A chat with Jim Griffin

I was chatting with Jim Griffin the President of the Colorado League of Charter Schools a few days after Governor announced his proposal to cut K-12 education 4.6%. We talked about that and other issues facing charter schools and the Colorado League.

As we talked about the Governor’s budget cut proposal, it was clear that Jim thinks it’s too early to know for sure, but that the message for charters is that we have to prepare for the worst. While there has been some talk of legal challenges, there are a number of ways that the Governor could approach this to try to make it square with Amendment 23. For example, Jim said that some have talked about adjusting the factors for cost of living and district size. In addition, as Amendment 23 only affects the base, I asked Jim if he thought Charter School Capital Construction funding might be cut. He said, “Anything that’s not in the base is vulnerable.”

He also said that as charter schools tend to be more “nimble” financially, it’s going to be interesting to see how charter schools do with this reduced funding environment. There might be a real contrast in the way charter schools handle these cuts compared to the way districts handle them. His advice? “Be knowledgeable about your revenue line items and which will be directly affected by cuts and be prepared for the worst. It’s going to be awhile before we know the actual cuts, but schools should be prepared.”

I then turned to the Colorado League Annual Conference that has been moved from November to February 25th and 26th. I really enjoy the League conference. Being from outside of the greater Denver area, I don’t see a lot of other charter leaders very often. It’s a time to reconnect and also make new connections. I also get to hear a lot of good things about the way charters are going and hear the struggles of others. The charter usually has about three hundred people attending, and with the conference in February this year, The League hopes that the turn out will be even greater. Kelly Grable is leading the effort and you can contact her if you are interested in presenting (Kgrable@coloradoleague.org).

I also got more information about The League’s strategic plan that is coming to completion. While not final, Jim told me that The League is working on a couple of interesting issues that should help charter schools. One effort involves a sustainable funding formula for expanded advocacy support – both at the state capitol and beyond. Another intriguing element will investigate the viability of alternative arrangements for delivering special education services to individual charter schools and groups of charters.

Jim had to run because he was off to a meeting in downtown New York, but those are a few things going on at The Colorado League of Charter Schools as they try to support charter schools across the state.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

See more about the league at www.coloradoleague.org

For more about membership in the league go here.

To be fair

Yesterday I wrote a blog about MN2020's report about charter school financial accountability. While I stick to everything that I wrote, I also want give MN2020 their due.

John Fitzgerald wrote a very positive piece about the 25 schools in Minnesota that had perfect audits.

I don't have much else to say because I still think that receiving a perfect audit says nothing about whether or not a school is a good school. A friend of mine once said that some financial people act as if the organization is a finance department with a school wrapped around it rather than a school that needs a finance department.

As a financial person, it's hard for me to say sometimes, but I'll take a school with decent financial controls and accounting but with an excellent academic program aligned with its mission over a school with excellent financial management with a decent academic program any day.

That isn't to say that a school ought not try to achieve both. It is simply to make sure that we prioritize properly. Thanks, John, for your positive piece.

Charters school have no accountability?

In a report from Minnesota, we hear that 75% of Minnesota charter schools have financial irregularities. This may sound alarming, but as a financial person, I know that a financial irregularity may be something as simple as someone using an incorrect account number. The question is are these schools effective at educating students and if they are is the money flowing out of the school inappropriately?

Let's look at the issue of not having proper segregation of duties, which was pointed out in the report. It is absolutely important that any organization, school or not, have good segregation of duties. This helps (but does not ensure) that funds are not misappropriated. In small organizations (such as charter schools) complete segregation of duties is almost impossible. (In a bit of self serving here, I'll mention that the company I work for assists charter schools in this regard by providing outsourced financial services at a reasonable cost so that schools don't get in this situation.).

The other thing that bothers me about the report and reduces the report's credibility in my eyes is the statement:

According to the report “Checking In on Charter Schools,” there were 154 charter schools in Minnesota in the 2007-08 school year, and nearly 30,000 students were enrolled in charter schools. They received about $10,500 per student from the state but are not required to publicly elect a school board. As a result, the public pays for the school but has no say in how it’s run or managed.

Can it really be true that in Minnesota the public has no say in how the charter school is "run or managed?" That just can't be. Charter schools have to obey almost all of the same laws as do non-charter public schools. The charter school has to be authorized by some entity above the charter school board, and the school has to follow the terms of its charter. Are the charter laws and the charters written so poorly in Minnesota (where charter schools started) that the public has "no" say? That is just beyond belief.

In addition, the charter school's audit report is a public document and any findings are public as well. The authorizer should receive a copy of the audit and any findings. So, there is public say so. If the issues haven't risen to the level of public concern, then either the public doesn't understand or the issues are minor enough that the public doesn't care. There is, after all, more to education than compliance. Compliance means you follow the rules. It doesn't mean you do a good job. For example, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers follow the same rules as the Indianapolis Colts. That doesn't mean that their football team is as good.

Let's take another example of a library. A library can be kept in perfect order with all the books properly coded and on the right shelves. The catalog system can be completely up to date, but if no one uses the library or the books are not on topics relevant to the users, or if the library if filled with comic books, then the library is worthless.

