Charter School Appeals in Colorado

I've been going through the list of charter school appeals to the State Board of Education and came across some interesting findings.

First, Denver Public Schools (DPS) has the most appeal cases with 19. To put that into context, Jeffco has 17, Aurora seven, and Adams 12 five. This is out of 132 appeal cases.

Second, there were two years, 1994 and 2006, when there were the highest number of appeals: 14. The high number of appeal hearings in 1994 makes sense because that's the first year the Charter Schools Act was in effect and there were numerous charter school applications that year. The high number in 2006 is harder to explain. It was the year after the Legislature adopted the Charter School Institute Act, which created the state's alternative authorizer. However, probably the most noteworthy piece in the data is that the number of appeal hearings dropped precipitously after that so that in 2008 there were only three hearings and in 2009 only one. This can easily be explained by the state's development of the standard application and model contract language. Both of these documents, for the first time, explained what was acceptable practice for charter school applications and charter contracts.

Another interesting point is the number of charter schools that never open even after a successful appeal to the State Board. The vast majority of appeal hearings are from brand new charter applicants; however, the law also allows an existing charter school to appeal "gross imposition of conditions" or issues with which the two parties disagree. Further, the vast majority of appeals are only heard once by the State Board. Even if the charter school wins a remand, most of the time the parties settle their differences and it doesn't go to the State Board for a second appeal. But when there is a second appeal and the State Board orders a local district to open a charter school, only a small number of those schools actually open.

It's also interesting to note that in 1994 there were more appeal hearings than charter schools that were approved to open. There were 14 appeals, but only 11 charter schools opened. Again in 1995, when there were 10 appeals, only 10 charter schools opened. In the early years of the Charter Schools Act, there was a high number of appeals and not many schools opening. But the law was also under pilot status until 1998 when the sunset provision was lifted.

This year there have been four charter school appeal hearings and none others scheduled for hearing at this time. Of the four, three of the cases are from Denver. The State Board ruled in favor of Northeast Academy and Monarch Montessori in February. However, the March hearing of Life Skills High School went in favor of the district on a 4-3 vote.

The appeal provision of the Charter Schools Act is one of the tenets that makes Colorado's law rank strong on national studies of charter school laws. It allows any applicant that has been denied, to bring their case to the State Board of Education for a quasi-judicial proceeding. In Colorado, the State Board has historically ruled with the district about half of the time and with the charter school half the time.

2012 Charter School Hall of Fame Inductees

This morning's opening session of the National Charter School Conference gave recognition to charter school leaders that were instrumental in the early years of charter schools in the early 1990's. Colorado's own Jim Griffin, President of the Colorado League of Charter Schools was inducted in to the Hall of Fame for his work, which includes starting the first charter support organization in the country. The video clip of Jim's work also featured the North Routt Community Charter School outside of Steamboat Springs.

Also inducted into the Hall of Fame were several leaders from Minnesota, the first state to pass a charter schools law in 1991. Jon Schroeder, Eric Mahmoud and City Academy were all honored. City Academy, started by Milo Cutter, was the first charter school in the country. Alums of City Academy were featured in a video clip and also personally addressed the audience.

Federal Programs and Their Impact on Charter Schools

Vic Klatt, Ursula Wright and Lisa Grover presented a workshop on federal programs at the 2012 National Charter School Conference.

Here are a few points that were made:

* There is complete gridlock in Washington. The ESEA was originally intended for reauthorization in 2007, but it still hasn't been done. The House put the ESEA in five chunks; only one passed and that includes the Charter School Program.

* NCLB is totally done. AYP is done. Teacher accountability is on the rise and there is general support for charter schools.

* The new waivers policy under U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is huge. In essence, every state with waivers has their own ESEA in 2-3 year segments. Waiver requests contains lots of jargon and confusing language; it's possible the ED doesn't even know what's in some of the approved requests.

* It will probably hold off until after the November elections, but there is a "fiscal Armageddon" coming between election day and January when the newly-elected members of Congress are seated. There will be an automatic 9% cut and cuts to military spending; the debt limit and unemployment tax needs to be addressed; and Bush tax cuts are still in place but will be revisited.

* Obama and Romney are fairly similar on education issues.

