ERIC Digest 118 - February 1998
Charter Schools
By Margaret Hadderman
In seven short years, the U.S. charter-school movement has
produced about 800 schools in 29 states and the District of Columbia,
enrolling over 100,000 students. Charter schools reflect their
founders' varied philosophies, programs, and organizational
structures, serve diverse student populations, and are committed to
improving public education.
Charter schools are freed of many restrictive rules and
regulations. In return, these schools are expected to achieve
educational outcomes within a certain period (usually three to five
years) or have their charters revoked by sponsors (a local school
board, state education agency, or university).
What Explains Charter Schools' Growing Popularity?
Some members of the public are dissatisfied with educational
quality and school district bureaucracies (Jenkins and Dow 1996).
Today's charter-school initiatives are rooted in the educational
reforms of the 1980s and 1990s, from state mandates to improve
instruction, to school-based management, school restructuring, and
private/public-choice initiatives.
Many people, President Clinton among them, see charter schools,
with their emphasis on autonomy and accountability, as a workable
political compromise and an alternative to vouchers. The charter
approach uses market principles while insisting that schools be
nonsectarian and democratic. For founders, starting a brand-new
school is an exhausting, yet exhilarating experience that "stirs the
creative and adaptive juices of everyone involved" (Ray Budde 1996).
Which States Are Leaders in the Charter-School Movement?
In 1991, Minnesota adopted charter-school legislation to expand a
longstanding program of public school choice and to stimulate broader
system improvements. Since then, the charter concept has spread to
more than half the states.
State laws follow varied sets of key organizing principles based
on Ted Kolderie's recommendations for Minnesota, American Federation
of Teachers guidelines, and/or federal charter-school legislation
(U.S. Department of Education). Principles govern sponsorship, number
of schools, regulatory waivers, degree of fiscal/legal autonomy, and
performance expectations.
Current laws have been characterized as either strong or weak.
Strong-law states mandate considerable autonomy from local
labor-management agreements, allow multiple charter-granting
agencies, and allocate a level of funding consistent with the
statewide per pupil average. Arizona's 1994 law is the strongest,
with multiple charter-granting agencies, freedom from local labor
contracts, and large numbers of charters permitted.
The vast majority of charter schools (more than 70 percent) are
found in states with the strongest laws: Arizona, California,
Colorado, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, and North Carolina.
What Progress Have Charter Schools Made?
Evidence on the growth and outcomes of this relatively new
movement has started to come in. The U.S. Department of Education's
First Year Report, part of a four-year national study on charters, is
based on interviews of 225 charter schools in 10 states (1997).
Charters tend to be small (fewer than 200 students) and represent
primarily new schools, though some schools had converted to charter
status.
The study found enormous variation among states. Charter schools
tended to be somewhat more racially diverse, and to enroll slightly
fewer students with special needs and limited-English-proficient
students than the average schools in their state. The most common
reasons for founding charters were to pursue an educational vision
and gain autonomy.
"Charter schools are havens for children who had bad educational
experiences elsewhere," according to a Hudson Institute survey of
students, teachers, and parents from fifty charters in ten states.
More than 60 percent of the parents said charter schools are better
than their children's previous schools in terms of teaching quality,
individual attention from teachers, curriculum, discipline, parent
involvement, and academic standards. Most teachers reported feeling
empowered and professionally fulfilled (Vanourek and others 1997).
Nathan points to three other signs of progress:
- Charter schools in California, Colorado, and Minnesota have
had their contracts renewed because they produced measurable
achievement gains, including that of students from low-income
families.
- The charter idea has helped stimulate improvement in the
broader education system. For example, the Massachusetts charter
law permitting applicants to go directly to the state board for a
charter helped convince Boston to create its own "Pilot School"
program. Minnesota districts, which had refused to create
Montessori public schools, did so after frustrated parents began
discussing charters.
- Civil-rights and advocacy groups are trying to create charter
schools. This includes civil-rights legend Rosa Parks, and groups
like the Urban League and ACORN (Association for Community
Organizations Reform Now) (Nathan, personal interview).
What Are Some Problems and Challenges Facing Charter
Schools?
Nearly all charter schools face implementation obstacles, but
newly created schools are most vulnerable. Most new charters are
plagued by resource limitations, particularly inadequate startup
funds.
Although charter advocates recommend the schools control all
per-pupil funds, in reality they rarely receive as much funding as
other public schools. They generally lack access to funding for
facilities and special program funds distributed on a district basis
(Bierlein and Bateman 1996). Sometimes private businesses and
foundations, such as the Ameritech Corporation in Michigan and the
Annenburg Fund in California, provide support (Jenkins and Dow).
Congress and the President allocated $80 million to support
charter-school activities in fiscal year 1998, up from $51 million in
1997.
