More Stunningly Brazen Dishonesty from the Seattle Times on Charter Schools


No, they still have no shame.
Sorry but I read none of that and have nothing intelligent to add to the conversation.
There is another variable that even the study doesn't completely address, or perhaps have the ability to quantify. That is the curriculum of charter schools as a whole. There was a good NPR segment on this subject and one of the discussions was how some charter schools might do better, but have a more narrow curriculum. There were some, who matched curriculum's, and did better, and some who matched and didn't. Some matched and did poorly. It was all over the map so to speak. So what you are saying is even more true when you factor that in as well. But then, they are just gearing up for another McKenna campaign point if you ask me. One for which truth is going to be just as subjective.
@3: Of course, the Stanford study, and a later one from the US Dept. of Education that showed charter schools doing no better in aggregate, are more nuanced than the top line numbers, suggesting that students from different backgrounds have different impacts in different study areas.

But it's the top line number that the Seattle Times used... and used in an incredibly dishonest manner.
@ Goldy, why can't you AND the Seattle Times editors all be hacks?

I'm going to read up on that study. There are a lot of ways to measure a school's performance, and they don't always get looked at equally. It will be interesting to see what the Stanford researchers thought.
Just out of curiosity, have you guys ever, you know, called them for comment in an official reporter capacity on their dishonest reporting when you fish this stuff out?

The levels of comedy could be staggering, and any chance to humiliate the two clowns that run the Times should never be passed up.
good work, nice find
Do you remember when newspapers used to be interested in things like facts and stories? Seattle Times is no better than the Stranger, and the Stranger is *supposed* to be activist and opinionated.
We'll save the hypocrisy part for last.

Public schools work places like Bellevue which are low density, right sized cities. They fail in unmanageable urban density. Bellevue has half the tax burden of Seattle, is more culturally and ethnically diverse and produces some of the nation's top public schools. Seattle does not.

Oh, and about hypocrisy and the will of the people, how about the yearly Initiatives to limit taxes, prevent income taxes and so on...there is a place where the majority has spoken...screamed, in fact...only to be down shouted by a kleptomaniac government in Olympia.
The proposed charter schools bill has a number of flaws. While it requires charter applicants to be non-profits, they can subcontract with for-profit corporations for education and management services. SPS Director Harium Martin-Morris calls this "a loophole big enough to drive a truck through." Rep. Pettigrew should agree to an amendment to limit charter subcontractors to non-profit corporations. The profit motive has driven many of these
franchise "network" to scrimp on teacher pay, school supplies and maintenance & operations.

These charter operators clearly expect to be handed Seattle school buildings to conduct their experiments. However, according to Director Martin-Morris, there are no Seattle school buildings that are not in the SPS plan, including two South End schools planned for re-opening and one that is a tear-down. Finding funding for capital, or paying rent plus maintenance and operations, is not in the typical charter school per-student capitation rate.

The state commission proposed to evaluate and grant charter applications under the bill is to be comprised of three members appointed by the Governor, three appointed by the Speaker of the House, and three appointed by the President of the Senate (Lt. Gov. Brad Owen). Either the bill was written by someone from out of state who doesn't know that our esteemed Lt. Gov. does not represent the Majority Leader of the Senate, or they already know whom he will appoint (representatives from Boeing, Microsoft and the Gates Foundation?). The Commission is budget-neutral, to be funded by grants and donations. From whom? Boeing? Microsoft? The Gates Foundation?
What @6 asked in a big way. Don't just call them on it here, call them up and tell them you're writing a story on them and ask questions.
Another study out of University if California at San Diego just reached the same conclusion, plus found that charter schools aren't incubators for new strategies to deAl with struggling students! Pops. Guess that Times missed that study, too!
The Times NEVER gets education stories (at least K-12) right. They also have an error in the editorial saying that all the charters have to have a proven record of success.

I asked them where that is in the bill as I can't find it. They were probably fed that line by LEV or some other group who just wants charters in.

Keep in mind that there will be a LOT of heavy-duty, out-of-state lobbying. There is money to be made here. As well, the head of Teach for America and the head of KIPP, one of the better charter organizations - well, they are married to each other and each of their groups got $50M from the feds.

Teach for America desperately needs charters here as they only have 11 of their "teachers" in Puget Sound schools. UW is running their master's degree program for them at a huge loss and they need more numbers. Charters love to hire TFA (read: cheap and easy to boss around).