“QUESTION 2. Charter school expansion. The question, if approved, would let state education officials approve up to 12 new charter schools a year.” The state education officials referenced in the question are the members of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE), who have the power to approve or withdraw a charter school application under Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 71, Section 89. There has been much discussion about the Board’s role after we reported that Paul Sagan, the Chair of BESE, gave $100,000 to a fundraising committee supporting Yes On 2’s efforts.
As mentioned previously on this blog, we are firmly NO on Question 2 and explained our reasons in our last post.But let’s break down what is actually IN the Initiative Petition (linked here and pasted below) that would become part of Massachusetts State Law if passed on November 8th.
What’s IN ballot Question Number 2:
The board may authorize up to 12 new charters or charter school expansions per year (or a combination of the two).
These new authorizations cannot exceed 1% of the total enrollment of the student population in Massachusetts, which was 953,429 in 2016, so new charter authorizations cannot exceed more than ~9,530 seats per year. Obviously this number will go up with population growth.
If the board receives more than 12 applications, BESE will “give priority to proposed charter schools or enrollment expansions in districts where student performance on statewide assessments is in the bottom 25% of all districts in the previous two years and where demonstrated parent demand for additional public school options is greatest.” A mystery to us: What method would BESE use to determine parent demand?
The approved new charter schools must comply with the student recruitment and retention policies already in place and will be subject to annual performance reviews by BESE.
What ISN’T in Ballot Question Number 2:
There isn’t one word in Question 2 about how 12 new public schools will be funded. I’ll use my own shoe collection here as a metaphor: If I add 12 new shoes to my already full shoe rack each year, they will (a) cost me money and (b) I will have to toss out 12 pairs of shoes to put all my shoes away. If Question 2 passes, existing public schools in your town and mine will lose money and may have to close.
There is no mechanism to stop the expansion of charter schools. This ballot question will remove from State Law the language that caps charter schools at 18% of a district’s total spending. We’ve written about how profitable charter schools can be, sothe initial interest by investors will be high. But the unchecked proliferation of charter schools will weaken ALL schools, because the amount of money available and the number of students is finite.
Charter schools will be able to open anywhere in Massachusetts. Anywhere. While the ballot question states the Board will give preference to charter applications in lower performing districts if there’s more than 12 applications, there is absolutely no language stopping charter schools from opening in any city or any town in Massachusetts. As we mentioned in our last post, charter school applications are NOT subject to the approval of your local school committee or your local government.
Public school parents know the Back to School drill: In the piles of paperwork that tumble from our children’s backpacks during the first weeks of school, we’ll find a list of all the basic classroom supplies that our teachers need to do their job. Families with enough extra money will buy paper, markers, soap, hand sanitizer, tissues, and deliver them along with our kids in the first weeks of school. Many of us will be asked to do this again and again throughout the school year.
There’s a question on the November ballot this year that could make public school funding shortfalls even worse. Ballot question number 2, if approved by voters, would allow up to 12 new charter schools every year without any additional funding attached to them. Just as the world has been blind-sided with the far reaching implications in the wake of the Brexit vote, the passage of the charter school ballot question will have a far-reaching financial impact on all K-12 education sectors and municipal budgets alike.
There are a number of reasons why a NO vote on Question 2 is the right choice, even if you are in favor of charter schools. We’ll explain briefly first for those short on time:
Ballot Question Number 2 would bring more charter schools to Massachusetts, but NOT more students and NOT more funding.
The Commonwealth’s funding structure for charter schools is broken; the expansion of charter schools defunds traditional public schools of critically needed state education aid.
Over 200 Massachusetts School Committees, Mayor Walsh, the Massachusetts Democratic Party, The Massachusetts Municipal Association, 8 City Councils and the NAACP oppose Question 2 due to problems with funding and the negative impact the additional charter schools would have on existing public schools and municipal budgets.
Charter schools open (and close) without the approval of the local government or the local school committee.
Charter schools use public money, but are privately operated.
Sold on voting NO on Question 2? Stop readinghere and thank youso much for voting NO (and asking your friends to do the same). Skeptical? We love geeking out about public school funding and we’ll happily explain. Ballot Question Number 2 would bring more charter schools to Massachusetts, but NOT more students and NOT more money
When a new charter school opens, students from nearby traditional public schools (and parochial schools, or even other charter schools) may leave to attend the new school. Despite a decrease in enrollment, the cost of running a school does not go down. In some cases the district’s cost may go up, because according to State Law, the sending public school district must pay for the charter school’s transportation. Traditional public school districts are structured to educate students; they are not designed to constantly contract and expand to accommodate the flow of students to charter schools (and sometimes back again).
