Diary of a Teacher in Poland

Look at poor Joker, spending the entire day fantasising about other people's qualifications. It's okay, I understand entirely that spending your days lumping sucks, especially when you rank even lower on the social and salary scale than a truck driver. I'm quite happy with my position at an international school, not least because it pays a comparable salary to the UK while having half the living costs.

The fact that you have to bust your ass daily for a few bucks an hour while I get paid very comfortably obviously burns you inside. Must be the source of your resentment towards others, and explains why you spend your days threatening to assault people on Reddit, LOL!

And yeah, I know one guy who worked 10 years in Saudi Arabia. He earnt around 80-90k a year USD, accomodation and flights were paid for, and private lessons covered his in country expenses. It's not for everyone, but the cash is there.

Gee, I wouldn't even get out of bed in the morning for that kind of pocket change... :)

Why does the salary matter? Wages in Poland are lower than in other places, but so is the cost of living.

He's just another Trumpanzee, obsessed with lying about his net worth in order to cover up the fact that he's living on the breadline. A worthy companion to our resident Welfare Queen.

On average? Never.

washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2018/03/05/how-much-or-little-teachers-earn-state-by-state/?utm_term=.88e8975b739c

Because it establishes your pecking order in society; your socioeconomic status...


Wages don't matter in any country unless you're at the top 1% (perhaps even .1%). Unless you're earning like $150, 200k+ a year your salary doesn't matter and even then it's not really all that much because due to globalization costs for housing, cars, gasoline, electronics, luxury goods, etc are all roughly the same. Whether you're making 15 20k zloty a month in Poland or $100k a year in the US you're still a slave unless you have investments. The problem is that people, including sadly now Poles as well, save less and less and live beyond their means. They live for the moment without thinking about the future. Just look at the dwindling home ownership rates. Most people in the world, Americans and Poles included, are one sickness, one emergency away from loosing everything because they don't have any investments, any money saved. People need to learn to have multiple sources of income - not just their day job. Whether I'm laying in bed or watching tv or even typing on PF i'm making money from several different sources and I hope to teach my generation and the youngins' to do the same. People think they're going to be comfortable just because they and their spouse are bringing in $100k+ a year. Yet as soon as something happens - one of them gets sick, loses their job, etc their dream comes crashing and before long they're no longer homeowners and now have to rent a crumby overpriced apartment...


In my suburb absolutely. Look up average teacher salaries in suburbs like lake bluff, lake forest, highland park, etc. I would know - I went there to high school. Actually they protested a few years back because the average salary was only around 100k so they bumped it up to 120k. Public schools in wealthy white suburbs pay basically double what they do in CPS. The superintendent of our high school makes $250k a years but that requires far more exerpeicne than a teacher. Most teachers will teach in Chicago for 3-4 years then move to the suburbs because the salary is way higher and they don't have to deal with ghetto idiot kids. Admins are paid $150k+

On average? Do all your teachers have 20+ years under their belt? Did you include benefits? Sorry, but I find that very hard to believe without any further details.


Not if you compare yourself with someone from another country (or even another state here in the US). Some opiate addicted hick from Kentucky probably receives more in gubermint help than a Chinese worker earns in a month. Does that mean the junkie is higher up in the pecking order? Nope.

Besides: do you really believe that your socioeconomic status is higher just because you have a few more bucks in your pay check every month? From my personal experience, people with less money are usually much happier than the rich ones. A Koch, a Mercer or a DeVos may have billions, but they can't even leave their home alone for a quick walk around the block. Higher status? Absolutely not. In my eyes they are poor feckers socially. I pity them.


That's why most civilized countries have some sort of single payer system...

This thread is proof that only the absolute dregs of society would even consider wasting their useless time on this pathetically sad forum

Well then read this one about lake forest which is one of the more pricey north shore suburbs.
patch.com/illinois/lakeforest/bp--22003-per-student-feeds-lake-forest-highs-insatiad2c175cc5a

Campus Administrative Office, starting with "Superintendent" Michael Simeck, who commands a starting base salary of $250,000 a year, down substantially from that of his predecessor Harry Griffith, who was paid an astounding salary of $362,339

For administrators, LFHS has a "Principal" ($195,817), an "Assistant Principal" ($182,091), a "Director of Personnel and Instruction" ($112,020), and an "Athletic Director" ($141,862).
Teachers make on average $120k with tenured (15 20+ years experience) make $150k+ with some even getting to the magic 200k figure. They also have an amazing retirement - they retire around like 55 or 60 or something (not sure the exact age) and continue to receive basically the same exact salary as when they were a teacher. Also, if a person has had numerous positions - say they started out as a teacher, then became a principal, then a superintendent they collect a pension from all 3 positions - not just their last one. This is also the same for police, fire, university teachers all over Illinois. Even people who work in the courts like a clerk may only make $40k a year but they get to retire at 55 60 and they get an $70 $80k+ a year pension.

