Addressing a common criticism of New York City charter schools, a study released on Thursday said that in general their students were not, in fact, more likely to transfer out than their counterparts in traditional public schools.
But the study, conducted by the city’s Independent Budget Office, concluded that special education students left charter schools far more often.
The findings shed light on a sector that mushroomed in the 12 years of the Bloomberg administration, with 150 charters now operating in the city. Though they serve just 5 percent of pupils, charter schools garner an outsize portion of debate because they are financed by taxpayers but privately managed, they often take space in public schools, and their teachers are usually not unionized.
Mayor Bill de Blasio has pledged to charge rent to charter schools with significant financial resources, such as those backed by philanthropists. Charter operators who have received free space for years are concerned.
Mr. de Blasio, a Democrat, was drawn into a philosophical squabble this week with Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, a Republican and the House majority leader. Mr. Cantor, in a speech at the Brookings Institution, warned that Mr. de Blasio’s approach could prompt a congressional review.
The mayor, at a news conference on Wednesday, responded that he would not back down from his aim to lift all students, and that any rent money received from charters would be “reinvested to help serve more children more effectively.”
The study by the Independent Budget Office tracked 3,000 children who started kindergarten in 53 charter schools in September 2008 and 7,200 children in 116 traditional schools in the same neighborhoods, for three years.
Charter schools have tended to post higher standardized test scores than traditional schools in New York City, but critics of the charter schools have accused some of them of improving results by nudging out the slowest and most difficult children.
But the researchers found that 70 percent of charter school students remained in their schools for the three years, versus 61 percent of those in district schools.
But the results were far different for special education students, who constituted less than 1 percent of the charter school kindergartens in the study, compared with 7 percent of the traditional schools’ kindergartens. The study found that 80 percent of children with special needs left charter schools in the three years, compared with 50 percent of those in public schools.
“The main contribution of this study is to demonstrate that there is attrition in both sectors, and I think that is something that has been little discussed or understood,” said Raymond J. Domanico, the budget office’s director of education research.
James Merriman, chief executive of the New York City Charter School Center, said that while some charters were “not getting the job done” for special education students, the district schools’ attrition numbers were also “no great shakes.”
He said charter schools were small and not particularly set up to handle large numbers of special needs students, something he said the sector had been working hard to change in recent years. Over all, he called the report a “myth buster” regardless of “whether you are talking about English-language learners, African-American students, Hispanics and students eligible for free or reduced price lunch.”
Officials with the city’s teachers’ union, the United Federation of Teachers, said they wished the study had been broader and captured the attrition rates of charter school students in higher grades.
Christina Collins, a researcher and policy analyst with the union, said charter schools did not always replace students who leave, particularly in the higher grades. And by holding on to higher-performing students, she said, charters have test scores that tend to appear inflated “and make a comparison directly with district schools less accurate.”
This has been my beef from day one about Charters. While Charters probably can address some SpEd students I don't think the vast majority can beyond speech therapy.
Charters work because if the district average spend is $10k/per pupil than the charter gets $10k per student enrolled. That's all great until you realize your "typical" student only really costs the district $5k/yr but a kid on the spectrum or with LDs might cost $25k/yr. What happens when all these SpEd kids either choose or are counseled to go back to their locally zoned public school? The public school gets stuck with a more expensive student population to educate and becomes a dumping ground for children with LDs, medical issues and behavioral problems.
Really, the special education category needs to be broken down. You have a host of differences in special education from mild ADHD, to severe learning disabilities, to kids with behavior problems being labeled as special education. The thing I'd want to know is of the special education students, how many of those kids have a behavioral issue related to it. So, if Dewayne has an IEP that allows him more time to read, does he also have bad behavior too, an does that get him disciplined on the regular and get his parent so angry that the parent pulls him out of the district? Don't stop at they leave, why do they leave? That's the next question.
This is another reason that I take issue with TN Gov. Haslam's Voucher proposal. If your kid needs special education services, you have to be ok with whatever the private school offers. Not ok with it, tough.
I hope someone gives some more focus to the story of charter schools dumping students right before the TCAPs before the legislature this year.
like who? Who cares? The politicians don't because they love charters. Not sure the public cares because they seem pretty pleased about choice and such, and if they are pleased with the status quo, then they are likely to just view dumping students as collateral damage.
I hope someone gives some more focus to the story of charter schools dumping students right before the TCAPs before the legislature this year.
like who? Who cares? The politicians don't because they love charters. Not sure the public cares because they seem pretty pleased about choice and such, and if they are pleased with the status quo, then they are likely to just view dumping students as collateral damage.
Maybe at least the media? My sense is the charters' numbers aren't any better than the public schools if you make them account for the kids they dump right before the test.
like who? Who cares? The politicians don't because they love charters. Not sure the public cares because they seem pretty pleased about choice and such, and if they are pleased with the status quo, then they are likely to just view dumping students as collateral damage.
Maybe at least the media? My sense is the charters' numbers aren't any better than the public schools if you make them account for the kids they dump right before the test.
No one cares. I'm serious.
Also, it's not just your sense. Study after study has confirmed charters don't perform better. But no one cares.
Maybe at least the media? My sense is the charters' numbers aren't any better than the public schools if you make them account for the kids they dump right before the test.
No one cares. I'm serious.
Also, it's not just your sense. Study after study has confirmed charters don't perform better. But no one cares.