Twenty-two years after the first charter was founded in Minnesota, the national movement still grapples with the tension between creativity and conventional measurements of success, writes Sarah Butromywicz for TIME Magazine. Overall, charter performance remains mixed. A recent study by the Center for Research on Education Outcomes that looked at charters in 25 states and D.C. found that just a quarter outperformed traditional peers in reading, and just 29 percent in math. The middling quality of charter schools on average has led to calls for increased accountability and tighter regulations. Some states, including Florida and Ohio, have passed charter closure laws that specify when a charter will be shut down based on its performance. In Minnesota, lawmakers recently tweaked charter rules to clarify that their primary purpose was to increase student achievement. Priorities passed in the early 1990s included fostering innovative teaching practices and devising alternate ways to measure student achievement. Charter leaders say the recent shift in emphasis makes experimentation more difficult. Increased paperwork and reports to authorizers drain time and resources; more time is spent negotiating for exemptions or putting student performance in context. Some are pushing back. In Minnesota, Chicago, and Southern California, educators have drafted alternate accountability systems for charters that include multiple measures of performance, including financial performance and school culture. More

Source:  Public Education News Blast

Published by LEAP

Los Angeles Education Partnership (LAEP) is an education support organization that works as a collaborative partner in high-poverty communities.