Bruce Baker has distilled the qualities of successful charter schools. In this post, Baker looks at the reasons that some NYC charter schools succeed.
The reason for creating charters in the late 1980s was that they would have the freedom to try new ideas and thereby to help public schools improve.
As the charters tried new things, public schools would learn from their experience and would improve.
The charters were supposed to gain freedom from most state regulation in exchange for their willingness to be held accountable.
After twenty years of charter school experimentation, we now have a pretty solid idea of “what works.”
The same things that “work” in charter schools should also work in public schools.
We should not waste time. Let’s learn from the charters so all schools can be successful schools.
First, the best charters spend considerably more money so that they can provide additional services and tutoring. Some spend thousands more per student.
That is an important lesson. Every public school that wants to see dramatic improvement should get extra funding.
Second, the charters are free of burdensome regulation by the states and districts.
That’s an important finding. The states and districts should immediately give public schools the same regulatory relief now available to charters.
Third, the charters do not accept the same proportion of students with special needs or students who are English language learners.
Uh-oh. That’s a hard one. Public schools are required by state and federal laws to have their doors open to all students. I don’t think that public schools can follow the charter model here. If public schools didn’t take these students, where would they go?
Fourth, the charters have even more money to spend because of the small proportion of children with disabilities and English language learners; this is a budget plus. But again, I don’t think public schools can maximize their dollars by excluding the most expensive-to-educate kids. So that’s another no-go.
Fifth, the charters make their own disciplinary rules and can toss out kids who misbehave by their rules, like bringing chips to school or not looking in the eyes of the teacher, or speaking up when they are supposed to walk in silence. But if public schools kicked out kids for minor infractions, where would they go? To another public school.
Sixth, the charters have longer school days, longer school weeks, and a longer school year. More time to teach, more time to get ready for state tests. Public schools can do that too, unless those pesky unions insist on being paid more for working longer hours.
Seventh, charters keep their costs low by encouraging or tolerating or not minding constant turnover among the teachers. That way, the bulk of teachers are in year one or two, at the bottom of the salary scale, and they are more malleable. Senior teachers cost more, and have ideas of their own. But public schools will have a hard time learning this lesson because senior teachers have job rights. Of course, with the current move on to eliminate seniority and tenure, even public schools will soon be dealing mainly with inexperienced and malleable teachers in their first year. Who will train the new teachers if the senior teachers have left? Well, that’a a problem we will deal with some other time. No one has time to think about that now.
But one thing seems clear: If public schools get more money; if they can be freed of regulations, if they can exclude the most challenging students, if they have longer hours, if they have constant teacher turnover to save money, if they can keep out or push out the students who don’t obey or who can’t pass the tests, then they too will get fabulous results.
Now that we have the secrets of charter success, what should we do? And what arrangements should be made for the children who are unwanted by the new schools of success? The children who don’t speak English, the children with disabilities, the children who don’t obey the rules, the children who get low scores. What should we do with them?
The charters show us how to Race to the Top. What they don’t show us how to achieve equality of educational opportunity.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I have a question.
The new evaluation systems for teachers are being developed and implemented in many states. Are they using these same exact systems to evaluate teachers at charters schools? And are the charter school test results made public like the regular public schools? Is this happening in all states?
On the Jersey Jazzman blog, it appeared that NJ has still not released the data on their charter schools. It has been over a year. He has a countdown posted. Public schools results are released pretty quickly.
What do they have to hide and what happened to transparency? The public has the right to know…I have heard that from political leaders.
Pennsylvania has just approved four more cyber charter schools to be based in Philadelphia.
http://tinyurl.com/d3p3k3u
This dispute a 2011 study which showed of the 12 cyber charters existing at that time only 2 made AYP and 8 needed “corrective action.”
http://keystonestateeducationcoalition.blogspot.com/2011/11/pa-cyber-charter-pssa-ayp-2007-2011.html
No, in most “reform” laws, the charter teachers are exempt from the punitive teacher evaluations.
Why? How can that happen? Why should they get tax money if they are not held to the same standards?
I suppose charters don’t “need” punitive teacher evaluations since they can fire teachers at will?
