Joe Nathan, who was a leading figure in the development of the charter movement, has spiritedly defended charters on this blog. He points to charters in Minnesota to show that the original ideals of the movement survive there. Unlike New York City, for example, where the charters are aggressively entrepreneurial, glory in pushing public schools out of their space, spend more than the neighborhood public school, and crow that they are far, far better and get higher test scores and deserve even more space.
But Minnesota is not altogether idyllic. Last December, John Hechinger of Bloomberg News wrote a disturbing article about segregated charter schools in Minnesota. He wrote about an all-black charter school (for “East African children”) in St. Paul and another charter in St. Paul that is 90 percent white (German immersion).
The title of his article: “Segregated Charter Schools Evoke Separate but Equal Era in U.S. Education.”
A sample of the article, which I recommend:
Six decades after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down “separate but equal” schools for blacks and whites, segregation is growing because of charter schools, privately run public schools that educate 1.8 million U.S. children. While charter-school leaders say programs targeting ethnic groups enrich education, they are isolating low-achievers and damaging diversity, said Myron Orfield, a lawyer and demographer.
It is fair to ask, What is the end game? Where are we heading? What is the goal? Separate schools for every ethnic group? The end of the idea of common schooling?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Very interesting article….odd how Mr. Nathan didn’t mention the degree of segregation. At least now we know where he is coming from.
Actually, Linda, where I’m coming from is being involved in the civil rights movement in various ways for the last 50 years..that includes a variety of marches, involvement with various communities of color, and having our 3 children attend urban, integrated, non-selective public schools in St. Paul, Minnesota.
We will have Joe Nathan on The School Choice Show.. You can read my book too for more information. Escape from Uncle Sam’s Plantation, by Ed Temple. You can watch him live 5pm Eastern time on twitter and facebook. It will also be on live radio. @disciplescoach
The fact that a relative handful of mom-and-pop charters hew to the “ideals” of the “original” charter movement – would that also include the all-white Christian academies set up to defy integration in the South, since that is also part of their genetics? – is near meaningless: as the chains scale up, the little guys will be closed, merged, consolidated. It’s the logic of the market and the imperative of the corporate model that has taken over the schools.
Once these independent charters have fully served their purpose of terminally diverting resources from the local public schools, they too will find themselves under attack.
I see your first paragraph as nothing but scare tactics. The Charters in my state have focused on academics. Although I do see some Charters falling victim to the same progressive fads in public schools.
I do think your second paragraph has some merit. Legislators and bureaucrats can’t help themselves. They will not be satisfied by allowing Charters to run without state intervention. That state intervention, if allowed to run amok, will have the same negative impact that it does on the public schools.
So why not improve the public schools so there is no need for Charters?
What are we missing?
Just so you know there are many excellent and successful public schools in our country. You seem to be missing that point in your arguments or you just choose not to acknowledge it. It isn’t all or nothing.
Some parents prefer, and some students thrive, in a Montessori setting. Others do better in a more traditional setting. Some teachers prefer to work in Montessori, while others prefer, for example, the Core Knowledge Approach. One of the things I’ve learned as a parent, urban public school educator over the last 42 years is that there is no single best school for all students.
Well done public school choice plans allow educators and parents to create more quality options, so more students can succeed.
I recall reading that article. It was disturbing. I also have been attempting to keep up with Mr. Nathan’s support for the Minnesota charter schools in comments made on your blogs. He should try harder to give the complete picture. Everything is never perfect.
I hope that courts will honestly look at these charters schools in terms of Brown vs. the Board of Education and P.L 94-142 Education for All Handicapped Children Act. Otherwise our schools will be even more flawed and not reformed in a positive way. It is a good thing that you, Diane, and many others are holding these organizations’ feet to the fire because it is really an important battle that we are fighting for the good of ALL children. Each and every one of them deserves a chance at a quality education and it appears that unless we stay vigilant, this will not happen. Thank you.
Bill Wilson, Former Minnesota Commissioner of Human Rights and first African American elected to the St. Paul City Council Presidency, and I responded to these questionable assertions in a column, a portion of which is below. Both of us support more excellent public schools, whether district or charter.
