Sign Up For Our Newsletter

Kara Kerwin, Flypaper

Here follows the eleventh entry in Fordham’s “Charter School Policy Wonk-a-Thon,” in which Mike Petrilli challenged a number of prominent scholars, practitioners, and policy analysts to take a stab at explaining why some charter sectors outpace their local district schools while others are falling behind.

Mike posed an extremely important question at the start of this wonk-a-thon: “How to build a high-quality charter school sector?”

With now over a million students on charter school waiting lists, we reformers ought to be seeking the answer to this question with a sense of urgency.

Simply stated, we need more choices in the type of education available to families. We need more children sitting in more seats in more schools made available by more choice. We need more public discussions about school choice, truthful and deeper conversations, in forums that matter.

We need more people—moms and dads, community groups, elected officials—calling for more options in education. And we need to give more power to parents over their own children’s education.

Unfortunately, too few activities in today’s education-reform movement, especially when it comes to charter schools, have focus primarily on expanding all options available to schoolchildren and expanding parents’ access to those options.

Many current policies, proposals, and practices artificially and unnecessarily constrain growth and deter investment in schools of choice. Some risk is inherent in innovation and growth. There is greater risk—especially to our nation’s children—from setting limits on the expansion of school choice.

It is time to push the charter school movement to a new level
 of maturity that encourages and ensures accelerated growth, one that allows charter schools of all types to play a more central role in school reform.

But we can’t do that if the discourse around charter schools is narrowly focused on closing down schools. We’ve all heard this before: “There are a lot of lousy charter schools out there.” Starting with the premise that they will fail does nothing to address the need for change or bolster support for well-intentioned legislation. Such debates only fuel our opposition, limit innovation, and push the charter school movement in a direction that turns us into the same thing we sought to fix.

But the reality is that schools, whether public charter or traditional public, are only as good as the laws that govern them—and especially how they are implemented. Most in the charter sector find ways to success regardless of such laws, restrictions, etc. For example, on paper, Massachusetts’ charter law doesn’t necessarily hold up to a perfect model, but Boston’s strong charter sector is the result of great implementation and people.

The real truth is this: there are a lot of lousy state charter school laws out there that need an overhaul to ensure student success.

Accountability is the hallmark of charter schools! It’s why the concept was born in the first place. And while opponents and charter supporters alike continue to claim that charters are not being held accountable, our data proves otherwise—especially in states with strong and clear charter laws and independent authorizers.

Unfortunately, there are bad apples that persist, remaining open year after year, but I will argue it is the fault not of the charter school movement or concept but of lousy laws that have failed to ensure accountability and success and have allowed the status quo to game the charter concept.

Authorizers matter, and in states with truly independent and multiple authorizers, accountability is surely at work.

It’s no wonder then, that the states which lead CER’s national rankings for creating new opportunities for students and having successful charters also have independent, multiple authorizers, almost all with universities as part of the portfolio and not subject to state education department oversight, either in an advisory or control capacity. These exemplary states with these institutions include New York, with the State University of New York Charter Schools Institute; Michigan, where public universities, including the impressive Central Michigan University, can authorize charter schools; and Washington, D.C., home to the only completely independent charter board in the nation, the D.C. Public Charter School Board.

In fact, the highest charter school and enrollment-growth numbers are in jurisdictions with strong charter laws. Strong charter laws feature independent, multiple authorizers, few limits on expansion, and high levels of school autonomy. In 2012–13, 335 additional charter campuses were established in states with charter laws and policies graded an A or B on CER’s annual ranking, while only thirteen additional campuses were created in states rated D or F. These numbers echo the growth differential observed in previous years. If we measure charter growth by the number of students enrolled, there currently are 1,335,408 in states that CER gave an A or B rating. Only 56,046 students attend charters in jurisdictions rated D or F.

Since 1996, CER has been evaluating charter school laws, not just on the merits of policy but how those laws actually result in great outcomes for kids. Policymakers and advocates often overlook the correlation between effective charter schools and the law of the states in which they operate. Additionally, the press often overlooks the details of a particular charter law in its coverage of charter accountability. But the reality is that strong state charter school laws help to create the highest-quality charter schools. In states with multiple and independent authorizers, stronger, more objective oversight is used to ensure that successful charter schools remain open and those that fail to perform are closed.

Building a high-quality charter school sector must first start with addressing the need for more and greater choices for parents and students, ensure accountability by enacting more laws that provide meaningful and objective oversight, allow schools and educators the autonomy to focus more on student outcomes, and make sure schools and students alike are funded more equitably.

