Teacher unions hate charter schools with a passion. They see them as undermining the state education system which is effectively controlled by the teacher unions. This position is a bit ironic, since charter schools are merely another kind of state school.
What teacher unions really hate about charter schools is the relative freedom (we use the term advisedly) charter schools have in operating. We are somewhat cautious here because the NZ version of charter schools has lots and lots of state control embedded. Every charter school in New Zealand (there are only five) is under a more rigorous and more frequent reporting regime to the Ministry of Education than an ordinary state school. But internationally this is not the case. Charter schools have far fewer restrictions in places like the US and the UK.
We can understand the caution of the New Zealand government. If the nascent charter schools were to fail it would be the end of the experiment for all time. This is why the teacher unions have tried every trick to ensure that failure is the outcome of charter schools in New Zealand. But this uber-caution by the government has introduced another serious jeopardy. So few charter schools have been funded and got off the ground--and the selection criteria have been so narrow and doctrinaire--that it is unlikely the charter school experiment will succeed in this country. Sooner or later a Left-wing Labour administration will return to power in this country. Closing down five charter schools will be relatively easy. Closing down one hundred would have been politically much more difficult.
Meanwhile charter schools in the US are forging ahead--and their superior educational achievements are now becoming so well documented by credible sources that they cannot be gainsaid. The antediluvian teacher unions in New Zealand are still asserting that there is no evidence that charter schools have achieved higher educational outcomes anywhere in the world--or that if they have it is because they have "cherry picked" students.
This apologia for the relative underperformance of government schools is a bit rich. The teacher unions end up blaming the students for being dummies. "We aren't getting superior results in our union controlled schools because we are left teaching low IQ pupils," is really a convoluted way of saying that union controlled schools have bad teachers. Decent teachers ought to be insulted by this piece of union propaganda.
Here is a report on recent research conducted on Boston's charter schools:
According to NZ teacher unions, these things do not exist, they are not happening; it's all propaganda.Boston’s charter schools show striking gains
Test scores surpass traditional public schools, counterparts nationwide
By Peter SchwormGlobe StaffBoston charter school students outperformed their counterparts at traditional public schools and at charter schools in other urban areas by a striking margin over a recent six-year span, a Stanford University study found.
The strides at Boston charter schools — in both math and reading — equaled what students would have learned if they had been in school hundreds of additional days each year, researchers said in the report, released Wednesday.
The disparity held true for black, Hispanic, and low-income students in both math and reading, and was particularly strong for black and Hispanic students who live in poverty. “Boston charter schools have done exceptionally well improving the academic growth of their students,” said James Woodworth, a research analyst with Stanford’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes.
The study seems likely to inform the long-running debate over whether Massachusetts should allow more charter schools. A group of supporters plans to file a lawsuit to eliminate the state’s cap on the number of charter schools, which are public but operate independently of traditional school districts and are given more room to design coursework.
Nationally, urban charter schools on average achieved significantly greater student success in both math and reading than traditional public schools, said the study, which covered the academic years 2006-07 to 2011-12. “This research shows that many urban charter schools are providing superior academic learning for their students, in many cases quite dramatically better,” said Margaret Raymond, who directs the research group.
The group, which studied charter schools in 41 urban regions, found that charters had a greater impact in math in 26 cities, and in English in 23 cities. In Boston, the average yearly academic growth for charter school students was more than four times that of their traditional school peers in reading. In math, the academic growth was more than six times greater. “These are historic achievement gains,” said Marc Kenen, who directs the Massachusetts Charter Public School Association. “Charters are providing a blueprint for success.”
Critics say charter schools drain money from the regular school system, creating a two-tiered system, and do not take on the most challenging students, making them appear more successful than they actually are.
Massachusetts currently has 80 charter schools, 34 of them in Boston, which is at its limit.
Nearly 42,000 Massachusetts students, including 18,000 in Boston, are on waiting lists to attend charters. Richard Stutman, president of the Boston Teachers Union, which represents teachers in the traditional public schools, played down the study’s findings, saying charter schools have substantially fewer students who are learning English as a second language.
“Given the cherry-picking of students, I’m not surprised at all that their scores are higher,” Stutman said.Stutman, citing the study, noted that just 8 percent of Boston charter school students are English-language learners, compared with 30 percent in the traditional schools.
While the gap among special education students was far smaller — 17 percent for charter schools and 21 percent for the district — Stutman contended that charter schools have relatively few students with serious disabilities. Charter school advocates reject that argument and note that enrollment is determined by lottery. . . .Jon Clark, co-director for Brooke Charter Schools, which has schools in Mattapan, East Boston, and Roslindale, said charter schools provide a longer school day and give students intensive personal attention. Principals have the freedom to hire a staff and craft a budget as they see fit, he said.
Clark rejected the “cherry-picking” argument and said the success charter schools have shown with low-income black and Latino students is the true indicator. “If you really care about the achievement gap, you can’t look at these numbers and dismiss them,” he said.
HatTip, Whaleoil
No comments:
Post a Comment