[mywittyname]

I support free choice in education because it's fair and gives poor students with dedicated parents a chance to get a great education.

I oppose private, for profit charter schools because they are notorious for corruption and poor education in both the college and K-12 sectors.

There are regions where parents can choose the public school their kids attend. My home city does exactly that and is home to some top-notch magnet schools which have graduated several famous individuals.

[brownbat]

> I oppose private, for profit charter schools because they are notorious for corruption and poor education in both the college and K-12 sectors.

I've heard the same complaints about corruption in teachers unions and poor education at urban non-charters. Everyone has their own examples for each side of the argument.

I can never tell how much of the pro- or anti- charter allegations are politically motivated or real science.

Best option I have is to rely on actual research. Stanford provides some periodic in depth studies of school performance, and has found that "across 41 regions, urban charter schools on average achieve significantly greater student success in both math and reading."

http://urbancharters.stanford.edu/news.php

That's heavily caveated. There are regional variances. Maybe charters don't outpace peers outside of urban environments. Still, it's enough for me not to dismiss them out of hand.