You can also read about the recent strike they had to raise the average wage from 100k a year to 120k. And no most of them have far less experience. Only the tenured ones have 15-20+ years experience. My biology teacher for example only had like 2-3 years teaching experience and only a bachelor's. The vast majority of the teachers however do hold atleast a masters. It is very common for a teacher to work their first 2-3-4 years in Chicago because they'll get a job right away and then move to the suburbs once they have that experience because the salaries are almost double and you don't have stupid ghetto kids that refuse to learn and prefer to have fist fights and stab each other with pens and pencils. Not to mention the regular shootings occurring after school... I remember when I lived in the city and went to school there there would literally be a guy i think the p.e. teacher l telling the kids 'hurry up now - go home, you don't want to stay around and get shot' lol no bs dude


Yet that Chinese person probably gladly leave his job and come to the US if given the opportunity. Go to any college campus in the US and you'll be surprised how many Asian, especially Chinese kids their are. Actually my new business partner who I'm working with on a brand new venture just came from China like 5

years ago and is doing whatever he can to bring the rest of his family here.


Well yes - that's the whole definition of 'socioeconomic'....

Socioeconomic status (SES) is an economic and sociological combined total measure of a person's work experience and of an individual's or family's economic and social position in relation to others, based on income, education, and occupation.

Therefore, by definition, if you have a higher income/more money you have a higher socioeconomic status than a person with a lower income/less money...

That's just a silly expression to make it easier for people to look down on their neighbor. In my eyes you only have more money, but not a higher status.

They are talking about administrative positions, not teachers.

Perhaps not 'status' overall, but according to the definition of 'socioeconomic status' yes, more money relative to the person next to you equals a higher socioeconomic status.

One of the reasons why Illinois is doing so poorly is due to these high salaries and even more so pensions. but the democrats will never change the system. in fact it's quite the opposite - they regularly threatened to not come in to work and refuse to teach the children until they get a raise, earlier retirement, etc. that's been ruining Illinois for decades yet the democrats refuse to budge on this and only wish to make it worse. that's why they're fighting the entrance of charter schools because they'd be a huge competitor and they don't have to follow all the political b.s. surrounding teacher salaries and pensions.

I'm not saying a teacher shouldn't get compensated fairly - far from it. But for teachers to refuse to teach their class until their salary is bumped up from 100k, which already puts them in the top quintile, to 120k is just ridiculous. That teacher clearly cares more about personal greed than the welfare of their students and should be sacked immediately. Yet that never happens. There's teachers who have beat students, said racist ****, been drunk/high on the job and yet they still won't ever get fired.

[quote=TheOther]They are talking about administrative positions, not teachers.@ TheOther[/quote
It's the same earnings for teachers....

this compares lake forest (same suburb as article above) to the rest of Illinois - these are a bit out of date as the average salary is no longer 100k, 107k but closer to 120k... regardless just about every north shore suburban teacher is bringing in six figures

illinoisreportcard.com/school.aspx?source=teachers&source2=teachersalary&Schoolid=340491150160001

article about the strike
illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2012/09/lake-forest-teacher-salaries-average-106-k-they-still-strike.html

According to an article published in the Chicago Tribune today (Sept. 12) by Lisa Black and John Keilman, the average base salary of the teacher at LFHS is $106,500, compared with a statewide average of about $65,000

chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-teachers-strike-suburbs-20120912,0,3276944.story

That was my point. I'm questioning the validity of such a rating system. It serves no purpose other than fueling the rat race and greed, and it is the root cause for the slow destruction of our society as we see it right now.


Okay. Wonder what teachers in other suburbs or counties think about that.

