Case III: Charter schools in Washington, D.C.
2
Document #12:
Diana Jean Schemo, “A second report shows charter schoolstudents not performing as well as other students,”
New York Times
,December 16, 2004.88
Document #13:
Martin Carnoy, Rebecca Jacobsen, Lawrence Mishel, andRichard Rothstein,
The Charter School Dust-Up: Examining the Evidence onEnrollment and Achievement
(Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute,2005)91
Document #14:
Erik W. Robelen, “NAEP Gap Continuing for Charters:Sector’s Scores Lag in Three Out of Four Main Categories,”
Education Week
,May 21, 2008.
96
Background informationon Washington, D.C. and its publicschools
99
Exhibit #5:
School system statistics
105
Exhibit #6:
Washington, D.C. School Governance
106
Exhibit #7:
Student performance
107
Exhibit #8:
Timeline of events in Washington, D.C.
108
Document #15:
Robert Allen Blair, “‘To Fix a Broken City:’ Home Ruleand the Origins of School Choice in Washington, D.C.,” Unpublishedsenior thesis, Education Department, Brown University, April 2006.Chapter 1: “The Charter Schools Movement in D.C. 1995-96.”109
Document #16:
Melissa Schoeplein, “Washington D.C.: The Charter School Revolution In the Wake of a Congressional Takeover,” Unpublishedpaper for ED164, December, 2001125
Document #17:
DC Appleseed Center,
Charter schools in the District of Columbia: Improving systems for accountability, autonomy, and competition
(Washington, DC: DC Appleseed Center, 2001)134
Document #18:
Mark Schneider (SUNY Stony Brook) and Jack Buckley(Boston College), “Making the Grade: Comparing DC Charter Schools toOther DC Public Schools,”
1
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis
25:2(Summer 2003)142
Epilogue
161
1
The work reported in this article was begun with support from the Smith Richardson Foundation and hascontinuing support from the National Science Foundation. Thanks to Dann Millimet for suggestionsregarding the propensity score model.
Leave a Comment