Mike Schmidt Statement of Issue: Since the first charter school opened in Minnesota in 1992 (Minnesota Dept. Of Education Website), America has seen charter schools move from a fringe educational alternative to an accepted and useful tool in public education. It is clear that charter schools are continuing to grow in popularity and student population, even with conflicting evidence about their effectiveness.
This review will evaluate the necessity for strong educational leadership, a clear educational charter with a defined vision and financial backing, and built-in mechanisms and criteria for accountability in establishing an effective charter school. History of Issue: Charter schools are generally attributed to an idea by Ray Budded in the sass's when he wrote a paper entitled "Education by Charter. " His suggestions centered around reorganizing the traditional schools in such a way that a group of teachers would receive educational "charters" directly from the district's school board.At the time, his ideas seemed too cumbersome to address an issue many thought was minor.
People were more inclined to tweak or update the existing system than try to begin something new from the ground up. In the sass's, the "Nation At Risk" report was released, changing the perception of our existing public educational model and creating an environment where people were more open to changes and alternatives to the existing educational model. AY Swanker, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, began to build on Buddies ideas suggesting that new schools be created within existing schools.From there, a study committee of the Citizens League of Minnesota expanded the ideas further, suggesting schools could be authorized by state educational departments and local school boards. Minnesota .
NET on to pass a law permitting the establishment of charter schools. This was soon followed by California in 1992. The next year, six more states passed variations of the law. (Kidney 2005). The floodgates quickly opened and the U.
S. Has since seen an explosion of charter schools all across the country.According to the National Center for Education Statistics, "From 1999-2000 to 2009-10, the number of students enrolled in public charter schools more than quadrupled from 0. 3 million to 1. 6 million students.
" This is due to both a larger number of charter schools as well as a growing student population in each of these schools. Charter schools are public school and therefore free and open to anyone. The largest influx of charter schools is in urban environments. As of 2010, 55% of all charter schools were located in cities with suburbia accounting for 21% and rural areas accounting for 16%, followed by towns at 8% (U.S Department of Education 2012).
Examination of Issue: Since their inception, charter schools have had an ever-growing level of support. Parent's viewpoint: Many parent's have come to hail charter schools, particularly the freedom they had from much of the institutionalized bureaucracy. It also gives parent's a choice if they are not satisfied with their current school. However, the choices are limited in that many charters must have a lottery admission, meaning they will not all get in. Additionally, the charter school may not be any better than the public school they are leaving. Another important factor in charter schools is their cost.
Because these schools are not obligated to honor state or district agreements with unions regarding pay, they are able to set their own pay scale. In theory, this allows them to be more cost effective. However, in practice, that is not always the case. "Comparative spending between the two sectors is mixed, with many high profile charter network schools outspending similar district schools in New York City and Texas, but other charter network schools spending less than similar district schools, particularly in Ohio" (Baker 2012). We also must consider that according too report by the Center for Education Reform from 2011 states that 65.
% of charter school closures occur because of either mismanagement or financial reasons. Because of the stress placed on students changing schools, a charter should not be proved without documented financial and management plans. Moving students to a new school Just to close it for what are preventable or foreseeable reasons simply does the students' long term education a disservice. While these aspects of charter schools have been very important in beginning this movement, ultimately it is the effectiveness of charter schools that will determine their future.
Evidence regarding the aggregate effectiveness of charter schools is mixed. Most famously, the 2009 study by the Center for Educational Outcomes stated that "17 percent, provide superior education opportunities for their students. Nearly half of the charter schools nationwide have results that are no different from the local public school options and over a third, 37 percent, deliver learning results that are significantly worse than their student would have realized had they remained in traditional public schools. While those numbers resonate like a failure of the charter experiment, when examined further, some of those claims fall about.
In his article "Improving Charter School Accountability: The Challenge of Closing Failing Schools," David Osborne states that the fallacy in this study is that the majority of the evidence comes from "a student's first year in a charter schools. " This taints the study because "when students change schools, their performance typically suffers in the first year; and the performance of charter schools is weakest in their first year. Position on the Issue: While educational innovation and experimentation is necessary to further develop our education system, this cannot be done at the expense of the students being taught. If a student enrolls in a new charter school that does an even poorer Job educating than its traditional counterpart, the student is then even further behind ND potentially at-risk of long-term educational inadequacy.
The students, rather than the school board or state department of education, are the ones who suffer at the hands of these failures.It is easy to note the rapid pace with which charter schools are growing, and it is likely they growing too fast at the moment to ensure each one is placed in a position to succeed. Because of that, many students are moving from unsuccessful traditional schools to unsuccessful charter schools. It is well-known that changing schools is generally hard on a student, and to change schools for the same level of education puts the students at a further disadvantage. If education is not improving in these schools, then the purpose for them evaporates.Initially, charter schools were trading accountability for their freedom and autonomy.
When they were introduced to the public, Osborne notes there were assurances that "No charter would be allowed to fail its students year after year, as traditional public schools are often permitted to do. If their students were not learning, they would close". However, that is not always the case. Osborne goes on to cite numerous obstacles to closing failing charter schools. From those, I believe three standout more than the others: 1 . Too many charters are not performance contracts with meaningful, measurable performance goals.
. Too few authorizers collect a robust body of evidence of charter school performance over the term of the charter. 3. Too many authorizers have no clear criteria for renewal and revocation.
Because of these issues, many charter schools are simply becoming alternative public schools with no real distinction or purpose. A failing school must still be regarded as failing whether it is a charter school or a traditional public school. Recommendations: Charter schools must begin with a strong charter that includes a clear vision for both the level of student achievement and the way to get there.They must also ensure that the leadership put into place is both qualified and capable. The school leadership must believe in the goals and methods articulated in the charter. School leadership should be solicited and on board as a "true believer" before any charter is approved.
Since the school will be brand new, the initial tone set in the first year becomes crucial. Just like with a person, the first impression of a school will often be he one that sticks. Charter schools and their leadership must also have a plan in place for current and future funding that meets a standard of financial sustainability.When organizing and operating a charter school, it is also essential that they be held to reasonable accountability standards. However, that accountability should measure student achievement against student achievement from local area public schools, not a national average. We need to be examining how schools can grow when compared to similar schools, or even to students who were not selected in the tottery to be admitted to the charter school, not when compared to national averages which inherently average out any situational or local circumstances.
The test needs to be "How much better (or worse) are we doing? " rather than "Have we caught up yet? " If charter schools continue to grow and expand without demonstrating improvement in student achievement, what many believe to be a magic bullet for education will serve only as a silver bullet in the heart of public education, dragging down aggregate student achievement, and eventually, the future economic security of our country. These schools require strong foundations of leadership and accountability in order to reach their potential of becoming innovative leaders in the world of public education.
