Hey Innovators!
Phase 1 of my Playworks internship has been over for a few weeks now. If you recall from my last post, phase 1 encompassed a great deal of volunteering within Urban schools. Aside from the loads of fun I had playing with kids on the recess yard, the biggest takeaway that I got from the first phase of my internship is the difference between charter schools and traditional public schools. I spent about half of my time volunteering in John P. Holland, a small charter school located in downtown Paterson, NJ. I spent the other half of my time volunteering in Peshine Avenue school, a massive public school located in Newark, NJ. Two very important contrasts exist between these two schools: the contrast between a charter school and a public school as well as the contrast between a small school and a large school—in this case, size matters. The conclusion I arrived at is that our country needs smaller charter schools and less penitentiary-sized public schools.
I noticed in John P. Holland, the smaller school, the school acted more as a community. With only one class per grade, there were only 9 classes throughout the K-8 system. The teachers knew all the students, and the students knew all the teachers. It was a community, not an institution.
Over at Peshine Avenue school, the student population was larger, class sizes were larger, and the building itself was enormous. Cutting class was a very easy task for students. Not a day went by when I saw less than 5 kids cutting class, roaming the halls with no apparent destination. Peshine was an instiution, not a community. Each student was a number. Teachers couldn’t be bothered with chasing a single insubordinate student down the halls when she had a class full of 25 other students to teach.
All in all, I am of the opinion that smaller is better when it comes to schools. When schools like Peshine Avenue in Newark grow too large, students turn into numbers, and the necessary personal attention and positive relationships that our urban youth need just dissipates.
Now on to the charter school vs. public school debate. Stanford recently put out a brand new study on Charter School impact in the US. Reading through this lengthy 100 page study was quite the task, and prevented me from writing this post earlier. Basically, here’s what the study says: Charter schools can be a very beneficial system if used in the right setting for the right people. For example, right beside Washington D.C. our beloved Louisiana’s charter school is thriving more than any other state’s charter school system in the country, recording the 2nd most student growth in reading and one of the top five highest periods of growth in Math. Overall, students enrolled in the Louisiana charter school system gain an extra 50 days of learning over those enrolled in a TPS (traditional public school). WOOOOOH! IT’S WORKING! NOLA…NOLA…NOLA! On the flip side, Nevada “has the weakest charter growth effect in reading, equal to 108 fewer days of learning” than TPS. To complement those state-by-state statistics, here are some pretty encouraging national statistics:
– Black charter students in poverty—compared to Black TPS (traditional public school) students in poverty—gain an extra 29 days of learning in reading a year and 36 days of learning in math.
– In 2009 charter students gained about 7 extra days of reading. In 2013, that number improved to 14 additional days.
– In 2009 charter students received about 22 less days of learning in reading than their TPS counterpart. In 2013, that number improved to 7 less days.
Statistics like these—some good, some not so god—exist in mass quantities within this extraordinarily comprehensive study. My main takeaway from the analysis is two-fold. First, closure of poorly performing schools is crucial to the success of the charter school system. While it is unfortunate for the students attending those schools, it is not beneficial for them to attend a poorly run school. The study lists hypothetical rules for school closures on page 89 of the study.
Second, and most importantly, the key to charter school success is time and patience. Students that transfer from a TPS to a charter lose 43 days of learning in reading and 58 days of learning in Math, on average, than students in TPS after their first year. After 2 years of enrollment, they gain 22 additional days of learning in reading and 14 additional days of learning in math than students in TPS. Finally, after 4 or more years of attending that charter school, charter students gain 50 additional days of learning in reading and 43 additional days in Math than TPS students. Those last numbers are telling of the system as a whole. The charter system is still in its adolescent phase. It hasn’t quite figured itself out yet, and is still going through an awkward period where many of the kinks in its system haven’t been figured out yet. But, it looks like the trends are on the rise, and with time, this quasi-natural selection system could become the main education system in Louisiana, if not the US.
Thanks for Reading,
Max