"A Study of Charter Schools: First-Year Report" was recently released
by the U.S. Department of Education. The study includes the first definitive
survey of all charter schools (90% of all charter schools in operation
as of the 1995-96 school year).
"A Study of Charter Schools: First-Year Report" was recently released
by the U.S. Department of Education. The report examines the role of states
in the charter movement, describes basic characteristics of charter schools
and their students, and examines why people create charter schools and
what barriers they encounter.
What follows are excerpts from the executive summary
of the report. The report was written and the study is being conducted
by RPP International and the University of Minnesota with support from
the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Educational Improvement (OERI).
The full text of A
Study of Charter Schools: First-Year Report is available online from
the DOE.
PREFACE AND HIGHLIGHTS
This summary provides highlights from the first-year report of the National
Study of Charter Schools, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education
as authorized by the 1994 Amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act.
Following are a few highlights of the study.
The Study includes the first definitive survey of all charter schools,
including 90 percent of all schools in operation as of 1995-1996.
Charter schools are extremely diverse. Their approaches to education
often vary dramatically from one another.
States play a primary role in defining the possibilities of charter
schools, and states vary greatly in their approaches.
Most charter schools are small, but they serve the great racial and
economic diversity of students that make up public education.
Charter school developers (including educators, parents and community
members) say that charters afford them an opportunity to pursue educational
goals that they felt they could accomplish more effectively with fewer
restrictions and stable financial support.
New charter schools face challenges encountered by fledgling small
business, including start-up costs, creating time for planning, cash
flow constraints, and attracting students and staff. Charter schools
that were pre-existing schools face different challenges; many have
realized autonomy from state regulations but some continue to struggle
to resolve local political and administrative situations (various state
restrictions still exist in many cases and may be increasing in some
states).
BACKGROUND
In response to widespread demands for better public education and for
more choice among public schools, a number of state legislatures in the
early 1990s permitted educators and local communities to develop charter
schools. While these schools receive public funds, they operate unfettered
by most state and local district regulations governing other public schools.
Instead, they are held accountable for improving student performance and
achieving the goals of their charter contracts.
Some believe that if charter schools demonstrate educational success,
they could provide effective educational models as well as create pressure
on local and state public education systems to operate differently, thereby
acting as a catalyst for changing public education across the nation.
Others believe that public schools should provide more choices to meet
the needs of students and parents. It is with these consequences in mind
that Congress in 1994 authorized funds, in amendments to the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act, for a study to assess the impact of charter
schools across the country. The first annual report of the Study provides
an early indication of how charter schools are progressing.
The Study will monitor the pulse of the charter school movement, addressing
research and policy questions in three major areas:
Implementation. Are charter schools similar to or different from other
public schools, and in what ways? What types of students attend charter
schools? Do they differ from students in other public schools? What factors
influence charter school development and implementation? How do states
differ in their approaches to charter schools, and in what ways do charter
laws and policies affect charter schools in each state?
Impact on Students. Do charter schools have an impact on student learning?
What are the conditions under which they improve (or fail to improve)
student achievement as well as other aspects of student learning?
Effect on Public Education. How do charter laws and charter schools
affect local and state systems of public education? Are charter schools
developing models or reform strategies that other public schools might
use to improve education? Does their existence pressure other schools
to reform? What lessons can be learned from the successes and failures
of charter schools?
THE FINDINGS
At the beginning of 1996, 252 charter schools were operating in ten
states. By the end of the year, 15 other states and the District of Columbia
had enacted charter legislation. One year later, 428 charter schools are
operating, and their numbers are likely to grow substantially over the
next few years. The following findings are based on phone interviews in
the spring of 1996 with 225 of the 252 charter schools operational in
1996 and on field visits to 42 of the 93 schools which had been open for
at least one year in 1996.
STATES PLAY A PRIMARY ROLE IN DEFINING
THE POSSIBILITIES OF CHARTER SCHOOLS
Each state follows a distinctive approach to charter school development.
The state's approach profoundly affects the number, type, and operation
of charter schools---and the impact they might have on the public school
system. Several states have freed charter developers from most regulations
that otherwise apply to public schools, but in others, charter laws are
more restrictive. The research team identified several dimensions of variation
in state laws, including:
How many charter schools are permitted? Sixteen of the 25 charter states
limit the number of charter schools in the state. Nine states have no
limits on the number of charter schools.
