Charter Schools

Brief Background:

The concept of charter schools is simple and succinct. "Allow a group of teachers or other would-be-educators to apply for permission to open a school. Give them dollar for dollar (in actuality-the state provides charter schools with the average amount per pupil spent statewide for operating purposes) what a public school gets for each student but without any strings attached. Free them from the regulations that cripple learning and stifle innovation at so many public schools" (Walsh, 1995, 3). Charter schools are an attractive option in education today for those who are disenchanted with the public school system in the late 1990's. Charter schools are not inclined to radically and fundamentally change the current system and therefore, citizens find these reforms more palatable. Joe Nathan states that, "the charter school movement attempts to promote widespread improvement in public education both by allowing people to create new kinds of schools and by encouraging existing school systems to improve in order to compete effectively with these new schools" (Nathan, 1996,18).

Like privatization or voucher programs, charter schools imply that markets and competition will raise standards in education. However, at the same time, charter schools are an attractive option for school reform because they are still using state funds. Therefore, many educators and administrators of public schools tout charter schools as a reform that will not only help children, but raise the current standards of public education.

History:

The first charter laws were enacted in 1991 in Minnesota. The state authorized eight charter schools with each one having to get permission from the local school boards. Since these first laws, charter schools have increased tenfold across the nation. Minnesota's charter laws have evolved since 1991 allowing for as many as forty charters (Walsh, 1995, 5).

Charter laws vary across the states, some being more lenient than others. In each state the law defines who may apply for a charter. For example, Massachusetts state law currently allows for only twenty five charters. Furthermore, those wanting to start a school can only submit a proposal once a year. In Minnesota however, those wanting to open a charter school can submit a proposal any time during the year. In every case, however, teachers and existing schools can apply (Center For Education Reform). There are clear cut steps to receive charter status.

A proposal must be submitted with clearly defined mission and goal. This includes: solid administrative and financial backing and a comprehensive curricular plan accompanied by a clear assessment plan to measure results.
The proposal must be submitted to one or more of the charter granting bodies in the state (Center For Education Reform).

Since the first charter laws in Minnesota, there are approximately 480 charter schools. The highest concentration of charter schools exists in: Arizona (164), California (109), Michigan (76).

What the advocates say...

Autonomy leads to innovative pedagogical practices that help students flourish. For example, school days, as well as the school year can be longer due to the fact that these schools are not constrained by the bureaucratic limit set by the state. The Renaissance School teaches for 205 days out of the year (Schools at the top of the Hill, 1997). Furthermore, City On A Hill teaches from 7am - 6pm at night (Kass, 1995, 34). Secondly, autonomy allows for teachers to create an innovative learning environment. Innovative teaching styles range anywhere from using public transportation to help children learn math, to holding dance classes conducted in French. Practices such as these can help produce results where an ordinary public school has failed.
Charter schools are held accountable for the results produced within and by the school. Therefore, many times students score above average results in test scores and college entrance exams because great attention is paid to performance outcomes. With a charter grant on the line, these schools must provide better results than public schools (Kass, 1995, 27).
Increased competition will only bring up the standards in public schools. As charter schools produce favorable results more and more families want their children to attend such institutions. Thus, waiting lists grow longer and public schools have to fight to keep students enrolled. Market competition will encourage the public schools to change and improve in order to keep students enrolled.

What critics say:..

Charter schools "will drain funding for traditional schools and leave staff and students unprotected" (Lidsay, 1995, 9).
Charter schools could soon lead to a resegregation of public education. Empirically, charter schools serve low-income and at-risk students who need special attention. Statistics state that these students tend to be minority students. Therefore there is a minority of white students attending schools such as Boston Renaissance Charter (21% White, 60% Black). Furthermore, with random admittance policies, charter schools are admitting students from a pool of children that are mainly minority. As this trend continues and as charter schools become more popular, there is an increased chance that the school systems will become more segregated.
Financial restraints will lead to cutting corners in education. Charter schools are not allotted start-up capital and therefore reducing financial expenditure is always an issue at the forefront of the educators' minds.
Many of the current charter laws are frail (Lindsay, 1995, 11). The weakly constructed and vague charter laws are aimed to appeal to a wide variety of citizens, and in fact they have political punch. These frail laws keep charter schools tightly linked to the district and state school boards therefore, gaining increased leverage with the state and local governments. Secondly, weak laws prevent charter schools from getting started. Conversely, states with strong charter laws like Arizona and Minnesota allow for schools to get off the ground with greater ease. Many of these laws are weak and watered down because of the opposition from teachers' unions and school board authorities who believe these structural reforms to education will drain capital from the existing system (Lindsay, 1995, 9). Will weak legislation result in the future obscurity of charter schools?

Selective state legislatures have argued that strengthening charter school laws could help strengthen the movement (Nathan, 1996, 168). For example, some legislators have proposed to permit more than one organization be allowed to sponsor charter schools. Secondly, many believe that these schools should receive some type of start-up funds to get the school off and running. Thirdly, it has been proposed to have some states eliminate their cap on the number of charter schools (Nathan, 1996, 168).

