Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Adolescence, ÊSpring, 1996 Êby Adele M. DeBlassie, ÊRichard R. DeBlassie
IDEAS & TRENDS; Rethinking Deliberately
Segregated Schools
By SUSAN CHIRA
Published: July 11, 1993
Ethnic Identity and Power: Cultural Contexts of Political
Action in School ...ÊBy Yali Zou, Enrique T. Trueba, Henry T. Trueba
By Yali Zou, Enrique T
. Trueba, Henry T
. Trueba
Contributor Yali Zou
, Enrique T. Trueba
, Henry T. Trueba
Published 1998
SUNY Press
Politics and education
452 pages
ISBN:0791437531
The relationship between ethnic identity and power has important consequences in a modern
world that is changing rapidly through global immigration trends. Studies of ethnic/ racial
conflict of ethnic identity and power become necessarily studies of political power, social
status, school achievement, and allocation of resources. The recognition of power by an ethnic
group, however, creates a competition for control and a rivalry for power over public arenas,
such as schools.In this context this book provides interesting and important insights into the
dilemmas faced by immigrants and members of ethnic groups, by school personnel, and by
policy makers. The first part of the book consists of comparative studies of ethnic identity. The
second part focuses directly on some of the lessons learned from social science research on
ethnic identification and the critical study of equity, with its implications for pedagogy. An
interdisciplinary group of scholars offers profoundly honest and stimulating accounts of their
struggles to decipher selfidentification processes in various political contexts, as well as their
personal reflections on the study of ethnicity.A powerful message emerges that invites
reflection about selfidentification processes, and that allows a deeper understanding of the
empowering consequences of a clear and strong personal, cultural, ethnic, and social identity.
These pages offer a keen grasp of the undeniable political contexts of education.
Forced Justice by David J. Armor in Books
By David J. Armor Oxford University Press (1995) Hardback 271 pages ISBN
Ê
In Forced Justice, David J. Armor explores the benefits and drawbacks of voluntary and
involuntary desegregation plans, especially those in communities with "magnet" schools. He
finds that voluntary plans, which let parents decide which school program is best for their
children, are just as effective in attaining longterm desegregation as mandatory busing, and
that these plans generate far greater community support. Armor concludes by proposing a new
policy of "equity" choice, which draws upon the best features of both the desegregation and
choice movements. This policy promises both improved desegregation and greater educational
choices for all, especially for the disadvantaged minority children in urban systems who now
have the fewest educational choices. The debate over desegregation policy and its many
consequences needs to move beyond academic journals and courtrooms to a larger audience.
In addition to educators and policymakers, Forced Justice will be an important book for social
scientists, attorneys and specialists in civil rights issues, and all persons concerned about the
state of public education Ç less
Segregation in Residential Areas by Amos Henry Hawley, Vincent P. Rock,
Social Science Panel in Books
Segregation in Residential Areas: Papers on Racial and Socioeconomic
Factors in Choice of Housing
by Hawley, Amos H. and Vincent P. Rock., eds. Div. of Behavioral Sciences, National
Research Council
your selectio
Rethinking School Choice [Paperback] By
Henig, Jeffrey R.
by Jeffrey R. Henig
This book disputes the appropriateness of the market metaphor as a guide to education policy.
Engaging the debate on the levels both of empirical analysis and democratic theory, Jeffrey R.
Henig traces the evolution of school choice as an idea and in practice. Its legacy, he observes,
is a mixed one. Sometimes it has been a vehicle for racial and economic segregation, with
divisive and corrosive effects. Where school choice has worked, the record shows, it has
depended less on the magic of the market than on an elusive combination of strong political
leadership, resolute governmental commitment, supportive coalitions of private interests, and a
willingness on all sides to challenge parochial gain in the name of the larger social good.
QuickTimeª and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Home | Favorite Documents | CiteNow
School Choice
Would it strengthen or weaken public education in America?
May 10, 1991 ¥ Volume 1
By Richard L. Worsnop
Introduction
Among educational reformers, ÒchoiceÓ s the buzzword of the hour. Supporters
say the entire educational system would benefit if parents could choose their
children's schools. In this view, competition for students would force schools to
improve. Better schools, in turn, would prod students to do better. And parents,
having set the whole process in motion, would take a greater interest in the
schools and in their children's academic progress. President Bush supports the
concept, but many teachers and school administrators are deeply skeptical. They
fear that choice plans will siphon money and interest from public schools, will
create elite schools for the few and secondrate schools for the many, will lead to
increased segregation of students by race and income, and will cost taxpayers
more money.
Go to top
Overview
Few issues generate more emotion these days than the quality of public
education in America. The widespread disenchantment with the state of the
country's schools found eloquent expression in a report issued in April 1983 by a
blueribbon federal panel. Entitled A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for
Educational Reform, the report warned that Òthe educational foundations of our
society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our
very future as a nation and a people.Ó The report caused a stir at the time, and
public opinion polls and political discourse indicate its conclusions are considered
by many Americans to be as accurate and timely today as they were eight years
ago. Now some academics, politicians and publicpolicy experts have stepped
forward with what they consider a solution to the woes of American public
education. It goes by the name of Òchoice,Ó and it aims to give parents a much
broader range of options in deciding where to send their children to school. For
parents, the idea is that this would mean greater ÒempowermentÓ in determining
what kind of education their children will get. For schools, the idea is that it would
mean a heightened awareness of parents' wishes and greater incentives for re
spending to them.
Proponents of choice say this concept ...would greatly improve the quality of
teaching. Parents would vote with their feetÑor their car poolsÑin determining
where to send their children. .. In the view of choice advocates, the winners would
be parents, students and educators committed to excellence. They say the losers
would be the country's entrenched education bureaucracy and educators who
either failed or refused to respond to the call for excellence.
The choice concept has caught on in many quarters throughout the country.
Minnesota has what is probably the most comprehensive statewide program, but
more limited versions have sprung up in other states. ...But while choice seems to
be today's leading answer to the lingering problem of educational mediocrity, it
raises a host of questions that many educators and academic experts find
troubling. They say that choice plans will siphon money and interest from public
schools, will create elite schools for the few and secondrate schools for the
many, will lead to increased segregation of students by race and income, and will
cost taxpayers more money. Teachers and school officials, moreover, are
apprehensive about the changes that freewheeling competition among schools
might bring. Among the questions raised by this new concept:
Does school choice lead to improved student achievement in
the classroom?
The key contention of choice advocates is that their approach will enhance
student performance. A major reason for poor academic performance, they say, is
that students are not challenged to perform at the top of their academic potential.
... more stimulating classroom environment would surely yield higher overall
scores on standard achievement tests.
Choice advocates note that parental involvement in their children's education is
an important indicator of student achievement, and they argue that the mere act
of choosing a school can serve as a catalyst for increased parental
involvement...But critics contend that many school choices will be made on the
basis of factors that have nothing to do with academics. They foresee parents
choosing schools because of their proximity to their homes or because they excel
in a particular sport. ...
Choice proponents argue that switching schools for the sake of convenience or a
better sports program is not necessarily a bad thing. Choice proponents often
point to testscore statistics from schools in choice programs to bolster their
contention that choice promotes academic improvement. Critics argue that these
statistics are open to differing interpretations. ...higher test scores could just as
likely reflect that increased proportion of bright and motivated students than
anything related to the curriculum.
Will choice programs lead to the creation of segregated or
elitist schools, with the best students being lured to the best
schools and the less gifted left behind?
Choice critics warn that the best schools will lure most of the brightest
students...Proponents argue that this doesn't have to happen. For one thing, most
existing choice programs prohibit transfers that would undermine school
desegregation plans. Proponents also say schools in choice networks won't
necessarily tailor their academic programs merely to the brightest students. More
likely, says education Professor Mary Anne Raywid of Hofstra University, they will
construct curricular programs designed to draw a wide diversity of
studentsÑthose who need special help, those interested in math, science, the
arts, etc. ÒIf É you put the programs together so that they appeal across ability
and achievement levels, then [a twotier system] is not an inescapable outcome at
all,Ó she says.
...Some public opinion polls indicate that blacks and other minorities favor choice
plans even more than whites. ... ÒMost AfricanAmericans and lowincome
people feel very helpless when it comes to the education of their children,Ó she
says. ÒWe don't have choice because we don't have the money.Ó
Should secular and churchrelated private schools be
included in a choice program designed primarily for public
school students?
... Many experts, including choice advocates as well as opponents, argue that
including private and parochial schools in a choice system could destroy the
public education system in America. They predict that great numbers of private
schools would emerge to answer parental desires and avail themselves of funds
previously reserved to the public education system. ...Others suggest that if
parents would abandon the public schools to such an extent, it reflects just how
bad they areÑand how desperately parents want to see improvements. ...Would
choice undermine the current education establishment and
transfer responsibility for choosing curricula, setting
graduation standards and running the schools? And, if so, is
that a good idea?
Two leading choice advocates John E. Chubb and Terry M. Moe, authors of a
recent Brookings Institution book on the subjectÑargue that the education
establishment itself is the problem and needs to be dismantled. They would place
nearly all accountability in the hands of individual schools, teachers and parents.
...They add that these schools have eliminated many of the old rules and
requirements that emerged from the education bureaucracy and stifled creativity.
In these schools, they write, Òteachers, parents and students are all encouraged
to think of themselves as their schools' ÔownersÕ and to take the
responsibilitiesÑand the pride and involvementÑthat real ownership entails.Ó
Others balk at this expansive freemarket approach to education, arguing that any
choice system should operate within a framework of at least some outside
political control. ... Finn advocates a system in which states would set what he
calls Òessential outcome standardsÓÑthe body of knowledge required for
graduationÑand then leave the schools free to meet those standards in their own
way. He also says states should institute systems of testing to ensure their broad
standards are being met.
Would choice programs increase educational expenditures?
...Critics say choice programs could end up adding to educational expenditures
...One of the chief concerns about choice plans is their impact on school
transportation costs. ......others point out that the Richmond school district was in
precarious financial shape even before Marks launched the choice program. For
one thing, the district had been outspending its general fund revenues since
1984. By the time Marks took office as superintendent three years later, the fund
had a deficit of more than $2 million. The district's deficit is now over $20 million.
In Minnesota, most of the financial trauma associated with school choice has
been at the local level, as school systems adjust to the loss or gain of state aid
that results from student transfers across district lines. But according to Richard
Anderson, executive director of the Minnesota School Boards Association, choice
has had little financial impact on a statewide basis. Indeed, he notes, the
Minnesota program was designed to be Òrevenueneutral.Ó
Go to top
Background
Movement's Origins
There is little that is genuinely new about schoolchoice plans. Wealthy families, it
is often noted, have always been able to send their children to the best
schoolsÑprivate ones, for the most part, or the public school system of an affluent
suburb. The most highly regarded suburban public schools are almost as
exclusive as the top private schools, since admission usually is restricted to
community residents.
Some cities offer bright students from families of limited means the chance to
attend a collegeprep high school, provided they pass a rigorous entrance exam.
Examples of such schools include Boston Latin School, one of the nation's oldest
public schools, as well as New York's Bronx High School of Science, Chicago's
Lane Technical High, Philadelphia's Central High and Cincinnati's Walnut Hills
High.
These Òexam schoolsÓ are not strictly comparable to the newer Òmagnet
schoolsÓ now found throughout the country. Magnet schools offer specialized
programs and generally are better funded and equipped than other schools in the
district. In many cases, magnet schools are established in innercity
neighborhoods as part of a desegregation plan. The idea is to attract white
suburban students, thus achieving racial balance by voluntary means.
Friedman's Voucher Proposal
Many students of school choice trace the movement's origins to a 1962 book by
economist Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom, In this work, Friedman
expounded his proposal for governmentfunded vouchers that would permit
parents to send their children to a schoolÑpublic or privateÑof their choice. Under
Friedman's plan, the government would provide parents with vouchers financed
from tax revenues earmarked for education. The vouchers would be redeemed for
cash by whatever school enrolled the children. Friedman suggested that the face
value of the voucher be equivalent to the cost of educating a child in public
school.
Friedman argued that a voucher system would improve the quality of education in
America by forcing schools to compete with one another for students. ÒIf present
public expenditures on schooling were made available to parents regardless of
where they send their children,Ó Friedman wrote, Òa wide variety of schools
would spring up to meet the demand. ...
Supreme Court Rulings
The tuition voucher idea and its companion concept, tuition tax credits, appealed
to political conservatives because of their freemarket connotations. Civil
libertarians, on the other hand, opposed such plans on constitutional grounds.
They argued that vouchers and tuition tax credits that could be used in church
related schools violated the First Amendment's ban on government
ÒestablishmentÓ of religion.
Over the years, the Supreme Court has taken a dim view of educational aid
programs that mainly benefit parochial school pupils. On the other hand, the court
has upheld the constitutionality of laws extending education benefits to all
children, regardless of the type of school they attend.
...Action in Congress
In the last dozen years or so, Congress has considered a number of tuition tax
credit proposals, but none have been enacted into law. ...
Reagan Backs Choice Plans
The tuition tax credit concept was one of the cornerstones of the Reagan
administration's education policy. ...Reagan said tuition tax credits were needed
because parents were hard pressed to pay both private school tuition and taxes to
support public schools. ...Reagan stressed that his tuition credit proposal would
be focused on the needs of low and middle income families. ...Opponents of the
1983 tuition tax credit bill said it would not appreciably help low and middle
income parents who wished to send their children to private schools.
State and Local Plans
Choice programs have made considerably more headway at the local and state
level than at the federal level...
Alum Rock Experiment
Another early experiment in school choice also yielded inconclusive results. From
1972 to 1976, the federal government spent about $7 million on a demonstration
program in California under which parents received publicly funded tuition
vouchers to spend at public schools of their choice in the Alum Rock Unified
School District near San Jose. The purpose of the experiment was to encourage
community control of the schools, especially in poor and minority neighborhoods.
Participating Alum Rock students in kindergarten through sixth grade got
vouchers worth $680; seventhand eighthgraders got vouchers worth $970. Low
income students also received a bonus voucher worth $275, which gave schools
an incentive to enroll them and cater to their special needs. All voucher students
were bused to their schools for free. By 1976, the experiment's final year, 14 of
Alum Rock's 24 elementary and middle schools were taking part in the voucher
plan. These schools had subdivided themselves into 55 minischools, each with a
highly focused curriculum.
The Alum Rock experiment seems to have had only a modest impact on
established patterns of school attendance. Initially, the vast majority of parents
chose schools near their homes. By the third year of the program, the proportion
of parents choosing schools outside their neighborhood had doubled rising from
about 11 percent to about 22 percent. ...The authors of the report found little
evidence that the voucher program led to improvements in reading scores or
innovations in teaching methods. But they also cautioned that it would not be fair
to use the results of the Alum Rock experiment to judge the success or failure of
choice plans...
Political Prospects
President Bush's legislative initiative makes it likely that Congress will be the main
forum for debate on school choice this year and next.
School Desegregation
How can the promise of equal education be fulfilled?
April 23, 2004 ¥ Volume 14, Issue 15
By Kenneth Jost
Introduction
Most black and Latino students today attend predominantly minority schools. All of the students at the
Georgia Avenue Elementary School in Memphis, Tenn., are AfricanAmerican. (Memphis Public
Schools)
This May the nation celebrates the 50th anniversary of the Supreme Court's
landmark decision declaring racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional.
But the promise of equal educational opportunity for all offered by the once
controversial Brown v. Board of Education ruling is widely viewed as unfulfilled.
Today, an increasing percentage of AfricanAmerican and Latino students attend
schools with mostly other minorities Ñ a situation that critics blame on recent
Supreme Court decisions easing judicial supervision of desegregation plans.
Black and Latino students also lag far behind whites in academic achievement.
Schooldesegregation advocates call for stronger steps to break down racial and
ethnic isolation and to upgrade schools that serve minority students. Critics of
mandatory desegregation, however, say stronger accountability, stricter academic
standards and parental choice will do more to improve education for all students.
...Is racial imbalance in schools increasing due to court
actions?
North Carolina's CharlotteMecklenburg County school system in 1971 became
the first in the country to operate under a courtordered desegregation plan using
widescale busing to achieve racial balance in school populations. Under the
plan, AfricanAmericans comprised between 30 percent and 40 percent of the
students at most of the schools through the 1970s and '80s.
With public support for desegregation weakening, however, the school system
shifted in the 1990s to voluntary measures to maintain racial balance Ñ chiefly by
attracting white students to majorityblack schools by turning them into magnet
schools. Then, at the end of the decade, white families successfully sued the
school system, forcing it to dismantle the busing plan altogether.
