“Researchers found that the greatest negative impact to learning occurred in the window between when closings were announced and the actual closing occurred. Typically, announcements were made in January, six months before schools closed.

Once students began studies in their new environments, they largely made up for lost time and performed on par with the control group selected by researchers, meaning they did no better than before.”

Ouch. As I understand, when schools are closed in NYC, there’s sometimes a phase-out period of LONGER than Chicago’s six months. (True of Bayard Rustin HS, wherein DOE stopped taking new 9th graders. Not sure re Elementary schools. And the Chicago study looked at K-8′s, not high schools.)

Seems like a time window in which student — not to mention teacher — morale, motivation, and performance, are at risk for sinking. “The school board changed policies during the 2006 school year in part to address some of the concerns. Instead of closing schools, it moved to turn around weak schools by firing and replacing staff.” Ouch again, but at least Chicago used data, not dogma, and changed the policy. Still waiting for same in New Yawk.

If I can piggyback on your comment above, there are a number of school buildings wherein the TPS and the Charter BOTH want Rooms to Grow. Class size is a part of it, but not the only metric. (I too am looking forward to the data. Anecdotally, I understand it to be the OTHER way round — smaller Charter class sizes, bigger TPS sizes.) Further, in some catchment zones, the TPS kids are getting turned away because the charter pulls from farther afield. Worse than a zero-sum game. It’s convoluted.