mark 11:17
Charles,
You remind me why I don’t want a penny of my taxes to support people’s religious choices. They should pay for it themselves. Not with my money. A religion that relies on government subsidy to survive won’t survive. If its followers won’t support it, why should taxpayers?
Q You remind me why I don’t want a penny of my taxes to support people’s religious choices. They should pay for it themselves. Not with my money. A religion that relies on government subsidy to survive won’t survive. If its followers won’t support it, why should taxpayers? END Q
I am with you. I do not want my tax money to subsidize anyone’s religion, be they Catholic, Protestant, or Muslim. That is why the founders of this nation, wisely forbade any establishment of religion in the 1st Amendment of the federal constitution.
The founders knew instinctively, that keeping government out of religion, and religion out of government, that both would thrive.
I disagree on one point, a religion that relies on government subsidy, will indeed thrive. The Anglican church does well in Great Britain, leeching off the taxpayers. The institution is in full vigor.
I have lived in Saudi Arabia, the Islamic religion is in full force in the Kingdom, because of the subsidies provided by the public treasury.
Charles,
This country does not have an established religion. Great Britain has the Anglican Church, which is the Church of England. We don’t have a Church of America. Saudi Arabia has an established religion. You picked bad examples.
You said Q . A religion that relies on government subsidy to survive won’t survive END Q
Now, you are correct that the USA does not have an established religion. This is true.
BUT- Other nations have established religions, including Saudi Arabia and The United Kingdom. The Church of England was set up by Henry VIII, and it has been receiving government subsidies ever since. The Anglican church is in full vigor, and has survived for centuries, and shows no sign of going away.
In Saudi Arabia, the Islamic religion receives many millions of Riyals, and it shows no sign of falling away. Islam is on the march, in many nations, and growing fast, due to the influx of money from the Saudi royal family.
For an historian, you do not seem to have a grasp of history.
Charles,
What you say is a non sequitur. Those religious examples are state-established religions. Which religion do you want to establish in the U.S.? Or do you want to establish all religions?
Charles
As far as other countries/religion are concerned you are comparing apples to oranges.
I was going to say you shouldn’t be insulting in your remarks, but I began to wonder if you were purposely being dense.
Q What you say is a non sequitur. Those religious examples are state-established religions. Which religion do you want to establish in the U.S.? Or do you want to establish all religions? END Q
You missed the mark on this one. In the UK, the Anglican church is subsidized by the British taxpayer. In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Islamic religion, is subsidized by the royal purse. These religions are “established” in their respective countries. The King of Saudi Arabia , is the “Custodian of the two Holy Mosques” of Mecca and Medina. Islam is thoroughly entwined in every aspect of life in the Kingdom. I know, I lived in Saudi for one year.
I support the federal constitution of the United States. The first amendment expressly prohibits the establishment of religion. I do NOT wish to establish any religion in the USA. I have seen the results of established religion up close and personal and I do not want any part of it.
Why can’t you just put this to bed?
–BTW, Happy Hanukkah . I went to a Hanukkah celebration at the Pentagon, last week, it was terrific.
I do not wish to disclose my religion. I will say that in my family:
My late parents were mainstream Protestants.
My ex-wife is a Buddhist.
My current wife is Russian Orthodox
One sister is a Unitarian, and her husband is Roman Catholic.
Other sister is Lutheran.
My brother is a Wiccan.
It should be easy to see why I support freedom of religion, and am unalterably opposed to the establishment of religion in the USA.
Thanks for your good wishes.
I do not wish to pay for the establishment or maintenance of any religion. I don’t want the government to support my religion or any other.
@fios56
Q As far as other countries/religion are concerned you are comparing apples to oranges.
I was going to say you shouldn’t be insulting in your remarks, but I began to wonder if you were purposely being dense.
END Q
I am not comparing anything. The United Kingdom , has an established religion. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, has an established religion (and prohibits the free exercise of all other religions).
The USA does not have an established religion.
I never insult anyone in my posts. I never use sarcasm (my wife is Russian, and I must use a specialized vocabulary). I mean what I say, and I say what I mean.
