Hosted by The Center for
Education Reform
Hosted by The Center for
Education Reform
CHARTER SCHOOLS OFFER A CHOICE
By Laura Friedman And Dave Camden
St. Louis Post-Dispatch, January 20, 1998
Now that the charter school idea has, indeed, as Gary Orfield pointed out in his commentary "swept the country," we think it is time to lay to rest the misunderstandings, misconceptions and falsehoods that are being perpetuated by him and by others opposed to these public schools of choice.
These schools are enormously popular. Instead of attacking the idea with unsubstantiated claims, we, as parents, policy makers and educators, should be asking why thousands of families have chosen the charter alternative.
One reason is that they work. Charter schools give parents a choice, school boards flexibility and students a chance to attend a school suited to their needs. No, a charter school is not an educational program. Nor should it be. The simple idea behind the charter school movement is that not all children learn in the same way. Children are different, public schools should be, too.
What Orfield calls a "privately defined vision of education" is really a common mission and vision, articulated by the school and supported by the personnel, the parents, the students and the community. This allows every charter school to be unique. Instead of regulations that put every district school into the same mold, charter schools can serve a wide diversity of students and families with a wide diversity of learning environments.
In the Los Angeles case cited by Orfield, he fails to note that the charter school system of checks and balances successfully prohibited the opening of a Scientology-based school. Because charter schools must lay out their educational philosophy, as well as how it will be implemented, examples like this are exposed, and disposed of, before the school can open its doors.
Furthermore, because each school is required to submit and adhere to a charter, or contract with a sponsor, all family know what they are getting when they choose a charter school.
Under the current system, only wealthy families have school choice: They can choose public, private or parochial education; they can even afford to move into a school district of their choice. Charter schools extend that choice to all families.
Charter schools are the only truly public schools. Magnet schools, for example, are far less equitable than charter schools. Many have admission requirements, based either on race and ethnicity or on achievement. District schools serve only those children in the neighborhood, and private schools may pick and choose which students gain admission. Only charter schools have absolutely no admission requirements.
The charter school concept is based an a very simple idea: Let each school succeed or fail on its own merits. In St. Louis, 62 out of 64 elementary schools scored in the bottom 20 percent on the MMAT (the statewide achievement test), 19 out of 21 middle schools scored in the bottom 5 percent and 9 out of 10 high schools scored in the bottom 10 percent. Yet, everyone of these schools continues to accept students day after day, year after year.
The tragedy in public education is not that a charter school may fail and go out of business, the real tragedy is that so many of our schools have failed miserably and do not go out of business. Every failure of a charter school - and there have been only six in the almost eight years of the charter school movement - is a success for the idea.
The "small school" movement and the "reconstitution" process, which has received some attention lately, do not adequately address the problems of failing schools. While it is admirable that the St. Louis school board is finally admitting, and attempting to address, the problem of failing schools, the charter school concept does this more equitably and on a larger scale. Breaking up a large failing school simply results in a greater number of small failing schools.
The charter school idea holds schools accountable for results. Schools that do not perform the way they should are closed and new schools with new ideas open. In this way, no child is stuck in a failing school while the school board ponders whether, and how, to "reconstitute" a particular school.
Recently completed research by the Hudson Institute confirms that charter schools are serving those most in need: at-risk and low income students, as well as those with limited English proficiency and those requiring special education services. Half of all charter school students belong to a minority group, 40 percent come from low-income families, 13 percent have been identified as having limited English language skills and more than 12 percent are recipients of special education services. Significantly, in every instance, these percentages are greater than those for pupils in the conventional public school system.
More important, the same researchers surveyed a cross-section of almost 5,000 students in 39 schools in 10 states and found the majority felt they were performing dramatically better in a charter environment. A similar survey of parents revealed the same high level of satisfaction with student achievement.
We believe it is time for Missouri to become the 31st charter school state; for our children, our families and our neighborhoods.
###
Laura Friedman and Dave Camden are with the Charter Schools Information Center in Clayton, Missouri.