Ballot Question Number 2 will add 12 more charter schools per year in Massachusetts with no endpoint in sight and no funding source. This unchecked proliferation will no doubt lead to public school closures and threatens to end public education as we know it in Massachusetts, even though we already have the best public schools in the country. If charter schools are able to expand at this accelerated rate, our existing under-resourced (and sometimes under-performing) public schools will get worse, not better.
The Commonwealth’s funding structure for charter schools is broken
Under the current funding structure, the sending district pays the tuition cost for the charter school using the state education aid earmarked for the entire district. When charter school proponents say the money follows the student, it doesn’t exactly tell the whole story. Because charter school tuition assessments are paid FIRST, a relatively small number of students receive the bulk of the state aid allocated to the whole district. There’s a reimbursement formula to help off-set the financial impact of a student leaving for a charter school, but it’s never fully funded by the state legislature. Here's how that scenario played out in Boston last year:
It’s in part due to this imbalanced funding structure that a bill to raise the charter school cap failed in the Massachusetts State Senate in 2014. In 2016, an education bill passed in the Senate that would have tied a cap increase to an additional ~$1 billion in education spending, but the House failed to take up the bill before the legislative session ended in July.
Citing issues with the funding mechanism, Boston's Mayor Marty Walsh reiterated his opposition to the ballot question (31 minute mark) on Boston Public Radio in July. It’s worth noting that Mayor Walsh was a co-founder of the Neighborhood House Charter School and is a fervent charter school supporter.
Over 200* Massachusetts School Committees, many elected officials, and the NAACP are opposed to Ballot Question 2
Charter schools open (and close) without the approval of the local government or the local school committee Prospective charter schools submit applications to open a new school to the Massachusetts State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE). Approval is given by BESE without the consent of the local government or school committee.
“The ripple effects of this school’s closing were widely felt by its students, their families, their teachers, and administrators, as well as the students, teachers, and administrators of the schools that had to absorb the displaced students mid-year. What makes this especially troubling is that it was preventable. I hope the lessons learned here will be appropriately incorporated into management and oversight practices to ensure a solid foundation for learning and to make this the last mid-year closing of a charter school.”
Better results, or apples to oranges? Charter school proponents boast that their students are performing better on standardized tests, but they are often enrolling and/or retaining students with less complex academic challenges. In Boston, the student population of the Boston Public Schools district is composed of 30% English Language Learners and 20% Students with Disabilities, while the charter schools in Boston are composed of 13% English Language Learners and 17% Students with Disabilities. As the number of charter schools expands and the number of district schools decreases, are charters prepared to educate children with more complex needs?
A recent study of Texas charter schools by Harvard and Princeton researchers yielded a surprising result. Though charter school students may perform better on standardized tests while in school, that did not result in increased income or better jobs for the graduates. It begs the question: Are charter schools simply teaching to a test?
Public money, private governance
Charter school advocates have long argued that charter schools are public schools. They are correct in that they operate with public money, but their governing boards (and their profits) are largely in the realm of the private sector. A 2016 report on Massachusetts charter schools by the Annenberg Institute of School Reform found that approximately a third of the seats on charter schools’ boards of trustees are held by members of the financial sector. Parents of charter school students make up only 14% of charter school trustees statewide, and 60% of the Massachusetts charter schools have NO parent representatives on their boards, even though state law mandates that 50% of the board should be parents.
InAugust, the National Labor Relations Board decided in two cases related to unionization that charter schools are private corporations and not public schools. The decisions were specific to New York and Pennsylvania, but it will be interesting to see if related cases arise as more charter school teachers attempt to unionize.
In 2015, the Washington State Supreme Court overturned a voter approved charter school referendum that passed in 2004 on the grounds that “money that is dedicated to common schools is unconstitutionally diverted to charter schools.” Massachusetts has a similar clause related to funding in our state constitution, but a lawsuit has never been filed on this specific issue.
Please:
Join us in opposing Ballot Question Number 2 Ask your friends, family and neighbors to vote NO on question 2 Share this widely with your networks until the election on November, 8th 2016
UPDATE: Over the past week, we've received some great follow-up questions about state education aid in the context of the BPS budget. We include 2 new supplemental figures below to help answer these questions. Both include information on the source data for the figures. Thank you to everyone for sharing and asking great follow-up questions. It's also worth mentioning that in addition to losing $120 million in state aid to charters this year, BPS also spent $15 million in charter school transportation.
