The economic cost of charter schools

[panamaican]

Most people can agree that education is an important public service. And most people can agree that the current system isn't serving the needs of our less fortunate students. THe concept of school choice and the expansion of charter schools to meet that need has become a standard point of discussion.

Yet a criticism brought against this particular direction is that charter schools are financially detrimental to the school districts where they're operating.and the students who are in those districts but not in the charter schools.

https://www.inthepublicinterest.org/report-the-cost-of-charter-schools-for-public-school-districts/
https://www.inthepublicinterest.org/wp-content/uploads/ITPI_Breaking_Point_May2018FINAL.pdf

Here's a study out of California that shows that for those districts, the expansion of charter schools is literally taking money away from the other kids. It's not a simple one to one transfer of dollars, the students left behind are actually receiving less per student dollars.

The report, Breaking Point: The Cost of Charter Schools for Public School Districts, calculates the fiscal impact of charter schools on Oakland Unified School District, San Diego Unified School District, and San Jose’s East Side Union High School District.

• Charter schools cost Oakland Unified $57.3 million per year. That’s $1,500 less in funding for each student that attends a neighborhood school.
• The annual cost of charter schools to the San Diego Unified is $65.9 million.
• In East Side Union, the net impact of charter schools amounts to a loss of $19.3 million per year.

School choice is an important concept but we have to make sure that it's not coming at the expense of other kids. As always it's one more reason to look closely at how we choose to fund schools. Perhaps the funding for charter schools should not come out of the same funding that we allocate for the public schools. Public school students should not be penalized so that charter school students can go elsewhere. And school choice should not be inhibited for those who wish to take advantage of it.

It's not a simple problem and deserves our attention.

 

[HockeyBjj]

Definitely a tricky situation to balance. My sister and wife are both in education and the more I understand of public vs private vs charter, the less clear it gets

Wisconsin has a goofy system here that tries to combat the issues you state, where the majority of charter schools are actually still public schools. Seems it was an attempt that is better than nothing, but mixed results

 

[jrams]

What's the correlation between well educated students and public funding (or at least in deltas)? There's an inherent assumption that more money = better schools, which makes sense, but I've never seen that proven. But what makes sense to us isn't always true.

 

[HockeyBjj]

What's the correlation between well educated students and public funding (or at least in deltas)? There's an inherent assumption that more money = better schools, which makes sense, but I've never seen that proven. But what makes sense to us isn't always true.

The really, really shocking thing to me is that private school teachers make less money than public school teachers

I still can’t undeestand how having lower paid teachers (therefore wouldn’t the better ones not want that and wish to make more?) = those schools are better as evidenced in higher standardized test scores and fewer school discipline incidents

 

[FascistDictator]

So just throw more money at it DUH!

 

[Falsedawn]

The really, really shocking thing to me is that private school teachers make less money than public school teachers

I still can’t undeestand how having lower paid teachers (therefore wouldn’t the better ones not want that and wish to make more?) = those schools are better as evidenced in higher standardized test scores and fewer school discipline incidents

Higher test scores are a bit of a misnomer. We're talking "higher" as in one or two percentage points, not any substantial amount.

Factor in that these charter schools are siphoning money from publics, and it turns the whole argument on its head. You took all this money from public schools, effectively making them do more with less, and you barely beat them?

Are lower public school scores because of the efficacious nature of charter schools, or because the publics simply have less money as a whole? The gap isn't nearly as wide as "school choice" advocates have represented it, and it narrows to the point of nonexistence when you factor in other negative effects like charter school segregation.

 

[Andy Capp]

Most people can agree that education is an important public service. And most people can agree that the current system isn't serving the needs of our less fortunate students. THe concept of school choice and the expansion of charter schools to meet that need has become a standard point of discussion.

Yet a criticism brought against this particular direction is that charter schools are financially detrimental to the school districts where they're operating.and the students who are in those districts but not in the charter schools.

https://www.inthepublicinterest.org/report-the-cost-of-charter-schools-for-public-school-districts/
https://www.inthepublicinterest.org/wp-content/uploads/ITPI_Breaking_Point_May2018FINAL.pdf

Here's a study out of California that shows that for those districts, the expansion of charter schools is literally taking money away from the other kids. It's not a simple one to one transfer of dollars, the students left behind are actually receiving less per student dollars.