At this festive time, let us rejoice in not only our religious freedom, but in our religious pluralism. There is a street near my home, where there is a Buddhist house of worship, and a Methodist church next door to one another. Every time I drive past, I think that very few nations on this planet, would have this.
That’s what makes the United States unique – our openness to everyone’s belief. If only everyone in this nation were truly respectful. Too many are close minded, so the rest of us must take up the slack.
Anyway – glad tidings to you or as I like to quote “Peace on earth, good will towards all!”
Career and Technology Education (CTE) is why Texas’ high school graduation rate is so high. It was meant for those students that had trouble graduating normal high school but they and Gifted and Talented (GAT) are the only ones not in it.
Essentially they have redefined what high school is, lowered the standards as it were. Proponents will claim otherwise.
Proponents also say that they prepare kids for in-demand careers such as STEM. First of all no STEM jobs are available at the high school level. Number two is there is NO STEM SHORTAGE. We had as shortage of Computer Science people in the 1960s because it was a fledgling discipline, so much so, that mathematicians and engineers were doing the programming for NASA and the race to the Moon. This shortage may have lasted through the 1980s.
There are at least six organizations that say there is no STEM shortage.
They are: The Center for Immigration Studies, The IEEE Organization, Economic Policy Institute (EPI), the Rand Corporation, the Urban Institute, and the National Research Council. In fact, the Rand Corporation went as far back as 1990 and concluded that there was no STEM shortage that far back.
So, why do people keep pushing this outdated notion?
This CTE is a farce just to get their high school graduation rates up?
Please explain why you’re so cynical. What makes you think all these programs are a farce.
5 years ago I wrote this piece a looking at many of these factors.
https://davidrtayloreducation.wordpress.com/2012/10/12/what-about-the-other-80/
Isn’t the push to make everyone “college and career ready” just like the push to make everyone “proficient”, and therefore by raising the bar above the realm of possibility, just a way to make public schools look like failures to aid in their privatization? And what’s the point of making college entrance a goal for all students if college isn’t tuition free? There’s nothing wrong with shop classes, which are vital to some and part of a well rounded education for others. The push for “high standards” is a red herring.
The reality is that college is not the path for all students. There must be some training for trades. This world needs great electricians and plumbers but we rarely do anything help train them.
@dtext727: How right you are! Our nation is failing to deliver adequate preparation to children, who are not headed for college. We need to make a solid, national commitment to advancing vocational/technical education, including apprenticeships.
In Germany, (I lived in the Federal Republic, for two years), the government partners with private industry, to steer technical students to appropriate vocational/tech education, and apprenticeships. Industries get tax incentives, to take on young trainees, and give them proper instruction in the trades.
Another European program that we could emulate on these shores.
(I am a telecommunications engineer, and computer systems professional). As far a shortage of STEM professionals, it depends on whom you ask. I have been working in this field since 1974 (military telecommunications). The Bureau of Labor Statistics, a federal agency, confirms that there are shortages of qualified engineers, in SOME fields. In some other fields, there is a surplus of qualified individuals.
Petroleum Engineering, is going to need people, until we run out of fossil fuels, or alternatives are developed. Although these professionals earn an outstanding salary, eventually they will no longer have employment (as petroleum engineers).
I earn a decent (but not high) salary. I have made more, I have made less. I once had to sell cars, to pay the rent. (I was thinking about standing on the corner with “Will engineer for food” on a sign around my neck.
During the Iraq/Afghanistan conflicts, I made a good salary, but I had to live in a tent on an Army camp. Depends on how bad you want a paycheck.
Read more about the shortage/surplus at:
https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2015/article/stem-crisis-or-stem-surplus-yes-and-yes.htm
So much for “innovative” charters . . .
Same kids, same results
If it was that easy to get everyone to graduate, everyone would graduate
At least the public schools have experienced teachers with an inkling of how to reach these kids – those “hard knocks” schools aren’t doing the job. Add in the money lost to these failed charters to reinstitute services including counseling and perhaps these “challenging” students would have a chance.