Charter Schools
E-Mail CER CER
Publications
Executive Summary:
Private business involvement in public education is booming, with huge benefits for the nation, parents, children, and schools.
Today, thousands upon thousands of children in hundreds of school districts are enrolled in schools funded by taxpayers but managed by private and typically, although not always, tax paying (or for-profit) companies. This unprecedented twist in public-private partnerships - once an unthinkable taboo - has recharged the sputtering education reform movement.
What began as an experiment a decade ago took off as school boards and municipalities across the nation gradually lost their reluctance to contract with private firms eager to prove that they could educate the most difficult pupils in chronically low-performing schools.
The relatively recent growth of public-private partnerships in education can be traced to widespread public dissatisfaction with the quality of many public schools and to charter schools.
Dissatisfaction created a demand for educational options that provide more academic rigor, accountability, and responsiveness to parental concerns - properties often missing in conventional public schools.
The advent of charter schools - independent public schools granted operational freedoms in return for fiscal and academic accountability - answered the public clamor in many states for choices within the free public education system.
At the same time, the phenomenal growth of the charter schools movement provided a hospitable climate for the parallel expansion of private school management companies.
Currently 38 states have charter school laws. Most permit for-profit companies to hold a charter or allow charter holders to contract with for-profit firms for total school management or management assistance.
Nineteen clearly identifiable education management firms currently manage about 350 schools. Most of the for-profit-managed schools are clustered in Michigan and Arizona, which have the most charter-friendly laws.
Charter schools usually are established by parents, teachers, businesses, universities, or community organizations. But municipalities and public school districts also have started jumping on the charter school bandwagon.
The relative autonomy of charter schools, combined with a clearly unmet market for alternatives to existing public schools, attracted entrepreneurs who saw a way to apply sound business practices to K-12 education and still make a profit. That vision led to the founding of dozens of for-profit companies eager to demonstrate that they could improve student performance with rigorous programs and efficient delivery systems. Assembling teams of education experts, curriculum developers, financial managers and researchers, the new breed of education providers known as "educational management organizations" (EMOs) challenged the public education system on its own turf. Within a decade, the upstarts won hundreds of contracts to establish and run new charter schools and to step in and take over the complete operation of failing district schools.
The for-profit management companies, in particular, have encountered opposition, mostly from teachers unions and other sectors of the entrenched education bureaucracy fearful of competition. But they are largely successful and continue to grow in number. As their successes mount, state and local education agencies opt more frequently to turn over chronically low-performing urban schools to management companies with programs tailored for disadvantaged, at-risk children. The state of Maryland, for example, in 2000 decided to take over several "academically bankrupt" Baltimore schools for reconstitution and after soliciting bids, contracted them out to a large national, for-profit educational management company.
While most of the companies are young and have little in the way of a track record, many of the schools run by the management companies have recorded impressive student achievement gains on standardized tests in their first year or two of operation. It is important to note, however, that achievement seldom is uniform, even among schools run by the same company. Reasons for disparity can range from characteristics of the school population to variations in the program desired by parents. Some companies use the same curriculum at all schools; others tailor the curriculum to the desires of clients.
Many of the EMOs have made it their mission to take on children and schools with a history of failure. While new teaching methods and curricula may not mean that all children immediately score above average on standardized tests, most can show significant academic improvement in just one school year. Many of these schools have shown that they can make a positive difference in children's lives through other aspects of their programs. Nearly all tout a safe and disciplined environment and stress character education. Many require pupils to wear uniforms - a step many parents feel subtly fosters a sense of self-discipline. Most feature a longer school day and school year than traditional public schools, although alternative schools often go to a shorter but more intensive day.
Most of the companies report improvements in student attendance, retention, and graduation at the schools they operate. Independent and in-house surveys show high parental and student satisfaction. Nearly all of the charter schools have waiting lists as more and more parents recognize that these companies and schools can offer the equivalent of a private school education within the framework of the nation's free public school system.
This new wave of public-private partnerships is changing the education landscape in ways that once would have been unimaginable. Even today, the idea of a for-profit company running a public school doesn't sit well with the teachers unions and administrators organizations that constitute the entrenched "education establishment." But in states with strong charter school laws and numerous charter schools, public education has metamorphosed from a monopoly in which the poorest children were stuck in the worst schools with no way out, to a competitive market place that encourages innovation, demands accountability, and does not tolerate failure.
The competition from charter schools and private management companies, in many places, has been a wake up call to poorly performing conventional public schools, suddenly forced to shape up or watch their pupils defect to the charter schools taking state per pupil funding with them.
What should the consumer know about the private management companies - or EMOs - and their schools?
The following pages include data and background information on companies that are working to improve student achievement at a variety of schools around the nation - from traditional public schools to public charter schools, from schools that focus on at-risk children to schools offering individualized learning that can not be found in a "one-size-fits-all" system.
The Center for Education Reform asked the private management companies to respond to questions regarding the information that they provide to consumers. The larger companies with developed marketing structures were quick to reply. Smaller companies responded more slowly, often because the person assigned the task was engaged in multiple projects. Some did not respond at all, or with minimal information. Some companies have a great deal of information posted on their web sites. Some have no web sites. For all of the companies, CER also conducted telephone interviews with a number of company representatives. The results of the CER fact-finding efforts follow. Providing information about these companies helps ensure informed decision-making by parents seeking educational opportunities for their children, educators looking to find education management organizations, and policy-makers whose laws and policies can mean the difference between success and failure for thousands of children. And we hope the information will be a useful aide to consumers who must make decisions about the companies on behalf of their children.
# # #
Published by The Center for Education Reform, (c) Copyright
2002
Compiled and Edited by: Carol Innerst
Contributing Editors: Jeanne Allen, Christian Braunlich, Michael Purtill
With Introduction by: Michael Moe, Partner, ThinkEquity Partners
Link to press release.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be used or reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, including electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the author. Printed in the United States of America. The full report may be obtained for $29.95 (plus S&H) by calling CER at (202) 822-9000, or by ordering via our website.
The Center for Education Reform is a national, independent, non-profit advocacy organization providing support and guidance to individuals, community and civic groups, policymakers and others who are working to bring fundamental reforms to their schools. For further information, please call (202) 822-9000.