Instigator / Pro
Dr.Franklin's avatar
7
Dr.Franklin
1616
rating
32
debates
62.5%
won
Topic
#2259

TOURNAMENT R1:Dr.Franklin VS Lemming

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
0
Better sources
2
0
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 5 points ahead, the winner is...

Dr.Franklin
Judges
whiteflame's avatar
whiteflame
27 debates / 193 votes
Voted
Tags
Education
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Judges
Contender / Con
Lemming's avatar
2
Lemming
1468
rating
6
debates
33.33%
won
Description

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bhNN3TEx1wJmf_Tq2yevvEvAhyIFOmKJYkBN_DLumOA/edit?usp=sharing

Round 1
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
Pro
#1
"On Balance, Charter Schools are Beneficial to the Quality of Education in the United States."

Setup

R1:Argument
R2:Rebuttal
R3:Defense
R4:Conclusion and final rebuttals

Framework

In order to determine what is beneficial to the education system or not, we can define terms in order to see how it would work

Charter Schools are:

"(in North America) a publicly funded independent school established by teachers, parents, or community groups under the terms of a charter with a local or national authority."

with more details

"Charter schools are independently-operated public schools that have the freedom to design classrooms that meet their students’ needs. All charter schools operate under a contract with a charter school authorizer – usually a nonprofit organization, government agency, or university – that holds them accountable to the high standards outlined in their “charter.” It is common to see charter schools led by former teachers who wanted to take the lessons they learned in the classroom and apply those lessons to an entire school."[2]

Beneficial is defined as:

"favorable or advantageous; resulting in good."

Quality is defined as

"the standard of something as measured against other things of a similar kind; the degree of excellence of something."

Education is defined as

"the process of receiving or giving systematic instruction, especially at a school or university."

VVOB defines a quality education as

"A good quality education is one that provides all learners with capabilities they require to become economically productive, develop sustainable livelihoods, contribute to peaceful and democratic societies and enhance individual well-being. "[1]

PRO will argue in favor of charter schools benefiting US educational system while CON will argue that charter schools do not benefit the US educational system.This is a debate about the benefits not whether one is better than the other-charter VS traditional

Argument

A1.A greater choice of curriculum and career with life skills-Charter Schools allows individual students to flourish in what they are interested in and what they are good at.If you have a curriculum in a school where technology, agriculture, engineering, and cooking are more actively promoted than traditional schools it allows students to choose their career earlier in their lifetime without a need for college.This is beneficial to the educational system as it allows students to embrace common career options earlier in their lifetime which has seen amazing benefits.A little less than 40% of high school graduates dont attend a 4 year college and charter schools provide these students a better option as Fordham Institute reports:

Public charter high schools can expand such opportunities. These schools of choice are ideal candidates for innovative career education models, particularly those that cultivate relationships with employers and industries and that aim to align student skills with employer needs. The flexibility afforded charters—in staffing, selection of curricula, structuring the school day, and other organizational features—can be leveraged to support strong, evidence-based models. Many charters, for example, can hire teachers from industry without the constraints of certification requirements and can offer more hours in internships or apprenticeships because they are not bound by seat-time rules.[3]
A2.Performance-Charter Schools outperform many traditional schools across the country as Forbes reports and gives the 5 main reasons why charter schools are outperforming traditional ones proving why they are beneficial.

A.True Autonomy-Charter Schools operate more independently than traditional schools and are not bound by the districts educational codes and laws which could hinder their curriculum advancement.There is simply more freedom in charter schools which is a benefit to education in the US as seen with the test scores.

B.Schools of Choice-Charter Schools are schools where anybody from any district in a certain area can apply to be in the school, this means that the school is forced to adopt their curriculum with different types of students.Having a school that doesn't only appeal to one set of students in one district allows multiple systems to flourish and is why charter schools perform better and are beneficial. 

C.Charter Schools are held accountable for student performance-this is why they take a more personal approach to curriculum and they need good results for funding where as public traditional schools practically have to exist.

D.Careful Authorization Process

E.Sustainability-Because Charter Schools are independent of the district's rules, it has the learn to be sustainable in it's own right. Sustainability without districts law is a benefit to US education and the performance results prove this.[4]

Schools that perform better are a benefit for the US educational system.

A3.Choice for students in poor school districts

Students who perform well in worse school districts have an opportunity to apply to a charter school.This seems obvious on the surface and deep research confirms this from educationnext where:

Students performing well in a bad school district who then moved to a charter school enabled them to score higher in both math and reading.There was also a significant decrease in grading repetition. They also found that students in a mile radius of three or more charter schools performed much better than students with only one charter school.This shows that where students that are in bad districts (that perform well enough to apply to a charter school) have access to charter schools and an obvious pattern follows:Better Performance in School[5]

This is further proven by an statistical analysis of the results.NYPOST shows that charter schools provides an opportunity for all students in poor and tough backgrounds especially for minorities.Simply put, charter schools provide hope and an opportunity for students in poor and tough backgrounds to succeed.[6]

A4.Increased instructional spending in traditional schools too

Instructional Spending or more commonly referred to as instruction expenditures instructional is defined as "Expenditures for activities related to the interaction between teachers and students. Include salaries and benefits for teachers and teacher aides, textbooks, supplies and purchased services. These expenditures also include expenditures relating to extracurricular and cocurricular activities."[10]The more funding for these things, the more beneficial it would be.

