Do NYC Charters Improve Performance?

In 2009, Caroline Hoxby published her report on charter school performance for the "New York City Charter Schools Evaluation Project". While Hoxby looked at many variables in her report, I am going to focus on two. The first is the population a charter school in New York City serves; Hoxby found that schools are more likely to serve African American students than either Asian or Caucasian students. The second finding in the 85 page report is that student continuously enrolled in a charter school are out performing students who either left the school, or were not accepted in the lottery.

The first is important because it addresses the the accusation placed on charter schools for separating African American and Hispanic students from Asian and Caucasian students. Hoxby finds this trend in New York City, based upon the location of the charter school, and is not an intentional result of the lottery process.

The second topic is important because, the lottery (which Hoxby finds to be truly random), works. Furthermore, if the lottery works then charter schools in New York City are performing their role be increasing student achievement for continuously enrolled students.

This finally begs the question: If charter schools are to co-exist with public schools, yet out perform public schools, what are the charters doing that the city can emulate?

To read this publication in full: How New York City's Charter Schools Affect Achievemnt

Categories of Charter Schools

As part of the think tank's research into school privatization I have started researching the most common organizational forms used by charter schools.  There are large non-profit and for-profit charter school organizations, university-backed charter schools, schools backed by community groups like ACORN, and finally, independent "mom-and-pop" charter schools.  To what extent should we be differentiating among them in our research and advocacy?  With the exception of for-profit school networks which I feel deserve special scrutiny, I don't yet have an answer.

My initial searching failed to uncover any comprehensive listing of different organizational forms running charter schools.  Since New York state law (like law in nearly all other states) grants chartering authority to a variety of state and local institutions, it generally leaves open the question of what type body can receive such a charter.  The chartering authorities examine each application individually, and though some restrict for-profit entities from receiving charters, they don't otherwise limit who can apply.

Working list of charter school models:

• Non-profit organization (ACORN, UFT, etc.)
• Independent university
• Non-profit school network (Harlem Children's Zone, Green Dot, Success Charter Network, etc)
• For-profit Education Management Companies (EMOs) - not allowed in NYC?
• Independent "mom-and-pop"

Resources

• The question of which chartering authorities are most effective is addressed in the report A Sum Greater Than the Parts: What States Can Teach Each Other About Charter Schooling (Mead and Rotherham).
• A list of New York City charter schools, along with their chartering authority, is available on the New York City Department of Education website.

School Choice

While Friedman wrote this article his article in 1997, "Public Schools: Make them Private" it remains heavily cited in other publications. Milton Friedman was one of the original advocates for school vouchers in the late 1900s, and after the advent of charter schools in 1991 he continued to promote school choice. In the 1997 publication Friedman further his support for school privatization when he claims school vouchers are the only method of promoting educational success in urban areas, where the worst schools continue to under-educate students. Yet, he has also received criticism for his inability to go further than his vague claim for universal success when he states he can't predict where a free-market education might lead the country. My final criticism of Friedman's article is in his support for local community control over schools. Yet, the charter schools, which continue to gain national support, have become a far cry from community organizations as national EMOs continue to proliferate the educational market.

Friedman's article can be found in Education Economics Dec 97, vol 5 issue 3, p 341, 4pages