The education establishment’s charges against public charter schools and the legislation to make them better, Senate Bill 8, are the nothing more than the same, tired allegations that opponents to choice have alleged against charters for years. Let’s call these the “8 Myths of Senate Bill 8”.
Myth #1: “Charters are a way to racially segregate public schools.” I list this as number one because it is the most inflammatory. Charters have open enrollment, meaning anyone in the state can enroll in any charter school without fear of being discriminated against. To encourage helping those needing it most, minority youth, the 1996 Charter School Act said a purpose was to “Increase learning opportunities for all students, with special emphasis on expanded learning opportunities for students who are identified as at risk of academic failure…” This has resulted in diverse options for parents and students. Charter founders began forming what has become 31 schools with over 60% in minority enrollment, all but one of which are meeting the growth and proficiency standards set by the State Board of Education (“SBE”).
The Senate Bill 8 (“SB 8”) removal of the requirement of district racial quotas simply confirms what the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Charter Schools said, “The State Board of Education should seek legislative change to eliminate the contradiction between the requirement that a charter school’s population reflect the racial and ethnic composition of the local district and the requirement for a lottery which cannot specify for a particular racial or ethnic group.”
In North Carolina we have over 250 district schools with over 90% minority enrollment. We have eleven historically black colleges and universities including the oldest in the South, Raleigh’s Shaw University.
Let’s not reverse the successes of our quality charters serving at risk children. We can encourage diversity by expanding the public’s understanding of charter schools and how to access them. Schools like Union Independent School, scheduled to open as our 100th public charter this August are examples of the “family academies” Durham Superintendent Eric Becoats envisions as one agent of the sea change in public education necessary.
Myth # 2: “Charters are underperforming and we do not need more.” Multiple national reports exist trying to measure charter school performance. Some argue that charters, in aggregate, do a better job educating students than their local district counterparts. Others show the opposite on a national level.
Here, the fact is 52.2% of our charters are “Schools of Distinction” or “Honor Schools of Excellence” versus 38% of district schools. Of charters 76.8% made Adequate Yearly Progress last year with 57.8% of district schools making the grade. No charters are categorized as “Low Performing” compared to 16 district schools.
In looking at charter school quality in the aggregate, however, it is often easy to overlook the spectrum of different approaches that exist.
The charter sector offers a diverse array of educational choices for parents. When I am asked, “What is better, a public charter school or a traditional public school?” I always ask, “Which charter and which district school are you asking about?” because each charter is competing against all schools, including other charter schools, and it is important that parents make informed choices for their children’s educations.
National statistical data often seems irrelevant to a parent. All that counts are the quality choices that a parent has. For most that choice does not exist.
Myth # 3: “Charters take money away from public schools.” Charter schools are public schools, paying the same teachers and educating the same children with the same taxpayer dollars. The difference is that charters provide parents with a choice on how their taxpayer dollars are spent—they can choose to spend them to educate their child in a district, or choose to send their child elsewhere.
The opposite is actually true as studies show that charters receive less money from taxpayers, including no money to put a roof over the children’s heads in our state. A national charter school study published by Ball State University found that, on average, a 400-student charter school would receive at least $365,000 less than a district school. This requires charters to operate more efficiently, delivering the value that taxpayers demand while providing the educational choices that parents deserve.
Myth # 4: “Charters must have cafeterias and bus service to be fair to every child.” The number one priority in a charter school is to provide a quality educational option for parents, and direct their scarce resources to doing so. This requires a different approach to transportation and food services in some instances. For example, at least 39 charters do provide transportation service, but those that do not have transportation have devised parent carpooling and other transportation plans, as a way to help ensure all students have access to attend. These transportation plans are and will continue to be required under the law.
Charters are open to any child in the state, several schools garnering children from five or more different counties. Charters are not afforded neat “attendance zones” district schools have which help to compactly transport students.
If detractors really want kids to get to the schools, the best option is to expand charters so they are closer to where the family lives in the first place.
Myth # 5: “New charter legislation will create an unneeded and unconstitutional commission.” The Commission called for in the legislation can be constitutionally established and is sorely needed, both to help relieve the State Board’s agenda to allow them to focus on broader educational policies for all students, and to provide a dedicated body to oversee the charter issues. It would be paid for through an oversight fee from schools themselves, not costing taxpayers any additional funds.
States with a dedicated, knowledgeable, and supportive oversight body, whose core mission is charter schools, have fared better in fostering a quality charter environment. If we are serious about improving quality in the charter sector, we must have an independent board that makes educated, deliberative decisions regarding new charters; negotiates contracts with them calling for rigorous and measurable academic and operational performance; monitors that performance; makes renewal and revocation decisions based upon charter adherence to the performance standards, and reports the charter activity in a transparent and objective data based delivery system to the General Assembly, the State Board, the Governor, and the public.
Myth # 6: “Charters are not accountable to anyone.” Charters are more accountable than any school. They are subject to all the state testing requirements of district schools, constantly monitored by the state, and have independent CPAs audit the books and reports given to the state. Charters all have to use the state standardized reporting of students and finances with the state. The vast majority of the schools use the same vendor which handles the school’s funds. Plus, the schools haves their Boards of Directors, another layer of direct accountability and oversight.
But most importantly, charters are accountable to parents. No child is assigned to attend a charter school—they all attend by choice. Parents who are dissatisfied with the quality of a charter can hold the school accountable immediately by moving their child to another school. This dual accountability—from the public through government entities and from parents empowered with choices—is unparalleled elsewhere in North Carolina’s public educational sector.
Myth # 7: “Charters do not serve children with disabilities and at risk youth.” The law requires the same standards for charters as district schools except that parents are assigned a district school and may choose a charter school.
Myth # 8: “Charters want to take even more money from district schools in the new bill”. The School Districts or Local Education Agencies (“LEAs”) are supposed to share funds in their “Current Expense Fund” with charters on a per student basis. Instead they chose for years to use creative accounting to remove money from this fund so it would not be shared with the charters. They were caught and in the “Sugar Creek” cases, told to repay the charters several million dollars.
With the pressure of the vested education interests, however, the General Assembly buried in the huge budget bill last summer an obscure provision to reverse the effects of the court cases and allow the LEAs to begin again, effective July 1, using the creative accounting which shortchange charters. SB 8 just attempts to reverse the 2010 provisions to return the sharing of local dollars on a fair and equitable basis among all public schools in a district.
In conclusion we should give a new Charter Commission the authority to work with the people of North Carolina as only one of many paths to becoming America’s leader in quality public charter education, and indeed, all public education. Let’s acknowledge that we have to take extraordinary steps. With due respect it is not time to be timid and cautious… it is time to be bold.
Respectfully,
Eddie Goodall, President
Stay Connected!