Organizations and individuals are invited to duplicate this fact sheet with attribution given to LWVMD. Before reproducing, please contact the LWVMD office for corrections or updated information.

LWVUS Education Position:

"Equal access to quality education is included in the LWVUS position on Equality of Opportunity. The phrase equal access to... quality education reflects League recognition that equality and quality ultimately are inseparable. However, the LWVUS has never undertaken a process for determining a common League definition of quality education that could serve as a basis for action nationwide. Therefore, when the definition of quality is a key factor in a state or local community, a local or state League must conduct its own study rather than relying on the LWVUS position to take action. Many Leagues that have member agreement on quality education in specific terms use their positions to support an array of local and state educational reforms. A number of Leagues have used LWVUS position to oppose private school vouchers. The LWVUS is a member of the National Coalition for Public Education, which opposes vouchers." (From Impact on Issues 1998-2000 p. 50)

Introduction:

Why a charter school movement? Charter schools are established for a variety of reasons. The founders generally fall into three groups: grassroots organizations of parents, teachers, and community members; entrepreneurs; or existing schools converting to charter status. The three reasons most given for creating a charter school are to: realize an educational vision; gain autonomy; serve a special population. Parents and teachers choose charter schools primarily for educational reasons - high academic standards, small class size, innovative approaches, or educational philosophies in line with their own. Some have chosen charter schools for their small size and associated safety.

"The term 'charter' may have originated in the 1970s when New England educator Ray Budde suggested that small groups of teachers be given contracts or 'charters' by their local school boards to explore new approaches. Albert Shanker, former president of the AFT, then publicized the idea, suggesting that local boards could charter an entire school with union and teacher approval. In the late 1980s Philadelphia started a number of schools-within-schools and called them charters. Some of them were schools of choice. The idea was further refined in Minnesota and based on three basic values: opportunity, choice, and responsibility for results"

(Overview of Charter Schools, US Charter Schools, www.uscharterschools.org)

Charter Schools defined:

"Charter schools, as originally conceived, are legally and fiscally autonomous educational entities operating within the public school system under charters, or contracts. The charters are negotiated between organizers and sponsors. The organizers may be teachers, parents, or others from the public or private sectors. The sponsors may be local school boards, state school boards, or other public authorities, such as universities. The organizers manage the schools and sponsors monitor compliance with the charter. The charters contain provisions regarding issues such as curriculum, performance measures, and management and financial plans.

Charter schools may be established in several ways. An existing school might convert to a charter school. Alternatively, a charter school can be developed as part of an existing school, comprising a 'school within a school.' Finally, a charter school might emerge as a brand-new entity.

In broad terms, charter schools are aimed at producing: (a) increased responsiveness to demands of parents, students, and teachers, and (b) greater opportunities for innovation in school management and pedagogy." (Charter Schools Laws Across the United States 1996 Edition, Sandra Vergari & Michael Mintrom, PIPC, Policy Report #2)

Depending on the enabling legislation, charter schools are public institutions that are free from many state and district regulations. No two charter schools are exactly alike. They vary in size, governance, focus, and pedagogy. Some have a special emphasis on science and technology, others on the arts or serving at-risk students. Some have complete fiscal autonomy, others are bound by financial guidelines written into the charter.

Charter Schools Vary From State to State, But Generally:

• Are created and managed by groups of parents, teachers and/or others. These schools are tailored to meet the needs of the local community.
• Are public schools. They do not charge tuition, they are open to all students, and they are accountable to the public.
• Are generally free from most education laws and regulations, but are accountable for results. They gain autonomy through a legal contract with a school district or another public agency. Standards for performance are established in the contract.
• Continue to operate only if they meet performance standards, and if they can attract students and their families to the school.
• Tend to be smaller schools, where students can have sustained relationships with caring adults. The average charter school has fewer than 300 students.
  

  (MD State Dept. of Education, Fall 1996, "Charter Schools: A Snapshot.")

Five states lead in the numbers of charter schools - California, Arizona, Texas, Florida, Michigan. In 1994 the Public Charter Schools Program ($15 million for start-up grants) proposed by President Clinton was passed by the U.S. Congress as part of the Improving America's Schools Act for fiscal year 1995. The Charter Schools Program was allotted an increase of $40 million for fiscal year 1997 as part of the total increase for "improving education."

Model for State Charter Schools Laws
( Advocates might view as the "ideal type"):

Organization: A variety of public or private actors are permitted to establish and operate charter schools.

Sponsorship: More than one type of public authority is permitted to sponsor charter schools.

Legal Status: Charter schools are non-sectarian public schools that exist independent of a school district. Charter schools are legally and fiscally autonomous entities, free to make their own decisions regarding school operations.

Regulations: Charter schools receive waivers from most state and local school regulations. Exceptions are regulations regarding health and safety, civil rights, fiscal accountability, performance requirements, and other restrictions specified in the charter.

Accountability: The site for decision making and accountability is the school itself Parents and the sponsoring public authority hold the charter school accountable for student outcomes. Failure to attract sufficient students and teachers, or a failure to meet the provisions of the charter, results in revocation of the charter by the sponsoring body.

Admissions: Charter schools may not charge tuition, and admissions policies must be nondiscriminatory. Where demand exceeds available space, students are chosen by lottery. Charter schools are schools of choice and students are not required to attend such schools.

Funding: A charter school receives the full public funding allotment associated with its student enrollment. A charter school with "at-risk" or disabled students is eligible for the same grants available to traditional public schools with such students. Charter schools are able to apply for state or federal grants to help with start-up costs.

Teachers: Teachers may work as employees or they may also serve as administrators of the charter school. Teachers previously employed by a school district retain protections such as seniority and retirement benefits if they choose to return to the district within a specified period of time.