One of us (Wilson) responded several years ago at the Minnesota legislature to the charge that charter schools such as the one he founded were “segregated.” He differentiated between schools like his (Higher Ground Academy) and the segregated public school he was forced to attend in Indiana: “We had no choice,” he recalled. “I was forced to attend an inferior school, farther from home than nearby, better-funded ‘whites-only’ schools. Higher Ground is open to all. No one is forced to attend. Quite a difference.”
http://charternotebook.org/giving-parents-choice-among-various-schools-i
Here’s a bit more of that article.
After working in urban communities for a combination of more than 80 years, one of us serving as Minnesota’s State Commissioner of Human Rights and being elected first African American to serve as St. Paul’s City Council Chair, and helping produce major gains with low income and students of color, we vigorously disagree with a recent assertion on the Charter Notebook blog site that “…any achievement” by a group of students at a charter school that is predominantly of one race is “hollow.” (Rachel Scott, “Independent Charter Schools and Diversity, Part One: The Problem of “Resegregation,” January 18, 2012)
Imposed separation because of or on the basis of race or color is the classic definition of segregation. People choosing of their own free will to attend a public school is the exercise of liberty. The right to assemble and exercising freedom of choice is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. How then is choosing which charter school to attend not consistent with the right of assembly? Unlike imposed segregation, charter schools include all who apply or wish to come. Unlike segregated schools of the 1950’s and 1960’s, these schools most certainly do not exclude anyone because of their race or color of skin.
Minnesota’s largest daily newspaper, the Star Tribune has found for the last two years that the vast majority of Minneapolis-St Paul area public schools that are “beating the odds” are charter public schools. In September, 2011, a graphic appeared in the Star Tribune listing the 10 public schools in reading and math with high percentages of low income students that had the highest percentage of students proficient in reading or math on the official statewide examinations. See: http://www.startribune.com/newsgraphics/129810153.html.
The top eight of the ten schools listed in math were charter public schools, and the top nine of ten schools listed in reading were charter public schools. These were schools that “showed the highest percentage of students scoring at grade level or better, despite having a high number of students living in poverty.” To be eligible to be on the list, a school had to enroll at least 85% students from low-income families.
The vast majority of these high-ranking charter public schools enrolled 80% or more students of color. Many of the “beat the odds” schools enrolled 90% or more from one race. Bill Wilson, co-author of this blog post (and former Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Human Rights) founded and is director of one of these schools. US News and World Report also has listed the school Wilson helped start, Higher Ground Academy, as one of the nation’s finest high schools.
Denying the value of these schools, as Scott does in her recent blog post, reminds us of what Ralph Ellison wrote about in the civil rights classic, Invisible Man. Ellison wrote, in part, “I am invisible, understand, simply because people refuse to see me.”
Back in January, I re-posted a tweet from Parents Across America founder Leonie Haimson that pointed to a post on a KKK-affiliated web site that cited this Bloomberg News article approvingly. The post’s author argued that the desire for separation was “natural” and praised the charter school movement for making this possible.
Days later, still on vacation, I started getting calls from reporters at Michigan media outlets asking for my response to a vitriolic press release from the Michigan Association of Public School Academies (the main charter school trade/lobbying group in Michigan). MAPSA president Dan Quisenberry called my reposting “sickening,” “beyond insulting,” and “beyond outrageous.” Apparently, I had struck a nerve.
I have not, and do not, accuse any charter school of breaking the law, though I am suspicious of the motivation of those who start charter schools designed to appeal to one ethnic or religious group. But as to MAPSA’s argument that “the claim itself has absolutely no merit,” they are on thin ice. A number of academic studies have shown that students in charter schools are likely to be in more segregated environments than their counterparts in local public schools in the same area.
A recent policy brief on this subject: http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/chartering-equity
Here in Michigan, we have charters that describe themselves as “Afrocentric,” that dedicate themselves to the study and celebration of the cultures of the Middle East, that have a clear focus on Latino students, and that advertise a “moral focus” (code for a Christian education, which they only abandoned under threat of lawsuit). How likely is a white family to enroll their child in an “Afrocentric” school; how likely is a Latino family to enroll their child in a school that focuses on Arab and Middle Eastern language and culture? How often will an African American family living in a small city choose to enroll their child in a charter focused on something like “aviation” which is located in a distant, mostly white, suburb and offers no transportation?
