Vol. 4, No. 42
October 15, 2002

Charter Schools Closures Demonstrate the Success of the Movement
A special CER Newswire "Blog" ^*

        As charter schools reach their 10-year milestone from the founding of the first charter in St. Paul, Minnesota, two things are clear. First, charter schools operate under a microscope uncommon for other public schools and second, the demand has fueled growth, which in turn has fueled challenges to their existence, creating the lion's share of closures out of obstacles stirred by districts.

        Today, CER is releasing a report that details the circumstances surrounding the majority of the 6.7 percent of charter schools that have failed to achieve their goals. It is clear from the data that the majority of these closures could have been avoided if the education establishment had not stood in their way.

        The reality is that whenever a charter makes a misstep or is having problems of any sort, the news coverage is abundant and often fuels speculation that this latest problem will be the end of the line for charter schools. That's fine with most education reformers, who recognize that the public should indeed be reading more about what really occurs in all schools. But the flurry of charter school horror stories paints a picture that is actually more dire than the one that exists. In fact, more than 93 percent of all charter schools are thriving, and almost 400 additional new charter schools began in the 2002-2003 school year alone!

        Another important dimension of closing a charter school is that it signifies what real accountability is all about. The closure of charter schools that fail to do what they are supposed to do proves that the charter concept is succeeding. The question for observers and policymakers should not be whether or not charter schools succeed, but whether or not all public schools - regardless of their category - are sufficiently accountable for their lack of progress. The recent No Child Left Behind Act makes strides in this direction, but it is only asking all public schools to meet standards - something charter schools already do.

        Reviewing closed charter schools is also important because they represent choices that parents once had that were taken away, many for manufactured reasons. Some groups, such as local school districts, and others in the education establishment that were threatened by these schools began working to push them back. Why? Sadly, the closures are because most people do not like change, especially if that change affects (or is perceived to affect) one's livelihood.

        Therefore in the guise of various procedural hurdles and bureaucratic obstacles, these groups have closed a number of charter schools despite academic achievement, student and parental satisfaction and community support. Given this new move by the groups supporting the status quo, we have introduced a new category into the list of closure reasons, simply called "District" to reflect this sad but growing trend.

        Since 1999, CER has undertaken the task of delving into every single school that was reported closed and investigated with state and local agencies and other data the conditions under which the schools closed. What we found is that the conventional reports, as well as those from critics such as the American Federation of Teachers, tended to lump together a wide variety of circumstances as closures when in fact there is a greater level of complexity than would appear at first glance. For example, we have seen a number of reports that count schools that never opened as closures while it should be clear to reasonable people that a school cannot fail if it never actually opened. Also a number of states have included several schools as "closed" when these schools actually were consolidated back to their districts by the districts and remain open. As is true in any activity, states that have a large amount of charter activity have a higher proportion of closed charters.

        To ensure that people have access to the facts about the universe of charter school closures, this report details the status of each charter or contract for charter that has ever been issued that is no longer or never was a school.

        Here are the facts: As of October 2002, there are 194 closures, which is 6.7 percent of the 2,874 schools ever given a charter. CER documents the causes and conditions of 154 of those actual charters that have failed in the new report entitled Charter School Closures: Opportunity for Accountability. The remainder of these closures are more recent and currently under review.

        An additional 77 charter schools were consolidated back into the school district that originally spawned them for a variety of reasons and are not counted as closures. Sixty of these are documented in this report. These schools are often known as dependent charters in some states. They were really extensions of the district and in many cases, even that little bit of independence was found unnecessary or somehow burdensome to district leaders, and thus, the charter is no more but the school or program that once operated as a charter still exists.

        Finally, at least 84 schools to date received a charter but never opened and thus are also not counted as closed. There are several more that have delayed their opening that are not accounted for in this report.

        Whatever the condition of the charter, however, it is clear that, when compared with the failure numbers of traditional public schools, charter schools are more likely to deliver on their promise of providing an atmosphere that breeds student achievement. Indeed the current crop of failing schools identified by the U.S. Department of Education stands at eleven percent, which is a few points above the charter school rate.

        Whereas charter schools are typically closed down for failing to comply with their charter, the public needs to ask what consequence for failure all public schools will meet for similarly failing to do their job. If states try to wiggle out of requirements under the new federal law, will the education groups who trumpet charter failures be quick to do the same to the traditional system schools? We hope the playing field will be level, but if it's not, we'll be ready to help the parents and policymakers make sense out of the numbers so that all children will eventually have the opportunity for accountability that the charter school movement currently offers.

(This Blog is derived in part from the summary of CER's new report, which was edited by research director Melanie Looney. For a copy of that report, link to Charter School Closures: Opportunity for Accountability or call 800-521-2118 for a printed copy, which is available for $19.95)

CORRECTION: Sorry! The last newswire described our concern over a grant awarded to Arizona State University (ASU). It turns out that it was not the anti-charter forces at ASU that received the grant, but the Leadership for Educational Entrepreneurs (LEE) Masters program located at ASU-West, which is focused on helping charter leaders. For more info on this program go to www.west.asu.edu/coe/graduate/LEE.htm

SUBSCRIBE to CER's Education Reform Newswire -- have these regular newswires delivered right to your email box (for free!).

SEARCH the Newswire Library.

BROWSE the Newswire Library

The CER Newswire may be redistributed in its entirety with proper attribution. The CER Newswire is published by The Center for Education Reform, the nation's leading authority on school reform. CER is dedicated to making schools better for America's children by improving educational access and excellence for all. CER works with parents, teachers and policymakers to advance meaningful education improvement initiatives.

###

CER Home Page Newswire Archives E-Mail CER CER Publications