Don't fight it

Charters would help LR district

In just over a year, Superintendent Mike Poore has proven to be a passionate, engaged and effective leader for the Little Rock School District. Most notably, on the 2016-17 ACT Aspire results, it was one of only 12 districts in Arkansas to improve in every single grade. That has only happened one other time in recent district history.

This story is only available from the Arkansas Online archives. Stories can be purchased individually for $2.95. Click here to search for this story in the archives.


JakeTidmore says...

Gary seems to have turned a blind eye to evidence that shows he is wrong, not "right" as he proclaims.
From the Network for Public Education:
Look at the facts

In Nashville, TN, an independent research firm MGT of America estimated the net negative fiscal impact of charter school growth on the district’s public schools result in more than $300 million in direct costs to public schools over a five-year period. [1]

Another study by MGT in Los Angeles, CA found district public schools lost $591 million due to dropping enrollment rates among students who leave and go to charters. [2]

A research study of school districts in Michigan found that choice policies significantly contribute to the financial problems of Michigan’s most hard-pressed districts. When the percent of students attending charter schools approaches 20 percent, there are sizeable adverse impacts on district finances. [3]

In New York, a study found that in just one academic year the Albany school district lost $23.6 – $26.1 million and the Buffalo district lost $57.3 – $76.8 million to charter schools. Because charters in both districts had smaller percentages of limited English proficient students, and charters in Albany enrolled fewer students with disabilities, the affected public schools were unable to reduce spending on English as Second Language and special education services. [4]
The Bottom Line

In any policy discussion of education, the goal should be to provide the best possible system for all children, given the resources available. While alternatives to public schools may provide better options for some children, on the whole, charter and voucher schools perform no better than the public school system, and often worse. At they same time they have a negative fiscal impact on existing public schools, and are creating a parallel school system that duplicates services and costs. Let’s stop draining our public schools and work together to strengthen them instead.
Also, here's more research and an interview with the author of the research:
htt ps://ww w.washingtonpost.co m/news/answer-sheet/wp/2016/07/15/how-charter-schools-in-michigan-have-hurt-traditional-public-schools-new-research-finds/?utm_term=.c8ea613b8a6c

Posted 14 September 2017, 8:28 a.m. Suggest removal

JakeTidmore says...

From Diane Ravitch's education blog, 2016:

As the charter industry grows, many observers have wondered how their expansion affects the public schools in the same district. A new study published by the National Center for the Study of Privatization in Education at Teachers College, Columbia University, addresses that question.

Policymakers have assumed that the charter sector would provide healthy competition for district public schools. The promise originally was that they would spur innovation and efficiency, and at the same time would be accountable for results. We know from the example of Milwaukee, which has had charters and vouchers for 25 years, that none of these promises were true. Nonetheless, the claims still are repeated and all too often believed by a gullible media and public, which seldom if ever hears critical views.

The present study should be distributed to every news outlet, so they understand the collateral damage that charters inflict on public schools.

“Little scholarship has been devoted to the impact of charter schools on, one, how much revenue school districts collect through local property taxes and, two, how school districts budget that revenue.

“With “The Effect of Charter Competition on Unionized District Revenues and Resource Allocation,” Jason B. Cook fills this void. Cook, a doctoral student in economics at Cornell University, focuses on Ohio, home to a high concentration of both online and brick-and-mortar charter schools, and examines school budget data in the state from 1982 through 2013. In addition to confirming in detail that charter competition has reduced federal, state, and local support for district schools, Cook finds that charter competition has driven down local funding by depressing valuations of residential property and has led school districts to redirect revenue from instructional expenditures (in particular, teacher salaries) to facility improvements. Cook complements these two important findings with thorough explanations.”

Posted 14 September 2017, 8:30 a.m. Suggest removal

Log in to comment