I have no issue with celebrating different cultural identities and experiences, but I am very concerned that the headlong rush towards charters will only increase the segregation of our nation. We are playing into the hands of those, of whatever ethnicity or religion, who want to turn their backs on community-governed public education and provide segregated enclaves where children need only mix with those most like themselves. In doing so, we put at risk everything we have done to ensure justice, equal opportunity and equal protection for every American.
For those morbidly interested, the MAPSA press release, and our response, can be found here:
http://www.miparentsforschools.org/files/KKK%20COMPARISON%20PRESS%20RELEASE.pdf (MAPSA’s attack)
http://www.miparentsforschools.org/files/MIPFS_reacts_MAPSA_release.pdf (our response)
The community governed public education that Steve defends means in many states that students are separated by race and class. In the east, some school districts have taken low income parents to court because they dared to enroll their children in suburban districts where they could not afford to live. This is one of the reasons that various polls show more support among low income families for various forms of public school choice.
The largest publicly funded school choice plan in the country is the suburbs. There, in many states, wealthy families can (and do) isolate themselves from inner city students. Plus, families can deduct from their taxable income the real estate tax they pay, and the interest on exclusive, expensive homes found in many suburbs.
Fortunately, here in Minnesota (and in some other states), legislators passed cross district public school choice plans that allow movement across district lines. This has meant in some rural areas, that students can go to school a few miles from home, rather than the nearest school in their district which can be 20-30 miles away.
We have students from suburbs coming into the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul to attend both district and charter public schools. I’m glad.
Is Mr. Norton in favor of allowing inner city Detroit, Grand Rapids, etc. students to attend suburban schools and allowing suburban students to come into Detroit? Since he seems to want more youngsters of various races and income levels to learn together (as I do), I hope he supports this idea and has used his lobbying skills to promote that idea.
Is Mr. Norton opposed to the charters in Michigan (including one that won a National Blue Ribbon award) established by Native Americans who want to make sure that the schools are presenting a respectful approach to their history and culture? Again, I hope the answer is yes. One of the reasons some Native Americans (and some Latinos, and some African Americans) have created charters is that they spent years trying to get the “community governed” district schools to be more respectful, and have decided this approach makes more sense.
There are some district schools that are very respectful and inclusive. But I do thing low income and families of color and educators should have the opportunity within public education to create non-sectarian schools open to all, that focus on a particular philosophy (like Montessori or Core Knowledge), or instructional approach (like project based learning) and that have the power to make decisions about faculty, curriculum and budget at the school level.
The 2011 Gallup Poll conducted by PHi Delta Kappa found 70% of Americans supported the charter idea. That’s not enough, by itself, but it does suggest the majority of Americans like the idea.
I’ll write a fuller response below, but a quick note on what is called here “schools of choice”: There is currently a bill in the Michigan legislature that would require all districts to accept students from other districts as long as there was “capacity,” which is not defined. (This is currently allowed, and not required, only within regional intermediate school districts.) The bill has stalled, largely because of opposition from constituents of the same conservative lawmakers who have proposed the other “choice” measures here, such as removing caps on charters, cyber charters, and introducing “parent trigger” laws.
My organization’s position on this is mixed, for three primary reasons.
1) In the Michigan context, this simply extends the zero-sum game among school districts. School operating funds here are determined entirely by a state formula, and are totally dependent on per-pupil funding (there is no allowance for fixed costs). Every child who transfers from one district to another takes their per-pupil funding with them; the losing district loses more money than they will save from having one less student on the margin. Added to this, Michigan law specifies that the student carries with them the lower of the two districts’ per-pupil allowances. Schools with higher allowances (because of historically higher tax levels) would not get the same funding to serve the transferring students. When combined, this puts both districts at a disadvantage.
(Even so, many districts are desperate to attract outside students to offset continued state cuts to education.)
2) The ability to transfer across district boundaries does not include transportation, which effectively limits this option to those children whose families are both involved enough and practically able to transport their children to and from a distant school during the day.
