Charter Schools Against the Odds, edited by Paul Hill of the University of Washington, is available online at the Koret Task Force site. “A profoundly hostile regulatory environment” makes it hard for charter schools to reach their full potential, Hill writes.

The three greatest barriers to charter school development are poorly crafted charter laws, inequitable funding, and the failure of many authorizers — school districts and other government agencies that approve charter applications and oversee schools — to take their responsibilities seriously.

I met Hill yesterday at the authors event at the National Association of Charter School Authorizers conference. He was promoting Charter Schools Against the Odds, I was pushing Our School and Steven Wilson, a veteran of early ventures into school management, was talking about Learning on the Job: When Business Takes on Public Schools. Diane Ravitch, author of author of Left Back: A Century of Battles Over School Reform, gave Wilson’s book a great plug:

Learning on the Job is a fair-minded, thoughtful, and deeply informed analysis of private education management organizations, which are assuming an increasingly important role in American public education. Steven Wilson has emerged from the trenches to give a balanced and perceptive critique of their promise–and their problems too.

Tomorrow I’m speaking on leadership in charter schools at the League of Colorado Charters conference in Denver. And trying to sell some copies of Our School, of course.

Same-sex education is OK with Uncle Sam.

Until now, single-sex classes have been allowed in only limited cases, such as gym classes and sex education classes.

The new rules will allow same-sex education anytime schools think it will improve students’ achievement, expand the diversity of courses, or meet kids’ individual needs.

Enrollment must be voluntary. And any children excluded from the class must get a “substantially equal” coed class in the same subject, if not a separate single-sex class.

Districts can also offer an entire school for one gender without doing the same for the other gender, as long as there is a coed school that provides substantially the same thing.

Women senators led the push to allow same-sex classes, though some feminists are now complaining.

Update: California’s brief flirtation with all-girls and all-boys programs flopped, reports the San Francisco Chronicle. Six programs were tried; five closed within two years.

A Ford Foundation study in 2001 concluded that the experiment had been a failure — not because single-sex education as a concept was bad, but because the programs were often badly carried out, with teachers poorly trained in gender issues and little state funding.

The researchers from Berkeley, San Diego and Toronto concluded that the schools had closed too soon for them to know if girls and boys benefited from the separate classrooms. They did, however, interview more than 300 participants and found that gender stereotypes were often reinforced under California’s program.

I’m dubious about single-sex education, though I’d like to see experiments with boy-oriented classes taught by male teachers. There may be a case for single-sex classes in middle school, when hormones aren’t under control and students are easily distracted.

The Ben Franklin is the theme of this week’s Carnival of Homeschooling, hosted by Beverly Hernandez.

Why Homeschool is hosting the Carnival of Kid Comedy.

When the kids go off to college, parents don’t just lose their nestlings. Often, they lose the friends made at soccer games, Scouts and PTA meetings, writes Laura Sessions Stepp in the Washington Post.

It’s all the things that aren’t there anymore,” says Anny Rosenthal, a single mom of two living in Bethesda. “It’s the Cub Scouts, the Girl Scouts, the basketball team. . . . With each stage, you say ‘We’ve gotta stay in touch’ but you don’t.”

Don’t these people make friends at work? It sounds like they need to get a life — of their own.

When my daughter went off to college, I realized that I missed her friends hanging around the house. After all, I wasn’t going to lose touch with my daughter but I wasn’t going to see much of her friends. With the help of e-mail, she’s stayed in touch with almost all of the old crowd. I see them occasionally when they’re in town, which is not that often. Nearly everyone went away to college. Only a few settled in the area after graduation.

Philadelphia’s drop-out rate is much higher than the district had admitted: Only half of students who start ninth grade graduate in four years; after six years, only about 62 percent earn a diploma, according to Johns Hopkins researchers. The rate is much worse for Latino and black students, especially males.

Female students graduate on time at higher rates, and the gender gap was nearly 15 percentage points between 2000 and 2003.

Latino males have the lowest on-time graduation rate of any group in the city: 29.3 percent to 38.2 percent.

Students attending large neighborhood high schools in low-income areas are much more likely to drop out than students attending magnet or vocational schools.

Philadelphia had claimed a 68 percent graduation rate.

At a high-poverty school in Southern California, middle-school students who ace the algebra final get cold cash, reports CBS News.

The student scoring highest on a final algebra test will get $250, while the person who finishes 15th gets $25. It’s called “Algebra Palooza.”

An attorney turned education reformer came up with the idea and the money. Test scores are up in algebra and he’s expanding to history and English.

Via School Me.

I said Ken De Rosa of D-Ed Reckoning would write more on why constructivism doesn’t work. He has. See part 1, part 2, part 3 and part 4.

Natalie Solent looks at reasons why constructivism (aka “discovery, experiential, problem-based or inquiry learning” ) remains popular despite lack of results. She thinks people who were good at school are generalizing from their own ah-hah! experiences, forgetting the non-ah-hah! moments and flattering themselves that they figured things out without help. Also, she says, “they don’t want to look bossy.”

But they’re plenty bossy when they teach prospective teachers, writes Tin Drummer.

I’ll be talking about my book, Our School, at 9 and 10:30 am, more or less, on Tuesday, Oct. 24 at the National Association of Charter School Authorizers conference in San Diego. I’ll talk on charter school leadership after lunch on Thursday, Oct. 26 at the League of Colorado Charter Schools Conference in Denver. I’ll have some time in Denver to get together with readers and/or bloggers. We’re not leaving till Saturday.

If you’d like an autographed copy of the book, e-mail me at joanne at joannejacobs dot com. It makes a lovely gift for that teacher, parent or student in your life. Or you can click on the ad and order it from Amazon.

Virtual science labs where students never touch a beaker, Bunsen burner or pithed frog, are becoming a common way for students to learn science. Online labs are cheaper than setting up labs in small schools and provide a wider range of experiments. But do students learn as much in online labs? From the New York Times:

When the Internet was just beginning to shake up American education, a chemistry professor photographed thousands of test tubes holding molecular solutions and, working with video game designers, created a simulated laboratory that allowed students to mix chemicals in virtual beakers and watch the reactions.

. . . In the years since, that virtual chemistry laboratory — as well as other simulations allowing students to dissect virtual animals or to peer into tidal pools in search of virtual anemone — has become a widely used science teaching tool. The virtual chemistry laboratory alone has some 150,000 students seated at computer terminals around the country to try experiments that would be too costly or dangerous to do at their local high schools.

But some say students need hands-on work to learn science. The College Board denies Advanced Placement status to classes with no-hands labs, but is reconsidering that decision. Online students have higher pass scores on the AP exam than students who’ve experienced hands-on labs. Online students may be more motivated to study science, however.