|
|
News : Catalyst Crib Sheets
High-performing charters dominate some markets
This article orginally appeared in the August, 2010 issue of Catalyst. Click
here to see that issue's table of contents.
September 1, 2010: But critics say too many still bring up the rear.
Small but growing groups of high-performing charter schools are beginning to dominate the academic landscape in Cleveland and Dayton, according to state report card data released last week.
In Akron and Canton, however, charter schools have made little impact, rarely performing as well as the best schools in the local school district, report card data showed.
Meanwhile, charter school performance in Toledo, Cincinnati, Columbus and Youngstown is mixed at best, with charters making up some of those cities' best and worst schools.
Those are some of the broad findings contained in an analysis of charter and district school performance in Ohio's eight big city school districts.
The annual analysis, prepared by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute and Public Impact, shows that the gap between top-performing and low-performing charter schools appears to be widening.
"There's a maturity in the charter-school market," says Terry Ryan, vice president for Ohio operations for Fordham, which sponsors charter schools in Columbus, Dayton and other parts of the state. "Some of the more established ones seem to be leading the way."
There are about 300 publicly funded, privately operated charter schools in Ohio which are expected to serve more than 100,000 this fall. Charter schools have operated here for more than a decade.
The analysis shows that charter-school performance varies greatly from city-to-city, and within cities.
The performance is gauged by the state's performance index, which takes into account all test scores in all grades (high schools are excluded because there are no tests to measure):
"The disturbing non-performance by so many of the charter school operators is cause for great concern," said William Wendling, executive director of the Ohio 8, a coalition of superintendents and teacher union heads from the state's largest districts. "After more than a decade and $4 billion of experimentation, it's clear there are simply too many charter schools in Ohio that are being run to benefit the private operators and not the students."
Charter supporters like Ryan acknowledge there are too many low performers. But Ryan says the gains are encouraging.
"You are starting to see in Cleveland a collection of charter schools that are head and shoulders pulling away from other public schools," Ryan said. "In Cincinnati, the district made impressive gains, but some of the charter down there are making gains, too. That's a hopeful indication of good things to come."
The debate is important as Ohio begins to plan for its next two-year budget. The budget will include decisions on how, and how much, charter schools are funded.
On Wednesday, a subcommittee of the Ohio School Funding Advisory Council recommended that Ohio fund district and charter schools separately.
The current system pays school districts first and then deducts money for children who decide to attend a charter school. Subcommittee members said their proposed change would help direct more money to classrooms by lowering the costs both sides incur from monitoring the current system.
The charter school analysis is available at: http://www.edexcellence.net/index.cfm/news_2009-10-ohio-report-card-analysis
This article orginally appeared in the August, 2010 issue of Catalyst. Click
here to see that issue's table of contents.
Search Related Stories
In Akron and Canton, however, charter schools have made little impact, rarely performing as well as the best schools in the local school district, report card data showed.
Meanwhile, charter school performance in Toledo, Cincinnati, Columbus and Youngstown is mixed at best, with charters making up some of those cities' best and worst schools.
Those are some of the broad findings contained in an analysis of charter and district school performance in Ohio's eight big city school districts.
The annual analysis, prepared by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute and Public Impact, shows that the gap between top-performing and low-performing charter schools appears to be widening.
"There's a maturity in the charter-school market," says Terry Ryan, vice president for Ohio operations for Fordham, which sponsors charter schools in Columbus, Dayton and other parts of the state. "Some of the more established ones seem to be leading the way."
There are about 300 publicly funded, privately operated charter schools in Ohio which are expected to serve more than 100,000 this fall. Charter schools have operated here for more than a decade.
The analysis shows that charter-school performance varies greatly from city-to-city, and within cities.
The performance is gauged by the state's performance index, which takes into account all test scores in all grades (high schools are excluded because there are no tests to measure):
- In Dayton, eight of the 10 top-performing schools were charter schools. Charters also accounted for five of the six-worst performing schools in the city.
- In Cleveland, eight of the best-performing schools in the city were charter schools. Seven of those schools scored "excellent" ratings on the state's accountability system.
- In Akron, by contrast, none of the 10 top-performing schools was a charter school, and five of the 10 worst-performers were charters. In Canton, none of the top 12 public schools were charter schools.
- In Toledo, the two top-performing schools were charter schools, but traditional district schools accounted for 15 of the city's 18 top-performing schools.
- Charter schools posted good and bad results in Columbus, Cincinnati and Youngstown. Some of those cities' top-performing schools were charter schools. But in each of those cities, six of the worst 10 schools were also charters.
"The disturbing non-performance by so many of the charter school operators is cause for great concern," said William Wendling, executive director of the Ohio 8, a coalition of superintendents and teacher union heads from the state's largest districts. "After more than a decade and $4 billion of experimentation, it's clear there are simply too many charter schools in Ohio that are being run to benefit the private operators and not the students."
Charter supporters like Ryan acknowledge there are too many low performers. But Ryan says the gains are encouraging.
"You are starting to see in Cleveland a collection of charter schools that are head and shoulders pulling away from other public schools," Ryan said. "In Cincinnati, the district made impressive gains, but some of the charter down there are making gains, too. That's a hopeful indication of good things to come."
The debate is important as Ohio begins to plan for its next two-year budget. The budget will include decisions on how, and how much, charter schools are funded.
On Wednesday, a subcommittee of the Ohio School Funding Advisory Council recommended that Ohio fund district and charter schools separately.
The current system pays school districts first and then deducts money for children who decide to attend a charter school. Subcommittee members said their proposed change would help direct more money to classrooms by lowering the costs both sides incur from monitoring the current system.
The charter school analysis is available at: http://www.edexcellence.net/index.cfm/news_2009-10-ohio-report-card-analysis
Catalyst Ohio is an editorially independent newsmagazine published by the Community Renewal Society
Our sister publications: Catalyst-Chicago | The Chicago Reporter
Privacy | Usage