3) All of this is simply a misdirection, inviting us to focus on “choice” (for those who are able to take advantage of it) rather than on the real problem: overwhelmed urban (and rural) school districts which, rather than receiving added resources to tackle issues associated with poverty, have seen their funding effectively cut year after year. (This is true of all districts here, but it hits the districts with the most at-risk students hardest.) Education “reform” here is all stick, no carrot, and shrinking resources.
Sorry, I meant to say that I hope Mr. Norton is supportive of schools in Michigan established by Native Americans that help insure respectful approaches to their history and culture.
There is only one way to beat the reform movement — commit to excellent public schools. The Democrats want Race to the Top, where the focus is on improving the worst 5% of the schools. The Republicans want Race to the Charter. We need a concerted effort to great public schools. It is not a race, it is a lifelong commitment.
Interesting to go into a Charter versus tpp many Public Schools. Many charters have the Southwest glow — maybe the people are not as experienced, but they sure try hard.
Some public schools are awesome, but it is …
Interesting going into some public schools — you feel like an intruder, when you ask for Special Education help, some tell you to go to …
Public schools will lose out unless there is a real effort to make them better, improve customer satisfaction and create the environment where parents want to send their kids to public schools
Race to the Charter is bipartisan, unfortunately.
Here’s another form of school choice in Minnesota – promoting more use of Dual Credit (High school/college) by high school students. This happens through Int Bac, Advan Placement, College in the Schools, Project Lead the Way and Post Secondary Enrollment Options (PSEO). PSEO allows high school students to take courses on college campuses with state funds following students from high schools to colleges.
Here’s a column about what Post Secondary Options has helped produce – a high school/college collaboration in which high school students can earn an AA as they graduate from high school.
http://hometownsource.com/2012/07/15/visionaries-are-helping-high-school-students-earn-a-two-year-college-degree/
Hechinger, Orfield, and Ravitch should all know the difference in context between state-forced or sanctioned “segregation” and the desperate choices that lead people of color to self-select smaller, more culturally affirming schools. After 400 years of not being able to have much of a choice, you’d think white anti-reformers would see the cultural chauvinism in their criticism of the choices parents of color make.
The irony is that as they pretend to care about “segregation” (a concept they seem to not understand), they fail to address the one thing that causes it most: white flight. Why assail the choices of people of color but not that of the majority who – through their choices – cause the problem?
Indeed, to see the level of hypocrisy, just witness the fact that Myron Orfield writes often about the “segregation” of charter schools, yet, in a district where 70% of the kids are of color, and 65% are in poverty, he sends his own child to Lake Harriet school, a school so exclusive it is on Fordham’s list of “private public schools” (http://edexcellencemedia.net/publications/2010/201002_Private_Public_Schools/2010_PrivatePublicSchools_Minneapolis.pdf)
This is the classic case of white liberals knowing what is best for us, even as they make other choices for their own children. While they criticize the choices parents of color make to escape defunct public schools that white parents abandoned years ago, they select for themselves public schools made exclusive by economics and history.
It is interesting that nowhere in this blog post is there a mention that Minnesota has one of the most racially predictable education systems in the country. Yet, 9 out of 10 schools beating the odds with black children are charter schools. In fact, the schools doing the absolute best with kids of color are charter schools. And, those schools are homegrown from members of the community.
In a time where it is often said that communities of color need to be more “involved” in education, and that the outcomes depend on it; consider this the way we want to be “involved” – by trying new things and have more power to determine for ourselves what an education should be.
The bottom line is that people of color have been exceedingly faithful supporters of traditional public education, even as our history has provided us very little opportunity to determine “what is education for our kids.” As the national debate is loud with the voices of that talk about us in the abstract, and assign all of our efforts for change to masters on a right-wing plantation, we have the right to seek alternatives for our kids.
Instead of producing supercilious screeds to tell us what is best for us, why not put your own children and grandchildren into the worst performing schools in America? That would be the most affirmative step toward desegregating traditional public schools; surely it would be more effective than going after charter schools, which only serve about 4 to 5% of students.
De jure segregation is illegal and immoral; “voluntary” de facto segregation is still harmful to our children and our communities and is a betrayal of everything we have worked for.
I stand by the words of Chief Justice Earl Warren: “…[I]n the field of public education, the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”
A lot of people choose to ignore that second line; it remains true whether the segregation is “forced” or not.
