5 ms·

I worked for 2 years as an AmeriCorps volunteer in Atlanta Public Schools. I'll preface this by saying I don't know if I believe charter schools are bad or good

I worked for 2 years as an AmeriCorps volunteer in Atlanta Public Schools. I'll preface this by saying I don't know if I believe charter schools are bad or good, but here are some arguments against them: - Charter schools take money away from neighborhood public schools. Most schools are funded per-capita, so fewer students means less money. But many costs are fixed/discrete (e.g. school nurse costs N thousand dollars). - Charter schools have inflated performance metrics. Often charter schools don't serve special needs students. More than that, charter schools bias towards engaged and interested parents. Because of policies like No Child Left Behind, it is really bad for local neighborhood schools to have all of their high performing students leave for charter schools. - Corporatization is evil. Charter schools often run more like a business than a socialized institution. Some even pay kids for good grades. Often, the success of a charter school depends on marketing, and successful marketing depends on performing well on metrics. Charter schools are then incentivized to "teach to the test" and potentially force out students who don't perform well. "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure."

sandworm101 8y ago
Lol, school nurse. Those disappeared in the 80s. Now it is normal for a single first aid attendant to cover multiple schools. Nurses cost way too much.
ryanx435 8y ago
> Charter schools have inflated performance metrics. Often charter schools don't serve special needs students. More than that, charter schools bias towards engaged and interested parents. Because of policies like No Child Left Behind, it is really bad for local neighborhood schools to have all of their high performing students leave for charter schools. Thats an interesting way of saying that charter schools get better results.
- cdman 8y ago
  Yes, due to an unfair advantage. As per the text you quoted: > charter schools don't serve special needs students. More than that, charter schools bias towards engaged and interested parents. Because of policies like No Child Left Behind, it is really bad for local neighborhood schools to have all of their high performing students leave for charter schools.
  - ryanx435 8y ago
    so if I'm an engaged and interested parent, and I want my child to succeed, looks like charter schools are the correct answer about where to send my kids.
    - frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
      1. No. Charter schools select the best students but that doesn't say that they're actually better at educating them than a normal public school. 2. You don't believe that kids should share an environment with the less-advantaged? Even if we said that your child may be more likely to 'succeed' when they are placed in an environment where almost no kids are materially wanting or have special needs - what kind of person are they going to be? Unfortunately it seems they are likely to grow up to be the same kind of person you are.
      - dang 8y ago
        We've banned this account for repeatedly violating the HN guidelines and ignoring our request to stop. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
        What request to stop and what HN guideline?
        dang 8y ago
        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16220030 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16220030 Many guidelines, but start with the civility rule.
        frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
- jahnu 8y ago
  It doesn't say that at all. "better results" should mean given a similar set of students. If you cherry-pick the inputs don't expect comparing outputs to be the same.
  - JoeAltmaier 8y ago
    Given the set of high-ability students, it does seem that charter schools have better results. There's an attitude that everybody should do poorly together, and that's better than anybody succeeding. Like a bucket of crabs, each clawing at the others trying to get out and pulling them back in that keeps the poor, doing poorly. And well-meaning ivory-tower types fuel the culture with idealistic 'fairness' arguments.
    - Retric 8y ago
      The data does not back this up. Charter schools like elite colleges gain 90% of their reputation from rejecting average or below students. There is variation among school quality adjusting for incoming students, however that exists for both normal and charter schools with many charter schools preforming worse than expected and many public schools preforming far above expectations. However, if you want to support the value of some institution or approach it's really easy to ignore this fact and create biased research.
      - JoeAltmaier 8y ago
        Citation? Its not about reputation (irrelevant) but accomplishment. And in the OP case, we're talking about one school helping one demographic. I wish this new school all the best luck in helping these kids.
        Retric 8y ago