What are charter schools, Dirk?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_schools_in_the_United_States

So there's 3 types of schools in the US for grade/high school. Public, private (Catholic, Lutheran, nondenominational but still private meaning you have to pay to go there, various elite academies that also have dorms for international students, etc), and charter which is like a mix of pulic and private - it's free but academically rigorous, the way kids are taught, the way teachers are held accountable resembles more of a private school. Charter schools are like the hot new thing now because they are public, meaning they are free, but they tend to be far more academically rigorous than public schools. Charter schools are non religious and although they are public the teachers generally don't belong to a union so you don't have the political bullshit as with public schools where whenever it comes time to renew the teaching contract the teachers all leave and the kids sit at home because no one wants to teach them. The teachers at charter schools are also far more scrutinized and can easily be fired, unlike public schools in which a teacher can do some truly egregious things and still not be fired. A teacher can come in drunk, beat a student, or not show up to work for a week and not even call in and they won't be fired. Short of like raping a kid you won't be let go in a public school. It's pretty bad... If you're a teacher that truly loves your profession and actually wants to teach people because you like the job than charter schools are the best - imo even better than many private schools. They're especially great for families who can't afford a private school and there's often a lottery system to get into them because of the demand. Unfortunately though it's luck of the draw so while you can have a really bright young kid that wants to learn you're number may not be drawn and hence that kid will end up going to a public school full of gangs, teachers who don't care, and shootings that happen literally right outside the school. Many charter schools score even higher than much of the private ones despite being open to everyone (although again it's a lottery system due to the demand) and certainly better than every public school with the exception of perhaps 1 or 2 public high schools that require an entrance test to get in. However, for teachers that simply look at their jobs as an easy career to make decent money and have a great early retirement and fat pension than charter schools are not where you want to be.


There's nothing wrong with greed it's when it takes over your life that it's a problem. There's a difference between working to provide for your family and spending time with them and being a workaholic telling yourself that you're doing a good thing by being a provider yet your wife never sees her husband and your kids never see their dad - that's a bad thing.

You realize though that it's media that promotes most of this stuff - especially MTV, garbage shows about the Kardashians, social media, etc. Everyone can't be young, rich, and famous but it's drilled into our minds that what we should be. Even more so now we're told that our religion, our customs, our nationalities are all social constructs and hence totally meaningless. It's implied that even our families aren't all that important.

Im being paid right now, fool.

Who ever said I worked by the hour? You make up so many lies!

Anytime you want to compare apples and oranges let me know, but you will embarrass yourself even more.


Making up lies again huh? What a sad little man you are Delph, all lies and cant back it up, typical coward. I dont have a reddit account, just more lies!

Over 16K posts and he has the gall to question my forum usage?


Not for you to worry about because you will never be able to work there.Lol

Our whole economic system is based on competition and unlimited growth. Earn more ... buy more ... earn more ... buy, buy, buy! The media are just a tool in this process. People tend to forget though that resources are limited and that unlimited growth is called cancer, which is usually deadly.

I believe that a high salary is certainly a "nice-to-have", but it is by no means essential for a happy life. It's actually the opposite: the more you have, the more you want and the more you are worried that you could lose everything.


That's debatable. The main problem with them is that there is no real public oversight so fraud is encouraged (which is why DeVos loves them so much).

Delph if you want to teach in Chicago public schools, these are the kind of people you'll have to teach - youtube.com/watch?v=eK_DuVNPli4

Look on the bright side though - 2-3 years at 50-60k a year, then move to the burbs to get 100k+ and a fat retirement. just don't get shot in your first few years and be conscious of what colors and brands you wear in certain areas...


A high salary doesn't mean much. Even if you're making 100k a year, you're left with 60-70k after taxes which is a totally average lifestyle especially in a major city.

poor, middle class, and rich all have 1 thing in common - they all want more.... so there really isn't much difference in that aspect..

I don't make an astronomical salary from my main day job yet I have a higher net worth than most doctors living next to me making double. why? because I invest my money and don't live beyond my means. I have used cars that i got super cheap and even my sunday ride will never lose value because its an antique so it appreciates. i probably have more money in jewelry than cars and all of it is worth more now than what i paid for it. I still advert on craigslist buying peoples jewelry because desperate people sell stuff for a fraction of its worth and its an easy profit for me. I pay myself first and foremost in the form of investments. as soon as I get a check whether its from work, a dividend payment, a remodeling project I finished, residuals from old contracts i sold, bitcoin, or whatever I reinvest it. this allows me to pay a smaller tax rate and keep more of my money. also, if say I lost my day job or say one of my sources of revenue disappeared id still have others.

also not everyone is like that. yes I want a speed boat, but I don't need an ocean going yacht. I want to buy a small prop plane once I near retirement, no need for a learjet. if I wanted to I could get a mortgage and move into a $2 mil home tomorrow. But I'm not going to do that because it's a waste of money and i'm not going to make a bank rich just for borrowing me money. Nor do I aspire to buy a 6,000 sq ft 2 mil home because I hate stairs, it costs a fortune to heat the place, not to mention paying 30k a year in taxes is just throwing money away. Plus the echo is annoying asf especially when you're on the phone. In fact right now i'm selling my house to downsize even though I'm financially better off than when I purchased it.

