charters on the hill

Virtual schools, open records, and claims about research — highlights from Congress’s look at charter schools

Witnesses at the U.S. House hearing on charter schools are sworn in near. From nearest on: Nina Rees of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools; Greg Richmond of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers; Jonathon Clark, of 482Forward; and Marty West of Harvard University.

Charter schools got some extra attention in Washington, D.C. today in the form of a U.S. House hearing.

The title of the hearing (“The Power of Charter Schools”) and the selection of witnesses (three of the four spoke highly of charters) made clear that the intent was to frame the discussion positively.

“For many, charter schools are the best option for their student to hone his or her individual abilities and build a successful life,” chairwoman Virginia Foxx, a North Carolina Republican, said in her opening comments.

But lawmakers also raised pointed questions about the schools’ transparency and effectiveness, as well as the role of virtual schools.

Here are four key questions raised at the hearing.

What should be done about struggling virtual charter schools?

Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, an Oregon Democrat, highlighted recent problems with virtual charter schools, pointing to Indiana Virtual School, which she noted “graduated a lower percentage of students than almost any other school in the state,” and the abrupt closure of a large virtual school in Ohio. She also pointed to Chalkbeat’s reporting on debates about oversight of virtual charters in Indiana.

Nina Rees, the president of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, acknowledged what a report by her organization called “the chronic underachievement of online charter schools.”

But, she said, “You don’t want to completely get rid of them because for some students these are the only choices available to them.”

Should charter schools be subject to open records laws?

In some states, charter schools don’t have to turn over documents or records the way government entities do.

In New York, for instance, charter schools themselves must follow state records laws, but the network organizations that charters often work closely with, like Success Academy, are not compelled by those laws. In DC, the charter authorizing board is subject to public records, but individual schools aren’t.

“Should any public charter school be subject to the same open records law as a non-charter school?” Rep. Bobby Scott, the committee’s ranking Democrat, asked the witnesses.

Jonathon Clark, a Detroit parent who is largely skeptical of charters, said yes. Rees was less definitive.

“We need to take a close look at the consequence of these additional rules and regulations on charter schools, but by and large my reaction is yes, they should be able to make this information available,” she said.

Which city’s charter model is better — Detroit’s or Denver’s?

Both cities were repeatedly highlighted, but for different reasons.

“Michigan’s lax charter authorization system has allowed schools to promise things and not deliver them, and to continue to take taxpayer money without providing Michigan’s — and, in particular, Detroit’s — students a quality education,” said Clark, who is on the board of the a city community group, 482Forward.

Rep. Scott also pointed to Detroit as an example of charter schools gone wrong, while highlighting Denver as a positive example.

In some ways, the cities are perfect foils. Denver has embraced what is called the “portfolio model,” where charters are tightly overseen based on academic results; the city school board authorizes charters; and some charter advocates say the board hasn’t allowed charters to grow quickly enough. Detroit has a more free-market approach with a number of authorizers, including universities, able to grant a charter; and an effort to create a portfolio style model was beat back by Republican lawmakers, with the backing of Betsy DeVos before she was secretary of education.

According to CREDO, in both cities charters modestly outperform comparable district schools — and in both cities the growth of charters remains politically contentious.

What does the CREDO research on charters really say?

During the hearing, people on both sides of the issue cited research out of CREDO, a Stanford-based research group that has conducted the most comprehensive research on charter schools.

In his opening remarks, Rep. Scott highlighted a 2009 CREDO report showing that just 17 percent of charter schools outperformed traditional public schools, but 37 percent did worse. “I used to say that on average, charter schools are average; this recent research is showing that on average charter schools are below average,” he said.

This study is not in fact recent, and a 2013 national CREDO study showed charter schools performed about the same as district schools.

Harvard professor Marty West acknowledged that in his testimony. But “dismissing the charter sector’s track record as mixed ignores clear evidence of benefits for students from low-income families, students of color, and students living in urban areas,” he said, pointing to a 2015 CREDO report on charters in cities and 2017 one on networks of charter schools, among other studies.

Later in the hearing, yet another CREDO analysis was highlighted by Rep. Bonamici, this time on virtual charter schools. This study showed substantial drops in test scores when students attended one of these schools.

