Sign up for our newsletter

New York State Rule Favors City Charters

Kara Kerwin, Wall Street Journal

Claims that the New York budget agreement is friendly to charter schools are little more than political spin (“New York Charts Bold Course for Schools,” U.S. News, April 1). The New York legislature, together with Gov. Andrew Cuomo, crafted a budget that financially favors a select few charter schools in New York City rather than giving charter schools—and the students they serve—statewide equitable treatment.

An equitable budget treats a student in Brooklyn the same as a student in Buffalo, regardless of whether they attend a charter or traditional public school. All this budget reveals is the desire of state lawmakers to score political points in the high-profile New York City charter-school debate and their lack of interest in fostering the statewide charter sector.

To truly improve the quality of education in New York for all students, fundamental flaws in funding equity in the state’s charter-school law must be addressed rather than looking for Band-Aid solutions year after year.

Tennessee Becomes Friendlier to Charter Schools

Latest in Series of Positive Actions Taken By State Lawmakers 

CER Press Release
Washington, D.C.
April 14, 2014

The Tennessee House of Representatives took the final approval measure necessary to pass HB 0702, which significantly increases the likelihood of expanding quality charter schools across the state. The bill will now head to Governor Haslam’s desk.

“After nearly two years of deliberation, it’s wonderful to see Tennessee lawmakers support a surefire method of expanding quality charter schools,” said Kara Kerwin, president of The Center for Education Reform. “I wholeheartedly commend Rep. Mark White and Sen. Dolores Gresham for their leadership in advancing this important piece of legislation one step closer to the finish line.”

As amended, this bill grants chartering authority to the State Board of Education in the event a charter school application is denied by local authorities, allowing quality charter school applications a chance to go forward despite initial resistance. The State Board will then be able to oversee charter schools to best ensure the success of charter administrators and the students they serve.

“The actions taken by the House today are part of a larger, exciting trend of Tennessee embracing reforms with a proven track record. From charter schools to vouchers, Tennessee lawmakers are showing a renewed interest in giving parents access to the educational choices they deserve,” Kerwin said.

This Toxic Standards Fight Isn’t Helping Students

Kevin P. Chavous
Education Week
April 11th, 2014

The late, noted civil rights leader Fannie Lou Hamer summed it up best when she said, “I’m sick and tired of being sick and tired.” Although she was voicing her discontent with racial inequality in Mississippi nearly five decades ago, I can relate to her sentiment today when I think about the recent debate within the education reform community concerning the Common Core State Standards. We reformers are in this battle to change the status quo, to focus on students and results, rather than systems and processes.

I respect education policy debate and discussion, but the division and bickering around the standards has me “sick and tired.” Not only are we embroiled in a growing verbal death match, but partisan politics has once again taken precedence over doing what’s right for kids. I see this firsthand as I travel from state to state, discussing education reform and the importance of educational choice with legislators and local community leaders. Increasingly, where one stands on the common-core debate is a new political litmus test akin to one’s political party bona fides.

Read the rest of the article here.

Why is the PTA blocking what’s best?: My Word

Chanae Jackson-Baker, Orlando Sentinel

Recently, the Florida PTA told its members to call lawmakers and get them to fight a bill that would expand Florida’s tax credit scholarship program. It said, “Tell them to stop the attack on our public schools!” But if the premise of the PTA is to advocate for all children, please explain why it would fight what is best for my four children.

I was an active PTA parent before placing my children in private schools using tax credit (for economically-challenged children) and McKay scholarships (granted to students with special needs). I went to meetings. I coordinated fund raisers. I worked diligently to recruit other parents. But it wasn’t enough to help my kids.

I watched my two daughters leave public school in the top 5 percent and 10 percent of their classes, yet have to catch up to other students at their private school. My high-school son (an honors student in public school) has to do additional work to be on the same level as other students when he enters private school next year. My children were not near their highest level of potential. They would have so many missed opportunities if the tax credit scholarship was not available.

The PTA wants you to believe that vouchers are taking money away from public schools, but the money follows the child. The money is not the school’s. Also, public schools receive more than $7,000 per child for children to be in overcrowded under-performing classrooms. In 2013-14, private schools received $4,880 per scholarship for children to be placed in academic settings that are more conducive to learning.

The PTA asserts there is no accountability. I argue that private schools that accept the scholarships have greater accountability. Their business is my children’s education; if they fail to successfully educate my children, we have the choice to take our children somewhere better. My choice is not an attack on public schools. If an individual chooses Publix over Walmart, it doesn’t mean one is bad. It just means each child should be placed in the setting that works for them.