Three charter schools in Boston further illustrate the costs and benefits of charter schools.

Boston Renaissance Charter School
City On A Hill Charter School
Academy of the Pacific Rim

Boston Renaissance Charter School

The mission statement: "To prepare a diverse cross-section of Boston children for success with a high quality education all at prevailing public school costs" (Massachusetts Charter School Initiative, 1996).

One of the largest charter schools in the country. Over 1,000 students enrolled in the 96-97 school year.
"Is a partnership of a local foundation and The Edison Project."
Each student is given an Apple computer, linked to the school, for home use.
A longer school day allows time for art, music, dance, drama and foreign language.
65% of students are from low-income families.
20% are White, 49% are Black, 24% are Hispanic, 9% are Asian.
Teachers' salaries range from $32,000-$44,100.
1,847 students on the waiting list. (MCSI, 1996).

So far, The Boston Renaissance School is deemed successful. The teaching is rigorous with a 205 day school year. It's partnership with the Edison Project, a private management company, has helped Boston Renaissance create an innovative curriculum, further develop the teaching profession by allowing teachers to stay on the cutting edge of education, and it has allowed for an ambitious use of technology. All three of these factors are pertinent to the future of education in America.

However, funding has been one main obstacles to its success. In the month of February, this school had to abandon expansion plans because of the lack of funds. Start-up costs and renovation costs are not allocated by the state. Therefore, if changes need to be made, funds must either be raised or come from the per-pupil allotment. The problem of funding and capital for charter schools might be their biggest battle to survive in the future. Critics argue that in the long run, this could take money away from the students. Furthermore, critics argue that although the charter school movement is quite strong, it will not endure due to the lack of proper funding, as well as the weak legislation surrounding the movement.

*The Academy of the Pacific Rim offers specific data regarding the costs involved in starting a charter school.

City On A Hill Charter School

The mission statement...

To graduate responsible, resourceful and respectful democratic citizens prepared to advance community, culture and commerce (MCSI, 1996).

All students read Shakespeare, speak in public, use computers, study algebra and learn to swim.
All students wear a uniform.
All students participate in a weekly town meeting (where issues such as foreign policy and school rules are debated).
Boasts near perfect attendance in the 7am-6pm school day.
Study hall on Saturdays.
Most students spend the summer at an internship.
54% of students are from low-income families.
30% are White, 56% are Black, 9% are Hispanic and 6% are Asian.
72% of students are reading below grade level (Kass, 1996, 27).
Average teacher salary is $35,000-$45,000.
51 students are on the waiting list.

This charter school in particular reminds education historians of a mixture between the old Latin grammar School and the Academy. City On A Hill stresses both academics and practical training. It is known to be one of the most successful charter schools in Boston. Yet, City On A Hill is a prominent example for the funding problems charter schools face.

Academy of the Pacific Rim

The mission statement...

To empower urban students of all racial and ethnic backgrounds to achieve their full intellectual and social potential by combining the best of the East-high standards, discipline, and character education-with the best of the West-a commitment to individualism, creativity and diversity (MCSI, 1996).

Scheduled to open in the fall of 1997 to 350 sixth, seventh and eighth graders.
The year will be 210 days long, with a longer school day.

Through examining the 1997-1998 budget for The Academy of the Pacific Rim, one realizes the clear cut obstacles that funding places on Charter Schools. The Academy receives $7,380 per pupil from the state of Massachusetts. This figure is on par with that of Boston area public schools. The Academy also receives transportation costs for the children ($603 per student). Therefore, the total revenue from the state to the Academy for the 1997/1998 school year is $798,300 (Academy of the Pacific Rim). This figure is a far cry from the capital needed to start-up a charter school, much less maintain it. Therefore, The Academy must solicit funds elsewhere, mainly private corporations.

When start-up and maintenance costs are figured in the equation, charter schools clearly are under funded by the state. As of 4/24/97, The Academy still needs to raise $193,361. These costs stem anywhere from classroom furnishings such as an art room, teacherÕs lounge and four more classrooms-to technology needs like faculty and student computers and a central computer server. The aforementioned needs of The Academy are instrumental in maintaining a high caliber learning institution. Without these amenities, the school could lag behind (Academy of the Pacific Rim).

The Academy of the Pacific Rim, however, is working around their funding problems. The school has offered other benefits beyond the material. These benefits include a disciplined learning environment in which to grow and learn about other cultures. The Academy Of The Pacific Rim is one example of the many charter schools attempting to change the face of education. It as well as the other charter schools all place a great emphasis on moral and civic behavior, placing a greater emphasis on school authority. Many school choice advocates state that the public schools can no longer discipline students. Beginning in the late sixties, teachers in the public system lost the ability to teach children basic morals and values. Charter schools, not restricted by the bureaucracy of the state educational system, are given more freedom to discipline and teach values and morals to its students.