The result, combined with increasing percentages of AfricanAmerican and
Hispanic students in the system, has been a growing concentration of minorities
in many schools. Today, more than onethird of the county's 148 schools have at
least 80 percent nonwhite enrollment.
Civil rights advocates say Charlotte is one of many school systems where political
and legal developments have contributed to a trend toward resegregation. ÒThe
federal court required Charlotte to resegregate,Ó says Harvard's Orfield, Òand
they are resegregating Ñ fast.Ó
Critics of mandatory integration, however, say today's concentration of nonwhite
students, particularly in urban school systems, largely reflects residential
demographics. Nationwide, whites comprise only about 60 percent of students in
public schools, compared to 80 percent in the late 1960s. In Charlotte today, 43
percent of the system's 114,000 students are black, and only 42 percent white.
Three high school students in Clinton, Tenn., peacefully register their feelings about their school
becoming the first in Tennessee to integrate, on Aug. 27, 1956. Many other protests were violent. (AP
Photo)
ÒIt's wrong to say that schools are segregated or becoming resegregated,Ó says
Abigail Thernstrom, a former member of the Massachusetts Board of Education.
ÒCities are becoming more heavily minority. ...ÒThe busing remedies didn't
eliminate the effects of that discrimination; they neutralized them,Ó Shaw
continues. ...ÒI like racially mixed schools better than racially homogeneous
schools,Ó Abigail Thernstrom says. ÒBut I do not want computer printouts that
say you have no choice as to where to send your kids.Ó
Do minorities suffer educationally because of racial
isolation?
Black and Latino youngsters lag significantly behind whites (and Asian
Americans) on every significant measure of academic achievement. The Òracial
gapÓ in learning deeply troubles advocates and experts on both sides of the
desegregation debate.
Traditional civil rights advocates largely blame racial isolation for the lagging
performance of blacks and Latinos. There is Òa very systematic relationÓ
between segregation and the learning gap, Orfield says. ÒNo one has ever made
separate schools equal in American history on any scale.Ó
Some critics of mandatory integration, however, see no solid evidence that
racially mixed classrooms significantly benefit learning. ÒThere is absolutely no
reason to assume that because schools are heavily Hispanic or black that these
children can't learn, that they have to sit next to whites or Asians in order to
learn,Ó Abigail Thernstrom says.
...Orfield says ...that desegregation has a ÒhugeÓ effect on Òlife chances,Ó
such as graduating from high school, going to college and Òbeing able to live in
an interracial world as an adult.Ó
... ÒSo they have fewer resources.Ó U.S. schools traditionally have received most
of their funding from property taxes, so schools in wealthier neighborhoods
usually had more resources than schools in districts with lower property values.
Armor and the Thernstroms instead blame the racial gap primarily on social and
cultural factors. ÒThere are very strong correlations between singleparent
households, low birthweight and performance in school,Ó says Abigail
Thernstrom. Armor lists singleparent households as one of 10 Òrisk factorsÓ for
low academic achievement. Some of the others include poverty, limited education
of parents, the size of the family and the age of the mother at pregnancy.
...Would Òschool choiceÓ policies help reduce the racial gap
in educational achievement for AfricanAmericans and
Latinos?
President Bush touts school vouchers, not integration, as the best way to help
disadvantaged students get a better education. ...Educational conservatives say
Òschool choiceÓ programs such as vouchers or charter schools will help
improve schools by promoting innovation and overcoming resistance to change
from public school administrators and teachers. Education Secretary Paige claims
particular support for school choice among AfricanAmerican families.
ÒMy reading of the polls shows that AfricanAmerican parents support choice,
vouchers, strongly,Ó Paige says. ÒThe parents are supporters because the
parents want the best education for the child.Ó
The public school establishment strongly opposes vouchers, saying they would
drain needed money from public schools. ...ÒThere is no evidence that charter
schools are better than average,Ó Orfield says, Òand our studies show that
they're more segregated than public schools.Ó
Abigail Thernstrom counters that vouchers and charter schools Òhave the
potentialÓ to improve education for minority youngsters. ÒThey have the potential
for one very simple reason,Ó she says. ÒThey are out from under the constraints
that make for such mediocre education in so many public schools.Ó
... Armor says. ÒIt might or might not. There's nothing intrinsic about charters that
says those teachers are going to have a better subject masteryÓ than teachers at
regular schools. As for vouchers, Armor says they Òcan also be used to go to a
school that doesn't have better programsÓ than regular public schools.
Publiceducation groups cite underfunding as a major barrier to improving
education for minority youngsters. Nationwide, schools with the highest minority
or lowincome enrollments receive $1,000 less per student than schools with the
lowest minority or poverty enrollments, according to a report by the Education
Trust, a Washington advocacy group.
ÒThere is definitely a relationship between the amount of funding a district gets
and academic performance,Ó says Kevin Carey, a senior policy analyst with the
group. ÒThere are important issues besides money: organization, expectations
for students, curricula, the way teachers are compensated. But money matters,
too.Ó
ÒWe need to pay attention to sending resources where resources are needed,Ó
Underwood says, Òso students with high educational needs get the resources
they need to learn, so you really aren't leaving any child behind.Ó
But Paige and other educational conservatives discount the importance of
funding. ÒI don't accept that the achievement gap is a function of funding
issues,Ó Paige says. ÒIt is a factor, but it is not the factor. The more important
factors are those factors embedded in the No Child Left Behind Act:
accountability, flexibility and parental choice Ñ and teaching methods that work.Ó
Orfield, however, says the No Child Left Behind Act has produced Òconfusion
and frustrationÓ for local school districts with scant evidence of help for minority
pupils. And the Legal Defense Fund's Shaw insists that school choice proposals
could help only some minority students while leaving most of them behind.
ÒMost AfricanAmerican students, like most students, are going to remain in
public schools,Ó Shaw says. ÒThe promise of Brown isn't going to be realized by
focusing on those few students who can escape from public schools. If we don't
talk about fixing public education, then I think we betray not only Brown but also
the fundamental notion of what public education is all about.Ó
Go to top
Background
Long, Hard Road
The Supreme Court's celebrated decision in Brown v. Board of Education marks
neither the beginning nor the end of the campaign for equal education for black
Americans. It was only a turning point in a struggle with roots in the 19th century
that now extends into the 21st.
...Current Situation
RaceCounting
Schools in Lynn, Mass., were facing a multifaceted crisis in the 1980s, with
crumbling buildings, tattered textbooks, widespread racial strife and rapid white
flight. To regain public confidence, the school board in 1989 adopted a plan
combining neighborhoodschool assignments with a transfer policy that included
only one major restriction: No child could transfer from one school to another if
the move would increase racial imbalance at either of the schools involved.
...But Clegg of the Center for Equal Opportunity says schools should not assign
students on the basis of race or ethnicity. ÒThe social benefits to achieving a
predetermined racial or ethnic mix are very small compared to the social costs of
institutionalized racial and ethnic discrimination,Ó he says.
RaceMixing?
...The Manhattan Institute's Abigail Thernstrom counters that the focus on racial
mixing is beside the point. ÒTeach the kids instead of worrying about the racial
composition of the school,Ó she says. ÒOtherwise, we're chasing demographic
rainbows. Cities aren't going to get whiter. And they're not going to get more
middleclass.Ó
Go to top
Outlook
Mixed Records
Fifty years after the Supreme Court declared the end of racial segregation, the
four communities involved in the historic cases present mixed records on the
degree of progress in bringing black and white children together in public schools.
...
IS THIS A DIFFERENT ARTICLE?
Success AsianAmerican Style
Uncivilized, unclean and filthy beyond all conception . . . they know not the virtues
of honesty, integrity or good faith,Ó fulminated Horace Greeley, the 19thcentury
abolitionist and social reformer, describing Chinese immigrants.
But the numbers today tell a different story. By any measure, AsianAmericans
have been phenomenally successful academically. As a result, the concentration
of Asian students in top American schools is wildly disproportionate to their ratio
in the U.S. population.
...Most of those early AsianAmericans, mainly Chinese, lived in California, where
school segregation developed quickly. By 1863, ÒNegroes, Mongolians and
IndiansÓ were prohibited from attending schools with white children. Statewide
restrictions were soon amended so nonwhite children could attend public schools
with whites where no separate schools existed; in areas with fewer Chinese
immigrants, they often attended schools with whites. San Francisco responded by
building a separate school for Chinese children in 1885.
In 1906, Japanese and Koreans also were ordered to attend the socalled
Oriental School in San Francisco, although the Japanese resisted, and by 1929
the vast majority of Japanese children attended integrated schools. The courts
and legislature ended legal segregation in California schools in 1947.
However, Chinese immigrants in California have staunchly opposed integration
proposals that required their children to be bused out of local neighborhoods.
ÒOne time, in the 1960s and '70s, when integration of schools was the big issue,
I almost got lynched in Chinatown by ChineseAmericans for supporting
integration,Ó said Lingchi Wang, a professor of ethnic studies at Berkeley and
veteran civil rights advocate. More recently, ChineseAmerican parents
successfully challenged a San Francisco schoolintegration plan, arguing that
their children were losing out due to racial quotas at magnet schools.
Today, regardless of their parents' income level or education, Asian students
perform better academically than other groups, though their performance does
improve as parental education and income increase. The persistent performance
gap, even accounting for socioeconomic factors, leads to a third explanation for
Asians' success: the great emphasis put on education by Asian parents, higher
academic expectations and the attitude that successful achievement is simply a
question of hard work.
...But evidence suggests that newly arrived Asians learn English faster than
Latinos, thus breaking down those barriers faster. For instance, 1990 Census
data showed that 90 to 95 percent of thirdgeneration AsianAmerican children
spoke only English at home, compared to only 64 percent of MexicanAmericans.
But Asian immigrants are not a monolithic Òmodel minority.Ó Asians who arrive
already speaking English, such as Filipinos or Indians, fare better educationally
and economically. The poverty rate among Filipino immigrants Ñ who come from
a country with a 95 percent literacy rate Ñ is only 6.3 percent, compared with 37.8
percent among the Hmong Ñ a mostly uneducated ethnic group from Southeast
Asia.
'We've Yet to Achieve' Equality of Education
Secretary of Education Rod Paige was interviewed on March 24, 2004, in his
Washington office by Associate Editor Kenneth Jost. Here are verbatim excerpts
from that interview.
On his experience attending racially segregated schools:
ÒThe fact that [white students] had a gym was a big deal. They played basketball
on the inside. They had a big gym with lights and stuff on the inside. We played
basketball on the outside with a clay court. We played up until the time that you
couldn't see the hoop any more. . . . I wanted to take band, but there was no
music. I wanted to play football, but there was no football team [until senior year].
. . . The concept of separate but equal is not at all academic for me. It is very
personal. And even today . . . I don't know what I missed.Ó
On the impact of the Brown v. Board of Education decision:
ÒWas the goal to take 'separate but equal' away . . . ? The answer would be
[yes], in a very strong and striking way. If the goal was equality education, to level
the educational playing field for all children, especially children of color, the
answer is we've yet to achieve that.Ó
On the resegregation of black and Latino students:
ÒEthnic communities cluster together because of a lot of different factors. Some
of these factors include preferences; some are economic. So our goal should be
now to provide a quality education for a child no matter where they are in this
system.Ó
On efforts to promote racial balance in schools:
ÒIf anybody is in a segregated school based on unfairness, then, yes, they
should work against that. But . . . we don't want to get integration confused with
educational excellence. We want to provide educational excellence to kids no
matter what their location is [or] the ethnic makeup of their community.Ó
Secretary of Education Rod Paige (U.S. Dept. of Education)
On the use of race in pupil assignments:
ÒA person should not be disadvantaged because of the color of their skin. Nor
should that person be advantaged because of the color of their skin. . . . That's
the principle I would apply to any set of circumstances.Ó
On ÒequalÓ opportunities for AfricanAmerican and Latino
students:
ÒI've got to come down on the side that there's a large amount of lower
expectations for minority kids. . . . If there are lower expectations for a child, then
the answer to your question has to be that there is not a fair opportunity.Ó
On causes of the Òracial gapÓ in learning:
ÒThere are three drivers. One is the quality of instructional circumstances. . . .
The second is the quantity of it . . . And the third one is student engagement.
Learning is an active activity between the teacher and the student. So the student
does have some responsibility here in terms of student engagement.Ó
On underfunding of minority and lowincome schools:
ÒI don't accept that the achievement gap is a function of funding issues. I think it
is a factor, but it is not the factor. . . . The more important factors are those
embedded in the No Child Left Behind Act: accountability, flexibility and parental
choice Ñ and teaching methods that work.Ó
On school choice proposals Ñ vouchers and charter schools:
ÒMy reading of the polls show[s] that AfricanAmerican parents support choice,
vouchers, strongly. . . . The parents are supporters because [they] want the best
education for the child. . . . Enforcing monopolistic tendencies on schools is a
detriment to schools. The people who force these monopolistic tendencies on
schools deny schools the opportunity to innovate, create and reach their
potential.Ó
Document Citation
Jost, K. (2004, April 23). School desegregation. CQ Researcher, 14, 345372. Retrieved June
11, 2008, from CQ Researcher Online,
http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2004042300.
Document ID: cqresrre2004042300
Document URL: http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2004042300
The CQ Researcher ¥ April 23, 2004 ¥ Volume 14, Number 15
© 2008, CQ Press, A Division of SAGE Publications. All Rights Reserved.
General Terms of Service | Copyright Notice and Takedown Policy | Masthead
Rethinking School Integration
Is the era of courtordered desegregation over?
October 18, 1996 ¥ Volume 6, Issue 39
By Kenneth Jost
Introduction
More than four decades after the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed racial
segregation in public schools, most black and Latino youngsters still attend
predominantly minority schools and the number is increasing. Federal courts are
making it easier for school districts to drop mandatory desegregation plans and
be released from judicial supervision. Some black leaders are questioning the
value of integration and joining other critics of courtordered busing. Civil rights
advocates say that the trend toward ÒresegregationÓ will hurt minorities'
opportunities in school and afterward. But critics say that desegregation produces
few educational gains for minorities, causes whites to flee innercity schools and
weakens popular support for public education.
Go to top
...Some black leaders support school choice plans that provide public funds to
help parents pay for private or parochial schools as a way to increase
integration. Armor agrees. ÒI like the choice movement, and I like plans that try
to combine choice and desegregation,Ó he says. ÒOne of the best channels of
integration in our society is to allow minority students to attend private schools of
their choice.Ó
For his part, Orfield says school choice Òthreatens to foster resegregation by
both race and class,Ó but also has Òpositive possibilities for crossdistrict
desegregationÓ if minority families interested in schools outside their districts are
given adequate information and support. But without Òstrong civil rights
policies,Ó Orfield writes, Òchoice plans can pay to transfer white students from
integrated city schools to allwhite suburbs.Ó
In the meantime, the sharpest debate is between those who favor court
intervention and supervision in school desegregation cases and those who want
courts to reduce their role and restore local control of schools. ÒThe courts
should recognize the practicality of the alternatives, that voluntary plans in the
long term have been just as successful, or no more unsuccessful, than mandatory
plans,Ó Armor says.
But Parker says courts still have an essential role where school districts have
failed to remove the effects of segregation. ÒThese cases were meant to address
serious constitutional violations,Ó he says. ÒThe age of the case is less
important than whether those constitutional violations have been successfully
addressed. If the school district hasn't taken care of the problem, then it doesn't
matter whether the case is five years old or 50 years old.Ó
... The segregated housing pattern is what's making it difficult. You've got a black
Charlotte and a white Charlotte, and that's what makes it difficult to desegregate
the schools without busing.Ó
Pro/Con
Should the courts reduce their role in school desegregation?
David J. Armor
Research Professor, George Mason University.. Written for The CQ Researcher,
October 1996.
As arbiters of the U.S. Constitution, the federal courts will always have a proper
role in the area of school desegregation. Whenever a school system is charged
with racial discrimination in violation of the 14th Amendment, the courts must
decide the issue of liability. July 9, 1996
Connecticut Supreme Court says racial segregation in Hartford's public schools is
unconstitutional, regardless of cause.
September 1996
Denver and Cleveland open school year with no courtordered busing.
Ê
Ê
Go to top
Short Features
Hispanic Americans: The 'Other' Minority
Latinos are the most segregated minority in America's public schools. Moreover,
the percentage of Latinos attending predominantly minority schools has been
steadily increasing in the 30 years since the government began keeping such
figures.
ÒWe have very severe levels of school segregation,Ó says Charles Kamasaki, a
vice president for the National Council of La Raza, an Hispanic lobbying group.
