Comments on: Is There Real Evidence for Lifting the Start-up Charter School Cap in New York State? http://www.edwize.org/is-there-real-evidence-for-lifting-the-start-up-charter-school-cap-in-new-york-state Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:46:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Edwize » WHO’S AFRAID OF TEACHER VOICE? CHARTER SCHOOLS AND UNION ORGANIZING http://www.edwize.org/is-there-real-evidence-for-lifting-the-start-up-charter-school-cap-in-new-york-state/comment-page-1#comment-3276 Edwize » WHO’S AFRAID OF TEACHER VOICE? CHARTER SCHOOLS AND UNION ORGANIZING Fri, 18 Nov 2005 04:17:51 +0000 http://edwize.org/?p=37#comment-3276 [[…] You could drive a fleet of non-union trucks through that hole, which ALF and Jackson Lewis will gladly defend in court. THE NYC DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION – CHARTER SCHOOL – ALF CONNECTION As offensive as it is, neither the Jackson Lewis pamphlet nor the Jackson Lewis presentations were unforeseen: no one expects that the leopard will change his spots. What was remarkable, however, was who appeared on the other panel at […] [[…] You could drive a fleet of non-union trucks through that hole, which ALF and Jackson Lewis will gladly defend in court. THE NYC DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION – CHARTER SCHOOL – ALF CONNECTION As offensive as it is, neither the Jackson Lewis pamphlet nor the Jackson Lewis presentations were unforeseen: no one expects that the leopard will change his spots. What was remarkable, however, was who appeared on the other panel at […]

]]> By: Edwize » NY Post: CHOICE IS GREAT — EXCEPT FOR TEACHERS WHO WANT A UNION http://www.edwize.org/is-there-real-evidence-for-lifting-the-start-up-charter-school-cap-in-new-york-state/comment-page-1#comment-2938 Edwize » NY Post: CHOICE IS GREAT — EXCEPT FOR TEACHERS WHO WANT A UNION Fri, 04 Nov 2005 17:30:46 +0000 http://edwize.org/?p=37#comment-2938 [...] It’s always entertaining to watch the mighty pens of the New York Post editorial staff twist and turn around an issue when the plain truth is too much for them to bear [and, for that matter, to bare].   The latest episode is the Post editorial ‘Zap The Cap’ which denounces – hold on to your seats, boys and girls – the UFT and Randi Weingarten for the fact that the cap on the number of charter schools in New York State remains in place.   Let us leave to the side the Post’s editorial sortie into the prose style of Dr. Seuss, as some of us always saw this as an inevitable rhetorical turn, given the limited repertoire of its barely post-adolescent editorial writers and the fact that it pitches its newspaper to a third grade reading level.     What is interesting here, as in most Post editorials, is what is not said. Specifically, the Post dances around the facts in this Daily News article, which appeared less than a week before the Post editorial. What is now on the record is the fact that Randi indicated the UFT’s willingness to consider an increase in the cap on the number of charter schools. The only condition for UFT support is that the law also be amended to ensure that teachers in charter schools who wanted to be represented by a union could do so without hindrance, by certifying a union as the collective bargaining agent once it is verified that a majority of the teachers have signed union membership cards.   But for those, both in the Post editorial offices and at Tweed, who see charter schools as a way to create non-union schools rather than schools of excellence, the idea that teachers in charter schools would have the free choice to unionize is anathema. Better that the number of charter schools be frozen than there be more unionized charter schools.   Choice, it would appear, is good for everyone but teachers who want a union.   [As devotees of the historical record, we can’t let this moment pass without also pointing out that the Post once again plays fast and loose with the facts in its editorial. It asserts that low-performing public schools are not closed down. We don’t know where they live, but in New York City over the last five years, no less than seventeen different high schools deemed to be low-performing have been closed down or are currently in the process of phasing out. And the Post misrepresents the academic performance of charter schools in New York State as superior to that of regular district schools. We have dissected that particular falsehood at some length, here and here.]  [...] [...] It’s always entertaining to watch the mighty pens of the New York Post editorial staff twist and turn around an issue when the plain truth is too much for them to bear [and, for that matter, to bare].   The latest episode is the Post editorial ‘Zap The Cap’ which denounces – hold on to your seats, boys and girls – the UFT and Randi Weingarten for the fact that the cap on the number of charter schools in New York State remains in place.   Let us leave to the side the Post’s editorial sortie into the prose style of Dr. Seuss, as some of us always saw this as an inevitable rhetorical turn, given the limited repertoire of its barely post-adolescent editorial writers and the fact that it pitches its newspaper to a third grade reading level.     What is interesting here, as in most Post editorials, is what is not said. Specifically, the Post dances around the facts in this Daily News article, which appeared less than a week before the Post editorial. What is now on the record is the fact that Randi indicated the UFT’s willingness to consider an increase in the cap on the number of charter schools. The only condition for UFT support is that the law also be amended to ensure that teachers in charter schools who wanted to be represented by a union could do so without hindrance, by certifying a union as the collective bargaining agent once it is verified that a majority of the teachers have signed union membership cards.   But for those, both in the Post editorial offices and at Tweed, who see charter schools as a way to create non-union schools rather than schools of excellence, the idea that teachers in charter schools would have the free choice to unionize is anathema. Better that the number of charter schools be frozen than there be more unionized charter schools.   Choice, it would appear, is good for everyone but teachers who want a union.   [As devotees of the historical record, we can’t let this moment pass without also pointing out that the Post once again plays fast and loose with the facts in its editorial. It asserts that low-performing public schools are not closed down. We don’t know where they live, but in New York City over the last five years, no less than seventeen different high schools deemed to be low-performing have been closed down or are currently in the process of phasing out. And the Post misrepresents the academic performance of charter schools in New York State as superior to that of regular district schools. We have dissected that particular falsehood at some length, here and here.]  [...]

