I don't consider myself right wing, but I guess in this case I wouldn't care even if it were nominally right-wing, because it's more important to give students good educations than it is to perpetuate institutions (eg giant school systems with awful performance) that might ideologically better align with my beliefs but are clearly not working.

Also, while I don't think students should be pushed out of charter schools purely for bad performance (if they are putting in the effort), I do think that poor minority parents should have the right to send their kids to schools that don't force students to share classrooms with disruptive or way-behind-grade-level students. When educational outcomes under the local public school system are really bad I think school-choice just makes a lot of sense as a way of figuring out what policies are popular/effective/unpopular/harmful.

▲

cwillu 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

The implication seems to be that charter schools are superior, but does that jive with other countries' successes? A commonly given alternative explanation is that the public options in the US are deliberately sabotaged via budget restrictions, and then the resulting poor performance is used to justify further cuts—a similar dynamic has been fairly recently executed in Alberta with public health care.

▲

nradov 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

There is very little correlation between per-capita student spending and student outcomes. We should fund our public schools adequately but no amount of funding can overcome a bad environment in a student's home or neighborhood.

	▲	enjo 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		And to be clear: we fund our schools at a higher rate than basically any other country in the world. We are fifth in the world in per-pupil student funding behind only Luxembourg, Norway, Austria, and South Korea. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd/education-exp...

▲

cyberax 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Budgets are NOT a problem. Magnet schools in the US get the same or _less_ funding per capita than the average for the area.

E.g. Lowell Heights in SF gets less than the average funding, and Stuyvesant in NYC gets the average amount.

▲

kevinventullo 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I thought charter schools and public schools received the same $/student.

▲

rahimnathwani 5 days ago | parent [-]

Charter schools generally receive less.

▲

ab5tract 5 days ago | parent [-]

Source please.

	▲	rahimnathwani 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		Here's just one: Heape-Johnson, A., McGee, J. B., Wolf, P. J., May, J. F., & Maloney, L. D. (August 2023). Charter School Funding: Little Progress Towards Equity in the City. School Choice Demonstration Project. In some states and cities the difference is more extreme than in others.

▲

weitendorf 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I think the specific form of "charter schools" we have are mainly a US invention, but a lot of countries (like the Netherlands, where it's more common than not) actually just let students use public funds to go to private schools, which would melt the heads of most people who oppose charter schools because it's "right wing".

Charter schools are I think a direct response to figuring out how to fix low performing, big school districts in the US. So while I have no idea if private or public schools do better in the Netherlands, I think we'd need to find something more like the Baltimore public school system in another country to make the right comparison.

> A commonly given alternative explanation is that the public options in the US are deliberately sabotaged via budget restrictions, and then the resulting poor performance is used to justify further cuts

I find this hard to address because it's not really a matter of policy but of ulterior motives or conspiracy. I personally have no secret plan to make public education even worse by posting about charter schools on hacker news. To me it's just about giving students the option to get educated by an independent institution rather than be forced to attend some of the worst public school systems in the country.

▲

TimorousBestie 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Perhaps you believe the “nominally right-wing” thing is merely academic. It is not.

https://freespeechproject.georgetown.edu/tracker-entries/neo...

▲

weitendorf 5 days ago | parent [-]

Nazis drink water and post on internet communities too. And that's a homeschool network, not a charter school.

Honestly, this might be a good opportunity for you to think about why you find charter schools such a nonstarter JUST because they tend to have more support among those on the right (which I'm not) than those on the left. That's actually one of the big problems I was trying to point out: people have extremely strong opinions on educational policy because of these ideological left vs right things rather than on what students actually need!

	▲	davorak 5 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> why you find charter schools such a nonstarter JUST because they tend to have more support among those on the right So my general impression is that the republican party, nationally, note I am distinguishing the republican party form political right in the USA, has not been supportive of education in terms of financing or in promoting the necessary environment to ensure high quality and consistent education. My general impression is that the republican party is for charter schools. An argument that says trust/invest in the system promoted by the party that has been undermining/unsupportive of the current system does not invoke my trust/sympathy. This is not a topic I have done rigorous investigations on, but what little I have done normally shows a lack of hard evidence and apples to apples between charter schools and traditional public schools.
	▲	TimorousBestie 5 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		> And that's a homeschool network, not a charter school. They were registered as an online charter school, which is why the Ohio DOE got involved at all. They wouldn’t have investigated an individual homeschooler. (Many “homeschool networks” or the like do this because it makes it easier for their clientele to prove they’ve met the meager legal requirements of homeschooling. Justifies the price tag, yknow?) > Honestly, this might be a good opportunity for you to think about why you find charter schools such a nonstarter JUST because they tend to have more support among those on the right (which I'm not) than those on the left You’ve imagined a whole backstory and character arc for me, which is sadly more interesting than the truth. I think charter schools are repugnant because they operate under little to no oversight and, around these parts, have a reputation for abusing students (see reason one). You seemed to imply earlier that the right wing connection was irrelevant or unimportant to the concept of a charter school. It isn’t, really. It’s an essential feature of the system, and why they’ve become so popular as of late after decades of failed leftist attempts at the same thing.
	▲	elktown 5 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		People should study charter schools here in Sweden where it’s common. It’s such a corrupt profit motivated segregation mess, it should be avoided at all costs. It’s taken a very well functioning public school system that had a high lowest standard across the board and segregated them by cherry picking cheap to maintain students. Then we also have the pure frauds, no education to the students until the finally gets shut down 5-10 years later when all inspections are done. etc etc. Why on earth willingly let in the profit motive into this? It was introduced right wingers in Sweden too ofc, boat loads of profit to their supporters. Now it’s also very hard to get rid of when state capacity has been reduced over the years.