This has a profound beneficial effect on the US educational system as the study analyses the spillover effects into traditional schools too.They found that due to NY's charter school success,traditional schools began ramping up their funding to match charter schools, traditional schools in NYC was seen increased funding by 2-9% and it came with a significant increase in instructional spending that GROWS when charter schools are nearby.

Charter Schools CO-LOCATED-instructional spending up 9%
Charter Schools located within a half of mile radius-instructional spending up 4.4%
Charter Schools more than a half mile away but within a mile in-instructional spending up 2%

it is obvious that the more accessible the charter schools are, the more instructional spending is put into traditional schools too.The beneficial effects of Charter Schools are seen in traditional schools too.Last, this destroys the myth that charter schools use up resources and take it from traditional schools.[5]

A5.Innovation

Charter Schools are a great way to innovate as naturally different types of curriculum will allow the development of different innovations in the educational scene benefiting it.These are the categories that charter schools have been found to innovate in:

A.Time-Charter Schools are more acceptable of all students and their paces so they are more lenient than the strict bell schedule which has saw good education benefits in empowering students based on a individual level and not a strict schedule[7]

B.Talent-Teachers are hired in charter schools based on what their expertise is in other fields.Engineering,agriculture, and technology have only recently been used for teaching and degrees in these fields can now be used for teaching thanks to Charter Schools and it's benefits

C.Technology-Many Charter Schools are centered around their technology and how students develop around it.naturally, charter schools would develop around technology.Technology has shown to have great benefits in education.Technology has allowed schools and students to access online textbooks,google docs,email for easier communication,and many more.The benefits of technology are easily seen and was enabled by charter schools.[8]

This is confirmed by a study from my source which says

"These next generation learning models give us a window into how modern schools can provide a high-quality education for students," said National Alliance President and CEO Nina Rees. "Public charter schools are paving the way on innovative models that will better prepare our students for college and life. We urge policymakers across the country to heed our recommendations to expand these models into more schools.[9]
They are individual examples of these too to show how exactly how these innovations work

Venture Academy-Charter School in Minnesota which experimented in dividing communities based off of individual differences for learning differences as each student is different and "they rotate between stations with different learning experiences including interdisciplinary project-based learning, digital content, independent work, and tutorials (all in the course of one day). Teachers also participate in peer observations and the use of technology at the school is driven by its ability to support student learning."

Then in Boston, the Next Match program developed which mixes up how staff is presented in the school.It is staffed by full time tutors and top of the master teachers.This innovative model has allowed has enabled full time tutors to support smaller bodies of students and a more individualized experienced.

In D.C, Ingenuity Prep is a charter school that innovated a system where students were given 33% more learning time than the students in the traditional schools and has found an innovative staff leader for teachers where "teachers at the master, lead, associate, and resident levels to learn from one another and encourage professional development."

Last,Summit Public Schools in the CF Bay area found an innovative way to find gaps in an individual student so that every student graduates ready for college.Teachers serve in multiple roles

This and many more individual examples are why charter schools are a benefit to education in that they provide innovation.

Conclusion

From a wider curriculum that allows a larger size of courses,better performance scores,giving an opportunity and choice for students in poor school districts,increased instructional spending for Traditional schools too, and has lead to innovation in US education proves that charter schools are in fact, beneficial to US education

Sources



Lemming's avatar
Lemming
Con
#2
'I say,
On Balance, Charter Schools are 'not Beneficial to the Quality of Education in the United States.
They ask to be funded by the public, but insist on being held to task for their behavior,
They claim their results trump all, but what are their results but smoke and mirrors, a false dichotomy.
Let 'private schools exist I say, for those so self assured of their better methods,
For those of means to try their outlandish ways and methods of education,
But let public funds stay where they belong.
In the hands of schools with an 'honest quality of education,
In the hands of schools that can be called to account for their methods.

It's widely recognized that problem causing students can be kicked to the curb, after being selected and exhibiting a few problem behaviors.
By this method charter schools skim the cream of the crop,
And use their lottery method as a subterfuge to claim to have the exact same student makeup as public schools.

So too I say, that the amount of flexibility/variability in charter schools is not to their favor.
Without a core of strength that does not bend like a piece of taffy, how is one supposed to have faith in the 'reliability of a school.
It is for such a reason public schools are to be acclaimed, praised for the amount of oversight one takes in their final results 'and methods.
The lack of consistency in charter schools is a clear reason for disdain against them, for mockery of their attempts to claim better performance.

Charter schools claim more innovation is needed, in a system that has never needed more innovation than what society and the public has given it.
All that's needed of schools is that they innovate with the times,
And this is seen clear enough by how schools 'already change from the past to the present.
Public schools can innovate well enough to time and circumstance,
What public education 'needs is public schools, held accountable to their results 'and methods.

Sources
Expulsions
Consistency
This Is What School Was Like 100 Years Ago
Round 2
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
Pro
#3
"On Balance, Charter Schools are Beneficial to the Quality of Education in the United States."

Introduction

My opponent has agreed to the definitions and the debate structure.Because of that this round will be a rebuttal and I will rebuttal my opponents R1.Since I have 30k characters I will rebuttal based on quotations

Rebuttal

They ask to be funded by the public, but insist on being held to task for their behavior,
All Schools should be accountable for their actions and their behavior, this is why charter schools are successful as Forbes stated in their article[1] that they take charge in their student performance and behavior and are why they perform better


They claim their results trump all, but what are their results but smoke and mirrors, a false dichotomy

the Charter Schools results are not smoke and mirrors.While there isn't a huge disparity between results,it shows that yes-students in charter schools do better than at TPS.A lot these results are based off on model of the education,school engagement, staff, and academic rigor.As proven, charter schools tend to innovate in these areas bringing up their performance.[2]The results speak for themselves.The Department of education found that out of 77 comparisons,charter schools outperformed TPS 65 times.That is a clear result saying that charter schools do better than TPS.


