|
|
The Charter Blog
|
Friday, March 29, 2013
|
Model Law March Madness
|
With the Sweet Sixteen round of the NCAA men’s basketball tournament under way, we’ve all become experts in bracketology (see President Obama’s picks here). But how would the tournament play out if teams advanced according to their state’s ranking on our model law?
In the Midwest region, we’d see an immediate fall of the number one seed. As one of only eight states that does not allow parents the opportunity to choose a public charter school for their child, Kentucky-based Louisville would quickly be knocked out. Second seed Duke would also be eliminated in the first round—New York-based Albany holds the eighth spot on our model law, while North Carolina is twenty-fourth. Despite its eighth seed in the tournament rankings, Colorado State’s home base holds the fourth strongest public charter school legislation in the nation, which would carry it to win the Midwest region.
The West region would advance according to the top tournament seed. Gonzaga is located in Washington, which comes in third on our model law rankings. Unlike in actual tournamet play, this high model law ranking would easily carry the first seed Gonzaga to win the region. On the other side of the bracket, Ohio State University falls in the bottom half of the 42 states with public charter school legislation, and would be upset by Iona’s New York-based ranking as one of the top ten states on our model law.
In the East, we’d see strong several strong contenders: Indiana (ranked 9 on our model law) would vie with California (seventh spot on the model law), and Butler (Pennsylvania is 19th on our model law) would duke it out with Colorado (fourth in the model law rankings)—which would go on to win the East region.
Finally, the South region would behold the ultimate Cinderella story. Minnesota tops our model law rankings, which would carry the 11 seed to win the entire tournament.
While we would not recommend actually filling out your bracket according to this methodology, this theoretical tournament bracket does point out states that are committed to improving the statutes that enable a thriving public charter school sector.
|
Posted by:
Nora Kern, Senior Manager for Research and Analysis
at
6:00 AM
|
|
|
|
Thursday, March 28, 2013
|
New Directions for Public Charter School Governance
|
|
The Fordham Institute released a pithy new paper today on the governance of public charter schools. In it, the author, Adam Emerson, questions one of the age-old (at least since 1991, when charters first came on the scene) assumptions about charters: that each school must have its own community-based governing board that operates the school and serves students from nearby communities.
A lot has changed over the last 22 years, with “all of those Os” emerging in the sector (via CMOs and EMOs), as Dr. Howard Fuller said at our conference in 2009. While 68 percent of public charter schools still fit the original “mom and pop” mold, 20 percent are operated by non-profit charter management organizations (CMOs) and 12 percent by for-profit education management organizations (EMOs). And 200+ charters offer full-time virtual instruction.
Emerson offers two sets of policy recommendations for better aligning the regulatory environment for charters with what’s happening on the ground that are consistent with our model law:
- The first would allow a single governing board to manage multiple schools to make it easier for high-performing charters to replicate and expand (that’s Component #15 in our model law).
- The second would create statutory guidelines for relationships between charter schools and educational service providers to ensure that the schools are in the driver’s seat in these relationships – not the other way around (that’s Component #10 in our model law)
Emerson also recommends that virtual charter schools be authorized by state authorizing entities, given that these schools usually end up serving students from all over a state. Among other things, this approach would remove the financial incentives and quality disincentives that exist for small districts to authorize large virtual charter schools. It’s a sensible recommendation, and one that we’ll be considering when we revisit our model law in the future.
|
Posted by:
Todd Ziebarth, Senior Vice President of State Advocacy
at
6:00 AM
|
|
|
|
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
|
Will Obama's Budget Recognize Charter Schools?
|
President Obama will soon release his federal budget for 2014, and a top priority is likely to be early-childhood education, particularly for the poor. But will the proposal seek much funding for the growth of charter schools—at least more than the paltry 0.4% of federal education spending that currently supports these exciting and demonstrably successful schools?
Last month, the respected private firm Mathematica Policy Research published a multiyear study of students enrolled in KIPP (the Knowledge Is Power Program), a network of 125 charter schools serving 41,000 students in 20 states and the District of Columbia. The study found that after three years students in the KIPP program were 11 months ahead of their traditional-public-school peers in math and eight months ahead in reading. Also after three years (or four for some children in the study), KIPP students were 14 months ahead in science and 11 months ahead in social studies.
