Government-Funded Independent Schools

1726 Words4 Pages

An analysis of charter schools – government-funded independent schools that offer either a special theme or are required to meet a particular performance indicator (Davies & Guppy, 2006) – as an alternative to mainstream public education reveals that charter schools should be notnot be supported for several reasons. First, in terms of academic performance, there is little evidence that charter school students fare better than public school students (Murphy, 2003). Second, as new providers of education, advocates claim charter schools bring innovative and fresh new thinking to schooling practices (Davies & Guppy, 2006), but research has found there is weak evidence to support such a claim. Finally, proponents of charter schools and marketization of education argue that since charter schools must abide by their school charter in order to stay in operation, they are more accountable and thus provide higher in quality education than public schools. due to clearer accountability and sanctions (Lubienski & Lubienski, 2006) as charter schools must abide by their school charter in order to stay in operation (Davies & Guppy, 2006). Furthermore, they argue that because the revenue of charter schools is dependent on student enrolment, (Davies & Guppy, 2006) they are motivated to increase the school’s quality in order to compete with other charter schools for student enrolment (Lubienski & Lubienski, 2006). However, research has found this claim of increased accountability and quality is backed by little evidence (Murphy, 2003). This paper will venture to explain each of the above reasons in further detail.

Increased academic achievement is a key selling point for charter schools. Advocates argue that charter schools offer more effective sch...

... middle of paper ...

...ts performing performed better at public schools than charter schools. With regards to innovation, studies by Murphy have shown overall, charter schools are no more innovative than public schools, let alone be the drivers of innovative schooling practices that its proponents assert. A review of charter school practices by Lubienski found that the nature of charter schools can actually inhibit innovation. Lastly, accountability, clear sanctions and market forces as drivers for higher quality in charter schools is weakly supported, as evidenced by the case of Crescendo Schools in Los Angeles. Based on the lack of evidence available to support the claims of improved student performance, innovative teaching, and high quality schooling from clearer accountability and consequences, charter schools should not be supported as an alternative to mainstream public education.

Open Document