]]> By: Edwize » “Noble Lies?” EDDRA And The Daily News http://www.edwize.org/is-there-real-evidence-for-lifting-the-start-up-charter-school-cap-in-new-york-state/comment-page-1#comment-1045 Edwize » “Noble Lies?” EDDRA And The Daily News Mon, 03 Oct 2005 17:31:18 +0000 http://edwize.org/?p=37#comment-1045 [...] And that is only the beginning of the dishonesty here. A few weeks back, we took a look here at Edwize at the argument of the New York Center for Charter Excellence for the lifting of the cap on charter schools, based on the earlier reporting of the results of the ELA exams alone. [The ELA results were published a few months before the results of the Math exams.] Then, as in the more recent case of the Math exams, the charter secondary schools in New York City performed better than the charter elementary schools, so we took the stronger argument for charter school excellence, the secondary schools, and examined it in some detail. What we found there was that the separation of New York City schools from the rest of New York State – an artificial distinction, since schools are chartered on a statewide, not a city, basis – was designed to gain maximum benefit from a few charter secondary school statistical outliers in New York City, while conveniently ignoring the much greater mass of low-performing charter secondary schools throughout the state. We did a similar study of the secondary charter schools giving the 8th grade Math exam, and the results were virtually identical. If you examine the table at the end of this post, you will find that while three of the six secondary charter schools in New York City were above the state average, and five of the six in New York City were above the city average, only one of the other nine secondary charter schools in the state were above the state average. When the entire pool of secondary charter schools in New York are examined, therefore, the results were nothing approaching the superior performance claimed by the Daily News. It is essential to examine the state wide results because if the cap for charter school were lifted, it would be lifted for the entire state, and it would be lifted for the chartering agencies which chartered all of the secondary charter schools in New York State. [...] [...] And that is only the beginning of the dishonesty here. A few weeks back, we took a look here at Edwize at the argument of the New York Center for Charter Excellence for the lifting of the cap on charter schools, based on the earlier reporting of the results of the ELA exams alone. [The ELA results were published a few months before the results of the Math exams.] Then, as in the more recent case of the Math exams, the charter secondary schools in New York City performed better than the charter elementary schools, so we took the stronger argument for charter school excellence, the secondary schools, and examined it in some detail. What we found there was that the separation of New York City schools from the rest of New York State – an artificial distinction, since schools are chartered on a statewide, not a city, basis – was designed to gain maximum benefit from a few charter secondary school statistical outliers in New York City, while conveniently ignoring the much greater mass of low-performing charter secondary schools throughout the state. We did a similar study of the secondary charter schools giving the 8th grade Math exam, and the results were virtually identical. If you examine the table at the end of this post, you will find that while three of the six secondary charter schools in New York City were above the state average, and five of the six in New York City were above the city average, only one of the other nine secondary charter schools in the state were above the state average. When the entire pool of secondary charter schools in New York are examined, therefore, the results were nothing approaching the superior performance claimed by the Daily News. It is essential to examine the state wide results because if the cap for charter school were lifted, it would be lifted for the entire state, and it would be lifted for the chartering agencies which chartered all of the secondary charter schools in New York State. [...]