I want the PTA to know that I now realize they are advocating for a system instead of each child. Most importantly, I want the PTA to know that my lower socioeconomic status doesn’t mean I don’t know what’s best for my children.

 

Charter School Myths

Letters to the Editor, Chicago Tribune

Anti-charter proposals

This is in response to “Charter envy; As N.Y. boosts school choice for students and parents, Illinois ponders a ‘death knell'” (Editorial, April 7). I regret to inform the Tribune Editorial Board that its painstaking admission wasn’t necessary because, with respect to charter schools, there’s not a lot in the state budget agreement of which to be envious.

Contrary to media reports and notes of congratulations directed at New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, New York’s budget is not “charter-friendly.” Instead, the budget looks out for a select few charters in New York City, as other charter schools across the state remain subject to a continued spending freeze and funding inequity.

New York’s charter school law, however, should cause envy as Illinois’ charter school law pales in comparison. The absence of multiple, independent charter authorizers that have a proven track record of producing quality is a major impediment to a thriving Illinois charter sector, which relies a great deal on local control.

The onslaught of anti-charter-school proposals under consideration in Springfield is troubling and should be cause for concern among parents currently seeking out better educational options for their children. Lawmakers should be focused on enacting lasting and structural changes so charters and the students they serve are protected from unfavorable budgets and rogue legislation.

— Kara Kerwin, president, Center for Education Reform, Washington

Parents Camp Out, Risk Jail to Get Kids into Better Schools

Lorean Heal, The Heartland Institute

Every year, parents across the country camp out and line up to get their kids into good schools. Some have even risked jail terms.

This year, Plano Texas parents pitched tents in freezing temperatures to be among the first to list their kids to transfer out of their school district. Parents in Chandler, Arizona camped out for a full weekend to get their kids into a magnet school. Berkley, California, like many other districts, hires home inspectors to check that kids flagged as potential line-hoppers actually live in the district’s attendance zone.

In 2013-14, 308,650 students were enrolled in private choice programs across the country, according to the Alliance for School Choice. That’s approximately 0.6 percent of K-12 students.

“There is a history in U.S. education of parents trying to get the best education for their children,” said Center for Education Reform President Kara Kerwin. “My parents worked around the clock to put me and my three older sisters through Catholic education in Buffalo, New York, when our traditional public schools were not doing well.“

Kerwin mentioned Kelley Williams Bolar, an Ohio mother who in 2011 faced jail time for falsifying her address to enroll her kids in a better school district.

Pent-Up Public Demand
Approximately 1 million kids are on charter school waitlists nationwide, according to the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools.

“The policy environment does not meet that demand,” Kerwin said. “As it stands, only about 5 percent of all schoolchildren have access or are enrolled in schools of choice.”

Some programs labeled choice actually limit it, Kerwin said, such as “universal lotteries” for public schools. In these, districts ultimately decide where a child will attend, “and that goes against the premise that parents should be able to choose.”

One of the nation’s largest choice programs, Florida’s tax-credit scholarships for low-income children, stopped keeping tabs on how many more kids wanted the scholarships than got them because it was disheartening. This year, some 114,000 kids have applied for approximately half that many spots.

“Almost all of the parents of scholarship children make a sacrifice to get their kids into the right school,” said Patrick Gibbons, spokesman Step Up for Students, which runs the scholarships.  “Since the scholarship is worth up to $4,880, most parents must pay a little out of pocket….We hear stories from parents about turning down raises in order to remain eligible for the scholarship.”

Homeschoolers Threatened
When homeschooling resurrected in the 1970s and 80s, many parents were jailed or threatened with jail for choosing that form of education.

“I became an attorney because my parents were jailed for home schooling me,” Rick Brueggemann, a candidate for circuit judge, told the audience at a FreePAC Kentucky event April 5. “Mostly what I see is if parents can’t arrange to have their children in a really good parochial school, they’re home schooling.”

Brueggerman says public education should give families freedom through school vouchers or education savings accounts.

Getting into Pre-K
“My wife went through some crazy antics to get our then-toddler into a pre-K daycare,” said Paul Croteau, a Texas dad. “We’re talking getting up at 4 a.m., waiting in line at 5 a.m., just to get a spot…We’re not talking about getting a spot in school, but to get your name on the signup list.

Croteau’s daughter is in eighth grade now, and he and his wife are trying to decide where she’ll attend high school.

“We actually started to social network, finding parents who are in the schools already and then milking them for as much information as we can,” he said. “’What did you do to get into that school? Who do I need to know to help move my application in? Who should I contact when? What activities are they looking for?’”

For some private schools, getting in is like applying to college, he noted.

