Stanford University study on charter schools

As an educational researcher with a doctorate and 20 years in the field, I am writing to critique the Sun Sentinel reporter's review of a recent Stanford University study on the efficiency of charter schools.

[Rick Caird]

It seems that Steven M. Urdegar is doing the same cherry picking he is complaining about. The executive summary points out that the individual state makes a big difference. So, it is easy to conclude the rules for charter schools have an effect. In that vein, the states that have a low limit on charter schools have the poorest result.

The third point from the study is that Charter schools do a significantly better job with students coming from poverty and those English Language Learning students.

Rick

[Grand Obsolete Party]

Rick Caird wrote:

It seems that Steven M. Urdegar is doing the same cherry picking he is complaining about. The executive summary points out that the individual state makes a big difference. So, it is easy to conclude the rules for charter schools have an effect. In that vein, the states that have a low limit on charter schools have the poorest result.
The third point from the study is that Charter schools do a significantly better job with students coming from poverty and those English Language Learning students.
Rick

There are many notable examples of successful charter schools across the country.
As Rick stated, these schools have been particularly effective where public schools have failed miserably...namely low income schools.
KIPP Academy is just one example of a national charter school.
These schools are successful because they are not bound by the constraints of Teacehrs' Unions: teachers are paid a higher salary that is performance based, and ineffective teachers are fired.
In addition, chater schools are not bound to local districts' non-sensical and arbitrary school calendars.
Finally, in most states, charter schools are closed within fiv years if performance does not meet state standards.

[Truth Matters]

Rick Caird wrote:

It seems that Steven M. Urdegar is doing the same cherry picking he is complaining about. The executive summary points out that the individual state makes a big difference. So, it is easy to conclude the rules for charter schools have an effect. In that vein, the states that have a low limit on charter schools have the poorest result.
The third point from the study is that Charter schools do a significantly better job with students coming from poverty and those English Language Learning students.
Rick

Rick, there were two reports written -one on a national level and one for Florida. The letter writer seems to be focusing on the Florida report while your focusing on the national report while you focus on the national report. The Florida report states that Charter School students coming from poverty/English language learning backgrounds do significantly worse in Florida than their public school piers.

[Truth Matters]

Interesting interview with Sec. of Education Arnie Duncan on NPR today.

A couple of high-lights:

About 10% of all teachers need to find a new profession and school boards need to work with unions to make this happen and at the same time award the top 10%.

Some Charter schools do amazing jobs with inner-city schools but there is a very wide variation in quality - more so than in public schools. Emphasized an intensive approval process, giving charter schools independence and holding them accountable. Bottom lime is that where Charter schools generally fail (like Florida) it is a result of the rules under which they were established. Over all very pro charter schools.

[Rick Caird]

Truth Matters wrote:

<quoted text>
Rick, there were two reports written -one on a national level and one for Florida. The letter writer seems to be focusing on the Florida report while your focusing on the national report while you focus on the national report. The Florida report states that Charter School students coming from poverty/English language learning backgrounds do significantly worse in Florida than their public school piers.

I had trouble finding the original report and I see no reference to a state report. I do remember from this morning the Charter schools in some states did better than other states. Florida was mentioned as one of the poorer states. But, states like La, Arkansas, and California had better results than the public schools.

Rick

[Truth Matters]

Rick Caird wrote:

<quoted text>
I had trouble finding the original report and I see no reference to a state report. I do remember from this morning the Charter schools in some states did better than other states. Florida was mentioned as one of the poorer states. But, states like La, Arkansas, and California had better results than the public schools.
Rick

It is hard to find (took about 10 minutes abd I did not save the link) but there is a seperate report for each state and a national report. The BCSS seems to quote from each without clarifying which report they are discussing and as the results are conflicitng this is confusing.

What I have taken from this is that where Charter school are properly licensed and regulated they can be successful but Florida is one of 5 or 6 states that on a whole has done a bad job with charter schools.