With the Administration placing a premium on expanding charter schools as part of the criteria for competitive economic stimulus funds, it is worth noting that no clear research has shown that charter schools – as an educational option – are superior than traditional public schools.  This article from the Boston Globe asked some critical  questions regarding performance of charter schools in relations to their student populations. 

“Are many charter schools achieving dazzling MCAS scores because of innovative teaching or because they enroll fewer disadvantaged students?” the article asked.

The article found that in many of the charter schools in Boston, which has a quarter of the state’s charter schools, English language learners made up less than four percent of students in all but one charter school, even though they represent almost a fifth of the students in the public school system.  When it comes to enrollments of students with disabilities, more than half the charter schools there were at least six percentage points below traditional school districts’ average of 21 percent.

The Globe analysis asked legitimate questions about how test scores could be affected by the makeup of student populations.  This is a good reminder that policymakers should not single out charter schools, or any one strategy,  as a magic reform tool.  The Administration’s position that states must encourage more charter schools by lifting enrollment caps or providing funding must also consider how the charter school is authorized and held accountable for student achievement.

NSBA supports charters that are authorized by the local school districts because such authorization will promote better coordination, sharing of resources and practices, accountability and a more comprehensive approach and support for education within the school system and the larger community.