Andrew Broy |
Andrew Broy: Just Say NO (to
any study questioning Charter School claims)
Andrew Broy is the head of the
Illinois Network of Charter Schools.
Broy,
who runs an “education blog” on the electronic Huffington Post, was ecstatic
with the election of Rahm Emanuel as Mayor of Chicago, and he quickly offered
suggestions to the new Mayor for selections of a fresh educational leader in
the city, one tailored to work with Sec. of Education Duncan’s Race to the Top
( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-broy/second-city-no-more_b_836089.html
).
Together,
Broy and Emanuel have worked well past the current caps on charter schools in the
city using a variety of loopholes in the law.
In fact, the number of new charter openings in Chicago is staggering –
only eclipsed by the number of public school closings.
Problem for Broy: A recent research study by
the University of Minnesota finding Charter Schools really don’t perform any
better than public schools – in fact, worse – and it is one with which Broy has,
understandably, taken serious umbrage.
Mayor
Rahm Emanuel has been rather silent on this recent and latest research, but in
the past the Mayor has used a different tactic than Broy. Rahm doesn’t say “no”; he uses a more
political and evasive response: “That’s old research” or “we should be measuring all schools’
performance, not just one kind.”
Broy
prefers to attack directly the researchers' methodology or the study’s validity.
"…that's old research…" |
The
Chicago Tribune? Well, they admit siding
with the Mayor and Broy whenever possible, although even the Editorial Board
finds itself wondering on occasion where Broy is coming from. Example?
Broy,
who likes to offer his own research whenever possible, defended at one
point the efficacy of Charter Schools by pointing to the numbers of students seeking entrance
into Chicago’s charter institutions. Kind
of like an “If you build it and someone wants to come “ argument. For Broy, interest is tantamount to successful
education. In an opinion piece by the
Chicago Tribune entitled “The Thirst for Charter Schools,” the Dold-led Board
states, “It’s no secret that this page strongly supports charter
schools…Charter schools attract excellent young teachers and offer them wide
latitude to reach students…” ( http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-04-04/opinion/ct-edit-charter-20130404_1_charter-school-andrew-broy-58-charters).
(Never mind that average salaries of charter schoolteachers
are nearly 30% lower than national averages for teachers/grade level…or that
wide latitude may mean not necessarily having qualifications in a specific subject
area. )
But
in April of 2013, even the Tribune questioned the number of students seeking
admission into Chicago Charter Schools at 19,000. Broy, who often cites that and other generous
numbers, ignores studied reports that these numbers “significantly overstate
demand because it counts applications, not students." In other words, if a student applies to four
or more different charter schools, each of these requests is counted as a student waiting
for one school. While that may seem
statistically invalid as representing the whole number of all students seeking admission, Broy
“stands by his calculation(s). “We feel the 19,000 number is strongly supported
and is likely a conservative estimate.” The
higher the inflated number, the increased proof we educate better?
Broy
adamantly accepts his own research standpoints, but he balks at the investigation
provided in this recent study by the University of Minnesota – and many other
foundations/universities indicating that charter schools do not perform in any
measurable way that outshines the public school system. And this recent study, specific to Chicago
and a single year of careful correlation/control of like students and like programs
demonstrates charter schools perform more poorly than their public counterparts.
Broy’s
response? “…lies, damned lies, and statistics”
(http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/29807949-452/charter-schools-coverage-off-base-incomplete.html
- .VEMbikuJL0s).
Yet,
the study entitled “Charter Schools in Chicago: No Model for Education Reform,”
is careful in its exegesis to include
past studies (with which Broy took exception) on charter school performance to
better validity and reliability of study.
Looking back at earlier studies by Rand Corporation, CREDO of Stanford
University [two separate researches] and a local Medill study, the University
of Minnesota calculated a research model designed to find a more consistent and reliable
manner in which to match control groups in both charters and public schools.
“What
the analysis described here can do is update the comparisons to the most recent
year available (2012-13) and provide comparisons that include all students and
all charter schools in the Chicago public school system. The completeness of the data set also allows comparison
of how other parts of the traditional system – selective or gifted student
schools and magnets – compare to traditional and charter schools. Finally, the available data makes it possible
to look at a range of achievement measures, including standardized pass rates,
student growth rates, and college entrance (ACT) scores” (http://www.law.umn.edu/uploads/77/fd/77fd345c608a24b997752aba3f30f072/Chicago-Charters-FINAL.pdf ).
The study, using comprehensive
data for years 2012-2013, shows that, after controlling for the mix of students
and challenges faced by individual schools, Chicago’s charter schools actually underperform
their traditional counterparts in MOST measureable ways.
Most
administrators might offer, “Well, you caught us on a bad year?” But Broy boldly assaults the validity of the
study altogether, declaring a single year not indicative of what charters have
done and do for students. On the other hand, beyond the litany of other studies indicating questionable results by Charters, the conclusions are pretty damning. In the U of M report for that single year: “Reading and math pass rates,
reading and math growth rates, and graduation rates are lower in charters, all
else equal, than in traditional neighborhood schools. This is true despite the fact that, because
students self-select into the charter system, student performance should exceed
what one sees in traditional schools, even
if charters do better at teaching their students.“
And,
recall, Broy’s particular style of research theorizes that self-selection
(times how many applications?) is revealing of a better education. That’s simple.
Read the full report for an
illuminating look at how Charters in Chicago increase expulsions, deepen racial
segregation, ignore record keeping, avoid reporting on school report cards, and
present students often with under-prepared or unlicensed would-be educators.
No comments:
Post a Comment