* There was no competition for SEAs to get CSP money in 2012 and probably won't be again in 2013. In 2010 funds were overcommitted and so states awarded in that year that are on 5 year grant cycles are probably the only states that are safe. The CSP grant is much more competitive.

Green Schools

The U.S. Department of Education recently announced their first Green Schools awards. Seventy-eight public schools were honored for their environmental impact, sustainability and "innovative school reforms."

It should be noted that the presumably now-healthy students in these Green Schools could be destined for a life of low achievement, underemployment and possibly even incarceration, but will undoubtedly have the satisfaction and peace of knowing they attended school in an environment that promoted recycling and a minimal impact on the environment.

As is the case with almost all education initiatives, there was data used to make the determination for which schools deserved this incredible distinction. For example, schools that now use rain barrels, previously-used pavement or off-grid solar power measured rainfall, tire pressure and iPad charge time, respectively. In the case of districts using school buses powered by used cooking oil for fuel, students who could correctly guess what type of food was made in the cooking oil were given a higher score.

The department's press release described the academic benefits for rope climbing, kayaking and other activities in their outdoor classrooms. In fact, reading "on the green" was used to enhance wilderness adventures. To ensure that school parents and communities were also involved in the green initiative, some schools posted "no idling" signs in parking lots and distributed garden produce to local shelters.

Students were prepared for growing up in the 21st Century by caring for bunnies, chickens, goats, fish and ducks. However, there was no mention of students learning about the anatomy and physiology of these animals in their Biology classes. One can only imagine these animals will also benefit from the enhanced green environment and live forever in their nurturing environment.

The one glaring omission from this press release was the hundreds of public schools deemed failing by the department and the hundreds of thousands of students attending these schools who cannot read or write on grade level. The effort put in to determining Green Schools meant that even less was being done for the students who have been failed by the public education system. Further, the message that everything is blissful as long as schools are recycling and minimizing their impact on the environment and therefore, focusing on getting students smarter isn't important, is part of the reason our nation is where it is today: performing significantly below countries that have clearly established the importance of a good education.

Alpha Authorizing

Jim Goenner is an excellent speaker, regardless of the topic he's presenting on. True to his nature, Jim Goenner presented an excellent workshop on Alpha Authorizing. Goenner started by talking about Ted Kolderie's July 1990 paper called "The States Will Have to Withdraw the Exclusive." Kolderie spoke about the system's need to change the incentives in public education. Kolderie's goal was to improve public education for ALL students. He proposed these goals be met through choice (empower families to choose their schools) and diversification (empower someone other than the district to create new public schools).

Goenner said that authorizers can either be change agents, market makers, forces for quality, and catalysts for excellence or they can be gatekeepers, monitors and evaluators. Goenner encouraged authorizers to think innovatively and challenge the "givens." Instead to foster an environment that attracts talent, capital and entrepreneurship. Authorizers should provide leadership and ideas for improving education, rather than being reactive to policies and practices that stimulate mediocrity.

Geonner stressed that public charter schools are "chartered" (a verb) and not "charter" (a noun). They are dynamic and evolving. Charter schools should foster an environment that attracts the can-do people who can strategize creative solutions.

By focusing on quality, charter school authorizers should:

*Thoroughly screen applicants and their applications.

* Measure and evaluate performance.

* Preserve discretionary judgement; in other words, be able to make wise decisions on a case-by-case basis rather than being locked in to policy restraints that aren't what's best for students.

* Protect school autonomy.

* Appropriately intervene when people fail. Don't be afraid to step in to close a charter school that doesn't perform well academically.

By being a catalyst for excellence, a charter school authorizer should

* Recognize and reward performance.

* Encourage the replication and expansion of successful charter schools.

* Create new performance-based paths for authorizing, overseeing and renewing charter contracts.

* Relentlessly pursue excellence (at all levels).

* Protect, preserve and advance the idea behind chartering. This is in regard to Kolderie's assertion that "someone other than" districts should be able to create new public schools.

Goenner also highlighted several statistics from the National Alliance for Public Charter School's website. He noted that every authorizer should have established key performance indicators for their schools collectively and individually. These indicators can fall into the broad categories of academic achievement/growth, fiscal performance and sustainability, organizational performance and student engagement.