The Washington State Charter Schools Commission met last week to "consider how it can keep monitoring the independent public schools while making plans to dismantle itself" (it also suspended applications for new charter schools).  The commission finds itself in this strange position after the state Supreme Court, controversially, ruled in September that charter schools are unconstitutional.

Some lawmakers are considering ways to counteract the ruling, and the state Attorney General has filed a Motion for Reconsideration with the court.

In the meantime, we'll continue to look at data and research on charter schools. Last month we looked at a series of studies showing charter schools especially benefit low-income, minority and English-Language-Learner students in urban areas (our blog post is here and podcast here). Today our focus is on Los Angeles, where the LA Unified School District (LAUSD) has a mix of traditional, magnet and charter schools.

Test scores released by LAUSD in September showed that while city charter schools outperformed traditional public schools, magnet schools outperformed them both.

A bit of background: Magnet schools are run by the school district; charter schools are independently operated, but still part of the public-school system. LA's magnet schools specialize in a variety of areas, including science, technology and math (STEM), business, liberal arts, and gifted students. The magnet schools for the gifted require students to meet certain academic standards, while the other magnet schools are open to all students (based on a points system).

The test score results set off what the LA Times described in an editorial as a "playground shouting match," with some charter school opponents apparently using the data to try to discredit charters.

There's no doubt the LA magnet schools' results are impressive and reflect well on the magnets' quality of education, but the results don't prove that charter schools aren't also beneficial for students. Charter schools still scored better than traditional public schools and, as the LA Times reports,

"Among students who took the test in charters, 83% were from low-income families; in the district, 79%; and in magnets, 69%."

As has been extensively researched and reported, a significant achievement gap exists between low-income students and their peers (see here for an example). With research showing that charter schools benefit low-income students the most, there's a good case to be made for having charter schools as part of the public-education mix.