Measuring Up



Minnesota

Not scored

See a summary of the state’s charter law.

See additional observations about charters in the state.

What is the state of charter schools in Minnesota?

GROWTH INDICATORS

 

 

Score


1. Public school share
 (2014–15)

N/A

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

Number

Percentage

 

Public charter schools

158

7%

 

 


2. Public school student share
 (2014–15)

N/A

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

Number

Percentage

 

Public charter school students

45,322

5%

 

 

3. Students by race and ethnicity (2013–14)

N/A

weight = 2 | Possible total = 8

Charters

Traditional

Difference

White

47%

72%

-25%

Black

25%

9%

16%

Hispanic

9%

8%

1%

Asian

14%

6%

8%

Other

5%

5%

0%

Total minority

53%

28%

25%

 

4. Students in special populations (2013–14)

N/A

weight = 2 | Possible total = 8

Charters

Traditional

Difference

Free and reduced-price lunch status

55%

38%

17%

Special education status

N/A

N/A

N/A

English learner status

N/A

N/A

N/A

Total special student populations

55%

38%

17%

 

5. Schools by geographic distribution (2012–13)

N/A

weight = 2 | Possible total = 8

Charters

Traditional

Difference

City

50%

19%

31%

Suburb

24%

28%

-4%

Town

9%

22%

-13%

Rural

17%

31%

-14%

Total nonsuburban

76%

72%

4%

 

6. Communities with more than 10 percent of students in public charter schools (2014–15)

N/A

weight = 1 | Possible total = 4

 

 

 

Number of communities with more than 10 percent of students in public charter schools

3

   
 

7. New public charter schools opened over the past five years  (2010–15)

N/A

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

 

 

 

2010–11

1

Average Annual Open Rate

3.5%

2011–12

6

2012–13

4

2013–14

7

2014–15

10

Total number

28

 

 

 

8. Public charter schools closed over the past five years (2009–14)

N/A

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

 

 

 

2009–10

1

Average Annual Closure Rate

3.5%

2010–11

6

2011–12

4

2012–13

7

2013–14

10

Total number

28

 

 

 
 

INNOVATION INDICATORS

 

 

Score

9. Percentage of charter schools with an identified special focus (2012–13)

N/A

weight = 2 | Possible total = 8

 

 

 

No Excuses

2%

Total

54%

STEM

5%

Arts

4%

Classical

7%

Purposely diverse

1%

Single sex

2%

International/Foreign language

15%

Montessori/Waldorf

15%

Dropout/Expulsion recovery

5%

Military

1%

Vocational training

1%

Public policy/Citizenship

1%

 

QUALITY INDICATORS

 

 

Score

10. Additional days of learning in reading (2007–11)

N/A

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

 

 

 

Number of additional days of learning in reading

14

 

 

 

11. Additional days of learning in math (2007–11)

N/A

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

 

 

 

Number of additional days of learning in math

-7

 

 

 

12. Percentage point change in top categories in state accountability system (2012–14)

N/A

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

 2012-13

2013-14

Difference

 

 

 

 

13. Percentage point change in bottom categories in state accountability system (2012–14)

N/A

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

 2012-13

2013-14

Difference

 

 

 

 

Items Reported But Not Scored

Startups versus conversions (2014–15)

 

Startups

Conversions

 

 

Percentage of a state’s public charter schools

99%

1%

 

 

 

Charter authorizers (2014–15)

 

Number of authorizers

Number of charter schools

Average number of charters per authorizer

Percentage of the state’s public charters authorized by this type of authorizer

Local education agency

5

9

2

6%

State education agency

Independent charter board

Noneducational government entity

Higher education institution

7

25

4

16%

Nonprofit

12

123

10

78%

 

Virtual public charter schools and students (2013–14)

Number of virtual public charter school students

1,761

 

 

Percentage of a state’s public charter school student population enrolled
in virtual charter schools

4%

 

 

Number of virtual public charter schools

3

 

 

Percentage of a state’s public charter schools that are virtual charter schools

2%

 

 

 

Health of the Movement Summary

Minnesota enacted the nation’s first charter public school law in 1991. In our most recent rankings of state charter school laws, it ranked #3 out of 43, in part due to a major overhaul of its charter public school law in 2009. Minnesota’s law does not cap charter school growth, includes multiple authorizers, and provides a fair amount of autonomy and accountability. However, it provides inequitable funding to charters.

A state’s charter public school movement had to meet three conditions to be scored and ranked in this year’s report. First, the movement had to serve at least 2 percent of the state’s public school students. Second, the state had to participate in CREDO’s National Charter School Study 2013 so that we had a measure of student academic growth data for its charter public schools in comparison with its traditional public schools. Third, the state had to have a state accountability system in place that categorized all public schools on the basis of performance in 2012-13 and 2013-14. Minnesota’s movement did not meet at least one of these conditions, so we did not score and rank it in this year’s report.

However, below we provide the data we were able to gather. Based on this information, we offer the following observations:

  • In 2014-15, 7 percent of the state’s public schools were charters.
  • In 2014-15, 5 percent of the state’s public school students were charter students.
  • In 2013-14, the state’s charter public schools served a significantly higher percentage of racial and ethnic minority students (25 percentage points more) when compared with traditional public schools.
  • In 2013-14, charter public schools in Minnesota served a higher percentage of students eligible for free and reduced-price lunches (17 percentage points more) when compared with traditional public schools.
  • In 2012-13, 76 percent of the state’s public charters were located in nonsuburban areas as compared with 72 percent of traditional public schools.
  • In 2014-15, three communities in Minnesota had more than 10 percent of their public school students in charters.
  • In 2012-13, 54 percent of the state’s charter public schools were special-focus schools.
  • Between 2010-11 and 2014-15, 28 public charters opened in Minnesota, a 3.5 percent average annual open rate.
  • Between 2009-10 and 2013-14, 23 public charters closed in Minnesota, a 3.1 percent average annual closure rate.
  • Between 2007-08 and 2010-11, charter public school students exhibited higher academic growth in reading (14 more days), on average, when compared with traditional public school students.
  • Between 2007-08 and 2010-11, charter public school students exhibited lower academic growth in math (seven fewer days), on average, when compared with traditional public school students.
  • During 2014-15, 99 percent of the state’s charter public schools were start-ups and 1 percent were conversions.
  • As of 2014-15, five local school boards had authorized nine charter public schools (6 percent of the state’s total number of charter public schools), seven higher education institutions had authorized 25 charter public schools (16 percent), and 12 nonprofit organizations had authorized 123 charter public schools (78 percent).
  • In 2013-14, three full-time virtual charter public schools operated in Minnesota, serving 1,761 students (4 percent of the state’s charter public school population).