Number: A substantial number of charter schools are permitted within a state. (PIPC, Charter Schools Laws Across the United States 1996 Edition, p. 5.)

Summary: The quality of state laws authorizing charter schools directly affects the quality and nature of charter schools in that state. Secretary of Education Richard Riley has spoken with dozens of charter school leaders around the country; several important principles have emerged from these discussions about the responsible authorization of charter schools. These themes include ensuring that charter schools are public schools, non-sectarian, open to all students, and not charging tuition. They also need to be linked to high standards for students and teachers, and freed from many laws and regulations in exchange for accountability for results. It is also critical that the implementation of the laws focuses on supporting improving teaching and learning for all, and serious fiscal and academic accountability. (MD State Dept. of Education, fall 1996, "Charter Schools: A Snapshot.")

The Maryland Public Charter School Study Group: This Study Group was appointed by the State Board of Education in September 1996. On January 28, 1997, the Group submitted their report. By consensus, the Study Group agreed:

• No legislation or regulation should be enacted for the sole purpose of qualifying for federal 'start-up' funds.
• Founders of proposed public charter schools should apply to local boards of education.
• Charter schools should be non-sectarian, non-religious, non-profit, and non-home-based.
• Charter school applications may request the local board of education, the State Board of Education, and/or the State Superintendent to waive certain rules, regulations, and requirements as well as any permissible federal requirements that inhibit the flexible operation and management of the charter school.
• Public charter schools should be measured by the same standards used to assess achievement in the State's other public schools.
• Contested local board of education decisions relative to charter school applications may be appealed as currently permitted by the Education Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland and the Code of Maryland Regulations.

The Study Group offered the following recommendations to the State Board of Education:

• The State Board of Education use the information contained in the report to develop and distribute guidelines for local school systems to use in considering charter school applications, and
• The State Board of Education continue to have open communications with the customers and stakeholders of public education concerning charter schools. ("Report of the Public Charter School Study Group to the Maryland State Board of Education," January 28, 1997.)

Funding of Charter Schools: The LWVMD Committee for the School Choice Study, after detailed research, came to the following conclusions regarding how charter schools around the U.S. are funded:

1. Although some start-up funds are available from federal sources, it is essential that additional start-up funds be provided by the state and county and private sources.
2. For the majority of states with charter schools, funding for a charter school consists of state revenue and municipal or district revenue in the same proportion that is provided for other schools within the district in which the charter school is located.
3. Sufficient funding must be provided for the maintenance and upgrading of facilities. Many charter schools have been adversely affected by significant underestimates of the amount of money required.
4. Charter schools qualify for applicable state and federal program funds.

Some Arguments FOR and AGAINST Charter Schools:

Arguments FOR:

1. Autonomy to meet specific needs.
2. High parental/guardian satisfaction.
3. Encouragement of innovative teaching practices.
4. Higher student achievement.
5. Ending of outdated rules and regulations (scheduling, curriculums, financing)
6. * Provide a system of accountability for results in public education.
7. Rejuvenation of public schools through family participation, atmosphere of respect, high expectations, and common purpose.
8. Small classes and smaller school size.
9. Reflection of America's entrepreneurial spirit.
10. A public school alternative to both vouchers and traditional bureaucratic public school monopoly.

Arguments AGAINST:

1. Threat to authority of local boards of education.
2. Paucity of accepted standards and assessment of quality by which to hold schools accountable, and little evidence of increased student achievement.
3. Danger of creaming best students, excluding poor, minority, and handicapped students.
4. Difficulty of providing full information about charter options for all parents.
5. Denial of a common educational experience for all children in our democracy, and increased difficulty in making the public school a center for the community.
6. Threat to exclusive bargaining rights and traditional staff certification if each charter can choose its staff.
7. Shortage of funds for start-up costs (even if state and local boards maintain per pupil funds).
8. Loss of funds for existing system, where majority of students remain.
9. Cost of alternative transportation system.
10. Threat to established administrators and teachers not chosen for charter schools.
11. Burn out and exhaustion of staff due to demands of establishing new schools.

• Associated Press, "Charter Schools to Receive Aid," The Washington Post, Sunday, August 29, 1999, p. A12.
• Bathen, Effie, Staff Writer, "Roadblocks loom ahead for first public charter Gazette Community News, Wednesday, September 22, 1999, p. AIO.
• LWV of Baltimore County, MD, Education Committee Report, "Options in Education for Families and Community: Choice, magnets, charter schools, vouchers, privatization, home schooling," Pub. # 97-01, April 1997.
• "Ready, READ!" The Atlantic Monthly, November 1998, pp. 92-104. Maryland State Department of Education, "Charter Schools: A Snapshot," Fall 1996.
• "Report of the Maryland Public Charter School Study Group," January 28, 1997.
• The Office of Educational Research and Improvement/U.S. Department of Education, publication entitled "A National Study of Charter Schools - Executive Summary," July 1998.
• Pearce, Kelly, "Charter schools' progress report," The Arizona Republic, Tuesday, March 16, 1999, pp. 1 and A2.
• Political Institutions and Public Choice (PIPC), A Program of Michigan State University's Institute for Public Policy and Social Research, Sandra Vergari and Michael Mintrom, "Charter Schools Laws Across the United States," 1996 Edition, Policy Report #2, East Lansing, MI.
• Weiss, Abby R., "Going It Alone: A Study of Massachusetts Charter Schools," Institute for Responsive Education, March 1997.
• Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, "Wisconsin Charter Schools," 1999, Madison, WI.

Internet addresses used:

http://www.uscharterschools.org
http://www.heritage.org/michigan.html
http://www.doe.mass.edu/lawsregs/0499charterlr.html