Who grants charters? In 12 states, the local school board is the only
authority that can grant a charter. In the remaining 13 states and the
District of Columbia, however, other---sometimes several---agencies may
grant charters.
Who may start charter schools? All but three of the 25 states and the
District of Columbia permit the creation of brand new schools. All states
and the District of Columbia have provisions for the conversion of public
schools to charter schools, while just six states allow the conversion
of private schools.
Who sets personnel policies? In 15 states and the District of Columbia,
charter schools may act as employers in their own right. In the remaining
ten states, legislation requires that teachers remain (or in the case
of newly created schools, become) employees of the local district. In
13 states, charter schools are subject to state collective bargaining
laws; but legislation in six other states is silent as to the status of
collective bargaining arrangements. The remaining states and the District
of Columbia either exclude charter schools from collective bargaining
arrangements or allow schools to address collective bargaining as a part
of their charters.
These and many other distinctions among state laws provide an opportunity
for the country to assess alternative state approaches to the use of charter
schools as a vehicle for education reform.
CHARTER SCHOOLS ARE DIVERSE
There is no "typical" charter school; they are extraordinarily diverse.
While some use advanced technology enabling students to study off-site,
others emphasize small, nurturing environments with close student-teacher
contact. Some schools mirror different aspects of school reforms of the
1990s, but others rely on more conventional pedagogy and programs. Structured
learning environments are featured in some charter schools, but others
have purposely designed less structured learning environments as a matter
of policy. A sizable proportion of charter schools are designed to serve
special populations, though most reflect the demographic characteristics
of students in their geographic area. The variety in charter schools is
evident, both in their diverse education programs and missions, and in
their array of approaches to management, governance, finance, parent involvement,
and personnel policies.
The report puts the variation in perspective by comparing charter schools
to other public schools in the ten states where charter schools were operating
in 1996:
Most charter schools are small. About 60 percent enroll fewer than 200
students, whereas only 16 percent of other public schools have such small
student bodies. No matter what grade levels are served, a higher proportion
of charter schools is smaller than other public schools. The difference
is most striking at the secondary level. Almost four-fifths of charter
schools enroll fewer than 200 students, in contrast to one-quarter of
other public secondary schools. Charter schools are more likely than other
public schools to serve a wide grade-level span (K-8 or K-12), or to be
ungraded.
Most charter schools are newly created. About 60 percent of charter
schools were created because of the charter opportunity; the remainder
are pre-existing schools that converted to charter status. About one-tenth
of all charter schools were previously private schools. Newly created
charter schools tend to be smaller than converted ones---three-fourths
of the newly created schools have fewer than 200 students, whereas only
half of the conversion schools have fewer than 200.
Charter schools have, on average, a racial composition roughly similar
to statewide averages or they have a higher proportion of students of
color. Massachusetts, Michigan, and Minnesota charter schools stand out
in that they enroll a higher percentage of students of color than the
average of all public schools in their respective states. Aside from Georgia
(which has only three charter schools), the average racial composition
of charter schools in the other states is similar to their statewide averages.
Charter schools serve, on average, a slightly lower proportion of students
with disabilities, except in Minnesota and Wisconsin. In eight states,
the typical charter school serves a somewhat lower percentage of students
with disabilities than the average public school in its state. In Minnesota
and Wisconsin this is reversed; the typical charter school serves a higher
percentage of students with disabilities. A number of charter schools
are designed specifically to serve special-needs students. Fifteen of
the 225 charter schools responding to the survey had student bodies that
were more than 25 percent special education students; two of them enroll
only students with disabilities.
Charter schools serve, on average, a lower proportion of limited-English-proficient
(LEP) students, except in Minnesota and Massachusetts. The averages mask
some statewide differences. Minnesota and Massachusetts charter schools
enroll a larger percentage of LEP students than the average of other public
schools in their states. And 21 charter schools serve student populations
composed of more than 25 percent LEP students. In the remaining states,
the average percentage of LEP students in charter schools is lower than
the statewide average. Georgia's three charters enroll a small percentage
of LEP students, but the statewide average is also very low.
Charter schools enroll approximately the same proportion of low-income
students, on average, as other public schools. About one-third of charter
school students were eligible for free and reduced price lunch, which
is about the same proportion as in all public schools. Approximately one-half
of the surveyed charter schools reported that their school participates
in the National School Lunch Program.