ÒThe highest degree occurs in school districts and schools with the fewest
resources. In our judgment, it undeniably has a negative effect on school
achievement among Hispanic children.Ó
Nearly threefourths of Latino students attend schools with at least 50 percent
minority enrollment, according to Department of Education figures for the 199192
school year, the most recent available. ...For his part, Kamasaki says school
segregation for African Americans and Hispanics alike stems from the same
problem: housing segregation. ÒÓÒÓ
Kamasaki also says that the Department of Education has an important role to
play in monitoring local school districts to detect socalled Òwithinschool
segregationÓ as when tracking practices result in isolating Hispanic or African
American students. ÒMost people agree that this can be just as pernicious and
just as harmful as other forms of segregation,Ó he says.
From Busing to Magnets to Money: A County's Struggle
to Desegregate
Busing and magnet schools failed to desegregate Prince George's County, Md.
Now the sprawling school district wants to try something else: money.
School officials in the predominantly black suburban county outside Washington
admit that the county's modest busing plan and its more ambitious magnet school
program have failed to bring black and white students together. Now the school
board wants a federal judge to allow a return to neighborhood schools. But not
the old and substandard neighborhood schools.
The board also wants the judge to order the state and county to pay hundreds of
millions of dollars for new school construction and operating expenses to improve
educational quality.
ÒWe've gone as far as we're going to be able to go to reach numerical
desegregation,Ó says Marcy Canavan, chairman of the school board. ÒSo we're
trying to move to a new step: Allow kids to return to neighborhood schools, which
is overwhelmingly popular among white and black students.
ÒBut we're focused on not moving any kids until we're sure that they're going to
good schools that will improve their educational opportunities and educational
performance,Ó Canavan says.
To do that, Canavan says the school board plans to seek a federal court order
requiring Prince George's County and the state of Maryland to pay for $180
million in new school construction over the next six years. In addition, the board
will be asking for about $30 million per year in additional operating expenses,
mainly to reduce classroom size to between 20 and 25 students per class.
Canavan says the new money is needed Òwith or without desegregationÓ
because of the county's explosive growth. School enrollment has grown by
22,000 in the past 10 years, but only two new schools have been built. Currently,
about 10,000 students are housed in modular or temporary classrooms instead of
in regular school buildings.
The school system is currently under federal court order in a desegregation suit
filed in 1970. Prince George's was then what its current black county executive,
Wayne Curry, calls Òa sleepy Southern hollow.Ó The county was about three
fourths white, and its school system rigidly segregated. Since then, the county,
and its school system, have been racially transformed. The current school
enrollment is about 72 percent AfricanAmerican, 19 percent white, 5 percent
Hispanic and 4 percent AsianAmerican.
To desegregate the schools, a federal judge in 1973 ordered a plan requiring
busing of students between predominantly black neighborhoods near Washington
and the predominantly white neighborhoods in outlying areas. But as the county's
black population grew and whites continued to move toward outlying areas,
school officials found it impossible to keep enrollment within the racial balance
guidelines set by the court.
A courtappointed panel of experts recommended a new plan in 1981 that called
for even more extensive busing to offset the changing demographics, or what
Canavan, who is white, today describes as ÒmassiveÓ busing. The proposal
drew a firestorm of criticism and eventually was shelved in favor of a magnet
school plan. The schools, featuring special curricula, were to be located in
predominantly black neighborhoods with the hope of attracting white students to
achieve a measure of racial balance.
Since the program was instituted in 1985, the number of magnet schools has
grown to 53, featuring some 16 specialized curricula and enrolling some 20,000
students. The programs have been popular, but Alvin Thornton, a former school
board member now working as a consultant in developing the new desegregation
plan, says the magnets were Òonly 50 percent successfulÓ in promoting racial
balance.
The magnets' popularity complicated their effects on racial mixing. For one thing,
in response to pressure from whites, some of the programs were placed in white
neighborhoods. In addition, there is a huge waiting list of blacks about 4,100
students as of last fall who cannot get into magnet schools because slots have
been reserved for whites.
Black parents complained about the difficulty of getting into programs that had
been established in the first place to benefit black students. In addition, black
parents were also complaining about busing. Although only about 12,000
students are subject to busing for racial balance, about 90 percent of those
affected are black.
The two lines of criticism converged this summer to produce a majority on the
predominantly black school board in favor of going to court to try to ease the
quotas at magnet schools, end racial balance busing and win release from court
supervision altogether. U.S. District Judge Peter Messitte agreed in August to
ease the magnet school quotas, but he put other issues on hold pending a full
scale reexamination of the status of desegregation in the county.
In a public briefing last month, Canavan acknowledged that the board's plan to
abandon busing would put more black students in Òschools that are now
considered segregated.Ó But she said educational quality would be improved if
the new construction and operating funds are approved. The plan calls for
construction of 12 new schools, renovation of 22 existing schools and reopening
of four closed schools.
ÒThe board is unwilling to return kids to schools where they will not thrive,Ó
Canavan told the Sept. 12 meeting. ÒIt is incumbent on us to be sure that these
children's educational opportunities increase rather than decrease because of an
end to busing.Ó
Few of the people at the meeting most of them black had anything good to say
about busing. ÒWhat I could never understand was busing,Ó one black woman
said. ÒThey were busing black children to a black school.Ó
On the minds of most parents at the meeting were the problems common to
school systems around the country: discipline, teacher quality and educational
improvement. ÒWhat I want,Ó one black father told the group, Òis to be able to
say that you can go into any school in Prince George's County and be able to
compete with any schoolÓ in the predominantly white adjoining counties.
At the meeting, County Executive Curry pledged strong support for the board's
plan despite the price tag. Curry endorsed the move to get out from under court
supervision, but he added, ÒI relish the help of the courtÓ in ordering the state to
help pay for the new plan. A spokesman for Gov. Parris Glendening, a Democrat
and former Prince George's County executive, attended the session but was
noncommittal, saying only that the governor was Òprepared to consider and
approve a significant increase in construction funds.Ó
For their parts, both Canavan and Thornton voiced optimism that the school
board could win a court order requiring funding of the plan. ÒWe would not have
done this unless we thought we could win,Ó' Canavan says. ÒWe think that when
the facts are examined, the court will come to the same conclusion that the board
did: that we can't do any more to desegregate under the original definition.Ó
Document Citation
Jost, K. (1996, October 18). Rethinking school integration. CQ Researcher, 6, 913936.
Retrieved June 11, 2008, from CQ Researcher Online,
http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre1996101800.
Document ID: cqresrre1996101800
Document URL: http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre1996101800
The CQ Researcher ¥ October 18, 1996 ¥ Volume 6, Number 39
© 2008, CQ Press, A Division of SAGE Publications. All Rights Reserved.
General Terms of Service | Copyright Notice and Takedown Policy | Masthead
Home | ÊView PDF | Send as Email...Full ReportIntroductionOverviewBackgroundCurrent
SituationOutlookPro/ConChronologyShort FeaturesMaps/GraphsBibliographyThe Next
StepContactsFootnotes | Print...Full ReportIntroductionOverviewBackgroundCurrent
SituationOutlookPro/ConChronologyShort FeaturesMaps/GraphsBibliographyThe Next
StepContactsFootnotes | Save to Favorite Documents | CiteNow! | Find Keyword
QuickTimeª and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Charter Schools
Will they improve or hurt public education?
December 20, 2002 ¥ Volume 12, Issue 44
By Charles S. Clark
Introduction
Fourthgrader Ashley Tropez volunteers to answer at Christel House Academy, one of four charter
schools that opened this fall in Indianapolis, Ind. Since the first charter school opened 10 years ago in
Minnesota, some 2,700 have been launched. (AP Photo/John Harrell)
A decade after the birth of the charter school movement, reform activists and
mainstream educators disagree over whether these experimental public schools
are a promising innovation or a damaging distraction. The nation's nearly 2,700
charter schools operate in 39 states, enjoying freedom from many traditional
regulations. But they must deliver concrete results in a specified period or risk
being shut down. Charters vary as much in their instructional approaches as they
do in their genesis, facilities, quality and political constituencies. Yet, the evidence
remains inconclusive as to whether they are boosting student achievement. The
evolving movement remains divided between critics, who see it as the first step in
dismembering America's public education system, and those who see it as the
system's last best hope.
Go to top
Overview
Forget your preconceived notions of dilapidated innercity public schools. At the
Capital City Public Charter School, occupying rented quarters above a CVS
drugstore on onceinfamous 14th Street in Washington, D.C., the brick building is
new, the school welllighted and clean.
Every morning at 8, when the 180 preK through seventhgrade students step off
the elevator, abuzz with enthusiasm, they are greeted by Principal Karen
Dresden, the city's charter school Principal of the Year last year. Dresden's
charges represent 17 Zip codes around the city and diverse racial groups. Four
hundred children are on the school's waiting list.
As a charter school, Capital City is a nonprofit, publicly funded experimental
school governed by a board, mostly parent volunteers, including many of the
school's founders. It is one of 2,696 charter schools established nationwide since
the first one opened its doors 10 years ago in St. Paul, Minn. Charter schools are
given freedom from most regulations in return for a promise to meet performance
goals or lose their charters, usually granted for fiveyear intervals.
One of Capital City's founders is Anne Herr, a State Department analyst who
heads the Board of Trustees. She says starting the school was a Òleap of faithÓ
motivated only in part by some parents' dissatisfaction with the traditional public
schools their children attended. ÒThe overall motivation was the excitement of
starting something new,Ó Herr recalls, though she admits that they might never
have started Òif we had known all the issues we were going to encounter.Ó
Field trips to Rock Creek Park and National Zoo are fundamental to the program at Capital City Public
Charter School, in Washington, D.C. Nearly 680,000 preK12 students attend charter schools in 39
states and the District Ñ slightly more than 1 percent of the 47 million students in traditional public
schools. Educators disagree over whether charters Ñ launched 10 years ago in Minnesota Ñ are a
promising innovation or a damaging and costly distraction. (Capital City Public Charter School/Dave
Philhower)
Capital City built its instructional regime around two increasingly popular
programs: Outward Bound's fieldtripheavy Expeditionary Learning, and a pupil
management approach called the Responsive Classroom, which emphasizes
developing social skills and a positive attitude towards selves, school and others.
ÒIt's a real opportunity for teachers to exercise leadership and build the school,Ó
Dresden says, adding that their pay and benefits are comparable or better than
those in traditional D.C. public schools, even though, she admits, Òthey do work
a little harder.Ó All the teachers boast strong elementaryeducation experience,
but were not required to jump through all the Òhoops and paperworkÓ of getting
locally certified, she says.
Tuition is free at Capital City, which receives public funds based on the normal
studentweighted formula Ñ a perpupil amount, enhanced for specialeducation
students and those with limited English.
Unlike regular public schools, however, charters must find alternative facilities.
Financing the lease on the current building Ñ and purchasing a larger one to
move into next year Ñ required negotiating loans and revenue bonds from area
banks, personally backed by a board member. ÒOur board has the ideal
membership for a startup,Ó Dresden says. ÒThey have backgrounds in banking,
facilities, grantwriting, law and architecture. You might think it would be good for
board members to know education, but we need their expertise in lots of areas
that I'm not as strong in.Ó
Across the country, nearly 680,000 preK12 students attend charter schools in 39
states and the District of Columbia Ñ slightly more than 1 percent of the 47 million
students attending traditional public schools. Depending on each state's enabling
law, charter schools can be authorized by local school districts, state
governments or special chartering boards. Their sponsors include universities,
socialservice agencies, YMCAs, Boys and Girls Clubs and, increasingly, private,
forprofit corporations. Instructional themes range from agriculture to the
Montessori method to online learning.
Surveys show that families who choose charter schools want small, effective
schools that are responsive to special needs, offer a structured environment and
operate flexibly. Yet the charter school movement is bipartisan and
philosophically broad. Educational liberals value charters for the freedom to
experiment, while conservatives stress the freedom for families to move out of
failing schools. (continued below)
Some enthusiasts see charter schools as opportunities to create laboratories of
innovation whose potential has yet to be tapped. ÒThis is a revolution in public
education, like democracy was a revolution in how people are governed,Ó says
Joe Nathan, director of the Center for School Change at the University of
Minnesota. ÒWe're seeing far more sophistication in how charters are set up.Ó
Ron Wolk, founder of Education Week, predicts that as charter schools become
more popular, they will attract privateschool students back into the public system.
Others see them as an alternative to the publicschool status quo. ÒThe current
system rewards good teaching by promoting teachers out of the classroom, which
promotes mediocrity,Ó says M.S. ÒMikeÓ Kayes, project director of the Phoenix
based National Charter School Clearinghouse, a Department of Education
funded group that supplies information on charter schools. ÒPublic education's
failures are systemic and institutionalized, so it's not enough to find a new
manager. You have to throw off the yoke of how teachers are hired and
rewarded.Ó
But critics point out that a disproportionate number of charter schools are set up
in ailing urban districts, making many lowincome families with atrisk children the
guinea pigs for sketchily funded experimentation. Joan Devlin, associate director
of educational issues at the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), says even
with some successes, charter schools are Òa distractionÓ from reforming
mainstream public schools.
ÒCharter schools can be good tools if they're carefully done,Ó Devlin says, noting
they must be accountable and that their pupils must be required to perform well
on the same achievement tests traditional schools are required to give. ÒAnd
they must be open to all.Ó
Unionized teachers claim that charter schools are a thinly veiled effort to
eliminate teachers' unions. Most charter schools do not offer prevailing wages
and hours, points out Deanna Duby, a senior policy analyst at the National
Education Association (NEA). ÒThey're trying to get rid of union contracts,Ó she
says. ÒThey're saying, 'Give us some money and leave us alone, and we'll take
care of things.'
ÒThe majority of our 2.7 million members would just as soon have charter
schools go away,Ó Duby says. ÒThey're a sign that we're not doing our job, but
many feel that the competition is not fair because if you took away all the
regulations [mainstream teachers] work under, we could be creative like charters,
too.Ó
In fact, Devlin argues, the tendency of many charters to employ teachers Òat
willÓ Ñ without tenure or longterm contracts Ñ is why teacher turnover at the
schools is so high: about 6080 percent. ÒI'm not saying bureaucracy isn't
burdensome, but it is not generally what impedes change and progress,Ó she
adds. ÒIt's no longer true that unions prevent school principals from hiring who
they want or firing incompetent teachers. You just have to show 'just cause' rather
than being capricious.Ó
Many administrators and teachers'union members worry that charter schools are
difficult to govern, organize and regulate, like the Los Angeles charter school that
reportedly bought its director a sports car. And authorities revoked the license of
Gateway Academy Ñ a chain of California charter schools Ñ after it was
discovered that some of its 14 schools were teaching Islam, charging parents
tuition and hiring convicted felons. The irregularities at Gateway were discovered
when a reporter found students praying with their Muslim teachers at a school in
Sunnyvale.
Moreover, some studies of student achievement have shown that charterschool
testscore gains have been minimal. ÒIf the schools are not effective, they should
be curtailed or abandoned,Ó say two Western Michigan University professors.
So far, the Capital City Public Charter School is passing with flying colors. Each
year, auditors from the D.C. Public Charter School Board evaluate the school
based on students' performance on the Stanford 9 and other standardized tests,
as well as nonacademic measures like attendance and fulfillment of the school's
management plan. During its first year, Capital City reported the highest reading
scores of the district's 33 charter schools.
Far less fortunate were the students, staff and parents of three other charter
schools closed by the D.C. Board of Education last June. The World Public
Charter School was cited for problems ranging from failing to provide
individualized education plans for specialeducation students and not verifying
students' residency to failing to conduct employee background and health checks
or supply textbooks.
Nonetheless, charter schools nationwide are on the upswing. President Bush's
landmark No Child Left Behind Act proposes new funding and organizational help
for charter schools.
ÒThe Clinton administration supported charters as a policy option, but our
approach is more entrepreneurial advocacy,Ó says Under Secretary of Education
Eugene W. Hickok. ÒCharter schools are not just an important part of public
education, they are an essential part.Ó
As the charter school movement enters its second decade, here are some of the
key issues being debated:
Are charter schools harming the traditional public school
system?
In suburban Long Island, N.Y., a group of parents have formed the Coalition to
Oppose Charter Schools in Glen Cove. ÒWe want to keep our community
desirable,Ó said spokeswoman Gloria Wagner. ÒThe connotation of a charter
school is, 'The [traditional public] schools are lousy and are not meeting the
needs of our children.' [If charter schools are allowed here], our property values
will go down, our taxes will increase to keep the standards up.Ó
In Worcester, Mass., Mark Brophy, president of the local teachers' union, blasted
charter schools as Òa conspiracy to implode public educationÓ by siphoning
away funds needed by traditional schools.
In Indianapolis, officials this fall complained that when four new charter schools
opened, the school district lost $1.5 million, mostly because the charters attracted
many privateschool students. And a recent survey of 49 school districts with
charter schools, commissioned by the U.S. Education Department, found that at
least half of the districts reported negative budgetary impact.
The financial impact on mainstream schools varies by state, says Paul Houston,
executive director of the American Association of School Administrators, in
Arlington, Va. ÒIt depends on how closely tethered the charters are to district
funds,Ó he says. ÒIn some states, the laws burden districts with oversight and
monitoring responsibilities without providing new funds. And superintendents
gripe that when charters go belly up, the districts have to sweep up the pieces of
a problem they had no role in creating.Ó
A school district's overhead costs are largely fixed, regardless of the number of
students, until it reaches Òa certain breaking point,Ó Houston adds. So if charter
schools reduce the number of children in the mainstream district from, say, 3,000
to 2,800, the district loses the funds for those 200 children who left Ñ but without
reducing its overhead. Ò[Thus], you indirectly impact the kids left in the system,
because you still have to maintain buildings and provide services.Ó
But Ted Kolderie, a former journalist and Minnesota citizen activist who helped
launch the charter movement, dismisses the siphonedfunds complaint. ÒYou
have an established industry that sees change occurring, has trouble changing
and tries to stop it,Ó he says. ÒThe complaints are selfinterested, though they're
not couched that way.Ó
Under the charter school concept, ÒThe money moves, and we finance kids,Ó
Kolderie says. ÒThat requires districts to think. All of these assertions come when
they think inside the box.Ó
Under Secretary Hickok acknowledges Òmore than a scintilla of truthÓ to the
problem of rigid overhead costs. ÒHaving said that, I remind my friends in school
systems that the issue is not funding or managing their systems, but educating
children,Ó he says. ÒYes, you've got management challenges, but if families feel
their children are not getting an education,Ó it is not the district's job to thwart
them.
Critics also complain that the charter movement risks resegregation and the
ÒBalkanizationÓ of public education, tearing the fabric of communities in ways
that have had negative consequences in other countries. For example, after New
Zealand abolished its national education department in 1989, the subsequent
formation of autonomous schools chosen by parents produced overcrowded,
homogenized, resegregated schools that pick their students rather than vice
versa, according to Edward B. Fiske, an education consultant, and Helen F. Ladd,
a professor of public policy studies and economics at Duke University.
Charter school proponents say that while the Balkanization charge is logical on
the surface, it doesn't hold up to scrutiny. ÒNeighborhood schools based on
housing patterns made sense years ago, but we're now in a crisis in the urban
schools,Ó says Jeanne Allen, president of the procharter school Center for
Education Reform, Òand if traditional schools are not serving students, then we
must be willing to let them leave.Ó
In fact, neighborhood schools have been losing appeal in some areas, including
wealthy suburbs where students attend a variety of alternatives to the local public
schools, ranging from religious institutions to collegeprep private schools.
Chester E. Finn Jr., charter supporter and president of the Thomas B. Fordham
Foundation, says publicschool choice offers a Òdizzying proliferation of hybrid
forms Ñ virtual schooling, home schooling in the morning with charter schooling
in the afternoon, public schools outsourced to private firms.Ó Balkanization
Òimplies that having a public school system is our foremost object of concern, but
my concern is whether the public is being educated. That can be done in a wide
variety of ways.Ó
Indeed, charter proponents say fears that charter schools contribute to re
segregation were not borne out in a recent Education Department survey. It
showed that charter schools had 52 percent minorities, compared with 40 percent
in traditional public schools, that both sectors had about 39 percent of students in
the federal lunch program, and both had about 10 percent with limited English
proficiency. The traditional public schools, however, had slightly more special
education students (about 11 percent vs. about 8 percent in charter schools).
Many strong publiceducation advocates do not think charter schools threaten the
public schools. ÒCharters exist because many people want to get out of the
bureaucratic environment they're mired in, not because they want to avoid the
principles and values of public education,Ó says Wendy Puriefoy, president of the
Public Education Network (PEN), an association of community organizations
known as local education funds (LEFs), dedicated to improving public schools.
Do charter schools foster innovation and achievement?
After 10 years of the charter school movement, evaluators must still rely largely
on anecdotal evidence of innovations and shifting reports of rising or falling test
scores Ñ the same complexities and lack of consensus that frustrate discussions
of traditional schools.
Skeptics argue that for all the lofty rhetoric about charters being laboratories of
innovation that would inspire mainstream schools, mixed results have forced
advocates to lower their sights. ÒThe claim was that the schools would be
innovative and educators would roll it out on a larger scale,Ó says the NEA's
Duby. ÒWe don't hear that now. Instead, you hear, 'Charters provide choice.'
That's fine if the schools are innovative and offer something kids can't get in
mainstream schools. But if it's just another choice, we're not supportive.Ó
Proponents like Under Secretary Hickok point out that charters were the first to
bring in dress codes and instructional programs that weave art and music into the
teaching of reading and math. Charters pioneered longer school days and school
years and have spotlighted Òniche curriculums,Ó such as Core Knowledge and
Open Court/Direct Instruction, recently adopted in the Sacramento, Calif., public
schools, says the Center for Education Reform's Allen. ÒThe point is not to take
one innovation Ñ because the whole charter approach is innovation Ñ but to start
with the premise of what can be done differently.Ó
Education scholar Paul Teske found that charter schools deliver innovations more
than twice as fast as traditional schools. Among their many innovations: before
andafterschool programs, extra tutoring, hightechnology in classes, teacher
development, teacher participation in policymaking, preK programs, parental
contracts and giftedandtalented programs.
In the Education Department's recent 49district survey, half of the school leaders
with charter schools in their districts reported becoming more customeroriented,
increasing their marketing efforts, tracking students who leave and improving
communication with parents. Most districts implemented new programs, or even
created new schools with programs like those of the charters.
One superintendent reported that after a second charter school opened in his
district, he lost $1 million in state aid. ÒIt's spreading an alreadythin budget even
thinner,Ó he told researchers, adding that if another charter school opened in his
district, he might have to close a school.
The superintendent said he felt competition from the charter schools, even though
only 1.3 percent of the district's students had switched to them. He also
acknowledged, however, ÒWe're better because of charters. I hate to say it, but
we're more aware of the importance of what parents say and have become more
customerservice oriented. We're willing to fix anything that parents leave for, like
scheduling or busing. The charter schools stole our students; we will steal them
back.Ó
As a result of competition from the charter schools, the superintendent
implemented several new educational programs, remodeled school buildings,
included parents in the hiring process for new principals, encouraged team
teaching and directed elementary schools to divide themselves into smaller units,
or Òfamilies,Ó to increase the sense of community. In addition, he announced
that he expected district students to outperform charter school students on future
achievement tests and created a new accountability system for district personnel
to reinforce that objective.
ÒThere are specialized charter high schools, such as schools for the arts,
particularly in urban areas where they're working at reforms,Ó PEN's Puriefoy
says. ÒUrban schools in the standardsbasedreform era are like emergency
rooms are to medicine. They don't work under antiseptic conditions, and they
have people coming in off the streets, but you have the same basic issues of
medicine. Urban schools are the real laboratories of learning for public education
as a whole.Ó
ÒIn most transitions, the early years are shaky,Ó activist Kolderie says. People
complained because Òthe early automobile was slower than the train, or because
the first telephone had a range of only two miles. We never before had a system
of autonomous schools. And even when charter schools are using proven
learning models, they're still new, in that the organizations created are singleunit
operations.Ó
As for student achievement in charter schools, conclusions are complicated
because there are no uniform tests or yeartoyear data. In the late 1990s, the
Phoenixbased Goldwater Institute, a freemarket think tank, studied reading
scores at Arizona charter and mainstream schools. ÒStudents enrolled in charter
schools for two and three consecutive years have an advantage over students
staying in [traditional schools] for the same periods of time,Ó the institute said.
But more recent studies are less glowing. In a review released in September by
the Brookings Institution's Brown Center on Education Policy, charter school
students in four of the 10 states studied scored significantly below those from
similar public schools. The study relied on 19992001 data from students in
grades 4, 8 and 10 in 376 charter schools. Contrary to expectations, students in
the urban charter schools scored higher than those in suburban or rural charter
schools, and those from larger schools did better than those from small schools.
Similar findings are reflected in an AFT report released in July. It found negative
testscore growth in charter schools in six states Ñ North Carolina, Texas,
Michigan, Louisiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania Ñ and mixed results elsewhere.
Positive results were found only in New Jersey and Connecticut.
The AFT evaluators also concluded that charter teachers feel less empowered to
make changes in their workplaces than those in traditional buildings and hold
mixed feelings about administrators and governance structures. They said
charters encourage innovation but are less effective at changing instruction; that
charters help isolate students by race and class; are not accountable financially
and neglect specialneeds students.
The proliferation of charter schools in Michigan prompted studies by Western
Michigan University's Center for Evaluation. ÒSome districts may be encouraged
to improve, but others are launched on a terminal cycle of decline,Ó wrote
researchers Michael Mintrom and David N. Plank. ÒWhen assessing students'
standardizedtest scores, no evidence suggests that charter schools are doing
better than their traditional counterparts in the same districts.Ó
The North Carolina Center for Public Policy Research and scholars writing for the
National School Boards Association both gave thumbsdown reviews of charters.
Not surprisingly, charter advocates question the methodology of some of these
studies, calling them biased. ÒCharter schools are all different,Ó says the Center
for Education Reform's Allen. ÒYou have to look at how often the state tests,
when the schools opened and whom they serve.
ÒIf you look at individual students' scores, not masked by averages, performance
is better at 80 percent of the schools,Ó Allen continues. ÒWith oversight boards
and audit groups dropping by more frequently than with traditional schools,
charter schools are the most scrutinized movement since desegregation. Yet you
find a very optimistic picture, succeeding against all odds.Ó
She points out that more than 50 years of longitudinal trends show that
Philadelphia's public schools are failing. ÒWe know more about traditional
schools,Ó she notes. ÒCharters know they are under the gun, but tests are
expensive. Many of the schools are serving nontraditional, specialed, atrisk
kids, so they struggle to demonstrate progress. But most are, in fact, doing well
by any other measures.Ó
For instance, Allen says, charter school mobility rates are stable (charter kids
tend to stay put), highschool graduation rates are at 9599 percent and 63
percent have waiting lists.
Surveys show rates of student, teacher and parental satisfaction in charter
schools triple those of traditional public schools. Finn and his colleagues say
parents rate charter schools better on class size, individual attention, school size,
teaching quality, parent involvement, curriculum, extra help, enforcing standards,
accessibility, discipline, basic skills and safety. Traditional schools rated the same
or better only on facilities.
ÒWe have a whole menagerie of charter schools,Ó the Fordham Foundation's
Finn says. ÒMany are fabulous, but there are too many bad and mediocre ones.
Some get better, others don't.Ó
The University of Minnesota's Nathan, who notes Minnesota has many prized and
influential charter schools, says, ÒThe generic thing called 'charter school' is like
the word 'business.' Some are effective, some are not. Some shouldn't have been
approved.
ÒBut the key is whether the ineffective ones are closed,Ó he continues. ÒA lot
more charter schools have closed than district schools. More close for business
reasons than academic ones, and the ones that do poorly in business also do
poorly academically.Ó
Kayes of the National Charter School Clearinghouse argues that the low
socioeconomic status of many charterschool students makes it imperative that
charters be examined with Òmoresophisticated valueaddedÓ assessments. ÒIf
you're getting highschool kids who come in reading at the sixthgrade level, and
if, at the end of one year, they're at the seventh or eighthgrade level, that's
phenomenal,Ó he says.
Parents who choose charter schools for their children tend to be more involved
with their kids' educations, Kayes says, and charters tend to be twothirds to
threefourths smaller than traditional schools. ÒBut improving student
performance is absolutely what's needed. If these schools only do as well as their
traditional counterparts, then why bother?Ó
Should private companies be allowed to run charter schools?
In Florida, threefourths of all new charter school seats are being created by
private corporations. Companies like ChancellorBeacon Academies, based in
Coconut Grove, work with developers to build new facilities with small classes. By
contracting with counties to receive $2,000 less per student than a traditional
school district, they pay teachers less than traditional schools, but they offer them
stock options, and, in theory, save taxpayers money.
According to the Center for Education Reform, 19 such companies or their
nonprofit subsidiaries Ñ called Òeducational management organizationsÓ
(EMOs) Ñ are operating some 350 schools around the nation, many of them
charters. They include nationwide companies like Edison Schools and National
Heritage Academies. In Ohio, White Hat Ventures LLC, founded by a millionaire
industrialist and privatevoucher advocate, runs a sixth of the state's 91 charter
schools. In New York state, companies run half the charter schools, and in
Michigan, twothirds.
To some publicschool purists, such publicprivate partnerships represent a
disturbing trend. ÒIt's based on deception,Ó says the NEA's Duby. ÒThe law
says a public school can't be forprofit, so they set up a nonprofit foundation. The
big corporate guys believe there is money to be made, so some are diving in to
take over the charter movement. It will be interesting to see how many momand
pop charters will survive and to what degree the movement will become for
profit.Ó
Critics also scoff at the notion that a ÒcookiecutterÓ design from a large
corporation can meet the individual needs of kids and families in diverse
neighborhoods. ÒEducation is hard,Ó Duby says. ÒLearning occurs through day
today interaction. Corporations can't come in and say, 'We've got magic.' Which
kids? Which environment? On what day? Too often they make decisions based
on a test score here, a number there. But it's more complex than you think.Ó
Paul Hill, a University of Washington professor and longtime researcher on public
schools, warns that schools may not develop a strong sense of Òinternal
accountabilityÓ if they do not control such crucial items as their own budget and
curriculum. Authorizers who have a positive opinion of an EMO Òmay be less
likely to look critically at each school affiliated with that EMO during both the
application and oversight processes.Ó
The companies deny any deception. ÒWe're not in the business of dummy
organizations,Ó says Vickie FrazierWilliams, vice president of community and
board relations for ChancellorBeacon Academies. ÒEvery state law is different.
Some allow a forprofit to own, run and operate a public school; others require a
nonprofit. It's difficult to keep up with changes. But friendly school boards look to
us, research us and invite us in.Ó
As for actually earning a profit, FrazierWilliams points out that her company
receives a fixed 1012 percent of a district's payments, so proceeds from any
efficiencies are channeled back into the schools. ÒThe profit comes from growing
in many different places,Ó she says. ÒCharters are the toughest model because
the parents vote with their feet. We have to please them.Ó
She also dismisses the common charge that companies try to create cookie
cutter, or ÒMcCharterÓ schools. ÒMaybe that happens in the early days, but
every child, school and community is different, and each principal sets a different
tone,Ó FrazierWilliams says. ChancellorBeacon partners with land developers to
build new schools in overcrowded districts. The school boards consist of parents
who all live in the same development, as opposed to traditional school boards,
which usually are elected from all parts of a school district.
Marc Egan, director of the Voucher Strategy Center at the Alexandria, Va.based
National School Boards Association, says a local school board Ñ which normally
is elected Ñ should be the agency that grants charters. A publicly accountable
board must decide whether a school meets the public's needs Ñ not a university
or a nonprofit that may be a dummy front, he says.
ÒWhat is their motivation? To please some financiers 2,000 miles away?Ó Egan
asks. ÒYou can't eliminate public accountability from how the taxpayer education
dollar is being spent.Ó
Under Secretary Hickok disagrees. ÒSchool boards, as originally structured, are
democratic. But what could be more democratic than parents voting with their
feet?Ó
Finn points out that, technically, under most state constitutions, state
governments are charged with educating children Ñ not just local school boards.
ÒSchools we have now are gypping so many kids and have no prospect of
turning around,Ó Finn says. ÒIt's unjust to say we must keep these kids trapped
in schools that are not doing what they say they are.Ó
Finn also calls the fear of profittaking a Òred herring.Ó Regular schools contract
with private companies to provide lunch and bus services, computers, textbooks,
building maintenance and tutoring, he points out. ÒSo a nontrivial part of the
budget flows into the coffers of forprofits,Ó he says. ÒDoes that make [those
companies] a front? People who don't like choice or charters are trying to get
people agitated into thinking EMOs are evil.Ó
Allen also defends the companies. ÒAnyone who wants to make a quick buck
doesn't go into education,Ó she says. ÒAnd there is a philanthropic edge to even
the most forprofit companies, though there are exceptions. The key is what the
company is doing for kids. You can't fire the MiamiDade County teachers' union,
but you can fire Edison.Ó
Houston, of the school administrators' group, says he is Òmore openÓ to giving
EMOs a shot than are many of his colleagues. ÒSome do a better job than critics
say, but they're not the ultimate solution. They're not a cash cow, and some of
them may exclude highcost, specialeducation kids.Ó
In October, the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress,
released a report saying there is no evidence to prove or disprove EMOs' claims
of raising student achievement, because none of the data provided had scientific
rigor. Rep. Chaka Fattah, DPa., who requested the study, warned Congress to
Òbe leeryÓ of private education companies.
