Saturday, October 08, 2005
Capital Campaign
"Capital Campaign" is a "policy analysis" of the current state of Washington, D.C.'s charter school movement by the Progressive Policy Institute's Sara Mead. The report was also written about by Washington Post education reporter Dion Haynes.
It is a good read in that the paper details the history of the charter school movement in D.C. Other than that I think it is a waste of time. My impression of the "study" is that it was published in reaction to the article Mr. Haynes wrote critical of standardized test scores of charter schools and is trying to provide a cheerleading section for these schools.
The most interesting line is that "Thus far, there is no clear evidence that charter schools have had a direct impact on student achievement in DCPS schools or otherwise driven systematic reform." No kidding. With more than 20% of D.C. school children now attending charter schools nothing has improved. I'm out of patience.
Ms. Mead also makes the same statistical error that we have discussed before in this space regarding the percentage of charter school versus DCPS schools that have not made AYP under No Child Left Behind. If you remove the charter schools that are too small to fall under the law then the fraction of those who did not meet the goals of the legislation for charters is almost exactly the same in comparison to traditional public schools. Not a pretty site.
Finally, I could not help but notice that the Cesar Chavez Public Charter High School for Public Policy is featured in the report. Of course it is as Irasema Salcido, the Founding Principal, has co-authored a paper with PPI in the past. But as even Ms. Mead must admit, the academic record at Chavez is "mixed." For all the publicity this school has received, it failed to meet AYP last year.
Ms. Mead is scheduled to tour the William E. Doar Jr. Public Charter School for the Performing Arts. I'll let you know how it goes.
PermaLink | 11:11 AM |
|
It is a good read in that the paper details the history of the charter school movement in D.C. Other than that I think it is a waste of time. My impression of the "study" is that it was published in reaction to the article Mr. Haynes wrote critical of standardized test scores of charter schools and is trying to provide a cheerleading section for these schools.
The most interesting line is that "Thus far, there is no clear evidence that charter schools have had a direct impact on student achievement in DCPS schools or otherwise driven systematic reform." No kidding. With more than 20% of D.C. school children now attending charter schools nothing has improved. I'm out of patience.
Ms. Mead also makes the same statistical error that we have discussed before in this space regarding the percentage of charter school versus DCPS schools that have not made AYP under No Child Left Behind. If you remove the charter schools that are too small to fall under the law then the fraction of those who did not meet the goals of the legislation for charters is almost exactly the same in comparison to traditional public schools. Not a pretty site.
Finally, I could not help but notice that the Cesar Chavez Public Charter High School for Public Policy is featured in the report. Of course it is as Irasema Salcido, the Founding Principal, has co-authored a paper with PPI in the past. But as even Ms. Mead must admit, the academic record at Chavez is "mixed." For all the publicity this school has received, it failed to meet AYP last year.
Ms. Mead is scheduled to tour the William E. Doar Jr. Public Charter School for the Performing Arts. I'll let you know how it goes.
PermaLink | 11:11 AM |
| 
