When the charter idea was first proposed, in 1988, the idea was that charters would enroll the students who were failing, for whatever reason, in regular public schools. The charters would enroll the dropouts, the about to dropout, the students who were unable to function in a regular environment. The charter would come up with workable ideas and share them with the public school, to make the public schools better.
Things haven’t worked out that way. Now charters compete for higher test scores, and it is risky to enroll high-needs students because they will drag down the school’s average. The charters run by hedge fund managers want to win. They want the highest scores, so they tend to pick and choose to boost their scores.
Now their goal is to compete and win, not to collaborate and support public schools.
Blame it on NCLB.
And now we have this, from a reader:
| In Trenton, NJ, the only charter that went after those difficult-to-teach students was just closed for not making adequate progress. the property was awarded to another charter operator with ties to Commissioner Cerf. go figure. |
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Something similar happened in Minneapolis. http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/news/2012/07/24/cityview-leaves-north-minneapolis-special-education-students-behind
I think that if you take public money, you need to take all kids.
LikeLike
I’ve thought about this a lot. Here is something I wrote a while ago. http://mskatiesramblings.blogspot.com/2012/04/what-if-charter-schools-did-they-were.html
As I continue to meet dozens and dozens of charter school students from across Chicago, I am continually reminded how different the charter schools are from their nearby public neighborhood schools. Working in a psychiatric facility means all the students I meet have some sort of mental health problem. And yet, a vast majority of the children I meet from the charters have either mild, or inward-focused disabilities such as depression or anxiety. Their learning problems are minimal and they have overwhelmingly been strong students academically. Many have only just begun to attend charters so, for the most part, I do not credit the schools themselves with this difference. These kids are the ones who already are good students with minimal behavior issues.
And I wonder, instead of skimming away these high-performing students, what if charter schools had followed the original intention of their creation? What if these schools had targeted not the best test-takers, or kids who with just a little push could be great test-takers (since test-taking is the only metric anyone seems to care about these days), but instead focused on the ones who were about to dropout, the ones who had a history of behavior problems, the ones who disrupted the learning of all the other students and took up the time of the teachers, the ones who are over-represented in Special Education, the ones who were truly struggling in the public schools?
And I imagine the charters as using flexibility in curriculum, staffing, and the use of funds to create truly innovative places of learning. They would be schools with various extra-curriculars to keep kids engaged, extra staff support to reach this tougher group of kids, innovative use of technology, services to reach out to kids already involved with gangs or with substance abuse issues, special programs for kids in the juvenile justice system or even the foster care system, flexible start and end times to encourage students to actually attend school regularly, vocational training opportunities including partnerships with local businesses and industries, and more. Charters could become an alternative to oppressive alternative schools.
In the meantime, the neighborhood school would feel supported and be better able to do a job educating the students who could succeed under a more traditional version of school. There are plenty of children living in low-income neighborhoods who have supportive home lives and who are ready to be challenged academically. But thanks to the effects of poverty, there are MORE students who suffer from debilitating behavior and learning challenges. It matters that some children are not receiving proper nutrition. It matters that more children are being exposed to substances in utero. It matters that children are growing up watching extreme violence on their streets and experiencing post-traumatic stress as a result. It matters that families cannot find employment and children suffer from the daily stress of unstable living conditions. It matters that children are being thrust into bouts of homelessness and the chaotic lives that ensue. If charter schools stepped up to help THESE kids, they ones I meet every day at my work—the ones who are difficult even for a staff of highly-trained professionals– they would be doing a huge service to communities and public schools. Charter schools would be SUPPORTING neighborhood schools by focusing attention and resources on the kids who truly needed it.
LikeLike
That is the reason that I am running for Minneapolis school board member at large. I am a write-in candidate because many on the current school board have authorized charters and are allowing them to expand. I think charters are becoming detrimental to the regular public schools because of their ability to refuse kids or remove kids who do not perform to their expectations, drain on the finances of the public schools, cause enrollment drop which leads to school closure. All public schools, including charters should accept all kids and work with them to help them achieve.
LikeLike
Just this morning I read an article in my local newspaper that discusses how there are larger percentages of students with special needs, particularly severe special needs, in public schools in the last few years. The raw numbers of students with disabilities hasn’t changed, just the percentages, because charter schools do not take students with disabilities. I wish I could find the link, but it was a national, Associated Press article. I was SO surprised (that last sentence was sarcasm).
LikeLike
Admissions policy differs depending on the jurisdiction and is a matter of public policy. In New York City, for example, charter school admissions must be by lottery. Would that admissions policy for charter schools address this issue?
LikeLike
No. Charter schools in NYC and elsewhere have smaller representations of students with disabilities and English language learners. See the GAO report on underrepresentation of Spec-Ed. See Bruce Baker blogs on both.
Diane
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch-thank you for pointing out the GAO report. It is interesting reading and if others are interested, it can be found here: http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/591435.pdf
It is true that as a group charter schools enroll a lower percentage of students with disabilities, but there seems to be a great deal of variation between states. In Virginia, for example, charter schools enrolled a much higher percentage of disabled students than the existing school system. Perhaps there are different regulations in the states where charters schools enroll higher percentages of students with disabilities.
I was also interested to find out that charter schools were more likely to have more than 20% of their students with disabilities than traditional schools. I think this reflects the value of choice in matching students to a school.
LikeLike