But let public funds stay where they belong.
public funds do not go anywhere with charter schools, it was actually proven in R1 that instructional spending increases in public funds when charter schools are around, not decrease.

Charter Schools CO-LOCATED-instructional spending up 9%
Charter Schools located within a half of mile radius-instructional spending up 4.4%
Charter Schools more than a half mile away but within a mile in-instructional spending up 2%[4]


In the hands of schools with an 'honest quality of education,
In the hands of schools that can be called to account for their methods.
which is charter schools


It's widely recognized that problem causing students can be kicked to the curb, after being selected and exhibiting a few problem behaviors.
While this is true, charter schools can naturally help with a different curriculum

By this method charter schools skim the cream of the crop,
This is a common public myth.In the summer of 2015, it was found that the majority of charter school transfers in a district,and this study analysed 85,000 students the students scored below average the math and reading scores, so while many charter schools provide an opportunity for students in low end districts to do better,it also gives students who were below average a chance at a different curriculum set for them-its about the chance to be better.[5]

And use their lottery method as a subterfuge to claim to have the exact same student makeup as public schools.
No Charter School claims they have the exact same student makeup-in fact that , unless it is proven that they do, this argument is without merit.In fact, charter schools take great pride in being different.Charter Schools in NYC have taken great pride in their diverse makeup that makes them unique.[6]

So too I say, that the amount of flexibility/variability in charter schools is not to their favor.
Without a core of strength that does not bend like a piece of taffy, how is one supposed to have faith in the 'reliability of a school.
the flexibility and the variety of the charter school is a benefit to them and the US education.Strict schools without flexibility or variety and a national curriculum are negatively affecting the US public education, one effect of this is the loss of creativity.Newyorkshools report that the strict guidelines in school subjects hinder the students ability to think outside the box or be creative as it enforces linear thinking due to the districts standards.It also incentivizes schools to drop creative subjects such as art and music.[7]

It is for such a reason public schools are to be acclaimed, praised for the amount of oversight one takes in their final results 'and methods.
Why should they be praised when their results are below those of the charter school results and their "oversight" has been proven to be too strict hindering creativity.

The lack of consistency in charter schools is a clear reason for disdain against them, for mockery of their attempts to claim better performance.
The consistency argument is without merit.While its true that some charter schools are better in some areas than other schools, the fact remains that charter schools do not bring down consistency especially when other factors are put in.Tutoring programs have been found very beneficial to test scores and charter schools that take advantage of this fact such as in Boston where the MATCH school has found tremendous results as well as Houston Charter Schools have employed a "no excuses" policy have found good results.Next,behavior is a massive outcome of the performance and many other factors constitute what really determines performance. Not so much charter schools VS TPS.[8]

This is where the benefits of charter schools come in.While the inconsistency can easily be explained by other factors affecting performance as above explained,charter schools that do perform better than TPS in their respective district is because of these reasons explained above and by forbes.Chatrer schools and TPS that do not take advantage of these factors fall behind no matter what school.Charter Schools INNOVATE in these areas which is why they have performed better when they are able to do whats best and what is set up for them.Charter Schools programs do very well and this is why they are still successful despite the inconsistency.

Charter schools claim more innovation is needed, in a system that has never needed more innovation than what society and the public has given it.
It has innovated a lot as already proven above.In fact, the impact is already seen in multiple points of evidence.Organizations such as summit Public Schools had lead the way in innovating for public education with the development of STEM and technology.It has even let minorities a great opportunity to enter STEM careers.[9]

All that's needed of schools is that they innovate with the times,
which charter schools have done with technology and STEM as previously proven

And this is seen clear enough by how schools 'already change from the past to the present.
which is being quickly done by charter schools as previously proven

Public schools can innovate well enough to time and circumstance,
Not necessarily. Overall, the education system hasn't changed much since the 1950's despite jobs requiring more education than ever.We see trends where normally enough education such as a high school or even college degree makes less money due to schools not adapting.Charter Schools ARE an adaption in the new education landscape where students can go and explore other options TPS is no longer required.We need rapid change in schools are we actually did a OK job in the 2010's[10]

What public education 'needs is public schools, held accountable to their results 'and methods.
charter Schools fit this description as forbes states their funding and development are based off of performance:[1]

Unless forced to by the state, elected school boards rarely close or replace failing schools – because it’s political suicide. Teachers unions often initiate district-wide protests over school closings, and parents and community members often join in. Because turnout in school board elections is often under 15 percent, their votes may determine the winners. For a school board member, closing or replacing a failing school often means losing the next election – even if it benefits children.[1]

I didnt see this point in the argument so ill address it here.The suspension and expulsion rate NATIONALLY are nothing to be concerned about and there isn't much difference.

Overall, charter schools suspend kids more at a measly 1.1% more.Hardly a difference in how they operate when it comes to discipline but sometimes there rate is lower or higher but cherry picking data from Texas and DC especially when national data is available is simply not honest.There is no conclusive evidence to suggest that discipline rates are higher or lower as in some categories, its lower, in some-its higher.For example, Charters reported lower overall rates of in-school suspensions, referrals to law enforcement, expulsions, corporal punishment, and school-related arrests than traditional public schools.[11]

Conclusion

I have rebuttaled my opponent thoroughly and look forward to his rebuttal.