Honestly I could lose everything I have right now and it wouldn't really matter to me. My knowledge, education and experience is priceless. With what I know I'd be able to rebuild everything so it wouldn't really matter. And most successful entrepreneurs and business people feel the same way. Of course they don't 'want' to lose everything and will protect - but should it happen they're not going to cry over it and shoot themselves because they failed - no they start over again and learn from their **** ups.


If a charter school ***** up they get their charter revoked. and no, charter schools are non-denominational. unlike say a catholic high school, there's no crosses hanging in the classrooms, no mandatory church attendance on Christian holidays, etc. they function much the same way as a public school but are far more strict. the graduation rates for almost every charter school is damn near close to 100% while for CPS - namely the ones in the inner city you have 1/3 kids dropping out or constantly truant. I went to a public school in Chicago - trust me any system is superior to them. I could probably run a superior school in my living room for a few hours a week and i'd get those kids to score higher on their ACT/SAT than the CPS average

There are ongoing attempts by religious organizations to undermine that:
chalkbeat.org/posts/us/2017/07/09/churches-running-charter-schools-the-latest-supreme-court-decision-could-open-the-door-in-some-states


That's where I would disagree with you. How much is 'enough'? You cannot buy happiness with money.


Hence the saying "no falls, no balls"...

Depends on the person. For some people they don't have 'enough' whether it's money, sex, alcohol, food whatever it may be. There's no limit for such persons. For me 'enough' would be whatever the sum is of being able to retire in a nice home in Poland with 2 or 3 cars and sexy girlfriends and not having to worry that my money will run out plus enough to leave a good sum for my kids to give them a boost in life. Hence, 'enough' for me would be probably 4-5 million. I wouldn't really need more.


That's a tired old boring debate by the same people who have nothing better to do than protest kids' saying the pledge of allegiance or using the words 'under God' etc. And this is about the state not wanted to allow a church to open a charter school even though the owner stated he wouldn't teach any religious classes. Charter schools are non denominational by design. And they're far better than any local alternative that's for sure. If you didn't have money for a private school and wanted your kids to get a half decent education, you'd be one of the parents clamoring to get their kids a spot. Unless of course you don't care about your child's education, which many parents do not, then you wouldn't care if they end up a sh1tty public school. Charter schools aren't perfect, but they're a far better alternative than public schools - especially in a place like Chicago, and kids who go there score far far higher on standardized tests than kids from public schools.

Besides, even if religion or theology is taught so what? It helps make a person more well rounded. I went to Jesuit university and each student had to take i believe 2 or even 3 theology classes. and no they didn't involve memorizing Christian prayers. in fact it taught more about other religions than Christianity. consider most people in the world are believers of some sorts it's good to have an idea of what they believe in, understand the theology behind certain practices, how it influences culture, etc.

True, lumpers get paid per load, not per hour. Understandable that you'd be hanging around the dock first thing in the morning.


I'm all for teaching theology on some level. I had a really fascinating course as part of my MA here that went really into Judeo-Christian (incorporating Islam) theology, and how it heavily influences our view of the world. The most interesting and controversial thing was the comparison to modern dictatorships, and how most dictatorships borrow heavily from the Abrahamic religions in one way or another.

I'd actually say one major failing in Polish schools is the absolutely shockingly poor level of religious education, combined with very little knowledge of other religions apart from Catholicism.

@Dirkdiggler,

Greed is NOT good! The Bible calls it one of the seven deadly sins for a good reason. Greed is what turned medicine and law into businesses instead of letting them remain practices where the focus was and should always be people over profit.

Teaching is still a noble calling, until it becomes denegrated by no-nothing Trumpazoids masquerading as guardians of capitalistic freedomLOL

Someone ought to remind our Fearless Leader that with economic freedom comes responsibility, such responsibility as can only come from strict limits.

Idealism costs money. If you're not paying for it, someone else certainly will be. Like it or not, it's the way of the world. And if you can't change it, because you can't, you have to play by those rules.

Downright evil even.