You are correct that white flight is one of the primary causes for de facto segregation in local public schools. It’s hard to make that argument for charters, which can generally draw from a much wider geographical area. I remain bitterly disappointed that the US Supreme Court has backed away from a commitment to desegregation, and balked on cross-boundary desegregation.
But the very least that we can do is to work to ensure that every child receives an excellent education. For my organization, that means ensuring that community-governed public schools have the support and resources adequate to the needs of their students. Ensuring the quality of local schools is probably the most effective way to reverse segregated housing trends. As long as education “reform” efforts are distorting incentives and narrowing the curriculum, as long as “competition” among schools consists solely of bleeding resources from local public schools in favor of privately-managed entities, we will be marching backwards.
(It’s worth noting that, in Michigan, the vast majority – around 70% – of all charter schools are managed by private, for-profit, companies. Michigan leads the nation in this measure, out-doing even Florida. Our legislators seem unconcerned about the conflict of interest between serving shareholders and serving students; they defeated every effort to require non-profit managers. It’s also worth noting that state-appointed emergency managers of two small, urban and mostly African-American districts – Muskegon Heights and Highland Park – recently decided to close the local districts and hand the schools over to charter companies. This is “choice”? The emergency managers, by the way, have total freedom to do this with no recourse from the citizens of the community. It’s a financial solution to a financial problem. How does this move public education forward? It does, however, give private firms a larger piece of public funding pie.)
I cite my state’s experience not because it is necessarily typical, but because I believe it offers the clearest case study of where the ideology of competition, privatization and success defined by narrow metrics will take our country.
Let me also say that we believe that meaningful and respectful study of cultures represented in our nation ought to be integral to the public school curriculum, and not just left to charter schools that cater to one ethnicity or cultural/religious group. There is a public purpose in the creation of public schools, and that includes shaping citizens who are prepared to participate in a diverse society and polity. We undermine that at our peril. We should be working to strengthen it instead.
As they say “Don’t judge a book by it’s cover; don’t judge until you walk in someone’s else’s shoes” many people are anti-charter schools, but before we jump into conclusions and say they are overtaking public schools. We must realize the benefits these charter schools hold for minority students. Talking from my experience, I attended a charter school; Higher Ground Academy, when I first came to the United States. I did not know any English, it was very difficult for me to communicate with the teachers and students. With the help of the teachers who translated everything for me, and the ESL classes that were offered I was able to learn a lot. I felt like I could relate to the people around me, we were from different backgrounds some from Somalia, Ethiopia, Yemen, Kenya, Egypt, and others that I did not get the chance to know; My point is to show that charter schools are in fact diverse. Within two years I was able to graduate from high school and attend the University of Minnesota. I now having graduated from the University of Minnesota in 2012 and currently applying to graduate schools. Without the help and the resources provided at Higher Ground I would not have been able to be where I am today. My high school teachers were ready to help even when I was in college. For example, I always used to go back with my Calculus book and my math teacher would sit and explain to me. I would like to point out the fact that most if not all Higher Ground students who graduated are attending four year colleges and some are continuing on to graduate schools.
There are many reasons why minorities decide to attend charter schools, one reason is the small class size, which makes it easier to interact more and relate with teachers and classmates. Another major reason is that when children attend schools where they are the only one that is African or Muslim they feel isolated and uncomfortable. Where many of them are un-noticed, they are also afraid to try because of how they are under estimated and believed that they are failures, lazy, etc all these negative ideas impact their test performance as well as their life goals. In addition, the results of these tests are influenced by the teacher expectations. When students are forced to believe that they are not worthy and will not be able to perform at level; they tend to perform poorly on the exams. The article Race and the Schooling of Black Americans by Claude Steele, Steele brings an important example of the Pygmalion. An African American boy raises his hand but his teacher chooses not to notice him, and gives more attention to the white students. This kind of racism underestimates the performance of blacks and other minority groups has a negative impact and lowers their self steam. Therefore, most of them are afraid to try so they don’t prove these stereotypes and feel inferior. In addition, special education and title one classrooms in poor schools are used to isolate minority students rather than an extra help to enhance their learning ability.