        the predominance of such studies in the United States does not show positive impacts on average for the charter school sector. https://www.brookings.edu/research/on-negative-effects-of-vouchers/ https://www.brookings.edu/research/on-negative-effects-of-vo... Recent research on statewide voucher programs in Louisiana and Indiana has found that public school students that received vouchers to attend private schools subsequently scored lower on reading and math tests compared to similar students that remained in public schools. https://www.brookings.edu/research/on-negative-effects-of-vouchers/ https://www.brookings.edu/research/on-negative-effects-of-vo... Or do you want the actual research papers?
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  But they get better results because they get better students.
  - abakker 8y ago
    The real question is whether they get results that are as much better as they should be, since they are selecting students up front. I suspect that picking your inputs at a very young age is more about marketing and capturing money than it is about true ability to perform. Either that, or it is simply a follow on of the fact that parents with money, free time, and high levels of education tend to have students that do well in school. The school may make no difference at all if the kids learn a lot at home.
whack 8y ago
That's a pretty good summary of the common anti-charter arguments. A few counter-arguments to the above: - Charter schools expand choice for low-income families. If your public school sucks and your family is doing well, you can always move elsewhere or go to private school. If you're from a poor family, charter schools are your only escape valve - Maybe it's bad for the public school, but it's good for the high performing students themselves, who are no longer dragged down by disruptive/disengaged classmates. - The vast majority of charter schools are non-profit. The people running and funding a charter school are just as motivated by good intentions, as those in public schools. They just happen to experiment with different approaches and methods, while giving students/parents the final say on where they want to go. - Metrics can be gamed, but a complete lack of metrics can also be exploited by underperforming/incompetent/disengaged organizations. Tracking a reasonably good metric is better than tracking no metric at all - something seen in how most successful organizations operate.
- learc83 8y ago
  >The vast majority of charter schools are non-profit. According to this article [1], schools can technically be registered as a non-profit, but contract out day to day operations to a for-profit management company owned by the same people who run the non-profit. This setup allows the school to take in tax free donations, but it means that from a profit motive standpoint it's identical to a for-profit school. I have no idea how common this is, but it does mean that it's not quite as simple as saying that the vast majority are non-profit. 1. https://ourfuture.org/20170615/are-nonprofit-charter-schools-a-distinction-without-a-difference https://ourfuture.org/20170615/are-nonprofit-charter-schools...
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  "Charter schools expand choice for low-income families." Only if charter schools are not permitted to pick and choose who attends. "Maybe it's bad for the public school, but it's good for the high performing students themselves, who are no longer dragged down by disruptive/disengaged classmates." This kinda boils down to "fuck you, I've got mine." It's why no one likes libertarians. "The vast majority of charter schools are non-profit." Citation needed. And a citation that they're actually non-profit, and not a non-profit in the same way the NFL is a non-profit. "They just happen to experiment with different approaches and methods, while giving students/parents the final say on where they want to go." Yeah, but many times those "experiments" have to do with just breaking unions.
brightball 8y ago
In the area where I live, there is a lot of anticipation for a Charter school to open because the county school board is so terrible. There are 6 regional seats for a single county wide school district and 3 of the seats vote against ANY improvements or expense increases. In a tie vote, nothing happens. It's been an issue for years at this point. There is a charter coming to the highest population area of the county and people are excited simply because it's managed by a state level school board instead of the county.
- naravara 8y ago
  >There is a charter coming to the highest population area of the county and people are excited simply because it's managed by a state level school board instead of the county. What's the impediment to voting out those people? Do they represent areas that are mostly retirement communities or something?
gedy 8y ago
> Charter schools take money away from neighborhood public schools Such a lie/distortion
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  How is it a lie? Money going to charters is money not going to the neighborhood school.
  - gedy 8y ago
    Kids going to School A from School B means that School A doesn't need to pay anything for that student. Plus public charter schools typically run less overhead and are more efficient per student.[0] [0] http://www.uaedreform.org/downloads/2014/07/the-productivity-of-public-charter-schools.pdf http://www.uaedreform.org/downloads/2014/07/the-productivity...
    - s73v3r_ 8y ago
      "Plus public charter schools typically run less overhead and are more efficient per student." Because they don't have to serve all the students, and they don't have to serve special needs students. Not mentioning that is quite dishonest.

