Tag Archives: charter schools

Media: “Three Factors Critical to Rural Charter Schools’ Success” in EducationNext

As of the 2017-18 school year, 809 rural charter schools nationwide serve approximately 256,000 students. Though that’s only about one tenth of all charter schools and students nationwide, it represents substantial growth over the last decade.

Despite the growth, charter schools aren’t always a viable solution to a rural community’s education needs. They can negatively impact the enrollment and finances of local school districts, resulting in the closure or consolidation of long-standing community institutions.

But that’s not always the case. There are some rural communities where charters can and do work.

My team and I recently conducted in-depth case studies of four rural charter schools that are outperforming state and district averages in reading and math. Each of these schools serve a diverse student body. I have a piece in EducationNext today that discusses three factors that seem to facilitate the success of these rural charter schools:

  1. The founders, leaders, and/or board members of these schools have deep ties to the local community.
  2. These rural charter schools were founded as an explicit remedy to a gap in the community’s education offerings.
  3. These rural charter schools maintain consistent leadership and/or engagement with school founders.

Read the full piece at EdNext and learn more about rural charter schools on our new website, ruralcharterschools.org.

What Are Microschools and Should We Have More of Them?

For our new report, “Working Toward Equitable Access and Affordability: How Private Schools and Microschools Seek to Serve Middle- and Low-Income Students,” we identified almost 200 intentionally small schools, often called “microschools,” across the country. Microschools’ small size — typically between 20 and 150 students across multiple grade levels — allows them the flexibility to implement innovative educational approaches such as multi-age classrooms, highly personalized and student-led learning, blended learning, experiential learning, and teachers as the primary school leaders.

Some proponents see microschools’ intensely relational, customized classrooms as a potential vehicle to improve educational opportunity for low-income students and students of color who are disproportionately underserved in our traditional public system. But is it a good idea to expand the model beyond the private school sector, where it largely lives now?

That question is hard to answer, largely because we don’t yet know enough about the quality and impact of existing microschools. Continue reading

Misinformation About California’s Special Education Systems and Enrollment Trends Won’t Help the Fiscal Crisis

Many California school districts are in financial trouble. Teacher pensions consume an increasing share of K-12 spending, and inflexible collective bargaining agreements and declining enrollments stretch district budgets.

In this strained financial environment, some of the complexity of California’s school finance system is lost, leading to simplified analyses and incomplete solutions. Addressing the financial shortfall requires a comprehensive understanding of the many different ways funding works in the state.

cover of Bellwether report cover of Bellwether report

 

 

 

 

 

 

To that end, we released new issue briefs yesterday that provide needed context and clarity on important issues in the state: special education financing and school enrollment trends and facilities. These issues have become part of the financial policy debate, but there are misunderstandings that unnecessarily fan the flames of tension between traditional and charter schools. For example, misleading analyses of enrollment trends and their impact on district finances make it more difficult to accurately assess facilities needs for districts and charter schools. And, since charter schools often enroll fewer students with disabilities, many can mistakenly believe that they are not contributing their share to special education.

But this isn’t quite right. Our hope is that a sober examination of these systems will point to reforms that can help schools of all types better serve students.

Continue reading

Learning from a Missed Opportunity in Massachusetts

If current predictions hold, several states will either set new or stand by current limits on charter school growth and expansion. These limits, called charter school caps, place a ceiling on the number of charter schools or students those schools can enroll. In 2016, Massachusetts did the same thing: Voters rejected Ballot Question 2, which would have raised the cap on charter schools in the state. But research released just last week suggests that Massachusetts’ voters made a mistake. The states currently considering similar legislation should pay attention.

In the study I’m referencing, authors Sarah Cohodes, Elizabeth Setren, and Christopher R. Walters examined the effect of a policy that allowed effective charter schools in Boston to replicate their school models at new locations. They found that these new schools produced large achievement gains that were on par with those of their parent campuses. What’s more, the average effectiveness of charter middle schools in the city increased after the policy reform.

This evidence could, perhaps, be dismissed if the sector saw only a marginal increase in the number of schools; that is, if there were only a few additional charter schools that pulled this off. But that’s not the case: Boston’s charter sector produced these results despite a doubling of the charter market share in the city.

This analysis would be a big deal for any charter sector, but it is particularly meaningful for Boston. As Bellwether found in a recent analysis of the charter sector, Boston has the highest performing urban charter sector in the country. The average child who attended Boston charter schools benefited from basically a full year of additional learning compared to students in traditional public schools: 170 additional days of learning in reading and 233 days of learning in math. And the research suggests that Boston charter schools have strong, positive effects on the learning outcomes of students with disabilities and English-language learners, as well. The implication here is that not only did Boston’s charter schools replicate their impact, they replicated some of the most effective charter schools we’ve ever seen, to the benefit of the thousands of students in Boston who are on charter school waitlists.

The states that are poised to double down on charter caps — such as New York, Maine, and California — shouldn’t make the same mistake as Massachusetts did in 2016. New York, in particular, is at risk here: In our analysis earlier this year, we examined the existing evidence on New York and New York City and found that there, too, charters are more effective than traditional public schools. By committing to the cap, the state is refusing thousands of students the opportunity to attend high-quality schools.

To be sure, there are reasons to question the growth of a charter sector other than whether charters can replicate effectiveness across schools. Charter critics cite, for example, concerns about the effect of charter sector growth on traditional public school enrollment. But, particularly during National Charter Schools Week, states should be skeptical of arguments used to support charter school caps that claim charter schools cannot be replicated effectively.

Media: “New Analysis Shows How a $13 Billion Funding Gap Between Charter Schools & Traditional Public Schools Hurts Underserved Students” in The 74

In January, Bellwether Education Partners released a new report that provided a rigorous, fact base on the weaknesses and strengths of the charter sector. In a new op-ed for The 74, I write about how disparities in funding between charter schools and traditional public schools hurt underserved students:

Twenty-seven years into the national charter school experiment, funding of charter schools and traditional public schools remains wildly unequal. In fact, charter school students receive 27 percent less in per-pupil funding than their traditional public school counterparts, leaving a total funding gap of nearly $13 billion.

The sheer magnitude of this gap should alarm anyone who cares about equity, but it matters even more because most charters serve a higher proportion of students of color and low-income students than traditional public schools and show positive effects on the performance of these groups. When charters are underfunded, it is the students most in need of a quality education whose educational opportunities are limited.

Charter schools are often critiqued for draining resources away from traditional public schools, but these data suggest that charter schools are doing more with less for students that are most in need of a high-quality education. Without action from state and local policy makers, charter schools will remained underfunded and charter school students will pay the cost. Read my full op-ed here.