Sources

Lemming's avatar
Lemming
Con
#4
Rebuttal to round 1

There's no 'need for gimmicky courses or to expand the curriculum into the unusual.
Paths less taken are for people with time on their hands.
And trades are to be learned in practice, trade schools, community colleges, and colleges
Except for traditional colleges, the other options are all affordable.

The performance claimed by Charter Schools, I say again, smoke and mirrors.
"Charter schools nationally serve far fewer students with disabilities—0% to 7%—and these are children with milder disabilities. The 2011 national average for public schools was 13%. The disabled students who do enroll in charter schools tend to have disabilities that are less severe and less costly to remediate than those of students in district schools.4 A study in New York found English language learners (ELLs) are consistently underrepresented in charter schools.5
A national analysis of charter schools operated by education management companies found only 4.4% of the students in these schools were classified as ELL.5
One of the most acclaimed charter school chains, KIPP, gets some of its great results from substantially higher levels of attrition than do their local school districts. A national study found 40% of the African American male students leave KIPP schools between grades 6 and 8. Overall a higher proportion of African American students than other ethnic groups leave the KIPP schools, and girls  are much more likely to remain in the KIPP schools across all ethnic groups.6"
Simply because Charter Schools drain the bottom, rather than skimming the top, doesn't change the result. It's another attempt at obfuscation, to claim the makeup of the students in a public school and a charter school are the same.
Professional sports teams with the most money have the advantage of buying the better players.
And charter schools with their sneaky and underhanded ways, have an advantage of claiming the better students.
Creating the illusion that charter schools better preform.

"The degree to which their schools are performing varies widely. In fact, a 61 percentage-point difference exists between the best- and the worst-performing charter schools in reading, and 52 percentage points in math."
Consistency is what is needed for the education of the masses. Fairness and equality of a reasonable degree of excellence.
Let the outlandish and gamblers pay their own way, not drag society down.

My opponent says
"Students who perform well in worse school districts have an opportunity to apply to a charter school.This seems obvious on the surface and deep research confirms this from educationnext where:"
What is this, if not skimming the cream of the crop?
What is this but proof of the false comparison in performance between public and charter schools?
If someone is preforming poorly in a public school, why not simply transfer to another public school?

My opponent says
"Increased instructional spending in traditional schools too"
One hardly needs a charter school for that.
When minimum wage is raised for one profession, it affects the minimum wage of other professions.
Doesn't mean that more professions are needed, it's just an inane observation on economics.

My opponent says innovation,
As if all public schools act in the 'exact same fashion, or fail to innovate with the times or people's askance.
Only difference is charter schools want free reign to do whatever they want in a shroud of darkness, and use a shield of smoke and mirrors to justify their unregulated methods.
Transparency and public schools 'I say.
Round 3
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
Pro
#5
"On Balance, Charter Schools are Beneficial to the Quality of Education in the United States."

Introduction

Thank you for Lemming to reply and rebuttaling my argument.This is R3 so I will defend my argument.

Defense

There's no 'need for gimmicky courses or to expand the curriculum into the unusual.
Other curriculum options isnt gimmicky or unusual as it has seen great benefits..

Paths less taken are for people with time on their hands.
How do you reach that conclusion?Whether kids in charter schools take a different path or not doesnt matter on how much time is on their hands

And trades are to be learned in practice, trade schools, community colleges, and colleges
Except for traditional colleges, the other options are all affordable.
Trades are valuable and can be learned in all public spaces and vocational schools are for trades only.The vocational school method is seen in charter schools too.For example, in Boston-An charter school actually has mixed vocational and how students can explore careers in those areas.[1]More and more teachers and experts are saying that TPS provide some sort of enrichment's and trades to their curriculum.Trades can help every student and should be covered at least somewhat in TPS as people demand.This is beneficial because not all students can enter in an academic career nor college so it has seen good benefits with programs like in Boston.Chart Schools with it's flexibility and non-strict curriculum.[2]

The performance claimed by Charter Schools, I say again, smoke and mirrors.
"Charter schools nationally serve far fewer students with disabilities—0% to 7%—and these are children with milder disabilities. The 2011 national average for public schools was 13%. The disabled students who do enroll in charter schools tend to have disabilities that are less severe and less costly to remediate than those of students in district schools.4 A study in New York found English language learners (ELLs) are consistently underrepresented in charter schools.5
A national analysis of charter schools operated by education management companies found only 4.4% of the students in these schools were classified as ELL.5
One of the most acclaimed charter school chains, KIPP, gets some of its great results from substantially higher levels of attrition than do their local school districts. A national study found 40% of the African American male students leave KIPP schools between grades 6 and 8. Overall a higher proportion of African American students than other ethnic groups leave the KIPP schools, and girls  are much more likely to remain in the KIPP schools across all ethnic groups.6"
First of all,the disability factor is without merit. Students in special education do not affect any test scores for public education in a significant way.[3]Next,ELL's,while being less represented in charter schools BUT,ELL's actually do BETTER in charter schools than TPS. Meaning ELL's benefit more in charter schools than in TPS.It is reported that they have a better opportunity at other subjects in school and have additional learning[4]Last, the KIPP foundation's dropout rates for African American males is the exact same as all schools nationally at 40%.While this isn't good but it shows that all schools level out to that number and that charter schools are NO different from TPS in this regard meaning no change.[5]

