The Charter Divide: Stakeholders in Massachusetts’ Public Education Debate
Charters Portrayed as an Alternative to Traditional Education
Charter school growth has shaken up Massachusetts’s view on public education. Despite the defeat of the November ballot initiative to increase the number of charter schools, the debate over these independently run schools is far from over.
According to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 40,200 students attend the 72 operating charter schools in Massachusetts while more than 32,000 students are on a waitlist to receive admission. But the idea of growing charter schools raises questions and creates a political divide.
Pro- and anti-charter groups pumped millions of dollars into advertising during the election campaign. Bright yellow signs with a showy red X for No on 2 dotted neighborhood lawns, while TV ads filled commercial breaks pushing for a yes vote.
In the last weeks of the campaign, Gov. Charlie Baker released a 30-second ad paid for by Great Schools Massachusetts promoting the ballot question.
“Public charter schools give parents a choice and are a pathway to success for these kids,” Baker said in the ad. “If you like your school, Question 2 won’t affect you, but Question 2 will change the future for thousands of kids who need your help.”
But what was missing in all the ads and debate was an explanation of key differences between charter and traditional district schools – an absence that led to many misunderstandings about the issue.
Simply stated, although charter schools are classified as public schools they operate as their own district, establishing their own instructional practices and academic curriculum.
“The operating principle of charter schools is that they are free to innovate,” said Erica Brown, chief of policy and practice at the Massachusetts Charter Public School Association. “It’s the diversity of charter schools and the autonomy of charter schools. That’s the unifying principle.”
These differences from traditional public schools are attractive to families looking for more successful educational routes for their children. This demand, illustrated by the 33,000 names on the waitlist for charter schools, was central to those supporting Question 2.
But this number could be skewed. Students may remain on the waitlist because they have been rolled over from the previous year’s list, or certain charter schools leave seats unfilled despite the waitlist.
According to the State Department of Education, there are 43,294 names on charter school waitlists across the state, which reflect 33,903 unique individuals. “Of those 33,903 students, 4,833 students (14.3 percent) are on an average of about three different waitlists, but they are only counted once,” the 2015-2016 report said.
Though waitlists for charter schools are lengthy, traditional districts schools are also seeing a growing number of students on their waitlists. Boston specifically has a list that totals “nearly 21,000 students, who, as of now didn’t get one of their first three choices for the current school year,” according to the Boston Teacher’s Union. Students must enter separate lotteries for charter and traditional district schools.
A 2013 report by the Boston Foundation notes, “the odds of receiving a charter offer are roughly comparable to the chances of receiving a first-choice assignment in [a Boston district school].”
Both charters and traditional district schools operate on the lottery system. For Boston Public Schools, students are allowed a top three pick and placed in schools from there. Boston Teacher’s Union suggests that “there are no less than 7,000 BPS students on a waitlist for their top choice, and considering that some of these students are not on three separate wait lists…there are probably closer to 10,000 unique BPS students on a waitlist for their first choice.”
Match Public Charter Schools, a three-school system in Boston that gets top marks from academic researchers, keeps students in its system from admittance through high school graduation. Siblings of admitted Match students receive top priority for admission into the system. Other charter schools throughout the Greater Boston area operate on a similar lottery process.
A main argument posed by opponents of charter school expansion is that charters are stealing money from public schools.
“If we truly believe in helping all students, we wouldn’t take from district school coffers and move it to charter school coffers,” said Boston City Councilor Tito Jackson. “We would deal with the underlying issue that everyone is dodging. In the state of Massachusetts, we underfund public education by $1 billion annually.”
Jackson has been a longtime foe of charter school expansion, saying public schools perform the same, if not better, than charter schools.
“I believe charters were put forward to be a test kitchen for innovative, new ideas. They weren’t put forward to take over public schools. That was not their objective. It’s challenging for me to hear a narrative where people are saying that charters are simply better,” Jackson said.
But a September 2016 Brookings Institution’s research report found that charter schools in the state’s urban areas “have large, positive effects on educational outcomes, far better than those of the traditional public schools that charter students would otherwise attend.”
The study said charter school outcomes were “particularly large and positive for disadvantaged students, English learners, special education students, and children who enter charter with low test scores.”
The study’s estimates showed an increase over one year in Boston charter middle school math test scores by a 25 percent of a standard deviation. For language arts, test scores increased about 15 percent of a standard deviation. But these test score gains are even larger in charter school.
Elizabeth Setren, an MIT researcher who has worked closely with the state Education Department, said the Brookings report, which she collaborated on, was centered around the lottery system for charter schools.
“We approached individual charter schools and collected their lottery records, then compared students who want to go to a charter school to those who don’t receive an offer,” Setren said.
Setren said the research has shown how successful charter schools are, and she hopes policy makers who debate the next step for charter schools will look at educational outcomes more than school funding issues.
