File talk:Charter School Performance Study (2009).svg

I've nominated this for a deletion debate, for stating more than what the source material allows, interjecting POV and original research in its interpretation.

First off, charter schools ARE public schools, so the labels you have chosen are nonsensically contrasting the identical. The actuate term used in the source material is traditional public school (TPS). More importantly, you’ve misrepresented the source data from page 44, table 9, labeled: “Table 9: Market Fixed Effects – Percentage of Charter Schools by Significance”. The CREDO study repeatedly states that it is not comparing charter schools to any actual traditional publics schools, but rather it’s comparing charter schools to heuristically adjusted virtual TPS. In other words, it’s comparing charter schools to purely theoretical schools, these are not public schools that actually exist, but your bar graph gives this impression. Understanding this distinction is vital, as that portion of the study’s validly is unpinned by the assumption that educational performance gains scale equally and linearly at all levels and demographics. As this is a controversial assumption, if this is incorrect then the demographic virtual modeling adjustment would also be inaccurate.

http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/MULTIPLE_CHOICE_CREDO.pdf

“The analysis employs a statistical technique, fixed effects, which is applied to each pair of charter and virtual schools to remove all the effects that are shared and constant over time. The average growth of students in each charter school is then computed relative to the average results of their virtual twins.” –page 43

“This finding says nothing about how well the local traditional schools are doing; it merely assesses the expectation that whatever the level, charters serving the same population should produce results at the same level.” –page 44 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.78.72.18 (talk • contribs)

The problem, besides of not correctly filing a deletion request, is that this is not really a valid deletion rationale on Commons. IMO, you should raise these concerns on the Wikipedia-pages where this graph is used. I expect, they will then either simply remove it from the articles (making deletion on Commons easier) or create a corrected version of this graph which then can replace the current version. I will therefore remove the incomplete deletion-tag and replace it by a fact-warning-tag, which is more appropriate for the subatance of your complaint. --Túrelio (talk) 20:26, 16 May 2013 (UTC)