How about comments on the ongoing scandal of quasi-private public schools that are allowed to screen out students via admissions test and auditions? You call them “magnets” in New York. Today’s NY Times points out one of the best known has had cheating scandals for years: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/nyregion/70-students-at-stuyvesant-to-retake-exams-after-cheating-case.html?_r=1&hpw
Does this bother you, or are you ok with quasi private “magnets”?
Joe Nathan, parent of 3 children who attended St. Paul, Minnesota public schools open to all, k-12.
Joe, you must have a guilty conscience about the difference between the charter movement you hoped for and the aggressive, money=making movement that is now sweeping the midwest and the south. I have mixed feelings about selective admissions public schools. I don’t have mixed feelings about charter entrepreneurs who skim top students, make a profit, pay themselves outlandish salaries, and boast that their test scores are better than those of public schools. They want more: more public money, more public space, more freedom from regulation. The only thing they want less of is transparency and accountability.
Diane, I’m sometimes enthusiastic, and sometimes disturbed by the way that communities have used the idea of public school choice…whether through in district options, or charters.
Over 42 years as a public school educator, I’m been deeply frustrated by the way that some districts decided to exclude many inner city kids by creating magnets that suburban students could enter (via admission test) but that most inner city kids could not gain access to. This is one of the reasons that many African Americans have turned to charters, which usually are open to all kinds of students. I’m also disturbed by some of the things I see happen in the charter world.
But most of our work involves bringing district and charter educators to work with and learn from each other. For example, we recently held a workshop, ending a year’s worth of work, in which district, charter and college educators learned from each other about how to help more students be successful.
Joe, sounds like you are striving to recover the original promise of charters, which you were instrumental in creating. But come to New York City, and see the aggressive charter entrepreneurs who grab free public space, exclude low-performing students, and boast of their “success.” See the kids in identical outfits organized to attend political events and lobby for more charters. How many charters can one child attend? See the public school students lose their art rooms, their resource rooms, their playground because a charter took their space, a charter whose wealthy board could easily rent or buy its own space. See the charters with lavish funding comparing themselves to public schools that do not have a board of hedge fund managers. See the communities riven by fighting between charters and public schools. See middle-class communities organizing to keep out the charter chains. See the rage as politically connected charter entrepreneurs get whatever they want from the mayor and governor. It’s a different story outside of Minnesota.
Why don’t you write something Mr. Nathen? Or are you just trying to excuse the lucrative charter industry by pointing out highly specialized public schools called Magnets?
On balance, while Magnet schools are more like charters in terms of being able to exclude students, they are unlike privately managed charters (or quasi-public if you like) in that they are district schools and typically have publicly elected school boards (Bloomberg’s fiefdom in NYC is a notable exception). Moreover, they are members of the same district (sharing funding) to which rejected students will end up, unlike charters, who have no consequences for discriminating.
Actually, PESJA, i write a weekly column that reaches up to 700,000 a week. I’ve written a number of commentaries for Ed Week, articles for Phi Delta Kappan, Ed Leadership and others.
By the way, district schools exclude kids by the hundreds of thousands. US Dept of Ed released data in March, 2012 about how African American students are 3 times as likely to be suspended or expelled as district educators. http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2012/03/06/feds-black-students-more-than-three-times-as-likely-to-be-suspended-or-expelled/
A variety of advocacy groups have been very critical of the number of kids who are kicked out by traditional schools.
Nevertheless there are terrific district as well as charter schools. I’d readily agree about that.
The list is fabulous, Diane. I bet you will think of another in the middle of the night!:)
My job, to remember them all!
Long before the charter movement started, there was an effective schools movement. Harvard professor Ron Edmonds noted that there were district public schools that produced excellent results with students from low income families. I realize it’s popular on this web area to disparage successful charters…but in 42 years as a public school educator, PTA parent and writer, I’ve learned it’s more useful to learn from, rather than criticize successful schools..whether they are district or charter.
The Ron Edmonds schools were typical public schools, not charter schools that selected their students and limited the intake of students with disabilities and English language learners. I knew Ron Edmonds personally as well as his research.
Yes, Edmond pointed out what many people question: that public schools could succeed with students from low income families. As to the composition of charters, many charters enroll a higher % of low income and limited English speaking students than the district.
