The Department of Education is determined to turn around the 5,000 lowest performing schools. To do that, President Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan are looking at the work of select charter schools that have been successful working with disadvantaged students. But how scalable is their success? Can the charter schools model help lead the way for the country’s lowest performing schools?

Amistad Academy is an example of a charter school that has worked. It has been congratulated by the last two administrations and educators visit the school to understand their secret. Amistad Academy has been successful with some of the most challenging students from the toughest poverty levels. And now the founders of Amistad Academy are creating a non-profit organization called Achievement First, to develop a network of 30 more charter schools. As the Education Sector report, Growing Pains: Scaling Up the Nation’s best Charter Schools, states: “Amistad and Achievement First are part of an ambitious movement in American education to educate large numbers of impoverished students to higher standards than public schools traditionally have sought for them.”

It is estimated that there are some 4,600 charter schools which serve over 1.4 million students in 40 states and the District of Columbia. Some charter schools, such as Aspire Public Schools, Uncommon Schools, and Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) schools have become famous. They have appeared on 60 Minutes and the Oprah Winfrey Show and in New York Times Magazine and Esquire magazine articles. But the concept of charter schools is still being tested and many, if not the majority, of the charter schools have not performed up to expectations.

A new enterprise, charter management organizations, or CMOs, are trying to advance the charter school concept. As the Education Sector report states: “Many CMO leaders have similarly large ambitions for the movement, building charter school networks in pursuit of a solution to the slow pace of improvement in traditional public schools and in response to the uninspired performance of many of the nation’s individual charter schools.”

Charter schools are instructive in finding what it takes to provide a great education for disadvantaged students. It takes great human resources, organization, and strong financial support. These findings provide a great lesson to people who want to start a charter school, and is a lesson for the public education system in general.

One of the challenges for charter schools is to create a school atmosphere that is motivating and instructive at the same time, where students feel they are cared for, and have ways to focus on the academics. Charter schools utilize a variety of techniques from school uniforms to daily pep rallies to longer school hours that help keep students focused. Slogans like SLANT (Sit up, Listen, Ask, Nod, Track) help reinforce students behavior in class. For charter school students, the school culture makes all the difference, by providing students with the “learned optimism” that is necessary.

Charter schools have a variety of barriers to fight through, and some of the chief barriers are the ones put up by the public schools, and their unions. Public schools view charter schools as a threat because they are competing for the same students. One of the bottom lines is that public schools get paid on a per student basis; losing students means losing money. In some states charter school teachers are not allowed to participate in the teacher pension system. 27 of the 40 states that allow charter schools limit their growth by putting caps on the number of charter schools.

When charter schools were started, the organizers assumed that one of the advantages would be the lack of regulations and the bureaucratic culture inherent in the public school system, providing more time for the students. Unfortunately this did not occur, and with the bureaucracy came the expense of both time and money.

Teachers are the heart of any public, private, or charter school but the charter schools can usually save money by hiring teachers less experienced than the public school teachers. Teach For America (TFA) participants make a two year commitment to teach in a at risk school, so many end up in a charter school. They come with almost no teaching experience but good background in their subject.

 A good school also needs a good principal to lead the way and finding principals for disadvantaged schools is a challenge. Just as there are organizations like TFA for teachers, there is the counterpart for principals, such as the non-profit, New Leaders for New Schools.

The bottom line for CMOs is that even with inexpensive teachers and principals, and low overhead, it still takes a great deal of money to run a good charter school. Over the past ten years, it has taken an estimated half a billion dollars in philanthropy money to keep the CMO system operating. As the report acknowledges: “Ultimately, the reliance on foundation funding could become a serious barrier to the growth and scaling goals of many CMOs.”

Many of the people who started CMOs had no idea that it would be so difficult to establish a charter school. As the Obama administration struggles to keep its promise to turn around the lowest schools they have to consider what kind of lessons can be realized from the hard work of charter schools.

Recommendations from the Education Sector Report include:

·         For CMOs to be fully realized all levels of government and especially public school districts will need to cooperate more fully with the charter schools.

·         Artificial caps on growth need to be eliminated along with requirements for extra school boards.

·         Charter school facilities need to improve. There are school districts with unused space that charter schools could use.

·         Operational funds are very important. Charter schools can produce good results but only with adequate funding.

There are at least five separate ways that the federal government can be instrumental in promoting the work of charter schools:

·         providing extra funding to states that level the playing field to facilitate the work of the charter schools.

·         supporting state laws such as standardizing the data collection requirements for charter schools that would make research easier.

·         encouraging states to set up more transparent accountability systems for those who wish to start a charter school.

·         making it easier for charter schools to participate in federal education funding.

·         altering the requirements of high-quality teachers. As the report states: “Finding great teachers to serve disadvantaged students is a hard enough challenge without laws that limit the ability of CMOs and charters to hire, pay, and promote teachers in a way that fits their organizational philosophy and mission.”

 

Source: Growing Pains: Scaling Up the Nation’s Best Charter Schools, Education Sector