These gains are substantial. For every three (or four) years they spend in the program, KIPP students are benefiting from almost a full year of greater learning growth than they would if they remained in traditional public schools.
This success is even more remarkable given that KIPP draws from some of the most disadvantaged communities in the country. Some 96% of KIPP students are black or Hispanic. More than four of five come from households with annual incomes low enough to qualify for subsidized school lunch.
What's more, the typical incoming student at KIPP scores in the 45th percentile in district-wide reading and math exams. That initial achievement level is much lower than for the typical student entering the traditional public school system.
Other studies have found similar results. In a report released last month on charter schools in New York City, Stanford University's Center for Research on Education Outcomes found that after just one year, charter-school students had gained one more month of learning in reading and five more months in math, compared with their district-school peers. More than a fifth of New York's public charter schools post significantly larger learning gains in reading than do their traditional counterparts—and nearly two-thirds of charters outperform traditional schools in math.
KIPP runs 10 schools in New York City, but it also has competition. In 2012, 87% of students in the Uncommon Schools charter network—which operates 15 New York City schools serving 3,900 kids—scored advanced or proficient in math. That is 27 percentage points above the city average. In English, more than half of Uncommon's kids were advanced or proficient, beating the city average by eight percentage points.
What is the key to the success of schools like KIPP and Uncommon?
For starters, as independent public schools, charters aren't weighed down by onerous regulations that stifle innovation. Administrators and teachers have the freedom to develop new and creative teaching methods. Charter schools have also attracted a new generation of talented, motivated teachers, school leaders and entrepreneurs through the promise of a new approach to educating underserved children.
Policy makers should encourage such educational entrepreneurship. One way they can do so is by eliminating state caps on charter schools, which currently apply in 21 of the 43 states (including Washington, D.C.) that have charter laws. With over 600,000 students on waiting lists to attend charter schools nationwide, this should be an easy task.
Legislators at the state and federal levels should also strive to attract new entrepreneurs to the charter-school space. Schools like KIPP and Uncommon succeed in the cities where they operate, but other geographic areas may demand different approaches. The next great public charter school may deploy a digital learning model or a hybrid of several models. Officials should be open to such experimentation.
At the same time, all charters should be regularly and rigorously reviewed. Those that consistently fail to meet achievement standards should be closed.
The federal government, meanwhile, should make sure that charters receive their fair share of funding. The current pot reserved to finance startup, replication and expansion of charter operations has just $254 million in it, or less than 1% of federal education spending. That share should grow.
The data are in. Charters can—and do—deliver top-notch education even to the most disadvantaged of American students. The White House, Congress and policy makers in state capitals must do their part to support successful charters, promote their replication, and encourage new entrants to adapt their best practices.
Ms. Rees is the president of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools.
A version of this article appeared March 27, 2013, on page A15 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Will Obama's Budget Recognize Charter Schools?. It was also published on The Wall Stree Journal online on March 26, 2013 here.
|
Posted by:
Nina Rees, President & CEO
at
6:00 AM
|
|
|
|
Monday, March 04, 2013
|
Letter to the Editor: 'Charters are Providing Hope'
|
|
To the Editor:
Re: “Better Charter Schools in New York City” (editorial, Feb. 23):
While rightly acknowledging the success of charter schools in New York City, you missed the mark in calling the national charter movement a “disappointment.” Interestingly, in 2011 you praised New Orleans, where 75 percent of all schools are now charters and the number of students attending a failing school is down threefold since Hurricane Katrina.
Whether they are 5 percent of public schools, as in New York, or 75 percent, as in New Orleans, charters schools are providing hope. In the last five years, the movement has added 1,700 schools and a million students. Another 610,000 are on wait lists.
The movement took the 2009 report by the Center for Research on Education Outcomes at Stanford seriously. Since then, nearly 500 charters have closed. The center’s more recent research has found that charter students from low-income families are outperforming their traditional public school peers.
When you review the evidence, you will find what millions of parents already know: the charter movement is a resounding national success.
