Reason Foundation - Policy Areas >

Record Charter School Enrollment Growth in California

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:17:00 EDT

The California Charter Schools Association reports some good news for California kids and school choice in the Golden state:

88 new public charter schools opened their doors for the first time this fall, bringing the total number of California charter schools in operation to 809 schools, serving approximately 341,000 public school students.
New and existing charter schools added an estimated 56,000 new students this year, the largest single-year enrollment increase in history and equivalent to adding the entire enrollment of the ninth largest school district in the state.
While it took California’s charter school movement 13 years to reach 200,000 students (in 2005) it only took four years to surpass the 300,000 students mark.
This year also marked the first year that more than half of all new charter schools that opened this fall (45 of 88 schools) are replications of existing, successful charter school models, an increase of 11 percent over the previous year.
The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) has the highest number of new charter schools in the state. With 19 new charter schools, for a total of 163 in operation, LAUSD also has by far the most charter schools for a single district in the nation.
As of this fall, approximately one in every six charter schools nationwide (16 percent) operates in California. According to the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, based in Washington, D.C., there are now more than 4,900 charter schools currently educating over 1.5 million children.

What the Privatized Education Sector Looks Like

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 00:27:00 EDT

Two new reports out of the Education Policy Research Unit at Arizona State University profile the Nonprofit and the For-profit Education Management Sector. The report offers detailed information about almost every management company from Green Dot to K12 Inc.

The reports defines an education management organization, or EMO, as an organization or firm that manages schools receiving public funds, including district and charter public schools. A contract details the terms under which executive authority to run one or more schools is given to an EMO in return for a commitment to produce measurable outcomes within a given time frame.

Profiles of Nonprofit Education Management Organizations: 2008-2009

A few facts from the new report:

While the number of schools operated by for-profit EMOs grew rapidly in the 1990s and is now leveling off, the number of schools operated by nonprofit EMOs has been growing more steadily and steeply over time.
Nonprofit EMOs operated public schools in 25 states during the 2008-09 school
year.
Nonprofit EMOs are most prevalent in Texas, California, Arizona, and Ohio. In terms of the proportion of charter schools managed by nonprofit EMOs, Illinois stands out, with 72% of its charter schools managed by nonprofit EMOs.
Nonprofit EMOs are garnering more support and are growing steadily, while the growth of for-profit EMOs is slowing.
A total of 103 nonprofit EMOs were identified and profiled in this report, including 16 large nonprofit EMOs, 40 medium-sized, and 47 small nonprofit EMOs.
The number of nonprofit EMOs that operated at least one charter school in 1995 is estimated to be 5. This number increased rapidly until 2004. Since then, only 5 new nonprofit EMOs have been established, although the number of schools operated by the existing organizations continues to grow.
KIPP, the Knowledge is Power Program, a national charter school network, experienced the largest net increase in schools during the past school year, from 57 to 64 schools.

Profiles of For-Profit Educational Management Organizations: 2008-2009

A few facts from the new report:

Since the first Profiles report was published for the 1997-1998 school year, the number of for-profit EMOs profiled has increased from 14 to 95, and the number of states in which EMOs are operating from 16 to 31.
Since the first Profiles report was produced for the 1997-1998 school year, the number of schools managed by for-profit EMOs has increased to 733 from 131. In the past year, the number of profiled schools has increased dramatically, to 733 from 533. However, we estimate that the actual number of EMO-managed public schools has leveled off over the past few years and attribute the dramatic increase only to a change in our methods.
Of the 733 schools profiled in this report, 74% are operated by large EMOs.
Fully 94% of EMO-managed schools are charter schools, and 6% are district schools. The number of district schools operated by EMOs continued to decline between 2007-2008 and 2008-2009.
The majority (57%) of EMO-managed schools profiled are primary schools.
The number of virtual schools operated by EMOs increased from 40 in 2007-2008 to 56 in 2008-2009. This is equivalent to 7.6% of all schools managed by for-profit EMOs.
The five states with the highest numbers of schools managed by for-profit EMOs are Michigan (191), Florida (136), Arizona (103), Ohio (95), and Pennsylvania (39).
The number of students in profiled EMO-managed schools increased by 84,809 in the last year. In total, the EMO-operated schools profiled in this report enrolled 339,222 students during the 2008-2009 school year.

"Stand and Deliver" High School First to be Bid to Outside Operaters in LA Unified

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:59:00 EDT

The Los Angeles Times reports the first schools to be bid out to outside bidders because of low academic performance:

Garfield High, which became nationally known as the real-life setting for the film “Stand and Deliver,” will be among the first group of local schools eligible for takeover because of persistent academic failure, a high-level district source has told The Times.

Garfield’s selection means that the nation’s second-largest school system will invite bidders — from inside and outside the district — to run the East Los Angeles campus of 4,600 students. This “request-for-proposal” process could apply to more than 250 schools under a Board of Education resolution passed in August, but the initial set of schools will number 12, sources said.

How far Garfield has fallen from the "Stand and Deliver" days:

Garfield High, which for decades has served a largely immigrant population east of downtown, reached its recent high-water mark in the 1980s, when math teacher Jaime Escalante built a famed calculus program that became the subject of a book and subsequent movie. Under his leadership, dozens of students passed the Advanced Placement calculus test every year, a rare feat even at the nation’s elite high schools.

Last year, only 5% of Garfield students tested as proficient in any math class. The school qualified for possible takeover as one of more than 250 that had consistently failed to meet federal benchmarks and thus was designated as falling into “Program Improvement” status. The board resolution applied to any school with that designation for three or more years.

Only 5 percent proficient in any math class!! Reason magazine explored the depressing untold story of what happened at Garfield High and how Jamie Escalante was forced out here.

Los Angeles School Competition Update

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:07:00 EDT

The Los Angeles Times reports that more schools in Los Angeles may be subject to the competitive bidding process after state test scores were released this week.

