Good day, CharterFolk.
I remain in catch-up mode, but happy I can find at least a few minutes to patch together a quick whip-around.
I did find time to get through Andy’s conversation about AI tutoring with Reed and Michael.
Highly recommended.
An age-old question arises in their discussion: will the charter school world be the medium through which innovation can be tested and proven, accelerating adoption more broadly?
I remain bullish.
But others are becoming less so, citing enrollment pressure on charter schools in places where universal ESAs are rolling out.
I certainly agree with AEI/CERN’s argument that we’ve got to make charter schools as unburdened by regulation as possible so that we can remain, or to some extent regain, that ability to innovate at the cutting edge.
But structurally destined to struggle against other options, especially ones prioritizing the needs of kids who wouldn’t otherwise access great education?
Call me skeptical.
To wit:
The latest U.S. News high school rankings are out.
I can’t do a comprehensive review of the entire top 100, but a quick look using chat reveals at least half are selective admissions schools.
And of the remaining 40-50 that aren’t, 23 are charter schools.
Milwaukee illustrates the point.
There are five included in the list, which the school district celebrates.
The unspoken part?
Four are selective-admissions district schools.
One is a charter school.
HAPA.
Which I hear is an absolutely fabulous school. Got to make it a point to visit that one this year.
In Utah, six of the ten are charter schools.
In Houston, a big portion are run by Harmony and Yes Prep.
The academic momentum seems roughly matched with continued enrollment growth.
New York.
Cleveland.
Even in Texas where new universal vouchers are rolling out, growth is robust.
Which brings me back to the ESA study and a smart analysis by Daniel Buck at Fordham.
The part I liked most:
The recognition that, of any reforms we have seen this century, the charter school movement is the one that is broadly recognized to have made the most positive impact.
After the bipartisan consensus splintered in the late Obama and early Trump years, and with some space to assess the era’s wins and losses, the charter sector remains one of the few reforms of that period that (justabout) everyone agrees was a success. They’re popular, they boast real academic advantages over traditional public schools, especially for poor kids, and, through competitive effects, they even improve the outcomes of students in those nearby traditional public schools.
Add it all up?
I dunno, CharterFolk.
Still seems like a momentum story to me.