Measuring Up



Texas

TOTAL SCORE:
68 out of 132

Rank: 11 out of 18

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 Texas?

GROWTH INDICATORS

 

 

Score


1. Public school share
 (2014–15)

6

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

Number

Percentage

 

Public charter schools

721

8%

 

 


2. Public school student share
 (2014–15)

3

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

Number

Percentage

 

Public charter school students

264,606

5%

 

 

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

8

weight = 2 | Possible total = 8

Charters

Traditional

Difference

White

16%

30%

-14%

Black

21%

13%

8%

Hispanic

58%

51%

7%

Asian

3%

4%

-1%

Other

2%

2%

0%

Total minority

84%

70%

14%

 

4. Students in special populations (2013–14)

8

weight = 2 | Possible total = 8

Charters

Traditional

Difference

Free and reduced-price lunch status

71%

60%

11%

Special education status

N/A

N/A

N/A

English learner status

N/A

N/A

N/A

Total special student populations

71%

60%

11%

 

5. Schools by geographic distribution (2012–13)

6

weight = 2 | Possible total = 8

Charters

Traditional

Difference

City

69%

35%

34%

Suburb

18%

25%

-7%

Town

5%

14%

-9%

Rural

8%

26%

-18%

Total nonsuburban

82%

75%

7%

 

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

4

weight = 1 | Possible total = 4

 

 

 

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

16

   
 

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

6

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

 

 

 

2010–11

43

Average Annual Open Rate

7.4%

2011–12

49

2012–13

67

2013–14

54

2014–15

55

Total number

268

 

 

 

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

9

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

 

 

 

2009–10

13

Average Annual Closure Rate

2.0%

2010–11

19

2011–12

9

2012–13

4

2013–14

25

Total number

70

 

 

 
 

INNOVATION INDICATORS

 

 

Score

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

6

weight = 2 | Possible total = 8

 

 

 

No Excuses

17%

Total

58%

STEM

10%

Arts

2%

Classical

2%

Purposely diverse

1%

Single sex

3%

International/Foreign language

5%

Montessori/Waldorf

14%

Dropout/Expulsion recovery

14%

Military

0%

Vocational training

2%

Public policy/Citizenship

3%

 

QUALITY INDICATORS

 

 

Score

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

0

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

 

 

 

Number of additional days of learning in reading

-22

 

 

 

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

0

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

 

 

 

Number of additional days of learning in math

-29

 

 

 

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

6

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

 2012-13

2013-14

Difference

Met Standard

60%

61%

1%

Met Alternative Standard

19%

20%

1%

Total

79%

81%

2%

 

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

6

weight = 3 | Possible total = 12

 2012-13

2013-14

Difference

Improvement Required

21%

19%

-2%

 

Items Reported But Not Scored

Startups versus conversions (2014–15)

 

Startups

Conversions

 

 

Percentage of a state’s public charter schools

89%

11%

 

 

 

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

16

75

5

10%

State education agency

1

643

643

90%

Independent charter board

Noneducational government entity

Higher education institution

Nonprofit

 

Virtual public charter schools and students (2013–14)

Number of virtual public charter school students

9,012

 

 

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

4%

 

 

Number of virtual public charter schools

2

 

 

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

0.002%

 

 

 

Health of the Movement Summary

Texas’ charter public school movement ranked #11 out of 18, scoring 68 points out of 132.

Texas scored relatively well on the following indicators:

  • In 2013-14, charter public schools served a higher percentage of racial and ethnic minority students (14 percentage points more) when compared with traditional public schools.
  • In 2013-14, charter public schools in Texas served a higher percentage of free and reduced-price lunch students (11 percentage points more) when compared with traditional public schools.
  • In 2012-13, 82 percent of the state’s public charters were located in nonsuburban areas as compared with 75 percent of traditional public schools.
  • In 2014-15, 16 communities in Texas had more than 10 percent of their public school students in charters.
  • Between 2009-10 and 2013-14, 70 charter campuses closed in Texas, a 2 percent average annual closure rate.
  • In 2012-13, 58 percent of the state’s charter public schools were special-focus schools.

Texas scored relatively low on the following indicators:

  • In 2014-15, only 5 percent of the state’s public school students were charter students.
  • Between 2007-08 and 2010-11, charter public school students exhibited lower academic growth (22 fewer days in reading and 29 fewer days in math), on average, when compared with traditional public school students in Texas.

In addition to the above points, we also offer the following observations about the movement in Texas:

  • In 2014-15, 8 percent of the state’s public schools were charters.
  • Between 2010-11 and 2014-15, 268 charters opened in Texas, a 7.4 percent average annual open rate.
  • Between 2012-13 and 2013-14, the percentage of charter public schools performing in the top two categories of the state’s accountability system increased by 2 percentage points (from 79 percent to 81 percent).
  • Between 2012-13 and 2013-14, the percentage of charter public schools performing in the bottom two categories of the state’s accountability system decreased by 2 percentage points (from 21 percent to 19 percent).
  • During 2014-15, 89 percent of the state’s public charters were start-ups, and 11 percent were conversions.
  • In 2014-15, Texas law allowed applicants to apply to either local school boards or the state board of education. As of 2014-15, 16 local school boards had authorized 75 charter public campuses (10 percent of the state’s charter public campuses) and the state board of education had authorized 643 charter public campuses (90 percent).
  • In 2014-15, two full-time virtual charter public schools operated in Texas, serving 9,012 students (4 percent of the state’s charter public school population).

concluding thoughts

  • Texas has a relatively good charter law, particularly as it relates to state-authorized charters. However, the law most needs to provide more equitable funding and facilities support to charter students.
  • In Texas, charter public schools serve a higher percentage of racial and ethnic minority students and free and reduced-price lunch students than traditional public schools, showing that charters are serving those students who most need a better public school option.
  • Texas also has a relatively high percentage of special-focus schools, showing that charters are providing a diverse array of options for students and educators.
  • While Texas’ charters did not perform as well as their peers in CREDO’s National Charter School Study 2013, the most recent data within that report are from 2010-11. Since that time, Texas charter school supporters, led by the Texas Charter Schools Association, have implemented several efforts to improve achievement. Taken together, these changes will better promote the growth of high-quality charters and the closure of chronically low-performing charters. In fact, more current data than the CREDO study show the percentage of charters in the top two categories of the state’s accountability system is increasing, while the percentage of charters in the bottom category of the state’s accountability system is decreasing.