And virtually no charters have the kind of high walls excluding students who do not excell that many magnet schools have (a USDE study some years ago found that more than half the nation’s secondary magnet’s used an admission test, more than 25% of US elementary schools.
There are many lessons to learn from some of the nation’s most effective district and charters with low income youngsters – and those lessons are not necessarily that higher achievement requires more money.
This is a reply to Joe Nathan’s second reply.
You stated: “As to the composition of charters, many charters enroll a higher % of low income and limited English speaking students than the district.” You left out the fact that this statement refers to schools in Minnesota and not all charter schools in the US. One cannot necessarily extrapolate from MN to the whole country. If I have misstated what you have said please correct me.
“There are many lessons to learn from some of the nation’s most effective district and charters with low income youngsters – and those lessons are not necessarily that higher achievement requires more money.” I agree with the first half of your statement. As one who teaches in a rural poverty district I believe that all students can learn even in a district that only spends $7900 per student and has the highest student/teacher ratio in the state. As a generality charters do end up spending more per pupil than the corresponding district schools so the second part of your statement is contradicted by that fact.
And if you believe that “higher achievement” as measured by standardized test scores is equal to higher learning by the students I have some ocean front property up by Duluth on Lake Superior to sell you.
In no way am I saying one can’t learn from the other. It’s like the new teacher on the faculty. It seemed there was always something I learned from them. I hope they learned from me as well.
You asked what district educators taught charter educators. I gave you an example. Of course educators who are open have a lot to learn. We have convened district & chartrer educators to learn from a person who worked with Lemov. Many district and well as charter educators loved the postive reinforcements that Lemov suggests in some of his strategies.
Actually, this blog is full of district educators who create and promote an us versus them. I’ve spent almost 2 decades bring district and charter educators together. But when I come to this (and other list serves, I see constant and continuing trashing of charters).
Joe, I never asked that question to begin with. In fact, I never asked any question. I think you put the reply in the wrong place.
You are right. It was Linda who asked. I apologize for the mistake.
Diane, I agree with some of your comments on charters – but 3,4,and 5? I do not know of any public charter school that does not enroll through the lottery – so how could they NOT accept students who are considered “at-risk”? Isn’t that the purpose of charters? To provide innovative learning organizations to increase the learning opportunities for ALL students? The only way a charter school can control their population is by being effective and lowering their pupil attrition rate. As a result, most of the openings are enrolled through sibling laws. In addition, tossing out students again defeats the purpose of a charter school. Charter schools have clear discipline plans that align with the school’s mission. In turn, creating a culture conducive to student mastery. It also helps when all of the teachers believe in the school missions and vision, you do not find that in many traditional public settings. I’m not saying that there are not charters out there that may cream some of the better student’s or “exclude” because he/she just doesn’t fit our mission. However, that is just one more student who is being left behind.
Many charters do not have a lottery because they are not oversubscribed.
There is now an abundance of studies showing that a large number of charters do not have a proportionate share of students who are ELL and special needs.
Read Bruce Baker’s posts. There are many others.
When I spoke in the Bronx last fall, I read the demographics on the local charters. They had half as many ELLs and special ed students as the neighborhood schools.
And you may not have seen the GAO report that came out a few weeks ago, which documented that charters typically do not have as much special ed kids.
Plus, charters in New Orleans have been sued for excluding special ed kids.
Tom,
They ‘control’ their school populations through disciplinary procedures, counseling ‘bad’ (those that will score poorly on standardized tests) students out of the school and a host of other mechanisms that the real public schools cannot and should not do.
And although I’ve not seen any study about the degrees of disabilities of special ed students in a charter versus public schools my suspicion is that the percentage of lesser disabilities makes up a larger portion of the charter school’s special ed students leaving the public schools with that much higher portion of more severely disabled students than before a charter came into being. If anyone knows of such a study I would be interested in seeing it.
All this reminded me of the well-circulated blueberry ice cream story. It’s really deja vu all over again.
http://teachers.net/gazette/JUN02/vollmer.html
Suzie, having been a urban public school teacher, administrator, PTA president and researcher for 42 years, I’ll make it brief: the more district educators deny that they have anything to learn that can be applied today, in their classrooms from outstanding charters, the more people will leave the district system.
