Does Charter School Attrition Matter If Test Results Are Good?

A large component of the recent education reform debate has centered around the growing number of charter schools across the country. Interest in the charter school movement seemed to intensify after President Obama's Race to the Top (RttT) legislation asked states to lift the cap on charter schools. Allowing more charter schools was in fact a criteria for 'winning' federal money for school improvements through RttT Another, likely more important factor, contributing to the focus on charter schools is the United States' most recent placement on he PISA or Program for International Assessment; the PISA is a worldwide evaluation of  students' scholastic capabilities in math, science and reading. In 2009, the United States ranked 30th in math (down from 24th in 2003),  23rd in science (down from 21st in 2006), and 17th in reading (down from 15th in 2000). As result of these rankings, politicians, educators and others began to look at improving our nation's schools with renewed urgency.

A negative consequence of this has been attacks on traditional public schools (A.K.A. the 'status quo'), school teachers, and teachers' unions who have been accused of protecting 'bad' teachers and against necessary reforms that would help students. Hatred toward teachers' union persists nationally despite the fact that there are states that do not allow unions (ex. Texas, Georgia). The focus on teachers' unions as the root of the American public school system's 'failure' has  increased the number of charter school supporters as many of these schools do not allow their teachers to unionize thereby making it easier to get rid of 'ineffective' teachers. Additionally, many charter schools  offer a longer school day and tutoring as a standard part of the curriculum. Most importantly, the most vocal education reformers are in favor of charter schools because of the (sometimes) excellent results that they produce. While Diane Ravitch, education historian, notes that on average charter schools do not do better than traditional charter schools, there are many charter schools considered 'better' schools based on the standardized tests scores that their students are able to achieve.

Massachusetts, often considered the best in terms of public education, has 63 charter schools with more set to open or expand in the coming school years. Below are the percentage of students who scored either proficient or advanced on the 2010 MCAS tests at 10 MA charter schools (percentages were combined).

	English	Math
Advanced Math & Science	94	85
Academy-Pacific Rim	74	63
Boston Collegiate	81	75
Boston Preparatory	73	69
City on a Hill	84	79
KIPP Lynn	76	55
MATCH	74	74
North Central	68	53
Phoenix	69	61
Salem Academy	78	64

Indeed a large percentage of students at these charter schools, many of whom come from minority and/or low income backgrounds, passed the MCAS test. Even more striking is how the pass rate changed over time. Below is a chart comparing the proficient/advanced rates during the students' first year at the charter school with their final year (some of these schools are middle schools, while others are high schools).

	First Year		Final Year
	English	Math	English	Math
Advanced Math & Science	92	89	98	95
Academy-Pacific Rim	52	63	97	96
Boston Collegiate	68	59	91	100
Boston Prepatory	67	75	92	100
City on a Hill	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
KIPP Lynn	37	37	83	74
MATCH	57	68	100	99
North Central	51	39	84	77
Phoenix	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Salem Academy	74	62	83	74

Again- excellent scores. Gary Rubinstein, Teach for America alum and high school math teacher, however, writes that there are "ways to fraudulently ways to improve test scores...One...is the practice by many charter schools of improving their test scores through attrition (see here here here here). Specifically, what Rubinstein is alluding to is the fact that the substantial improvement in test scores over time for charter schools may not be driven by 'better' teachers or improved curriculum. Instead, the improved test scores that some reformers tout as proof of their superiority may largely be the result of low performing students leaving the school. Thus, the charter schools' results could be deemed a facade based on the shedding of students who do not perform well.

Do the charter schools listed here see a decrease in students over time?

Below is a chart tracking student enrollment showing how many students were in each grade during the 2010-2011 school year.

	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
Advanced Math & Science	0	180	266	203	114	76	62	62
Academy-Pacific Rim	75	84	83	73	50	39	47	33
Boston Collegiate	100	100	98	94	53	43	41	25
Boston Preparatory	0	50	91	69	53	46	23	14
City on a Hill	0	0	0	0	122	77	45	50
KIPP Lynn	100	100	86	84	0	0	0	0
MATCH	0	90	73	56	72	67	47	42
North Central	0	0	46	79	82	67	53	41
Phoenix	0	0	0	0	66	62	32	32
Salem Academy	0	55	56	54	51	35	30	28

Of the schools listed only one (KIPP) seems to have a set number of students for its initial class (100).Still it is apparent that for these schools, there is a substantial difference between the number of students in the earlier grades when compared to the later grades. Boston Collegiate, for example, had 100 students in the fifth grade during the 2009-10 school year but only graduated 25; the graduating class at Phoenix Charter School had about half the number of students that the 9th grade class did. 

Rubinstein makes a huge fuss about charter school attrition calling it analogous to cheating. He considers it cheating because some have pointed to charter schools' test scores as proof of their superiority over traditional public schools; these test scores, according to opponents of public school privatization, may in fact be driven by the shedding of more difficult student populations. Test result comparisons may indeed be misleading or skewed by attrition rates. The Advanced Math and Science charter school's 2010 test results, for example, included 243 students in the 6th grade class but only 60 in the 10th grade class; Boston Preparatory's results included 77 students in the 6th grade but only 26 in the 10th. Charter schools also tend to enroll smaller numbers of English language learners and students with special needs (see here) leaving some to wonder if these more difficult populations are the students leaving charter schools in large numbers over time leaving traditional public schools solely with the challenge of educating them.

At the end of the day does charter school attrition really matter if the results are excellent?

Generally speaking, maybe, but attrition in itself should not necessarily be our main priority. Students may move or may not do well academically making a choice to transfer, the parents may have decided it's not the right environment or that necessary services are not available. It is even possible that low performing  (or ELL or special needs) students do not leave at substantially higher rates that average or high performing students. On the other hand, there have been charter school students who have been asked to leave; this is certainly problematic given that it is much harder for a traditional public school to expel a student than it is for a charter school. Charter schools generally also do not admit new students after a certain grade while traditional public schools see students coming and going at any point during the year. Therefore, increased test scores may be the result of a combination of factors including the longer school days  and more stringent standards but also the departure of low performing or ELL students; it is complicated to parcel out what is what without reliable data and confirmation of the reasons for leaving by the parents/student. In the context of the current educational reform debate, however, in which schools are encouraged to compete for students, where winners (with high test scores) are rewarded and losers (with low test scores) are punished, charter school attrition among other data will continue to seriously scrutinized. Teachers and principals who are hard at work each day and understand the complexity of academic achievement are being asked to achieve 100% proficiency (i.e. perfection) and also protect their schools and students from sanctions such as school closures and private management. Thus, the search for that 'smoking gun' that explains some charter schools' success is perhaps a in part side effect of current political policies and public discontent.

So, as long as reformers such as Michelle Rhee and Bill Gates point to charter schools as the answer to the education crisis, attrition will matter. As long as conservative governors use charter school results as a reason to privatize public education and strip teachers of their collective bargaining rights, it will matter. As long as all charter schools, allowed free rein in determining who stays and who goes, are considered superior to traditional public schools regardless of their actual quality, it will matter. As long as public school teachers are attacked for not getting the same or better results, it will matter. As long we continue to move toward a two-tier system of education while racing to the top while leaving plenty of children behind, it will matter. It will matter as the bragging and boasting about test scores and graduation rates often begets those who will seek the truth about these so-called miracle schools as they often do not really exist. So regardless of where you stand in regard to charter schools, for these and many other reasons charter school attrition (regardless of what it is derived from) unequivocally does and will continue to matter.

All data taken from: www.doe.mass.edu