Deborah McGiff, The Huffington Post

Sixty years ago this week, my family and other Black families across the country were wondering how the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision would impact their children’s education. How long would it take for the promise of a great education to become a reality?

Despite the call for “all deliberate speed,” generations later, we are still waiting. In urban areas especially, a high-quality education remains out of reach for too many low-income and working class students. But there is hope.

As a former superintendent of Detroit Public Schools, Deputy in Milwaukee Public schools, Assistant Superintendent in Cambridge, MA, an administrator and teacher in New York City, and charter schools movement leader I have seen urban education up close for more than four decades. And one of the most exciting and encouraging developments over the course of my education career has been the growth of high-performing public charter schools that are free to all and open to all.

Stanford’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) conducted the most comprehensive assessment of public charter schools to date and found that Black students in public charter schools are gaining up to one and a half months of additional learning in reading and math, compared to their peers in traditional public schools.

In some places, such as New York City’s Success Academies, public charter schools are actually flipping the achievement gap – helping Black and Latino students outperform affluent, white students across their states.

And in public charter schools from Chicago’s Urban Prep Academies to the KIPP high school in rural southeast Arkansas, nearly every student is going to college and graduating at rates higher than the national average.

Unfortunately, some commentators and academics are looking past this success and claiming that public charter schools are “re-segregating” public education. The supposed proof is that many public charter schools enroll a very high percentage of Black and Hispanics students.

It is true that public charter schools enroll more students of color than white students. Nationwide, 63 percent of students enrolled in public charter schools are students of color. But critics ignore two key points.

First, children aren’t assigned to charter schools; parents choose charter schools for their children. More than 2.5 million children attend public charter schools and another one million names are on waitlists. Parental demand is high because many urban Black and Hispanic parents recognize education options in charter schools that, sadly, they can’t access in traditional public schools.

Second, the racial and socio-economic balance in charter schools is similar to the racial and socio-economic balance in the traditional public school system.

A 2009 study by RAND that examined student-level data in five large cities (Chicago, Denver, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, and San Diego) concluded: “In most sites, the racial composition of the charter schools entered by transferring students was similar to that of the [traditional public schools] from which the students came.”

Charter schools in aggregate have a higher proportion of students of color because charter schools are most likely to be found in urban neighborhoods that are home to a higher proportion of Black and Hispanic families. These are typically the neighborhoods with the greatest need for better schools – and public charter schools are finally filling that need.

The fact that public charter schools are offering hope to students of color is why many Democrats, including President Obama and California congressman George Miller, are charter proponents. It’s hard to imagine they would champion an education reform that “re-segregates” public schools.

Rather than criticizing charters for serving too many Black and Hispanic students, those who want to realize the dream of an outstanding education for all, as I do, should aim to do two things.

1) Make charters available to more students in more places. With waitlists one million names long, we clearly aren’t meeting the demand for public charter schools. The main source of funding for launching new charters is the federal Charter Schools Program. The House recently passed a bill re-authorizing the program and the Senate should do the same.

Furthermore, public charter schools are restrained in their growth by local and state laws that either ban charters outright or cap the number of charters. By authorizing charters in every state and lifting caps, public charter schools can serve students in many more neighborhoods.

2) Take what we know is working in public charter schools and apply those practices to traditional district schools.

In public charter schools, students are spending more time in class; teachers are focusing on reading and math, especially in the early grades; college and career readiness are the goals from day one; and a wider variety of curriculums are offered, including concentrations in the arts and the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields.

Public charter schools want to share these proven practices with other schools. Rather than seeing charter schools as threats, traditional district schools should see them as sources of great ideas and great results.

Public charter school supporters will continue to do all we can to make charters even better and correct flaws where they exist. But warrantless criticism won’t help any student. Public charter schools are delivering on the promise of Brown by making a world-class education available to students of every race and from every economic circumstance. We need more of them.

Reality Check-In, with Jeanne Allen
Vol. 1, No. 1
May 28, 2014

Why Education Reform really does need a reality TV show

I would not have said this a year ago. I’ve been opposed to such a thing, despite being auditioned once for a show that promised to show the real challenges schools face daily. (I was supposed to be the provocateur, calling out bad practices on screen. Thankfully they dropped me from consideration when I insisted we had to talk about solutions. So much for my worldwide fame!)

But now I have another take. Having been “on the outside” for 6 months now, after 25 years “in,” I now understand clearly why EdReformers bang their heads against a wall daily and make only marginal progress:

Only a few thousand people – maybe 20,000 – are actually paying attention.

