This story about the performance of public school students on math compared to other kids was one of the most emailed-stories of the weekend on the New York Times web site. These kinds of comparisons are closely-watched by people in every type of school imaginable under the sun - traditional public, charter schools, and private schools alike. The National Alliance For Public Charter Schools put out a statement calling the story "misleading" because it presents an incomplete picture of student achievement in charters because it uses old data from 2003. (NAPCS notes that the 2005 scores showed marked improvements for charter school kids.)

The study is getting lots of attention from opponents of school choice, who argue that the data suggests things are just fine in public schools without charter schools, vouchers, or tax credits.

The Chalkboard agrees with NAPCS' Nelson Smith that it is important to remember these particular scores are an incomplete snap-shot. But the Chalkboard also agrees with EdWize's Leo Casey (UFT) that it's not good enough for charters to simply outperform their local districts. It is worth factoring-in a student's background when we look at New York-specific data so we determine what difference charter schools are making in the lives of our most vulnerable children.

Wouldn't it be interesting to see a New York version of this kind of study, and one that looks not just at one set of scores, but a progression that shows whether the charter school "movement" is a movement in the right direction for the kids who need charters the most? (Opponents who want to stop charters will always find something else to quibble with, but The Chalkboard thinks this measure should matter greatly to charter supporters, and to parents who are trying to find the best publicly-funded education for their children.)