Charter schools in miami: Uh oh. We’re very sorry.

Top 10 Best Miami-dade County Public Charter Schools (2023)

School (Math and Reading Proficiency)

Location

Grades

Students

Rank: #11.

Doral Academy Of Technology

Charter School

Math: ≥99% | Reading: 98%
Rank:

Top 1%

Add to Compare

2601 Nw 112th Ave
Miami, FL 33172
(305) 591-0020

Grades: 6-8

| 293 students

Rank: #22.

True North Classical Academy

Charter School

Math: 96% | Reading: 92%
Rank:

Top 1%

Add to Compare

9393 Sw 72nd St
Miami, FL 33173
(305) 749-5725

Grades: K-8

| n/a students

Rank: #33.

Just Arts And Management Charter Middle School

Charter School

Math: 87% | Reading: 90%
Rank:

Top 1%

Add to Compare

2450 Nw 97th Ave
Miami, FL 33172
(305) 597-9999

Grades: 6-8

| 265 students

Rank: #4 – 54. – 5.

Somerset Academy Charter Middle School South Miami Campus

Charter School

Math: 85-89% | Reading: 85-89%
Rank:

Top 1%

Add to Compare

5876 Sw 68th St
Miami, FL 33143
(305) 740-0509

Grades: 6-8

| 158 students

Rank: #4 – 54. – 5.

Somerset Preparatory Academy Sunset

Charter School

Math: 85-89% | Reading: 85-89%
Rank:

Top 1%

Add to Compare

11155 Sw 112th Ave
Miami, FL 33176
(305) 271-9000

Grades: K-8

| 330 students

Rank: #66.

Somerset Academy Elementary School South Miami Campus

Charter School

Math: 86% | Reading: 90%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

5876 Sw 68th St
Miami, FL 33143
(305) 740-0509

Grades: K-5

| 487 students

Rank: #77.

Doral Academy

Charter School

Math: 85% | Reading: 88%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

2450 Nw 97th Ave
Miami, FL 33172
(305) 597-9999

Grades: K-5

| 1,067 students

Rank: #88.

True North Classical Academy South

Charter School

Math: ≥90% | Reading: 80-89%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

7900 Sw 86th St
Miami, FL 33143
(305) 405-7373

Grades: K-8

| 170 students

Rank: #99.

Doral Performing Arts & Entertainment Academy

Charter School

Math: 80-84% | Reading: 93%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

11100 Nw 27th St
Miami, FL 33172
(305) 597-9950

Grades: 9-12

| 426 students

Rank: #1010.

Bridgeprep Academy Interamerican Campus

Charter School

Math: 85-89% | Reading: 80-84%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

621 Beacom Blvd
Miami, FL 33135
(305) 643-4833

Grades: K-8

| 180 students

Rank: #1111.

Doral Academy Charter Middle School

Charter School

Math: 81% | Reading: 86%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

2601 Nw 112th Ave
Miami, FL 33172
(305) 591-0020

Grades: 6-8

| 1,418 students

Rank: #1212.

Somerset Academy Bay Middle School

Charter School

Math: 81% | Reading: 84%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

9500 Sw 97th Ave
Miami, FL 33176
(305) 274-0682

Grades: 6-8

| 231 students

Rank: #1313.

Isaac: Integrated Science And Asian Culture Academy

Charter School

Math: 80-84% | Reading: 80-84%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

301 Westward Dr
Miami, FL 33166
(305) 863-8030

Grades: K-8

| 266 students

Rank: #1414.

Archimedean Academy

Charter School

Math: 79% | Reading: 86%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

12425 Sw 72nd St
Miami, FL 33183
(305) 279-6572

Grades: K-5

| 646 students

Rank: #1515.

True North Classical Academy High School

Charter School

Math: 85-89% | Reading: 75-79%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

9393 Sunset Dr
Miami, FL 33173
(305) 749-5725

Grades: 9-12

| 160 students

Rank: #1616.