“They want to see grades. They want to see activities. They want to see your fundraising efforts in the past. They want to see not only what the student has done, but also what have you as the parent done for your school?…It’s very, very difficult these days.”

 

Victory for Online Learning in New Jersey

Court Decision Upholds Spirit of Charter School Innovation

CER Press Release
Washington, D.C.
April 11, 2014

A unanimous ruling from a New Jersey appellate court upheld the right of the State Commissioner of Education to authorize online charter schools, paving the way for innovation and squashing a union-led effort to discourage the expansion of online education.

“This court decision made it unequivocally clear that online learning-based charter schools have just as much standing in New Jersey as any other solution to improve outcomes for Garden State students,” said Kara Kerwin, president of The Center for Education Reform.

In recent years, it’s become apparent that online and blended education is here to stay, with an estimated four million plus students nationwide taking part in some sort of online-based learning method. As the court points out, there is no indication whatsoever the State Legislature ever intended to impede the Commissioner’s ability to authorize online and blended charter schools.

“The blinding clarity of the court decision that reaffirms authorizing power to the Commissioner is a clear sign of how futile it is to stand in the way of advancements in online-based learning approaches,” said Kerwin.

Judge Sides with Louisiana in Voucher Case

Elizabeth Harrington, The Washington Free Beacon

A federal court has rejected attempts by the Justice Department to scrap Louisiana’s school choice program, ending a months-long battle between the state and the Obama administration.

U.S. District Court Judge Ivan Lemelle ruled Tuesday evening that the Louisiana Scholarship Program can go on as planned, as long as the state provides information to the DOJ on vouchers 10 days prior to their award.

The judge did not grant the DOJ’s request to be able to deny vouchers on an individual basis. The vouchers are used by the families of students who attend failing public schools to pay for tuition at private institutions.

Gov. Bobby Jindal (R.) called the ruling a “win for children and their parents.”

“Today is a great day for school choice and access to an opportunity for a better education for all Louisianians,” he said. “I am pleased that the court rejected President Obama’s Justice Department’s attempt to establish a review period where bureaucrats in Washington would be able to reject scholarship awards solely because the child is not the ‘right’ skin color.”

The ruling rejected the DOJ’s request for a 45-day review period for all vouchers and will not disrupt the program, simply shortening the second round of scholarship awards by 10 days. The first round of vouchers for the 2014-2015 school year are scheduled for distribution April 21.

Attorney General Eric Holder also praised the ruling, and reiterated his claim that the DOJ was only “seeking information” on the voucher program.

“We welcome the court’s order as it rejects the state’s bid to resist providing even the most basic information about how Louisiana’s voucher program will affect school desegregation efforts,” Holder said. “This ruling ought to resolve, once and for all, the unnecessary dispute initiated by the state’s refusal to provide data.”

The DOJ had requested a permanent injunction against the program last August, which would have required all vouchers to be pre-approved by a federal judge.

Louisiana will have to provide the federal government with data on applicants, including name, race, student I.D. number, address, and the public school district the student would be fleeing. The DOJ can challenge whether a school is “impeding desegregation” under the 1975 court ruling Brumfield v. Dodd, an authority the agency has always held.

Additionally, on Thursday the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned an earlier ruling by Judge Lemelle that blocked parents of voucher students from intervening in the case. Lemelle had sided with the DOJ, which filed a motion last fall arguing that parents whose kids have benefited from the program had no legal standing to become defendants in the case. The government said the parents’ interest in the lawsuit was “remote.”

The appeals court ruled that parents do have an interest in any lawsuit that “threatens a ‘prospective interference with’ educational opportunities.” While the five families who sued to intervene in the case will not be heard due to the case’s conclusion this week, the Fifth Circuit ruling will allow parents to become defendants in the future should the DOJ challenge the program again.

“The purported aim of the United States is to enforce the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,” the Fifth Circuit Court said. “If any group can be described as within the zone of interest protected by that clause, surely it is these mostly minority parents who believe that the best way to ensure equal protection of the laws is to give them the opportunity—along with other parents who live in poverty and whose children are in failing schools—to send their children to better schools.”

Jindal said Louisiana would resist further attacks on the program, which primarily serves minority students who attend C, D, or F rated schools. Nearly 7,000 students received vouchers this school year.

“We have learned from this lawsuit the potential dangers of federal government overreach in K-12 education,” he said. “We will remain vigilant that the Department of Justice will not take advantage of the information sharing process and use it as means to further obstruct school choice.  We will continue to oppose any attempts to impede children and their parents from being able to escape failing schools and have access to better educational opportunities.”

School choice organizations also praised the ruling, and vowed to continue to fight for the program.