Thirty-nine Los Angeles schools -- a group larger than the entire Glendale school system -- identified as "failing" under federal standards became eligible Tuesday for takeover under a recent Board of Education policy.

These schools bring the number of Los Angeles Unified School District campuses eligible for takeover to 252. Bidders from inside or outside the nation's second-largest school system could submit proposals to run such schools. The bidding process also applies to 51 new schools set to open over the next four years.

Under the policy adopted last month, existing schools become eligible for takeover when they reach their third year in "Program Improvement." A school receives this label after persistently failing a federal standard, called Adequate Yearly Progress, that measures whether a school has the required percentage of proficient students. This percentage is rising sharply every year, and, as a result, more schools are annually judged as failing.

In New Orleans School Choice and Autonomy Drive School Improvement

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 10:33:00 EDT

In Education Week Leslie R. Jacobs and Paul Vallas argue that autonomy, budget control, and school choice drive school improvement in New Orleans.

New Orleans schools now operate under a decentralized system that is unique. Sixty percent of students attend charter schools, and both charter and noncharter schools have autonomy over staffing and budgets. All schools are schools of choice. The money follows the student, so schools receive funds based on their enrollment. There is no longer a collective bargaining agreement, nor a citywide salary schedule.

The results thus far are compelling. In the four years since Hurricane Katrina devastated the city, New Orleans has shown more growth in student achievement than any other district in the state. The percentage of failing schools is down significantly, and student test scores are up in every grade and subject. Some of the gains are dramatic. The 10th grade math proficiency rate has jumped from 39 percent to 58 percent, and the senior graduation rate from 79 percent to 89 percent. The percentage of 8th graders proficient in English has grown from 26 percent to 42 percent. For context, from 1999 until the state takeover in 2005, 8th grade English proficiency had improved by a meager 3 points.

For a look at several districts that are moving toward charter-like autonomy, budget control, and choice see Reason's "Weighted Student Formula Yearbook."

Parents Like Charter Schools: 2009 School Year Edition

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 12:43:00 EDT

The annual PDK/Gallup poll on public education shows a significant jump in public support for public charter schools—from 51 percent in 2008 to 64 percent this year.

In New Orleans a new survey by the Council for a Better Louisiana showed strong support for the system's move to charter schools, with 74 percent saying they support charter schools and 62 percent saying they would support converting more schools to charters. Already, more than half the city's public school are charters.

And in Maryland the Baltimore Sun reports that parents want more seats in charter schools:

Despite the growing number of charter schools in Maryland, 3,000 students remain on waiting lists and advocates say legislators should loosen the ties that prevent further growth and support of charters.

Some charter schools have so many students who want to go there that they could fill every seat twice, said David Miller, director of the Maryland Charter School Network.

City Neighbors Charter School in Baltimore has 198 students and 420 students on the waiting list, said Principal Mike Chalupa. "I think that we have built up a really good reputation. We provide a progressive education model in an urban environment," he said.

Los Angeles Charter School Competition: School for the Arts Smackdown Edition

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 11:49:00 EDT

The Los Angeles Times tells the story of two new Los Angeles schools focused on arts education:

One occupies $232 million worth of serious architecture on a promontory overlooking downtown Los Angeles. The other rents cramped space in a South L.A. church.. . .

The Los Angeles Unified school at 450 N. Grand Ave., perched across the 101 Freeway from the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels, was years in the making and is housed on one of the most expensive and widely praised campuses in the nation. Yet it is only now shaking off more than a year of controversy and false starts in its launch to become the flagship of the district. The Fernando Pullum Performing Arts High School at 51st Street and Broadway may have the feel of something hastily thrown together out of spare parts, but it is led by one of the city's most respected music educators and has the support of such big-name artists as Kenny Burrell, Jackson Browne, Bill Cosby and Don Cheadle.

Adding a twist to the relationship between these two fledgling schools is this: Fernando Pullum, a charter school run by the Inner City Education Foundation (and named after the music teacher who heads the foundation's arts program), doesn't plan to stay in its rented quarters for long. It has its sights on an eventual takeover of 450 N. Grand.

"When our performing arts school is doing one amazing thing after another . . . . people will say, 'Why is this school in a small church on 51st and Broadway instead of at 450 N. Grand?' " said Mike Piscal, chief executive of Inner City schools.

First, the fact that LA Unified spent $232 million on a school for the arts, without even having an arts program or students to enroll in the building goes to the district's continuing focus on style over substance. Why is the district spending this kind of money on a "Crown Jewel," while thousands of students continue to fail and suffer in low-performing schools?

In fact, other expensive flagship public schools with new and grand facilities, such as the Santee Education Complex, have not led to improvements in student achievement. Grand facilities do not guarantee any improvement in student performance. Here is hoping that the recent competition from charter schools and the potential for low-performing schools to be taken over by charters, will keep this new $232 million school from faltering.

The bottom line is that Mike Piscal from ICEF charters is waiting and watching. His organization's small charter school for the arts in the old church building is ready to buckle down and focus on some high quality arts education. The traditional LA public school for the arts with millions more in resources and facilities better watch their back.

School Choice and More in Los Angeles

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 16:33:00 EDT

Lots of school reform in Los Angeles this week. Of course the big story via Education Week:

The Los Angeles board of education has agreed to open up as many as 250 schools to outside managers in a move meant to jump-start the pace of academic improvement in the nation’s second-largest school district.

In a 6-1 vote that followed a nearly four-hour debate, board members on Tuesday approved a resolution that will allow outside groups—such as charter school operators, community organizations, as well as in-house talent—to compete to operate 50 new schools set to open in the city over the next four years.

The new policy will also invite groups to take on the management task of turning around roughly 200 schools that are chronic underperformers.

And in other school reformy news, The Los Angeles Times reports that the Los Angeles Unified School District has instituted a pay incentive program for high-level administrators.

The incentive pay is mandatory for two new senior administrators who report directly to Cortines. And 17 current employees have the option of joining the program, in which they could increase or lose up to 10% of their salary depending on several measures, including student test scores.