International Studies Charter Middle School

Charter School

Math: 82% | Reading: 80%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

2480 Sw 8th St
Miami, FL 33135
(305) 643-2955

Grades: 6-8

| 323 students

Rank: #1717.

Aventura City Of Excellence School

Charter School

Math: 81% | Reading: 80%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

3333 Ne 188th St
Miami, FL 33180
(305) 466-1499

Grades: K-8

| 1,034 students

Rank: #1818.

International Studies Charter High School

Charter School

Math: 75-79% | Reading: 83%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

2480 Sw 8th St
Miami, FL 33135
(305) 643-2955

Grades: 9-12

| 405 students

Rank: #1919.

Somerset Academy Bay

Charter School

Math: 75-79% | Reading: 80-84%
Rank:

Top 5%

Add to Compare

9500 Sw 97th Ave
Miami, FL 33176
(305) 274-0682

Grades: K-5

| 426 students

Rank: #2020.

Archimedean Middle Conservatory

Charter School

Math: 73% | Reading: 87%
Rank:

Top 10%

Add to Compare

12425 Sw 72nd St
Miami, FL 33183
(305) 279-6572

Grades: 6-8

| 328 students

Rank: #2121.

Academir Charter School West

Charter School

Math: 77% | Reading: 80%
Rank:

Top 10%

Add to Compare

14880 Sw 26th St
Miami, FL 33185
(305) 485-9911

Grades: K-8

| 623 students

Rank: #2222.

Archimedean Upper Conservatory Elementary School

Charter School

Math: 70-74% | Reading: 90-94%
Rank:

Top 10%

Add to Compare

12425 Sw 72nd St
Miami, FL 33183
(305) 279-6572

Grades: 9-12

| 315 students

Rank: #2323.

Highly Inquisitive And Versatile Education (Hive) Preparator

Charter School

Math: 74% | Reading: 81%
Rank:

Top 10%

Add to Compare

5855 Nw 171st St
Hialeah, FL 33015
(305) 231-4888

Grades: K-8

| 840 students

Rank: #2424.

Doral Academy Charter High School

Charter School

Math: 72% | Reading: 84%
Rank:

Top 10%

Add to Compare

11100 Nw 27th St
Miami, FL 33172
(305) 597-9950

Grades: 9-12

| 1,874 students

Rank: #2525.

Renaissance Elementary Charter School

Charter School

Math: 71% | Reading: 83%
Rank:

Top 10%

Add to Compare

10651 Nw 19th St
Miami, FL 33172
(305) 591-2225

Grades: K-5

| 915 students

Rank: #2626.

Downtown Doral Charter Elementary School

Charter School

Math: 72% | Reading: 80%
Rank:

Top 10%

Add to Compare

8390 Nw 53rd St
Miami, FL 33166
(305) 569-2223

Grades: K-5

| 1,088 students

Rank: #2727.

Pinecrest Academy (North Campus)

Charter School

Math: 65-69% | Reading: 85-89%
Rank:

Top 10%

Add to Compare

10207 W Flagler St
Miami, FL 33174
(305) 553-9762

Grades: K-8

| 426 students

Rank: #2828.

Pinecrest Academy Avalon

Charter School

Math: 75-79% | Reading: 70-74%
Rank:

Top 10%

Add to Compare

13993 Mailer Blvd
Miami, FL 33143
(407) 432-5441

Grades: K-5

| 364 students

Rank: #2929.

Pinecrest Cove Academy

Charter School

Math: 70% | Reading: 80%
Rank:

Top 10%

Add to Compare

4101 Sw 107th Ave
Miami, FL 33165
(305) 480-2097

Grades: K-8

| 960 students

Rank: #3030.

Somerset Gables Academy

Charter School

Math: 67% | Reading: 80%
Rank:

Top 20%

Add to Compare

624 Anastasia Ave
Miami, FL 33134
(305) 442-8626

Grades: K-8

| 502 students

Rank: #31 – 3231. – 32.

