Charter schools
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Charter schools

on

  • 755 views

Presentation used in class

Presentation used in class

Statistics

Views

Total Views
755
Views on SlideShare
338
Embed Views
417

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

1 Embed 417

http://citunlv.pbworks.com 417

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • OPERATIONAL DETAILS LIKE NAME, ORGANIZATION, MANAGEMENT, AND CURRICULUM ARE SET BY THE CHARTER.State legislation DEFINES WHICH PUBLIC ENTITY, KNOWN AS THE “AUTHORIZER” ISSUES THE CHARTER.
  • Progressive politicians promote charter schools as a way to create innovative community based learning centers.Conservative politicians admire the charter idea as a way to avoid oppressive government regulations and operate with the notion of competition and parental choice.
  • A common debating point for an against charter schools is their degree of accountability. Over the past decade plus, there has been a movement to increase accountability for public schools. What people are talking about when they say “accountability” in reference to education is the quality of the education students are receiving and the ability of administrators to run a safe, fiscally balanced facility. There are three ways of looking at accountability in education. These models are 1,2,3
  • Bureaucratic model - Darling- Hammond “agencies of government which promulgate rules and regulations intended to assure citizens that public functions will be carried out in pursuit of public goals voiced through democratic or legal processes”
  • Performance model: Concerned with outputs. A periodic report of the attainments of schools and other educational units. A set of indicators or statistics that provides information about how well schools are performing. Levin and Rivera in Garner and Cobb’s Charter School Accountability. Testing is certainly a good way to determine what and how much students are learning, but it tends to cause test driven curriculum. Also, testing methods need to be revisited for both Traditional public schools and charter schools that are based upon how much a student has learned over a year, not a snapshot in time of what they know at that moment. Will discuss NAEP and CREDO later in presentation.
  • Although the theories behind charter schools make them sound ideal, the performance levels are yet to be achieved as we will see in the next segment on charter school performance.
  • Traditional public schools are predominantly bureaucratic and performance with a little bit of the market based model. Although the bureaucratic model provides multiple checks and balances, it can be inflexible for some.
  • In theory charter schools are predominantly held accountable on a market based model, with a little bureaucratic model and performance thrown in. For example, Arizona has some of the most lenient charter school laws in the country. However in most states there is still some bureaucracy in charter school administration particularly in states where governing bodies are more active. A charter still has to adhere to the charter contract. Charter schools are also tested. In Nevada they have to go through assessment testing the same as traditional public schools. There are some downsides of the market based approach to accountability. Decisions for attending a school can be varied – friends, location. Can lead to a narrow view of school success – if a parent does not see a need for math, then a curriculum without math may seem perfectly acceptable to that parent.
  • NAEP study showed far fewer white students than black students as compared to traditional public schools.Study showed that there were more charter schools located in city core. The 2003 study showed fewer students with disabilities.
  • Reading – although not significantly different, the general trend shows charter school students below traditional public school students in most SES, racial and location categories
  • Math scores for all students were significantly lower in charter schools than in traditional public schools particularly in central cities.
  • Teachers in public schools had a significantly higher number of teachers with teaching certificates and teachers with more experience. Note that the more experience a teacher has, the higher the average scale score. Teachers at charter schools with 10 or more years teaching experience actually had students that performed higher than the public school
  • Stanford University published 2009Study was possible because of all the student data from regular achievement testing.
  • 17 % OF CHARTER SCHOOLS PROVIDE SUPERIOR EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES FOR THEIR STUDENTS THAN TRADITIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOL.46%OF THE CHARTER SCHOOLS HAVE RESULTS THAT ARE NO DIFFERENT FROM THE LOCAL PUBLIC SCHOOL OPTIONS.37 %, DELIVERED LEARNING RESULTS THAT ARE SIGNIFICANTLY WORSE THAN THEIR STUDENT WOULD HAVE REALIZED HAD THEY REMAINED IN TRADITIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
  • THE LEGISLATION GIVES THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS A METHOD TO EXPERIMENT WITH PROVIDING A VARIETY OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC SCHOOLS TO THE PUPILS OF THE STATE