Charters sometimes face opposition from local boards, state
education agencies, and unions. Many educators are concerned that
charter schools might siphon off badly needed funds for regular
schools. The American Federation of Teachers urges that charter
schools adopt high standards, hire only certified teachers, and
maintain teachers' collective-bargaining rights. Also, some charters
feel they face unwieldy regulatory barriers.
According to Bierlein and Bateman, the odds are stacked against
charter schools. There may be too few strong-law states to make a
significant difference. Educators who are motivated enough to create
and manage charter schools could easily be burnt out by a process
that demands increased accountability while providing little
professional assistance.
What Are Some Possible Policy/Practice Directions for
Charters?
As more states join the movement, there is increasing speculation
about upcoming legislation. In an innovation-diffusion study
surveying education policy experts in fifty states, Michael Mintrom
and Sandra Vergari (1997) found that charter legislation is more
readily considered in states with a policy entrepreneur, poor test
scores, Republican legislative control, and proximity to other
charter-law states. Legislative enthusiasm, gubernatorial support,
interactions with national authorities, and use of permissive
charter-law models increase the chances for adopting stronger laws.
Seeking union support and using restrictive models presage adoption
of weaker laws.
The threat of vouchers, wavering support for public education, and
bipartisan support for charters has led some unions to start charters
themselves. Several AFT chapters, such as those in Houston and
Dallas, have themselves started charters. The National Education
Association has allocated $1.5 million to help members start charter
schools. Charters offer teachers a brand of empowerment, employee
ownership, and governance that might be enhanced by union assistance
(Nathan).
Over two dozen private management companies are scrambling to
increase their 10 percent share of a "more hospitable and
entrepreneurial market" (Stecklow 1997). Boston-based Advantage
Schools Inc. has contracted to run charter schools in New Jersey,
Arizona, and North Carolina. The Education Development Corporation
was planning in the summer of 1997 to manage nine nonsectarian
charter schools in Michigan, using cost-effective measures employed
in Christian schools.
Professor Frank Smith, of Columbia University Teachers College,
sees the charter-school movement as a chance to involve entire
communities in redesigning all schools and converting them to
"client-centered, learning cultures" (1997). He favors the Advocacy
Center Design process used by state-appointed Superintendent Laval
Wilson to transform four failing New Jersey schools. Building
stronger communities via newly designed institutions may prove more
productive than charters' typical "free-the-teacher-and-parent"
approach.
Charter schools might also benefit by adopting research-based
schooling models, such as Accelerated Schools and the Success For All
Program, and by emulating successful programs in charter or
"grant-maintained" schools in England, Canada, and New Zealand.
Resources
American Federation of Teachers. Charter Schools: Do They
Measure Up? Washington, D.C.: Author, 1996. 68 pages.
Bierlein, Louann, and Mark Bateman. "Charter Schools v. the Status
Quo: Which Will Succeed?" International Journal of Educational
Reform 5, 2 (April 1996): 159-68. EJ525 971.
Budde, Ray. "The Evolution of the Charter Concept." Phi Delta
Kappan 78, 1 (September 1996): 72-73. EJ530 653.
Jenkins, John, and Jeffrey L. Dow. "A Primer on Charter Schools."
International Journal of Educational Reform 5, 2 (April 1996):
224-27. EJ525 978.
Mintrom, Michael, and Sandra Vergari. "Political Factors Shaping
Charter School Laws." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association (Chicago, March 24, 1997).
46 pages. ED407 708.
Nathan, Joe. Charter Schools: Creating Hope and Opportunity for
American Education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1996. 249 pages.
ED410 657.
Smith, Frank L. "Guidance for the Charter Bound." The School
Administrator 54, 7 (August 1997): 18-22. EJ548 963.
Stecklow, Steve. "Businesses Scramble to Run Charter Schools."
The Wall Street Journal 137, 37 (August 21, 1997): B1, B8.
U.S. Department of Education. A Study of Charter Schools: First
Year Report. Washington, D.C.: Author, 1997. 74 pages. ED 409
620.
Vanourek, Gregg and others. "Charter Schools as Seen by Those Who
Know Them Best: Students, Teachers, and Parents." Washington, D.C.:
Hudson Institute, 1997. 12 pages. ED409 650.
Also consult these websites:
This publication was prepared with funding from the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, under contract No. OERI RR93002006. The ideas and opinions expressed in this Digest do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of IES, ED, or the Clearinghouse. This Digest is in the public domain and may be freely reproduced.
Ordering Information: Single paper copies of this ERIC Digest are available from the Clearinghouse while supplies last. Although there is no charge for the materials themselves, a postage/handling fee of $3.00 is required to cover the Clearinghouse's expenses. This fee is waived if (1) you enclose a stamped, self-addressed envelope or (2) you order other materials for which there is a charge. Send orders for paper copies to the ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, 5207 University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97403-5207. Make checks payable to University of Oregon/ERIC.
|