Ben Gamla Charter School

Charter School

Math: 65-69% | Reading: 75-79%
Rank:

Top 20%

Add to Compare

11155 Sw 112th Ave
Miami, FL 33176
(305) 596-6266

Grades: K-8

| 250 students

Rank: #31 – 3231. – 32.

Somerset Academy Elementary South Campus

Charter School

Math: 65-69% | Reading: 75-79%
Rank:

Top 20%

Add to Compare

19620 Pines Blvd
Miami, FL 33143
(954) 404-7616

Grades: K-5

| 331 students

Rank: #3333.

Mater Academy At Mount Sinai

Charter School

Math: 60-64% | Reading: 85-89%
Rank:

Top 20%

Add to Compare

4300 Alton Rd
Miami Beach, FL 33140
(305) 604-1453

Grades: K-5

| 160 students

Rank: #3434.

Mater Gardens Academy

Charter School

Math: 66% | Reading: 79%
Rank:

Top 20%

Add to Compare

9010 Nw 178th Ln
Hialeah, FL 33018
(305) 512-9775

Grades: K-8

| 805 students

Rank: #3535.

Somerset Parkland Academy

Charter School

Math: 68% | Reading: 74%
Rank:

Top 20%

Add to Compare

8401 Universtiy Dr
Miami, FL 33143
(954) 718-3391

Grades: K-8

| 534 students

Show 100 more public schools in Miami-dade County, FL (out of 166 total schools)

