By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
25 years after the first charter school, model sees steady growth but results remain a work in progr
6785432b216ad0b864dedb285249823d5f36ce747ff2d528566c06213cfc12b7
Experts debate race, equity, innovation and accountability at forum marking silver anniversary of charter school movement. - photo by Eric Schulzke
It's been 25 years since Minnesota launched the charter school movement in June of 1991, and after years of steady growth, charters are now a controversial but fixed piece of America's educational landscape, according to a group of experts gathered at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C., recently to mark the upcoming anniversary of the first charter law.

The charter movement as a whole got mixed grades from the group, which included recently retired Education Secretary Arne Duncan. The experts differed on the core purpose of the charter movement and on how well the schools are serving the needs of the communities they serve.

Charters, independent public schools that enjoy autonomy in hiring and curriculum traditional district schools lack, now educate 6 percent of American children. That may seem small, but in 2000, charters claimed just .07 percent of the students.

Today, over 2.5 million kids attend charters, and in some urban centers their influence is enormous. In New Orleans, 93 percent of students attend charters. Detroit comes second at 55 percent, then Washington, D.C., at 44, Philadelphia at 30 and both Los Angeles and Houston at 21.

Innovation and choice

Charters were originally conceived as laboratories for innovation, according to Richard Kahlenberg, a senior fellow at the Washington, D.C.-based Century Foundation at the Brookings event. Those innovations were then supposed to transfer to district schools, through collaboration or competition, Kahlenberg said.

Most experts at the forum agreed that the innovations have not been all that radical. In fact, many of the most prominent charter networks have emphasized discipline and "back to basics," more a return to the past than a leap to the future.

The greatest innovation of many urban charter schools is academic rigor and high expectations, argued Duncan, who served for seven years as President Obama's secretary of education and is now a fellow at the Brookings Institution.

Charter schools, Duncan said, serve children not born to middle class families. And for them six hours a day isn't enough. If you are starting life behind, then you need more help, more resources, more opportunities."

It's difficult to innovate on curriculum when everything is driven by test scores, said Jon Valant, a post-doctoral fellow in economics at Tulane University in New Orleans. "There are only so many ways to make test scores go up," Valant said, "and this has limited classroom innovation (in charters)."

Charters do function much like traditional public schools, said Robin Lake, director of the Center for Reinventing Public Education, a pro-charter think tank based at the University of Washington, but charters have been quicker to adopt innovations in areas such as personalized learning and classroom technology.

"You see a cleaner experimentation in charter schools. They take on an idea and test it, and it doesn't work, something happens," Lake said. "In district schools, it's just harder to get everyone on the same page, to work through all the different layers."

Lake said CRPE has an active program working with the Gates Foundation to enhance collaboration between charters and district schools, but that a "war mentality," with traditional schools feeling under assault, still hampers relations between the two sectors.

But the real purpose of charters is not to spur innovation or create competition with district schools, Duncan insisted, but rather to enable parental choice. Every child learns differently, Duncan said, and even children within the same family might need different approaches. "If we could have at least one good choice," he said, "and ideally three or four good choices, that would be a good thing."

"Not every school has to have the same purpose," said Douglas Harris, a professor of economics at Tulane University.

Race and empowerment

Inevitably, conversations on charters come back to racial equity and socioeconomic opportunity, given the disproportion of urban, poor and minority children they serve.

In addition to being heavily urban, charter schools serve more low-income students than traditional schools (46 percent versus 41 percent) and more African-American students (27 percent versus 15 percent), according to data from the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools.

Charter schools have, Fuller argues, exposed the lie that you cannot educate poor children. But he argues they have yet to fully engage the poor and minority families they disproportionately serve.

"The one thing that concerns me about charter movement is that it's the only social movement where the people most impacted don't lead it," said Howard Fuller, the former superintendent of Milwaukee Public Schools and a professor at Marquette University.

"If you look at the largest charter management organizations and the advocacy organizations, they are all run by white people," Fuller said, speaking as the lone African-American on the day's panels, and one of the few in the room. "We have to see that, and we have to see it as a problem."

Fuller drew a distinction between engagement and empowerment. "Empowerment is when you decide to build a bridge," he said. "Engagement is when they ask you what color you want it."

Acknowledging Fuller's challenge, Rees said her organization is working on reaching out to the 2 million graduates from charter schools to expand leadership in poor and minority communities. "They have the greatest opportunity to lead here," she said.

Equal access

The participants also addressed concerns over equity and access, responding to the common charge that charters engage in "cream skimming," or taking the students only from the most motivated families, leaving those with behavioral or learning challenges to the district schools.

Charters have been accused of counseling out students who present either discipline or learning challenges, urging parents to take them elsewhere. The CRPE's Lake said that there is a fine line between counseling out and the popular no excuses charter schools, which makes a safe, disciplined school culture central to their mission.