Go to top
Background
Born on a Napkin
The roots of the charter school movement date to the early 1970s, when the
ÒhippieÓ movement was trickling down to the highschool level. Reformers in St.
Paul, Scarsdale, N.Y., Philadelphia and Arlington, Va., began setting up
experimental Òfree schoolsÓ within public schools.
Later, as the national pendulum swung toward a Òback to basicsÓ educational
approach, the Reagan administration in 1983 released its landmark ÒA Nation at
RiskÓ report, warning of a rising tide of ÒmediocrityÓ in America's public
schools. Though educators of all leanings took the harsh report seriously, many
felt it was an effort to pave the way for a Òschool choiceÓ movement that might
include taxpayersupported privateschool vouchers.
By the late '80s, California had considered legislation that would have required
school districts to offer alternative programs if at least 20 parents expressed an
interest. Minnesota, at the behest of thenGov. Rudy Perpich, enacted two laws
that permitted publicschool transfers across district lines. And Philadelphia
began experimenting with ÒcharteringÓ new educational structures within
districts. Meanwhile, overseas, the British Parliament enacted the 1988 Education
Reform Act, which allowed schools to opt out of their local district to join a
national network.
But many say the official birth of American charter schools occurred at a 1988
Minneapolis Foundation education conference, where the charterschool concept
was scribbled on a napkin by a group of five education and civic leaders: then
AFT President Albert Shanker; Sy Fiegel, a veteran of the East Harlem school
choice plan; Barbara Zohn, president of the Minnesota Parent Teacher Student
Association; Elaine Salinas, the Twin Cities education program officer for the
Urban Coalition; Kolderie, of the Citizens League in Minneapolis; Ember
Reichgott, a Democratic state senator from Minneapolis; and the University of
Minnesota's Nathan.
The advocates, Nathan says, shared a worldview as ambitious as that of early
women'ssuffrage activist Susan B. Anthony. Shanker dubbed the schools as
ÒcharterÓ institutions, borrowing the name from a book by New England
educator Ray Budde, who drew on the idea of Renaissance kings giving charters
to explorers to find new worlds. Former Education Secretary Lamar Alexander,
thenchairman of the National Governors' Association, first proposed allowing
charter schools to trade exemptions from regulations for improved results.
States Climb Aboard
Minnesota passed the nation's first charter school law in 1991. Initially, it was
opposed by Gov. Arne Carlson and the Minnesota teachers' unions, whose
members called the idea Òinsulting.Ó The NEA told Congress it was
Òunalterably opposedÓ to charters; later it would launch its own charter schools.
The Minnesota program began modestly by authorizing eight charter schools, but
a year later only one Ñ the City Academy in St. Paul Ñ had opened its doors.
In 1992, California became the second state to authorize charter schools.
Republican Gov. Pete Wilson signed charterschool legislation after a competing
voucher initiative was defeated at the ballot box. Five more states followed suit in
1993, and in 1994 Arizona enacted one of the country's most activist, freemarket
oriented charterschool laws. Arizona's campaign was led by thenstate legislator
Lisa Graham Keegan, who later became the state's superintendent of education.
The same year, Congress authorized experiments with charter schools when it
reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
The charter school movement has now spread to 39 states and the District of
Columbia, stressing all or parts of four basic theories, according to University of
Washington researcher Hill. Some states, like Georgia, pursued
innovation/experimentation strategies. Others Ñ California and Colorado Ñ
pursued a more traditional, standardsbased reform approach. Michigan and
Massachusetts adopted a Ònew supply of schoolsÓ strategy, emphasizing
broadening the array of operators. The state with the most charter schools,
Arizona, used a Òcompetition/market strategy,Ó which gives parents the widest
choices possible.
Charter bills were more likely to pass in Republicancontrolled states, according
to researcher Bryan C. Hassel. In Georgia and Colorado, the governors wanted
to keep school boards in charge of charter schools, while governors in
Massachusetts and Michigan saw them as a way to bypass the school boards
and teachers' unions.
In some states, strange political bedfellows pushed the legislation through. The
charter school bill in New York, for example, was stalled due to opposition from
teachers' unions and the state education commissioner. To get the law enacted
during a December 1998 lameduck session, Republican Gov. George Pataki
formed an alliance with black leaders from the Urban League, the Rev. Floyd
Flake (a former Democratic congressman), Edison Schools and some business
leaders.
Most charter schools are in urban areas, Òwhere it's easier to make the argument
that you need to do this,Ó says the AFT's Devlin. There is less pressure for such
schools in wealthy suburbs, she says, where the public schools are performing
relatively well. Some charter laws included specific provisions designed to prevent
racial resegregation.
However, charter schools are popular in the suburbs in Colorado, New Jersey
and Connecticut, Òwhere proponents have overcome fear of 'unwanted
competition' among mainstream educators,Ó one researcher says.
The resulting mosaic of charter schools and related laws is notable for its
variations. Minnesota's charter schools, for example, have 43 different sponsoring
organizations. In California, 75 percent of charter schools require contracts for
parental involvement. And in Indianapolis, the mayor has most of the authority to
authorize new charters.
Union opposition, for the most part, has evolved from efforts to block legislation to
proposals for charter reforms, such as requirements that the schools hire certified
teachers, allow collective bargaining, obtain school board approval, ban contracts
with forprofit companies and impose uniform student testing.
But Wolk, of Education Week, says unions seeking to reform charters must not
remain enamored with Òa bureaucracy that can't tolerate deviation or
inconsistency.Ó ÒThe Boston teachers' contract alone is sixinches deep with
rules that have accreted over the years,Ó he says. ÒIt's OK to have regulations to
ban racial and ethnic discrimination, but most of the regulations are just more
paperwork.Ó
Creative Resources
The biggest challenge facing budding charter schools has been the shortage of
facilities. In Massachusetts, five of the 14 schools set to open in 1994 still had no
buildings lined up, five months before the school year was to start. One charter
school temporarily used a motel; recess was held in the parking lot.
Charter schools have found homes in office buildings, warehouses, old parochial
schools, strip malls and storefronts, says Jon Schroeder, director of the St. Paul
based National Charter Friends Network. Even so, he points out, they must abide
by local building codes, since health and safety regulations cannot be waived.
Some states provide Òtransition impact aidÓ to help charter founders locate
appropriate facilities, while other states offer unused public school buildings. The
federal government now supplies some funds for charter facilities.
A variety of organizations have sprung up around the country dedicated to
helping charter schools secure buildings and other necessities. ÒWe sponsor job
fairs for recruiting teachers and help bring in experts on internal systems,Ó says
Shirley Monastra, executive director of the District of Columbia Public Charter
School Resource Center. The group also meets informally with representatives of
other resource centers in several states. Plus, California State University has
launched a Charter School Development Center, while the Walton Family
Foundation circulates accountability methods in several states.
Outsourcing is a common practice. According to the Education Department, 54
percent of charter schools obtain legal services from a nondistrict provider, 59
percent do so for insurance, 46 percent for payroll and 42 percent for social
services.
Funding levels for charter schools differ by state, and some argue that they are
underfunded. In Washington, D.C., the perpupil funding rate is 100 percent,
which means that charter schools receive 100 percent of what traditional schools
receive. But New Jersey charter schools only receive 90 percent of that,
Monastra says.
A recent survey by the Center for Education Reform found that the average per
pupil cost in charter schools is $4,507 Ñ significantly less than the $7,000 average
in traditional public schools.
However, a study of charter school funding conducted by the AFT found that in
some cities, like Boston, charters were actually receiving $1,800$2,000 more
than mainstream schools, Devlin says. She notes that there are more
elementarylevel charter schools than high schools because high schools have
many higher fixed expenses, such as biology labs.
But the University of Minnesota's Nathan insists the AFT is wrong. ÒThere is
substantially less money in virtually every charter school,Ó he says. And, many
states and cities provide a financial cushion to shield districts from the impact of
perpupil funds lost to charter schools.
ÒThe unions want to keep the competition starving,Ó the Thomas B. Fordham
Foundation's Finn says. ÒThe public systems are abysmally awful at handling
contraction. If they lose 25 kids, they should get rid of a teacher or close a
classroom or building instead of insisting that costs are rising.Ó
Some union locals have challenged the constitutionality of charter schools in
court, but such lawsuits have been rejected in California, Colorado, Michigan,
Minnesota and New Jersey, according to Schroeder of the National Charter
Friends Network. A suit by the Ohio Federation of Teachers challenging the
diversion of public funds to charter schools is still pending. In California, the
affluent Sequoia Union District sued the state to avoid paying $1 million for
facilities required by a statesponsored local charter school because the district
never approved the school. A judge ruled in late August that Sequoia must
provide the facilities.
ÒCharter schools are facing challenges and need capital,Ó says Puriefoy of the
Public Education Network. ÒIt's as if General Motors announced a new line of
cars but would not provide new capital.Ó
Funding charter schools, says the NEA's Duby, should not mean that teachers
give up their pension plans. ÒYes, the schools are freed from the bureaucracy of
the central office, but many are also freed of [the requirement that they provide]
support services, such as buses, food and special education. They find
themselves spread thin, and many may be more in need of union support.Ó
Seeking Accreditation
Being free and experimental, most charter schools have foregone the traditional
accreditation process, designed to assure officials and the public that a given
school meets basic standards in its instructional program and physical plant.
Some charters, to reassure parents that their children's charterschool credits will
be transferable, apply for accreditation with one of the Education Department's
six approved regional accrediting bodies. In the early years, the absence of
standardized testing was a major obstacle to accreditation, but the Center for
Education Reform reports that 98 percent of charter schools now require at least
one standardized test.
Many charter school operators feel they need their own accreditation methods, if
only to weed out failing schools to avoid tarring the entire movement. Kayes, of
the National Charter School Clearinghouse, says some schools are accredited by
the Arizonabased Association for PerformanceBased Accreditation, while others
are working with the WashingtonD.C.based American Academy for Liberal
Education. But some regional bodies exclude charters without certified teachers,
which Kayes calls Òunreasonable.Ó
This fall, California offered a new accreditation program using team visits,
conducted jointly over two years by the California Network of Educational
Charters and the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. The program
was implemented as Democratic Gov. Gray Davis was imposing new regulations
on charter schools after revelations about abuses at some schools, and central
district officials complained they lacked the resources to properly monitor charter
schools.
Similar complaints last winter about the burden of quality control prompted the
Pennsylvania School Boards Association and 100 school districts in the Keystone
State to sue a group of ÒvirtualÓ charter schools that had enrolled some 5,100 K
12 students in an online learning program. The suit claimed the schools drain
funds from the public schools and were not sufficiently accountable.
However, some observers fear that the accreditation trend Ñ as well as new
demands of the No Child Left Behind Act and the academicstandards movement
Ñ could force conformity and standardization on charter schools, says Minnesota
activist Kolderie. ÒSome of the most interesting charter schools have no courses
and no employees; they break convention,Ó he says.
Others are concerned about the tendency of some charter schools to engage in
religious or quasireligious instruction. In San Bernardino County, Calif., a charter
school was recently disciplined for teaching Christianity. And a charter school in
Yuba River, Calif., which features the philosophical Waldorf teaching method, was
hit with a lawsuit in 2001 accusing it of practicing religion.
The religion question is a difficult one, says the Fordham Foundation's Finn. ÒWe
want to teach character Ñ meaning values, ethics and morals Ñ but not religion,Ó
he says. ÒSome educational programs look to some like religion Ñ they light
candles and have rites and rituals. But it's not God or theologically based prayers.
ÒThere's plenty of goofy stuff at charters, even at the progressive schools that
practice constructivist nonsense that might work well for some but works badly for
others, particularly the disadvantaged.Ó
Go to top
Current Situation
Federal Support
The Bush administration has requested an alltime high of $300 million for charter
schools for fiscal 2003.
In June, Education Secretary Rod Paige presided over a charter school
conference in Milwaukee that drew record attendance and energized the
movement with plans to form new, national, charter school alliances, according to
Under Secretary Hickok.
Charter advocates, for the most part, are pleased by the boost charter schools
received in the No Child Left Behind Act. The law's requirement that all students
demonstrate Òadequate yearly progressÓ in proficiencies toward state standards
in core subjects may actually be easier for charter schools, says an analysis by
the Center for Education Reform, because they have experience with contracts.
But unlike the traditional public schools, notes Schroeder of the National Charter
Friends Network, new accountability requirements will be overseen by the
schools' authorizers and sponsors, rather than by the school districts. ÒTime will
tell how that will work, and to what extent the existing accountability plans for
charters will be incorporated into the overall state plans.Ó
Kayes of the National Charter School Clearinghouse notes that when the time
comes for failed schools to be identified under the No Child Left Behind Act, one
option would be to turn them into neighborhood charter schools.
Vouchers Link
The November elections, in which Republicans routed Democrats in many parts
of the country, were seen as a boon to the schoolchoice movement in general.
Among the winners, 52 percent favor school choice and only 35 percent oppose
it, says the Center for Education Reform. Moreover, Republican gains in
Congress and in the Florida, Ohio and Wisconsin legislatures were seen as a
plus for the related schoolvoucher movement.
Vouchers are considered more radical than charters, in that many voucher
proposals permit public funds to be used for education at private schools,
including parochial institutions. Republicans are more inclined toward vouchers
than Democrats, even though support for charter schools is evident in both
parties. ÒThe parties differ in motivation,Ó the AFT's Devlin says. ÒSome
advocates on the right view charter schools as the camel's nose under the tent for
vouchers. Liberal Democrats see them as the moat protecting public schools from
vouchers.Ó
Under Secretary Hickok argues that critics create a Òfalse dichotomyÓ between
vouchers and charter schools. ÒThe American public needs to have choice in
the broadest sense, and we hope vouchers are part of it,Ó he says.
With vouchers, public funds can be used for tuition at religious schools, as the
Supreme Court ruled in a Òstraightforward decisionÓ last June, Hickock adds, as
long as the purpose of the program is secular education. ÒThis administration
has its faithbased initiative in play here. So if a school has a secular instructional
purpose, that doesn't mean religious people can't be providers.Ó
Allen of the Center for Education Reform sees a variety of education reforms
moving on parallel tracks, all responding to different deficiencies of public
education. ÒThe voucher is the more direct, immediate service,Ó she says.
ÒMost in education reform say the system for too long was impervious to change
and has failed to educate most kids to the levels we need it to. So there's a
significant need for choice, but there's no onesizefitsall approach.Ó
But the Public Education Network's Puriefoy argues that the goal of charters is to
give parents and communities Òa point of entryÓ into improving the public
education system.
Education Week's Wolk doesn't agree that charters are Òa stalking horse for
vouchers.Ó Instead, he feels they are Òthe best defense against vouchers.Ó
Like the early civil rights movement, there is plenty of vigorous disagreement
within the schoolchoice movement, the University of Minnesota's Nathan says.
[Former Supreme Court Justice] ÒThurgood Marshall didn't agree all the time
with Martin Luther King Jr.,Ó he says. ÒIn any major movement, there are major
disagreements.
ÒI don't think vouchers are a good idea,Ó he continues. Just as there are limits
on freedom of speech, so there must be limits on school choice. Schools must
be open to all kinds of kids, and voucher advocates want to be sectarian and pick
and choose kids.Ó
Steps Forward and Back
Charter schools in the nation's largest school district got a boost this October
when newly installed New York City public schools Chancellor Joel Klein
announced plans to create additional charter schools. He vowed create a Òmore
welcome environmentÓ for the experimental schools, of which there are currently
only 18. The students who go to charter schools only receive twothirds of the
amount traditional school students receive.
In November in Los Angeles, the secondlargest system, a newly reconfigured
group of school reform activists and academics announced plans to set up 100
charter schools. Members of the Los Angeles Alliance for Student Achievement
want to form a ÒshadowÓ public school system, run by a nonprofit corporation, to
create a more collegebound school culture.
