Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 218, to recognize charter schools and their students, parents, teachers and administrators across the United States for their…
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 218, to recognize charter schools and their students, parents, teachers and administrators across the United States for their ongoing contributions to education.
This week is the Sixth Annual National Charter Schools Week and a great opportunity for Congress to honor charter schools and those involved in the role they play in reforming and improving our Nation's public education system.
Charter schools are public schools that agree to improved academic achievement and accountability in financial and other operations, in exchange for increased flexibility and independence. Greater autonomy allows charter schools to focus on increasing academic achievement for individual students, rather than complying with bureaucratic paperwork.
Charter schools are subject to all the same No Child Left Behind achievement goals as other public schools, but with greater flexibility in how they improve student success. Increased flexibility allows charter schools to use varied educational methods and techniques while accounting for results.
Almost 3,300 charter schools serve around 900,000 students in 40 States, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico; and nearly 40 percent of these charter schools have waiting lists.
Charter schools are adept at meeting the specific needs of the local communities in which they are located and are particularly devoted to serving low-income communities. Nationwide, almost half of charter schools serve students considered at-risk or who have previously dropped out of school. Charter school students share similar demographic characteristics with students in all public schools, and charter schools serve significant numbers of students from low-income families, minority students, and students with disabilities.
Because charter schools often serve students with limited access to educational options, these innovative public schools allow many parents and students freedom of choice that otherwise would not be available. And studies show that the increase in educational options, including access to charter schools, is improving outcomes for students.
According to the Center for Education Reform, 15 studies show that students frequently enter charter schools significantly below grade level. These students will then progress at or above the gains being made in surrounding districts, demographically comparable schools, or at the State average.
In December, Harvard University released a comprehensive, long-term study comparing student academic achievement at charter schools and
traditional public schools, and I will enter the executive summary of that report in the Record at this point and share just one of the most compelling facts.
Achievement in Charter Schools and Regular Public Schools in the United
States: Understanding the Differences
(By Caroline M. Hoxby)
abstract
This study compares the reading and mathematics proficiency
of charter school students to that of their fellow students
in neighboring public schools. Ninety-nine percent of all
elementary students in charter schools are included in the
study. The charter schools are compared to the schools that
their students would most likely otherwise attend: the
nearest regular public school with a similar racial
composition (the ``matched'' school). Compared to students in
the matched regular public school, charter students are 5.2
percent more likely to be proficient in reading and 3.2
percent more likely to be proficient in math on their state's
exams. Students in charter schools that have been in
operation longer are more likely to have a proficiency
advantage over their peers in the matched regular public
school. In reading, the advantage is 2.5 percent for a
charter school that has been operating 1 to 4 years, 5.2
percent for a school operating 5 to 8 years, and 10.1 percent
for a school operating 9 to 11 years. Also, charter school
students are more likely to have a proficiency advantage if
their school has funding that is at least forty percent of
that enjoyed by regular public schools. The results suggest
that charter schools are especially likely to raise the
achievement of students who are poor or Hispanic.
executive secretary
This study compares the reading and mathematics proficiency
of charter school students in the United States to that of
their fellow students in neighboring public schools. Because
charter schools are public entities, their students take
state exams. Thus, this study is based on schools that enroll
approximately 99 percent of elementary students who attend
charter schools. The charter schools are compared to the
schools that their students would most likely otherwise
attend: the nearest regular public school with a similar
racial composition (the ``matched'' school).
Compared to students in the matched public school, charter
students are 5.2 percent more likely to be proficient in
reading and 3.2 percent more likely to be proficient in math
on their state's exams. Charter schools that have been in
operation longer have a greater proficiency advantage over
the matched public schools. For example, in reading, the
advantage is 2.5 percent for a charter school that has been
operating 1 to 4 years, 5.2 percent for a school operating 5
to 8 years, and 10.1 percent for a school operating 9 to 11
years.
The results show that charter schools are especially likely
to raise the achievement of students who are poor or
Hispanic. This is a useful finding because charter schools
serve students who are disproportionately likely to be
minorities or poor.
Charter school students are more likely to have a
proficiency advantage if their state has a strong charter
school law that gives the schools autonomy and that ensures
that charter schools get funding equal to at least 40 percent
of the total per-pupil funding of regular public schools.
In states where charter schools are well-established,
charter school students' advantage in proficiency tends to be
greater. For instance, in Arizona, fourth grade charter
students are about 10 percent more likely to be proficient in
reading and math than students in the matched regular public
schools. In California, the corresponding proficiency
advantages are 9 percent in reading and 5 percent in math. In
Colorado, the corresponding proficiency advantages are 12
percent in reading and 14 percent in math.
North Carolina is the only state in which charter students'
proficiency is statistically significantly lower, by 4
percent, in both reading and math, compared to students in
the nearest public school. In addition, Texas' charter
students appear to be statistically significantly less
proficient in math (not reading).
By adjusting for schools that serve at-risk students, the
study focuses on regular charter schools that are expected to
meet the same standards as traditional public schools. The
study's ``matching'' method compares charter schools to
public schools that are likely to share the same
neighborhood, same economic conditions, and the same
population of students and parents. The selection of a
neighboring public school as the point of comparison ensures
that the groups of students being compared are as similar as
possible. It is also likely that the public school selected
for comparison was the school that most of the charter school
students would have attended, had there been no charter
school.
A national study like this one is useful because it is
comprehensive. Nevertheless, it is useful to complement
studies like this one with studies based on randomization.