School choice is an important concept but we have to make sure that it's not coming at the expense of other kids. As always it's one more reason to look closely at how we choose to fund schools. Perhaps the funding for charter schools should not come out of the same funding that we allocate for the public schools. Public school students should not be penalized so that charter school students can go elsewhere. And school choice should not be inhibited for those who wish to take advantage of it.

It's not a simple problem and deserves our attention.

tl;dr Fuck charter schools. Fuck DeVos.

Edit: It's important also to note,

"Rising income inequality means those at the top have a growing resource advantage. Some high-income families use these resources to pay for housing in particular neighborhoods, resulting in increasing segregation by income between neighborhoods over the past four decades. Residential segregation creates inequalities between neighborhoods, and neighborhood contexts are critical for children’s development. Children who grow up in disadvantaged neighborhoods have worse educational and occupational outcomes later in life."
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brow...gregation-among-school-districts-and-schools/

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

Charter schools should be outlawed.

 

[Quequeg]

Just a way to funnel taxpayer money to corporate interests, a main Republican policy goal.

 

[Damien Karras]

Betsy Devos is doing a fantastic job. only the best!

 

[jrams]

The really, really shocking thing to me is that private school teachers make less money than public school teachers

I still can’t undeestand how having lower paid teachers (therefore wouldn’t the better ones not want that and wish to make more?) = those schools are better as evidenced in higher standardized test scores and fewer school discipline incidents

This is purely anecdotal, so not really useful, but I know my friends who are teachers have opted to take lower paying jobs in better districts. The primary driving reason is so that their kids can go to the better schools but a lesser factor is they aren't the breadwinner in the family and prefer to have an easier job (plus better networking with rich parents) than going through bullshit for a bit more money.

 

[44nutman]

Charter schools have been a huge problem in Florida but the problem is they pay big money in donations to mainly Republicans who make sure they are unregulated.
There have been stories of charter school teachers that don’t even have a high school diploma. Schools just taking the money and running.
Somehow the Rubes got tricked into thinking education is a bad thing.

 

[Darwinambrosius]

The really, really shocking thing to me is that private school teachers make less money than public school teachers

I still can’t undeestand how having lower paid teachers (therefore wouldn’t the better ones not want that and wish to make more?) = those schools are better as evidenced in higher standardized test scores and fewer school discipline incidents

Private school teachers have less red tape, better parent support, and better students to work with, in general. Teachers who have already made it to collecting pension or partial pension see it as a much smoother way to ride out their careers.

Private schools are generally seen as a much less stressful job, and veteran teachers who already know to manage classrooms and educate well make up most of the faculty, generally speaking.

 

[bobgeese]

Discipline needs to be restored into the school system.

That’s likely the biggest difference you’ll find in successful vs failing schools.

 

[Lord Coke]

Most people can agree that education is an important public service. And most people can agree that the current system isn't serving the needs of our less fortunate students. THe concept of school choice and the expansion of charter schools to meet that need has become a standard point of discussion.

Yet a criticism brought against this particular direction is that charter schools are financially detrimental to the school districts where they're operating.and the students who are in those districts but not in the charter schools.

https://www.inthepublicinterest.org/report-the-cost-of-charter-schools-for-public-school-districts/
https://www.inthepublicinterest.org/wp-content/uploads/ITPI_Breaking_Point_May2018FINAL.pdf

Here's a study out of California that shows that for those districts, the expansion of charter schools is literally taking money away from the other kids. It's not a simple one to one transfer of dollars, the students left behind are actually receiving less per student dollars.

School choice is an important concept but we have to make sure that it's not coming at the expense of other kids. As always it's one more reason to look closely at how we choose to fund schools. Perhaps the funding for charter schools should not come out of the same funding that we allocate for the public schools. Public school students should not be penalized so that charter school students can go elsewhere. And school choice should not be inhibited for those who wish to take advantage of it.

