How many more of these studies do we really need?
Well, it's another week and there's another study showing once again that charter schools fail to perform better than the traditional public schools they are being touted to replace. Of course the whole premise behind comparing and rating large categories of schools, based on a selected group of standardized test scores makes no sense and needs more debunking.
This latest study, coming out of Stanford's CREDO group finds:
Charters actually come out slightly better in this year's CREDO study then they did in 2009. But charter school cheerleaders like Scott Pearson, are downright giddy over reportedly (I always add in that word when talking about D.C. test scores in the post-Rhee era) improved charter reading and math scores in the District. Pearson, who comes out of Arne Duncan's Dept. of
This latest study, coming out of Stanford's CREDO group finds:
56 percent of the charters produced no significant difference in reading and 19 percent had worse results than traditional public schools. In math, 40 percent produced no significant difference and 31 percent were significantly worse than regular public schools.
 |
| Pearson |
