Where Does Your State’s Charter Schools Law Rank?
Today, the Alliance released a new report and database entitled “How State Charter Laws Rank Against The New Model Public Charter School Law.” The rankings report follows the original intent of charter school law, which is to ensure that public schools are allowed to be more innovative and are held accountable for improved student achievement.
The report also reflects a maturing of the charter school movement, incorporating lessons learned about how state policy can better ensure charter growth and flexibility while also providing accountability for student learning. As one example, the report pushes states to enact laws requiring authorizers to establish rigorous application processes; provide firm but supportive oversight; and create reliable, transparent processes for funding and renewal – provisions that support the creation of great charter schools and improved student achievement as we’ve learned via the laws, regulations, and research in such states as Massachusetts and New York.
Is it odd for a charter advocacy group to push for strengthening accountability, in addition to advocating for no caps, more autonomy, funding equity, and facilities support? Not if you recognize the growing consensus among political, education, state charter association, and school leaders about how to accelerate the move toward more and better public charter schools:
- In addition to pushing for removal of caps, funding equity, and facilities support, one of the four charter criteria in the U.S. Department of Education’s Race to the Top application asks about the extent to which “The State has laws, statutes, regulations, or guidelines regarding how charter school authorizers approve, monitor, hold accountable, reauthorize, and close charter schools.”
- Former Speaker of House Newt Gingrich, not a fan of government regulation, has aptly stated that chartering “is not 'write a check to every entrepreneur who shows up.'" According to Gingrich, charters must be transparent, and the charter selection process must be thorough.
- In 2006, Ohio Senator Jon Husted (then Speaker of the Ohio House), one of the charter movement’s strongest champions, led an effort to pass a bill strengthening school and authorizer accountability in the Buckeye state.
- In 2009, a bipartisan group of Minnesota lawmakers enacted a sweeping overhaul of the nation’s first charter school law, providing clarity to school and authorizer accountability in the state. This effort was championed by the Minnesota Association of Charter Schools and other grassroots charter supporters.
- In the 2010 legislative session in Pennsylvania, a bipartisan duo of state senators has introduced legislation to allow for more growth, expand authorizing options, and establish clearer lines of accountability – in part based on the Alliance’s Model State Charter Law.
- Last year, the California Charter Schools Association unveiled a plan to toughen school accountability in the state, part of which would require improved laws and regulations governing school performance. This plan was developed by a group of school leaders in the Golden State.
The rankings report released today, and the model law that it’s based upon, pushes states to accelerate the movement of more authorizers toward the best-in-class practices exhibited by the nation’s most effective ones, such as the State University of New York, the Indianapolis Mayor’s Office, and Central Michigan University, while also pushing states to get much more serious about charter flexibility, funding equity, and facilities support.
The charter bargain of more autonomy for increased accountability remains a winning formula. We now need to enact better laws on both sides of the coin to better support more great public charter schools and improved student results.
Visit the new State Charter Law Rankings Database
We thank the National Alliance for its comprehensive effort to evaluate state charter laws.
In Indiana, the general perception has been that we have one of the strongest charter laws in the nation. I can say with certainty that our #29 ranking has been eye-opening for many.
However, to those of us who believe that improvements are needed, we are now armed with objective, third-party evidence of this fact and, more important, a detailed roadmap to guide our efforts to improve.
The charter world should embrace the forces of competition. Hopefully, this will be a call to each state to strive for the #1 position in next year's report. Even if we fall a bit short, we will have expanded the number of high-quality education options to countless children and families throughout the nation.
Russ Simnick, President
Indiana Public Charter Schools Association
This week, the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools released an innovative and comprehensive report ranking charter school laws in our nation, with California coming in at #3.
We commend the Alliance for taking this important step and for providing charters the information that will allow us to grow on our strengths and work on our challenges as a statewide and national movement.
We have a monumental task in California as we move toward high-quality education reform. We look forward to working with the Alliance and all our partners and coalitions to achieve our goal of providing education options for students, parents, and communities.
Jed Wallace, President and CEO
California Charter Schools Association
I applaud the staff of the Alliance and others who worked with them to produce this comprehensive evaluation of the quality of state charter laws!
Although many some will question the methodology for scoring the states, I think this has been the most objective method of rating the most important aspects of the charter laws.
As State Associations, we need these ratings to assist us as we work with legislators and policy makers to improve our laws. Most all of them want to know what other states "are doing" when we speak with them here in Georgia about proposed new or amended legislation.
We are pleased that our state ranked #4. Believe me, this would not have been our rating even two years ago. And while we could not have assigned a "grade" to our laws, we know that it would have been a very low one. Now we believe that this ranking presents a real challenge to our stakeholders to be true to the legislation--to fulfill the intentions and provisions of the laws. It should also motivate us to look to other states for ideas and experiences about what works and what does not, with an eye to how we all can further strengthen our state charter laws.
Tony Roberts, CEO
Georgia Charter Schools Association
Post new comment