I know that’s hard to believe. After Waiting for Superman, the trials of Michelle Rhee, Facebook, KIPP, and people from Cory Booker, to presidents from Reagan to Clinton and more, only a fraction of the people in our otherwise exceptional nation have a clue that reformers are doing what they are doing to create better opportunities for kids.

I was shocked to learn this, and it hasn’t been an easy conclusion to reach. The reasons are numerous, but I’m going to offer just one primary reason in this commentary…

…Reformers are (generally great but) clueless.

This Memorial Day I sat by the water among dozens of families with whom my kids grew up. They come from all over the East Coast. They are old and young and in between. Most are politically engaged and hardly apathetic. They are right, left, and center. They go there to relax and when socializing, they share what they know and ask one another about what they don’t know. These are not wealthy people; they are mostly working and middle class Americans including researchers, plumbers, bank employees and educators. One thing they all have in common though, is that all are Americans, or aspire to be.

These citizens are, like most citizens, informed about the issues when they need to be, but most of the time they are just folks. Because they are pretty civic-minded and because they have known me a long time, they do have some sense of what’s happening in education.  But this is just one little piece of their world, and as such they know only what they see in their community or from their own trusted sources of news, and that’s not very much.

Yet, nearly every Memorial Day until this year I’ve arrived at the Bay convinced otherwise. Every other time I arrived having just spent months engaged in protracted battles as the head of the Center for Education Reform, a post from which I stepped down in the fall. Arriving at the Bay last year for the first time since the previous season, I had just completed terse negotiations with Pennsylvania legislators and others over amending the State’s charter school law so that the schools might finally have equitable funding and communities more opportunities to start schools and serve kids. At the same time we were in the thick of developing new protocols to push out the daily education news through our Media Bullpen.  We were involved in local advocacy work with New Jersey charter leaders who couldn’t find a friend in their own state. On top of that, efforts were underway in many states to craft better policies on issues ranging from teacher evaluations to achievement standards.

All of this was occurring against the backdrop of continued failure in our schools as revealed by the National Assessments.  I had spent many hours on television and in print commenting on these issues.

This was pretty standard for my work, and upon reengaging with the folks at the Bay year after year I’d assume they all were as clued in as I was to all of these important battles. I’d stroll down to the water and as the typical “how are you what are you doing these days” would evolve, I’d say things like, “Well Philly has been really difficult these days,” or “still trying to break through the barriers to get more reform.”

There would be questions and comments about this school or another that they know about, and sometimes arguments about whether unions can work or not. Eventually somebody would always say – “hey-I-saw-you-on-TV-that-was-great.”

Of course this all made me believe they knew exactly what I was talking about and that they were actively engaged in education reform issues.  At a minimum I thought my long time seasonal friendships had persuaded them to at least be quiet supporters of the movement or maybe even committed voters for reform.

Clearly I was projecting.

This year I arrived wearing a new hat. I am still personally and professionally engaged in education reform but I am no longer leading the charge nor am I intimately engaged day to day.

The questions have been the same, but my answers have been different. Having now become a “normal, ordinary” person — the kind I pushed my team to find and educate so that more people would join our cause — I now have come face to face with a cold reality. Those of us who bleed “EdReform” assume that once exposed to the hard facts, others will not only follow us but also fully engage. It isn’t so.

As my inaugural weekend at the Bay reminded, our individual lives — our families, our work and our friends — largely dictate what we do and how we conduct ourselves with regard to the issues of the day. If we are “in it” we feel like others are in it with us. If we are not, the subject changes, and the focus shifts.

I walked around for years thinking that people were interested in education reform because when we talked about it they seemed to be interested. My friends and I would often discuss the topics they knew were foremost in my mind. “What are you up to?” They asked me over and over again, and I’d respond about the issue du jour. Not anymore. Six months of having been “out of it” means others are, by extension, out of it too.

Now the conversation is not about work — because until now work was always my passion – but about the other things that consume my time, like adult kids and activities, vacations, and the stuff of daily life. When we all have kids in school, they supply an endless sea of discussion topics. As they age, so does our interest in school related issues.

It’s hard to tweet and Facebook and Instagram things that are no longer your daily focus. Don’t get me wrong — I still read and participate in numerous efforts to change the system and I continue to write about it.  I still consult regularly with colleagues and other stakeholders with whom I’ve been connected all these years.  That won’t change, nor will my personal passion for reform.

