Variety in the modes of education is a good thing: not every pupil is effectively educated in a public school.
But, I can't help but think this is merely stealth privatisation of education: a profit making exercise. That it might actually have positive outcomes for pupils is a happy accident.
while it's great there's robust debate (elsewhere in this thread), gven all the other self-serving things this govt has done, I think we can take this as unlikely to go well for 'the rest of us'...
The article points out that a large number of schools in the UK are charter schools (40% primary, 80% secondary), but doesn't then say if that is a positive or not.
One size doesn't fit all in education, which Seymour points out. But how do charter schools address this issue?
One size doesn't fit all. That's why all kids should have an hour of reading, an hour of writing, and an hour of maths every day (which takes up like 70% of the learning time available).
I'm all for innovation in education, but surely there is plenty of international data to give just a little bit of information on the positives of charter schools.
I nice comparative analysis would go a long way, but no.
Oh sure, that's what the 3 horsemen are doing, but the schools could play this too... It's risky, but every teacher I've met had indicated things have been bad for decades