Loading…

Elementary Schools | MDCPS-Charter Schools Compliance and Support

Website

5800 SW 135 Avenue Miami, FL 33183

Principal Ms. Karla Rodriguez

Email

(305) 967-8492

Fax (305) 392-1928

MSID: 2002

Region: South

Voting District: 7

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: No

Website

13330 SW 288th Street Homestead, FL 33033

Principal Mr. Antonio Cejas

Email

(786) 601-7668

Fax (786) 601-7669

MSID: 4242

Region: South

Voting District: 9

Accredited: No

High Performing: No

Website

13400 N. W. 28 Street Opa-Locka, FL 33054

Principal Mr. Patrick Evans

Email

(786) 353-6109

Fax (305) 688-1745

MSID: 4002

Region: North

Voting District: 1

Accredited: No

High Performing: No

Website

600 W. 20 Street Hialeah, FL 33010

Principal Ms. Elizabeth Poveda

Email

(305)-884-6320

Fax (305) 884-6321

MSID: 5384

Region: North

Voting District: 5

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: No

Website

795 N. W. 32 Street Miami, FL 33127

Principal Ms. Ileana Melian

Email

(305) 634-0445

Fax (305) 634-0446

MSID: 1017

Region: Central

Voting District: 2

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: No

Website

12900 N. E. 17 Avenue N. Miami, FL 33181

Principal Ms. Lourdes Isla-Marrero

Email

(305) 359-8580

Fax TBD

MSID: 2022

Region: North

Voting District: 1

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: No

Website

10651 N. W. 19 Street Doral, FL 33172

Principal Ms. Hortensia M. Torres

Email

(305) 591-2225

Fax (305) 591-2984

MSID: 0400

Region: Central

Voting District: 5

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: Yes

Website

18491 S. W. 134 Avenue Miami, FL 33177

8100 S.W. 104th Street, Miami, FL 33156

Principal Ms. Angela Nuñez

Email

(305) 860-3730

Fax (305) 860-3720

MSID: 0402

Region: South

Voting District: 7

Accredited: No

High Performing: No

Website

1700 Krome Avenue Homestead, FL 33030

Principal Ms. Idalia Suarez

Email

(305) 726-3380

Fax (305) 249-4919

MSID: 2012

Region: South

Voting District: 9

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: No

Website

1217 S. W. Fourth Street (a.k.a. 1223 S.W. 4 Street) Miami, FL 33135

Principal Ms. Isabel Navas

Email

(305) 643-2132

Fax (305) 642-3717

MSID: 5410

Region: Central

Voting District: 6

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: No

Website

137 N. E. 19 Street Miami, FL 33132

Principal Ms. Mitzie Ortiz

Email

(786) 477-4372

Fax (786) 446-8714

MSID: 2013

Region: Central

Voting District: 2

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: No

BridgePrep Academy of Village Green

Website

1084 W. 23 Street Hialeah, FL 33010

Principal Mr. Rafael Villalobos

Email

TBD

Fax TBD

MSID: 5056

Region: North

Voting District: 4

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: No

Website

1411 N. W. 14 Avenue Miami, FL 33125

Principal Ms. Makeesha Coleman

Email

(305) 325-1080

Fax (305) 325-1044

MSID: 4070

Region: Central

Voting District: 5

Accredited: No

High Performing: No

Website

3405 N. W. 27 Avenue Miami, FL 33142

Principal Ms. Olga Camarena

Email

(305) 638-8016

Fax (305) 638-8017

MSID: 3000

Region: Central

Voting District: 2

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: No

Website

980 McArthur Causeway Miami, FL 33132

Principal Ms. Michelle A. Pestana

Email

(305) 329-3758

Fax (305) 329-3767

MSID: 4000

Region: North

Voting District: 3

Accredited: No

High Performing: Yes

Website

10207 W. Flagler Street Miami FL 33174

Principal Ms. Victoria Larrauri

Email

(305) 553-9762

Fax (305) 553-9763

MSID: 5048

Region: Central

Voting District: 5

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: No

Website

14301 S. W. 42 Street Miami, FL 33175

Principal Ms. Ana C. Diaz

Email

(305) 207-1027

Fax (305) 207-1897

MSID: 0600

Region: South

Voting District: 8

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: Yes

Website

9790 S. W. 107 Ct. Miami, FL 33176

Principal Ms. Saili Hernandez

Email

(786) 860-5976

Fax (786) 860-5973

MSID: 4037

Region: South

Voting District: 7

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: No

Website

24555 S. W. 112 Avenue Homestead, FL 33032

Principal Ms. Dianet De Armas

Email

(786) 504-3639

Fax (786) 504-3697

MSID: 5836

Region: South

Voting District: 9

Accredited: Yes

High Performing: No

A new era of urban education? – Education

Education

Many educators have come to the conclusion that poverty and language barriers in urban schools are unacceptable excuses for appallingly poor student achievement. To write off the grim achievements of these areas as inevitable is to doom a generation of urban youth to a life without prospects and hopes. The day of reform has come. Saving urban schools entails dismantling the entrenched and patronage-driven school board bureaucracy, holding schools accountable for their work, and encouraging well-planned experiments with charter and contract schools and vouchers. nine0003

By any measure, student achievement in the country’s urban schools is poor. In urban schools, which have a large number of poor students, academic performance is appallingly low. While there are some exceptionally performing schools in almost every urban district, the results for most students and most schools are worse than those in suburban districts. School officials usually attribute the dismal results to the large concentration of poor and non-English speaking students in the cities and the fact that poverty is closely linked to poor academic performance. nine0003

Arthur son of Henry VII

At the Brookings City Education Conference last May, sponsored by the Brown Center for Educational Policy, scholars and school principals agreed that the city’s schools are in need of a massive renovation. The new wave of school reform now under way is rejecting the idea that the defeat of a large proportion of poor children in urban areas is inevitable. To accept the current level of underachievement of poor children in urban public schools is to send most of the rising generation to a life without hope. Discussions at the conference, to be published early next year as the second volume of the Brookings Papers on Education Policy, looked at the prospects for various changes to the education system, including the introduction of charter schools, private contracts and vouchers. . nine0003