Simply because Charter Schools drain the bottom, rather than skimming the top, doesn't change the result. It's another attempt at obfuscation, to claim the makeup of the students in a public school and a charter school are the same.
While the makeup isnt exactly the same-it shows that even when students like ELL's perform better in charter schools, it shows a dishonest attempt to discard charter schools results.Charter Schools also do not drain the bottom of the student pool as already proven before-Charter School students are actually admitted below average in their respective state.[6]

Professional sports teams with the most money have the advantage of buying the better players.
And charter schools with their sneaky and underhanded ways, have an advantage of claiming the better students.
Creating the illusion that charter schools better preform.
Actually, charter schools are funded less than TPS so this claimed advantage does not exist. Nationwide, on average, charter schools are funded at 61 percent of their district counterparts, averaging $6,585 per pupil compared to $10,771 per pupil at conventional district public schools. Additionally,they do not receive funding for security.[7]

Next,Nothing is sneaky about charter schools. They admit all students and across the board, they perform better.A benefit for US education

"The degree to which their schools are performing varies widely. In fact, a 61 percentage-point difference exists between the best- and the worst-performing charter schools in reading, and 52 percentage points in math."
Consistency is what is needed for the education of the masses. Fairness and equality of a reasonable degree of excellence.
Let the outlandish and gamblers pay their own way, not drag society down.
Between the range of best vs worst, charter schools fare a lot better than TPS.In Missouri, where the source focuses on,the difference of math MAP test scores are insanely wide.From 95% to 1.8% in the worst district in St.Louis.The point is that test scores always vary widely based off of an area's wealth and general well-being.the 52 point difference pales in comparison to 86 points seen in TPS.Charter Schools has significantly brought down those inconsistent numbers which is a benefit to USA education.

Also, the consistency argument between charter schools can be explained by which methods work in charter schools and how some are more innovative and successful than others just like other TPS. This was explained in R2.[8]

My opponent says
"Students who perform well in worse school districts have an opportunity to apply to a charter school.This seems obvious on the surface and deep research confirms this from educationnext where:"
What is this, if not skimming the cream of the crop?
What is this but proof of the false comparison in performance between public and charter schools?
If someone is preforming poorly in a public school, why not simply transfer to another public school?
Again, the skimming the crop argument has been debunked as students admitted into charter schools were below average.[6]Nest,the flase comparison ahs been debunked this RD and proven by sources 3 and 4.Last,charter schools are these "another public schools".Most districts don't allow other kids to transfer and they are slim chances they will get in anyway,ctmirror.org reports that "Of the 1,157 students from Hartford and the surrounding communities whose first choice was to attend the Academy of Aerospace and Engineering Elementary School in Rocky Hill, just 83 were offered enrollment — a 7 percent acceptance rate."

and "Overall, 790 of the 2,577 students who wanted to leave their city school for a suburban school won a spot in one of the schools they applied. That’s 30 percent.
“It’s not a choice: it’s chance,” said mayoral hopeful Luke Bronin during a debate on education last week. Bronin is challenging Mayor Pedro Segarra for the Democratic Party’s nomination."[9]

Its clear that charter schools, who are not bound by districts and give a chance for ALL student to apply is a better choice than simply attempting to switch.That is another reason why Charter schools are beneficial.


My opponent says
"Increased instructional spending in traditional schools too"
One hardly needs a charter school for that.
When minimum wage is raised for one profession, it affects the minimum wage of other professions.
Doesn't mean that more professions are needed, it's just an inane observation on economics.
While one doesnt make a charter school for that reason, the correlation and benefits are there.First, how do you know that the wages are increased with charter schools?Instructional spending doesn't just mean wages, it means everything about the school that is increased, and while it might be an economic observation, it is STILL a benefit of charter schools.More competition for public schools and the finished product is a better education system in the US enabled by charter schools.A benefit.

My opponent says innovation,
As if all public schools act in the 'exact same fashion, or fail to innovate with the times or people's askance.
Only difference is charter schools want free reign to do whatever they want in a shroud of darkness, and use a shield of smoke and mirrors to justify their unregulated methods.
Transparency and public schools 'I say.
Public Schools do struggle to innovate.Gettingsmart.com has identified 5 reasons why this is

1.Politics-this can easily be seen with the latest school opening debate, it can hinder innovation
2.new business model discouraged on whereas charter schools, the entire thing are new business models
3.noncunsumption
4. Stratification fears by parents and risk taking, whereas charter schools are already risks and parents know what they are going with their kids TPS dont
5.unusually high number of stakeholders.this makes it difficult for innovation.[10]

Next,Charter schools independence is what makes them successful.Forbes listed that as a reason why they perform better.[11]

Conclusion

I have defended my arguments from my opponents rebuttal and I look forward to his R3.

Sources

Lemming's avatar
Lemming
Con
#6
My defense against my opponents round 2,
I say,
That Pro speaks of accountability in the charter school end result of grades, but as I've said elsewhere, charter schools end grade results are a skewed picture, a false image, which makes the lack of accountability in means, even worse.
It's bad enough to act badly for a good result, it's worse to act badly to a bad result.
For without proof of charter schools supposed better ends than public schools, what was it all for?

