Student achievement is mixed... so now what?

Charter school performance has been a popular topic in education research for years.  Research results are mixed -- one can find support for whatever position one wishes to take on the issue.  My opinion is that the diversity of outcomes in charter schools means that they aren't the panacea some advocates claim, but they can serve a useful purpose as laboratories for experimentation.  The schools are as varied as our students and we should seek a policy framework that provides them their essential freedom to experiment while simultaneously recognizing that they must exist within the community of public schools: they have an important though limited role in that community.  They must serve their students and the larger purpose too.

Ideally, charter school experimentation will find new solutions to larger educational problems, but currently the competition for funds, space, students, and public attention has fouled the atmosphere of cooperation that should exist within the community of schools.  We need policies that provide charters with adequate resources without making them compete with existing schools are necessary -- some sort of recognition that "good fences make good neighbors".  And equally important, we need more inter-school collaboration so that experiences can be usefully shared and all parties can benefit from the charter school work.

Links

Why Charter Schools Fail the Test (NYT Opinion)

How to measure student performance?  A charter schools advocate explains why charter schools don't necessarily do any better on standardized tests.

Despite Push, Success at Charter Schools is Mixed (NYT)

"But for all their support and cultural cachet, the majority of the 5,000 or so charter schools nationwide appear to be no better, and in many cases worse, than local public schools when measured by achievement on standardized tests, according to experts citing years of research."

How Does Unionization Affect Charter Schools?

As unionization in charter schools across the country continues, differing views regarding the effects of unionization on charter schools come to light.

“…unionization effort raises questions about whether unions will strengthen the charter movement by stabilizing its young, often transient teaching force, or weaken it by preventing administrators from firing ineffective teachers and imposing changes they say help raise achievement, like an extended school year” (New York Times, July 26, 2009).

Among the reasons of one Chicago charter school teacher for opting to unionize were frustration with staff turnover, “lack of teacher input, with working longer and harder than teachers at other schools and earning less.” Additionally, some teachers note a sense of empowerment in unionizing.

Jay Greene, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute (April 16, 2009), holds the view that unionization does not have a positive affect on charter schools’ rates of academic achievement. “… students accepted by lottery at charters run by the school district with unionized teachers experienced no benefit.” He cites economist Caroline Hoxby’s work, which states that “students accepted by lottery to charter schools were significantly outpacing the academic progress of their peers who lost the lottery and were forced to return to district schools.” “When charter schools unionize, they become identical to traditional public schools in performance.”

It seems that those who see positive potential of unionization focus on consistency of the work force and its assumed benefits in terms of teacher’s voice and the stability provided within a school community. Those who argue against unionization do so based on concerns over academic success.

As unionization in charter schools continues to grow, further studies will have to be done to see what characteristics are present in schools (both charter and non-charter) that provide both stability and teacher empowerment as well as high academic achievement. I don’t believe that the answer to the question “To unionize, or not to unionize?” has to focus on one over the other.