Putting the word “public” in front of a charter school is an affront to anyone who values public education. One in five charter schools are for-profit, and many are operated as chains. By putting the word “public” in front of the term, charter schools take on the risk of failing, and taxpayers are stuck paying for the risk. Nonetheless, charter schools promise accountability. This is the question that many educators are grappling with.
Many critics say that charter schools divert district funds, making it difficult to determine which schools benefit more. However, a recent study in New York City showed that students in the district schools in that city had higher scores on state tests than their counterparts in nearby charter schools. Perhaps, this was due to the districts stepping up their game to keep students. That’s a valid concern, but it needs further study.
While some critics are calling for a moratorium, others are arguing that charter schools should be free of discriminatory practices. Several charter schools have rejected this idea, and some have been criticized by industry-sponsored organizations. The NAACP has called this “an attack on charter schools.”
While the “no excuses” code of conduct in a successful academy has merit, it’s hard to say whether this is a good thing for society or not. Charter schools lose students over time, and attrition is a major concern. According to a study by Leo Casey, founder of the Shanker Institute, the attrition rate fell steadily each cohort after the second grade. And this attrition rate varied between different schools: Success Academy Harlem 1, the flagship Success charter school founded in 2006, saw its enrollment drop steadily after second grade but continued to enroll students until ninth grade.Read More About: blastace