Dr. Charles Barone is the Senior Director of the Center for Innovation, National Parents Union.

It’s a shame that while Republicans last month advanced the most sweeping private school choice bill in history, Democrats missed a fantastic opportunity to show their support for public school choice in a hearing held by the House Committee on Education and Workforce, in honor of National Charter Schools Week. 

Entitled “Reimagining Education: How Charter Schools Are Closing Gaps and Opening Doors” the hearing featured 3 Republican witnesses who focused on the difference that high-quality public charter schools are making in lives of schoolchildren and one Democratic witness who offered some legitimate but mostly specious critiques of charters and was unwilling to acknowledge virtually anything positive about them. 

Tough questions are fair game. It’s legitimate, for example, to inquire whether or not public charter schools result in increased segregation or adequately serve students with disabilities.

What’s absolutely unacceptable is to exaggerate negative research findings about public charter schools and to ignore the wealth of data showing that high-quality charter schools make a significant difference in the lives of students, especially those farthest from opportunity. 

For example, both the Democratic witness and Democrats on the dais claimed that charter schools cause segregation of students by race. There’s a grain of truth to that. But objective researchers have found that the effect is marginal and that in some cases, especially when looking between districts in metropolitan areas, charters may actually improve integration. 

And Democrats are not exactly consistent when it comes to the real root causes of segregation. Several Democrats at the hearing expressed a strong preference for “neighborhood schools” over public charters. Obviously, however, if segregation is rooted in housing patterns, then focusing public policy solely on “neighborhood schools” will only further solidify school segregation. Democratic lawmakers have largely ignored recommendations from experts like Rick Kahlenberg and from our colleagues at the Diverse Charter Schools Coalition to create alternatives to segregated neighborhood schools through integrated public schools of choice. 

Moreover, integration may not be the be-all, end-all. Forced systemic segregation is very different from a system where parents are choosing schools with students who look like theirs. Parents and families are literally choosing charters because of their reputation for getting it done for their kids – not being forced by any government system literally meant to block kids from great schools. Because, according to CREDO, charter school students in so many places do outperform their traditional public school counterparts.

Take a look at public charter schools in New Jersey, one of many states where CREDO found that charter students outpace their traditional public school peers. Below we compare the achievement of students at 3 “segregated” public charter schools in Newark, NJ with student performance in a traditional, “integrated” public school system just down the road in Montclair, NJ. The demographics for each are in the table below.

Now look, below, at comparisons of the percentage of 4th graders meeting or exceeding expectations for ELA on the New Jersey Standards of Learning Assessment (NJSLA) at each of those 3 public charter schools with 4th graders in Montclair. Even though the median household income in Newark is about $35,000 while in Montclair it is about $133,000, the Newark charter schools, overall, hold their own. Two of the Newark charter schools – North Star and Robert Treat – are very close to Montclair while the third, Gray, has a “meets or exceeds” in ELA more than 12 points above Montclair. 

However, it’s when you look at the results for racial subgroups that the real differences emerge. Hispanic students in the 3 charters have a “meets or exceed” in ELA 10-30 points higher than those in Montclair and Black students in the 3 charters outpace those in Montclair by even larger margins – 15-35 points.

If you were a Black or Brown parent, where would you want to send your kid?

On NJSLA math (below), the score differences between the 3 Newark charters and Montclair are a little less extreme – Robert Treat has a little work to do when it comes to math, but it’s not all that far from Montclair. Still, Black and Hispanic students in the other 2 Newark charters have percentages “meeting or exceeding” NJSLA expectations in math 20-45 points higher than those in Montclair.

We demand that Democrats start highlighting these stories of success and stop discounting them. We insist that they stop proposing simply throwing more money at the system and then turning a blind eye when it fails those kids the party claims they care most about.  

When asked by by the Subcommittee Chairman why there wasn’t universal support for charters, witness Eva Moskowitz, CEO of the Success Academy Charter Schools in New York City, responded:

“I think there are narratives that are super convenient… [P]oor kids are harder to educate and have challenges that many of us in this room couldn’t possibly imagine unless we ourselves have come from poverty – but it isn’t dispositive. You can outperform your zip code if you provide rigorous curriculum, if you have loving, nurturing teachers and principals … I think the reason there is so much animus is because entities like Success [Academy] are proving that there’s nothing wrong with the children … there is a problem with a system of delivery.”

Democrats would do well to reflect on those sentiments and do whatever housecleaning is necessary to align their views with the available evidence and to stop telling poor families – and poor performing public school systems – that we don’t expect much from their kids. 

*******

You can find written witness testimony here and a video recording of the hearing here.