The Reformy Arguments Are Getting Worser
Michael Vaughn posted a piece at Education Post that makes this increasingly tiresome claim:
But it’s getting harder and harder to see the teachers unions as fighting for the common good when they’re so often fighting against what is clearly good for kids.I picked apart Vaughn's argument and pointed out he had made assertions that were not backed up by the evidence. He responded, and I agreed to post his response here. However, as this is my blog, I claim the privilege of having the last word.
Let's start off by disabusing Vaughn of several of the claims he makes in his response to me:
And the latest CREDO study shows that urban charters, in some cases, serve more students from low-income families and higher percentages of English-language learners and students with disabilities.No, it does not. The CREDO study shows in some cases -- emphasis on some -- that the student populations that they studied had those characteristics. This is one of the major methodological criticisms of the CREDO study: its home-grown method for matching students excludes too many charter students who can't be matched to public students.
The table on page 6 of the CREDO study shows the characteristics of the tested students of the charters in the cities studied -- not of all of the students in those charters. The fact that nearly 20% of the students in the charters studied could not be matched is a good indication that the populations of the charters differ significantly from their hosting public school districts. And the study didn't include all cities with charter students.
In addition: the CREDO study aggregates students of varying levels of economic disadvantage and special need into one group. That's not very helpful when comparing charter populations to district public school populations.
And let’s stop the “privatization” nonsense and the efforts to deny parents access to those options.For about the millionth time: charter schools are not public schools in any meaningful sense. Yes, they access public funds, but so do many non-profit and for-profit organizations that are not state actors. Charters belong in this latter category.
The Ninth Circuit Count of Appeals says so. The Washington State Supreme Court says so (admittedly, it's a matter of local state law in that case). The National Labor Relations Board says so. The Census Bureau says so. Legal scholars writing in academic journals and for the American Bar Association say so.
Further, we know that investors are looking to make money from privatized charter - See more at: http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2015/10/the-reformy-arguments-are-getting-worser.html#sthash.oXFP5Wsk.dpuf