A Comparison of the Numbers of Special Ed Students in District and Charter Schools

Ed Week has an article here comparing the number of special ed. students in charter and district schools.  It finds that the numbers are pretty equal in secondary schools, but higher in elementary schools.

I would love to see researchers deal with these questions:

Are there any differences in the make-up of the sped population in district and charter schools? 

Do the services for sped students differ in the district and charter schools?  The cost per student?  I know that many district schools have put programs in place to deal with kids with more severe disabilities.  Have charters? 

How many of the charter students return to the district school for their sped services?

What is the drop out, or expulsion, rate of sped kids from district schools?  From charter schools?

Since the difference in cost, and resources needed, to educate a student with mild learning disabilities, and a student with multiple, severe disabilities is huge, without this kind of information I don’t see the point of simply comparing numbers.

The Dreariness of Some Charter Schools Teaching Methods

The New York Times has an article here describing how Alabama is taking over some of their school districts and putting in charter schools, often ones run by large chains.

Students are supposed to sit with their hands folded and their eyes tracking their teacher?  Sorry, but this isn't how children learn.

You want to raise scores?  Flood the schools with books.  Give the kids plenty of time for independent reading. Encourage writing by having the students write about what's important to them.  Teach subjects with hands-on projects.  Reward creativity in both teachers and students.  Essentially, replicate the enriched environments that produce the high-achieving children now.

The Growth in Tracking and Ability Grouping

Ed Week has an article here discussing how tracking and ability grouping is making a resurgence.

In my 37 years of teaching high school English I went back and forth on this issue.  Some thoughts:

The ideal setup is a curriculum with many electives so students can sort themselves.  Maybe they want to take British Literature, which is difficult, or Contemporary Literature, which is more accessible to mediocre readers.  I do think that students who want to take more difficult courses should be able to, and high-achieving students—who may be taking difficult math and science courses—should be able to take an English or history course that is interesting for them, even if it’s not so difficult.

I also think there should be catch-up courses for kids who have poor skills.  A poor reader is not going to be able to read John Donne.  He should be put into a saturation reading and writing program until his skills are at a level that he can take more mainstream classes.

What always chilled me were high schools with separate tracks that kids pretty much got stuck in.