Charter schools Charter schools Presentation Transcript

  • *THE DEBATE CONTINUES
  • * 1991 – FIRST CHARTER SCHOOL IN MINNESOTA. * 1998 – 1,100 CHARTER SCHOOLS, 250,000 STUDENTS ENROLLED. * 2004 – 3,000 CHARTER SCHOOLS IN 37 STATES AND WASHINGTON,D.C., 750,000 STUDENTS ENROLLED. * CURRENTLY, 5741 CHARTER SCHOOLS IN 41 STATES AND WASHINGTON,D.C. *REFERENCES:CHARTER SCHOOLS. (2012). RETRIEVED SEPTEMBER 7, 2012, FROM HTTP://WWW.NEA.ORG/HOME/16322.HTM.THE IMPACT OF CHARTER SCHOOLS. (2012). RETRIEVED SEPTEMBER 7, 2012, FROM HTTP//NATIONALCHARTERSCHOOLS.ORG/THE-IMPACT.LUBIENSKI, C. A., & WEITZEL, P. C. (EDS.). (2010). THE CHARTER SCHOOL EXPERIMENT EXPECTATIONS, EVIDENCE, AND IMPLICATIONS. CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS: HARVARD EDUCATION PRESS.WEIL, D. (2000). CHARTER SCHOOLS: A REFERENCE BOOK. SANTA BARBARA, CALIFORNIA: ABC-CLIO, INC.
  • * NON-RELIGIOUS PUBLIC ELEMENTARY OR SECONDARY SCHOOL * OPERATES UNDER A CONTRACT OR “CHARTER” * MUST HAVE OPEN ENROLLMENT * MAY NOT CHARGE TUITION * MUST PARTICIPATE IN STATE AND FEDERAL TESTING AND ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAMS * CHARTER MAY BE REVOKED OR NOT RENEWED IF A SCHOOL DOESN’T MEET ITS PERFORMANCE GOALS. * EACH STATE DETERMINES ITS OWN CHARTER LEGISLATION *REFERENCES:CHARTER SCHOOLS. (2012). RETRIEVED SEPTEMBER 7, 2012, FROM HTTP://WWW.NEA.ORG/HOME/16322.HTMOBRIEN, E. M., & DERVARICS, C. (2012). CHARTER SCHOOLS: FINDING OUT THE FACTS: AT A GLANCE. RETRIEVED SEPTEMBER 7, 2012, FROM WWW.CENTERFORPUBLICEDUCATION.ORG.
  • * PRESIDENT OBAMA – PROCLAIMED MAY 6, 2012 – MAY 12, 2012 NATIONAL CHARTER SCHOOL WEEK STATING, “…CHARTERS SCHOOLS DEMONSTRATE WHAT IS POSSIBLE WHEN STATES, COMMUNITIES, TEACHERS, PARENTS AND STUDENTS WORK TOGETHER.” * GOVERNOR ROMNEY – WHEN THE 85% DEMOCRATIC LEGISLATURE PASSED A BILL PUTTING A MORATORIUM ON ANY NEW CHARTERS, HE VETOED IT. *REFERENCES:OBAMA, BARAK. (2012). PRESIDENTIAL PROCLAMATION – NATIONAL CHARTER SCHOOL WEEK 2012. RETRIEVED ON SEPTEMBER 7, 2012 FROMHTTP://WWW.WHITEHOUSE.GOV/THE-PRESS-OFFICE/2012/05/07/PRESIDENTIAL-PROCLAMATION-NATIONAL-CHARTER-SCHOOL-WEEK-2012.ROMNEY FOR PRESIDENT. (2012). RETRIEVED ON SEPTEMBER 7, 2012 FROM HTTP://MITTROMNEY.COM/ISSUES/EDUCATION.
  • * INNOVATION* ACCOUNTABILITY* DIVERSITY* PERFORMANCE*
  • * INNOVATION HELPED TO CREATE TRADITIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM* BASED ON SMART METHODOLOGIES AND ESTABLISHED PRACTICES* CHANGING LANDSCAPE, LIVING STYLE, AND DYNAMICS IN TODAY’S AMERICAN SOCIETY* CREATES NEED FOR INNOVATION IN ALL FIELDS AND PROFESSIONS, INCLUDING EDUCATION* CREATES NEED FOR INNOVATION IN TEACHING METHODS AND CURRICULUM*
  • * NOT PROVIDED WITH A LOT OF FREEDOM* PRACTICES CARRIED OUT WITH A LIMITED AND CONTROLLED ELEMENT OF INNOVATION *
  • * THRIVE ON INNOVATION* IDEOLOGY OF THEIR MANAGEMENT* PROVIDE SPECIALIZED KNOWLEDGE AND INNOVATIVE MEDIUMS* TEACHERS PROVIDED WITH FREEDOM TO EXERCISE INNOVATIVE IDEAS* RESULTS IN CUSTOMIZED AND EFFECTIVE TEACHING STYLES AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS *
  • * VARIOUS ESTABLISHED THEORETICAL MODELS FOR TEACHING THAT ARE GENERALLY ACCEPTED AND PRACTICED* ACT AS LABORATORIES OF REFORM* CAN ACT AS A CATALYST FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM *
  • * THREE TYPES OF ACCOUNTABILITY IN EDUCATION TODAY* BUREAUCRATIC* PERFORMANCE* MARKET* (Garn & Cobb, 2001)
  • * SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE CONSITUENCIES SUCH AS PARENTS, BOARD MEMBERS, LEGISLATORS AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC* MANY GUIDELINES FOR ADMINISTRATORS AND FACULTY* TELL ADMINISTRATORS HOW TO RUN THEIR SCHOOL* TELL TEACHERS WHAT TO TEACH AND WHEN * (Garn & Cobb, 2001)
  • * ASSESSMENT TESTING* SCHOOL EFFICACY BASED ON STUDENT TEST PERFORMANCE* NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATION PROGRESS NAEP TEST: THE NATIONS REPORT CARD (2003)* CENTER FOR RESEARCH ON EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES (CREDO) REPORT* (Garn & Cobb, 2001)
  • * SUBJECT TO SUPPLY AND DEMAND* IF A SCHOOL HAS HIGH ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS THERE WILL BE MORE DEMAND BECAUSE PARENTS WILL WANT STUDENTS TO ATTEND HIGH ACHIEVEING SCHOOLS* LESS BUREUACRACY ALLOWS ADMINISTRATORS TO HIRE FROM A LARGER POOL OF POTENTIAL TEACHERS* (Garn & Cobb, 2001)
  • * RED-TAPE * DIFFICULT CERTIFICATION PRACTICES PERFORMANCE * STIFFLED INNOVATION MARKET * STIFFLED FREEDOM TO CHOOSE FOR PARENTS, TEACHERS, & BUREAUCRATIC ADMINISTRATORS * WE KNOW WHAT’S GOING ON* (Garn & Cobb, 2001)
  • * DECISIONS FOR STUDENT ATTENDING ARE NOT ALWAYS BASED ON HOW WELL THE SCHOOL IS PERFORMING OR ITS MARKET BUREAUCRATIC CURRICULUM. * NARROW VIEW OF SCHOOL SUCCESS * CHARTER REVIEW PERIODPERFORMANCE* (Garn & Cobb, 2001)
  • * TODAY’S AMERICAN SOCIETY IS FACING A HIGH DEGREE OF DIVERSITY* NEEDS OF THE STUDENTS DIFFER GREATLY FROM EACH OTHER *
  • * HAVE TROUBLE ADDRESSING THE DIVERSE NEEDS OF THE STUDENTS FROM DIVERSE BACKGROUNDS* HAVE STANDARDIZED CURRICULUM AND TEACHING METHODS WHICH REMAIN THE SAME AND DON’T VARY *
  • * CAN BE CONSIDERED THE STRENGTH AND THE ALTERNATIVE TO THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM PROBLEM* CUSTOMIZE TEACHING METHODS, COURSES, AND PEDAGOGY ACCORDING TO THE COMMUNITY’S NEEDS *
  • * CRITICS OF CHARTER SCHOOLS ARGUE THAT CHARTER SCHOOLS ARE ADDING TO THE PROBLEM IN SOCIETY OF DIVERSITY* HAVE A TARGET MARKET AND THIS IS WIDENDING THE GAP IN SOCIETY* TARGET A MARKET BY HAVING A RIGOROUS CURRICULUM AND NOT PROVIDING TRANSPORTATION SERVICES *
  • WHAT IS THE NATION’S REPORT CARD?Started in 1969NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONALPROGRESS (NAEP)National Center for Education Statisticswithin the U.S. Department of Education.They are responsible BY LAW to carry outthis test.Let’s policy makers know how schools areperforming and what students know aboutcertain subjects. * (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2007)
  • * (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2007)
  • * (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2007)
  • * (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2007)
  • * (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2007)
  • * FIRST NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF CHARTER SCHOOL IMPACT* PARTNERED WITH 15 STATES AND WASHINGTON, D.C.* THERE WERE 2403 CHARTER SCHOOLS IN STUDY* ANALYZES THE IMPACT OF CHARTER SCHOOLS ON 70% OF THE CHARTER SCHOOL POPULATION* FOCUSED ON HOW CHARTER SCHOOL STUDENTS PERFORMED AND COMPARED IT TO THE PERFORMANCE THEY WOULD HAVE REALIZED IF THEY WOULD HAVE ATTENDED THEIR ASSIGNED TRADITIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOL. *
  • CREDO RESULTS 60% 40% 20% 0% Superior Same Worse* 17% OF CHARTER SCHOOLS STUDIED PROVIDE SUPERIOR EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES* 46% OF CHARTER SCHOOLS STUDIED HAVE RESULTS THAT ARE NO DIFFERENT FROM THE LOCAL PUBLIC OPTION* 37% OF CHARTERS SCHOOLS STUDIED DELIVERED LEARNING RESULTS THAT ARE SIGNIFICANTLY WORSE *
