The theory behind charters was that they would produce better results or lose their charter.
Education Trust Midwest reports that this is not happening.
Low-performing charters are not closed. Instead, they are expanding.
Charter operators have learned how to work the political system to their benefit. Not so much for the kids.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Agreed that some charter school authorizers need to do a better job of holding schools accountable. Some charters have been closed. Some currently operating charters should be closed, and the folks running them should not be allowed to open additional schools until performance improves.
Perhaps it’s worth noting that while Ed Trust Midwest is concerned about some low performing charter groups being allowed to expand, Ed Trust Midwest also supports expansion of high quality charters. That’s a portion of the press release that Diane did not quote from:
“Our analysis found that while some strong operators have been approved to expand this fall, some of Michigan’s worst operators also are continuing to replicate. We examined the operators slated to open 32 new charter schools this fall, based on a recent Michigan Department of Education release. Authorizers have the power to rein in low-performing operators, yet many have not done so.
“The Education Trust–Midwest believes all Michigan students deserve a high-quality school, no matter its governance structure,” said Amber Arellano, executive director of the nonpartisan research and advocacy group. “That’s why we support the expansion of high-quality charter schools in Michigan. Sadly, too many of the new charter schools opening are run by operators who are failing to do right by our parents and students.”
LikeLike
Joe,
Can you explain what low-performing means in Michigan? I am from Michigan.
Is it possible for a charter school (in Michigan) to be low performing against the “average” school or some cut point, but still be out performing the schools from which the children transferred?
Also, it seems that some of the parents choose charter schools wanting to get their children out of dangerous school environments. Is this counted as part of the success or failure?
Just wondering.
LikeLike
Good question, Cindy, for which I do not have a complete answer. Central Michigan University, which is regarded as one of the state’s most rigorous authorizers, says it uses the following methods of assessing schools:
9 mission specific goals;
9 value-added analysis of student academic achievement;
9 relative performance compared to other schools;
9 state accountability standards;
9 federal accountability standards;
9 fiscal accountability;
9 site and facilities; and
9 notification and reporting requirements.
You (and others interested) could find more information here:
http://thecenterforcharters.org/modules.php?name=Documents&sp_id=57
I know that this is an incomplete answer to your question about what they view as “low performing.” I’d suggest you contact the folks at Central Michigan to ask more specifically.
Parents select schools for a variety of reasons, whether district, charter, homeschooling or private. Yesterday Diane sent a note out about a youngster who is being homeschooled because of bullying. This am a public school teacher posted a note on this list-serve saying she had withdrawn a student from a large district high school for the same reason. One of the many advantages of small public schools, whether district or charter, is that research found that the smaller schools were regarded as safer by students than larger schools.
At least one charter in Michigan has been selected by Native American students and families in part because of high student performance (on standardized tests) and because the families felt that there was more information provided to students about history and culture of Native Americans, as well as other Americans.
Some parents select charters because they like the idea that it is smaller. Others because they like the fact that it offers languages to elementary students. Others because they like the school’s philosophy (like Montessori or project based).
The same is true of district schools – some select those because of the curriculum, size, philosophy, etc.
If you do check with Central Michigan, I hope you will share what you learn.
LikeLike
Nathan,
Here is a link to information on 2012 MEAP results from CMUs website:
http://thecenterforcharters.org/modules.php?name=Issues&sp_id=114
It would appear that while charter schools in Michigan perform, on average, below the entire state, on average, on their MEAPS proficiency, they outperform their counterparts in their own geographic/demographic areas. Also, students in charters, on average, when compared appropriately to their socioeconomic peers, on average, outperform their statewide counterparts; sometimes very significantly. And not insignificant, it seems there are several charter schools that even outperform the top schools in Michigan regardless of race or income level. This equals success to me.
I am not anti teacher, anti public school, or anti education, but when people try and take information and warp it to fit their agenda, I get exceedingly piqued. Just as I will be if I find out that CMU tried to doctor the results to make it look like minorities and the poor (the ones most likely to choose charter schools) are performing better in the charters than they were in their old schools.
We either work together to provide the best education to ALL students or this will continue to be highly political when that is so counterproductive. Go ahead. Win the war against choice, but you will still have children who can’t read, can’t do math, and who are graduating from high school without basic math and writing skills and then who will you all blame. Oh, yes, poverty and testing.
