So Gary Houchens sent me this handy link about ACT scores in the midst of a Twitter discussion on charter schools in Kentucky. Of course, there aren’t any charter schools in Kentucky right now. But Gary wants to change that.
Which is fine. There are some very high quality, solid charter operators out there who may offer good options for some families.
BUT: The ACT numbers from the link simply don’t make the case that Kentucky MUST have charter schools to get results.
Houchens and Richard Innes from the Bluegrass Institute suggest that if Kentucky is to improve its results for African-American and Latino students, charter schools provide the answer.
Not so fast. Let’s look at a comparison between Tennessee and Kentucky. After all, Tennessee is most similar demographically and it’s right next door (or, below).
Tennessee has also gradually been expanding charter school offerings since 2002. There are several high quality charter programs in both Memphis and Nashville. So, if charters really do help urban students and students of color improve performance, that result would be evident in the numbers Innes cites.
Instead, African-American and Latino students in Kentucky perform better than their counterparts in Tennessee. And in fact, the achievement gap between white and African-American students in Kentucky and Tennessee is identical.
Just having charter schools hasn’t made Tennessee any better at getting results for students of color.
Perhaps even more telling is how Kentucky and Tennessee students on free/reduced lunch perform. For this, we turn to NAEP results. Both states have around 55% of their students on free/reduced lunch. Initially, Tennessee students on the program were the focus of charter schools, though that has expanded. So, if the benefits of charters are clear, they’d be showing up here.
Kentucky’s kids score higher than Tennessee’s on 7 out of 8 indicators (4th/8th math, science, reading, writing).
Let’s take 4th grade reading as an example. In 2009, Kentucky 4th graders on free/reduced lunch scored 10 points higher on NAEP reading than Tennessee’s. By 2011, the difference was 12 points in Kentucky’s favor, with Tennessee’s number actually dropping a point.
What’s Kentucky doing differently? A focus on high standards and, until recently, investment in schools. Can they do more? Sure! And charter schools could be a part of that equation.
Let me be clear: High quality, high performing charters should NOT be prevented from coming to Kentucky simply because a few superintendents don’t like the idea. If quality can be controlled and accountability ensured, Kentucky might want to add charter schools to its arsenal.
But let’s also be clear about expectations. Simply adding the choice of a high quality charter school will not dramatically change the Kentucky education landscape. Kentucky shouldn’t be adding charter schools simply because choice is a nice idea. Or because they are expecting some dramatic new result. Expectations should be realistic and the focus, in general, should be on investing in the resources that support high quality, rigorous instruction for all students, regardless of what type of school they attend.
For more on education policy in Kentucky, follow us @KyEdReport