Boring or not, it is a very important discussion for a simple reason. Charter schools are publicly funded, which is why nut jobs like Betsy DeVos can't wait to open their own ones. It's a perfect solution for these Bible thumpers. Spreading their religious beliefs through indoctrination of our kids while at the same time receiving public funds and delivering low quality education. If you allow Christian charter schools and you are okay to fund them with your tax dollars, then you'll also have to accept to pay for Scientology schools and Muslim madrasas. I'm sure you're totally okay with that, right?

I know I'm not. Religion has no place in public schools. Keep it in your churches and Sunday schools, and don't expect me to pay for it.

@delphiandomine

Yeah a lot of people are against teaching religion in school and i understand because most think that a school will only focus on 1 religion and try to indoctrinate their kid and in some cases, especially religious grade schools like catholic schools or the jewish yeshivas yes that's absolutely true. But those kind of schools tend to cater to more religious people. You won't find a kid from a secular or Lutheran or hindu family clamoring to get their son into the local yeshiva. In high school though (i went only 1 year to a private high school rest were public) and in college it was different. While yes, we did spend time learning about the old testament but that was to tie it to Christianity, Judaism, and islam. Most of what we learned was about other religions as there was a fairly accurate assumption that most the kids already knew a lot about Christianity but little about other religions. Just about all liberal arts college require students to take some philosophy and theology classes regardless of major to make them more well rounded. Granted they were basically 101 201 level so most of the info you could get from a Wikipedia article but still it was worth learning. For example, i probably would've never known that Muslims revere Jesus and believe of Mary as a virgin had it not been for those lessons or read parts of the various hindu texts like the rig veda


Then you'd have to make all levels of education free all over the world. The vast majority of people aren't going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and a decade in school if they're not going to end up with a six figure income at the end of the day. And even then you're going to be hard pressed to fill such roles as the amount of people who want to become say a stomach surgeon is going to be limited when there isn't the financial incentives. You wouldn't believe how many educated Poles left for the US, UK, Germany, etc during the PRL years to take a blue collar job. There's people who were dentists, geologists, philosophy professors back in the PRL who left to become painters or carpenters in the US because they saw a more financially secure future. This is now why there were even those recent strikes with nurses and doctors in the state funded hospitals and clinics in Poland. Why would someone spend all those years and all that money studying just to make like $1,000-$1,500 a month as a medical professional in a government hospital? They do private practice more and more now because there simply isn't enough financial reward to be a nurse or doctor at a state facility.

Greed for money isn't good - i agree. I don't think that being ambitious and striving to have a financially secure future for yourself and your family is a bad thing though. Naturally like with everything people take it too far. Also, that's not the only thing people have a greed for - it could be for knowledge, for a woman (lust), to get in better shape, etc. I think of greed more as an extreme focus or devotion to something.

Our society is greedy, both Polish and US, seeing as they're fully globalized western societies. Unfortunately, much of the globalized (which is really just American corporatism being spread around) societies have taken the negative aspects and you see this in Poland now too. People are not as keen to save money - especially the younger generations, there is more impulse shopping (thankfully it's still pretty limited, but nonetheless increasing a bit), the personal small loan industry has rapidly expanded and the rates are even higher than in the US, and there's just a big push to buy buy buy. Poles are very careful though before spending some money. You'll go to one of the big malls on the weekends and you'll see tons and tons of shoppers but you'll notice that many (perhaps most) aren't carrying shopping bags and are just window shopping or will buy like 1 thing only. Unlike the US, you won't see like a group of girls each with like 2 shopping bags on each arm all from different stores. People will buy like 1 pair of shoes or a shirt and that's it. There isn't that like 'shopping spree' mentality. Nonetheless, Poles appreciate luxury brands and they cost the same, if not more due to VAT and the smaller market, than in the US.


Except no one is doing that. There isn't a single charter school (at least in my city or state) that is religious. Not one. And as far as 'low quality education' charter schools consistently outperform public schools - that is fact.

@Polishinvestor,

Guess then by your logic, and I encounter it habitually nearly every day, those opposing the Nazis should justa kept their mouths shut and silently, dutifully gone along with the madness, after all, the "New Order" was the way of the world, so why fight it, huh?

Sorry, mack!! Thinking and feeling humans know there's gotta be a better way, since some of 'em experienced the better way, when greed was reigned in, when the tone in the air was not markets, markets, markets, but instead, a standard for all, teachers, doctors, etc.