Point the finger, get us to look the other way. We all know that poverty and low performance in schools go hand-in-hand. But those of you in the very powerful positions in education forget that many of us don’t see the problems you see in New York City, Chicago, Detroit, and Los Angeles in terms of gangs, violence, and extreme poverty. Yet, we still see public education failing on many levels. You are not speaking for us. And that is pushing us out of the lifeboat. We either drown or join someone else’s lifeboat.
LikeLike
Hi . My Doughter a Super start ( 3 D’s students ) My bigest mistake transter to a Charter Scholl , after a copules MOGHTS She start refusing the Charter School . I found out , bulling , arrasment , sex-arrasment a bunch of girls ( proved ) The Principal ostruted HOT LINE investigations . Who is possible interrogate a minor with mental desorder with out parents concern ? Is not ilegal ? As also hired teachers. With out qualifications is fallow public Scholl requariments ?
To conclude , I hope this help you out . I’m sorry I was blind like you before transfer my two kids from a public Scholl to Charter . Let’s say we Live in french you are the principal in a charter Scholl . Do you will hire a teacher ? japoneses speacker teacher only in a french Scholl . Do you ?
Well here in U.S i know a bunch OF Chrters Scholl principals . Yes Miami a mayority speakers Spanish , But does that mean an only Spanish speakers teachers can be part of americans teachers societyy ? You are start enaff to know that Is complity senless . Exactly that Is why the Charter scholl are colansing . My Daughter is briting as a diamond on a Public Scholl .
I’m Sorry If i insult Your inteligent with my terrible English . You can make un on it , but I Grow up Cuban – Russian . My Spanish is let’s say not perfect because perfection it not exist , but my Spanish is almost perfect , charter Scholl principals languages ( English ) compared with my Spanish . I’m PRO , an Charter Scholl principal are not qualify to be a teacher in a good public school . Why ? Well most of them have no clue what does mean IDEA , SECTION 504 etc , etc .
That is why 2014-15 35 CHARTER SCHOL CLOSE DOORS .
Thanks I learn English from you and I share whith what Charter really are . 🙂
LikeLike
Don’t know where to put this, so I’m dropping it here. This article summarizes so well what we’ve been saying about rheeform:
ww.salon.com/2013/06/03/instead_of_a_war_on_teachers_how_about_one_on_poverty/
LikeLike
Agreeing that we need to work on problems outside schools, some of us also believe that we can learn from terrific district & charter public schools.
LikeLike
You can keep repeating the lie that charters are public schools, but that doesn’t make it so. They are private entities, recognized as such by the courts, that receive public funding.
Charter law that refers to them as public schools is a verbal fig leaf. The charter law in New York State makes it clear they are privately governed entities, and no amount of “some charters have been closed,” and “we need to work on problems outside of schools” is going to change that.
LikeLike
Recognizing that you don’t like charter public schools, 41 state legislatures and US Congress have adopted legislation that regards them as public schools.
Also, on the issue of schools “pushing students out” or encouraging them to leave, some district public schools have been doing this for decades. I’ve worked in and with alternative public schools since the 1970′ – including some in New York State. Educators in these (Public) alternative schools often comment on how traditional district schools have encouraged or pushed students out.
In New York, some of these alternative are run by BOCES (Board of Cooperative Services). Some are run by local districts.
The fact that it has happened long before charters existed does not make it right.
LikeLike
Joe,
The Federal Appeals Court in the Ninth Circuit recognized charter schools as “private,” at the request of a charter operator who did not want to be subject to state labor law protecting the rights of his employees.
The National Labor Relations Board recognized charter schools as private, at the request of charter schools that did not wish to permit their teachers to organize as a union.
If the receipt of public funds make an institution public, then almost every university in the nation is a public university, with the exception of about half a dozen diehards.
Charter schools operate under different rules from public schools; they can kick kids out for whatever reason they choose.
Charter schools arbitrarily limit the grades in which they will accept new students.
Charter schools arbitrarily exclude students with disabilities and students who speak little or no English.
You can keep saying they are “public,” but they are not public schools.
Charter schools are privately managed schools with private boards of trustees, that receive public funding.
They may evade conflict of interest laws; they may have boards composed of all the members of one family.
They are not public schools. Saying so doesn’t make it so.
We have now had the same exchange about 4 or 5 times, and I am not going to do it again.