It's not a simple problem and deserves our attention.

I don't believe in charter schools. I think schooling is as much about learning to interact with other people than anything else. Plus charter schools isolate the stoner and drop out kids from the smart kids which makes things worse for the loser kids. I believe the big public high school with people from different back grounds makes our society a more tolerant place. When you start having charter schools all the Asian kids are going to be in the tech charter schools. All the white are going to be in the drama, humanities and arts schools. So that is going to increase resentment.

Additionally young teens do not really know what they want. We should be forcing teens to do PE and learn civics. A mandatory cirriculum for all teens is a good thing because it increases civic virtue

 

[Quequeg]

I don't believe in charter schools. I think schooling is as much about learning to interact with other people than anything else. Plus charter schools isolate the stoner and drop out kids from the smart kids which makes things worse for the loser kids. I believe the big public high school with people from different back grounds makes our society a more tolerant place. When you start having charter schools all the Asian kids are going to be in the tech charter schools. All the white are going to be in the drama, humanities and arts schools. So that is going to increase resentment.

Additionally young teens do not really know what they want. We should be forcing teens to do PE and learn civics. A mandatory cirriculum for all teens is a good thing because it increases civic virtue

Where is the money going to come from to support this. Nobody wants to pay their taxes as it is.

 

[Gandhi]

Most people can agree that education is an important public service. And most people can agree that the current system isn't serving the needs of our less fortunate students. THe concept of school choice and the expansion of charter schools to meet that need has become a standard point of discussion.

Yet a criticism brought against this particular direction is that charter schools are financially detrimental to the school districts where they're operating.and the students who are in those districts but not in the charter schools.

https://www.inthepublicinterest.org/report-the-cost-of-charter-schools-for-public-school-districts/
https://www.inthepublicinterest.org/wp-content/uploads/ITPI_Breaking_Point_May2018FINAL.pdf

Here's a study out of California that shows that for those districts, the expansion of charter schools is literally taking money away from the other kids. It's not a simple one to one transfer of dollars, the students left behind are actually receiving less per student dollars.

School choice is an important concept but we have to make sure that it's not coming at the expense of other kids. As always it's one more reason to look closely at how we choose to fund schools. Perhaps the funding for charter schools should not come out of the same funding that we allocate for the public schools. Public school students should not be penalized so that charter school students can go elsewhere. And school choice should not be inhibited for those who wish to take advantage of it.

It's not a simple problem and deserves our attention.

I was staunchly behind the concept of vouchers, charters, school choice.

I still support it in concept.

But here is the reality. The funding of schools is so unequal (through local property taxes), that claiming we can fix it through market concepts that will unfortunately undermine the funding system even more, is ludicrous.

Fix the funding. Every child in primary and secondary education needs ~equal access to funds (adjusted for regional cost of course).

Once that is done then let’s talk about having the funding follow the child and get some competition into the system, pay teachers more / fire bad ones, etc etc.

I support this thread BTW!!!!

 

[panamaican]

I don't believe in charter schools. I think schooling is as much about learning to interact with other people than anything else. Plus charter schools isolate the stoner and drop out kids from the smart kids which makes things worse for the loser kids. I believe the big public high school with people from different back grounds makes our society a more tolerant place. When you start having charter schools all the Asian kids are going to be in the tech charter schools. All the white are going to be in the drama, humanities and arts schools. So that is going to increase resentment.

Additionally young teens do not really know what they want. We should be forcing teens to do PE and learn civics. A mandatory cirriculum for all teens is a good thing because it increases civic virtue

I agree with you on that. This is a continuation of a decades old trend where people are working very hard to carve out private social niches where they, or their kids, don't have to engage with the rest of world. And you're probably right about the negative effects on society.

 

[Lord Coke]

Where is the money going to come from to support this. Nobody wants to pay their taxes as it is.

I don't know what you are talking about. This is how public school has traditionally been.

 

[Quequeg]

I don't know what you are talking about. This is how public school has traditionally been.

You have never heard people complaining about property taxes?