Keep in mind there is a lot of other research on charters beyond CREDO, which has come in for some criticism for its methodology. Much of that other research has reached similar conclusions, with charters posting average test score performance overall, large gains in some cities, and negative results for fully virtual schools.

new money

House budget draft sends more money to schools, but not specifically to teacher raises

PHOTO: Laura Faith Kebede/Chalkbeat

Despite months of heated debate, Indiana House Republicans are not setting aside extra dollars for meaningful teacher raises in their version of the state’s $14.5 billion education budget plan released Monday night.

Even though lawmakers are proposing preserving a controversial merit-based bonus pool and adding small amounts for teacher training programs, their budget draft would largely leave it up to school districts to dole out raises through increased overall funding.

The budget draft proposes increasing what Indiana spends on schools overall by $461 million — or 4.3 percent — through 2021, a little more than increases in years past. The basic per-student funding that all districts get would jump from $5,352 per student this year to $5,442 per student in 2020 and $5,549 per student in 2021. House lawmakers are also adding in a one-time payment of $150 million from state reserves that would pay down a pension liability for schools. But while lawmakers and Gov. Eric Holcomb have said that pension payment would free up about $70 million in schools’ budgets each year, the state likely wouldn’t require the cost-savings be passed along to teachers.

Although increasing teacher pay is a top goal for House Republicans, lawmakers have crafted bills that hinge on districts spending less money in areas such as administration or transportation rather than adding more money to school budgets and earmarking it for teacher salaries.

Their criticism of school spending has raised the ire of superintendents and educators who say they have little left to cut after years of increasing costs and state revenue that has barely kept pace with inflation.

But budget draft, which is expected to be presented to and voted on by the House Ways and Means Committee on Tuesday, doesn’t completely omit efforts to incentivize teachers to stick around. Unlike Holcomb’s budget proposal, House lawmakers are keeping in the current appropriation of $30 million per year for teacher bonuses.

The House budget draft would also set aside $1 million per year for a teacher residency pilot program and $5 million per year for schools that put in place career ladder programs that allow teachers to gain skills and opportunities without leaving the classroom.

Teacher advocacy groups, such as the Indiana State Teachers Association and Teach Plus, have been supportive of residency and career ladder programs, but the organizations have also called for more action this year to get dollars to teachers. Additionally, the ideas aren’t new — similar programs have been proposed in years past.

Calls for the hundreds of millions of dollars it would take to raise teacher salaries to be more in line with surrounding states will likely go unheeded for now as the state instead prioritizes other high-profile and expensive agencies, such as the Department of Child Services and Medicaid.

But while plans for major teacher pay raises appear to be on hold, House lawmakers are looking to boost funding in other areas of education to support some of the state’s most vulnerable students.

The budget draft would increase what the state must spend on preschool programs for students with disabilities from the current $2,750 per-student to $2,875 in 2020 and $3,000 in 2021 — the first such increase in more than 25 years.

House lawmakers are also proposing the state spend more money on students learning English as a new language, at $325 per student up from $300 per student now. While all schools with English learners would receive more money per student under this plan, the new budget draft removes a provision that had previously allocated extra dollars to schools with higher concentrations of English learners.

A 2017 calculation error and an uptick in interested schools meant state lawmakers did not budget enough money for schools with larger shares of English-learners in the last budget cycle, so they ended up getting far less than what the state had promised. But even the small increases were valuable, educators told Chalkbeat.

House lawmakers also suggested slashing funding for virtual programs run by traditional public school districts. Going forward, funding for both virtual charter schools and virtual schools within school districts would come in at 90 percent of what traditional schools receive from the state — now, only virtual charter schools are at the 90 percent level. It’s a marked change for House lawmakers, who in years past have asked that virtual charter school funding be increased to 100 percent.

The virtual funding proposal comes as lawmakers are considering bills that would add regulations for the troubled schools, where few students pass state exams or graduate.