  • * CHARTER SCHOOL LEGISLATION PASSED IN 1997 (NRS 386.490 – 386.610) * LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND STATE PUBLIC CHARTER AUTHORITY ARE AUTHORIZING AGENCY FOR THE APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF NEW CHARTERS * CHARTER SCHOOL POPULATIONS MUST NOT DIFFER BY MORE THAN 10% FROM THE RACIAL COMPOSITION OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN THE ZONE THAT THE CHARTER IS LOCATED * FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS ARE PROHIBITED FROM APPLYING TO OPEN A CHARTER SCHOOL * CHARTER SCHOOL INVOLVEMENT WITH A FAITH BASED ORGANIZATIONS IS PROHIBITED *REFERENCE:OFFICE OF CHARTER SCHOOLS NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. (2012). RETRIEVED ON SEPTEMBER 7, 2012 FROMHTTP://NDE.DOE.NV.GOV/SD_CHARTERSCHOOLS.HTM
  • * THERE ARE 32 CHARTER SCHOOLS IN NEVADA* SINCE 2000, 11 CHARTER SCHOOLS HAVE CLOSED* THERE ARE 17 CHARTER SCHOOLS IN CLARK COUNTY* CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT SPONSORS 7 CHARTER SCHOOLS * REFERENCE: OFFICE OF CHARTER SCHOOLS NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. (2012). RETRIEVED ON SEPTEMBER 7, 2012 FROM HTTP://NDE.DOE.NV.GOV/SD_CHARTERSCHOOLS.HTM
  • *REFERENCE:2011-2012 DISTRICT ACCOUNTABILITY SUMMARY REPORT. (2012). LASVEGAS, NV: CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT.
  • ReferencesBudde, R. (1989). Education by charter. Phi Delta Kappan, v70 n7(Mar 1989), p518-20.CHARTER SCHOOLS. (2012). RETRIEVED SEPTEMBER 7, 2012, FROM HTTP://WWW.NEA.ORG/HOME/16322.HTM.THE IMPACT OF CHARTER SCHOOLS. (2012). RETRIEVED SEPTEMBER 7, 2012, FROM HTTP//NATIONALCHARTERSCHOOLS.ORG/THE-IMPACT.LUBIENSKI, C. A., & WEITZEL, P. C. (EDS.). (2010). THE CHARTER SCHOOL EXPERIMENT EXPECTATIONS, EVIDENCE, AND IMPLICATIONS. CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS: HARVARD EDUCATIONPRESS.WEIL, D. (2000). CHARTER SCHOOLS: A REFERENCE BOOK. SANTA BARBARA, CALIFORNIA: ABC-CLIO, INC.Chen, G. (2009, July 10). Charter Schools Versus Traditional Public Schools: Which One is Under-Performing?. Public SchoolReview. Retrieved from http://www.publicschoolreview.com/articles/123Garn, G., & Cobb, C. D. (2001). A framework for understanding charter school accountability. Education and UrbanSociety, 33(2), 113-128. doi: 10.1177/0013124501332002Hoxby, C.M. (2004, September). A Straightforward Comparison of Charter Schools and Regular Public Schools in the UnitedStates. Harvard University and National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved fromhttp://www.wacharterschools.org/learn/studies/hoxbyallcharters.pdfNational Conference of State Legislatures. (2012). Charter School Arguments. Retrieved from http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/educ/charter-schools-pros-and-cons.aspxNational Center for Education Statistics. (2007). The nations report card. Washington, D.C.: National Center for EducationStatistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Dept. of Education. Retrieved from http://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo3601Vergari, S. (1999). Charter schools. Education and Urban Society, 31(4), 389-405. doi: 10.1177/0013124599031004002Vergari, S. (2002). The charter school landscape. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.