Charter Schools Help Some Kids, but Cost Many Others
Tuesday, June 07, 2011
In case you've missed the headlines, the Mayor of Cranston, Allan Fung, has proposed opening a five-school network of charter schools in Cranston. To be run by Achievement First, a charter school management company, these schools are to serve largely low-income students from both Cranston and Providence. They are intended to be "Mayoral Academies," meaning they are not overseen by a school department, and not subject to any of the labor restrictions on Rhode Island charter schools.
You may think that a good idea, or you may not. We can debate the merits of teacher unions and their effect on education, and sure that would be lots of fun. But what isn't really debatable about this proposal is that the wonderful educational opportunities available to the students at these new schools will only come by reducing the opportunities available to the students who aren't in those schools.
I spent a little time last week with the AF proposal, and have this to report: I needed no convincing on the point, but the section about school results in Rhode Island is effective in persuading me that we have a lot of work to do in improving our schools. Our results overall are not great, and statewide, the gap between poor students and better-off ones are significant. On the other hand, the best testing data available is far from an overwhelming endorsement of charter schools. But even if you think AF schools will work magic, there's a problem and -- as usual -- it's money.
Follow the money
The way charter schools are funded under Rhode Island law is that the funding follows the student. A Providence