Most charter schools are eligible for Title I funding. This finding
holds for all states except for Colorado, Hawaii (which has two charter
schools) and Wisconsin (which has five). For most states, about half or
more of the schools reporting eligibility receive funding. However, in
Michigan, only 25 percent of this group receives funding; in Colorado
and Wisconsin, none receive funding. Further study is needed to determine
why schools that are eligible to receive Title I funds do not receive
them. Commentators have suggested that this problem may be due to administrative
issues or to difficulties that charter schools may experience in understanding
the complexity of Title I eligibility requirements.
The data thus show that though most charter schools are small---and
their numbers are relatively few---they serve the great racial and economic
diversity of students that make up public education. And like other public
schools engaged in major school reform, their approaches to education
often vary dramatically from one another.
THE MOST COMMON REASONS FOR FOUNDING CHARTER
SCHOOLS ARE TO PURSUE AN EDUCATIONAL VISION OR GAIN AUTONOMY
Charter schools are started in order to realize an educational vision;
have more autonomy over organizational, personnel, or governance matters;
serve a special population; receive public funds; engender parent involvement
and ownership; or attract students and parents. Different types of charter
schools had distinctive motivations. In particular:
Almost all newly created charter schools seek to realize an educational
vision and /or serve a special student population. Two out of three newly
created charter schools founded the charter to "realize an educational
vision." Another 20 percent were developed to serve a special population
of students, including "at-risk," language minority, disabled, or ethnic
and racial minority students.
The vast majority of schools chartered in order to gain autonomy are
pre-existing public schools. Four out of five charter schools that sought
autonomy from districts, state regulations or collective bargaining agreements
were public school conversions.
Most private schools convert to charter status in order to offer their
educational vision to additional or more diverse students using public
funds. In addition to realizing an educational vision, pre-existing private
schools cited attracting more students and seeking public funding as most
important reasons for converting to charter status.
There is a common thread across these distinctive motivations: Charter
developers feel that charters afford educators, parents and community
members an opportunity to pursue goals they felt they could accomplish
more effectively if they had fewer restrictions and stable financial support.
NEARLY ALL CHARTER SCHOOLS FACE IMPLEMENTATION
OBSTACLES
The vast majority of charter schools face difficulties during development
and implementation, but newly created charter schools experience a distinctive
pattern of difficulties compared to converted schools.
Resource limitations cause the most pervasive problems, especially lack
of start-up funds. Lack of start-up funds was mentioned more frequently
than any other single problem, by 59 percent of charter schools. Among
newly created schools, 68 percent said lack of start-up funds was a problem.
More than one-third of all Charter schools cited a problem with lack of
planning time. Similar percentages cited inadequate operating funds and
inadequate facilities. In all, seven out of ten charter schools named
at least one area where resource limitations produced some difficulty.
Some charter schools experience problems with other entities. Between
15 percent and 25 percent of charter schools cited each of the following
difficulties, (listed with the difficulties receiving the highest percentage
first): state or local board opposition, state education agency resistance
or regulation, internal conflicts or local education agency resistance
or regulation, or union or bargaining unit resistance. In all, three out
of five pre-existing schools experienced at least one of these problems.
No one of these difficulties was common across many charter schools, but
rather each problem tended to arise largely based on unique local situations.
Regulatory issues were cited less frequently. Only one out of four charter
schools, whether newly created or pre-existing, encountered one or more
problems involving regulatory barriers. For each type of regulatory barrier,
only ten percent or fewer of responding schools cited the problem. Regulatory
issues include restrictions on hiring teaching staff, health and safety
regulations, other state regulations (including financial, liability,
and retirement issues), and state accountability requirements.
It is typical for schools undergoing change to experience implementation
problems, but new charter schools have additional and singular challenges
most akin to those encountered by fledgling small businesses, including
creating time for planning, cash flow constraints, and attracting students
and staff. Conversion schools face different challenges; many have realized
autonomy from state regulations, but some continue to struggle to resolve
local political and administrative situations (various state restrictions
still exist in many cases and may be increasing in some states).
NEXT STEPS
It is far too early to assess the significance of charter schools for
American education, but this report offers the first comprehensive description
of the charter movement; thus, it provides a foundation for tracking future
charter developments. Building on this database and yearly updates, researchers
will study in subsequent years the impact of charter schools on student
performance and on state and local public school systems. In 1997, the
research team begins its longitudinal assessment of student achievement.
It will conduct intensive site visits in order to identify state and local
factors affecting charter implementation and student achievement, and
initiate the difficult task of collecting information on the possible
consequences of charter schools for American education.
