Adam Ozimek has a good post on the under appreciated success of charter schools over at Forbes.
But I would like to propose a better conventional wisdom: “some charter schools appear to do very well, and on average charters do better at educating poor students and black students”.
Readers of this blog will be familiar with this argument, as well as the CREDO data that Adam cites. There is clear evidence that charter schools better serve low income African-American students.
But here’s one point Adam might have added to his argument: charter schools achieve these results while spending 20-30% less than traditional schools.
This report puts this number at 28%, and notes that the funding gap has actually increased over time. The irony here is that while charter school performance has improved over time, their funding gaps have grown wider.
It is very rare that a policy vehicle delivers better results for low income students while also saving taxpayers money.
We have strong scientific evidence that shows charters do just this.
Unfortunately, low income children in our country continue to be harmed by those who ignore this scientific evidence.