Steel’s Article:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1992/04/race-and-the-schooling-of-black-americans/6073/
To make my point even more clear I would like to point out that many people choose to go to smaller lesser known colleges rather than attending huge colleges for a lot of the same reasons. Parents choose to take their kids to charter schools.
Higher Ground is one of Minnesota’s Elite charter schools. By elite, I mean this in the highest sense of praise. Students gravitate to high performing charters for the same reason that talented piano students gravitate to piano teachers who produce winning pianists, or New York students gravitate to the limited number of public school elites: they want to be at a school were learning is important, where other students are committed to learning, where the entire institution is dedicated to excellence. There are many traditional publics in Minnesota that create that atmosphere as well, and we see students gravitating to those schools as well. In fact, a study by the non-partisan legislative auditor in Minnesota claimed that the performance of charters in general in Minnesota was no better, and perhaps worse, on the average than traditional publics. Charters have several advantages in Minnesota, and a few disadvantages. One advantage is that if someone truly gifted in running a school wants to create a program using all of the elements that actually work, he or she can do so. Another advantage is that students like the previous commenter, if they care enough, can escape to a good charter when their traditional public fails them. One disadvantage is someone who is totally incompetent, can create a charter school and siphon away public money for a pretty long time before anyone wakes up to what is happening. Those of us who advocate for traditional publics, or who have responsibility as board members, must recognize that the elite charters have found some things that work. If the traditional public educators refuse to incorporate those concepts, then traditional publics will fail, right along with a ton of charters.
Glad to see praise for Higher Ground from several sources, including St. Cloud School Board member Jerry Von Korff and two of the school’s graduates. Full disclosure – our office now is located in Higher Ground. We’ve advocate for schools and other organizations doing this, and we did it for 24 years with various universities/colleges. Now we’re sharing (and trying to help) a public school.
Two other comments: I would not equate Higher Ground, whose students perform well, with some of the nation’s high performing schools that use academic tests to select their students. Higher Ground has no such tests. I’ve written previously about how the late Senator Paul Wellstone and some of us tried to rewrite federal grant guidelines to reduce startup funding for schools that use admissions tests.
On the issue of who can start a charter in Minnesota…Can someone who is “totally incompetent” start a charter here, as Jerry suggests? Many authorizers report that they have extensive review before approving a charter proposal. I’ve been asked to review hundreds of charter proposals and strongly recommended against approving many of them. (Mostly, authorizers agreed). I respectfully disagree that a “totally incompetent” person can start a charter here.
Finally, our organization has helped many district teachers start new schools within schools, or entirely new schools. That was part of what we did in CIncy. The district used the small school strategy, strong leadership from the local teacher’s union, youth/community service and other strategies to make progress in its graduation rate with both white and African American students. Our Center is a fan and ally of educators, whether district or charter, who think they can be better ways to help some young people succeed.
Charters schools are a source of comfort for many minority students some may say they are an un-necessary waste of funding however if you look at it through the eyes of the minority students that attend charter schools it will help paint a better picture of the necessity of having charter schools around. I having personally attended many public schools around the city of St. Paul, can say that ending up in a charter school after years of being the only black student in my class is something I am truly grateful for. The feeling of being alone and misunderstood is one that grew with me with every public school I attended. The feeling that I was seen as the outcast the “lower” was one I could not shake off. I felt like even the teachers expected less of me than what I was capable of offering. After I switched to Higher ground it was easier for me to focus on actually learning rather than being so caught up in trying to blend in at a place where I stood out like a sore thumb. At Higher Ground I wasn’t made to feel inferior to any of my classmates because of my skin color. Yes it is true that charter schools are not as diverse as some public schools but what good is that when the races are kept segregated within the school itself not by physical means but ideas that place one race against another. The point I am trying to make in saying all this is that charter schools hold a lot for minority students in the way of comfort and encouraging them to raise the bar higher and set higher goals for themselves.
Some do, and some charters are terrible schools.
When there is no regulation, no accountability, and no oversight, there are all sorts of outcomes.
Sort of like the stock market, but even less predictable.
Thanks for the great insights! I’ve been searching for quality charter schools in Minnesota since my family and I are moving there! So exciting to hear that we will not be disappointed.