But in Boston, the Massachusetts Department of Education canceled plans to
open six additional charter schools next fall, saying that 11 charter schools in the
city is enough, given current budget constraints. Ohio, Texas and California also
have introduced new curbs on charters.
Go to top
Outlook
Just a Fad?
No one said the road to a nation of charter schools would be smooth. In Douglas
County, Colo., the oldest charter school went through five principals in eight
years. Nearly 7 percent of new charter schools fail, according to a recent Center
for Education Reform survey Ñ fewer than the 11 percent of public schools the
center claims are failing.
ÒYes, the closings are wasteful,Ó Kayes of the Charter School Clearinghouse
acknowledges, Òbut what plan do the mainstream schools have for improving?Ó
Researcher Hassel says the implementation problems and Òpolitical
compromisesÓ that some charter advocates have been forced to accept Òhave
severely hampered the ability of charter school programs to live up to their
promise.Ó For example, 14 states rewrote their charter laws between 1997 and
1998.
The Fordham Foundation's Finn predicts more charter schools will be established
in the coming decade, and more data will be available for evaluating them. But
the foundation is shifting its focus from the quantity of charter schools to the
quality.
Under Secretary Hickok is concerned about losing the movement's
Òentrepreneurial spiritÓ to the institutionalization of charter schools. ÒIt could get
cooptedÓ by bureaucracy, he says.
But he is confident the Education Department will help charter schools reach out
to disengaged parents and communities. ÒWe can create interest on the part of
parents a generation or two removed, for whom there is the possibility of a
different kind of community,Ó he says.
Charter schools have a Òmixed track recordÓ that in many ways is a distraction
for public education, says Houston of the school administrators' association.
ÒThey are neither a huge threat nor a landmark innovation,Ó he says. ÒBut if the
laws are structured right, administrators should be able to use them for reforms,
to leverage and embrace an array of options for improvement.Ó
The movement is Òhere to stay, at least in the short term, so we will participate,Ó
says the NEA's Duby.
ÒThe vista looks promising in terms of the viability of charter school policy
innovation,Ó writes Sandra Vergari, an assistant professor of educational
administration and policy studies at the State University of New York at Albany.
ÒSymbolically, politically and substantively, the reform appears to hold more long
term significance than the typical fad in educational policy and administration.Ó
But she also asks whether charters might meet individual interests, while not
necessarily meeting collective interests. Indeed, as Kayes points out, there is a
proposal in Arizona to create a samesex charter school for grades 48. ÒWe
wouldn't say it would be best for all communities or parents, but it would be an
alternative,Ó he says.
Puriefoy of the Public Education Network believes charter schools will help create
a more varied public education system that uniformly imposes higher
expectations, helps students meet standards and gives them choices. There
should be Òfair and multiple assessmentsÓ for both students and adults, she
adds, but they will be administered differently in different areas of the country.
ÒWe're headed toward significant progressÓ she says, Òbut when charter
schools reach a certain scale, they too will encounter what feels like bureaucratic
roadblocks.Ó
Movement cofounder Kolderie stresses the longterm view. Nearly 20 years after
the warnings in ÒA Nation at Risk,Ó he says, ÒNo one thinks reform has been
done, and there's not a lot of reasons to believe it will be done, even with the big
hammer of accountabilityÓ in the No Child Left Behind Act.
ÒWe're still in the process of creating the schools we need now,Ó Kolderie says.
ÒTo rely exclusively on changing the schools we've long had will not work, and it
is an unacceptable risk to take with other people's children.Ó
The AFT's Devlin is more wary. ÒCharters vary in quality, have little impact on the
body of knowledge of what children should learn and will have little impact on how
21stcentury schools should be organized,Ó she says. ÒBut they're not
necessarily a bad idea, and we don't see them going away. Their founders are
discovering what we've always known Ñ that running a good school is really hard
work.Ó
Go to top
Pro/Con
Do charter schools help public education?
Jeanne Allen
President, Center for Education Reform. Written for the CQ Researcher,
December 2002
Since their inception, charter schools have been committing to opening their
doors to children who would not normally have a chance. Success for charters
means success for all of education. Researchers who have studied the effect of
charters on public education found:
¥ In California, charter schools are more effective than traditional public
schools at improving academic achievement for lowincome and atrisk students;
in Chicago, charter schools performed better on 80 percent of student
performance measures; in Arizona, a statewide study of 60,000 youngsters found
charter pupils outperforming traditional public school students.
¥ Higher proportions of disadvantaged and specialneeds students
attend charter schools Ñ the antithesis of Òskimming the creamÓ from the public
schools, as critics allege. Charters enrolled a larger percentage of students of
color than all public schools in the charter states. In 199899, the most recent
year for which data are available, charter schools were more likely than all public
schools to serve black students (24 percent vs. 17 percent) and Hispanic students
(21 percent vs. 18 percent).
¥ Academic accountability: Performance is intensively reviewed by
authorizers and parents who must annually renew their commitment to a school.
¥ Parent and teacher satisfaction surpasses that of parents and
teachers in traditional public schools.
Critics contend charter schools do no better than traditional ones, citing some
Òbad appleÓ stories or lowgrade research. Seven percent of all charters that
ever opened have been shut down for failing to meet their goals. Yet 11 percent of
all public schools are failing, and there are no provisions for closure.
Charter schools are improving education by sparking improvements in the
traditional system Ñ leading schools and districts to alter behavior or improve
offerings.
Charters offer atrisk programs and stateoftheart education. They provide arts
and music education, Core Knowledge, Montessori, Back to Basics or other
thematic instruction; double the reading instruction; raise the expectations; set
innovative discipline policies and ensure parental buyin. Teachers get wide
latitude, and more time is spent teaching.
They educate but do not overlabel specialneeds children. With 80 percent of the
funds normally allotted for education, they are still expected to perform, and
perform better Ñ and they do. Some people ask why this can't be done in the
regular public school system. The answer is quite simple: Educational change
doesn't happen without pressure.
Joan Devlin
Associate Director, Educational Issues Department, American Federation of
Teachers (AFT). Written for the CQ Researcher, December 2002
In 1988, when former AFT President Albert Shanker first embraced the idea of
charter schools, he envisioned them as laboratories of innovation that would offer
new curricula and teaching strategies, eliminate burdensome red tape and
improve student achievement.
But today, good charter schools are few and far between. A recent AFT report
found that most charters have not lived up to their promise to raise student
achievement and promote innovation. Of current charter schools, more than half:
¥ Fail to raise student achievement compared to traditional public
schools in the same area;
¥ Fall far short of meeting expectations to bring innovation into the
classroom and the public school system at large;
¥ Tend to sort children by socioeconomic status; and,
¥ Spend more money on administration and less on instruction than
other public schools.
Charter schools' staunchest defenders may try to dismiss the AFT report as an
aberration, but recent independent research Ñ in states like California, North
Carolina and Texas Ñ confirms AFT's findings that charter schools are not leading
to innovation or higher student achievement, and, in fact, too often are failing to
keep pace with the public schools.
States bear some of the blame for the failure of charter schools. Few states
provide adequate oversight, leading to mismanagement and fraud. In Ohio, the
Coalition for Public Education has filed a suit charging that Ohio's charterschool
program violates the state constitution. And California newspapers assert that
state's charter schools have used taxpayer dollars to hire convicted felons, buy a
sports car for a school official and commit other offenses. More than half of the
nation's charter schools are in Arizona, California, Florida, Michigan, Ohio and
Texas, yet these states have openended charter school laws that allow such
abuses to continue unchecked.
Ardent charter school supporters focus on the few positives, while ignoring or
distorting the main body of research and will certainly continue to push for more
charters and less oversight. That would be a mistake. To date, the charter
experiment is a disappointment at best. Charter schools serve only as a
distraction from effective reforms that are raising achievement in communities
around the country: smaller class sizes, better early childhood education and
greater emphasis on putting wellqualified teachers into every classroom.
Policymakers owe it to the public to examine the existing research before they
give charter schools a blank check for expansion.
Go to top
Chronology
1970s
Lawmakers and educators experiment with publicschool choice programs.
1971
St. Paul and Minneapolis, Minn., offer the first public choice program in
alternative ÒopenÓ and ÒfreeÓ schools, followed by similar schools in
Scarsdale, N.Y., Philadelphia, Pa., and Arlington, Va.
1980s
Nation decides U.S. schools need reform.
1983
National Commission on Excellence in Education publishes dire warnings about
declining quality of U.S. education in ÒA Nation at RiskÓ report.
1988
National labor, education and civic leaders hatch idea for charter schools Ñ a
concept scribbled on a napkin at Minneapolis foundation conference.
1990s
Charter school movement expands to 36 states and the District of
Columbia.
1991
Minnesota enacts first charter school law.
1992
First charter school opens in St. Paul, Minn. California enacts second charter law.
1993
Charter school laws are enacted in Colorado, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico
and Wisconsin.
1994
Federal government backs charter schools in reauthorization of the 1965
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). . . . Arizona enacts one of the
nation's most farreaching charter school laws.
1995
Abandoning earlier opposition, National Education Association (NEA) launches
fiveyear effort that results in four NEA charter schools.
1996
Congress passes District of Columbia School Reform Act granting chartering
authority to the D.C. Board of Education and D.C. Public Charter School Board.
1998
ESEA amended with Charter School Expansion Act, which increases federal
funding and support.
2000s
Charter school movement continues to expand.
2000
In presidential campaign, both Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al
Gore promise huge expansion of charter schools; Bush talks of $3 billion in loan
guarantees, Gore vows to triple number of schools by 2010.
August 2000
Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government and Ford
Foundation award $100,000 to Minnesota for its charter school law, to be used for
nationwide advocacy.
Oct. 26, 2000
National Council of La Raza, a nationwide advocacy group for Hispanics,
announces it has raised $6.7 million to develop a network of Latinooriented
charter schools.
Nov. 14, 2000
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation gives nonprofit Aspire Public Schools $3
million to create network of small charter schools, part of larger efforts to create
smaller schools.
Jan. 8, 2002
President Bush signs No Child Left Behind Act, requesting $300 million in funding
for charter schools and guaranteeing that charters can continue to report their
yearly progress to their sponsors, rather than the local school board.
April 29May 3, 2002
President Bush proclaims National Charter Schools Week. ÒCharter schools
embody the principles of President Bush's No Child Left Behind plan Ñ marrying
strict accountability for results, greater options for parents and families, and more
freedom and flexibility than traditional public schools,Ó Education Secretary Rod
Paige says.
June 1922, 2002
Education Department convenes fourth national charter school conference in
Milwaukee.
June 27, 2002
U.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of Ohio's school voucher program, which
allows publicschool kids to attend parochial schools in Cleveland, using public
education funds for their tuition; some charter school advocates are pleased.
Nov. 5, 2002
GOP election gains boost advocates for voucher programs in Texas, South
Carolina and Colorado, in addition to those in effect in Florida, Ohio and
Wisconsin.
Ê
Ê
Go to top
Short Features
Freedom and Headaches: An Educator's Plunge
Taking the plunge into charter schools brings veteran educators freedom Ñ and
new headaches. ÒThere was a shocking realization when I went from being in
the instructional arena to the business arena in one fell swoop,Ó says Linda
Proctor Downing, a former magnet highschool director who started four unique
charter schools in Phoenix. ÒThough I had been an educator for 20 years, I really
hadn't understood how hard people in the district bureaucracy have to work to
keep instructional programs running day to day.Ó
Downing is now in her sixth year running the nonprofit operation Ñ Arizona
Agribusiness and Equine Center (AAEC) Ñ where nearly 300 high school
students ride horses and do ranching chores while studying anatomy, physiology,
genetics and mathematics.
The Arizona Department of Education funds the schools, housed on community
college campuses, but fundraising is always a necessity. Downing is currently in
the throes of planning new fundraising to expand the equestrian programs at the
two newest centers, started six months ago. ÒIt was an eyeopener that the
business aspect meant being on call 24 hours a day, seven days week,Ó she
says.
The flexibility Downing has in running the school is reflected in her approach to
paying teachers. ÒWe have no salary scale, and we pay what the market
demands, with no two similar salaries,Ó she explains. ÒWe hire the best person
we can find from an industry, often people whom the school system wouldn't hire
because they lack secondary certification.Ó
ÒWe recently stole a biochemist from the local neurological institute,Ó Downing
adds. ÒIn my previous school, I had no say in hiring, firing or discipline. Now I
can collaborate with staff members and set up an interview team.Ó She can offer
job candidates smaller class loads than traditional schools.
AAEC students Aaron Fontes and Tiana Orberson display their biotech project, ÒScreening Desert
Plants as Potential Antibiotics,Ó at the Future Farmers of America annual competition in Louisville, Ky.
(Arizona Agriculture and Equine Center/Robert Sinnott)
The downside to the operation's small size and flexibility is that outside auditors
Òare a lot harder on us than they are on traditional schools,Ó Downing says.
ÒWe're so small that they can spend more time looking at us.Ó The auditors have
been impressed both with her students' scores on standardized tests and with the
high number of collegelevel credits they earn from the community colleges Ñ the
average student graduates with a 3.43 grade point average and 46 college
credits. ÒSome students have actually received their community college degrees
before they get their diploma from us,Ó Downing says.
The program's intimate size also means Òwe know every kid and parent in the
school,Ó Downing says. Parents and children sign an agreement promising to
strive for good grades and good attendance; the school promises zero tolerance
for misbehavior. ÒParents have immediate access to me by phone.Ó
Managerial flexibility stands as a key attraction for entrepreneurial educators. As
a Massachusetts charter principal told a researcher for the Thomas B. Fordham
Foundation, ÒWhen we get a rŽsumŽ, we call the number, and we can hire the
person on the spot if we like them.Ó Another principal explained that his school
Òexpected more of teachers and paid them less, a guarantee that those who took
the job really were imbued with the mission of the school.Ó
Some principals boasted of being able to fire a lunch caterer for late deliveries or
take students on a field trip with just two days' notice. Others exulted at being
freed from the budget syndrome common in traditional schools, in which funds
not specifically earmarked are spent haphazardly at the end of the year merely to
avoid ÒlosingÓ them Ñ having them withheld the following year.
Teachers also like the opportunities charter schools offer for indepth lessons.
Dave Philhower, a fourthgrade teacher at the Capital City Public Charter School
in Washington, D.C., has taken his students to the National Zoo more than 30
times to study animals and help write children'slevel exhibit labels. At his
previous teaching job in the suburbs, ÒI would never have had the release time or
an administration so supportive,Ó he says.
The risks of experimentation, however, are high for charter schools, because they
have such high profiles, and the financing is often dicey. ÒIn the charter arena,
we don't get a second chance,Ó Downing says. Ò If you don't get it right the first
time, you're likely to end up in the newspaper.Ó
[1] Quoted in Bill Triant, ÒAutonomy and Innovation: How Do Massachusetts Charter School
Principals Use Their Freedom?Ó Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, December 2001.
Go to top
Are Charter Schools Failing Special Education?
When Patricia Chittams removed her learningdisabled son from the World Public
Charter School, in Washington, D.C., she said he wasn't receiving the extra help
he needed.
ÒThey provided no specialeducation services, no matter how much we wrote
and begged,Ó said Chittams. ÒThey did nothing.Ó
Ultimately, the city school board closed World Public and another local charter
school, charging Ñ among other problems Ñ that they had failed to provide
adequate specialeducation services.
Some parents and educators fear that the nation's 2,700 charter schools,
because of their experimental, regulationexempted structure, may be neglecting
children with disabilities. ÒIts hard to say that the charter school movement has
been beneficial to specialeducation students,Ó says National School Boards
Association (NSBA) spokesman Marc Egan.
Others argue that the charter school model allows schools to better serve
children with disabilities. ÒIf you're a charter school that serves the deaf or the
blind, then you get an economy of specialization, and you can really concentrate
on serving those kids' needs,Ó says Herbert J. Walberg, a scholar at the Hoover
Institution and charter school board member.
Government assessments of the prevalence of specialeducation programs at
charter schools have produced seemingly contradictory results. A Department of
Education study completed in 1999 found that specialeducation students made
up 8.3 percent of the charter school student population, compared to 11.2 percent
at regular public schools. However, the same report also cited findings indicating
that charter schools enroll specialeducation students at a slightly higher rate than
their regular counterparts. In conclusion, the Education Department researchers
say in most areas data on charter schools and special education Òare scant.Ó
And since charter schools are authorized by 39 different state laws, it's difficult to
broadly assess their impact. ÒThe federal government is not collecting data on
charter schools and special education because the states are responsible for
monitoring [them],Ó says Eileen Ahearn, program director at the National
Association of State Directors of Special Education.