"The district is moving in a more progressive manner," said board member Yolie Flores Aguilar, who supports merit pay for all district employees. Flores Aguilar on Tuesday won support for a controversial plan that would allow charter groups and other outside operators to take over as many as 250 schools.

Gov. Schwarzenegger Has Chance to Tie Teachers to Student Performance and Push Charters

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:37:00 EDT

My new column on President Obama's "Race to the Top" plan and California's desire for the federal funds:

Gov. Schwarzenegger should also latch on to President Obama’s call for more charter schools. Last week on CNN, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said, “I'm a fan of good charters. And the more we're creating options and new opportunities for parents, particularly in historically underserved communities, we think that's very, very important….You have to give these charter school operators real autonomy. These are, by definition, educated -- educated entrepreneurs, education entrepreneurs and innovators. You have to free them from the bureaucracy.”

As last week’s state test scored showed, many of the state’s poorest communities would greatly benefit if charter schools were allowed to compete with the failing public schools. Across California in 2009, 50 percent of children were proficient or above in English, up from 46 percent the year before. In Math, 46 percent of students were proficient, a gain of three points.

Yet, those already mediocre numbers are much lower for disadvantaged kids. Only 36 percent of economically-disadvantaged students scored proficient in English and 37 percent of economically-disadvantaged students were proficient in math.

This “achievement gap” is crushing the futures of many poor and minority students. Only 37 percent of the California’s African-American and Hispanic students are proficient or above in English - 31 points behind white students and 36 points behind Asian students. As the San Francisco Chronicle’s Jill Tucker recently wrote, “Based on the rate of improvement from 2003 to 2009, it would take up to 105 years to close the white/Hispanic achievement gap and at least 189 years to close the white/black gap, which has failed to narrow by even a point in English since 2003.”

To help these kids, Schwarzenegger needs to revamp many of the state’s worst schools. California uses a “similar schools ranking,” which compares schools based on how their student achievement scores measure up to 100 schools that are similar in size and makeup. Going forward, if a school is at the bottom of those “similar schools rankings” and has failed to meet adequate yearly progress under No Child Left Behind requirements for five years, the school should immediately be restructured. Charter schools should be allowed to bid to manage these schools, as President Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan have previously suggested.

In California, charter schools are already successfully serving the most disadvantaged students. If you look at test scores in public schools where more than 70 percent of children qualify for the free lunch program, charter schools operate 12 of the state’s 15 top performing schools.

With Secretary Duncan traveling the country with former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich to promote “Race to the Top” and charter schools, Gov. Schwarzenegger has an opportunity to implement the type of bipartisan reforms that many thought he’d bring years ago. Getting California to evaluate its teachers, at least in part, on how much their students improve and replacing failing schools with charters are two reforms that can start to fix a public school system that continues to fail way too many kids.

Full Column Here

Education Research and Commentary

Obama's Race to the Top May Help Spur Much-Needed Education Reforms

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:29:00 EDT

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is once again “shopping” for government reform ideas (remember the California Performance Review?) to erase the massive deficit and improve California. In perfect timing with Schwarzenegger’s newfound ambition, the U.S. Department of Education is getting ready to hand out its $4.3 billion “Race to the Top” education reform funds.

The Obama administration’s “Race to the Top” program is using federal money to encourage states to better track student progress; recognize and reward good teachers; and close chronically low-performing schools, replacing them with higher-quality charter schools.

At first glance, California has been disqualified before the “Race to the Top” even starts. The state does not have the legal ability to link student achievement data to teachers and principals. In 2006, teachers' unions successfully lobbied for a law that “prohibits the state from linking student data to teacher data for the purpose of pay, promotion, sanction, or personnel evaluation.”

That’s right: California’s teachers cannot be judged by how well they teach.

But with all that federal money out there, Gov. Schwarzenegger recently called for a special legislative session to rework state law so California can get a slice of the “Race to the Top” funds.

"Right now, we can't tell over the course of time how an individual teacher or principal or school is doing," Schwarzenegger said. "They call it a firewall, and I say tear down that wall."

But the governor shouldn’t stop at tying test scores to teachers. Layoffs by seniority -- last hired, first fired -- have been part of the California Education Code for over three decades. Schwarzenegger should introduce legislation to adopt a seniority-neutral layoff policy that allows districts to layoff personnel based on effectiveness rather than years of service.

In Los Angeles, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa experienced the negative consequences of the seniority laws first-hand. Villaraigosa took over 10 low-performing schools under a partnership with the Los Angeles Unified School District. But when layoffs and cutbacks had to be discussed, the mayor learned that all of his schools could be gutted: all of the principals and assistant principals and about 200 teachers would have to be replaced by more “senior” teachers from other schools that were not part of the reform efforts. The education establishment should realize it can’t afford to lose good teachers simply because they haven’t been on the job as long as less effective peers.

Gov. Schwarzenegger should also latch on to President Obama’s call for more charter schools. Last week on CNN, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said, “I'm a fan of good charters. And the more we're creating options and new opportunities for parents, particularly in historically underserved communities, we think that's very, very important….You have to give these charter school operators real autonomy. These are, by definition, educated -- educated entrepreneurs, education entrepreneurs and innovators. You have to free them from the bureaucracy.”

As last week’s state test scored showed, many of the state’s poorest communities would greatly benefit if charter schools were allowed to compete with the failing public schools. Across California in 2009, 50 percent of children were proficient or above in English, up from 46 percent the year before. In Math, 46 percent of students were proficient, a gain of three points.

Yet, those already mediocre numbers are much lower for disadvantaged kids. Only 36 percent of economically-disadvantaged students scored proficient in English and 37 percent of economically-disadvantaged students were proficient in math.

