As the school year has approached in fall 2015, the issue of serious teacher shortages across the country has come into focus, with certain districts dramatically lacking in sufficient numbers of quality candidates.
The debate over charter schools shows few signs of receding as a central component in the discussion about improving U.S. public education. While proponents see charter schools as a vital source of innovation in public education, opponents feel they are largely ineffective and operate at the expense of large numbers of students. To complicate matters, previous research about the impact of charter schools on student achievement has uncovered mixed results.
Since the first charter school opened in the late 1980s, more than 4,000 have been established. The charter school movement is not without its critics, of course, and some argue that an approach that works in one area may bring about different results in another.
Are charter schools better for children? The answer depends on context. And it’s not an unequivocal “yes,” at least based on evidence from test scores: One of the most comprehensive randomized studies to date, published in 2010 by the National Center for Education Evaluation, found that charter schools were no more effective than public ones in raising math and reading outcomes.
The concept of merit pay in education is simple enough: Bonuses are given to educators who succeed at their jobs based on agreed-upon criteria, which can include the results of standardized tests, evaluations or other measures. Merit pay has received support as part of the federal “Race to the Top” initiative, and a number of state and local efforts have included such programs. As with many education reform initiatives, however, criticism isn’t lacking.