While charter schools do not have to comply with many federal and state
regulations, they are not exempt from federal laws prohibiting discrimination
against the disabled or handicapped. ÒThe laws say [public] schools must
provide specialeducation services to students with disabilities,Ó says Lynda Van
Kuren, spokeswoman for the Council for Exceptional Children. ÒTherefore, it is
incumbent on charter schools to provide those services.Ó
A 1975 federal law Ñ now called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA) Ñ says no student can be denied admission or participation in any school
program receiving federal financial assistance. Federal funds make up about 7
percent of overall public school monies. ÒCharter schools are public schools,
they're receiving tax dollars and they cannot deny admission to any student,Ó
says Egan of the NSBA.
Yet some charter school programs have logged a disproportionate number of
specialeducationrelated complaints. For instance, Arizona Ñ which with 465
charter schools has more than any other state Ñ recently revealed that its charter
schools accumulate specialeducation complaints at a rate six times higher than
traditional public schools.
ÒRecently there seems to be an increasing number of hearings requested [under
IDEA] regarding charter schools,Ó Ahearn says. Charter schools must accept
every student that applies or hold a lottery if there are more applicants than the
school can accommodate.
However, Ahearn is not aware of any federal lawsuits challenging charter schools'
treatment of specialed students. She attributes the lack of complaints to the
availability of official avenues of complaint under IDEA.
Advocates for the disabled say some charter schools are Òweeding outÓ the
hardertoeducate specialeducation students. They might be avoiding specialed
students because they score more poorly on standardized tests, and educators
are under increasing pressure to show improvement on test scores. Egan admits
that he has no hard statistics on how widespread the practice is. ÒWe have some
concerns that charter schools may only be admitting children with lesssevere
disabilities, because they are less costly to educate and provide for,Ó he says.
Charter advocates argue that federally mandating specialeducation services at
charter schools only makes them less effective. ÒThe whole idea of charter
schools is to get away from bureaucratic regulation from the federal and state
governments,Ó Walberg says. ÒSpecial education Ñ because of these
bureaucratic and burdensome categories like IDEA Ñ causes a real burden for
charter schools. The federal regulations should be loosened.Ó
Because most charter schools are smaller than their traditional publicschool
counterparts, they may lack the facilities and staff to meet every child's special
needs. ÒYou have this huge inefficiency of these federal and state programs. It's
a way that the forces of the status quo can prevent charter schools from
thriving,Ó Walberg adds.
For some, charter schools offer a middle ground between federally mandated
inclusion and nontraditional public schooling. At the CHIME charter school in Los
Angeles, Principal Julie Fabrocini and her colleagues integrate children with
special needs into mainstream classrooms, a process required by IDEA. ÒBeing
a charter school affords us more opportunities to more thoroughly integrate kids
with disabilities, because we start from the ground up and bring in staff and
faculty who are of like mind,Ó she says. ÒWe want schools to [reflect] an
accurate representation of the community, and we want to stop an
institutionalized perspective for people with disabilities.Ó
In the end, until more legitimate research is done, the jury is still out on whether
the disabled are being adequately served by charter schools. ÒThe data
collection is still being done to see what exactly the charter school movement has
given to special education,Ó adds Egan.
Walberg agrees: ÒIt's nearly impossible to answer the question of how well
charter schools are serving specialeducation students because charters are very
heterogeneous. What we have right now are arguments rather than evidence.Ó
Document Citation
Clark, C. S. (2002, December 20). Charter schools. CQ Researcher, 12, 10331056. Retrieved
June 11, 2008, from CQ Researcher Online,
http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2002122000.
Document ID: cqresrre2002122000
Document URL: http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2002122000
The CQ Researcher ¥ December 20, 2002 ¥ Volume 12, Number 44
© 2008, CQ Press, A Division of SAGE Publications. All Rights Reserved.
General Terms of Service | Copyright Notice and Takedown Policy | Masthead
Author(s):
Hermes, MaryÊ
Title:
The scientific method, Nintendo, and Eagle feathers: rethinking the meaning of
"culturebased" curriculum at an Ojibwe tribal school
Source:
International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 13, no. 4 (2000): 387400
Additional Info: Taylor and Francis Ltd; 20000701
Abstract:
In this article, the author analyzes the assumptions people make about culture and curriculum and
asks what prevents the idea of culturebased curriculum from making radical changes in Native
American schooling. She attributes the segregation of "culture" from "academic" curriculum to an
internalization of colonial structures. In this scenario, "culturebased" (Native American)curriculum is
superimposed on a curriculum that is already based in culture (Western European.) She discusses
some of the ways a static notion of culture is played out at one tribal school and what the implications
of these hegemonic practices are. Further, she discusses some classroom practices that refuse an
essentialist definition of "Ojibwe" culture as a basis for curriculum and instead act to engage students
in the process of making meaning in their classroom. It is suggested that by thinking of culture as
creating relationships and meaning, we shall be able to move beyond the destructive dichotomy that
associates intellectual rigor with Whiteness.
Accession No:
0951839809518398(20000701)13:4L.387_17
Database:
ECO
Creating Sacred Places for Children in Grades 46.
Sandra J Fox
2001
English Document (ED) 248
NISBA, P.O. Box 790, Polson, MT 59860. credit card orders: 8005424922 (Toll Free) ($25.00 plus
$3.95 shipping).
This guide attempts to help teachers of American Indian children in grades 46 provide a culturally
relevant education that takes place in the regular classroom, includes content related to Indian
students' lives, makes students proud, expands to other experiences, and enhances learning. Creating
sacred places means responding appropriately to students' academic, social, emotional, physical, and
spiritual needs....
Complicating Discontinuity: What about Poverty?
Source:
Curriculum Inquiry v35 n1 p926 Mar 2005 (18 pages)
Additional Info: Journal Customer Services, Blackwell Publishing, 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148.
Tel: 8008356770 (Toll Free); Fax: 7813888232; email: subscrip@bos.blackwellpublishing.com.;
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467873X.2005.00313.x
Standard No:
ISSN: 03626784
Language:
English
Abstract:
In this article, two white science teachers at tribal schools in the Upper Midwest of the United States,
who were identified by community members and school administrators as successful teachers,
describe experiences of how they wrestle with the daily effects of generations of oppression. Most
vividly, they talk about poverty. This article provides a description of some of the beliefs and attitudes,
described by the teachers, that help them to be effective allies and teachers for Native American
students. Their interviews offer a glimpse into the internal struggle with the contradictions of
oppression. This article broadens the discussion of Native American culturebased education and
raises questions for the general applicability of cultural discontinuity as an allencompassing
explanation for Native American school failure.
High School Segregation and Access to the University of
California
Isaac Martin;Ê Jerome Karabel;Ê Sean W Jaquez
2005
English Article (EJ) 23
Educational Policy, v19 n2 p308330 May 2005
Sage Publications, 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 8008187243 (Toll Free); Fax:
8005832665 (Toll Free).
Using institutional data on fall 1999 freshman admissions, we document the existence and magnitude
of inequalities among California high schools in the access they provide to the University of California
(UC). Because high schools are segregated by socioeconomic status and race, we examine how
schools that differ on these dimensions also differ in their rates of admission to UC....
Title:
High School Segregation and Access to the University of California
Source:
Educational Policy v19 n2 p308330 May 2005 (23 pages)
Additional Info: Sage Publications, 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 8008187243
(Toll Free); Fax: 8005832665 (Toll Free).; http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0895904804274058
Standard No:
ISSN: 08959048
Language:
English
Abstract:
Using institutional data on fall 1999 freshman admissions, we document the existence and magnitude
of inequalities among California high schools in the access they provide to the University of California
(UC). Because high schools are segregated by socioeconomic status and race, we examine how
schools that differ on these dimensions also differ in their rates of admission to UC. We find that UC
admission rates are grossly unequal between the public and private sectors and within each sector.
Different groups, however, face different barriers. Schools where the student body is heavily Latino
tend to have low per capita admissions because fewer students apply; schools where the student body
is heavily African American tend to have low per capita admissions because fewer applicants are
admitted. Our research suggests the need for both high school outreach to increase applications and
contextual review of applications to reduce inequalities in the admission of applicants.
References:
Number: 64
Peer Reviewed:
Yes
Majority African American Schools and
Social Injustice: The Influence of De Facto
Segregation on Academic Achievement*
CARL BANKSTON mI University of Southwestern Louisiana
STEPHEN J. CALDAS, University of Southwestern Louisiana
Abstract
The research reported here proceeds on the premise that if minority race and its
predominance in particular schools constitutes a disadvantage in the educational system,
then members of the privileged group will tend to place their children in schools that
avoid the supposed liability of minority concentration, and thereby perpetuate inequality.
We draw upon the remarks of James Coleman, who posited that intangible resources are
concentrated in the schools of the privileged group, and are lacking in the schools with
a high concentration of minorities. In this research, we examine whether the racial
composition of schools has an influence on individual achievement, controlling for the
race of individuals. Our findings are that the degree of minority concentration has a
powerful negative influence on achievement test results, that this influence does not
appear to be explained by socioeconomic factors or other factors, and that both whites
and African Americans are negatively affected by degree of minority concentration.
Conclusion
Our findings do provide evidence that (1) being African American does appear
to be related to lower levels of measured academic achievement in Louisiana
schools, (2) this relationship does not appear to be attributable either to readily
discernible individual traits or individual family socioeconomic characteristics,
(3) de facto segregation, understood as minority concentration, constitutes a
disadvantage over and above that of individual students' own racial status,
(4) minority concentration seems to exercise a negative influence independent
of patterns of behavior and habits prevailing in schools and independent of the
socioeconomic level of schools, and (5) African Americans are, as we might
expect, the most seriously affected by minority concentration schools.
Navajo Mothers and Daughters: Schools, Jobs,
and the Family
DONNA DEYHLE AND FRANK MARGONIS
University of Utah
Navajo women's historically problematic relation to public schools might be best
understood by considering the role that matrilineal networks play in giving
Navajo women a place of respect as mothers and daughtersa life course to
which schools contribute little. Navajo women's commitment to cooperative
family relations is sharply at odds with contemporary educational practice and
much educational thought, which assumes the desirability of an individualistic
lifestyle and is devoted to helping students adopt a middleclass orientation.
AMERICAN INDIAN EDUCATION, NAVAJO WOMEN, JOBS AND
SCHOOLING, FEMINIST RESEARCH
p. 160 This picture, wherein women must choose between romance and
achievement, does not capture Navajo women's choices on the reserva
tion or their values. For both romance and achievement signal life
courses that are part of middleclass circumstances and an individualis
tic middleclass perspective that is foreign to Navajo women's lives.
p. 162 At present, most Navajo women pursue life as mothers and daughters
on the reservation, and schoolsas currently conceivedoffer little to
that life course. Schools serve as avenues to upperlevel jobs, and since
Navajo women value family more than careers, most are not committed
p.163
to overcoming the credentialing hurdles required to qualify for profes
sionallevel employment. Moreover, Navajo women expect that their
efforts would be blunted by Anglo job discrimination. To the degree that
educators neglect Navajo women's ethical disagreements with middle
class lifestyles and realistic assessments of the opportunities promised
by such a life, they will continue to misunderstand Navajo women's
relations to schools.
Segregation not good for academic performance The Effects of Segregation on African
American High School Seniors' Academic Achievement
Author(s): Roslyn Arlin Mickelson and Damien Heath
Source: The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 68, No. 4, (Autumn, 1999), pp. 566586
Published by: Journal of Negro Education
PEABODY JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, 75(4), 1936
Copyright ? 2000, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Charter Schools: The Search
for Community
Robert R. O'Reilly and Lynn Bosetti
Charter schools have been introduced as a means of revitalizing and im
proving the effectiveness of public schools. The need for change attained
national attention after the publication of reports such as A Nation at Risk
(National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983), which alleged
that the American public school system was in a state of crisis. The Com
mission's report, and others that noted the failings of the public school sys
tems, provided the impetus for (a) the school effectiveness movement
(Barth, 1991; Cuban, 1990); (b) structural changes in the management and
financing of public schools (Odden, 1995); (c) attempts to provide greater
choice within public education, such as open school boundaries within
school districts and even beyond school district lines (Weiss, 1998); and (d)
the creation of magnet schools (Smrekar, 1996).
The more dramatic attempts to restructure schools are based on the belief
that market mechanisms such as various school choice plans will (a) im
prove the effectiveness of schools through competition among schools for
students, (b) reduce inefficiencies in the administration and delivery of edu
cation, and (c) have the effect of improved educational outcomes (Chubb &
Moe, 1990; Goldhaber, 1999). From these beliefs emerge plans for tuition
vouchers (Friedman & Friedman, 1990),
greater support for private schools,
a growth in home
schooling, and the establishment of charter schools.
School choice also arises out of the conditions of postmoder life, char
acterized by cultural pluralism and a population that is increasingly mo
bile and unrooted and where there is a lack of common vision or identity.
These conditions result in a lack of consensus regarding the goals and pur
poses of education (Bosetti, 1999). Parents are drawn to schools that reject a
valueneutral, "onesizefitsall" approach to public schooling. Instead,
they are seeking schools that resonate with their particular values and be
liefs regarding the goals of education and what constitutes good teaching
and learning. They are seeking schools that are safe and caring, that are
free of drugs and violence, and that provide a sense of community where
their children are accepted and feel they belong.
Charter schools are hybrid institutions. They are public institutions that
have some of the characteristics of a private agency. For example, they are
public schools, effectively financed and controlled by public educational
agencies. Typically, they must (a) provide a curriculum mandated by a
central governing authority, (b) submit to accountability systems, and (c)
be open to all students who may apply without discrimination. At the
same time, they exhibit certain private sector characteristics. Each school is
autonomous and has a unique charter that states the aims, objectives, and
mandate of the school. Each school, beyond its public mandate, is primar
ily accountable to the parents of the children of the school. Parents are in
fluential members of the governing board of the school, which has the
power to set objectives, control finances, and hire and replace employees.
Levavic (1995) identified organizations with these characteristics as oper
ating in "quasimarkets." She defined organizations in quasimarkets as
public sector organizations that have separate providers and purchasers
and an element of user choice. Quasimarkets remain highly regulated.
Governments control (a) who may enter the market as providers, (b) levels
of investment, (c) the quality of services to be provided, and (d) the price to
be paid for the services. Frequently there is no cost to the consumer (i.e., tu
ition fees; Levavic, 1995, p. 167).
In the United States, as of the Fall of 1999, there are nearly 1,700 charter
schools operating in 31 states and the District of Columbia, serving ap
proximately 350,000 students. In 22 states and the District of Columbia,
there are 10 or more charter schools. The largest numbers of charter
schools are in the states of Arizona, California, Massachusetts, Texas, and
Florida (in that order; Center for Education Reform, 1999).
Conclusion
The dominant themes of charter schools in practice appear to be the new
relationships between parents and the school and the redefinition of the
role of the state in the administration of
public education.
Parents and teachers identify with their schools in ways that they have
not done with a
public school board or with most public schools. There is a
kind of nostalgia
surrounding the charter school movement in Alberta, re
flected in parents' search for a small school community where their children
are safe, known to all, and academically
challenged. Goldring and Smrekar
(1997), in their study of parental involvement in magnet schools, found that
parents who are active choosers view themselves as separate from other
public school parents because their choice represents a significant break
from the complacency and compromise experienced in their neighborhood
schools. There is a mythology of "specialness" that surrounds each charter
school community that teachers, students, and parents draw on to derive
their identity and meaning, and to build a culture of sentiment, tradition,
and practices. In some charter schools this is reinforced through school uni
forms. The sense of community, social trust, and social cohesion are some of
the positive outcomes of charter schools in Alberta. ....." The state has a responsibility
to (a) create poli
cies; (b) target opportunities and resources toward meeting the needs of
those children who have the least social, economic, and political resources;
(c) ensure conditions of universal access to programs that meet the needs
of children; and (d) address the issues of diversity and equity so that a
good and viable society is maintained. The viable role of charter schools in
meeting those objectives has yet to be determined.
Review of Educational Research
Fall 2000, Vol. 70, No. 3, pp. 253285
Valued Segregated Schools for African American
Children in the South, 19351969: A Review of
Common Themes and Characteristics
Vanessa Siddle Walker
Emory University
For the last two decades, the published research on the history of
education of African Americans in the south during the era of de jure
segregation has shifted from a focus on the inequalities experienced
by segregated schools to understanding the kind of education African
American teachers, principals, and parents attempted to provide un
der externally restrictive circumstances. This review provides a synthe
sis of this line of research. Results indicate that exemplary teachers,
the curriculum and extracurricular activities, parental involvement,
and the leadership of school principals were critical characteristics
influencing the communities' perceptions of the schools. Additional
research is needed that will explore student outcomes, variance within
the characteristics, and external influences.
