A recent New York Times and Washington Post article explains how the NAACP’s response to charter schools may be misguided.

Below are a series of statements from both articles. Links to the full articles are at the bottom.

Members of the NAACP’s board of directors, meeting in Cincinnati, ratified a resolution adopted in July by delegates to the organization’s 2016 convention that called for a moratorium on more charter schools until:

1. Charter schools are subject to the same transparency and accountability standards as public schools
2. Public funds are not diverted to charter schools at the expense of the public school system
3. Charter schools cease expelling students that public schools have a duty to educate
4. Cease to perpetuate de facto segregation of the highest-performing children from those whose aspirations may be high but whose talents are not yet as obvious. (WashPost)

…a “blanket moratorium on charter schools would limit black students’ access to some of the best schools in America and deny black parents the opportunity to make decisions about what’s best for their children.”(WashPost)

These schools, which educate only about 7 percent of the nation’s students and sound research has shown that, when properly managed and overseen, well-run charter schools give families a desperately needed alternative to inadequate traditional schools in poor urban neighborhoods. (NYTimes)

Addressing the issues raised in its resolution—including real transparency and accountability standards for charters—is a necessary step in the fight for great public schools for all children. (WashPost)

…students enrolled in charter schools in 41 of the nation’s urban regions learned significantly more than their traditional public school counterparts.(NYTimes)

…educational gains for charter school students turned out to be significantly larger for black, Hispanic, low-income and special education students in both math and reading.(NYTimes)

Such academic improvements have stimulated heavy demand for more charters among low-income black and Latino families that are often trapped in failing districts.(NYTimes)

…poorly run charters can be disastrous. In some areas, the study notes, not a single charter school outperforms the traditional school alternative — and in some places, more than half are significantly worse. The city of Detroit, where more than half of all students attend charter schools, has recently become an example of such a failure.(NYTimes)

Given the demand for good charters, a moratorium would clearly be a bad idea. (NYTimes)

The N.A.A.C.P. resolution is less credible when it says that charter schools have contributed to “increased segregation.” Yes, many in urban centers have predominantly black or Latino student enrollment, but it’s nonsensical to fault a charter school for serving a minority student body in an overwhelmingly minority area.(NYTimes)

In advocating a blanket moratorium on charters, the N.A.A.C.P. would fail to acknowledge what’s happening to children who need and deserve a way out of the broken schools to which they have been relegated.(NYTimes)

The NAACP faces a choice: cling to policies of the past that have failed Black children for decades, or embrace the future and the innovative practices that will create hope and opportunity in places where neither is present.” (WashPost)

Whatever position one takes on charters, there is no denying that the charter sector in a number of states is severely troubled, with little or virtually no oversight, leading to numerous financial and other scandals. (WashPost)

Washington Post

New York Times