City School Achievement

City schools have 24 percent of all US public school students, 35 percent of poor students, and 43 percent of minority students. In a large study of urban education, Education Week concluded that most fourth graders living in U.S. cities cannot read and understand simple children’s books, and most eighth graders cannot use arithmetic to solve practical problems. Slightly more than half of students in major cities fail to graduate from high school in the usual four years, and many of those who do are ill-prepared for higher education or work. According to the editors of Education Week, performance in schools with high levels of poverty is worse, but poverty is not the only reason for poor performance: for some reason, simply being in a city school seems to lower performance. Students in urban schools, where most children are poor, are more likely to perform poorly on tests than their peers who attend high poverty schools outside the city. Most likely, in urban public schools, poor students. Urban Catholic school students from similarly disadvantaged backgrounds outperform their public school peers and are much less likely to drop out. nine0003

On tests conducted by the federally funded National Assessment of Educational Progress, students in high-poverty schools in cities lag far behind everyone else. As shown in Figure 1, 63 percent of grade 4 students in out-of-town schools across the country achieve a basic level of reading compared to 43 percent of students in urban schools. In high poverty schools in urban districts, only 23 percent of fourth graders meet this minimum standard. In some states, the gap between urban and non-urban areas is even larger (see Figure 2). Even more surprising, however, are the large disparities between students in schools with high levels of poverty in urban and suburban areas. Poor children in urban schools are much less likely to achieve baseline performance on NAEP tests than poor children who do not live in cities. nine0003

Some Contributing Factors

Urban education suffers from many problems, but the biggest one is the spread of dense areas of poverty where multiple social ills converge. The correlates of poverty—poor health, inadequate housing, high crime rates, broken families, substance abuse—create an environment in which heroic effort is needed to maintain hope for the future and a willingness to work hard for deferred benefits. In some cities, such as East St. Louis, Illinois and Camden, New Jersey, Detroit, New Orleans, Hartford, Miami, Atlanta, Cleveland and Dayton, more than 40 percent of children live in poverty. Schools may provide health services, adult education, and many other programs to help children and their families, but in the end, their primary responsibility is to provide children with a quality education; if they don’t, no other institution will. For children living in poverty, effective schools are critical; schools are their last hope for a better life. Schools cannot create economic activity or jobs; they can teach children the knowledge and skills they need to improve their life prospects. nine0003

City schools do not live up to this fundamental expectation. Not only are their numbers startlingly poor, but in many areas school buildings are in disrepair, materials are scarce, and teachers’ salaries are not competitive with neighboring suburbs. Due to often poor working conditions and uncompetitive wages, urban districts have trouble attracting and retaining highly qualified teachers. At the national level 39.5 percent of science teachers do not have higher or secondary education in science, and 34 percent of mathematics teachers do not have basic or additional education in mathematics. In urban areas, the figures are even higher. For example, in urban schools where half or more of the students are poor, 45 percent of math teachers have neither a major nor a minor in math.

What is Queen Elizabeth’s favorite color?

The large bureaucracies in charge of the city’s schools seem incapable of effective management, even though they have the resources to repair their buildings and pay higher salaries. School bureaucracies in big cities often seem to have self-serving strategies that protect administrative positions rather than children. They have mastered the art of continuous reform, loudly proclaiming the latest initiative, even though these announced reforms do not lead to significant changes in children’s educational outcomes. The history of these school systems raises suspicions that additional resources will be absorbed into dubious one-time programs and administrative costs without any impact on what happens in the classroom. nine0003

Many school reformers believe that the current system of government is unable to improve the performance of students from poor areas of the city or create schools that can successfully teach poor children. City schools continue to operate on the assumption that there is one best way to solve every problem and that those who work in central offices know best. Regardless of who is the superintendent or who is a member of the school board, administrators in the central office control the budget, hire and assign staff, and issue directives to schools. Important decisions are made in the central office, not in the school. Compliance with rules and regulations is valued more than performance. Those closest to the children – principals and teachers – lack initiative by nature. Urban school systems do not like the principle of student or teacher choice of destination; they prefer a system where all schools are as identical as possible and where students and teachers are interchangeable like widgets. These systems are characterized by a lack of clear standards, recognition of social support, a lack of accountability, and administrative bloat. The proliferation of federal and state programs, many designed to solve urban problems, has exacerbated bureaucratic tendencies in metropolitan areas, adding new levels of accountability, regulation, and micromanagement. nine0003