]]> By: Leo Casey http://www.edwize.org/is-there-real-evidence-for-lifting-the-start-up-charter-school-cap-in-new-york-state/comment-page-1#comment-265 Leo Casey Wed, 31 Aug 2005 17:37:20 +0000 http://edwize.org/?p=37#comment-265 Curious2: Some market choices are low risk, and some market choices are high risk. The choice of a toothpaste is low risk, and so the government regulates it in minimal ways -- some basic FDA regulations that ensure that the product is not a hazard to the consumer. You and I choose our toothpastes based on marketing by the brands, but it matters very little what tooth paste we choose. By contrast, The choice of a brain surgeon is high risk, and so the government regulates it in rather substantial ways -- we don't allow hospitals and doctors to perform such surgery without undergoing rigorous and ongoing forms of licensure and certification. There is no way that either you or I would know how to obtain and evaluate the specialized knowledge which would tell us that a particular doctor or a particular hospital is a safe choice for brain surgery [and both of us are well-educated people], and so we have to rely upon government to do a preliminary 'vetting' through regulation. We assume that if the government has certified a doctor or a hospital, minimal conditions have been met. As market choices go, the choice of a school is high risk in the life of a child. A bad choice can not be simply undone, or years of a child's education simply recuperated. Moreover, there is a degree of specialized knowledge involved in assessing the performance of a school, and a non-educator, or even an educator without access to certain kinds of information, is not in a position to make a sound decision on the quality of a school all by themselves. Government thus has a special responsibility to ensure the quality of the schools it makes available to the public. These schools should meet minimum performance standards. Schools which fall below those standards should be closed down. The point of charter schools was to provide parents with more good choices among public schools. Insofar as charter schools in a state like NY are not yet performing at the same level as the district public schools, this policy objective is clearly not being met. When the state legislature passed the law authorizing the formation of charter schools, they placed a cap on the number of charter schools, with the idea in mind that charter schools would need to prove themselves as at least equal to the district schools before their numbers were expanded. The point of my analysis was that, contrary to the argument the DOE is making, that burden of proof has not been met. As to the second part of your argument, you seem to want to ignore the fact that what I did was examine an argument put forward by the DOE and other charter school advocates, and show how, on its own terms, it was wrong. In a somewhat strange twist of logic, I am to be held responsible for the shortcomings of their argument -- the fact that they did not control for the demographics of the student population. But in point of fact, their failure to control for socio-economic class in the student population is just one more reason why the evidence they offer for their argument to lift the cap is not convincing. And since they are making the argument to change the law, the burden of proof is on them. Finally, you want to dismiss the fact that a conference of the charter schools themselves, with every incentive to present charter schools in a positive light, an analysis was made that showed when controlled for socio-economic class, charter schools were not performing at the same level as district schools. [I actually thought that the presentation spoke highly of the charter school association, because it meant that they were paying serious attention to the quality of their schools.] This presentation is quite important because it shows that the full analysis is being done, that the DOE knows full well what is in that analysis [they are present at such events], and that the reason why they choose not to make such a comparison in these arguments is because they know that it will reflect poorly on the argument they are making. You can't have it both ways: if this sort of analysis is the most insightful, then you must recognize what it says, especially when it is coming from inside the charter school movement itself. Curious2:

Some market choices are low risk, and some market choices are high risk. The choice of a toothpaste is low risk, and so the government regulates it in minimal ways — some basic FDA regulations that ensure that the product is not a hazard to the consumer. You and I choose our toothpastes based on marketing by the brands, but it matters very little what tooth paste we choose. By contrast, The choice of a brain surgeon is high risk, and so the government regulates it in rather substantial ways — we don’t allow hospitals and doctors to perform such surgery without undergoing rigorous and ongoing forms of licensure and certification. There is no way that either you or I would know how to obtain and evaluate the specialized knowledge which would tell us that a particular doctor or a particular hospital is a safe choice for brain surgery [and both of us are well-educated people], and so we have to rely upon government to do a preliminary ‘vetting’ through regulation. We assume that if the government has certified a doctor or a hospital, minimal conditions have been met.

