Is Administration Leaner in Charter Schools?2
Introduction
Public school leaders frequently confront the criticism that they fail to carry outtheir administrative duties efficiently. There is chronic and widespread concern thatadministration consumes too much of the education dollar. By this view, the diversion of resources from classroom instruction to bloated public school administrative structureshas hampered efforts to improve student outcomes. One of the appealing prospects of charter schools, by contrast, is that as decentralized organizations compelled to competefor students, they will allocate their resources more intensively on instruction (Hill, et al.1997, Finn, et al., 2000). The financial and performance pressures on schooladministrators appear unlikely to fade any time soon. As the charter school movementmatures and gains wider support among state and federal policy makers, it is fitting toexamine how charter schools compare to traditional public schools (TPSs) in theirallocation of resources for administration, instruction, and other functions.Researchers and policymakers have long wondered whether granting schoolsgreater autonomy from district central administration to make resource allocationdecisions would result in any real difference in spending patterns. Many observersanticipate that decentralizing budgeting authority from districts to schools will permitmore efficient resource use that conforms better to schools’ particular needs. The failureof school-based management initiatives in the 1980s to produce anticipated changes isoften attributed to central administrations’ reluctance to relinquish control over resources(budgets, staffing). The charter school movement by contrast has established a widelyimplemented new model of school organization and governance in which the influence of