“This decision takes a lot of the teeth out of the Department of Justice’s original efforts to block the Louisiana Scholarship Program, and puts in place safeguards to both the success of scholarship students and students as a whole in Louisiana,” said Kara Kerwin, president of The Center for Education Reform.

“Students should not be trapped in a failing or underperforming school simply because of the color of their skin or the neighborhood they live in,” said Ann Duplessis, president of the Louisiana Federation for Children. “We remain vigilant and will continue to fight to ensure Louisiana’s low-income parents do not become the victims of purely political moves.”

State Senate Passes School Choice Measure To Allow Low-Income Students To Use Vouchers

The Chattanoogan.com

The Tennessee Senate on Thursday passed school choice legislation that would allow low-income students in failing schools to use vouchers.

If enacted, the bill in its first year would issue vouchers to as many as 5,000 income-eligible students in the bottom five percent of schools in Tennessee.

Kara Kerwin, president of The Center for Education Reform, said, “Efforts to create a voucher program are part of a broader trend going on right now in Tennessee to introduce educational options through multiple avenues of innovation.

“Whether it’s instituting a program to give low-income students a better chance at success, facilitating the state charter school sector or allowing parents to petition for change in schools, Tennessee lawmakers are well on their way towards allowing for better educational options to flourish.”

Analysis of the Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act

MEMORANDUM

April 11, 2014

TO:  U.S. charter schools

RE:  Analysis of the Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act  

FROM: Alison Consoletti Zgainer, Executive Vice President, Center for Education Reform                                                    

Tuesday, the U.S. House Education Committee held a hearing on H.R. 10, the Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act, and while some are praising the legislation, the Center for Education Reform cautions that it is nothing more than a natural progression of the federal government becoming too involved in charter school policy.

The goal of the Success and Opportunity through Quality Charters Act is to consolidate two programs—the state grant program for charter schools and the charter credit enhancement program—into one larger program to counteract redundancies.

The biggest problem, however, is one that has been increasing over the years in this grant program, and, in fact, other federal regulations regarding charter schools: the federal government is taking too much of a direct role in defining “quality” and “high performance” of charter schools.

It is one thing to give grants to states with strong charter laws (usually defined in the federal grant application as states with multiple authorizers, no caps, and funding equity provisions), and then the states give out sub-grants to charters or charter groups based on their own criteria, while following the guidelines of the federal grant.

The problem is this legislation relies too heavily on the phrases “high-quality” and “replication”, giving the federal government the ability to decide what is a high-quality charter school or charter management organization (CMO). No longer is the federal government simply giving money or credit enhancements to states to disperse to “successful schools” (however they define it), but rather the federal government is going further in setting up “high-quality” definitions and dictating in some ways the process of handing out sub-grants.

Trying to judge the quality of an entire network of charter schools does not make sense because it does not allow for unique or changing circumstances. Not only do charter management organizations have a variety of schools in their network, some of which are higher performing than others, but trying to fit quality into a formula hurts or even deters a CMO from taking over failing schools.

Parents choose charter schools for a variety of reasons, from safety, to quality, to specialized curriculum. Trying to force charter schools into a one-size-fits-all “quality” definition is boxing in schools that were never meant to fit within a single definition to begin with – autonomy and innovation are exactly why charter schools were created and these are precisely the qualities that enable charter schools to be successful. Allowing a formula to determine a quality charter school is essentially saying that a government employee knows what is better for a student than that student’s own parent.

The federal role in charter schools should incentivize states to create a healthy and strong charter school environment for themselves by passing strong laws. Dictating or making judgments regarding which charter school models should be replicated or expanded should not be up to the federal government, but rather charter school authorizers and each individual state’s charter school marketplace.

The ability of the federal government to ensure that the public’s interest is protected, and that education is well managed, is best left to those closest to our families and communities. The federal role should be one of assessment and data gathering, conducting nonpartisan, objective research to support policymaking, and ensuring that the most needy are supported and helped, provided that such support is predicated on success, and not the status quo.

For more on the federal government’s role in education see:

A Reformer’s Course of Action: Defining the Needs of Substantive Education Reform in Federal Programs

For more information on the Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act:

Original legislation can be found here, and amendments from Tuesday’s hearing can be found here.

 _______ 

Alison Consoletti Zgainer is the Executive Vice President of the Center for Education Reform (CER). In her eight-year tenure with CER, she has led the research arm of the organization. She is a contributor and author of countless reports and studies on charter schools, including the Survey of America’s Charter Schools and the annual Charter School Laws Across the States Rankings & Scorecard. Alison has also served as a peer reviewer for the federal Charter Schools Program Grant.