The more traditional and widely accepted portrait of
the schools depicts a theme of almost complete inferiority. In this view, the
African American segregated school is depicted as inferior because of
inequal
ity in facilities, lack of transportation, shorter school terms, teacherpupil
con
flicts, overcrowding, poor teaching, and poor student attendance (Ashmore,
1954;
Baker, 1996; Clift, Anderson, & Hullfish, 1962; Crow, 1992; Johnson, 1941;
Kilpatrick, 1962; Philips, 1940; Pierce, Kincheloe, Moore, Drewry, &
Carmichael,
1955). Conclusion
The available literature indicates that the segregated schools in the South
appear to have certain consistent characteristics. These include exemplary
teach
ers and principals who increasingly were well trained and who created their
own
culture of teaching; curricular and extracurricular activities that reinforced
the
values of the school and community; parental support of school, both in its
financial needs and its cultural programs; and school principals who
provided
the leadership that implemented the vision that parents and teachers held
about
how to uplift the race. Accompanying descriptions of these attributes are
also
descriptions of the inequities the schools faced and the challenges that
were
created as a result.
Indeed, many of the schools' characteristics appear to have been a direct
response to the challenges they faced and intimately connected to the
oppres
sive circumstances in which they operated. In their world, there was a clear
"enemy"racism. As such, the schools operated with a welldefined purpose
for
African American uplift that was shared by teachers, principal, and
community
members. All the training and modeling by teachers and principal were
aimed at
helping themselves and their students overcome that enemy. The
curriculum
and extracurricular activities were other avenues to support the same goal.
Even
parents supported the goal, as they provided for the schools what the
schools
could not provide for themselvesfinancial support. In this world, all worked
together to achieve the common goal of educating students to function and
achieve in a world where the odds were stacked against them.
Finally, the closed segregated community minimized difficulties in role, lan
guage, values, and behaviors; it also minimized possibilities for
miscommuni
cations, conflict in values, and so forth. In this view, the African American
school is revealed, as Rodgers (1967) writes, as a "world of its own, with its
own
dynamic quality and its own ecological structure" (p. 11); it was "a complex,
interdependent system" (p. 15). Indeed, in this closed system where school
mem
bers and community members interacted in a number of settings and where
school and community values reflected the beliefs of the other, the schools,
as
Irvine and Irvine (1983) note, "took on uniquely styled characteristics
reflective
of their members' patterns of communication, cultural preferences, and
norma
tively diffused modes of behavior" (p. 416). The school was thus as
extension of
the community.
American Educational Research Journal
Summer 2002, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 279305
When Tribal Sovereignty Challenges
Democracy: American Indian Education
and the Democratic Ideal
K. Tsianina Lomawaima
Teresa L. McCarty
University of Arizona
The lessons ofAmerican Indian educationa grand experiment in standard
izationcan lead to a more equitable educational systemfor all U.S. citizens.
While masquerading as a toolfor equal opportunity, standardization has
marginalized Nativepeoples. We arguefor diversitynot standardization
as a foundational value for a just multicultural democracy, but diversity is
feared by some as a threat to the nation's integrity. Critical historical analy
sis of the apparently contradictory policies and practices within American
Indian education reveals a patterned response to cultural and linguistic
diversity, as the federal government has attempted to distinguish
"safe"from
"dangerous" Native practices. Examples of the contest between Indigenous
selfdetermination (rooted in internal sovereignty) andfederal control illus
trate theprofound national ambivalence toward diversity but also thepoten
tial to nourish 'places of difference" within a healthy democracy.
Language and Indigenous Community Empowerment
A major finding of longterm evaluations of bilingual/bicultural education
at Rough Rock was that bilingual students who had the benefit of cumula
tive early literacy experiences in Navajo made the greatest gains on local
and national measures of achievement (McCarty, 1993b, 2002). These find
ings reinforce those of other longterm evaluations of bilingual education,
including the Navajo programs at Rock Point and Fort Defiance, Arizona
(Holm & Holm, 1990, 1995; Rosier & Farella, 1976; see also Ramirez, 1992;
Thomas & Collier, 1997). The Rough Rock data also demonstrate that liter
acy in a second language is mediated by firstlanguage literacy, a finding
supported by numerous earlier studies in a variety of linguistic and socio
cultural settings (e.g., Crawford, 1997; Cummins, 1989, 1996; Krashen, 1996;
Moll & Diaz, 1993).
The criticalhistorical analysis presented here reveals the enormous
investment of time and energy that has been poured into attempts to eradi
cate American Indian cultural and linguistic distinctiveness. Despite this
sys
temic and sustained effort, American Indians have survived as distinctive
and
productive peoples. Can American Indian cultural distinctiveness be main
tained without the concomitant economic, political, and social marginaliza
tion of Indigenous communities? This question begs a larger one: Can
places
of difference be maintained without denying educational, economic, politi
cal, and social rights and opportunities to their inhabitants? Our answer to
these questions is a passionate yes. But achieving these goals requires
fac
ing certain truths. Standardization, while masquerading as an equalizing
force, in fact stratifies, segregates, and undercuts equality of opportunity.
We
have only to consider the history of American Indian education to see how
this is so.
Our analysis may lead readers to be pessimistic about the future. We
argue for a hopeful outlook that embraces the possibility of change. We
believe that the relationship between tribal sovereignty and federal
sovereignty
need not be an adversarial one. The choices that Native communities make
need not be eitheror choices, nor must there be an immutable dividing line
between Indigenous and nontribal citizens. We suggest that the
relationship
between tribal sovereignty and the U.S. democracy can more profitably be
viewed as an inspiration. Vital and persisting American Indian communities
can inspire the nation's citizens to rise to the challenge of securing a
democ
racy in which equality is more than rhetoric, and social justice prevails.
Schools
are essential institutions for developing these critical democratic values.
Our
analysis demonstrates that schools can be constructed as places of
difference
where children are free to learn, question, and grow from a position that
affirms
299 who they are. This vision of critical democracy, long held within
Indigenous
communities, has the power to create a more just and equitable educational
system for all.
2We use the terms American Indian, Native, and Indigenous
interchangeably to refer
to peoples indigenous to what is now the United States. We recognize that
the pre and
postcolonial experiences of Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians differ
substantially from
those of American Indians in the 48 contiguous states, just as great
diversity exists among
the more than 550 American Indian tribes. Nonetheless, all Native peoples
in the United
States share a singular legalpolitical status in terms of their relationship to
the U.S. gov
ernment. We also use the term American in a national sense, referring to
the United States
of America or its citizens, recognizing that there is a larger understanding
of the term refer
ring to Canadians and Latin American nations and peoples.
Improving Outcomes for Urban African American Students
Author(s): Ralph Gardner, III and Antoinette Halsell Miranda
Source: The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 70, No. 4, African American
Children with
Special Needs, (Autumn, 2001), pp. 255263
Published by: Journal of Negro Education
Improving Outcomes for Urban African
American Students
Ralph Gardner, III and Antoinette Halsell Miranda, The Ohio State University
Almost 50 years after the Brown v. the Board of Education of
Topeka, Kansas (1954)
decision there are still inequalities in the education system. African American
children,
particularly
those living in impoverished communities, are at increased
riskfor special education referral. This
paper examines causes for the disproportionate representation of African
American students in
mild mental retardation (MMR) and serious emotional disturbances (SED)
special education
categories. It also provides recommendations to promote positive academic and
social behaviorfor
African American students that may prevent the students' need for specialized
education services.Improving Outcomes for Urban African
American Students
Ralph Gardner, III and Antoinette Halsell Miranda, The Ohio State University
Almost 50 years after the Brown v. the Board of Education of
Topeka, Kansas (1954)
decision there are still inequalities in the education system. African American
children,
particularly
those living in impoverished communities, are at increased
riskfor special education referral. This
paper examines causes for the disproportionate representation of African
American students in
mild mental retardation (MMR) and serious emotional disturbances (SED)
special education
categories. It also provides recommendations to promote positive academic and
social behaviorfor
African American students that may prevent the students' need for specialized
education services.
African American students should not be placed at risk for special education
due to poor instruction or cultural differences between themselves and teachers.
Addition
ally, effective schools can benefit from the support of structured afterschool
programs.
Children who live in impoverished communities often do not have the resources at
home that meaningfully compliment the school's efforts. Afterschool programs
can be
developed to build both academic and social skills while keeping the children
away from
the dangerous street environment. Children who are behind
academically can benefit
from additional instructional opportunities. Structured afterschool
programs can provide
the necessary instructional opportunities to enhance student achievement.
Over the last 50 years, African American students have made many educational
gains.
However, much work is needed to achieve true equality in education for all
children.
African American students continue to be overrepresented in special education.
Much of
the work must focus on the accurate identification of children with special needs,
develop
ing strong academic programs with positive behavior supports, and preparing
culturally
responsive teachers to work in urban environments.
African American students should not be placed at risk for special education
due to poor instruction or cultural differences between themselves and teachers.
Addition
ally, effective schools can benefit from the support of structured afterschool
programs.
Children who live in impoverished communities often do not have the resources at
home that meaningfully compliment the school's efforts. Afterschool programs
can be
developed to build both academic and social skills while keeping the children
away from
the dangerous street environment. Children who are behind
academically can benefit
from additional instructional opportunities. Structured afterschool
programs can provide
the necessary instructional opportunities to enhance student achievement.
Over the last 50 years, African American students have made many educational
gains.
However, much work is needed to achieve true equality in education for all
children.
African American students continue to be overrepresented in special education.
Much of
the work must focus on the accurate identification of children with special needs,
develop
ing strong academic programs with positive behavior supports, and preparing
culturally
responsive teachers to work in urban environments.
On the Power of Separate Spaces: Teachers and Students Writing (Righting)
Selves and Future
Author(s): Lois Weis and Craig Centrie
Source: American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 39, No. 1, (Spring, 2002),
pp. 736
Published by: American Educational Research Association
American Educational Research Journal
Spring 2002, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 736
On the Power of Separate Spaces:
Teachers and Students Writing
(Righting) Selves and Future
Lois Weis and Craig Centrie
State University of New York at Buffalo
The debate on segregated and desegregated schools generally has been
framed as an eitheror matter, and in fact, legally, this has been the case.
What we have not investigated to any great extent are programs within
already desegregated schools that serve an identifiable population of students
for the express purpose of cultural affirmation and advancement of the tar
geted group. In this article we provide data that attest to the potential power
of such spaces, investigating a girls'group in an urban magnet school and a
homeroom set asidefor Vietnamese students in a neighborhoodbased urban
comprehensive school. Using ethnographic data, we articulate both thepower
of such spaces and the contradictory impulses within such arrangements.
Conclusion
Spaces in schools targeted for identifiable ethnic, racial, and gender groups
can, under the right circumstances, enable the development of healthy and
empowered young people. Places such as those discussed here, where youth
can grow their own bodies and minds under the tutelage of strong, caring
adults, are tremendously important. These places reinforce what scholars
such as Michele Foster have been saying about the importance of African
American teachers in schools under the control of the AfricanAmerican com
munity (1990). In both the Vietnamese homeroom, in the midst of a large
urban school, and the girls' group in the Arts Academy, we see young peo
ple gaining specific skills as they strive to name themselves and their future.
The Vietnamese, under the skillful guidance of Mr. Lee, preserved their cul
ture while learning to live in America on their own terms and create a future
by going to college. The young women, under the guidance of Ms. Carbonell
Medina, were fighting off an envisioned future of joblessness, abuse from
men and the welfare system, and unwanted pregnancies. They, too, were
gaining skills and a potential a set of alliances to encourage and enable them
to create that future. The two programs examined here illustrate the importance
of having spaces devoted to the experiences of particular marginalized
groups.
What we do not know is whether the effects of these programs are long
lasting. Because no followup work with these groups of students was con
ducted, it is not known to what extent the messages embedded within these
spaces "stick." However, experiences such as those examined here are for
ever with us and offer an alternative voice throughout one's life that contrasts
with the dominant messages about a group's assigned place in the United
States. Certainly the narrations of African Americans who have attended
schools directly under the control of the community suggest the power of
alternative visions. It is in spaces constructed in opposition to the dominant
society's sense of which groups belong where that much political work has
been done over the years, work that challenges the broader social structure
(Omi & Winant, 1994; Evans & Boyte, 1992).
A troublesome aspect of these spaces is the extent to which they un
intentionally (or perhaps necessarily) rely on the construction of an "out
group other," a group against which the identity of the "chosen" group is
woven. For example, although there were other Southeast Asian students in
the room, Mr. Lee focused only on "his" students. Indeed, the room was set
up to enable only Vietnamese students to take maximum advantage of space
and time, thus effectively marginalizing all other students in the room. Cer
tainly this is potentially troublesome, particularly the obvious outsider nature
of Hmong and Cambodians, who were assigned to the same homeroom. In
the girl's group, of course, young men were not afforded the same opportu
nities as the young women, although the situation was not totally analogous
to that of the nonVietnamese students.
Through more extensive interviews, it was found that some of the out
sider nature between the Vietnamese and the other Southeast Asians was a
result of traditional historic differences in Southeast Asia. Moreover, some of
Mr. Lee's marshaling of classroom resources was due to the generally com
petitive nature of managing scarce resources in a relatively poor school (Cen
trie, 2000a). West Side High educated almost exclusively poor, innercity
youth of color, as well as recent immigrant arrivals primarily from Third
World countries. Few, if any, students attending West Side High are privi
32 leged visavis the larger American social structure. In the Vietnamese home
room, as in any group, an identity is constructed around commonalities: col
lective interests, concerns, and shared experiences. These commonalities
inevitably create "others," or those who do not share the same identity. Nev
ertheless, unlike fullfledged pullout programs where a large part of any
given day may be spent away from the larger group, the Vietnamese students
at West Side High spent the majority of the school day with the rest of the
students in the school, individually and collectively learning to negotiate
intergroup tensions and learning the similarities and shared interests of other
groups. West Side High is well known for its International Days and pro
grams, for example, and for AfricanAmerican appreciation events during
February, Black History Month.
Through the Vietnamese homeroom and the nurturing guidance of
Mr. Lee and the Vietnamese aides, the Vietnamese students acquired the nec
essary skills to foster good selfesteem while in an environment where they
were learning to accept difference, not simply to tolerate others, as appears
to be the goal of pluralism.
An even more troubling aspect of the Vietnamese homeroom, however,
revolves around the ways in which privileged Vietnamese students were
potentially socialized with respect to the other students of color in the school.
There was arguably much potential for the socialization of privilege and
racism in the Vietnamese students who were constructed as "shining
stars"perhaps as honorary Whites, afforded privileges in the school that
AfricanAmerican and Latino students, in particular, are not afforded.
Whereas the Vietnamese students simultaneously experience both social
subordination and racial and ethnic privilege in school, other students of
color experience only social subordination. Most disturbingly, the Vietnamese
data suggest that separate spaces potentially contribute to privilege for cer
tain nonWhite groups at the expense of others. Ironically enough, of
course, it is the insights of AfricanAmerican scholars regarding the value of
separate spaces that is explored here. In this case, the particular separate
space under consideration is, paradoxically, contributing to the relative dis
empowerment of the very groups about which and for whom the literature
was written.6
We do not claim to be able to untangle all the possible ways in which
separate spaces could work for various groups in the desegregated context,
given the broader racial hierarchies in the United States. The Vietnamese
example makes clear the potential issues arising from such spaces, given
racial and ethnic disparities. As a model, however, there is great potential
power in separate spaces, and care should be taken not to affirm one group's
identity and future at the expense of another's. In separate spaces such as
those examined here, students are encouraged to fight backto write their
own scripts in contrast to those of the dominant society about who
they are
and what they can and should become. They are, under the
guidance of
adults, learning to write alternative scripts when so many others would like
to write them off entirely or edit out their homebased cultures. This model
33 offers great potential for anyone in public schools who is committed to all
students' reaching their full potential.
As Nancy Fraser (1991) notes, it is advantageous for "marginals" to create
"counterpublics" where they may oppose stereotypes and assert novel
interpretations of their own shifting identities, interests, and needs. Fraser
theorizes that these spaces are formed, ironically, out of the very exclu
sionary practices of the public sphere. We too have found that these
"counterpublics," which in our case existed in the midst of urban public
schools, offer enormous potential as marginalized peoples struggle for
space, voice, and economic justice in the United States. The implications
of such spaces for educational practice demand further attention. We owe it
to our youth.