LikeLike
Diane – If the definition of a public schools is that it accepts “all students,” than many district schools fail the test. Many local, regional or statewide magnet schools use the kinds of standardized tests that you condemn to determine who can attend. Moreover, some suburban “public” schools hire detectives to screen out students who don’t live in the district. These “public” schools are not open to all.
Some magnet schools operate under different rules than other district public schools
Some statewide schools operate under different rules.
Some charters are district public schools. They operate under the same rules as other schools in the same district.
In the first sentence of the NLRB decision that we have discussed, the NLRB says that charters are public schools.
Some district schools can and have kicked and pushed kids out for decades.
Saying charters are not public schools does not make it so, any more than saying a virtual school in Virginia was a charter – when it wasn’t.
LikeLike
Charters are not public schools.
Neither is Harvard or Yale or NYU.
LikeLike
US Congress and 41 state legislatures consider charters to be public.
LikeLike
They are wrong. Remember when 17 states said that segregation of the races was legal? They were wrong. For many decades, our country said that women should not be allowed to vote. they were wrong. Really, this is not a debate, as Monty Python said. it’s a contradiction. You will never convince me that that privately managed schools that are not bound by state and federal laws and that are free to exclude children with disabilities and English language learners, free to ignore state labor laws, free to use disciplinary policies that are illegal in public schools, are public schools. Go argue the point elsewhere. It is boring to say the same thing repeatedly to you.
LikeLike
Nothing like an open mind.
One of the great patterns in America is the steady expansion of opportunity. We expanded opportunities in voting rights, in housing, jobs, and in education.
LikeLike
The definition of a public school is that it is subject to public, democratic control, not the decisions of a private board; it is nonprofit; it is subject to all state and federal laws governing admissions, student discipline, and fair treatment of employees. By these standards, charter schools are NOT public schools. How many times do you want me to say the same thing over and over? Charter schools are operated by private corporations and are not subject to the same state and federal laws as public schools. Shall I say it again?
LikeLike
dianerav: I am a slow learner, and a little confused by eduspeak, but is this the general thrust of this dustup? To wit:
as a rule, charter schools and public schools differ greatly when it comes to workers rights, students rights, parents rights, and citizens rights, which means they are exactly the same and should be referred to by the exact same terms.
Or am I missing the point again?
Perplexed and puzzled.
😦
LikeLike
Charter public schools must follow federal laws that district public schools must follow. State legislatures under the Constitution have the primary responsibility for education. So states set up various rules. States have
a. Created some state wide public schools that have admissions tests (such as statewide public schools in Illinois and Louisiana)
b. Allowed districts to create schools that use standardized tests to determine who can enter (you know, the tests many people criticize as invalid and inappropriate). Such schools generally have far lower percentages of low income students, students with disabilities and students who don’t speak English than other public schools in the same area. But we call all of them “public.
c. States also have created different rules regarding teacher unions.
d. States also have created different rules for district & charter public schools, some of which have been discussed here. One difference is that in many states, district boards may levy taxes, but charter schools may not. So the level of tax support is different.
e. What we call “district” schools sometimes in operate in communities that are 90% or more white and wealthy. Some of those districts hire detectives to make sure that “outsiders” are not attending their “public” schools. How’s that for being open to all kinds of kids? (Not)
Another inequity is how much is spent among district public schools in a state. So a district school in x community may have literally thousands of dollars/pupil more than public schools 5-10 miles away. How’s that for equitable?
LikeLike
A perfect summary! The purpose of eduspeak is to confuse, distort, and to state the opposite of reformers’ true intentions (think George Orwell). Luckily, people are beginning to understand the true intentions of these groups. Have you read this article yet? I’m posting it a second time because I love its succinct analysis of the situation.
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/03/instead_of_a_war_on_teachers_how_about_one_on_poverty/
LikeLike
KrazYTA, we are marching boldly to the creation of a dual school system, both publicly funded, but playing by different rules. One can ignore parent rights, student rights, worker rights, the other cannot. Bold and progressive? Not.
LikeLike
Or, the U.S. has had had far wider educational options for wealthy families for more than 150 years. Inequities increased after World War II as suburban districts developed.
For the last 30 years, some educators and community groups have recognized that students learning in different ways and that there is no single curriculum or educational strategy that helps all young people achieve their potential. So educators began offering public school options in the late 1960’s as part of an effort to help more students succeed, and to provide better opportunities for professional educators.
