A Report Worth Reading

Fordham’s latest report Charter School Autonomy: A Half-Broken Promise is well worth reading (disc: I was on the advisory panel). We’ve known for a while that some states restrict charter school freedoms more than others, but this report adds an important dimension to the issue of charter school autonomy by digging into how charter school authorizers do, or don’t, restrict charter school operations. The report finds that on average authorizers reduce charter schools’ overall autonomy ‘grade’ from a B+ to a B-.

Autonomy and accountability are often thought of as a trade-off in charter schooling–expanded autonomy in exchange for increased accountability. But this report shows that there is also an intersection between autonomy and accountability, and that accountability may ultimately impinge on autonomy. This may be in the form of additional requirements in a charter application, subtle pressure from an authorizer to use a particular discipline system, or tests that constrain a school’s ability to experiment with different curricula. This intersection is important to consider if we expect autonomy to lead to real innovation and experimentation in schools. How we set up our accountability systems will partly determine how much innovation happens.

Also, as authorizers face more scrutiny over the quality of their schools, they may seek to minimize risk by minimizing schools’ ability to try new strategies. As one authorizer states in the report:

In recent years, we have definitely moved away from taking ‘leaps of faith’ on charter applications. In the past, we have seen too many of those leaps [result] in harm to students. There are too many proven approaches out there; [we can’t] justify that level of uncalculated experimentation on students.

It’s a report worth reading, and an issue that should continue to be watched.

Tagged as: Charter School Authorizers, Charter Schools, Fordham Institute