Is Our Children Learning?

Washington is facing a serious education shortfall. We know this. Recently, the Washington State Supreme Court decided that we are failing to adequately fund our education system, our paramount duty. In late January, a pair of bipartisan bills was put forward in Olympia in an attempt to close the opportunity gap that is widening in Washington’s public schools.

The bills, sponsored by Representative Eric Pettigrew (D-Seattle) in and Senator Steve Litzow (R- Mercer Island), would authorize the creation of public charter schools in the state. The passage of the bills out of committee are in jeopardy this week, but I thought I would get you up to speed in case their progress is not halted and they live to see another day.

There have been plenty of articles and opinion pieces written in the past weeks on the bills, pro and con, but I will stick to the basics here. They would ultimately allow a total of 50 public charter schools to be opened in the state and limited to ten new schools per year. If you go to the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) website, they state that Washington has 2,300+ schools in 295 districts. With that in mind, 50 public charter schools would total about two percent of public schools in Washington. The bills also limit public charter school operation to non-profit organizations with a track record of success in other states.

With the achievement gap in Washington increasing, supporters of education reform usually adopt the mindset of “any means necessary”. This ends up upsetting quite a few charter opponents. Reformers will point to successful charters around the country in the 41 states and D.C. that currently allow them. They usually cite the following: KIPP, Democracy Prep, Uncommon Schools, and Achievement First. Opponents are then lickety-split quick to cry foul and point to the Stanford CREDO study that compared charter schools to other area schools and found that only 17% of the charters performed better. Parts of the Stanford study have been questioned, but it is still enough to be widely cited and used to justify anti-charter fervor.

Both sides of the debate have valid points. There are many successful public charter schools out there. And many of them do very well in neighborhoods with high populations of low-income and minority students. A recently released study by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) praised charter schools for implanting broad based civic education curriculum that extended beyond the typical social studies and history classes. But for all the charter school success stories, there are many public charters that perform worse than traditional schools and end up being shut down. A new report out of Minnesota, the state with the longest history charters, recorded charter school graduation rates at the back of the pack in two suburban counties. The graph below shows traditional public schools in green and charters in blue.

Additionally, a majority of Washington state voters have voted against allowing public charters school three different times, in 1996, 2000, and 2004. That precedent will be a significant hurdle for the pro-charter movement.

We have learned a lot about charter schools since 2004 when Washington voters last rejected them. All charters are not created equal. Andrew Rotherham over at Time wrote a great article covering the charter schools that seem to be getting it right. His main points are that successful charter schools have three things in common. They exercise more control of their teachers than traditional public schools, they spend a lot of time and resources focusing on results, and they use large amounts of data when making their decisions. Those are all tangible qualities that we can replicate in all public schools in our state.

In a perfect world our schools would all have the money and resources they deserve, every student would graduate high school prepared for college or a career, and there would be plenty of money left in the budget to fully fund our state’s social safety net and rainy day fund. But a majority of voters and legislators have made it very clear that creating a more progressive revenue stream is not a priority. In a recession, our policy makers are forced to cut until the budget is balanced. Until my fairy-tale state is a reality, education reformers will always look for new ways to help students. Even if it is just one school in one community. Who wouldn’t? There may be some issues with this bill and it certainly will not revolutionize education in our state. It may even fail this year. But we should not let that diminish what successful charter schools are achieving. Nor should we shun their techniques. Because helping even one school is ultimately better than waiting.