Daley-backed schools not standouts, study says

Check out the above article by Northwestern University student Anthonia Akitunde about the new report that Renaissance 2010 schools are doing no better, and in many cases worse, than neighborhood schools.

"Katheryn Hayes, communication director of RSF, said the report was affirming because it found that RSF-funded schools were 'performing equally well to students in CPS schools' very early and serving students in the same income bracket and ethnicity."

But we were promised "dramatically better" schools, not schools performing "equally well" as the schools CPS claimed were failing so horribly that they had to be closed. 

RSF spinning away

Today Catalyst reported that the Renaissance Schools Fund (RSF) has issued its own analysis of the report -- which RSF paid for but apparently does not feel was spun positively enough.    

The RSF analysis includes data from 2008 which was not included in the commissioned report, and which RSF claims show an upward trajectory of achievement.

Catalyst points out, "These measures, however, use a controversial approach that compares Renaissance schools to nearby neighborhood schools. The method does not control for the background characteristics of individual students."

Most researcher would consider such comparisons to be invalid.  

By the way, I originally referred to the report as a University of Chicago study. It is actually a study by SRI International with a U of C co-writer, and is available on the web site of the Consortium on Chicago School Research. 

Funders liking these results?

Akitunde's story says that the results will be used in RSF's grantmaking decisions. Let's see if the funders are as "results oriented" with Renaissance 2010 as they claimed to be when they stopped funding LSC advocacy and CPS watchdog groups.