This “achievement gap” is crushing the futures of many poor and minority students. Only 37 percent of the California’s African-American and Hispanic students are proficient or above in English - 31 points behind white students and 36 points behind Asian students. As the San Francisco Chronicle’s Jill Tucker recently wrote, “Based on the rate of improvement from 2003 to 2009, it would take up to 105 years to close the white/Hispanic achievement gap and at least 189 years to close the white/black gap, which has failed to narrow by even a point in English since 2003.”

To help these kids, Schwarzenegger needs to revamp many of the state’s worst schools. California uses a “similar schools ranking,” which compares schools based on how their student achievement scores measure up to 100 schools that are similar in size and makeup. Going forward, if a school is at the bottom of those “similar schools rankings” and has failed to meet adequate yearly progress under No Child Left Behind requirements for five years, the school should immediately be restructured. Charter schools should be allowed to bid to manage these schools, as President Obama and Secretary Duncan have previously suggested.

In California, charter schools are already successfully serving the most disadvantaged students. If you look at test scores in public schools where more than 70 percent of children qualify for the free lunch program, charter schools operate 12 of the state’s 15 top performing schools.

With Secretary Duncan traveling the country with former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich to promote “Race to the Top” and charter schools, Gov. Schwarzenegger has an opportunity to implement the type of bipartisan reforms that many thought he’d bring years ago. Getting California to evaluate its teachers, at least in part, on how much their students improve and replacing failing schools with charters are two reforms that can start to fix a public school system that continues to fail way too many kids.

Lisa Snell is director of education at Reason Foundation.

Los Angeles Unified School Competition Round-Up

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 12:49:00 EDT

Here’s a round-up about Los Angeles Unified’s board proposal to introduce competition to run new and low-performing schools and to offer more high quality choices for Los Angeles students.

The LA Times calls it L.A. Unified’s Chance for Change:

After several weeks of delay and lobbying, a resolution by board Vice President Yolie Flores Aguilar is slated for a vote. It would give outside organizations such as charter operators, unions, the mayor's office and community groups the opportunity to submit proposals for running the 50 or so new schools expected to open over the next few years. Flores Aguilar has improved her initiative in some key ways, including an expansion that also opens up the district's lowest-performing schools to outside supervision. The resolution enjoys the strong support of Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who has championed it despite the reservations of his labor allies. Now it deserves a ringing endorsement from the board.

Education Week tells the story behind WHY Yolie Flores has chosen to champion the resolution.

Yolie Flores Aguilar, the main author of the resolution and the vice president of the school board, said she was compelled to push for a “new way” after seeing a report from researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles, showing that out of every 100 students enrolled in high schools in her school board district comprised of communities in southeast Los Angeles, as few as 28, and no more than 36, actually graduated. Third-grade students’ reading scores also alarmed her: less than 30 percent read at grade level.
“I didn’t know whether to scream or to cry,” said Ms. Flores Aguilar. “My frustration is at the casualness of how people have reacted to the failure of so many of our schools. “When I look at the data indicators, I think this is a 911 emergency,” she said. “I don’t understand why we aren’t stepping it up.”

A new analysis by the California Charter Schools Association finds that Los Angeles charter schools that want to run the new schools in Los Angeles have proven track records and already outperform demographically-similar district schools.

Sixteen charter school organizations currently operating 75 charter schools in Los Angeles (including several which open this fall) have publicly expressed interest in submitting proposals to open charter schools upon passage of the resolution. The Association conducted a matched comparison analysis of the performance of these 16 charter school organizations and assessed each charter school’s performance compared to the three similarly-matched district schools that students would otherwise likely attend.

The analysis revealed that 70 percent of charter schools outperformed all three of their neighborhood peers in both English-Language Arts and mathematics. Additionally, 89 percent of the charter schools in the analysis outperformed at least two of their three similarly-matched district schools in both English-Language Arts and mathematics.

Some other interesting developments in the Los Angeles school choice story include:

The Los Angeles school superintendent Ray Cortines is behind the proposal. "Mr. Cortines, who pushed for Ms. Flores Aguilar to target low-achieving schools as well as new schools, said even if the board doesn’t approve the measure, he will pursue the strategy administratively."
To date, new schools in Los Angeles have been no guarantee of improved student achievement. Ben Austin, the executive director of the Parent Revolution, a group closely affiliated with some Los Angeles charter-management organizations told Education Week: "the district’s $20 billion school construction program can’t be called a success when many of the new schools that opened in recent years sunk to the bottom academically.They literally begin to fail under federal law the day after the ribbon-cutting ceremony.”
Thousands of parents are expected to gather tomorrow in downtown Los Angeles to actively voice their support for the "Resolution for Public School Choice" between 12 PM and 2PM.

Governor Schwarzenegger Calls For Education Overhaul in Special Legislative Session

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 11:50:00 EDT

As the Sacramento Bee reports:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Thursday called a special legislative session for lawmakers to repeal a controversial law that prohibits linking teacher evaluations to student performance. . . .

Specifically, the proposal would repeal a law that prohibits using student test scores in combination with a statewide system for storing information about teachers that will go online next year. The Obama administration has said states that prohibit linking teacher evaluations to student performance will not be eligible for the "Race to the Top" stimulus funds.

The Governor is also calling for legislators to lift the cap on charter schools, allow children in failing schools to attend any school in the state, and for legislation to close the lowest-performing schools in the state and replace them with higher-performing schools.

Rose Friedman, R.I.P.--The Friedmans Left Families a Real School Choice Legacy

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 02:00:00 EDT

My colleague Brian Doherty offers an eloquent tribute to Rose Friedman and her contributions to liberty. He notes the role that the ideas and accomplishments of the Friedmans played in:

helping make America a place that is in some respects actually freer, and in most respects an intellectual environment where the idea of human liberty has wider play than it did before they did their long, arduous work of explaining the benefits of liberty, often against great opposition.

School choice is certainly one of those ideas that has much wider play despite great opposition. In remembering Rose Friedman, it is a perfect time to reflect on just how much progress has been made toward the 50-year old voucher idea to offer parents real education choice.

