The War on Charter Schools, Part 1

The Minnesota Star Tribune just published a tremendously negative series on charter schools.  While the misrepresentations abound in the articles, these two stand out:  1) that all charter administrators should hold a MN administrator’s license and 2) that charters should be so regulated that they cannot fail.  

While many of the points were abhorrent, the most insidious was the idea that charter schools fail because their leaders aren’t required to have administrative licenses.  

Take a look at who runs schools. For the vast majority of those in charge of education, it goes something like this:  

• You go to school

• You are a good student

• You like school

• You become a teacher

• You become a good teacher

• You become a principal

• You are a good principal

• You become a superintendent

• You change school districts every 5 years

In order to attain those top jobs, this industry does not allow for those at the top to DO anything else.  Yet, even though they train students to go on to be doctors, entrepreneurs, bankers, engineers, plumbers, government employees, YOU-NAME-IT; they do NOT have the experience outside of education to ever see how the system that they perpetuate affects those outside of school.  

The idea behind charter schools is to allow innovation. In order to truly innovate, a school doesn’t need to be led by the product of the above cycle of influence.  The idea behind non-licensed administrators is to allow people who have succeeded in different areas of life and profession to create a DIFFERENT vision of a school, not just more of the same.  If your charter focuses on the arts, you need artists; if your charter focuses on the needs of students with autism, you need leaders who understand the needs of students with autism.  If your charter preserves languages, you need folks who speak the language.  If your charter affirms your culture, you need leaders who understand that culture.  While many, many charter leaders DO hold administrative licenses, REQUIRING them will ensure that leadership in charter education is the same old, same old.  (And be sure to check out the part where they say that TEACHERS and PARENTS are incapable of school governance). 

As far as Charters closing?  There are two important ideas at work here.  First, is the idea of school choice.  No one forces a family to enroll a child in a charter and no one holds them hostage once they are there.  If the FAMILY feels the charter is failing, the FAMILY makes the decision to go somewhere else.  Thus, if a charter closes due to low enrollment, that’s a consumer-driven choice. Second, chartering involves a risk.  Imagine if a small business model was held to the same standard.  The average survival rate of new businesses at 5 years is 50.6%.  Innovation requires the opportunity to try something new.  It should be expected that some charters will fail.  

There’s no bait and switch here.  Families know when they enroll in a charter that their school will probably be in some subpar building somewhere where the landlord is gouging the school for rent, the funding will be tight (charters are only funded at 70% of district schools and not allowed to levy), and that their child will be getting something DIFFERENT.  If they had wanted what the district had to offer, they wouldn’t leave.  Making charters like the district schools by regulating the autonomy and creativity out of them just makes charters exactly like what families are trying to escape.  

There should be enough room in education for ALL students.  Teachers should be allowed and encouraged to govern charter schools.  Families should have a choice in where their child attends school.  District schools should appreciate a little competition.  If they are worried that a charter is drawing away their students, maybe they should ask themselves why?  There’s no law that prevents a district from creating programs that are similar to a popular charter school.  That’s actually their purpose.  

Don’t fall for the negative press.  School closings are part of the price of innovation.  Let charters flourish or fail by enrollment.  It is truly the voice of the consumer.  Not every charter school will succeed.  Putting that metric as the measure of success will only ensure that a charter school is no different than your district school.  And who would want that?