School choice and culture wars: CRT exposure and viewpoint diversity across educational sectors

“No Excuses” charter schools for increasing math and literacy achievement in primary and secondary education: a systematic review

Spurring parental involvement has been a core objective of charter school reform. This study compares for-profit-managed and nonprofit-managed charter schools and their public school peers in Detroit on two indicators of parental involvement. Nonprofit-managed charter schools generated higher rates of general parental involvement, net of demographic, school, and self-selection controls. Public schools, however, elicited greater parent participation in school decision making, using the same controls. Although differences in school strategies may be underlying these results, self-selection mechanisms also appear to be salient, underscoring variation in school choice participation among demographically similar families in high choice deindustrialized cities.

Charter schools are positioned by proponents as a key component of reform efforts striving to expand school choice. Proponents argue that charter schools have the flexibility to experiment with novel curricular and instructional models outside the constraints of the traditional public education system, and therefore have the potential to transform students’ experiences. Influential reports over the last three decades have highlighted the need to improve students’ preparation in STEM, and charter schools have emerged as a reform with the potential to do so. This work uses methods from social network analysis and logistic regression to investigate how course-taking patterns in Texas charter and non-charter schools either promote or constrain student engagement within the STEM disciplines by: 1) exploring STEM course offerings in Texas charter and non-charter public secondary schools; and 2) identifying students’ STEM course-taking patterns in these schools. Findings suggest charter schools are less likely than non-charter public schools to offer STEM courses tailored for special education students and that charter school students’ course-taking patterns tend to be either slightly more advanced or more basic than the course-taking patterns of students in non-charter schools. In addition, students in charter schools tend to be more mobile (e.g., transfer between schools) than students in non-charter public schools.

What impact have Minnesota's public school choice options had on the state's education system overall? Mr. Nathan and Mr. Boyd report on some unanticipated positive results, some negative predictions that did not come to pass, and a few unfortunate instances that underscore the need for careful monitoring of the programs and the schools participating in them. THE SUPREME Court's voucher decision in July 2002 adds to the importance of understanding the promise and challenges of school choice within the public school system.1 An analysis of Minnesota's experience with school choice programs between 1985 and 2002, conducted by researchers at Penn State University and the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute, shows that school choice programs can be valuable and can help to stimulate improvement in the broader system. But the research we conducted also makes clear that any school choice plan needs to be carefully monitored and that participating schools should be reviewed regularly.2 Data for this project were gathered in several ways. More than 2,000 students were surveyed, including students who took advantage of the state's Post-Secondary Enrollment Options law and students at six representative alternative schools in rural, urban, and suburban areas. More than 50 individuals, including representatives of key state education, community, and business organizations, were also interviewed. An extensive research and literature review was carried out, and, in cooperation with Minnesota's Department of Children, Families, and Learning (the state education department), information was gathered and analyzed from previously unpublished state records. A Brief Overview of Minnesota's School Choice Laws Minnesota began passing public school choice legislation in 1985 and has enacted four major programs. * Postsecondary options (1985). This program allows high school juniors and seniors to attend a college or university full or part time, with state funds following the students to pay tuition and lab and book fees. Any student admitted by a college or university is eligible, and the decision to apply is left to the student. * Second-chance options (1987). This program allows 12- to 21-year-old students who have not succeeded in traditional schools, according to a variety of measures, to attend smaller alternative schools created by a district, a group of districts, or a private organization that can convince a district to give it a contract. * Open (1988). This program allows K-12 students to move across district lines as long as the receiving district has room and the movement does not harm desegregation efforts. * Charter schools (1991). This program allows educators to create new schools or convert existing public or private nonsectarian schools into public charter schools with no admissions tests. The schools are responsible for improving achievement, or they are closed. These schools must be authorized or sponsored by one of several groups, including local districts, postsecondary institutions, or nonprofit organizations with at least $1 million in assets. Who Participates in School Choice? A great deal of discussion has taken place about enrollment and charter schools. But our research demonstrated that the largest school choice programs in Minnesota -- by far -- were those authorized by the 1987 law allowing students who had not succeeded in traditional school settings to attend a different, often much smaller, alternative school. This program is also the fastest growing. According to state figures, the number of students participating in second-chance programs grew from 4,050 in 1988-89 to more than 100,000 in 2000-01. Meanwhile, participation in the open program grew from 140 in 1988 to just over 28,000 in 2000-01. From 1988 to 2000, overall K-12 grew 17%, but the number of students participating in one of the four statewide choice programs grew more than 1,300%. …