"Unlike public schools, private profit charter schools are not subject to a public audit of their books."
"In May 2014, the Center for Popular Democracy and Integrity in Education issued a report called Charter School Vulnerabilities to Waste, Fraud And Abuse. This report concluded that fraudulent charter operators in 15 states were responsible for losing, misusing or wasting over $100 million in taxpayer money per year"
"In December, 2014, another report was published called When Charter Schools are Nonprofit in Name Only. This report described the common practice of charter schools pretending to be “non-profits” only to sweep all of the money out of the fake non-profit front group and into the pockets of private for profit “management” corporations."
There's also a chart on the link that shows a contrast in teacher pay, and the 'profit that charter schools make.
It's the 'same problem one get's when they allow private prisons and don't bother with significant transparency and oversight.

This all in addition to how Charter Schools are able more easily than public schools to abandon and shun poor preforming or problem child students.

When I stated,
"It's widely recognized that problem causing students can be kicked to the curb, after being selected and exhibiting a few problem behaviors."
My opponent responded,
"While this is true, charter schools can naturally help with a different curriculum"
Admitting to the wrongdoing of method in which public schools are capable of acting, he then suggests a change in curriculum. But has he not been touting this entire debate the value in a lack of oversight in charter schools, so long as their 'so called results are met?
'I say, transparency and oversight are hallmarks of public schools, add such to charter schools and they are public schools in all but name.
There is no reason public schools cannot possess some variety in curriculum, in fact they already 'are different from one another to degrees. As anyone who has moved from one public school from another might tell you.
Teachers, principles, superintendents, all individuals, all different methods, different schools, cities, states.
'But, held to transparency, accountability, public view.

If you want private, there is private school.

I speak now again on consistency,
Sweeping changes cannot be advocated when every school uses a different screw and screwdriver. There is a reason for mass manufacturing in the modern age.
It's not bad to act as befitting an occasion, or the unusual.
But when everyone follows a different path, it becomes tangled and confused. Some excel, and others fall behind, but changes cannot be implemented properly, when all act in the shadows, without standards or plan.

No changes since the 1950s?
"Education has changed a lot in the past 60 years. While students in the 50s relied on slide rulers and reading accelerators to help them learn, kids today have access to laptops, calculators, tablets, and much more."
"Average teacher salary $4,000 in 1955 to $39,000 in 2011"
"Average days of school per year, 1950 155 days, 2011 280 days."
In 1954, Brown v. Board of Education had 'just taken place, leading to desegregation of American public schools.
And all that barely a scrape off the surface.
Of course public schools have changed and adapted to the times, and still will in the future.

On expulsion,
"Charter schools expelled approximately 72 students for every 10,000 in the schools. At the same time, other public schools in the city expelled one student for every 10,000."
"some educators are suggesting that charter schools are using the heavy arm of discipline to weed out challenging students. While charter schools have the ability to expel students fairly readily, public schools have no choice but to accept those students back into their classrooms."

"A recent Washington Post article examined charter school expulsions in the District of Columbia. DC Public Schools adopted a uniform discipline policy in 2009 that permits expulsion only for severe violations, such as bringing a gun or drugs to school or assaulting students or staff, but charter schools may set their own policies. Of the approximately 76,700 students enrolled in DC Public Schools in 2011, about 29,300 attended charter schools. Despite only enrolling 38% of DC students, charter schools expelled 676 students between 2009-2011, compared to 24 expulsions in public schools."
Which brings my argument back again to consistency, without regulation to their methods, charter school possess great ability to harm their students and their futures.
And if you make the method of charter schools public, what are they but public schools?

Round 4
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
Pro
#7
"On Balance, Charter Schools are Beneficial to the Quality of Education in the United States."

Introduction

This is the last round so I will make my final rebuttals and then a conclusion\

Final Rebuttals

That Pro speaks of accountability in the charter school end result of grades, but as I've said elsewhere, charter schools end grade results are a skewed picture, a false image, which makes the lack of accountability in means, even worse.

This was rebuttaled last round.It was proven that these results are not smoke and mirrors.


It's bad enough to act badly for a good result, it's worse to act badly to a bad result.
For without proof of charter schools supposed better ends than public schools, what was it all for?
How do Charter Schools act badly?This is a baseless claim.They are plenty of proof that charter schools perform better that was represented.From the forbes article, to rebuttaling your points last RD and ELL data.

"Unlike public schools, private profit charter schools are not subject to a public audit of their books."
"In May 2014, the Center for Popular Democracy and Integrity in Education issued a report called Charter School Vulnerabilities to Waste, Fraud And Abuse. This report concluded that fraudulent charter operators in 15 states were responsible for losing, misusing or wasting over $100 million in taxpayer money per year"
"In December, 2014, another report was published called When Charter Schools are Nonprofit in Name Only. This report described the common practice of charter schools pretending to be “non-profits” only to sweep all of the money out of the fake non-profit front group and into the pockets of private for profit “management” corporations."
There's also a chart on the link that shows a contrast in teacher pay, and the 'profit that charter schools make.
It's the 'same problem one get's when they allow private prisons and don't bother with significant transparency and oversight.
First,private profit charter schools CAN be subject to a public audit and ARE public anywhere.Many have been subject to audits.[1]Next,they claim that charter schools waste a lot of money.This is a common argument but upon further review it shows that this is a basic fact about duplicating a product.Simply put-You can't save money by buying more of what you have.Constructing two police departments in one area will never be as cheap as only putting one.And when it comes to education,This is simply an axiom for economics and good spending.AND, in Pennsylvania, they found that charter schools only waste money because of the extremely unfair system of how they give money away[3].They only waste money because the government gives it to them.Take away funds can cant be wasted and problem solved without blaming charter schools.This is a sign that the current federal government expenditures are not working and blaming charter schools for wasting money is without merit or economic knowledge.[2]

Next,the source talks about non profit and management corporations.These management corporations help around a third of all charter schools and are defined as "an entity that manages at least three schools, serves a minimum of 300 students, and is a separate business entity from the schools it manages".Managements are efficient in what they do and provide great resources to charter schools.It is perfectly reasonable for charter schools to be non-profit as they are as well as be taken care of by a management corporation.And it isnt a big deal at all.Nothing about is sneaky. Management companies support the school so they need money.

From my source:

Here is where the confusion stems—although the EMOs that manage a small share of charter schools are for-profit entities, the schools they manage are not. All charter schools are public schools.Arizona and California are the only states to currently allow for-profit management organizations to hold a public charter school’s charter. In Arizona, fewer than 5 percent of the state’s charter schools are for-profit entities, and state statute has recently changed to incentivize school leaders to move to non-profit organizations. In California, Governor Brown signed Assembly Bill (AB) 406 into law in September 2018, which bans for-profit entities from holding charters and charter schools from contracting with for-profit entities for management services.
Whether or not a school is operated by a non-profit or for-profit entity has no bearing on outcomes. All charters schools are held to the standards set by their state. Charter schools exist to provide all children access to a high-quality public school option, and they are charged with adhering to the unique mission set out in their charter.[4]
Next,he talks about how much profit charter schools make,simply put-this chart makes no sense-Again, the only "profit" they reverie are for management companies and they are there to HELP the school-In fact, in your very source-it states that money or "profit" is given to management corporations to cover the school building fees, yet how is this bad?

The contrast in teacher pay is misleading, the report where the chart is based on isn't teacher pay.It is actually classroom instruction and that doesn't equate to spending on teachers which is why the teacher portion of the graph is misleading.It means "“The purposeful direction of the learning process”; one of the major teacher class activities (along with planning and management). "[5]First, this term is very broad, the main role of the teacher can be explored in many ways that charter schools have been found to do such as teachers serving multiple roles OR having a comprehensive Tuturing program that takes place of the teacher.It is incredibly dishonest to label that as Teacher spending-chart link for reference-https://weaponsofmassdeception.org/images/3_charters/3.3_fraud/09.jpg

Now, as previously discussed, the profit bar are really management corporations who also fund classroom instruction and other funds.The profit bar shouldn't exist on the chart.

This all in addition to how Charter Schools are able more easily than public schools to abandon and shun poor preforming or problem child students.
this is a baseless claim with no evidence.No, Charter Schools do not shun poor performing students.All students are admitted by law.

Admitting to the wrongdoing of method in which public schools are capable of acting, he then suggests a change in curriculum. But has he not been touting this entire debate the value in a lack of oversight in charter schools, so long as their 'so called results are met.
Again, this claim that it would negatively affect charter schools more is baseless.For example, kids with ADHD perform better in a smaller classroom, charter school environment.In fact, kids with disabilities in charter schools show significant gains in performance then compared with their TPS counterparts.[6]And while, there is problems with discipline, it is a problem in ALL of USA education rather than charter schools.

'I say, transparency and oversight are hallmarks of public schools, add such to charter schools and they are public schools in all but name.
Transparency is not a problem for charter schools.Recently, D.C passed a law for charter schools to be more transparent the the law has came under heavy criticism:

DC Should Demand Performance from Public Schools, Not Paperwork
The fact is, DC’s charter sector has grown over the last two decades precisely because charter schools are not all the same, and they are different from traditional public schools assigned to families based on where they live. A charter school is an independently run public school granted greater flexibility in its operations in return for greater accountability for performance. Charter schools are open to all children, do not require entrance exams, cannot charge tuition, and must participate in state testing and federal accountability programs.
The “charter” establishing each school is a performance contract detailing the school’s mission, program, students served, performance goals, and methods of assessment. What matters in charter schools is not the inputs but the outcomes — not their teachers’ names and how their salaries compare (as Allen’s legislation seeks to know for every school) but how well their students do. A volunteer board of trustees, which in DC includes parents and sometimes teachers and students, is responsible for upholding the school’s performance promises around academic achievement, financial management, and organizational stability. If a charter school does not meet performance goals, the DC Public Charter School Board can close it.[8]
Clearly, attempts for charter schools to be more transparent is actually a red herring and a manufactured crisis.
There is no reason public schools cannot possess some variety in curriculum, in fact they already 'are different from one another to degrees. As anyone who has moved from one public school from another might tell you.

While that is true, charter schools do a lot better job at it.First of all when it comes to innovation, it is drawn back by 5 reasons as previously discussed[9]Charter schools are more flexible to change their curriculum by design as they are not bounded to common core curriculum.It is an obvious fact that charter schools have more variety in curriculum. IN EXCHANGE for this, they have to meet accountability.[10]

Teachers, principles, superintendents, all individuals, all different methods, different schools, cities, states.
'But, held to transparency, accountability, public view.
So are charter schools as proven above and the fact remains that charter schools ARE transparent and an argument against them on that is a red herring.[8]

And no, not all public schools are different.They must conform to the same curriculum under the states standards.

