A reader informsus that the auditor of Massachusetts recently released an audit of the state’s charter schools. Our reader offers some of the findings:
“Suzanne M. Bump, Auditor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, has finished her audit of the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s (DESE’s) oversight of the Commonwealth’s charter school system.
“Since 1996, Massachusetts has spent $4.3 billion on charters, and this report shows that DESE—known for its emphasis with local public school districts on data collection and data-driven-decision-making—doesn’t ensure (maybe they can’t) ensure the collection, storage, security, reliability, validity or the dissemination of THEIR data. Such data has been the used to determine policy affecting the future of Massachusetts School Districts since 2009.
“Here’s just a sampling of the report says:
•Charter school waitlist information maintained by DESE is not accurate. A lack of accurate waitlist information may result in ineffective planning and oversight, as well as policymaking consequences such as an inaccurate assessment of demand when charter school approval, renewal, or expansion applications are considered and when the Legislature makes decisions on changes to existing limitations on the number of charter schools.
•Operating under different statutory requirements, charter schools have lower percentages of licensed teachers than traditional public schools.
Additionally, charter school teacher salary levels average 75% of those at sending districts.
•The reliability and accuracy of charter school information in DESE’s data systems are questionable.
•The extent to which the charter school system has provided a successful mechanism for developing and disseminating replicable innovation models is not determinable.
•DESE was inconsistent in its decisions regarding whether to impose conditions for school charter renewal.
“During our audit period, DESE was inconsistent in its decisions regarding whether to impose conditions for some school charter renewals Inconsistency in charter
renewal decisions can cause multiple problems: charter schools may not clearly understand expectations, schools may be missing the opportunity to receive important feedback, parents may be misinformed about schools performance, and children may receive substandard academic programs.”
Maybe it’s not part of their job to comment on this aspect, but one of the big reasons a consistent, transparent process has been valued in “good government” circles is to avoid political capture and favoritism shown to one entity over another due to campaign donations, nepotism, the whole range of corruption and capture. The process has to be consistent: the same for everyone, every time.
I’m not clear why they’re starting from scratch in “charter school governance”. We’ve known these things for 100 years. There’s nothing unique about charter schools that would dictate that we have to ignore everything we’ve learned about process and government. These are basic safeguards. They’ve been around forever. There’s no reason to learn the same expensive lessons over and over again because the contractor is a charter school.
North Carolina found out they had bad numbers for charter school enrollment and every public school kid took a hit in funding because of it:
” The nine new charter schools that opened in the Charlotte area this fall amid a rapid expansion now enroll about half the number of students they had projected, according to data released by the N.C. Department of Public Instruction.
The figures support complaints from Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools that the district found itself with thousands more students than expected”
Oops! I guess the public school kids just have to suffer the consequences of “the adults” inability to act responsibly and consider what happens to public schools when they exaggerate demand for charter schools. There is the potential for loss when you take risk like this within a system. There’s a potential downside. These kids lost.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/11/10/5305917/charlotte-area-charter-school.html#.VKFz6v9H4
Two conclusions: First, DESE is incompetent; its record keeping is both incomplete and inaccurate, and does little to no monitoring of charter schools compliance with regulatory mandates; Second, charter schools are, as required, developing innovative programs that can be replicated in the public schools. Add to these failures, the issue of not ‘backfilling’, denying equal educational opportunity to children with special educational needs and english language learners, overly high suspension and expulsion rates and the lack of transparency of charter school financial records, including executive salaries
What we see in Massachusetts as in other states is that charter school operate without minimum state controls and are therefore able to operate as they wish, free from regulatory constraints, to the detriment of public school age students, parents and public schools and the public at large.
With the appointment of the new head of the Executive Office of Education, jJim Peyser, a notoriously pro charter school person who works along with Mitchell Chester another shill for charter schools I expect to see the lifting of the cap on new charter schools and continued lack of regulatory oversight by the DESE.
And even more disturbing is that Charlie Baker just picked Peyser, a pro-charter, pro-high stakes testing Education Secretary….
Peyser as Secretary of Education is really a dangerous development for public education and teachers in Massachusetts and gives the lie to the notion of Baker as a moderate. I remember when Peyser and his Pioneer Institute used to be seen as outliers way over on the right. They’ve managed to control the message on matters educational in such a manner that their once wacky ideas now appear moderate.
What is most disturbing is that over the past 15 years the MDOE/DESE has been reorganized and has shifted its resources to supporting all aspects of the Federal and State education reform policies. Frankly, what we now have is an education agency dedicated to implementing Curriculum Standards and over use of standardized testing, in conjunction lifting the cap on new private charter schools and insufficient and incompetent monitoring of existing private charter schools. It is well known that Peyser is a shill for the conservative Pioneer Institute and has long supported increasing the number of private charter schools at the cost of supporting public schools. Massachusetts public school and students will continue to be in deep trouble under the Charlie Baker (Bill Weld), Jim Peyser regime. Of course we should have seen this deplorable situation approaching over the past 15 years, going back to the Massachusetts Educational Reform Act of 1993 and the implementation of MCAS testing.
North Carolina is an example of how public schools lose when they roll the dice, but here’s an example of how everyone involved lost:
“A cash-strapped charter school with two Philadelphia campuses has notified parents it plans to close for good this week. But officials from the School District of Philadelphia said Saturday night the decision was news to them.
In a notice posted on the school’s website, administrators at the Walter D. Palmer Leadership Learning Partners Charter School said its board had voted to permanently close the school Wednesday after months of financial turmoil. The words permanently close were in red. A letter dated Friday was sent out to parents with information about reenrolling their children at other schools.”
They can’t take on risk like this. Public schools aren’t private sector businesses. They’re not “start ups”. They are systems. Decisions ripple, they spread out beyond the failed entity, and they don’t (can’t) know where it’s going to land, who will take the hit if a piece fails. It’s reckless. There’s no other word for it.
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/20141228_Troubled_Palmer_charter_school_closes.html#4AhuQtqYe02tl2bv.99
If the Charter School teachers are paid about 75%, then the state should fund them at 75% or have a transparent website showing where and how much is going elsewhere. It is public taxpayer money and the taxpayers need to know where their money goes.