Hosted by The Center for
Education Reform
Hosted by The Center for
Education Reform
Charter Schools: Choice In America's Public Schools
By Dr. Philip E. Geiger
American School and University, April 29, 1997
The President of the United States called for three thousand by the millenium and in the last few years 28 states have approved their existence. Now there are more than five hundred and the number is growing every year, geometrically. Charter schools are here to stay. Bill Clinton is likely to outdo himself on this challenge. Three thousand charter schools by the Year 2000, no problem!
So what are charter schools? They're public schools. The "skunk works" of public education. They are still a part of the public sector, but they don't always have to follow the same rules as the "mainstream"; they can innovate; they can specialize; they can be focused on learning strategies, subjects, topics, or programs that attract fewer than the masses. Upon application, normally to the State Department of Education, an applicant can receive authority to operate a public school with public dollars to provide a unique public education to those who "'choose" to be there. In some instances the local school system has the same right to sanction such a school.
Charter schools grew out of the ever increasing desire for parents to choose the school and the program their children experience. We saw "magnet schools" in the 70's and 80's start the ball rolling, but that effort soon became the primary solution for voluntary racial integration. Too few districts or states without the integration problem figured they needed such an innovation.
In New Jersey, where the state legislature has authorized the State Commissioner of Education to award up to 135 charters, only 18 were awarded in January 1997. Applications are due again in August for the next round of applications for the 1998-99 school year. Each student receives 90% of the average per pupil cost in the district the student attends. Students in the community where the school sits have first crack at entrance. For those who think that the only people attracted to charter schools would be those from urban and poor areas, note that the charter school in Princeton, NJ has received more than enough applications to "'go full steam ahead".
In Massachusetts, students receive the average allocation of educational dollars that would be spent on that child in the local school system. Although only 25 charters have been approved in the Bay State, the State legislature is likely to approve more for the next school year and the governor has suggested that 75 more charters would be a good number. Currently the state is funding a good portion of this effort.
Arizona is definitely the leader in the charter movement partially because it is growing by leaps and bounds and more schools are needed virtually everywhere. But Arizona's Commissioner of Education Lisa Keegan has an "attitude" about public education. The attitude: we're here for the kids and charters schools will enhance the lives of Arizona's youth, go for it!
The caution of some states including Massachusetts is the fear they will offend the unions in the process since charter school teachers are hired by the charter board of directors and therefore don't fall under an existing negotiated agreement. However, based upon the comments of an NEA representative at the American Association of School Administrators conference in February, the NEA is likely to start a drive to organize the charter school faculties too. It's just a little harder organizing labor in one school at a time (there are 83,000 public schools in the US) vs. organizing 13,000 school systems.
Students are admitted to charter schools just like the regular public schools. All may apply and if there are too many candidates, there is a lottery. A few have specialized admissions criteria that must be met so the student can meet the goals of a special program. If the school is going to be a science oriented school for example, the student better love science and have some capability to focus on this subject intensely. The staffing, textbook selection, program design and all the usual school decisions are left to the charter board. Students still must meet state imposed academic standards.
There is at least one catch thought! Using the same or fewer dollars the regular public schools have to operate their schools, charter schools generally have to lease or buy space with those dollars too. In some cases, cooperative and confident school systems have allowed the charter school to use an abandoned or surplus facility for basic out of pocket expenses plus maintenance.
Another problem is capital. Charter applicants in some states can only be non-profit organizations, or colleges, or community groups. When they realize they have to provide desks, chairs, facilities, and a host o other capital items, they need to find capital or get contributions of the goods. A private business could amortize these costs over the life of the property and fund these acquisitions "up front". For the charter school, up front funding means either tapping everybody's master card or finding a philanthropic group that will either lend the money or fund the purchases. And they do exist! But charter school founders face more personal risk and liability than local school officials.
So with these potential pitfalls, why are these schools developing? To name just a few that headlined a recent federal study:
With all the talk about school reform over the past two decades, charter schools may spurt on more real reform than all the institutional effort that has developed since the 1983 report A Nation At Risk. Instead of trying to create change and flexibility, responsiveness and instructional standards, accountability through the "system", the "system" may now have to change to compete with the "rookie of the year" -- charter schools. Play ball!
###
Dr. Geiger is president and chief operating officer of Education Alternatives Inc. of Bloomington, MN, which manages private schools and public charter schools nationwide. Dr. Geiger is formerly the superintendent of schools in Lexington, MA, Piscataway, NJ; Galloway Township, NJ.