“The debate is centered around school finance,” Setren said. Instead she says the question should be “are kids at charter schools getting a quality education?”
Setren said her research says the students are.
“In fact, for English-language learners, a year in a charter school essentially allowed them to catch up to native English speakers in traditional public schools, erasing much of the achievement gap that typically exists,” according to an MIT News report on her research.
“The outcomes for English-language learners and special education students are really lagging behind,” Setren said. “They’re two of the most disadvantaged groups, and so I think any effort to understand what can work and what can make a difference is really important.”
Katherine Merseth, senior lecturer on education at Harvard University, said her own research and other studies indicate that these disadvantaged groups perform better in charter schools and the schools’ operating structure helps the staff adjust what works and what doesn’t.
“Charters have the advantage of being much more nimble than traditional public schools because their governance structures are closer to the school,” Merseth said. “In general, charters have much less of a bureaucratic structure of administration as well.”
But the bureaucratic and legislative process can stifle charter school growth. States such as California and Texas place limits on charter school expansion.
California, Texas, and Florida have the most charter schools operating and continue to debate efforts to expand. And though charter schools are on the rise in these states, others like Kentucky, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and West Virginia don’t permit charter schools.
Texas has recently increased the bond capacity for charter schools, allowing millions of dollars to remain in public charter school coffers. The state’s move to guaranteed these school bonds, has added another $566 million in school bond debt, ultimately allowing charter schools to pay a lower interest rate.
Though this endowment aims to help charter schools financially, Texas charter schools are facing what other charter schools across the nation face — lack of facility funds. Many public charter schools in Texas that, serve mostly economically disadvantaged students, currently occupy old commercial space, mainly out of necessity. But this hasn’t impacted the success rate of Texas charter schools.
A Children at Risk, a Texas-based child advocacy group, research report found “a significant number of charters [in Texas are] beating the odds. These schools have more economically disadvantaged students than the state average and yet are outperforming the state in their academic performance.”
Despite the generally positive assessment of charters, states are still reluctant to allow unbridled expansion. California charter schools were denied the chance to expand to satellite campuses in early November in a state appellate court ruling. The decision said that hundreds of these charter satellite campuses are illegally operating outside of their permitted districts.
“The ruling was considered a win for California’s school districts that have seen student numbers and state attendance funds decrease when charters opened “resource centers” in their boundaries without the district’s approval or oversight,” the Northern California Record reported. But charter school advocates say the court ruling is a loss and the education of more than 150,000 independent study charter school students will be disrupted.
Charter school advocates will continue to push for expansion and emphasize the impact charter schools have on the public education landscape. The California Charter Schools Association noted that “74 percent of charter schools met student achievement targets for disadvantaged students compared to 59 percent of non-charter schools. Sixty-seven percent of California’s charter schools met student achievement targets on state tests in the 2009-10 school year compared to just 57 percent of non-charter schools.”
Though charter expansion for Massachusetts failed, Gov. Baker has turned his focus to other ways the change the educational landscape.
“I am proud that our administration has made historic investments in our public schools, expanded support for vocational schools and proposed new solutions to make college more affordable,” Baker said an official statement. “I look forward to working closely with all stakeholders toward our common goal to ensure a great education for every child in Massachusetts, regardless of their zip code.”
Charters Provide Teachers With Choices
By 7:05 a.m., Jackie Mulvehill, a 6th grade history teacher, is usually preparing to serve breakfast in the cafeteria or greet students in the hallway of the Match Public Charter School in Jamaica Plain.
It’s her regular routine as she gears up for another day of teaching her predominately high-need, low-income and English-as-a-second language students. A high point for her are the sessions with her teaching coach to ensure she’s on the right track with her weekly lesson plans and to gain insight on how to improve her teaching skills.
This feedback process is one aspect that the Match school system prides itself on – that and its high test scores and college completion rates. In 2008, the U.S. Department of Education recognized Match High School as one of the eight best charter high schools in the country; in 2009 the school was ranked by the U.S. News and World Report in the top 3 percent of public high schools.
According to the school website, “In 2014, 80 percent of our English Language Learners achieved proficiency in the fourth grade literacy MCAS after being at Match for less than three years.”
Match provides coaching periods for all teachers. Mulvehill meets with her coach once a week in the morning before she has back-to-back teaching blocks. She knows how coaching can make a significant difference for the individual teachers and the school as a whole.
Her knowledge comes from a less than positive experience. The 28-year-old from Needham, began her charter school career in Washington, D.C., where she also attended American University for graduate school; in her two years there, she said she never received the mentoring she needed to be a successful teacher.
“My charter school was literally a horrific place to work. I got observed twice a year and got no feedback. We had lesson plans due, but nothing ever came of it,” Mulvehill said. “I never got feedback on my teaching.”