As market choices go, the choice of a school is high risk in the life of a child. A bad choice can not be simply undone, or years of a child’s education simply recuperated. Moreover, there is a degree of specialized knowledge involved in assessing the performance of a school, and a non-educator, or even an educator without access to certain kinds of information, is not in a position to make a sound decision on the quality of a school all by themselves. Government thus has a special responsibility to ensure the quality of the schools it makes available to the public. These schools should meet minimum performance standards. Schools which fall below those standards should be closed down.

The point of charter schools was to provide parents with more good choices among public schools. Insofar as charter schools in a state like NY are not yet performing at the same level as the district public schools, this policy objective is clearly not being met. When the state legislature passed the law authorizing the formation of charter schools, they placed a cap on the number of charter schools, with the idea in mind that charter schools would need to prove themselves as at least equal to the district schools before their numbers were expanded. The point of my analysis was that, contrary to the argument the DOE is making, that burden of proof has not been met.

As to the second part of your argument, you seem to want to ignore the fact that what I did was examine an argument put forward by the DOE and other charter school advocates, and show how, on its own terms, it was wrong. In a somewhat strange twist of logic, I am to be held responsible for the shortcomings of their argument — the fact that they did not control for the demographics of the student population. But in point of fact, their failure to control for socio-economic class in the student population is just one more reason why the evidence they offer for their argument to lift the cap is not convincing. And since they are making the argument to change the law, the burden of proof is on them.

Finally, you want to dismiss the fact that a conference of the charter schools themselves, with every incentive to present charter schools in a positive light, an analysis was made that showed when controlled for socio-economic class, charter schools were not performing at the same level as district schools. [I actually thought that the presentation spoke highly of the charter school association, because it meant that they were paying serious attention to the quality of their schools.] This presentation is quite important because it shows that the full analysis is being done, that the DOE knows full well what is in that analysis [they are present at such events], and that the reason why they choose not to make such a comparison in these arguments is because they know that it will reflect poorly on the argument they are making. You can’t have it both ways: if this sort of analysis is the most insightful, then you must recognize what it says, especially when it is coming from inside the charter school movement itself.

]]> By: curious2 http://www.edwize.org/is-there-real-evidence-for-lifting-the-start-up-charter-school-cap-in-new-york-state/comment-page-1#comment-262 curious2 Wed, 31 Aug 2005 15:01:29 +0000 http://edwize.org/?p=37#comment-262 Hey Leo, Thanks for your reply. Your reply raises a potentially minor issue in response to very direct and basic questions. You think parents shouldn't have choice because they might be mislead by marketing? Should this also apply to food, clothing, toys, airfare, cars, etc? These are all important things to children as well. Seems like a flimsy argument to me. Also, I think msd2005 pointed out a basic flaw in your lengthy posting. In your reply to him you change your basic argument to one of raising doubt rather than demonstrating inferiority and then try to make the original point again by referring to an unknown presenter at some conference you once attended. Again, this seems like a flimsy argument. In both cases, it seems like your original posting was mostly a long flawed framework for justifying your opinions on how schools should operate. I think the argument would be stronger if you left out the weak data-based justifications and focused on your experience-based suspicions. Hey Leo,

Thanks for your reply.

Your reply raises a potentially minor issue in response to very direct and basic questions. You think parents shouldn’t have choice because they might be mislead by marketing? Should this also apply to food, clothing, toys, airfare, cars, etc? These are all important things to children as well. Seems like a flimsy argument to me.

Also, I think msd2005 pointed out a basic flaw in your lengthy posting. In your reply to him you change your basic argument to one of raising doubt rather than demonstrating inferiority and then try to make the original point again by referring to an unknown presenter at some conference you once attended. Again, this seems like a flimsy argument.

In both cases, it seems like your original posting was mostly a long flawed framework for justifying your opinions on how schools should operate. I think the argument would be stronger if you left out the weak data-based justifications and focused on your experience-based suspicions.