The greatest tribute to Rose and Milton Friedman is that school choice is no longer rare or controversial. Every year it becomes more the rule than the exception:

The Supreme Court validated the Friedman's voucher idea in 2002.
More parents than ever report having more school choice. For example, the National Center for Education Statistics reports that more than 50 percent of parents report that they have a school choice other than their residential school assignment.
The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice reports on 26 school choice programs in 16 states.
More than 16 school districts have attached funding to the backs of children and ditched residential assignment for district-wide choice through student-based budgeting.
Developing a school choice program and strategy is common practice for most school districts in the United States.
Not to mention more than 4,000 charter schools, with funding attached to the backs of 1.8 million children.
In larger numbers, low-performing schools are being closed and replaced with school-of- choice options.

The bottom line is that millions of children have the Friedmans to thank for a higher quality education. The Friedmans have helped to make school choice a reality and that legacy will live on as even more families continue to have a larger number of higher-quality educational opportunities for their children.

Rest in Peace, Rose.

Los Angeles Drop Out Rate is Good News and Very Bad News

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 18:21:00 EDT

In the LA Unified School District the dropout rate fell by 17 percent.

This is good news overall. However, 16,000 students who were counted as dropouts last year were duplications.

In addition, several individual schools continue to have dropout rates approaching 50 percent. These schools should not be open.

As the Los Angeles Times reported, "Jefferson High had an improved but still poor graduation rate of 48.6%. Ditto for the Santee Educational Complex, with a dropout rate of 41.2%."

When the Los Angeles school board revisits a proposal that would allow charter operators and other outside groups to bid for control of 50 new schools scheduled to open over the next four years, the students that attend these schools with high dropout rates should be first in line to attend new schools.

The Los Angeles school board should resist union opposition and remember the kids that attend high schools with 50 percent dropout rates. The board should allow outside operators to open new schools and let kids in failing schools have priority to attend the new schools.

Mayor Villaraigosa Calls for Competition for Los Angeles Schools

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:51:00 EDT

Perhaps an indication of how far the school choice debate has moved in the last decade. Perhaps a bellwether for how things are changing in a positive direction away from the public school status quo.

In the Los Angeles Times, Mayor Villaraigosa makes the case for bidding out new Los Angeles schools to school organizations outside of Los Angeles Unified.

For too long, leaders at every level of government have defended a status quo that serves the interests of adults more than children; that gives bureaucrats a near monopoly over public education; that shuts parents out of the conversation; and that, over and over, fails our kids.

It's time to get past the gatekeepers and stop preserving a system defined by low performance, low standards and low expectations. It's time to embrace new ideas and reclaim concepts such as accountability and competition, and it's time to admit the need for more than one educational choice. Put simply, it's time to put students first.

On Aug. 25, the Los Angeles Board of Education will have the opportunity to take the first real step toward reforming our broken system and transforming our schools. Board member Yolie Flores Aguilar has proposed a measure that would fundamentally change the way we run our schools, giving organizations outside the Los Angeles Unified School District--charter school groups, teacher collaboratives and others -- the chance to compete to operate new campuses set to open in fall 2010.

Most significant line by the Mayor:

I recognize that these changes won't come easily. I know that the voices of dissent -- the individuals and institutions that rely on and benefit from the status quo -- will try to drown out the calls for reform. But we cannot place the same old failing school system into brand new buildings and expect different results.

Detroit School Bankruptcy--Bellwether for Nation's Public Schools?

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 11:55:00 EDT

The Wall Street Journal reports that the Detroit public schools are on the brink of bankruptcy:

DPS's enrollment -- which largely determines its allotment of state funding -- is about half what it was in 2001, as suburban districts and charter schools have siphoned off tens of thousands of students. By this fall, DPS will have 172 schools open and more than 100 vacant. Meanwhile, the high-school-graduation rate is 58%; coupled with the enrollment losses, only about one-quarter of students who start high school in the district graduate from it in four years, according to outside estimates. . .

Behind DPS's predicament are many of the same problems that have haunted the city's auto industry for years: excess capacity, high labor and pension costs, fleeing customers, ineffective management, outside competition and -- except for a handful of respected programs -- a reputation for low quality.

This is not a Detroit problem, it is a national public school problem.

excess capacity
high labor and pension costs
fleeing customers
ineffective management
outside competition
a reputation for low quality

Many other school districts are losing students and money and have labor and pension costs that continue to encroach on their day to day operating costs. In addition, charters continue to gain significant market share in very specific geographic regions. The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools reports that in 2007–2008 school year, 12 communities had at least 20 percent of their public school students enrolled in public charter schools, double the number of communities from the 2005–2006 school year. Also, 64 communities now have at least 10 percent of public school students in charter schools.

Many other school districts face a similar financal scenario as Detroit. Spending keeps going up, while enrollment is shrinking. Like the auto industry, school districts need to fundamentally change their economic model. Unfortunately, at least for now, most districts continue to be bailed out by taxpayers.

The Great Charter School Debate: Final Round

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:58:00 EDT

In the final installment of the Great Charter School debate the Los Angeles Times asks:

Are charters a drain on traditional public schools?
Is it really a bad thing that charters put pressure on low-performing public schools? Lisa Snell and Ralph E. Shaffer finish their debate.

Here's a snippet of my answer:

Charter schools should not be viewed as a fiscal drain on school districts. Instead, they should be viewed as high-quality public schools that offer parents more options and raise school districts' overall quality. Districts should embrace higher-performing charter schools and work to replicate and imitate these schools, which are adding value to their students' education.

Look at Los Angeles and Oakland, where charter schools have had a positive effect on public education. In Los Angeles, more than 70% of charter schools outperform their nearby district schools. Ten of Los Angeles' 12 recently recognized California Distinguished Schools are charter schools. Statewide, 12 of the 15 highest-performing public schools serving low-income students are charter schools. Similarly, in Oakland, the highest-performing schools are charters that have raised achievement for disadvantaged students.

Are Charters a Drain on Traditional Public Schools?

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 EDT

Los Angeles Times

LATimes Dust-Up Asks: Is it really a bad thing that charters put pressure on low-performing public schools? Lisa Snell and Ralph E. Shaffer finish their debate. To read Shaffer's response, go here.

Ralph, charter schools are the way to go. In a March speech on education policy, President Obama championed charter schools, praising their innovation and urging states to lift caps on their growth. Obama and U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan have called for doubling the number of charter schools across the country. They want high-quality charter schools with proven track records to replace lower-performing schools.

Many urban school leaders in such places as Philadelphia, Newark and Oakland are embracing charters and developing specific plans to close low-performing schools and replicate high-quality charters. For example, the current issue of the Economist reports that, in Newark, 17 schools run by 12 charter-management groups teach almost 10% of the 48,000 children the city's school system and that these numbers will soon double. Similarly, Philadelphia schools chief Arlene Ackerman has called for replacing 45 low-performing schools with higher-quality charter schools. School leaders have called for an expansion of charter schools because the evidence demonstrates that these schools are improving outcomes for the most disadvantaged and lowest-performing students.

Charter schools should not be viewed as a fiscal drain on school districts. Instead, they should be viewed as high-quality public schools that offer parents more options and raise school districts' overall quality. Districts should embrace higher-performing charter schools and work to replicate and imitate these schools, which are adding value to their students' education.

Look at Los Angeles and Oakland, where charter schools have had a positive effect on public education. In Los Angeles, more than 70% of charter schools outperform their nearby district schools. Ten of Los Angeles' 12 recently recognized California Distinguished Schools are charter schools. Statewide, 12 of the 15 highest-performing public schools serving low-income students are charter schools. Similarly, in Oakland, the highest-performing schools are charters that have raised achievement for disadvantaged students.

In addition, these charter schools are improving performance for middle- and high school students where traditional public schools have often made the least progress. A recent study by the California Charter Schools Assn. found that the gains made in Oakland charters were most pronounced among middle- and high school students, and that these gains are increasing over time. Similarly, the March 2009 Rand Corp. study on charter schools in eight states found that charter students are more likely than traditional public school students to graduate high school and enroll in college.

The evidence that charters outperform district schools is coming in from across the nation. In New Orleans, where more than 55% of students are enrolled in charters, these schools continue to post faster achievement gains in reading and math for disadvantaged students. In Boston, a 2009 study conducted by researchers from Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that Massachusetts charter schools are outperforming traditional public schools in both math and English.

In California, there is a strong demand from parents for more charter schools. In 2008, charter school enrollment in Los Angeles increased by 8,000 students, and many campuses have long waiting lists. The California Charter Schools Assn. reports that the number of charter schools would need to triple to accommodate all of the students currently on waiting lists in California.

Parents are desperate for more high-quality education options. Charter schools are not a fiscal drain on districts. They are public schools with impressive track records that should be viewed as a legitimate part of a high-performing public school system.

Lisa Snell is director of education at Reason Foundation. This article was first published as part of an LATimes.com Dust-Up “The Great Charter School Debate.”

The Great Charter School Debate Continued

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:39:00 EDT

In the second installment of the "Great Charter School Debate" the Los Angeles Times asks:

Who do charters educate?
Are they taking their fair share of special-ed and English-language learners?

A snippet of my counterpoint:

There is little evidence that charter schools are succeeding because they are educating higher-performing students. A March 2009 Rand Corp. study, "Charter Schools in Eight States: Effects on Achievement, Attainment, Integration, and Competition," examined charters in Chicago, Denver, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, San Diego and the states of Florida, Ohio and Texas. It found that charter schools do not "skim" the top students away from traditional public schools. In fact, in many locations, students transferring to charter schools have below-average test scores. In addition, the Rand study found that charter transfers had surprisingly little effect on racial distributions of students. Typically, students transferring to charter schools moved to schools with racial distributions similar to those of the traditional public schools from which they came.

This is also true in Oakland. According to the Oakland Unified School District's annual scorecard, overall charter enrollment in Oakland includes a higher percentage of both English-learners and Latino students. About 51% of the students enrolled in Oakland charter schools are Latino, and about 30% are English-learners; at district-run schools, about 34% of the students are Latino, and about 29% are English-learners. On average, English-learners in Oakland charters outperformed those in Oakland's traditional public schools, 679 to 644, on the state's Academic Performance Index in 2008.

Who Do Charters Educate?

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:00:00 EDT

Los Angeles Times

LATimes Dust-Up Asks: Are they taking their fair share of special-ed and English-language learners? Ralph Shaffer and Lisa Snell debate. To read Shaffer's response, go here.

Ralph, the way in which you analyze student subgroups at the school level by comparing them with district averages for subgroups is misleading. You assume that all district-run schools in Oakland actually match the district's average demographics. This is not the case. There are many examples of district-run schools that are not racially integrated and have large populations of certain subgroups of students. Many schools have majority Latino or African American populations, or majority Asian or white populations. For example, at Hillcrest Elementary School, white students make up more than 65% of the enrollment; West Oakland Middle School is about 87% African American. The American Indian charter schools are actually more diverse than many of the district-run traditional schools.

Similarly, there are many examples of Oakland charter schools that serve higher percentages of English-language learners and economically disadvantaged students: Education for Change's enrollment is 67% English-learners, Monarch's is 68%, Lighthouse Community's is 75%, and the Dolores Huerta Learning Academy's is a whopping 99%. Ernestine Reems charter and the American Indian charter schools have almost 100% low-income students.

Special-ed is also difficult to evaluate at the school level. While some charters have below-the-district averages for special-ed students, so do many district-run schools. Other charter schools have higher percentages of special-ed students, such as Civicorps Elementary and North Oakland, both with 11%.

This obsession with the minutia of student demographics at individual schools ignores the big picture of how charter schools have helped disadvantaged students.

The bottom line is that many urban school environments are not as racially integrated as some people might prefer. However, while racial integration may be one goal of public education, it should not overshadow actual achievement gains for disadvantaged children. Charter schools in Oakland outperformed that city's traditional public schools in a number of disadvantaged subgroup populations, including Asian, socio-economically disadvantaged, African American, English-learners and Latinos.

Lisa Snell is director of education at Reason Foundation. This article was first published as part of an LATimes.com Dust-Up “The Great Charter School Debate.”

The Great Charter School Debate

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 19:02:00 EDT

In today's Los Angeles Times I begin The Great Charter School Debate with Cal Poly Pomona History Professor Ralph E. Shaffer.

From my first installment:

Charter schools are based on a premise of school choice, and parents are not compelled to enroll. If the discipline and ideology are too much, parents have other choices available. In fact, charter schools have led to systematic district reforms that have increased the number of high-quality choices for families. Oakland is a case in point.

Oakland Unified has been California's most improved large urban district, adding 73 points to its Academic Performance Index (California's benchmark for student achievement) over the last four years. In addition, Oakland has seen improvements over a wide variety of indicators: more AP classes, lower dropout rates, more students passing high school exit exams and more rich activities such as debate and chess teams. While Oakland has five of the top-performing charter schools in California, it also saw 21 traditional district schools make double-digit percentage point gains in reading and math scores in 2008.

This story is not unique to Oakland. Charter schools are a stalking horse for real school district reform. The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools reports that in 2008, 12 communities across the country had at least 20% of their public school students enrolled in charter schools, and 64 communities in the U.S. now have at least 10% of their public school students in charter schools. According to the Reason Foundation’s Weighted Student Formula Yearbook 2009, 15 districts have moved to student-based budgeting and open-enrollment school choice policies. In places like Baltimore, Denver and New York City, competition from a large number of charter schools has led districts to begin offering their schools and families some of the same freedom as charter schools enjoy.

How Much Freedom Do Charter Schools Deserve?

Wed, 10 Jun 2009 00:00:00 EDT

Los Angeles Times

LATimes Dust-Up Asks: Are charter schools given too much latitude in teaching ideology to their students? Lisa Snell and Ralph E. Shaffer debate. To read Shaffer's response, go here.

Schools with extreme ideology have not been a major issue in the charter school movement. Most parents choose charters because they are safer, have stronger academics and maintain more discipline and control over students. Even at the American Indian Public Charter School in Oakland, the ideological beliefs (not buying into progressive teaching pedagogy) are directed at the teaching staff, not the students. In fact, what critics seem to object to at American Indian is the explicit lack of ideological moments for students and the rigid focus on core academics. As controversial charter leader Ben Chavis explained about his schools' high scores, "These poor kids are doing well because we practice math and language arts. That's it. It's simple."

Charter schools are based on a premise of school choice, and parents are not compelled to enroll. If the discipline and ideology are too much, parents have other choices available. In fact, charter schools have led to systematic district reforms that have increased the number of high-quality choices for families. Oakland is a case in point.

In Oakland, charter schools accounted for 16.8% of the district's public school enrollment in 2008; there, charter schools are outperforming their district peers at all grade levels. Low-income students, English-language learners and ethnic minority students are sharing in this success. This competition from charter schools has led Oakland to embrace district-wide reforms, including funding schools more like charters and giving principals control of school resources through student-based budgeting. Oakland has also embraced an open-enrollment school assignment policy that allows parents to choose any campus in the district.

Even as the Oakland Unified School District is forced to make significant budget cuts because of declining enrollment and California's budget crisis, the district is acting more like a charter school organization. The majority of the district's budget reductions have been made at the central office, and 87% of the district's unrestricted budget will go to schools in the 2009-2010 school year.

Oakland Unified has been California's most improved large urban district, adding 73 points to its Academic Performance Index (California's benchmark for student achievement) over the last four years. In addition, Oakland has seen improvements over a wide variety of indicators: more AP classes, lower dropout rates, more students passing high school exit exams and more rich activities such as debate and chess teams. While Oakland has five of the top-performing charter schools in California, it also saw 21 traditional district schools make double-digit percentage point gains in reading and math scores in 2008.

This story is not unique to Oakland. Charter schools are a stalking horse for real school district reform. The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools reports that in 2008, 12 communities across the country had at least 20% of their public school students enrolled in charter schools, and 64 communities in the U.S. now have at least 10% of their public school students in charter schools. According to the Reason Foundation’s Weighted Student Formula Yearbook 2009, 15 districts have moved to student-based budgeting and open-enrollment school choice policies. In places like Baltimore, Denver and New York City, competition from a large number of charter schools has led districts to begin offering their schools and families some of the same freedom as charter schools enjoy.

Perhaps the new superintendent of Oakland Unified, Tony Smith, summed it up best at a town hall meeting last month by saying he was "a pretty big fan of the charter movement." But he also said non-charter schools should have the opportunity to enjoy some of the same freedoms as charters: "If you don't trust people in schools, then you're going to centrally manage, you're going to say, 'I know better than you.' "

California's 700-plus charter schools serve more than 250,000 students; nationwide, about 4,700 charter schools serve more than 1.5 million children. These schools have not been primarily ideological, nor have they compelled parents to enroll their children. They have become so popular because they offer parents high-quality options and the right to exit lower performing district-run schools.

Lisa Snell is director of education at Reason Foundation. This article was first published as part of an LATimes.com Dust-Up “The Great Charter School Debate.”

American Indian Public Charter School: The Ironic Charter School

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 16:11:00 EDT

The American Indian Public Charter School is perhaps one of the most interesting stories in the school reform movement. As the Los Angeles Times reports:

Reporting from Oakland -- Not many schools in California recruit teachers with language like this: "We are looking for hard working people who believe in free market capitalism. . . . Multicultural specialists, ultra liberal zealots and college-tainted oppression liberators need not apply."

That, it turns out, is just the beginning of the ways in which American Indian Public Charter and its two sibling schools spit in the eye of mainstream education. These small, no-frills, independent public schools in the hardscrabble flats of Oakland sometimes seem like creations of television's "Colbert Report." They mock liberal orthodoxy with such zeal that it can seem like a parody.

This was a school that started as one of those schools that the school choice opponents warn you about: a school with a narrowly focused cultural agenda that did not lead to any improvement in student performance. Here in lies the irony: while the school still has a culturally focused name, it is perhaps the least politically correct school in America.

He began by firing most of the school's staff and shucking the Native American cultural content ("basket weaving," he scoffed). "You think the Jews and the Chinese are dumb enough to ask the public school to teach them their culture?" he asks -- a typical Chavis question, delivered with eyes wide and voice pitched high in comic outrage. There is no basket weaving at American Indian now -- and little else that won't directly affect standardized test scores. "I don't see it as teaching to the test," said Carey Blakely, a former teacher at the school who is writing a book about it. "I see it as, there are certain skills and knowledge that you're supposed to impart to your students, and the test measures whether your students have acquired those skills and that knowledge."

The school is perhaps not for every child, but represents the great benefit of choice. For those parents who want a school that embraces discipline and competition, the charter school movement has created this option. For an entertaining and heartening tale about what is possible when school leaders have autonomy and control, read the whole thing.

Special Education Outsourcing in San Diego Charter Schools

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Fri, 29 May 2009 11:38:00 EDT

As The Voice of San Diego Reports:

Ten local charter schools want to turn to an office more than 500 miles away in El Dorado County to help them educate children with disabilities using the schools' own staff and strategies, instead of paying San Diego Unified to help meet those needs.

If approved, it will be a groundbreaking step for the charters, which already enjoy freedom over hiring, policies and curriculum but have traditionally been bound to the district when educating kids with Down Syndrome, attention deficit disorder or other disabilities. Their hope is that turning away from the school district will empower them to manage their own special education programs and provide a less expensive, more effective alternative than paying skyrocketing fees to the school district.

Under school district control, special education "is a whole component of your program that you don't even own and operate," said Jed Wallace, CEO of the California Charter Schools Association. "That is completely antithetical to what the charter school movement is all about."

El Dorado plans to charge the schools much less than they were charged by San Diego Unified, but the charters will also become responsible for providing services and staffers that were previously outsourced to the school district, which had assigned special education staffers to the charter schools and ran the programs. Charter advocates say it has already worked at the High Tech High schools, which partner with an agency in San Bernardino County for special education. It is a classic tradeoff for charter schools -- more autonomy for more responsibility -- and it is loaded with both opportunities and risks.

"Now school districts and counties throughout the state can't hold them hostage -- if that isn't too strong of a term -- when they have an opportunity to look for other options," said Vicki Barber, El Dorado County Superintendent of Schools, whose office would oversee the charters' special education programs.

In addition, the San Diego charter schools suffer from a lack of autonomy over there special education services:

One problem is autonomy. Charter schools pick their own teachers and other employees, but they have less control over which special education staffers they borrow from San Diego Unified, who are evaluated by San Diego Unified, belong to a union in San Diego Unified, and may not share their school philosophy. That can be a problem at schools that expect staffers to work a longer day than at San Diego Unified or use a specific strategy for teaching. Barber said it can also become tricky when schools want to change the way they help special education students, such as opting for team teaching or assistants to help in the classroom.

"We didn't have a role in choosing staff. Parents were complaining that the teachers were temporary," replaced every few months, said Paula Cordeiro, board secretary at Keiller Leadership Academy and a University of San Diego education dean. The school considered joining the El Dorado organization but ultimately decided to stay with San Diego Unified for special education after the district started responding to its concerns and gave it a voice in which special education staffers were assigned to the school. "But a lot of the issues that were raised were taken care of."

Notice that the new provider for special education services is another public school entity that is offering more efficient services for less resources. This gets close to the "shared services" concept where local government bodies could "share" or contract services with a wide range of other government institutions. This introduces competition between government institutions to provide the best service. Why must charter schools partner exclusively with their local school district, thus defeating the purpose of the charter school's autonomy over resources. Reason looked at shared services here and special education innovations in charter schools here.

The World's a Charter School

lisa.snell@reason.org (Lisa Snell) — Thu, 21 May 2009 16:43:00 EDT

Education Week reports on the world-wide growth of charter schools based on the writing of University of Southern California researchers, Dominic J. Brewer and Guilbert C. Hentschke, who studied the growth of these new-breed, hybrid schools in more than a dozen countries, including the United States.

Having opened its first charter school in 1992, the United States may be a pioneer of the modern charter concept, which allows selected schools to operate in the public sector with more autonomy than regular public schools. The authors point, however, to at least 14 other countries, spanning three continents, in which national and regional governments have taken recent steps to introduce some form of market-based schooling into their public education systems.

Besides the United Kingdom, which introduced its academies in 2003, other countries include: Argentina, Australia, parts of Canada, Chile, parts of China, France, Japan, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Qatar, Singapore, and Tanzania.

Consider the example of Qatar:

In Qatar, on the other hand, the goal is to convert all the country’s public schools to charter-like entities within a decade, and the wealthy Persian Gulf nation is well on its way. The country’s 87 publicly funded, independent schools already enroll 60 percent of its schoolchildren.

"The idea is that these would not be just a few interesting schools on the periphery of the system, but rather that this would be the model that would serve all kids," said Mr. Brewer, who was one of the consultants hired by Qatar to redesign its school system, a process that began in 2001.

The country set up a separate agency, independent of its education ministry, to oversee the system. Qatar chose that route, Mr. Brewer said, partly because the existing system was seen as too bureaucratic and resistant to change.

I often wonder at what point do charter schools in the United States reach a tipping point where people start to ask why don't we fund every individual school like a charter? Why do we continue passing money through school districts and school boards that set policy for large numbers of schools. Is this a middle man schools can live without?