Charter school opponents can’t hide from the data

Effective arguments are becoming harder to come by for charter school opponents. At first their big claim was that charters "siphon" money from traditional public schools, but that's a tough sell now that school districts receive more than two years of funding after a student chooses to leave for a charter school.

Next came the claim that charter schools "push out" lower-performing students. That one was derailed by data showing that retention rates in urban charters are no worse than in the surrounding district. The big difference is that traditional school students usually drop out when they leave; charter students return to the district and generally graduate with no problem thanks to the increased rigor they encountered in their charter school.