I am, however, living it differently and seeing first hand why it was so hard to get people to show up at a meeting, to write their lawmaker or to push back a failing system.  I used to consume the reform stuff almost 12/7. It was what I read for fun on the weekends (seriously), what I talked about at parties, what I talked about with my kids and husband nonstop. I read every blog, every newsletter, and every tweet. I attended events, blogged, wrote and managed a small but robust team, which in turn created armies to tackle the opponents of choice and accountability in word or deed.

There was no question we had to work hard to attract attention and I was relentless in getting the work done to educate, inform and galvanize the masses, those great EdReform-unwashed. Once they became interested or engaged, it was definitely our job to keep them engaged. Inevitably we — and others like us — grew frustrated about how difficult that was. We would question why someone who was an activist one-year suddenly stopped responding to emails, or why a small dollar donor stopped writing checks.

I had an inkling that life got in their way, but I also thought sometimes that the growth of the reform movement had resulted in their finding other outlets for their interests.  But what is clear now is that ordinary people just don’t have time for it all. Wearing a new hat, I understand fully now to me that we engage and outrage only when our friends and family clue us in, either because they are “in it” by virtue of their work or service on boards and in their communities. Without those connections, we — the masses — don’t even know there is an EdReform movement out there.

I imagine many people who were part of other social movements felt the same frustration.  Remember that most people didn’t go to Woodstock and most people didn’t fight in the Cultural Revolution.  Most people don’t focus on politics (let alone vote!) and most people don’t know much about education reform. But we can change that.

Professional education reformers must face the reality that their world is actually small and will continue to get only sluggish results, unless they grapple with the issue of how real people spend their time.  They — we— must stand back from the reality of the hundreds of e-letters that fill “our” inboxes, that are loaded with confidence-boosting calls for help, showers of praise from our colleagues, and news of thousands of media hits, and realize that such noise is having little impact on actually reaching the people who can help “us” make real change.

While there have been many great wins in expanding access to great education to more kids, the wins are isolated and often short-lived, because the ordinary people involved go back to leading busy lives. So, what do we do about this?

• First, be honest with yourselves and assume no one new is reading your newsletter. Find other ways to communicate directly with real people right where they live. Bring back the town hall meeting or the community dinner, because guess what? Real people don’t have time to go to conferences during the day but they do like food!

• For every New Schools summit or Fordham Institute seminar you hear about or attend, spend two days in a neighborhood or at a community organization (like a Kiwanis club) doing nothing but asking this question and listening to people’s answers:  “What do YOU do to help your family and your community, and how do you do it? Where do YOU spend your time?”

• Stop writing about the same things — please. People outside of education reform can’t relate to all the stories about Newark, KIPP, quality authorizing, or even teacher evaluations! Try talking about pocket book issues — how taxes are spent on schools and what programs get funded; how their fellow Americans (not necessarily their kids or grandkids because the vast majority of us don’t have kids) spend their time. It’s not that people don’t care — it’s that they need other reasons to care. This leads me to the next point:

• Make education an issue of patriotism — which it is — because most of us deeply believe in our country and want it to continue to be the best nation in the world. Craft your communications to expose the connection between schooling and democracy. Show where and how it is that our children learn uniquely American values and where they don’t. When Americans know that only a handful of 17 year-olds can correctly identify the time and the purpose of the American Revolution, they can’t be confident the product of that Revolution will last or benefit their own kids, which will spur them into action.

• Expose inequality of opportunity and lack of freedom, not just lagging math scores. Most of us don’t think about math as relevant anymore. Explain the connection between a student’s lifelong achievements and earning power.

• Take the issue to TV. When searching for a new “standard” television this year, I was shocked to learn that standard now seems to include every kind of media outlet possible at the touch of a remote. Take the Reality TV plunge and knock the sleazy stuff out of first place. If a Nun could be on the Italian equivalent of “The Voice,” why can’t an Ed Reformer?? You’ll be amazed how many people will start to engage.

• Finally, ask for feedback. If people aren’t writing back and talking to you about what you say, how do you know it’s working? News Flash: It’s probably not.

When I wrote the School Reform Handbook nearly 20 years ago, it was with ordinary people in mind. As our movement grew, we assumed everyone grew with us. Some did. But most people always will be focused on the basics of their everyday life. To engage them, we need to focus on how ordinary people live ordinary lives, and become part of their lives, not the other way around.

 ###

 Jeanne Allen is founder, senior fellow and president-emeritus of the Center for Education Reform, and the author of Education Reform: Before it Was Cool – The Real Story and The Pioneers Who Made It Happen, an indispensable anthology of the modern education reform movement.