On average, charter schools are not performing as well as their traditional public-school peers, according to a new study that is being called the first national assessment of these school-choice options. The study, conducted by the Center for Research on Education Outcomes at Stanford University, compared the reading and math state achievement test scores of students in charter schools in 15 states and the District of Columbia—amounting to 70 percent of U.S. charter school students—to those of their virtual "twins" in regular schools who shared with them certain characteristics. The research found that 37 percent of charter schools posted math gains that were significantly below what students would have seen if they had enrolled in local traditional public schools. And 46 percent of charter schools posted math gains that were statistically indistinguishable from the average growth among their traditional public-school companions. That means that only 17 percent of charter schools have growth in math scores that exceeds that of their traditional public-school equivalents by a significant amount.
In reading, charter students on average realized a growth that was less than their public-school counterparts but was not as statistically significant as differences in math achievement, researchers said.
"We are worried by these results," Margaret Raymond, director of CREDO and lead author of the report, Multiple Choice: Charter School Performance in 16 States, said at a news conference. "This study shows that we've got a 2-to-1 margin of bad charters to good charters." . . . .
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Day 3: NYTimes and WaPo Continue to Ignore National Charter Study
Do you want to guess how many seconds it would take the NY Times, WaPo, or the Boston Globe to report that a national peer-reviewed study showed that there was a 2-1 margin of good charters to bad charters? Now that the CREDO study shows that there is a 2-1 margin of bad charters to good charters, these big city reporters are nowhere to be found after 3 days. At least there is the LA Times and good ole U. S. News and World Report: