More Stats Comparing regular DCPS, Charters, and the Entire Group of Publicly-Funded Students in DC

This time we will look at percentages of white & asian students, of students with limited or no english proficiency, students who are poor, students in special education, and also the percentages of students ‘proficient’ in reading, from 2007 through 2010.

First, the percentages of white and asian students enrolled in the tested grades:

As you can see, the percentage of white or asian students has not been large in the past few years, in any of these categories. However, in the regular public schools, in the grades tested, the percentage of white and asian students has gone up from about 7% to about 10%, which seems significant to me. But again, please remember that lots of grades do NOT get tested, and therefore the real percentage for DCPS as a whole, including those non-tested grades, could be higher, lower, or the same.

I also notice that the fraction of white or asian students in the charter schools appears to be very low, less than half of the percentage for all of the publicly-funded schools in DC. Apparently, the fears of some that charter schools would become a refuge for white, middle-class-background students, away from majority-black regular DC public schools, has not come to pass. (At least not yet.)

Next, let’s look at percentages of students who are educationally disabled (students in special education). Here is the graph and table:

As you can see, these graphs are all pretty close to horizontal, meaning not a lot of change. Is the change that we see, the slight wiggles upwards or downwards as we read from left to right, significant? I don’t know for sure, but I doubt it.

What I think IS significant is that the proportion of students receiving special education services in the charter schools is much lower than the proportion of those students in the regular public schools. As you can see, a bit more than 20% (one student in five) in the regular public schools receives special education services. THOSE SERVICES ARE LABOR-INTENSIVE, SO THEY ARE EXPENSIVE. However, in the charter schools, the fraction is roughly 13% (about one student in eight).

Published in: on September 13, 2010 at 5:27 pm  Comments (4)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://gfbrandenburg.wordpress.com/2010/09/13/more-stats-comparing-regular-dcps-charters-and-the-entire-group-of-publicly-funded-students-in-dc/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

4 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Do you mean % of students in publicly-funded schools in DC who are white or Asian

    or

    % of white or Asian students resident in DC who attend publicly-funded schools?

    I’m assuming the former, but, grammatically, it looks more like the latter (or, at best, ambiguous).

    Like

    • You are right – it’s ambiguously worded. The graphs and data are all constructed the same way. What I was looking for was a straight demographic analysis of public schools, of charter schools, and the two combined. I was trying to find out, say, what fraction of charter school students are black? What fraction are white or asian? What fraction are poor? What fraction are LEP-NEP? And the same thing for the regular public schools, and the same thing for all publicly-funded schools combined.

      Like

  2. There are a handful of charter schools which manage to attract middle and upper-middle class white and asian families, but they have waitlists in the hundreds. Everyone applies to the same ones:

    Appletree, Bridges, Capital City, E.L. Haynes, LAMB (Latin American Montessori Bilingual), Two Rivers, Washington Latin, and Washington Yu Ying

    Like

  3. Great schools are not the charter schools, however the Washington Yu Ying is a new star! Proper facility, great teachers but I will strongly disagree with Washington Latin which attracted plenty of bad students body. Staff is very casual, horrible facility, lack of strong leadership, don’t get fool with the website statement from the present Head master – it is opposite direction. Besides Latin which is poorly developed they have nothing to offer when comes to classical curriculum. Nothing, most worrying facts is they are badly organized however plenty of administrative staff – with poor performance, and rude. Stay away from Washington Latin!

    Like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: