It’s no secret that the education establishment regards charter schools with great suspicion. Charter schools may be public, but they’re also free to innovate and otherwise shake things up. This is good news to many education reformers, among whom these maverick schools enjoy rock-star status. But such freedom is discomfiting for education officials intent on maintaining the status quo.
Try as they might, though, opponents haven’t been successful in shutting down a plucky and resourceful charter school movement. Charter schools are operational in 40 states, so they’re here to stay. But opponents have still concocted another way to cut into the sustainability of charters – withholding fair funding.
In the landmark finance study, Charter School Funding: Inequity’s Next Frontier, published by the Fordham Institute in 2005, Chester Finn and Eric Osberg write that the “success and staying power” of the charter school movement “have only strengthened the resolve of its many opponents to cram what they view as an evil education genie back into its bottle. And to keep it on short rations in the meantime.” More than two years later, many charter schools are still hungrily picking through the leftovers.
Shoestring budgets aren’t the only hurdle charters have had to clear. Some states have also passed laws limiting the power to authorize new charters just to local school boards. This has stalled the progress and growth of the movement. Fortunately, recent developments in North Carolina and in Georgia indicate that the tide – both monetary and legislative – may be turning.
On Tuesday, an appeals court told the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools (CMS) to pony up money owed to five Charlotte-area charter schools. According to the Charlotte Observer, this ruling “could cost Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools more than $450,000.” This decision marks the second time a court has ruled in favor of these charter schools in a matter of weeks. In January, a judge told the school district it owed the charters $1.3 million.
What’s at issue? CMS has refused to share money for pre-K and high school turnaround programs; CMS has also withheld funds from “other local revenue.” The school district’s disparate formulas for measuring enrollment in charter and district schools mean less money for charters as well. Judges have said CMS must share the money; they also agreed the way CMS calculated charter enrollment was unfair – a victory for these schools. Let’s hope CMS tires of the appeals process and decides to pay up.
In Georgia, charter school supporters also have reason to celebrate. On January 31, Georgia’s House of Representatives voted to pass legislation creating an independent charter-school authorizer. Current law says only local school boards can approve new charters. Georgia’s legislation now moves on to the Senate. (Here in North Carolina (PDF), the University of North Carolina and the state board of education may authorize; local school board authorization is subject to state board approval.)
According to the Center for Education Reform (CER), “independent authorizers” are currently in place in 17 states. Georgia’s legislation, if approved by the Senate, will go a long way toward cultivating a friendlier environment for charters: in 2007, school boards rejected 21 out of 21 applications to start charter schools in the Atlanta area, says CER.
Developments in Georgia and Charlotte are encouraging, yet obstacles remain. In North Carolina, charter schools are denied funds from our state “education lottery.” Charter schools also do not receive capital funding for construction – a major hurdle for fledgling schools.
Despite stiff opposition, though, charter schools are reshaping public education. But we can and should do more – to make laws more hospitable to charters, and to fund these schools fairly.
Most importantly, we would do well to acknowledge the obvious: charter schools are not a threat to public schools. They are public schools. Isn’t it time we gave them their due?