government run schools do!
why cany jimmy read, write or add!
and look at the collages they have to re teach them
The NCES study did a poor job comparing economic status between the charter school and public populations because the NCES relied on free or reduced lunch status as a proxy... which NCES admits is a poor indicator.
"NCES data rely on surveys of schools drawn from a nationally representative sample self-reporting the number of students who participate in the free and reduced lunch program as a proxy for poverty. When CER raised concerns in 2004 with NCES about its poverty data, that government data center acknowledged, ?free and reduced lunch is a rather poor proxy for poverty, but it is all that is available.?
Many charter schools do not participate in the programs or track such data, resulting in inflated economic statuses of the student populations.
Two, charter schools generally target low economic and low education populations, resulting in an overall lower ability population of students. Until chatrer schools are able to develop a continuously rotating population of students (as public schools have), their scores will be low.
Three, the term "charter schools" is unfortunately too broad and has been used for schools that are online-based in addition to other misfits.
... do you get any union newsletters? I belong to the AFT and the newsletters are by far dominated by K-12 politics. There is no surprise as to which candidates they endorse which is a misuse of dues IMO. And there is no end to the studies they commission to prove anything but the government/union monopoly on education is maintained and no alternative is considered.
It's odd. Usually Democrats don't like monopolies that deliver poor service for inflated prices. But anyone that has checked their property tax bill (and/or town budget if it is not itemized on the tax bill) lately knows that's exactly what they get with the union dominated government schools.
I just recently entered the field (high school bio) and have yet to get all the junk mail. Personally, I'm upset that a good part of my dues (no option to withhold them) goes towards any political candidates without my permission. I'm all for elective donations through the unions.
I'm not anti-union, I just dislike the national unions because of their focus on politics and activism. The issues of job protection and reasonable pay and benefits (imo, the true purposes of a union) are handled by the state and local unions, so there is no real use of NEA and the AFT.
... national teacher's unions is their influence in and advocacy over the curriculum. I can't think of any other union that has such a stranglehold over the operation of the "business" they are employed by as the teacher's unions do. Can you imagine the CAW having a say in/influence over what models GM is going to offer next year?
A labor union should first and foremost be for the protection/advocacy of the worker. How pushing the inclusion of radical leftist issues in the curriculum works into that to the benefit of the teachers is beyond me.