sandworm101 8y ago

Lol, school nurse. Those disappeared in the 80s. Now it is normal for a single first aid attendant to cover multiple schools. Nurses cost way too much.

ryanx435 8y ago

> Charter schools have inflated performance metrics. Often charter schools don't serve special needs students. More than that, charter schools bias towards engaged and interested parents. Because of policies like No Child Left Behind, it is really bad for local neighborhood schools to have all of their high performing students leave for charter schools. Thats an interesting way of saying that charter schools get better results.

cdman 8y ago
Yes, due to an unfair advantage. As per the text you quoted: > charter schools don't serve special needs students. More than that, charter schools bias towards engaged and interested parents. Because of policies like No Child Left Behind, it is really bad for local neighborhood schools to have all of their high performing students leave for charter schools.
- ryanx435 8y ago
  so if I'm an engaged and interested parent, and I want my child to succeed, looks like charter schools are the correct answer about where to send my kids.
  - frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
    1. No. Charter schools select the best students but that doesn't say that they're actually better at educating them than a normal public school. 2. You don't believe that kids should share an environment with the less-advantaged? Even if we said that your child may be more likely to 'succeed' when they are placed in an environment where almost no kids are materially wanting or have special needs - what kind of person are they going to be? Unfortunately it seems they are likely to grow up to be the same kind of person you are.
    - dang 8y ago
      We've banned this account for repeatedly violating the HN guidelines and ignoring our request to stop. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
        What request to stop and what HN guideline?
        dang 8y ago
        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16220030 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16220030 Many guidelines, but start with the civility rule.
        frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
jahnu 8y ago
It doesn't say that at all. "better results" should mean given a similar set of students. If you cherry-pick the inputs don't expect comparing outputs to be the same.
- JoeAltmaier 8y ago
  Given the set of high-ability students, it does seem that charter schools have better results. There's an attitude that everybody should do poorly together, and that's better than anybody succeeding. Like a bucket of crabs, each clawing at the others trying to get out and pulling them back in that keeps the poor, doing poorly. And well-meaning ivory-tower types fuel the culture with idealistic 'fairness' arguments.
  - Retric 8y ago
    The data does not back this up. Charter schools like elite colleges gain 90% of their reputation from rejecting average or below students. There is variation among school quality adjusting for incoming students, however that exists for both normal and charter schools with many charter schools preforming worse than expected and many public schools preforming far above expectations. However, if you want to support the value of some institution or approach it's really easy to ignore this fact and create biased research.
    - JoeAltmaier 8y ago
      Citation? Its not about reputation (irrelevant) but accomplishment. And in the OP case, we're talking about one school helping one demographic. I wish this new school all the best luck in helping these kids.
      - Retric 8y ago
        the predominance of such studies in the United States does not show positive impacts on average for the charter school sector. https://www.brookings.edu/research/on-negative-effects-of-vouchers/ https://www.brookings.edu/research/on-negative-effects-of-vo... Recent research on statewide voucher programs in Louisiana and Indiana has found that public school students that received vouchers to attend private schools subsequently scored lower on reading and math tests compared to similar students that remained in public schools. https://www.brookings.edu/research/on-negative-effects-of-vouchers/ https://www.brookings.edu/research/on-negative-effects-of-vo... Or do you want the actual research papers?
toasterlovin 8y ago
But they get better results because they get better students.
- abakker 8y ago
  The real question is whether they get results that are as much better as they should be, since they are selecting students up front. I suspect that picking your inputs at a very young age is more about marketing and capturing money than it is about true ability to perform. Either that, or it is simply a follow on of the fact that parents with money, free time, and high levels of education tend to have students that do well in school. The school may make no difference at all if the kids learn a lot at home.

whack 8y ago

That's a pretty good summary of the common anti-charter arguments. A few counter-arguments to the above: - Charter schools expand choice for low-income families. If your public school sucks and your family is doing well, you can always move elsewhere or go to private school. If you're from a poor family, charter schools are your only escape valve - Maybe it's bad for the public school, but it's good for the high performing students themselves, who are no longer dragged down by disruptive/disengaged classmates. - The vast majority of charter schools are non-profit. The people running and funding a charter school are just as motivated by good intentions, as those in public schools. They just happen to experiment with different approaches and methods, while giving students/parents the final say on where they want to go. - Metrics can be gamed, but a complete lack of metrics can also be exploited by underperforming/incompetent/disengaged organizations. Tracking a reasonably good metric is better than tracking no metric at all - something seen in how most successful organizations operate.

learc83 8y ago
>The vast majority of charter schools are non-profit. According to this article [1], schools can technically be registered as a non-profit, but contract out day to day operations to a for-profit management company owned by the same people who run the non-profit. This setup allows the school to take in tax free donations, but it means that from a profit motive standpoint it's identical to a for-profit school. I have no idea how common this is, but it does mean that it's not quite as simple as saying that the vast majority are non-profit. 1. https://ourfuture.org/20170615/are-nonprofit-charter-schools-a-distinction-without-a-difference https://ourfuture.org/20170615/are-nonprofit-charter-schools...
s73v3r_ 8y ago
"Charter schools expand choice for low-income families." Only if charter schools are not permitted to pick and choose who attends. "Maybe it's bad for the public school, but it's good for the high performing students themselves, who are no longer dragged down by disruptive/disengaged classmates." This kinda boils down to "fuck you, I've got mine." It's why no one likes libertarians. "The vast majority of charter schools are non-profit." Citation needed. And a citation that they're actually non-profit, and not a non-profit in the same way the NFL is a non-profit. "They just happen to experiment with different approaches and methods, while giving students/parents the final say on where they want to go." Yeah, but many times those "experiments" have to do with just breaking unions.

brightball 8y ago

In the area where I live, there is a lot of anticipation for a Charter school to open because the county school board is so terrible. There are 6 regional seats for a single county wide school district and 3 of the seats vote against ANY improvements or expense increases. In a tie vote, nothing happens. It's been an issue for years at this point. There is a charter coming to the highest population area of the county and people are excited simply because it's managed by a state level school board instead of the county.

naravara 8y ago
>There is a charter coming to the highest population area of the county and people are excited simply because it's managed by a state level school board instead of the county. What's the impediment to voting out those people? Do they represent areas that are mostly retirement communities or something?

gedy 8y ago

> Charter schools take money away from neighborhood public schools Such a lie/distortion

s73v3r_ 8y ago
How is it a lie? Money going to charters is money not going to the neighborhood school.
- gedy 8y ago
  Kids going to School A from School B means that School A doesn't need to pay anything for that student. Plus public charter schools typically run less overhead and are more efficient per student.[0] [0] http://www.uaedreform.org/downloads/2014/07/the-productivity-of-public-charter-schools.pdf http://www.uaedreform.org/downloads/2014/07/the-productivity...
  - s73v3r_ 8y ago
    "Plus public charter schools typically run less overhead and are more efficient per student." Because they don't have to serve all the students, and they don't have to serve special needs students. Not mentioning that is quite dishonest.