NSBA’s Statement on the Hearing on Charter Schools Before the House Committee on Education and Labor: February 24, 2010
For the first hearing in what we expect to be many in preparation for the reauthorization of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the full House Committee on Education and Labor on February 24, 2010, undertook the charter schools issue, with H.R. 4330, as its focus. The committee and House leadership believe charters and K-12 education, based on recent national polling data, could be a base for bipartisan cohesion. It was instructive, however, to hear a number of members question the patterns of charter school authorizers on issues raised by NSBA, such as: civil rights, special education services, suspension and expulsion rates and practices, lower assessment scores than traditional schools, and sidestepping of state and federal law.
As background, charter schools emerged on the education scene in the early 1990s and are now in 40 states with 1,407,817 students in 4,618 schools as of 2008. This amounts to three percent of the overall U.S. school population. They most often operate as independent entities in cooperation with or in competition with traditional school districts. The original, most honorable of motives for founding charter schools were cutting edge practices, innovation, subject matter focus, community spirit, enthusiasm and educational revitalization. However, there also is a darker side to many, whereby these new institutions have cavalierly circumvented or set aside long held education policy and belief, bypassed collective bargaining agreements, and often reaped unreasonable profits for educational management entrepreneurs.
Charter schools have been promoted by governors, business executives, community activists, and a small cadre of state legislators. Until today charter schools have operated mostly on the fringe. In a rather bold move emanating from the overriding influence of the Chicago Public Schools’ experiences, today they are a cornerstone of President Barack Obama’s and U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan’s education agenda. Because they do not exist in every state and the knowledge base of Members of Congress on their operations vary widely, it is critical that we educate our elected representatives on some basic issues relating to charter schools.
NSBA’s recommendations to the committee included:
- Charter schools should have to abide by the same environmental, labor, civil rights, due process, and fiscal laws that public schools must. Any new legislation should rectify areas where this is not the case and strengthen areas where it is, but is not clear or firmly directed.
- Solely public school systems led by boards should be the sponsors of charters. The local school district should determine accountability, such as determining the criteria that will be used in establishing the charter. Charters authorized in this manner will promote better coordination, sharing of resources and practices, accountability, and a more comprehensive community wide approach and support for education vis-a-vis the school system than will a charter school that is inserted by an external agency.
- Local school boards should retain the authority to decertify or not renew the charter of any school that fails to meet criteria set forth in the charter or as otherwise specified by the local school board, including but not limited to a requirement that charter schools demonstrate improved student achievement.
- A compendium of charter schools data should be developed so that we have a sound base and understand precisely where they are, who they serve, and what education services they provide. In addition, we need to know more about their student mobility, suspension and expulsion rates and student body makeup.