Leaving No Child Behind: why were charter schools formed and what makes them successful?

For years our nation's schools have had to wrestle with the reality that too many minority children and children from disadvantaged backgrounds are not learning. (1) There are major achievement gaps between disadvantaged minority children and their more affluent peers. (2) Charter schools were formed on the premises that they would be accountable for achievement and that they would overcome these achievement gaps. (3) "Charters are self governing public schools, often run by private companies, which operate outside the authority of local school boards, and have greater flexibility than traditional public schools in areas of policy, hiring and teaching techniques." (4)

 
  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. Philadelphia started 
  a number of schools- within-schools and called them "charters." (5) 

The first state-authorized charter schools came into being pursuant to 1991 Minnesota legislation. (6) California followed Minnesota's lead and enacted its own charter school legislation in 1992. (7) By 2007, forty states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico had laws in place for the creation of charter schools. (8)

The basic concept of charter schools is increased autonomy from local school boards and freedom from some regulation, in return for accountability for achievement. (9) Charter schools operate under a contract, or charter, with government agencies, such as local school districts, state charter, school districts, state and local education agencies, or a college or university. (10) Most states allow charters to be sponsored by local education agencies or school districts. (11) In some cases these charters must also be approved by the state education agency. (12) Only Arkansas requires that the state education agency sponsoring a charter have approval from a local education agency. (13) Groups that hold charters include non-profit organizations, teacher groups, and parent groups. (14)

Charter schools tend to be smaller than traditional public schools. (15) Charter high schools average 447 students, while public high schools average 1549 students. (16) Charter schools serve a greater proportion of minority students--sixty-two percent in charter schools versus fifty percent in public schools. (17) Charter schools also serve more poor students, as measured by free and reduced lunch counts. (18) While there may be minor differences between charter schools in different states or school districts, most have the following common characteristics: Autonomy from administration of the local school district, parents who are given the option of choosing a charter school over a public school, a focus on at-risk students or on a particular subject such as fine arts, and the receipt of less money per student from tax revenue than local public schools. (19) As of May, 2008 there were 1,259,571 students attending 4303 public charter schools in forty states and the District of Columbia. (20)

It might be expected that children who enroll in charter schools most often come from failing public schools. However, children enrolled in charter schools come from both public and private schools. (21) For example, a review of the enrollment pattern in Michigan showed that the enrollment pattern from public and private schools is about the same. (22) A review of why children may apply to charter schools helps lead to an understanding of why this movement has gained such momentum in a short sixteen years. (23) Parents apply to have their children attend a charter school for a variety of reasons. Those reasons might include their child doing badly in a public school, their child performing at a typical level in a poor school, or their having an exceptional student that is not being offered the resources they need. (24) Parents may also be motivated in a constructive way or they may be highly motivated to intervene in a dysfunctional way. (25)

With improvements in achievement as the goal for all charter schools, one would expect that the rapid growth of the charter school movement is the result of reports of such improvements. F. Howard Nelson and Nancy Van Meter prepared a comprehensive report to compare achievement between public schools and charter schools. (26) Their study found that in 2005, on average, students in charter schools "scored the same or lower in almost every comparison to public school students." (27) This was particularly true when traditional public schools in large cities serving mostly minority students were compared to charter schools with the same make-up of students. (28) Both types of schools had similar scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). (29) This study may appear to suggest to the public that charter schools are not effective in improving achievement. However, the report also notes that when compared to public schools, charter schools are more likely to have a special focus on target students. (30) This would include students with educational disadvantages, such as those who are eligible for free or reduced lunch, and have a higher percentage of black students. (31) In fact, charter schools welcome the toughest of the tough, students who have fallen through the cracks and who are in the most danger of being left behind. (32) Since lower socio-economic status and minority background are often found to correlate with lower achievement, these students may do poorly in school and perform worse on tests than the general school population. (33) A study of charter schools in Arizona found that first year children attending a charter school may have significantly lower reading scores than students in comparable public schools. (34) But when students remain in the charter school for a second and third year they have significantly higher scores than students at comparable schools. (35) If they continued to attend a public school, there is little doubt that their level of achievement would remain low. (36) Therefore, if these students reach the same achievement levels as other public school students, then the charter schools have made substantial gains. (37)