The Chatter About Charters

Did you listen to President Obama’s speech to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce today? I don’t know how much it varied to his standard stump speech on education. I was happy, but not surprised, to hear him identify high quality early childhood education as a priority.

But today I was listening with a new perspective, and this bit caught my attention:

“Now, that leads me to the fourth part of America's education strategy - promoting innovation and excellence in America's schools. One of the places where much of that innovation occurs is in our most effective charter schools. And these are public schools founded by parents, teachers, and civic or community organizations with broad leeway to innovate - schools I supported as a state legislator and a United States senator.

But right now, there are many caps on how many charter schools are allowed in some states, no matter how well they're preparing our students. That isn't good for our children, our economy, or our country. Of course, any expansion of charter schools must not result in the spread of mediocrity, but in the advancement of excellence. And that will require states adopting both a rigorous selection and review process to ensure that a charter school's autonomy is coupled with greater accountability - as well as a strategy, like the one in Chicago, to close charter schools that are not working. Provided this greater accountability, I call on states to reform their charter rules, and lift caps on the number of allowable charter schools, wherever such caps are in place.”

I confess that I am a newcomer to the charter school debate. I have been vaguely aware for some time that the teacher unions weren’t crazy about them. And since I have great respect for teachers and count many as friends, I assumed that I agreed. I’ve also been engaged in many a stressful budget year as a parent in the local public schools, so the thought of children leaving their home schools and taking their per child state education funding with them (in our case out of district) didn’t sit well with me. And finally, I generally lumped charter schools into the same category as private schools and school vouchers – options that could potentially drain engaged students and parents out of the struggling public schools that need them the most.

So it was almost with embarrassment that I recently entered my own child in the local charter school lottery. When we learned that he had a spot, I was filled with a mix of relief and excitement for my son, who I am certain will thrive in the new environment, and guilt for all the reasons I listed above.

The experience has made me look a little more deeply into charter schools and the debate they engender. Here are the basic arguments on both sides.

The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools says that because charter schools are more flexible (they typically have fewer restrictions on curriculum, structure, hiring, etc.) they are more responsive to their students. In some cases, charters use innovative strategies to meet the needs of underserved students. Because they usually report to their own boards, charter schools argue that they have a high level of accountability, and that they have a strong track record of success.

While the National Education Association cautiously acknowledges some potential benefits that can be drawn from charters, they also point to accountability issues. Citing a report from the U.S. Department of Education on its web site, the NEA argues that, “…the U.S. Department of Education found that many charter school authorizers lack the capacity to adequately oversee charter school operations, often lack authority to implement formal sanctions, and rarely invoke the authority they do have to revoke or not renew a charter. Where charters have been revoked or not renewed, the decision has been linked more to noncompliance with state and federal regulations and financial problems than with academic performance.” In other words, when charters fail to make an academic difference for their students they don't always get shut down.

Obama’s speech today addressed some of those concerns, while simultaneously calling on states to lift any caps on the number of charter schools approved. I think that’s a sound way to move forward in a policy area with such strong potential. In addition to meeting the needs of many students today, the lessons learned as charter schools innovate and experiment could be more widely and effectively disseminated into the public school community at large – exponentially increasing the number of students they benefit. That’s what I believe as a student of policy. As a parent who values public education, I'm grateful that the option is there for my child.

Currently the Massachusetts Legislature is considering two proposals related to charter schools. The first, which the Massachusetts Charter Public School Association opposes, would create a separate budgetary account for charter school funding, and reduce the per-student state expenditure for each student. This is consistent with the Massachusetts Teachers Association’s position that charter schools should not divert public school funds at the local level.

The other proposal would, as President Obama suggested, lift the cap on the number of charter schools in the Commonwealth, and target their development to high need areas.

If you are a parent, a student, a teacher or just a concerned citizen in Massachusetts, you might want to weigh in on these proposals with your state legislators.

Have you had experience with charters, positive or negative? What do you think of President Obama’s casting of them as a tool for the “advancement of excellence?” As I learn more about the charter experience on the personal and professional level, I would appreciate your comments.