The Pros and Cons of Charter School Systems

Charter schools began in 1988 when there was a clamor for educational reforms within the public school systems. Charter schools are schools that are innovative in terms of their curriculum. These schools also have a charter contract from different stakeholders such as the parents, the teachers and the community in which they are held accountable to achieve in order to continue existing. Because charter schools are designed to be accountable for the quality of education that they offer, enrollment in these charter schools have rapidly increased.

The Charter School Movement is one of the most successful growing educational reforms of the United States. Since the first charter school opened in Minnesota in 1992, the number has since then increased to about 3,600 which are spread throughout 40 states in America (The Center for Educational Reform 2007).

The design and the general operation of charter schools are based on these following guidelines: (1) Charter schools should uphold academic excellence and they are accountable to this. If charter schools cannot live up to the expectations set by stakeholders then their funding would be cut and they will be closed. (2) Charter schools allow families the opportunity to choose the right and the most appropriate school for their child in order to have the best quality education. Teachers of the charter school movement may also choose to create and work at schools where they directly shape the best working and learning environment for their students and themselves (The Center for Educational Reform. 2007); and (3) Although they still follow the same rules and regulations as that of public schools, charter schools are autonomous and are free to design their own curriculum and that they have their own states funding which cannot be diverted into other state institutions or affairs.

Charter schools are designed to give families the choice on where they want their children to enroll in. Charter schools may accept student enrollees which are not included in their immediate district. Charter schools also act as laboratories in which successful practices in teaching and learning could be identified and later learned and replicated by the traditional public schools. Also, because charter schools are not heavily regulated by the school districts, policies that are identified to be most prohibitive in the pursuit of educational excellence can be eliminated for all the schools. Because there is a risk that traditional public schools would have a drop in enrollment due to the enrollment in charter schools, competition is created in which traditional public schools will improve their performance to maintain or prevent drop in student enrollment due to charter schools. Because they are held accountable and may loose funding or may even face closure, charter schools do their best to uphold the standards of excellence that their contract asks of them (Jan McComb. March 2002).

Studies have shown that compared to students in the nearest regular public school, charter school students are 4 percent more likely to be proficient in reading and 2 percent more likely to be proficient in math, on their state's exam (The Center for Educational Reform. 2007). Also compared to students in the nearest regular public school with a similar racial composition, charter students are 5 percent more likely to be proficient in reading and 3 percent more likely to be proficient in math (The Center for Educational Reform. 2007)

Although charter schools are becoming popular, there are still disadvantages that are associated with them. Because of their small size and limited numbers, charter schools can only provide public school options only to a limited number of families. Because of this, fairness and equality in the acceptance of students for enrollment might become biased to the more favored families of the community (Jan McComb. March 2002) Charter schools are too limited in scope in order to adequately provide pressure to the entire public school system for reform. Studies have shown that charter schools in California school districts are still not yet being held accountable for student learning and that the three principles that guide the charter school system is still not being implemented properly (Amy Stuart Wells 1998).

All in all, the charter school movement is a very promising reform movement in order to increase the educational standard of the United States. However, the guiding principles of why these charter schools are created should be strictly followed and monitored. Charter schools should not become biased on their selection process of student enrollees. Because of the limited slots for students in charter schools, the powers that be in accepting and selecting students might become biased and might be inclined to accept students who are already academically superior to other students. This should be avoided so that charter schools can live up to its guiding principle of trying on different teaching techniques to a varied student populace. Lastly, charter schools should start taking accountability for student achievements in order for it to become truly effective and to have a greater impact on the educational reform movement. Stakeholders and sponsors of these charter schools should also make sure that these schools are following their guiding principles in order to ensure the success of this reform movement.

REFERENCES:

The Center for Educational Reform. (2007) Just the FAQS: Charter Schools. http://www.edreform.com/index.cfm?fuseAction=document&documentID=60

Jan McComb. (March 2002). Charter Schools. Issue Brief: Legislative Policy, Research, and Committee Services. http://www.leg.state.or.us/comm/commsrvs/brief_charterschool.pdf

Amy Stuart Wells. (1998). Beyond the Rhetoric of Charter School Reform: A Study of Ten California School Districts. http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/docs/charter.PDF