NINA REES
President and Chief Exec.,
National Alliance for Public Charter Schools
Washington, Feb. 24, 2013
This letter to the editor originally ran on the New York Times website, and was published on March 3, 2013.
|
Posted by:
Nina Rees, President & CEO
at
6:00 AM
|
|
|
|
Thursday, February 28, 2013
|
A Moment of Truth for the No Excuses Public Charter Schools
|
An article by Robert Pondiscio in the Spring edition of Education Next looks at “no excuses” public charter school networks (CMOs) at a critical juncture. These networks stake their reputation on college-prep coursework and college acceptance rates, but is their focus actually translating into college completion? Now is the “put up, or shut up” moment for networks like KIPP, who has 1,000 former students in college in the 2012-13 school year. The number will surge to 10,000 KIPP graduates in colleges in just three academic years.
Schools like KIPP and YES Prep, who tout their graduates’ college acceptance rates, are also transparent about their struggle to boost college completion rates. The six-year college completion rate for KIPP middle school graduates is 33 percent. Despite YES Prep’s 100 percent college acceptance rate, their six-year college completion rate is 41 percent.
But true to their no excuses credo, these networks are aggressively forging ahead with ways to support their graduates through the uphill battle to a college degree. Besides academic preparedness, there are many obstacles to college success, ranging from difficulty completing financial aid forms to the myriad distractions that come with campus life. To address these issues, KIPP and other no excuses charter networks are forming partnerships with colleges which aim to demystify college life and create meaningful support networks for minority and first-generation college attendees. Additionally, character education emphasizing “grit” and perseverance is increasingly being incorporated into the charter school cultures. Even with the odds against them—only one out of every 12 low-income black and Hispanic students who are accepted to college earns a bachelor’s degree—the no excuses schools are sticking to their mantra.
KIPP classroom. San Francisco, California. © Allison V. Smith
|
Posted by:
Nora Kern, Senior Manager for Research and Analysis
at
6:00 AM
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
|
What You Need to Know about the Sequester
|
|
The Sequester: What You Need to Know
The sequester (across-the-board spending cuts) is scheduled to go into effect on Friday, March 1st. As authorized in the Budget Control Act of 2011, it requires $85.3 billion in cuts, evenly split between defense and discretionary programs. At this time, the U.S. Department of Education estimates that education programs will be cut by 5.1 percent.
Impact on Federal Education Funding
Since most federal education programs are forward-funded, the U.S. Department of Education does not expect these cuts to impact this school year (2012-2013). Any cuts would go into effect in July 2013, impacting the 2013-2014 school year. The one exception is the Impact Aid program, which compensates school districts that are located on land owned by the federal government. This program will face immediate cuts.
Will the Sequester Impact the CSP, Title I, Title III and IDEA funding?
Yes. Nearly all formula, new awards and continuation grants will be impacted. Only a handful of education and safety net programs that are exempt from the sequester, including:
- Child Nutrition Programs: School Lunch, School Breakfast, Child and Adult Care Food
- State Children’s Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP)
- Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
- Pell Grants
- Medicaid
- Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
- Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
What’s Next?
On March 27th, the Continuing Resolution (CR) funding the federal government expires, and the CR must be renewed through the end of the fiscal year. If there are any proposals to “fix” the sequester, they will be rolled into the CR negotiations.
For a one-page summary of the sequester, please click here.
|
Posted by:
NAPCS Pressroom
at
6:00 AM
|
|
|
|
Friday, February 22, 2013
|
Commissions Highlights need for Equitable Public Charter School Funding
|
The Equity and Excellence Commission, established by Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, was charged with collecting data, analyzing issues and obtaining broad public input regarding how the federal government can increase educational opportunity by improving school funding equity. The report For Each and Every Child was released on February 19th, and it highlighted the value of public charter schools in providing a high-quality education for all children, particularly those from low-income communities.
We agree with a number of the Commission’s key findings, particularly its call for public charter schools, and all public schools of choice, to receive equitable funding. The most recent study on charter school finances suggests that charter schools receive approximately 20 percent less funding than their traditional public school counterparts.
We are also pleased the Commission acknowledges that public charter schools have succeeded in providing choice to families, and serve a high number of students in low-income communities and communities of color. As we have previously noted, public charter schools across the nation enroll a greater percentage of low-income students than traditional public schools (46 percent versus 41 percent), black and Latino students (27 percent versus 15 percent and 26 percent versus 22 percent, respectively), and students who perform lower on standardized tests before transferring to public charter schools.
