It was Martin Luther King day, and far too cold for sane
people to be out and about, but the General Assembly goes on, never stopping
for holidays. Roger Gray, Cindy Kirby,
and yours truly, Robley Jones, were joined by President Meg Gruber, and we were
the only ones at VEA today.
It was also gun day at the GA. “Guns Save Lives” stickers were
everywhere. I saw one man with a
sawed-off shotgun in a holster. It doesn’t
seem right for gun day to be on the day honoring Dr. King!
I rose at 5, rushed to get ready, took the cold walk to the
Capitol for the 8:00 meeting of the House Privileges and Elections Committee to
testify against the charter school constitutional amendment, and as soon we
arrived, the sponsor of the measure asked that it go by until next Monday. Welcome to the GA!
This, however, gives us another week to lobby the bills, HJ1
and HB3. The Senate companions are SJ6
and SB588. Our best chance to kill these
bills and resolutions is in the Senate.
Here is a slightly edited version of an article on these measures
that I had published this past summer:
Charter School Constitutional Amendment: Devolution in Reverse
Perhaps the most radical education proposal before the General Assembly
in the upcoming session is Delegate Bell and Senator Obenshain’s constitutional
amendment, which empowers the Board of Education to “establish charter schools
within the school divisions of the Commonwealth.”
Currently, this power rests with the local school
boards. For example, the Richmond City School Board established the
Patrick Henry School of Science and Arts a stone’s throw from my home.
The Bell/Obenshain proposal dramatically shifts this decision away from a local school board, which is directly accountable to the people by virtue of election or by appointment by those who are elected, to a state level policy board appointed by the governor.
Think of the implications! Nine members of the Virginia Board of Education, appointed by the Governor, could require your locality to build, staff, and administer a charter school regardless of local needs or desires.
The Bell/Obenshain proposal dramatically shifts this decision away from a local school board, which is directly accountable to the people by virtue of election or by appointment by those who are elected, to a state level policy board appointed by the governor.
Think of the implications! Nine members of the Virginia Board of Education, appointed by the Governor, could require your locality to build, staff, and administer a charter school regardless of local needs or desires.
The fiscal implications are contrary to the lesson of the Pied Piper, “He who pays the piper calls the tune.” Let’s look at the example of Arlington. The state provides only 12% of the funds, on a per-pupil basis, to run Arlington’s schools, but under the Bell/Obenshain proposal, the state could require Arlington’s taxpayers to foot 85% of the bill for establishing a charter school.
Research does not support the override of the authority of the local
school board inherent in Obenshain’s amendment. The
findings of the Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) found
that:
Some charters do better; the majority do the same or worse. CREDO also moved beyond individual student performance to examine the overall performance of charter schools across multiple subject areas. They found that while some charter schools do better than the traditional public schools that fed them, the majority do the same or worse. Almost one-fifth of charters (17 percent) performed significantly better (at the 95 percent confidence level) than the traditional public school. However, an even larger group of charters (37 percent) performed significantly worse in terms of reading and math. The remainder (46 percent) did not do significantly better or worse.
Some charters do better; the majority do the same or worse. CREDO also moved beyond individual student performance to examine the overall performance of charter schools across multiple subject areas. They found that while some charter schools do better than the traditional public schools that fed them, the majority do the same or worse. Almost one-fifth of charters (17 percent) performed significantly better (at the 95 percent confidence level) than the traditional public school. However, an even larger group of charters (37 percent) performed significantly worse in terms of reading and math. The remainder (46 percent) did not do significantly better or worse.
The CREDO findings are consistent with other mainstream research on
this topic.
Further, there is significant documentation of fraud and abuse within
the charter school movement. “Charter
School Vulnerabilities to Waste, Fraud And Abuse,” authored by the Center
for Popular Democracy and Integrity in Education, echoes a warning from the
U.S. Department of Education’s Office of the Inspector General. The report
draws upon news reports, criminal complaints and more to detail how, in just 15
of the 42 states that have charter schools, charter operators have used school
funds illegally to buy personal luxuries for themselves, support their other
businesses, and more.”
Delegate Bell and Senator Obenshain are self-proclaimed fans
of President Ronald Reagan; however, their proposal flies in the face of one of
Reagan’s core principles – devolution. Let’s leave the charter granting
authority closest to the people with local school boards.