This effort continues throughout the country, along with efforts to reduce poverty, improve health care, provide strong early childhood programs, increase the number of good jobs available. Each is designed to help more young people achieve their potential.
Like the story of America, expanding opportunity does not always succeed. As Langston Hughes wrote in Mother to Son,
Well, son, I’ll tell you:
Life for me ain’t been no crystal stair.
It’s had tacks in it,
And splinters,
And boards torn up,
And places with no carpet on the floor—
Bare.
But all the time
I’se been a-climbin’ on,
And reachin’ landin’s,
And turnin’ corners,
And sometimes goin’ in the dark
Where there ain’t been no light.
So boy, don’t you turn back.
Don’t you set down on the steps
’Cause you finds it’s kinder hard.
Don’t you fall now—
For I’se still goin’, honey,
I’se still climbin’,
And life for me ain’t been no crystal stair.
The history of American, whether in voting rights, housing and job opportunities and now the chance to marry who you choose, has been one of expanding opportunity.
LikeLike
Where’s the “like” button when you need one?
LikeLike
Yes, there are charters of varying quality. The problem in Michigan is that the state has no real authority to close a charter (even though it gets state money). A member of the state board of education noted in an article months ago (on the same topic) that it’s up to the authorizers to close the school. So in the case of a for-profit organization (like Leona Group) the only motivation to close a school would be a lack of profitability rather than a poor quality school.
Also understand that Michigan’s ideological legislature (particularly the House) doesn’t really care about school quality when it comes to charters. Charters don’t typically unionize and they underpay their teachers relative to public schools. This is in the interest of the legislature (and governor). So they really don’t mind that many charters underperform.
In 2011, Michigan passed many policies that seemed to make some sense. Public school couldn’t really debate accountability measures too hard. In some ways, those laws were well-intended. But the state’s magnificent investment in charter expansion and the money-pit EAA (which is getting so much outside money and additional state money that it is unbelievable) has revealed an ideological approach rather than an educational reform.
Charter schools have become the “out” for parents who want their kids away from other kids more than anything. Some charters are really just a way for churches to have a school funded by the state. One local charter is really just the kids from a local mega-church. As has been noted many times, charters are not a game changer. They vary in quality. This is particularly noteworthy in that the report comes from EdTrust who is no friend of public schools, by the way.
LikeLike
Steve,
You are no fan of charters, either. Should we then distrust everything you say about charters? You never look at one source for anything unless you just want to have your position reinforced and you aren’t really concerned with the truth.
Can you provide the name of the charter that is being state funded as an alternative for a mega church in Michigan? Because that is something I could get worked up about (and not in a good way).
I’m all with you for closing down charters that perform poorly as long as performing poorly means the students in the charter are performing worse than they were before they started going there. Are you willing to close down public schools that perform poorly?
LikeLike
I’m ok with closing down any school that performs poorly. Public schools are quite easily closed these days. Look around in places like Philly and Chicago and Detroit. Charters, not so much.
I’m not a fan of most charters because they don’t really provide an alternative and are a political tool. I noted that some charters are good (that’s what vary in quality means). I have a friend who is on the board of a charter that specifically assists prior dropouts who have slightly exceeded the age to be in a public school. That’s a good use of the charter idea.
I did not say that the charter with mega-church families is an alternative to a religious school. I’ll clarify. Every single parent in the neighborhood who belongs to the mega-church sends their kids to the charter school. It’s an out for them that is convenient. Every student who attends the school is not from that mega-church. Does that make sense? The parents use the school as a way to keep their kids away from other types of kids as much as possible. That’s not a sign of educational quality for that school, just a way to socially segregate a group. Charters can be used for that.
“You never look at one source for anything unless you just want to have your position reinforced and you aren’t really concerned with the truth.” – your quote regarding me.
Nice assumption and wholly incorrect. Avoid pigeonholing others that you don’t know in a specific way. I’ve looked at models of successful charters that I thought included some good ideas. But it would be disingenuous to suggest that charter advocates in Lansing are entirely interested in education without recognizing that they can be a political tool as well.
This is not a war against choice. It’s merely presenting a greater understanding that the choices are not equal. As long as charters can have advantages that public schools don’t have (counseling out, statistical manipulation, parent contracts), comparisons are not entirely fair. They don’t get to play by the same rules.