Parents who wish to send their children to The Academy must attend a conference which outlines the goals of the school and its curriculum. Therefore, parents are fully aware of what their children will encounter during the school year. Therefore, the pool of students who will eventually attend The Academy are those with parents who agree on the issues of school authority and moral teachings. This is not the case in the public sphere of education. Public schools have their hands tied due to the nature of the bureaucracy. In contrast to charter schools, many parents of children in public schools are at odds with the school's administration and teachers.

Why charter schools are different from privatization:

Charter schools may in fact solicit funds from private corporations. The Boston Renaissance School is an example of how public and private funds are used within the constraints of charter school legislation. However, charter schools differ from privatization in some key areas.

State funds are the primary source of capital as in public education, in contrast to funds solicited primarily from private corporations.
Charter schools are developed to empower teachers, administrators and parents. Privatization allows the corporation to set up curriculum and then that corporation hires teachers to carry out a certain plan of action.

Why charter schools are different from voucher systems:

Charter schools differ from voucher programs in four key areas.

Charter schools must be nonsectarian (Nathan, 1996, 6).
In most states, charter school legislation does not allow the administration to pick and choose students based on previous achievements etc. Voucher programs, on the other hand, are allowed to choose the student body.
Charter schools can't charge additional tuition to students beyond what the state provides. The voucher system allows private and parochial schools to charge additional funds above and beyond what the state provides.
Unlike voucher programs, charter schools must document improvements of student achievement in order to keep the charter.

Conclusion/Commentary

The previous three examples raise some contentious issues surrounding the issue of school choice. As a hybrid between public schools and radical reform movements such as privatization and voucher systems, charter schools are an attractive options for a majority of the public and educators alike. However, how do we assess whether charter schools indeed are successful?

A recent study conducted this year by The Institute For Responsive Education, states that "charter schools are not only new schools, they are also new organizations, and as such, they are faced with a long list of organizational development issues that take a significant amount of time to manage" ("Going It Alone," 1996, i). The Institute found four common issues that surrounded the five Boston charter schools they studied.

There is a high degree of satisfaction among participants.
Governance is a significant barrier. It is difficult to create a collaborative decision-making structure that is also efficient.
Educational issues need more attention. For example, many teachers in charter schools felt they need to spend more time defining student outcomes, curriculum, and assessments. However, the teachers feel overwhelmed by the long lists of improvement needs and by their own impatience to make improvements quickly. Secondly, teachers and administrators must begin documenting their successes and examining their impact on mainstream education.
Autonomy creates isolation. Charter schools are having a difficult time gaining support and assistance from the state and local school boards. One solution to this problem would be for charter schools across the nation to work closely with each other to deal with technical and organizational dilemmas. ("Going It Alone," 1996, i-ii)

These findings may seem gloomy for a charter school advocate, however, through some changes in funding and legislation, the future of charter schools could be bright.

Further Commentary

Although charter schools have not been operating long enough to gauge their impact on mainstream education, they could influence and change education in many areas. Typically, charter schools attract a majority of low-income students. However, charter school students also tend to have parents that take an active role in the child's education. Therefore, many times, the students who are in a classroom of a charter school are those who want (or are forced by parents) to learn and improve. Furthermore, the classroom in a charter school is many times idyllic consisting of a smaller classroom whereby the teacher can give more individualized attention to each student. Also, without the bureaucratic restraints of the state government, teachers can mold their teaching styles in innovative ways to help each student learn in an optimum way. Having the freedom to teach in different manner in a classroom filled with students whose parents are engaged in their education will typically improve the students test scores and academic record. The aforementioned situation makes the charter school ideal possible.

Joe Nathan states that, "until we recognize that the current education system neither rewards nor penalizes failure, we will not see any real progress toward educational reform" (Nathan, 1996,186). The monopoly on education by the public schools allows for sub-standard results in the education of young people today. Public schools are not held accountable for how well or how poorly their children are progressing in their education. Only when the market forces play a role in the education system, (whether it be a charter school or more radical reform such as a voucher system) will our current situation improve. There are documented successes of charter schools across the nation which have overcome the tremendous obstacles in starting a charter school. Furthermore, these schools are said to be "doing a better job of helping young people, especially those from low-income backgrounds and families with limited ability to speak English" (Nathan, 1996,186).

Boston Renaissance Charter School, City on a Hill and the Academy of the Pacific Rim are testimony to the costs and benefits of creating and running a charter school.

For more information on charter schools visit these web sites:

http://edreform.com/charters.htm http://carei.coled.umn.edu/Charterschools/NatChrtr.html http://www.dlcppi.org/cslist.htm http://macsserv1.wpusd.k12.ca.us/canec/canec.html http://pip.ehhs.cmich.edu/chart.html

Government 375: Educational Reform and Ideology