A challenge to the urban system

The systemic failure of urban education has provoked various attempts by state and local authorities to change the status quo. In cases where school failure was particularly bad, the state took over some school districts (the most aggressive state was New Jersey, which took control of schools in Newark, Paterson, and Jersey City). In Illinois, the legislature transferred responsibility for the Chicago school system to the mayor. Some districts have hired non-teachers to run the school system. Others have closed schools and rebuilt them with new staff. nine0003

Other promising strategies – charter schools, contracts and vouchers – are based on market principles of competition and choice. Charter schools are public schools that are allowed to operate outside the direct control of any local school board. They are accountable to government agencies and must agree to comply with government standards. Otherwise, they may lose their charter. This is a distinction that immediately distinguishes charter schools from regular public schools, which can fail to meet state standards for many years without any adverse effects on anyone other than children. Jean Allen of the Center for Educational Reform, which keeps a record of charter schools, estimates that more than 50 percent of all charter schools are in urban areas today. The promise of charter schools is a direct exchange: autonomy from the rules in exchange for accountability for results. Some charter schools are regular public schools that have opted out of their school district; others are run by non-profit organizations, parents or teachers. Less than 10 percent are run by commercial organizations such as the Edison Project. A small proportion is run by universities, teacher unions, or other agencies. nine0003

Minnesota passed the first charter law in 1991. By 1998, 34 states had passed laws allowing charter schools. According to the Center for Education Reform, by the end of the 1997/98 school year, about 800 charter schools had been opened with about 166,000 children, and another 400 were approved for opening in the fall of 1998. A typical charter school is small (less than 300 students) and most have a waiting list. Most charter schools are located in Arizona, California, and Michigan, but a significant number also operate in Colorado, Florida, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, and Texas. In some states, weak charter laws ensure that few charter schools will ever open because local school boards have the exclusive right to grant charters. No agency is more hostile to charter schools than local school boards, which rightly view them as unwelcome competition. nine0003

Charter schools have much more freedom than regular public schools, and one way to use this is to create smaller classes than regular schools, usually with fewer resources. Most charter schools are founded by people who have a vision of what makes a school successful, and their visions are many. Some of them are very progressive, others are very traditional. According to an annual study by the Education Reform Center, a quarter of charter schools had a back-to-basics curriculum, and another fifth worked with E. D. Hirsch Core Knowledge Curriculum, which emphasizes a knowledge-rich curriculum. Forty percent of these catered to dropouts or students at risk of dropping out, and one quarter was for gifted and talented youth. nine0003

What is particularly attractive about charter schools is that they are public schools that rely on choice (parents and teachers) and accountability (to government agencies). When a charter school fails – some were closed due to misuse of funds, one in D.C. was closed after a principal attacked a news reporter – the very fact that the charter is terminated is evidence that public officials are serious about their duty to control financial activities. and the school’s academic integrity. nine0003

Given their short history, it is too early to tell if charter schools will improve student test scores or graduation rates. In both urban and suburban areas, local school officials denounce charter schools for taking students and dollars. However, the creation of charter schools often forces regular public schools to act decisively when faced with competition for students, using resources more wisely and focusing on student achievement. Charter schools can be a wake-up call that will push weak school systems to make effective reforms. nine0003

Contracting is another form of competition and choice that can change urban education. Paul T. Hill, Lawrence S. Pierce, and James W. Guthrie, in their book The Reinvention of Public Education, proposed that each public school should have a public agency contract that would allow the individual school to control its budget and staff. At the heart of their argument is the belief that schools succeed when they have an integrative principle, a set of clear goals that describe what makes a school a community and that focus the school on student learning. Under their scheme, schools will be self-governing, making most of the decisions that affect them. Unlike the current urban school system, which seeks to eliminate differences between schools, contracting will encourage schools to pursue their own goals, provided they agree to meet the academic standards set by government agencies. Local school boards love to make contracts, especially when they let them find an agency willing to take charge of children with learning difficulties. Some city districts have contracted for-profit organizations such as the Edison Project to run schools, and some others (Seattle and Riverside, California) are considering contracting as a general reform strategy. About half a dozen commercial organizations and many non-profit organizations offer their services as contractors to school districts. However, in some states – New York City for example – it is actually illegal for the school board to give tuition under contract. nine0003