From the Editorial Board Virtual Charter Schools:Where Did All The Children Go? Sarah Byrne Bausell Over the last decade, parents and students seeking a more flexible and individualized educational experience have increasingly turned to virtual public charter schools, the newest trend in an age old U.S. debate about school choice (O’Hanlon, 2012). Though the school choice movement emanates from what Alan Wolfe (2009) noted as “the right end of the political spectrum” (p. 34), school choice (and all of its more recent mutations) has enjoyed bipartisan nurturance, rooted in a collective commitment to a consumer choice ideology and supported by a steady stream of model bills manufactured by assertive school choice lobbyists. Most notably, the Virtual Public Schools Act (2011), a model bill introduced by the conservative free market collective called the American Legislative Exchange Council, ensured that cyber public schools in Tennessee would be “provided equitable treatment and resources as any other public school” (Underwood & Mead, 2012). The model bill has since been passed in numerous states. As a result virtual charter schools typically receive the same spending per pupil as a brick and mortar charter, despite not having any expenditure for food service, facilities, or transportation (Saul, 2011). It would be a mistake to chalk virtual charter schools up as just another public education fad. According to a 2014 National Educational Policy Center report, the United States is host to over 400 virtual charter schools (Molnar et al., 2014). Though still a relatively small number of schools, the rate of this ten-year growth is extraordinary. For an estimated 300,000 students seeking an alternative pathway, these schools afford an opportunity to earn accreditation from the comfort (or confines) of home (Samuelsohn, 2013). With guaranteed and ample public funding, virtual charter schools are staged to become ubiquitous features in our public school landscape. Virtual public charter schools stem from a politically charged and economically motivated ideology- one that has inextricably tied pupils to purse strings. The two most prominent corporations running virtual charters, K12 and Connections Academy (recently acquired by Pearson Inc.), reported happy news in last year’s annual stock reports. K12 earned 948 million dollars in revenue (K12, 2015, p. 3), while the share price for Pearson, which owns Connections Academy, rose over 32% (Moreno, 2014). Connections Academy and K12 are not merely virtual schools benefiting from increased enrollment numbers; they are also wheelhouses for the rampant outsourcing of educational auxiliary services, providing curriculum packages and online courseware for brick and mortar schools. Like all lucrative business models, they help shape a need and then they fill that need. Despite recent media attention, which questions “aggressive student recruitment” (Rabin-Havt, 2015) and implies the misuse of tax dollars for marketing purposes (Smith, 2013), for K12, the $26.5 million spent on advertising in 2010 served their corporate mission well (Saul, 2011). However, what’s good for investors is not necessarily so for the most immediate stakeholders: students. Promotional materials herald this service as highly individualized [End Page 109] and “expert vetted,” but recent empirical evidence paints a much grimmer portrait: dysfunctional schools, huge student attrition rates, dismal test scores, overworked teachers, and reports of an abounding cheating culture (Barbour & Reeves, 2009). An analysis of school performance revealed that only 27% of the nation’s virtual public charters met Adequate Yearly Growth in the 2013–2014 school year (Molnar et al., 2014). For example, Hubbard and Mitchell (2011) found that over half of the Colorado students enrolled in virtual charters either transferred to a different school or stopped attending school entirely within a one-year time frame. Attrition rates are not only a Colorado concern; despite receiving over 4.1 million dollars for student tuition in 2014, the Massachusetts Virtual Academy at Greenfied (owned by K12), ranked amongst the lowest performing schools in the state (Allen, 2013). A 2013 Politico investigation revealed that cyber charter schools in Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York precipitated student attrition rates sometimes three times the number of their equivalent brick and mortar counterparts (Samuelsohn, 2013). Within this messy intersection between profit and schooling there are huge consequences for students and their families, which warrant our careful consideration. Virtual charter...

