Pros

According to proponents:

• Charter schools present students and parents with an increasingly diverse array of education options.
  
  
• The competition provided by charter schools forces school districts to improve the performance of their schools in order to attract and retain students and dollars.
  
  
• If managed properly, charter schools serve as laboratories for education experimentation and innovation. The easing of certain regulations can free teachers and administrators to develop and implement new learning strategies.
  
  
• Increased accountability for charter schools means that schools have to perform or risk closure. This extra incentive demands results.

• Because charter schools operate as a business, as well as a learning institution, they are subject to market forces that may eventually force them to close, depriving students of a continuous education.
  
  
• Charter schools sometimes segregate students along racial and class lines and fail to adequately serve students with disabilities or limited English proficiency.
  
  
• Accountability for student performance is difficult to measure and enforce in the burgeoning charter school movement. The usual complications of accurate student measurement are compounded by the often-conflicting demands of the state government’s need for accountability and the marketplace’s desire for opportunity.
  
  
• The emergence of education management organizations as proprietors of charter schools creates “pseudo-school districts” in which decisions are made far removed from the school.