Because many charter schools have more applicants than
places, they routinely hold lotteries, which allow
scientific, random assignment studies to be conducted. The
key advantage of randomization-based studies is that the
charter school students and regular public school students
are comparable not only in terms of race, ethnicity, and
income, but also on subtle dimensions like motivation and
aptitude. Multiple studies based on randomization are
underway. The first such study (Hoxby and Rockoff 2004) finds
that a large system of Chicago charter schools raised math
and reading scores by about 6 percentiles among students who
entered in grade 5 or below.
Because charter schools enroll only 1.5 percent of
students, it is important to include nearly all of them in a
study. Results based on only a small sample of charter school
students (for instance, studies that rely on the 3 percent
sample of the National Assessment of Educational Progress)
cannot be used to draw conclusions about states' charter
school policies. A study that relies on a 3 percent sample of
1.5 percent of American students is a study based on only
0.045 percent of students. In contrast, this study uses data
that are sufficient for detailed investigations of charter
school students' proficiency, nationwide.
The study, completed by Harvard economics professor Caroline Hoxby, found charter schools overall are more likely to raise the academic achievement of students who are poor or minority, and show a larger effect on reading and math proficiency when they operate in areas that have a high percentage of students who are poor, African American, or Hispanic. Charter schools serve the very students who need help the most, and they are getting results.
Charter schools have benefited from a strong degree of bipartisan support at the local, State, and national levels. This was evidenced in 2001 by the efforts of both Republicans and Democrats in Congress to expand access to charter schools through the bipartisan No Child Left Behind Act. In the last 10 years, Congress has provided $1.5 billion to support charter schools through facilities' financing assistance and grants for planning, startup, implementation, and dissemination.
Through this resolution honoring National Charter Schools Week, Congress is recognizing the continued success demonstrated by charter schools and acknowledging the benefits that charter schools provide to our local communities. Charter schools provide parents with a wider variety of educational choices. This not only helps the students who attend those charter schools but also helps to take some of the pressure off traditional public schools that might be struggling to improve.
I want to thank my colleague, the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Porter), for introducing this resolution and urge my colleagues to join me in strong support for our Nation's charter schools.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman once again yielding me this time, and I am glad that our friend from D.C. was here to honor the contributions of charter schools, because clearly here in D.C. charter schools have had a significant impact on providing educational opportunities for children who, in many cases, are stuck in some very, very bad schools.
Now, I appreciate the support of the charter schools week resolution by my friend from D.C., but let me try to answer part of the charges that were outlined in terms of her opposition to other forms of school choice.
We know that in our large urban centers, we have a difficult time educating low-income children who need our help the most. No place is more evident than right here in the District of Columbia, where we spend over $13,000 per student and have some of the worst schools in all of America. We have similar problems in other large urban districts and, clearly, charter schools have been an opportunity for some students to escape these dreadful schools and have a chance.
All of us know that without a chance at a decent education, none of us would be here, but without a decent education, many of those children will never ever have a chance at the American dream. I have always believed if we are to reform education in America, if we are going to give every child and every parent of a child a chance at a good education, the way to do that is to provide more choices and more options for parents around the country so that they can choose schools that they believe are in their best interest.
In some communities, charter schools might be the answer. Here in the District of Columbia, clearly they are growing. Dayton, Ohio, part of my congressional district, probably has more charter schools per capita than any large urban center in America. And it is providing a very good opportunity for students to escape the Dayton public schools and enter the charter school of their choice.
But it should not be the only choice. There are a lot of parochial schools, private schools, Christian schools all over America that parents want to choose. We all know that if you have money, you have choice. Middle income, higher income, you have all the choice you want because you can get your child into the school you think is best for them. But if you are poor and you cannot move, you have no choice. And if there is not a charter school in your particular neighborhood, you do not have any choice. You are stuck, stuck and condemned to an education that will never help lift you out of poverty and never give you a chance at the American dream.
That is why other forms of choice, I think, are important. That is why I and others were involved in helping the mayor here in the District of Columbia and other parents here in the District who wanted a scholarship program. We provided $15 million to help some low-income children get into a private school and it has helped. It has helped about 1,100 children here in the District in giving them another option. I think, frankly, it is a good option.
I was at two of those schools this morning. I was at St. Francis DeSalles Elementary School, and I was at St. Anthony's Elementary School, both over in the northeast part of town; and both schools, part of the 13 schools that make up the city's Center Consortium. These are 13 very poor Catholic schools here in the District, who I have been involved with over the last few years to help raise them private money to help provide scholarships, to help keep those schools open in those very poor neighborhoods. Last week, I visited four schools in the southeast part of town, in Anacostia. I did not realize Anacostia was as large as it is, but it is very large and it is very poor.
And the fact that those schools are there provide more children more choices, more opportunities to have a chance. I saw kindergartners this morning reading at a first-grade level at both of these Catholic elementary schools. Yes, they have some students that are there because they get D.C. scholarships; others are there because of the generosity of an awful lot of people who want to keep these schools open and provide a choice for those parents and those students.
It is this competition from the public schools, the charter schools, the private schools that I believe will make our school system better and will help all of them. Growing up in sports and growing up in a large family, I know a little about competition, and competition makes all of us better. I believe that the increased competition we are seeing in the provision of an education, especially in the K through 12 arena, has in fact made all of education better.
Do we have a long way to go? We certainly do, but I believe that charter schools are playing an integral role in providing that competition. I think parochial schools, private schools, and Christian schools play a role in that competition as well. The more we can do to encourage parents to have more choice about where their kids can go to school, I think the better off those children will be and the better off our society will be.