ABSTRACTEducational efforts by the MSE profession can effect society in several ways: by producing more and better MSE graduates, by enhancing the Materials backgrounds of students from other engineering disciplines, by continuing education programs, and, in a nontraditional sense, by impacting the non-engineering community with outreach programs. I suggest that the effect on society of working with disadvantaged elementary school children, such as inner city fifth graders, is potentially far greater than efforts spent on non-engineering students already in college, high school students, or even middle school students. The Fifth Grade Volunteer Teaching Program (5GVP) at Marquette has attempted over the last ten years to inform Milwaukee's inner city fifth graders of the existence of an engineering career while showing them that science is something that they can actually do themselves and that the doing is fun. Maybe some of the roughly 5,000 students taught have stayed in the college prep track in math and science as a result of contact with our enthusiastic engineering student volunteers. Our lessons are self contained and heavy with things for the fifth graders to do themselves. One lesson, which portends Materials Science and Engineering, is called, “Phases of Matter”. This year I have expanded the 5GVP Program to include three of the Choice Schools operating in Milwaukee. These schools differ from the Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) and from each other significantly. Class sizes in the Choice Schools vary from much smaller than MPS to about the same size as MPS. The school buildings range from ramshackle to very modern. The Charter School has science labs and the Choice Schools do not. The Charter School is for profit and these two Choice Schools are not for profit.

Addressing psychiatric disparities in adolescents: clinical applications of social support in school mental health interventions: a cross-sectional study

Soulevant le paradoxe de l'obligation de l'education civique des enfants et de l'apprentissage des valeurs fondamentales du liberalisme telle que l'autonomie de l'individu, l'A. montre que la permissibilite de l'education civique pose probleme, tant du point de vue de l'autorite de l'ecole en matiere d'enseignement et de l'autorite des parents en matiere d'education, que du point de vue de la legitimite de l'etat liberal au regard du consentement hypothetique des citoyens. Examinant les arguments en faveur de l'education civique developpes par W. Galston et A. Gutmann, ainsi que l'argument instrumental en faveur de l'education falicitant l'autonomie, l'A. montre que le debat souleve la question de la place de la famille religieuse de l'enfant et la question des programmes scolaires dans le cadre limite de la doctrine liberale

This literature analysis examines the experiences of Black students in public charter schools in the United States by analyzing the current literature and enrollment data in this domain. Through the investigation of multiple empirical studies that examine the effects of charter schools on the academic achievement and enrollment trends of Black students, the author introduces the concept of Black Charter School Effect. The Black Charter School Effect encompasses the ability of public charter schools to successfully attract, and in many cases, educate Black students. This analysis offers implications for policymakers to consider the redesign of state charter laws that impact urban communities.Keywords: charter schools, African American students, best practices, charter school effectThe Black-White achievement gap, the gap in traditional measures of academic achievement between Blacks and Whites, has been debated and analyzed among scholars, legislators, and practitioners for decades. The federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 was authorized to address the achievement gap. However, since its passage, the achievement gap has changed relatively little. The 2009 National Center for Education Statistics' (NCES) achievement gap statistical analysis, that reports on national achievement scores among fourth and eighth grade students, revealed, that in both mathematics and reading, White students scored on average 26 points higher than Black students (Vanneman et al., 2009)- only five points lower than when earlier studies were conducted (mathematics in 1 990 and reading in 1 992).Countless authors have attempted to identify the causal factors associated with the achievement gap. Many have identified several influences that are school related such as low teacher expectations, lack of curriculum rigor, poor teacher training programs, lack of school resources, tracking, a lack of appreciation for Black culture, incompetent administration, and so forth (Delpit, 1995; Kozol, 2005; Ladson-Billings, 2009; Meier, 2002; Steele, 1992; Thompson, 2004). Conversely, other scholars have identified socioeconomic and home environment triggers such as a lack of time reading to children, lack of parental involvement, student apathy, lack of adequate healthcare, mobility, lack of affordable housing, and low socioeconomic status, as reasons Black students perform poorer than White students (Coleman, 1988; Rothstein, 2004). One group of researchers contends that a combination of factors such as student turnover rates, inexperienced teachers, and student racial composition, significantly contributes to the achievement gap (Hanushek & Rivkin, 2006).Despite the lack of coherent agreement on what causes the achievement gap, the pervasive achievement disparity between Black and White students is directly tied to a relatively new phenomenon among Black families in this country today - public charter schools. Black families in America are seeking public charter schools in unprecedented numbers (Alliance, 201 la).Nationally, Black students are choosing charter schools nearly double the rate that they are choosing traditional public schools. During the 2010-201 1 academic year, Black students accounted for roughly 1 6% of the national student population in traditional public schools, while in public charter schools they accounted for 29% of the student population (Alliance, 2011a). Studies have documented this phenomenon through both qualitative and quantitative analyses, and have presented differing outcomes for the effects of charter schools on Black student enrollment (Abdulkadiroglu et al., 2009; Bifolco & Ladd, 2006a, 2006b; Bodine et al., 2008; Booker, Zimmer, & Buddin, 2005; California Charter Schools Association, CCSA, 2008; Frankenberg & Lee, 2003; Hoxby, Murarka, & Kang, 2009; Zimmer & Buddin, 2005).This analysis seeks to address the phenomenon and to paint a picture of the overall Black student experience in American charter schools by addressing the following questions:* Why are Black families choosing public charter schools? …