The Commission notes that some of the best schools for disadvantaged students are charter schools, but raises concerns about the inconsistency of student performance across all charter schools. The quality of charter schools is improving, and we expect student performance will continue to rise. The latest research shows that students in charter schools are increasingly outperforming their traditional public school peers. This is not because charter schools skim the best and the brightest from public schools. In fact, the highest quality research shows that students in charters outperform their peers who applied to a charter but were not chosen in the randomized lottery.
NAPCS will continue to advocate for the growth of high-quality charter schools, and for equitable federal, state, and local funding for all schools.
|
Posted by:
Gina Mahony, Senior Vice President of Government Relations
at
6:00 AM
|
|
|
|
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
|
NAPCS President Responds to SOTU Address
|
|
Though President Obama's State of the Union (SOTU) Address did not focus on charter schools, he highlighted two initiatives that stand to greatly benefit public charter schools: a partnership with states to encourage access to high-quality preschool and a Race to the Top program aimed at upgrading the quality of high school curricula by focusing on science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). The benefits of high-quality early-childhood education are indisputable. A study by the Federal Reserve shows that high-quality early childhood education can generate a total benefit cost-ratio of $17 for every dollar invested. No education program shows such a significant return on investment.
During his campaign for President in 2008, Obama proposed a $10 billion, 10-year investment in high-quality early-childhood education. But other than his Early Learning Challenge grant initiative (which is a fraction of this amount), the Administration has not been able to find the funds to support this effort. Public charter schools such as the Apple Tree Institute for Early Learning in Washington, D.C. provide examples of the innovations that the charter school movement can unleash when offered the funds to start Pre-K instruction (D.C. is one of the few states that offers universal access to Pre-K). The sooner students are exposed to a robust early care and education program, the greater their chances are to start school ready to learn. In fact, I hope that the Administration will start to talk about school readiness with the same sense of urgency as its call for college and career readiness.
As for his high school initiative, public charter schools have been at the forefront of developing partnerships with colleges and employers and many, like BASIS charter schools from Arizona, are specifically designed to introduce students to the field of STEM (starting in elementary school). These are welcome efforts, but to bring the focus on STEM to life, the Administration needs to promote a more comprehensive digital initiative aimed at giving students access to high-quality STEM education through technology. Otherwise, it is not clear where we will be able to find the teachers to support this initiative. Here again, online charter schools, such as Connections Academy, provide examples of cost-effective ways to offer high-quality content to thousands of students. These programs help students gain the necessary skills for the future.
The public charter school sector looks forward to working with the Administration to amplify both of these initiatives in the coming years.
|
Posted by:
Nina Rees, President & CEO
at
6:00 AM
|
|
|
|
Friday, February 01, 2013
|
National School Choice Week Whistle Stops: Buffalo, Rochester and Albany, New York
|
This week, the Charter Blog will follow the National School Choice Week whistle stop tour—profiling public charter school facts along the tour route (see previous stops Topeka/Kansas City, Chicago, Indianapolis/Milwaukee, and Toledo/Cleveland).
Today’s stops on the National School Choice Week (NSCW) whistle stop tour are Buffalo, Rochester and Albany, New York. New York has top-notch charter legislation, ranked 8th (out of 43) on our model law. New York also has a thriving charter sector. Albany is tied for the 7th largest market share, while New York City has the 2nd largest charter school student enrollment and is tied for the 7th largest growth in the number of public charter schools in the nation.
Strong parental demand for public charter schools in New York City (there are over 50,000 students on waiting lists to attend charter schools in the city) is not surprising given that several studies have demonstrated positive academic performance gains for students who attend public charter schools (see Hoxby, CREDO, Dobby & Fryer, and Supovitz).
|
Posted by:
NAPCS Pressroom
at
6:00 AM
|
|
|
|
Friday, February 01, 2013
|
Public Charter Schools for Montana
|
Montana is one of the eight states that still does not allow public charter schools, but we've been working to change that. On January 30th, legislation to establish public charter schools had a fair and tough hearing in House Education Committee. Thanks to one of the bill's sponsors, Senator John Windy Boy, from the Chippewa Nation, for testifying on how charter schools could help children from the tribe learn their native language.
Pictured: Lisa Grover, NAPCS Sr. Director of State Advocacy, and Montana Senator John Windy Boy
|
Posted by:
Lisa Grover, Senior Director of State Advocacy
at
6:00 AM
|
|
|
|