I don’t defend every charter or every district school…but there is a LOT to learn from some of them…and it’s not just about more money or selective admissions.
Just within an hour of Minneapolis. Minnesota New Country has done a great job with project based learning, High School for Recording Arts focuses its curriculum around music, saving teenagers who have been failed in traditional schools, Hiawatha succeeds far better with spanish speaking students than near by district schools, and Harvest Prep is doing so well with African American students (who make up 100% of its student body) that both the Minneapolis & St. Paul district have asked the school’s leaders to help them.
Reading Dr. Ravitch’s blog, I see many educators in denial.
Mr. Nathan,
Can you elaborate on what the charter schools learned from the public school teachers?
Surely they were able to learn something? If these efforts were truly collaborative, it wasn’t charters merely helping the public schools.
Charters here in the northeast are usually run by management companies with very high salaries for a select few and very high attrition rates among their teachers. I would expect teachers to stay if it was a great school.
They have a militaristic style of management for the students. I wouldn’t want to work there. I prefer my public school to this style of management, what another poster referred to as “behavioral sterilization”.
Joe,
No one has stated that district educators aren’t willing or cannot learn from a charter school. That’s a straw man argument.
You may believe that “it’s not just about more money or selective admissions.” Yes, it is because on average charters do spend more than their corresponding district’s schools. Selective admission does occur by the fact that the parents of charter schools are more motivated and capable of doing the work that is needed to get their children into charters (not that that is necessarily a bad thing.) So yes, their is selective admissions, just not done by the charters themselves. And it’s what happens after admission is where the majority of charter school based selection occurs through disciplinary issues, counseling out students who don’t buy into the charters ways, and any of the other miscellaneous ways charters have figured out how to get rid of a ‘bad’ student-which the public school can’t and shouldn’t do as we are charged with educating all students not just the most willing and compliant ones.
No, most of us public school teachers are not in denial. We just look at the facts and determine that charters and public schools have at least two differing charges-public schools attempt to educate all and charters are selective.
Do you know how much that guy earns per speech? I talked to him today to verify what I thought. He has made a wonderful living going around the country telling educators how under-appreciated they are.
Linda asked what charter educators learned from district educators. One example – a terrific high school (district) physics teacher has his students create You-Tube videos to demonstrate basic principles of physics – other district & charter educators thought his ideas were terrific.
We disagree on facts. Having worked in 30 states with educators and legislators, I’ve seen many traditional schools push out students they don’t want to work with – first to alternative schools, and then to charters. I helped start an award winning k-12 option in St. Paul in St. Paul, Mn. in 1971. Alternative school educators saw this push out happen all over the nation, and it is still going on.
After reading your posts, I think you may be on the one who can’t see the forest through the trees.
The Lemov book, the SLANT technique, rapid fire questioning, keeping the kids on edges, cult-like hand gestures/signals,
walk in perfect lines, shine your shoes, tuck in your shirt, make eye contact at all times. Did you read the comment about five year olds being yanked by their shirt collars to sit up straight and when questioned by a younger teacher the response was: “They’re crack babies..they don’t know any better.” search back to find that.
I don’t need to employ those abusive strategies to get kids to pay attention and to be engaged.
The experiences of teachers count as much as those who flit from
state to state. We have expertise as well.
I agree with some of the things in Lemov’s book, and disagree with others. I don’t know about the comment re crack babies – I’ve heard disrepectful comments from too many teachers over the last 40 years. I don’t need to use all the techniques in Lemov’s book to engage students either.
I can’t comment on people’s expertise. I look at things like the Hope Survey that measures whether students are learning to set goals and work toward them, or % of students attending school (and whether it is increasing, or what’s happening on writing rubrics, as well as whether there is progress on test scores.
District & charter educators in various states have asked for help from our organization. I’ll pass on responding to the comment about flitting from place to place.
Some of us look at data and surveys and studies and some of look a
real live children everyday as well as the rest. Everyday teaching and learning experiences over the course of 20-30 years mean more than analyzing data, test scores, and figures.
That’s why teachers admire and flock to Nancy Atwell workshops and books. She still teaches and has everday experiences that all of us can relate to…ones you’re proud of, ones that make you smile, laugh and cry. She is the real deal.