We examine the characteristics of schools preferred by parents in New Orleans, Louisiana, where a “portfolio” of school choices is available. This tests the conditions under which school choice induces healthy competition between public and private schools through the threat of student exit. Using unique data from parent applications to as many as eight different schools (including traditional public, charter, and private schools), we find that many parents include a mix of public and private schools among their preferences, often ranking public schools alongside or even above private schools on a unified application. Parents who list both public and private schools show a preference for the private sector, all else equal, and are willing to accept lower school performance scores for private schools than otherwise equivalent public options. These parents reveal a stronger preference for academic outcomes than other parents and place less value on other school characteristics such as sports, arts, or extended hours. Public schools are more likely to be ranked with private schools and to be ranked higher as their academic performance scores increase.

Parents in the United States have had the legal right to choose the school their child attends for a long time. Traditionally, parental school choice took the form of families moving to a neighborhood with good public schools or self-financing private schooling. Contemporary education policies allow parents in many areas to choose from among public schools in neighboring districts, public magnet schools, public charter schools, private schools through the use of a voucher or tax-credit scholarship, virtual schools, or even homeschooling. The newest form of school choice is education savings accounts (ESAs), which make a portion of the funds that a state spends on children in public schools available to their parents in spending accounts that they can use to customize their children's education. Opponents claim that expanding private school choice yields no additional benefits to participants and generates significant harms to the students “left behind” in traditional public schools. A review of the empirical research on private school choice finds evidence that private school choice delivers some benefits to participating students—particularly in the area of educational attainment—and tends to help, albeit to a limited degree, the achievement of students who remain in public schools.

School choice typically refers to opportunities to enroll youth in public and/or private educational alternatives to traditional neighborhood public schools. While these options continue to grow in the United States under the umbrella of school choice, magnet and charter schools are the most common forms of public school choice. In this article, we review the development of school choice and the differing historical and philosophical origins of magnet and charter schools. We then summarize what we know about the extent to which these public choice options exacerbate or ameliorate two forms of inequality—academic achievement and school segregation by race and class. Research suggests that magnet schools often encourage racial and class diversity, while charters contribute to racial and socioeconomic isolation. While low‐income minority students may benefit academically from attending magnet schools, it is unclear whether charter schools have any effect on achievement when comparing charter school students to their counterparts in traditional public school. We expect that continued growth of magnet schools will likely promote school diversity both within and between districts, though some types of magnets may also inadvertently promote segregation. However, expansion of the charter school sector will heighten school segregation and exacerbate racial and socioeconomic isolation.

The 1990s witnessed growing attention to the adoption of choice‐based school reforms, particularly charter schooling and school vouchers. Although researchers have approached the school choice debate from theoretical, normative, and empirical directions, little attention has been paid to examining how teachers view school choice or what factors shape their attitudes. This oversight is significant because teachers can impact the success of school choice experiments in many ways, such as through their willingness to launch and staff schools of choice, adopt new practices developed in schools of choice, and support choice‐based reform efforts in their unions and communities. Using a survey of Arizona and Nevada teachers, we find that White, experienced, unionized, Democratic educators and those working in a “positive” school environment are less supportive of school choice. Arizona teachers, who live in close approximation of a free market for education, are particularly hostile to choice, but teachers who have had personal contact with a charter school are more supportive. The results indicate that the success of school choice will likely be influenced by the characteristics of the teacher workforce and teachers’ familiarity with competition.