To make matters worse, Mulvehill said her principal was also operating a pyramid scheme that sold women’s girdles, and he employed teachers to work for him.
“In charter schools, principals have unbelievable autonomy, which is a great thing as a principal because you can require and ask more of your teachers for students,” she said. “But there are some principals that don’t do well with that power.”
Discouraged by the poor working environment, Mulvehill decided to leave. Less than two years later, the school was closed.
Mulvehill moved to Boston, and though she wasn’t ready to return to a classroom, she still wanted a job in education. She took a position with a local nonprofit, where she coached and managed first and second year teachers in three different Boston public schools. In a school leadership role, Mulvehill ran the last three hours of the school day as a coordinator and worked alongside teachers to create a balanced curriculum.
“I never thought that I would go back to the classroom because I had such a horrible experience, and teaching is literally one of the most exhausting jobs when you care about what you’re doing,” she said.
After four years of providing feedback and support to other teachers, Mulvehill realized she wanted to return to the classroom. She said she was inspired to become the best teacher she could be, choosing the type of working environment she had abandoned several years before — charter schools.
Now in her first year of teaching at Match, Mulvehill has sought teaching opportunities that would provide her with the coaching the school provides.
“I want that feedback so I can be a better teacher. I’ll be working my tail off, but I’m doing it to become a better teacher.”
Mulvehill felt the communication at Match was a perfect fit for her. She was able to understand what feedback she would be getting and a clear expectation of what to expect in their charter school system before even beginning her teaching duties.
That is one of the reasons why Mulvehill strongly believes in the charter school system, including her support for lifting the cap on the number of charter schools in the state. Massachusetts voters rejected that proposal on Nov. 8.
“I don’t think they realize how hard teachers are working in charter schools to help improve student achievement and close the achievement gap,” Mulvehill said.
One of the major debate points about the ballot question focused on the types of students charter schools serve. Unlike public schools, charter schools are choose which students may attend, creating, some tension between charter school and public school teachers.
Mulvehill recognizes that problem. “Some charters really do kick out students and only keep the high performing ones,” she said.
Mulvehill said this is the reason many public school teachers dislike charter schools.
“There are schools that do take advantage of being able to kick students out easier than a public school. Then those public schools inherit those students,” Mulvehill said. “It makes it seem like the charter schools are not trying as hard to support the whole student and just kick them out.”
But Mulvehill said she hasn’t seen such cynicism in her school, which she said works to retain and support students. Not many charter schools will expel a student on a one-time offense, she said.
Mulvehill said charter school teachers are concerned with the success of their students and work to have a disciplinary structure that allows for a better learning environment. They also provide extra tutoring hours to ensure that students aren’t left behind.
Mulvehill she spends the last part of her afternoon either assisting with a tutoring class period or in a study hall. Since the charter school has a longer school day, these study hall periods allow for homework completion. She said she usually leaves school around 5:30 or 5:45 p.m. each day, a few hours after her friends in public schools have completed their days.
These long demanding hours are part of the charter school structure, according to Katherine Merseth, senior lecturer on education at Harvard University.
“Charters tend to employ younger teachers who either start having a family or go to grad school. (The charter schools) pay less, and often ask teachers to do more,” Merseth said.
Mulvehill said her brother, who works in the Boston Public School system, makes roughly $100,000. She said the public school system traditionally pays more than charter schools – a possible factor in charter schools’ higher teacher turnover rate.
“Boston is probably one of the highest paying school districts in the country,” Mulvehill said.
Mulvehill said if she taught in the Boston system, as a third- year teacher she would be making around $66,000, about $1,000 more a year than her current pay. She said her salary is almost unheard of with her level of teaching experience.
“Because it’s a charter they can technically pay people whatever they want, whereas [BPS] is on a pay scale,” she said.
According to glassdoor.com, a database of salary reports, benefit reviews, and more, the average salary for a BPS teacher is $71,393 per year. For a middle school teacher, like Mulvehill, the annual salary is $72,707. Mulvehill said her salary should increase as she gains more teaching experience. If she were to move into a school leadership position, which she said she would consider doing to stay working at a charter school, her pay could increase by more than $10,000.
Despite criticism of longer hours and lower pay, Mulvehill said charter schools have a significant advantage over public schools when it comes to classroom sizes. Smaller classrooms allow teachers to cater to individual students a benefit for both the students and the teachers.
The average class size in the 2014 school year for BPS was 17.3 students. According a BPS report, class size limits are set in the contract with the Boston Teachers’ Union. But charter school classes are much smaller. An analysis of state data put the average at 12.2 students per class.
“Charters can have the potential to be great,” she said. “I think Match is a wonderful network and I know resources are going to where I can be literally the best teacher I can be in an inner city school.”