LikeLike
Actually, Steve, that quote wasn’t intended to be aimed at you at all. It was aimed at the assumption that a source is not reliable because they don’t necessarily agree with subject of the discussion.
My point is that (for the sake of making an analogy) I might really dislike a certain radio personality of the cigar-smoking variety. Most everything he says is an exaggeration to score a political point or is an outright lie meant to cater to his like-thinking minions. However, he might occasionally say something that is true. Do I use all the false things he has said to support my opposition to the truth of the one thing?
So, I was trying to point out that we should never (the collective YOU) just look at one source. So, I apologize that I was not clear on that. That was not a swipe at you.
LikeLike
Charter school supporters have known for years that Michigan charters are 80% for-profit.
They’ve taken reams of testimony in the statehouse on it.
They’ve never lifted a finger to reform Michigan’s school reform, just as they’ve watched as Ohio went to for-profits.
If you’re waiting for reformers to hold themselves accountable, you’ll be waiting a long time. It’s been 15 years in Ohio. When poor performing charters are closed here, they simply reorganize under a different name and reopen.
Part of the reason, of course, is because for-profits hire lobbyists who.purchase state legislators.
It’s very tough to re-regulate once you let for-profits in. It’s naive and reckless to claim otherwise.
LikeLike
I’ll know reformers are serious about reform of charter schools when they acknowledge that lobbyists for charters exist in FL, MI and OH and legislators in those states have been captured to varying degrees by those lobbyists.
It was the inevitable and predictable result of introducing for-profit schools into these states.
Honestly, this is la-la land. How long are they
going to pretend that it is teachers
unions versus well-intentioned “reformers”?
Rhee and the Gates people DON’T KNOW that the OH statehouse is crawling with for-profit K-12 lobbyists?
That’s weird. Everyone else in the state knows.
There’s a reason they don’t regulate these schools. Reformers spend enough time in statehouses to know what that reason is.
If they ever feel like getting honest on this, maybe we could have a real debate.
LikeLike
Lobbyists for charter public schools exist in Florida, Michigan and Ohio (and other states)
Lobbyists for district public schools exist in Florida, Michigan and Ohio (and other states).
Lobbyists for private corporations looking to see things to public schools exist in many states. Do your states provide some funds directly to some testing firms? (Many of you have noted the answer is “yes.”)
Campaign contributions (and offers of other forms of assistance, including polling, telephone calls, going door to door) are present in many states.
From Churchill by Himself, page 574:
“Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…”
LikeLike
For-profit charter school lobbyists. The schools are for-profit entities. The lobbyists push legislators for more charter schools because those charter schools are profitable. White Hat Management is notorious in Ohio, but there are others. The entire raft of “cybercharters”,for example, or the “credit recovery” for-profits.
It’s just a fantasy to talk about the clout of teachers unions while ignoring what’s been going on under your noses for ten years.
I’m perfectly willing to admit that teachers unions lobby on behalf of teachers.
Why won’t charter supporters admit that for-profit charter lobbyists lobby to block or gut regulation of these schools? This idea that these authorizers are simply not rigorous enough or that they will self-regulate is a fantasy. The governor or legislature could step in at any time and regulate these schools. They don’t.
If you’re wondering why charters haven’t been regulated in Michigan, I suggest you look into how 80% of the charters in Michigan are for-profits.
I’m a public school parent in Ohio. I’m not a teacher. I think it was incredibly reckless for school reformers to introduce for-profit K-12 schools into my state. We will never, ever be able to regulate them properly. It’s been a decade. There are more money-making opportunities every year.
I get direct mail advertisements from charter schools that are located 70 miles away. My son is in 4th grade. It’s unlikely I’m going to be sending him 70 miles to school. I’m paying for these advertisements, along with everyone else in this state. I don’t think that’s a proper use of public education dollars. My local public school doesn’t produce direct mail advertisements, nor do we send them to charter school students. I’d love to know where they got the mailing list.
LikeLike
In reference to Michigan Charter schools, I thought this was interesting:
http://www.michiganradio.org/post/three-little-known-facts-about-charter-schools-michigan
LikeLike
Just try to figure this one out …
State fines Muskegon Heights schools for hiring teachers without proper certification
LikeLike