This book argues that the autonomy granted to choice schools has been a counterproductive dead end. Its authors see no proof that freedom has produced the outstanding results that charter school advocates promised. Nor has the competition from charter schools spurred the improvement in public schools that charter advocates predicted. Instead, charter schools and education vouchers promoted competition among schools that should be cooperating. Overburdened public school districts are faced with rivalry from schools that are merely duplicating conventional programs and competing for some students while ignoring others. Since choice schools are not meeting the expectations touted by their advocates, the authors maintain that they should be planned, monitored, and operated by school districts. The federal government is devoting millions of dollars to charter and voucher programs that currently require parents to abandon regular public schools. The goal of the authors ofThe School Choice Hoaxis to expose the misleading hyperbole that has been driving the school choice movement and to show how charter schools can become more effective and useful to public school districts. Both authors have been following the school choice movement for over a decade. Together they bring to the topic an unusual blend of academic and practical knowledge derived from long, successful careers as a sociologist (Corwin) and former Deputy Executive Director of the American Association of School Administrators (Schneider). The authors have formed their conclusions from years of research and analysis and have devoted a great deal of attention to making sensible recommendations designed to make school choice models more useful to public schools. This book will be helpful to parents who are faced with the prospect of making choice work better. The authors' conclusions have been carefully drawn from, and documented with, current research derived from years of neutral observation. Throughout, the book is packed with observations about school choice that will inform parents, politicians, and other community members about the advantages and disadvantages of choice schools. The authors offer explanations that will help the average citizen understand and appraise overblown claims by advocates. They also provide detailed reviews of other reforms, some of which are already infused in existing choice models.

As charter schools proliferate, public universities are increasingly called on to support them in various capacities. The authors consider how universities might best meet the challenges of ensuring that charter schools deliver a high-quality education to their students. The charter school movement has taken the country by storm, leaving in its wake 33 state laws allowing parents, educators, or entrepreneurs to create independent schools that are publicly funded but free from many state and local regulations.1 SINCE AMY Stuart Wells and her colleagues wrote those words in 1998, at least six more states have approved charter school legislation, well over 500 new charter schools have opened, and more than a quarter million additional students have begun attending charter schools. In the fall of 2000, more than 300,000 students attended 2,048 charter schools. By September 2002, there were 2,695 operating charter schools in the U.S., serving just over 684,000 students, with nearly 70 new schools scheduled to open by the fall of 2003.2 Undoubtedly, Wells' metaphorical description of the charter school movement continues to reflect accurately the scope and speed of this national movement. In spite of their numbers and growing popularity, we know very little about charter schools -- about the ways they are organized and managed, their methods of operating, or their impacts on educators, families, and students. Furthermore, the research base that policy makers might access to help them identify particularly promising charter school proposals remains disappointingly thin. As states continue to expand their involvement with charter schools, state universities are in the unique position of choosing from a variety of potential roles they may play and responsibilities they may fill in this process. Our purpose in this article is to begin to examine the options by which public universities -- and particularly their schools and colleges of education -- can most effectively and appropriately contribute to the charter school process in their states. Since the first such school opened in Minnesota in 1992, the charter school movement in the U.S. has grown with astounding speed. This growth results from a number of factors, not the least of which is the more general national interest in the issue of providing parents with greater choice in their children's education. In order to understand the roles that state universities may play in the charter school movement, it is important to consider the context in which charter schools are developing and the broader societal trend toward school choice. The U.S. Department of Education defines charter schools as follows: Charter schools are public schools, but what sets them apart is their charter -- a contract with a state or local agency that provides them with public funds for a specified time period. The charter itself states the terms under which the school can be held accountable for improving student performance and achieving goals set out in the charter. This contract frees charter developers from a number of regulations that otherwise apply to public schools.3 Some observers see charter schools as a sort of middle ground between creating options within the current public school system and adopting the more radical choice proposals that include nonpublic schools. Charter schools are, in effect, public schools that are allowed to operate much like private schools. As such, they are both similar to and distinct from traditional public-public approaches (e.g., magnet schools) and the more dramatic public-private approaches (e.g., vouchers for private school enrollment). It may be this sense of balancing between the extremes that explains the surprising progress of the movement in little more than a decade and the widely diverse political support it has received. Perhaps because it is a compromise between two passionately supported approaches, the charter school movement presents state universities with an unusual and uncomfortable set of expectations. …