The no excuses schools, Lake said, necessarily entail that particularly unruly students might not stick around. Many charter schools struggle to maintain "mission coherence" and discipline without filtering out tougher students. "They are struggling to figure out how to do that fairly," Lake said.

"All charters and magnet schools cream skim, if only because they take the most motivated families," argued Richard Kahlenberg, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation. Kahlenberg has long argued that all students benefit from more diversity in the student body.

Parental self selection is one thing, but consciously pushing out students who require special attention is quite another. The conscious cream skimming issue gained national attention earlier this year when one of the Success Academy charter schools in New York was called out for keeping a "got to go" list of students who needed to be forced out. That incident reinforced longstanding suspicions that charters commonly "counsel out" challenging students, argued Douglas Harris, "and that was really damaging to the charter movement."

"We can disagree on what public education ought to be," Harris said, "but I think we can all agree that every school should be welcoming to students."
Sign up for our E-Newsletters
How to avoid 'sharenting' and other paparazzi parenting habits
ce406c66b9871a104ac24256a687e4821d75680dcfc89d9e5398939543f7f88f
A recent study revealed parents often spend up to two hours staging a single photo of his or her child to post online. - photo by Amy Iverson
Before having kids, some people just dont appreciate their friends baby posts. But after having a child of their own, three fourths of new parents jump right on the parental social media bandwagon. If you have become a member of this group, there are some rules to follow for posting responsibly.

Much of a parents worry is how to teach their children to use social media responsibly. We talk with our kids about privacy, oversharing, and setting restrictions on their devices to keep them safe. But parents themselves need to look in the digital mirror once in a while. Before having children, it doesnt take as much effort to think about what to post online. Its up to us to decide what we share about our own lives. But once you become a parent, there are many questions to think about regarding what is appropriate to post about your kids on social media.

In a recent survey, kids clothing subscription company Mac and Mia surveyed 2000 new parents to find out how they are documenting their kids lives on social media, and what concerns they may have.

First of all, people without children seem to feel a bit differently about the onslaught of baby pictures online than those who are parents. 18 percent of people say before they had kids, they were annoyed by their friends baby posts. But after having children of their own, 73 percent admit they post progress pictures of their little ones every single month.

Not only are new parents letting the world know each time their baby is a month older, but they are posting about their kids every few days or so. Men and women report they post 6-7 times per month about their baby.

And while 70 percent of new parents say the benefit of using social media is how easy it is to help family and friends feel involved, there are some downsides. Here are a few tips to avoid the pitfall of becoming paparazzi parents.

Dont miss the moment

In the Mac and Mia survey, some parents admitted to spending up to two hours to get the perfect shot of their baby. That seems a little extreme. New and old parents alike should be careful about spending so much time taking pictures and videos that they dont enjoy the moment. Years ago, I decided to never live an experience through my phone. A study by Linda Henkel, a psychology professor at Fairfield University in Connecticut, found that when people took pictures of objects in an art museum, they didnt remember the objects as well as if they simply observed them.

This photo-taking impairment effect can happen to parents as well. If we are so consumed by getting the perfect photo, we can miss out on the moment all together, and our memory of it will suffer.

Dont forget about privacy

60 percent of couples say they have discussed rules and boundaries for posting their babys photos, according to the Mac and Mia survey. Even so, men are 34 percent more likely to publish baby posts on public accounts. If parents are concerned about their childrens privacy, keeping photos off of public accounts is a given.

In the Washington Post, Stacey Steinberg, a legal skills professor at the University of Florida, and Bahareh Keith, a Portland pediatrician, wrote that sharing too much information about kids online puts them at risk. They write that all that sharenting can make it easier for data thieves to target out kids for identity theft. Check that your privacy settings are where they should be and never share identifying information like full names and birth dates.

Dont be paparazzi parents

36 percent of parents say they take issue when their childs photo is posted online by someone else. Responsible social media users will always ask permission before posting a photo of another child. But parents should also think about whether their own children will take issue with their own posted photos a few years down the road.

When parents are constantly snapping pictures and throwing them on social media, it can be easy to forget to pause and make sure the post is appropriate. I always use the billboard example with my kids. I ask them to picture whatever they are posting going up on a billboard in our neighborhood. If they are okay with that, then their post is probably fine. Parents should ask themselves this same question when posting about their children. But they should also ask themselves if their child would be OK with this post on a billboard in 15 years. If it would cause embarrassment or humiliation, it might be best to keep it private.

Once children reach an appropriate age, parents should include them in the process of deciding what pictures are OK to post. Researchers at the University of Michigan surveyed 10- to 17-year-olds and found children believe their parents should ask permission more than parents think they should. The kids in the survey said sharing happy family moments, or accomplishments in sports, school and hobbies is fine. But when the post is negative (like when a child is disciplined) or embarrassing (think naked baby pictures or messy hair), kids say to keep it off social media.
Latest Obituaries