The budget draft also includes:

  • $5 million per year added to school safety grants, totaling $19 million in 2020 and $24 million in 2021
  • Doubling grants for high-performing charter schools from $500 per student to $1,000 per student, at a cost of about $32 million over two years. The money is a way for charter schools to make up for not receiving local property tax dollars like district schools, lawmakers say.
  • $4 million per year more to expand the state’s private school voucher program to increase funding for certain families above the poverty line. Under the plan, a family of four making between $46,000 and $58,000 annually could receive a voucher for 70 percent of what public schools would have received in state funding for the student. Currently, those families receive a 50 percent voucher.
  • About $33 million over two years (up from about $25 million) for the state’s Tax Credit Scholarship program.

rethinking the reprieve

Indiana lawmakers take step to eliminate generous ‘growth-only’ grades for all schools, not just those in IPS

PHOTO: Anthony Lanzilote

A panel of Indiana lawmakers took a first step Monday to stop giving new and overhauled schools more generous state A-F grades that consider only how much students improve on tests and cut schools slack for low test scores.

The House Education Committee was initially looking to clamp down on Indianapolis Public Schools’ innovation schools, barring them from using student test score improvement as the sole determinant in their first three years of A-F grades. The more generous scale has boosted IPS’ performance as it launches a new strategy of partnering with charter operators, by allowing some innovation network schools to earn high marks despite overall low test scores.

But lawmakers expanded the scope of the bill to stop all schools from receiving what are known as “growth-only grades” after Chalkbeat reported that IPS’ overhauled high schools were granted a fresh start from the state — a move that would allow the high schools to tap into the more lenient grading system.

“I want to be consistent, and I felt like [grading] wasn’t consistent before, it was just hodge-podge,” said committee Chairman Bob Behning, an Indianapolis Republican. “We need to be transparent with parents.”

Read: Why it’s hard to compare Indianapolis schools under the A-F grading system

The committee unanimously approved the bill. If it passes into law, Indianapolis Public Schools stands to be one of the districts most affected. Growth-only grades for innovation schools have given the district’s data a boost, accounting for eight of the district’s 11 A grades in 2018. All of its high schools could also be eligible for growth-only grades this year.

Indianapolis Public Schools officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In the past, they have defended the two-tiered grading system, arguing that growth on state tests is an important window into how schools are educating students. Growth-only grades were originally intended to offer new schools time to get up and running before being judged on student test scores.

IPS was also the target of another provision in the updated bill that would add in stricter rules for when and how schools can ask for a “baseline reset” — the fresh start that its four high schools were recently granted.

Read: IPS overhauled high schools. Now, the state is giving them a fresh start on A-F

The resets, which districts can currently request from the state education department if they meet certain criteria that show they’ve undergone dramatic changes, wipe out previous test scores and other student performance data to give schools a fresh start. The reset schools are considered new schools with new state ID numbers.

The state determined a reset was necessary for IPS’ four remaining high schools because of the effects of decisions last year to close three campuses, shuffle staff, and create a new system a new system for students to choose their schools. Each school will start over with state letter grades in 2019.

But Behning and other lawmakers were skeptical that such changes merited starting over with accountability, and they were concerned that the process could occur without state board of education scrutiny. If passed into law, the bill would require the state board to approve future requests for accountability resets.

A state board staff member testified in favor of the change. The state education department did not offer comments to the committee.

Rep. Vernon Smith, a Democrat from Gary, said he didn’t like the fact that a reset could erase a school’s data, adding that he had concerns about “the transparency of a school corporation getting a new number.”

The amended bill wouldn’t remove the reset for IPS high schools, but by eliminating the growth-only grades, it would get rid of some of the incentive for districts to ask for a reset to begin with. Under current law, reset schools are considered new and qualify for growth-only grades. But the bill would require that reset schools be judged on the state’s usual scale, taking into account both test scores and test score improvement — and possibly leading to lower-than-anticipated state grades.

The amended bill would still offer a grading grace period to schools opening for the first time: New charter schools would be able to ask the state to give them no grade — known as a “null” grade — for their first three years, but schools’ test score performance and test score growth data would still be published online. Behning said he didn’t include district schools in the null-grade measure because they haven’t frequently opened new schools, but he said he’d be open to an amendment.

The bill next heads to the full House for a vote.