Doing better for charter schools
When President Obama urged states to lift charter school caps, many saw it as the catalyst to reduce charter limits in North Carolina and finally push forward with the recommendations of the state’s bipartisan Blue Ribbon Commission on Charter Schools. Proposed legislation in the North Carolina General Assembly has been touted as the first step in that forward momentum. But close inspection of the bill has left some wondering if the measure inadvertently could mean “one step forward and two steps back” for the state’s charter school movement--particularly for those schools serving low-income and at-risk students.
In 2008, the state’s Blue Ribbon Commission recommended increasing the number of charter schools by 6 schools per year. The first charter school in each county and high performing charter schools, especially those demonstrating success in closing the achievement gap, would have been excluded from the graduated annual cap. In total, it was estimated that the commission’s recommendations would have resulted in approximately 86 new charters in the first year of modified legislation.
Recent charter school legislation, which has been approved by the North Carolina House and is in the state Senate, has been described as a modest implementation of the Blue Ribbon Commission’s plan. On its face, the bill appears to strike a compromise between charter school advocates and those who oppose competition within the traditional public school system. The state would allow a total increase of 6 new charter schools instead of 86, while creating more stringent evaluation measures for the schools.
Performance evaluation would be modified to require charter schools to demonstrate one year’s growth in individual student performance per school year or face revocation of the charter by the end of the second year of operation. In addition, the State Board of Education would have the authority to shut down charter schools deemed to have low levels of student performance for two consecutive years.
Charter school advocates are concerned that the proposed evaluation measures, combined with the rigid cap, would harm the state’s charter schools and block North Carolina from receiving additional federal funding. Baker Mitchell, founder of two charter academies in Eastern North Carolina, believes the legislation is so restrictive that it would discourage charter groups from establishing new schools that serve mostly minority, low-income students and hurt those schools already serving at-risk populations.
“In exchange for the tiny gain of 6 additional schools, charter schools will face shut-downs based on new, absolute criteria, irrespective of how surrounding schools may be performing. This is a massive setback,” said Mitchell. “The consequences, however unintended, will be for charter operators to focus only on high-income, high achievement areas where the students easily can surpass the state average.”
According to the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, only 1,315 traditional public schools out of 2,329 made one year’s growth in one school year during 2007-08. Even fewer traditional public schools made Adequate Yearly Progress under federal guidelines. Charter school supporters point to those statistics when arguing that the bill allows the state to shut down charter schools that actually outperform local, traditional public schools.
“No one is suggesting that standards be lowered,” said Steven Raburn, Executive Director of the North Carolina Alliance for Charter Schools. “But charter schools should be judged relative to other schools in their communities, based on established criteria that already define low performance as below 60% proficiency for two consecutive years.”
North Carolina has financial incentive to demonstrate substantial growth in the area of charter schools, with the distribution of federal stimulus funds directly tied to a range of reform metrics including the elimination or increase of charter school caps. Moreover, the US Department of Education is poised to release $4.3 billion in “Race to the Top” funds to a handful of states that submit plans for ambitious educational reform. Considering the Obama administration’s strong endorsement of public charter schools, especially those targeting the achievement gap, it is safe to assume that North Carolina must modify its existing charter school law to be a legitimate contender in the race.
The question is whether our state is in it only for the federal prize money or for the greater, long-term commitment to educational improvement. When it comes to charter school legislation in North Carolina, parents, children and educational reformers are hoping for a marathon instead of a mad-dash.