]]> By: Leo Casey http://www.edwize.org/is-there-real-evidence-for-lifting-the-start-up-charter-school-cap-in-new-york-state/comment-page-1#comment-196 Leo Casey Sun, 28 Aug 2005 13:26:52 +0000 http://edwize.org/?p=37#comment-196 Curious2: There is a difference between marketing a school and producing a quality school. It is significant that, when the SUNY Board of Trustees decided that they had to shut down two of the schools they had chartered for low performance, there was resistance from the parents at one of those schools here in NYC. The school had been marketed well, but not made into a quality institution. Msd2005: You are correct that comparisons of schools should be done with other schools serving a demograpgically similar student body, and that comparisons should be over time [value-added]. If the DOE and other charter school advocates were serious about the claims they had made, they would have done so. They did not. Note that I simply pointed out that the claims they made could not be sustained. Last spring, I attended the NY State Charter School Association covention where such an analysis was provided. The presenter corss-referenced the percentage of free lunch of students [as a proxy for poverty] with the performance on the state exams for all of the schools in the state, plotting them on a graph. He then threw up a line of regression, which showed that as a general rule, the higher the concentration of poverty the lower the test scores, and vice versa. He then put the charter schools on the graph -- and the great bulk of them fell below the line of regression. His message, entirely correct: charter schools in NY State have a lot of work to do to make their schools into quality schools. Curious2:
There is a difference between marketing a school and producing a quality school. It is significant that, when the SUNY Board of Trustees decided that they had to shut down two of the schools they had chartered for low performance, there was resistance from the parents at one of those schools here in NYC. The school had been marketed well, but not made into a quality institution.

Msd2005:
You are correct that comparisons of schools should be done with other schools serving a demograpgically similar student body, and that comparisons should be over time [value-added]. If the DOE and other charter school advocates were serious about the claims they had made, they would have done so. They did not. Note that I simply pointed out that the claims they made could not be sustained.

Last spring, I attended the NY State Charter School Association covention where such an analysis was provided. The presenter corss-referenced the percentage of free lunch of students [as a proxy for poverty] with the performance on the state exams for all of the schools in the state, plotting them on a graph. He then threw up a line of regression, which showed that as a general rule, the higher the concentration of poverty the lower the test scores, and vice versa. He then put the charter schools on the graph — and the great bulk of them fell below the line of regression. His message, entirely correct: charter schools in NY State have a lot of work to do to make their schools into quality schools.

]]> By: msd2005 http://www.edwize.org/is-there-real-evidence-for-lifting-the-start-up-charter-school-cap-in-new-york-state/comment-page-1#comment-160 msd2005 Fri, 26 Aug 2005 02:17:44 +0000 http://edwize.org/?p=37#comment-160 Comparing average charter school performance to the state average is garbage statistics. It's apples and oranges. A valid comparison would compare charter schools to other public schools with similar demographic characteristics. Urbanicity, race, poverty, SpEd and ELL are important factors in such a comparison. Moreover, these snapshot comparisons don't tell as much as comparing average gains over time which one of these days we should have the capacity to measure when everyone takes the state test in grades K-12. Comparing average charter school performance to the state average is garbage statistics. It’s apples and oranges. A valid comparison would compare charter schools to other public schools with similar demographic characteristics. Urbanicity, race, poverty, SpEd and ELL are important factors in such a comparison. Moreover, these snapshot comparisons don’t tell as much as comparing average gains over time which one of these days we should have the capacity to measure when everyone takes the state test in grades K-12.

]]> By: curious2 http://www.edwize.org/is-there-real-evidence-for-lifting-the-start-up-charter-school-cap-in-new-york-state/comment-page-1#comment-149 curious2 Thu, 25 Aug 2005 19:26:26 +0000 http://edwize.org/?p=37#comment-149 Hey Leo, What do you think about the choice argument for lifting the cap, i.e. parents seem to want to send their kids to charter schools so let's create more? Do you think the parents that are going through the trouble to send their kids to charter schools are making a mistake? Are they sending their kids to inferior schools from which they had previously attended? Hey Leo,

What do you think about the choice argument for lifting the cap, i.e. parents seem to want to send their kids to charter schools so let’s create more? Do you think the parents that are going through the trouble to send their kids to charter schools are making a mistake? Are they sending their kids to inferior schools from which they had previously attended?

]]>