No sense rationalizing! Folks went to war over a better way than merely the status quo. Once, the status quo was so much higher than it is today, it's nearly unrecognizable.

When I was in grade school, up through high school, teachers were basically knowledge workers who were expected to know something, to correct faulty grammar at the risk of today's so-called "political correctness", know their stuff backwards, forwards, and inside out. We pupils expected such and parents wouldn't have had it any other way.

Not yet. That was the reason for the lawsuits of some of these religious organizations.


That's a myth:

washingtonpost.com/local/education/charters-not-outperforming-nations-traditional-public-schools-report-says/2013/06/24/23f19bb8-dd0c-11e2-bd83-e99e43c336ed_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.2e979d0a463a

Follow the link to Stanford University and check the items on the right.

Oh please like the Washington compost isn't going to write a biased response on this. They are funded by leftist jeff bezos. I could post a link that shows the opposite - the74million.org/article/exclusive-data-shows-charter-school-students-graduating-college-at-three-to-five-times-national-average

Also I'm talking specifically about Chicago/Illinois specifically - not the entire country. In other areas the situation is different. Let's say your a working class family with 2 kids and you want to send them to the best high school around. Well for 2 kids at $15k-$20k+ EACH an elite private school is out of the question for many, perhaps most, families living in Chicago - especially without any aid. Even if you and your wife make 100k together, after taxes you're left with 75k, 70k, then take out mortage/rent say 25k a year (roughly 2k a month). now you're at 45k 50k leftover for the year for a family of 4 - and that's after just income taxes and rent/mortage.

If you want to send both kids to a private school even on a household gross income of 100k you'll have to feed the whole family with ramen noodles and domino's pizza because that's about all you'll be able to afford after paying tuition for two kids and your rent/mortgage. And some parents do that - there was a news segment of one guy who would collect cans to recycle after work to raise extra money for his kids education. And I'm not even adding bills, insurance, gas, food, property taxes if homeowner, health insurance, etc. And most Chicago families aren't bringing in 100k+ a year i believe the average household income is around 55-60k a year or something with some areas having average incomes as low as 20k.

So that leaves you with 2 options (unless fo course you're able to move specifically for belonging to a good school district - which some low income parents are smart enough to do... unfortunately many households don't care about their child's education. in fact, they purposely even pop out more ghetto muffins to get a bigger welfare check, a larger section 8 apartment, etc.

I'm not saying charter schools are superior to every public school. No not at all. If say i lived in lake Geneva Wisconsin or the surrounding areas i wouldn't consider any option but to send my kid to the local public school because it has very high standards. In Chicago that is not the case - especially inner city, the south side, and west side. Those public schools are God awful and the parents who are interested in their child's education know that. And that's why many of them line up bright an early on enrollment day for the chance to get their kids into a charter school because they know those kids will have a statistically higher chance of graduating and attending college afterwards.

Each state is different too. Chicago has terrible public schools yet go an hour north in Wisconsin and they're wonderful - especially in the small towns, rural areas, and the villages around Lake Geneva was a resort town. In that case there likely wouldn't be any difference between a charter and the local public school. In fact the charter might even be worse since the public school in the lake Geneva district is considered to be a great public school and the average test scores of the students are high.

From center left NPR:
Like previous studies, the one from CREDO concluded that kids in most charter schools are doing worse or no better than students in traditional public schools. About a third, though, are doing better. And that's a big jump from four years ago. The gains among blacks, Latinos and kids whose first language is not English have been impressive and surprising, says CREDO Director Margaret Raymond.

"The fact that we can show that significantly disadvantaged groups of students are doing substantially better in charter school in reading and math, that's very exciting," she says.

More and more charter school students are doing better, Raymond says, because they're getting anywhere from three to 10 extra weeks of instruction compared to their public school counterparts.

"The average charter school student in the United States is benefiting from additional days of learning," she says, "compared to where they were four years ago and compared to traditional public schools they otherwise would've attended.

None of these findings were in dispute. But when Jeanne Allen looked at the study, it upset her.
Nonetheless:
"The way that CREDO has manipulated data and made conclusions about policy based on that data is absolutely 'un-credible,' " she says.

npr.org/2013/07/16/201109021/the-charter-school-vs-public-school-debate-continues

Guess why I told you to click on the link to Stanford University. You believe they are biased, too, I know. Tell me why one of the best universities in the world would have an interest to manipulate this data?

FWIW:
The charter schools in my city are all worse than the public ones. They demand constant participation and donations of parents because they are so low on budget.