A New Study Reveals Much About How Parents Really Choose Schools

I am not sure I understand the article or the findings or whats it's trying to claim.

My oldest son is in a charter school the most hotly debated one of them: Success Academy. Its biggest problem is not attracting kids but building more schools and making sure they keep getting funding. His school is in Williamsburg and some people come from upper east to attend the school (the kids meet at 7.30)

Furthermore of course distance is always going to be an issue for some but I frankly don't see it in real life as most kids don't get to choose at all.

Maybe there is something I am missing.

> Poorer families care more about other factors — and less about academics. The study split families up into thirds based on the median income in their census tract. What they found was that the lowest-income New Orleans families were even more likely to pick schools that were close by, that offered extended days, and that had football and band in high school — and, conversely, they had a weaker preference for schools based on test scores.

Are we convinced that choosing schools by their test scores is the best way to choose schools?

The researchers started with a simple premise. Charter schools deliver equality only if parents prefer schools with higher test scores. Clearly some parents don't.

I can't imagine a universe where a better football program actually ends up being a wiser choice for your child than better test scores. Does anyone think we're better off, on average, even considering football to be more important? It just seems like test scores being more important is far and away the right answer.

So for me, the real question is, is there a way to convince parents that test scores are really all that matters without resorting to full-blown jingoism? More precisely, do we have to coerce the idea that test scores matter more than football?

Effective education systems have all sorts of coercion, and the most successful ones tend to treat test scores as the #1 priority. German high school students are tracked into different tiers of educational attainment. German laws restrict the ability of private schooling to provide an alternative to the national system's decision, "Test scores are important, your child is stupid, and he's going to become an apprentice." Anecdotally, I've learned that some Korean parents track their poor-performing daughters into performance arts (i.e., playing violin and singing). And in my top-ranked public high school, we ghettoize students into honors/non-honors starting Freshman year. My takeaway from these high-performing scholastic environments: the child doesn't choose how important test scores are. The system chooses for them, and it chose "test scores are important."

If charter schools are to succeed, and indeed any objective educational reform, I tend to agree with the implied argument of these researchers. Test scores are more important. Now, what do we do with the people who disagree?