New Jersey Should Face Facts Concerning Charter Schools
Fifteen years ago New Jersey joined nineteen other states in passing legislation, the Charter School Program Act of 1995, specifically allowing for the establishment of up to 135 charter schools in the state in 48 months following the effective date of the Act. Then, as now, charter schools were seen by many policymakers as a mechanism for school reform in that they provide an alternative to traditional public schools. The legislature extolled the benefits of charter schools finding, among other things, their potential for improving student learning and establishing a new form of accountability for schools. Key to their thinking was the idea that if charter schools were free from some of the restrictions faced by traditional public schools, they would be able to develop innovative programs that would serve as models for educational reform.
Since then, charter schools have not lived up to that potential either in terms of their numbers or their performance. By the beginning of 2011 there were 73 charter schools in the state serving 22,000 students, a small fraction of its 1.4 million public school students. Moreover, there is little evidence that they have served as incubators for school reform or that they perform as well or better than traditional public schools, despite a recent report by the New Jersey Department of Education finding that urban charter schools outperform their district counterparts on required standardized testing. That report has come under criticism for not addressing the fact that charter schools educate fewer special education students and students with limited English language proficiency than their home districts, factors which can contribute to higher test scores for charter school students.
Yet today, charter schools are receiving greater attention than ever, having been identified by Governor Christie as key to his agenda for school reform. This year he made good on his promise to increase the number of charters in the state by approving a record 23 new schools. In last year's budget, Governor Christie showed his support for charter schools by exempting the charter school budget from the $820 million in cuts in school aid that fell on other schools. In the next few years, charter schools will likely receive a greater share of New Jersey's diminishing funds for public education, undoubtedly at the expense of traditional public schools. But should this be case? Are charter schools—which are often described as "publicly funded, privately run schools" —sufficiently "public" to warrant the public's support?
Open to the Public
Perhaps one of the greatest attributes of public education in this country is that it is available to everyone. Traditional public schools—with few exceptions—must accept all students who live within the boundaries of the districts in which they operate. They cannot turn students away due to budgetary or space constraints. Charter schools, on the other hand, can. Charter schools are open to all students within their districts if space is available. If there are more applicants than available slots, admission—as provided in the Charter School Act—is determined by a non-discriminatory lottery. Students not admitted by lottery may be placed on waiting lists.
Funded by the Public
Public schools in New Jersey are generally funded by property taxes. Charter schools are also taxpayer-funded, but have a distinct disadvantage compared to traditional public schools. They only receive 90 percent of the school district's budget per student from the operating budgets of the district where the school is located. Moreover, charter schools do not receive facilities funding. To make up for what can only be characterized as underfunding, charter schools often rely on funds from a variety of private sources running the gamut from grassroots bake sales and silent auctions to major grants from private foundations and corporations to support their operation.
Accountable to the Public
To ensure that they are accountable to the public they serve, traditional public schools are subject to countless regulations regarding how they are run, what is taught, and who can be employed by them. The same requirements do not apply to the same extent to charter schools. In fact, charter schools may be exempted from "[s]tate regulations concerning public schools, except those pertaining to assessment, testing, civil rights and student health and safety." Although charter schools do follow many of the same requirements as traditional public schools, there are a few notable exceptions. For example, traditional public schools are governed by boards that are publicly elected (or appointed by democratically elected officials) and staffed by certificated professionals. Charter school boards, though "public agents," can be appointed (at least initially) by charter school founders with little or no public input. Moreover, though all charter school teachers, principals and support staff must hold appropriate New Jersey certification, charter school "lead persons," the individuals charged with performing the "organizational tasks necessary for the operation of a charter school," much like those normally associated with a traditional school principal, need not be certificated at all.
The exemptions from certain regulations have given many charter schools the autonomy to spur innovation and achieve excellence. Indeed, since 2004 five New Jersey charter schools have been named Blue Ribbon Schools by the U.S. Department of Education in recognition of their students' performance. On the other hand, this limited oversight no doubt has been a factor in the decision of the New Jersey Department of Education to close 19 of the state's charter schools as of 2009. While financial problems led to many closures, several charter schools were shut down due to mismanagement or poor academic performance.
Given the increase in the number of charter schools that will be operating in New Jersey in the next few years, lawmakers should examine policies to ensure that charter schools are adequately serving and are responsive to the needs of the public. While charter schools will never be able to accommodate the majority of New Jersey students, they should still appeal to a broad range of public school students. Care should be taken to ensure that charter schools do not cater to narrow segments of the population as may be the case if charter school legislation is changed to allow private and parochial schools to convert to charter status. Private philanthropic support, which can be fleeting, should never be seen as a long-term solution to the underfunding of charter and traditional public schools. The perceived windfall to Newark public and charter schools by the $100 million gift from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is nothing but a temporary fix to looming budgetary issues. By the same token, Governor Christie's proposal to change the charter school law to allow the operation of charter schools by private companies with their own profit-oriented boards of trustees should be looked at with caution. Traditional public schools are generally seen as institutions of learning open to the public, funded by the public and accountable to the public. Charter schools should be no different.
Roslyn Powell, J.D., M.P.A. teaches high school social studies and law at Academies @ Englewood, a school of choice program for students of Englewood and other towns in Bergen, Hudson and Passaic counties, where she manages the Law and Public Safety program. She is also a co-founder and board member of A Better Balance: The Work and Family Legal Center, a legal advocacy organization dedicated to empowering people to meet the conflicting demands of work and family without sacrificing their economic security.
Return to beginning of article.
Please note that Legally Speaking is intended to be informational in nature. Nothing in Legally Speaking should be construed as legal advice as to any specific matter. Readers are encouraged to contact legal counsel to discuss specific legal issues that arise.
Return to beginning of article.