The proposal that generates the most fervent support and the most violent resistance are vouchers. The original idea for vouchers came from Milton Friedman in 1955, who wanted to break the monopoly of public schools by allowing each family to spend their money on education as they wished. Over the years, voucher proposals have won the support of free-market enthusiasts, but have met with strong resistance from civil servants’ unions and others who prefer the current public education system, run entirely by state institutions. nine0003

In recent years, the voucher debate has shifted in favor of students from low-income backgrounds in the first place. Dozens of privately funded voucher programs operate in the country’s cities. They are designed to stimulate demand for government-funded programs. Currently, the only public voucher programs are in Milwaukee and Cleveland, where low-income students receive public grants to attend private schools, including religious schools. Both programs have been challenged in state courts by the Teachers’ Union, the American Civil Liberties Union, and other plaintiffs who oppose not only the use of public money in non-public schools, but specifically the inclusion of religious schools. June 19In ’98, the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld Milwaukee’s program, including the participation of religious schools, stating that the elective program has a secular purpose, will have the primary effect of promoting religion, and will not unduly confuse church and state. Ultimately, either the Milwaukee program or the Cleveland program will make its way to the US Supreme Court, which will resolve the issue.

Perhaps out of desperation over the deplorable state of city schools, public opinion is shifting towards support for vouchers. According to a Gallup poll, 74 percent of the population were against vouchers at 1993; by 1997, opposition had fallen to 52 percent. Support for vouchers was highest among blacks (72 percent), young people aged 18 to 29 (70 percent), and urban dwellers (59 percent). In a survey by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Research, 57 percent of blacks and 86 percent of blacks aged 36 to 50 approved of vouchers. Blacks with the lowest incomes (less than $15,000) provided the most support (70 percent). ). What’s more, prominent black leaders such as former Democratic Congressman Floyd Flake of New York and former principal Howard Fuller in Milwaukee are advocating no support vouchers, no charter schools, and no other fundamental reforms. nine0003

Fig. 2. Student performance: Largest gap between urban and non-urban areas

Percentage of students who achieved a basic or higher NAEP score by percentage point difference

Source: Education Week. Tables from the 1994 NAEP Reading Test and the 1998 Math and Science Tests have been published.

Direction of education reform

landing of Columbus in the new world

By now, everyone agrees that there is no silver bullet or panacea that will solve the problems of urban schools, but some related strategies are becoming fundamental to long-term change. None of these should be seen as stand-alone, but rather as part of a coordinated effort to redirect urban schooling. nine0003

• City school systems and their states must adopt clear and rigorous academic standards so that everyone knows what students are expected to learn.
• They must have high standards for those who teach in their schools, hiring only those teachers who have an academic specialization in the subject they are going to teach and who have passed the qualifying exam like people in other professions.
• Correct and accurate information about student performance must be made available to the public. This information should come from tests and assessments that determine what children should know and be able to do, not from norms that simply determine average performance. One way to do this is to give school districts access to their NAEP scores in reading, math, and science. nine0082
• Districts that lacked funds for capital repairs and teacher salaries should receive them. Those suffering from mismanagement and misallocation of resources need management reform.
• Individual public schools should have much more control over resources and staff. Academic standards should be set by city or state officials, but the school should have the power to determine how to meet the standards, who to hire, where to buy materials, services, and meals, and how to manage its schedule and organization, so as long as it provides satisfactory educational results. nine0082
• Schools must be held accountable for student achievement. Public officials must review the educational and financial performance of schools and be prepared to rebuild failing schools, suspend charters, and do whatever is necessary to ensure that persistent failure is unacceptable.