If you want private, there is private school.
Well there's a problem:Money-not everyone can afford a privatized education in where charter schools can actually provide a private school environment all for free.According to fatherly.com a benefit of charter schools is that it is a private school environment and class size[11]

I speak now again on consistency,
Sweeping changes cannot be advocated when every school uses a different screw and screwdriver. There is a reason for mass manufacturing in the modern age.
It's not bad to act as befitting an occasion, or the unusual.
But when everyone follows a different path, it becomes tangled and confused. Some excel, and others fall behind, but changes cannot be implemented properly, when all act in the shadows, without standards or plan.
But again, the RANGE of public VS charter school performance is utterly meaningless. Some TPS perform exceptionally well while others particularly in low income areas do not do well.The same range of public schools VS charter schools in the data[12] are 85 points.The fact is that comparing the best charter school or TPS is practically useless as only major difference to note is the extreme wealth gap between districts.[13]The poorest district no matter whether TPS or charter schools.This is a rule found all over educational results.The better thing to do is to compare charter schools and TPS in their respective district rather than one district to another.

No changes since the 1950s?
"Education has changed a lot in the past 60 years. While students in the 50s relied on slide rulers and reading accelerators to help them learn, kids today have access to laptops, calculators, tablets, and much more."
"Average teacher salary $4,000 in 1955 to $39,000 in 2011"
"Average days of school per year, 1950 155 days, 2011 280 days."
In 1954, Brown v. Board of Education had 'just taken place, leading to desegregation of American public schools.
And all that barely a scrape off the surface.
Of course public schools have changed and adapted to the times, and still will in the future.
Yes education has generally changed but wasn't point.Sure,students have access to greater technology, the civil rights movement created change in equality for all and teacher salary has increased although every profession has increased and school is longer.BUT what about curriculum changes.How a school day operates, what is taught, testing,etc.Schools like everything else changes but at it's core of what it teaches, it has not changed.No industry has looked even similar to what it is today except education.As fastcompany.com states

How many industries that were around 100 years ago–and are still around today–are making their products almost the exact same way? Can you think of an industry that uses almost the identical methods of production they did 100 years ago, one that hasn’t undergone radical industrialization, innovation, or significant transformation?How about the American classroom? Our method of teaching hasn’t radically changed over the past century. It’s stuck, it’s dated, and it’s in need of radical transformation. While there are bright spots in the private school system, the public education system–where the vast majority of our children are being taught, guided, and motivated–is a dated, bloated, inefficient, bureaucratic dinosaur. It lost sight and understanding of its consumer a long, long time ago.
Education is in large part the foundation on which our culture[14]
Charter schools help innovate these new ideas with tutoring programs and a technology based learning experience as previously discussed and proven.

On expulsion,
"Charter schools expelled approximately 72 students for every 10,000 in the schools. At the same time, other public schools in the city expelled one student for every 10,000."
"some educators are suggesting that charter schools are using the heavy arm of discipline to weed out challenging students. While charter schools have the ability to expel students fairly readily, public schools have no choice but to accept those students back into their classrooms."
This is just a repeat of what you said in your R1 and has already been rebuttaled.Overall, charter schools suspend kids more at a measly 1.1% more.Hardly a difference in how they operate when it comes to discipline but sometimes there rate is lower or higher but cherry picking data from Texas and DC especially when national data is available is simply not honest.There is no conclusive evidence to suggest that discipline rates are higher or lower as in some categories, its lower, in some-its higher.For example, Charters reported lower overall rates of in-school suspensions, referrals to law enforcement, expulsions, corporal punishment, and school-related arrests than traditional public schools.[15]

"A recent Washington Post article examined charter school expulsions in the District of Columbia. DC Public Schools adopted a uniform discipline policy in 2009 that permits expulsion only for severe violations, such as bringing a gun or drugs to school or assaulting students or staff, but charter schools may set their own policies. Of the approximately 76,700 students enrolled in DC Public Schools in 2011, about 29,300 attended charter schools. Despite only enrolling 38% of DC students, charter schools expelled 676 students between 2009-2011, compared to 24 expulsions in public schools."
Which brings my argument back again to consistency, without regulation to their methods, charter school possess great ability to harm their students and their futures.
And if you make the method of charter schools public, what are they but public schools?
The reason why this is because of demographics.Charter schools take in a higher rate of black students which are more likely to be expelled or suspended. Also, it can work in some cases where a 2013 study called explaining charter school's effectiveness[16] found that A Boston charter school that has been praised with it's effectiveness has higher rates of suspension and was found to work.However, this data is mostly interpretation of it as there has been errors in the data cited by the Department of Education.The fact is that charter schools do not significantly discipline students on a national level and the data can be sliced to fir your narrative.Last,if you are expelled from a public school district, you either have to move or go to a different school, while with charter schools, the most common method is that they simply move back to public schools like what is seen in D.C.

Conclusion

I have rebuttaled my opponents defense and i look forward to his final rebuttals.Thank you to Whiteflame for voting on this and thank you to BearMan for this tournament opportunity.

Sources

3.https://www.washingtonpost.com/-The Walmartization of of Public Education
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
Con
#8
I'll just go with a basic conclusion then,
I've already made my case for how charter schools use smoke and mirrors, skimming of the top to distort their "Success Rate".
Pointed out how they discriminate against the less able in society.
Are well known for fraud, those ponzi schools.
Pay their teachers 'less, and steal funds from public schools.
Are lacking in transparency and oversight of their methods.
Really far too much on test results to justify themselves, bah I say, great so the students can take tests, but what about practical results of living life rather than test taking.
Their lack of synergy with one another makes it difficult to make across the board changes that improve all schools at once.
Public schools already posses the ability to change and adapt based on circumstance.
And private schools are the option one has, if they are unsatisfied with public school and it's fair and equitable methods.

Other conclusions and sources, and more detailed justification can be found in previous rounds.