BOULDER, CO (September 24, 2024)—A recent Fordham Institute report contends that the state’s charter schools have outperformed traditional public schools and implies that they merit continued or expanded state investment. The report’s conclusions lack research evidence and sound methodology, however.

These flaws are detailed in a review of Ohio Charter Schools After the Pandemic: Are Their Students Still Learning More Than They Would in District Schools? University of Kansas professor Bryan Mann finds that the report’s evidence does not match its claims.

Instead, Professor Mann explains, the report relies on previously critiqued methods and provides findings that lack the strength to suggest meaningful differences between charter and traditional public schools. For instance, the study fails to control for the different student populations attending charter and comparison schools.

Ultimately, the report simply recycles flaws of past arguments and offers nothing new to the literature on charter school achievement.

Though there are undoubtedly high-performing Ohio charter schools just as there are high-performing public schools, the effort and energy spent on expanding the sector could be better spent elsewhere, Professor Mann concludes. He suggests focusing on the mechanisms that lead to successful practice in both sectors. As such the report’s wholesale endorsement of one type of school over another is unfounded, and the report is of little use to policymakers.

Find the review, by Bryan Mann, at:
https://nepc.colorado.edu/review/ohio-charter-schools

Find Ohio Charter Schools After the Pandemic: Are Their Students Still Learning More Than They Would in District Schools?, written by Stéphane Lavertu and published by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, at: https://fordhaminstitute.org/ohio/research/ohio-charter-schools-after-pandemic-are-their-students-still-learning-more-they-would