Typo and alignment issue…some of us look at
Joe,
Not sure if I am reading you correctly in this statement “I’ve seen many (how many is many? ballpark estimate is ok) traditional schools push out students they don’t want to work with – first to alternative schools, and then to charters”. Are you saying that public schools have denied access to the schools through current practices or that they have in the past? If so when and has it since changed? Now if you consider alternative schools, which are part of the public school district, then no they haven’t pushed those students out but have provided an alternative setting.
If you are talking about disciplinary issues whereby a student is suspended for a certain period that is different. For example, Johny threatens Joey with being beat to a pulp tomorrow and then proceeds to attempt to do so and is given a suspension of 180 days, when Johny completes the 180 days he is allowed back into the school. If Johny happens to be under 16 then it is the parents’ responsibility by law to find an alternative educational setting for that time frame and one of those choices could be a charter school. But I would not consider that as the public school “pushing out” the student.
As the parent of a less than stellar student who never completed high school, even though given a number chances and alternative settings, I understand that the traditional public school setting doesn’t work for all students. But it wasn’t for lack of trying on the part of the public school and they certainly didn’t “push” him out, quite the contrary. (By the way he has matured as I kept telling him he would, went to chef school and now prepares desserts and salads that are “too pretty to eat” and too expensive for this public school teacher’s salary).
By the way, what charter schools have you been involved in? Non-profit/profit? for how long? If you don’t mind me asking.
Hi Duane, first, glad, that things are working out for your son.
Thentaking your last question first, our organization (Center for School Change) has worked with both districts and charter public schools over the last 25 years (districts since 1988, charters since 1992). We’ve helped districts create new options open to all kinds of students & we’ve helped create independent charter public schools.
http://www.centerforschoolchange.org
On the issue of push-outs, I helped create and worked in a k-12 district public school option that started in 1971 and is still operating (as a grades 7-12 option). I watched the public school option evolve into the idea of schools for students that districts did not want in their building, and into magnet schools. I’ve visited more than 1,500 schools in 41 states over the last 40 years.
Hope that helps.
Linda, national research shows that more than 60% of charters are independent, are not part of a group. Can you cite research that “charters here in the NE usually are run by management companies.” I’ve visited a variety of charters in NY, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Delaware and Pennsylvania that are not. And I’m not prepared to agree that all schools that are members of a group are militaristic or bad. It’s fine if you dont’ want to teach in one of them. You might prefer the project based, teacher run charters that have been set up by EdVisions Cooperative (right – a teacher run cooperative) – there are more than 30 of them around the country.
Achievement First – NY,CT, RI
Uncommon Schools – Boston
KIPP – Boston, NYC
See tactics in Lemov Book – Teach like a champion
Check previous posts by Jim Horn – Schools Matter
Check previous posts about Relay Graduate
School – see video Rigorous Classroom
Discussion
Family stories in Boston..several…ways to keep families and limit their opportunities for other schools and ways to get rid of non perfomers – KIPP and Uncommon schools.
We all have our own experiences…yours do not negate mine.
There is a lot more that can be learned and share by public school teachers than the one physics teacher and videos.
Don’t degrade and underestimate our contributions. You create an us. vs. them mentality, just like TFA.
KIPP is in Florida as well.
Charter Schools USA
Somerset Academy Schools
If politicians are bashing the current school district system of doing things, how can they turn around and support a multi-state school district-type system called a charter school network?
I just finished watching Mitt Romney’s speech to the NAACP. I would say that more time was spent talking about education, and he used charter schools as the solution to the problem. It was essentially a “why charters are great” speech. I wish his people would read this post by you. If charters are so successful with these policies, why not grant traditional public schools the same privileges? Oh, it’s not about these policies. It is about busting the union and getting rid of the older ($$$) teachers.
“Third, the charters do not accept the same proportion of students with special needs or students who are English language learners.”
To me this is a very important issue. Having been a special education teacher in the inner city, I know that there are many children that fall into this category. Therefore, it is a continuation of discriminating against poor minority children that have the capability to learn but need more TLC. Unless these children are fairly included, the improvement in education will be limited.