On the other hand, a library might not have the best tracking system or some books might not get on the right shelves, but if the library has the books that people need and has a great librarian who makes sure the best books and relevant books are brought into the collection, you have a good library.

I'm not suggesting that schools out not strive for better policies and procedures in their financial record keeping. In fact, the reason I joined my company is to help smaller school avoid this issue all together. I am suggesting that technical difficulties in accounting does not normally rise to the level of an offense that should cause a school to be closed. In fact, what it probably should cause is for the authorizer to step in and coach the school or require them to get additional outside help. The level of offense also does not affect the main priority of the school, which is educating children.

The whole point of charters is to give them some freedom, but in most states, such as Colorado, charters cannot exempt themselves from any of the school finance laws. Because of this schools, especially young schools, do make mistakes on reports to the department of education or in getting documents ready for audit. It doesn't make them evil or a bad school.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MN2020 is a progressive think tank which in my language means that it stresses form and check boxes more than results. For example, they toot the familiar we don't spend enough per student line, when there is little research that shows a direct causal relationship between per pupil spending and academic achievement. They call themselves a"progressive, non-partisan" organization, which by itself is deceptive. They may not be associated with a party, but they are not unbiased.

Chicken or Egg: Do unions make good charter schools?

After this morning's post, I read an article on the New York State Teachers Union site about a charter school that is operating successfully with union teachers. This is proof that unions and charter schools do not have to be at odds. It's a good blog and a good example.

As usual, I have to point out a negative in the blog. "Teacher unionists said the conference poignantly illustrated why charter school teachers need union representation," states the blog writer. The problem I have is perhaps nit-picking, but often the devil truly is in the details. The problem is the word "need." The other problem is the word "charter school teachers."

The emphasis in education can't be the teachers. It has to be the students. The teachers are extremely important, but the focus has to be what is good for the students.

The problem with the word "need" is that there are many charter schools functioning really well without unionized teachers. As I pointed out this morning, there is absolutely no guarantee from the union that they will provide quality teachers and certainly every indication that there are many factors that contribute to good teaching that do not necessitate either certification or union membership. In fact, a state or district could have non-union certified teachers and not lose a thing.

Again, what I see (and I realize that I'm looking for it) is unions making more of themselves than they are. Unions are not bad in and of themselves. I hope none of our regular readers hear us saying that. The point is that unions continue some of the bad habits of the past of self-protection and putting forward positive examples and ignoring their negative examples of union actions. I really like what happens when good union teachers provide good education, but the question is a causal one. Does the fact that these are union teachers make them better teachers? That fact has yet to be shown. Perhaps it is the case that these teachers are great teachers because they are the type that want to teach in a charter school where the demands are greater, where the principal is more supportive. We have to examine the variables before we can jump on the union band wagon.

AFT on charter schools and partnerships

I know most of you can't believe I'm doing this, but to be fair, I want you all to see what the American Federation of Teachers says about charter schools.

I have to admit that I like a lot of what is on the AFT web site on this issue. The AFT talks about innovation, empowering teachers in the classroom, accountability and transparency. These are all good things.

Not surprisingly, here is where I strongly disagree. The AFT says that charter schools should "Hire well-qualified teachers—either certified teachers or those on a pathway to certification." The problem is that there is absolutely no research that demonstrates that certification makes a teacher a better teacher. The charter school that I used to work for had great teachers. Most of the best teachers were not certified. One is a retired instructor from the US Air Force Academy. One is simply a great teacher with a long history of teaching in private schools and charter schools who is passionate and well educated in his subject. Another, my daughter's AP Chemistry teacher (Linda Cummings) who educated her students so well that my daughter who ended up as class salutatorian and is now at the Colorado School of Mines is breezing through chemistry while many of her classmates struggle.

What is it that keeps unions after the idea of charter schools as long as they don't hurt unions? Is it about the kids? Excuse me for being skeptical, but I'm glad that unions are beginning to recognize the strengths of charter schools. The problem is that they continue in self-protective mode.

In business we see that those who succeed are those who create value. It seems to me that if the unions really wanted to convince people like me that they are all about the kids and education rather than simply protecting themselves through legislation, they would do things that created value--that they'd be passionate about creating value. The reason I'm skeptical is that I don't see that happening. I don't see the unions saying, "Hey, the way we are going to justify our existence is to make sure that all of our teachers are as good as they can be. If a teacher wants to be in the union in good standing, he or she must demonstrate the skills that make students better. In fact, we'll self-police our union members and get rid of members that don't meet our high standards." Has anyone heard a union leader say any of those things? If you have, I haven't.

I urge you, AFT leaders, if you are reading this blog. Convince me. Show me. Demonstrate that you really want to create value in education. Then I'll get on your side. Thank you for writing so many positive things about charter schools. I hope that you are honest about wanting to partner with charter schools rather than destroy them. I hope that in your partnership, you strive to make them better by making your members be better. Don't let slackers maintain union membership. Encourage those who are not good teachers to find other professions. Public charter schools need great teachers just as public non-charter schools do. Help create those teachers. Can we be partners?

Charter school innovates with program for peace and reconciliation

In an age when many of us in the "older" generation worry about what appears to be increasing youth violence, it's nice to see a school emphasizing peace and non-violent solutions to problems. Santa Barbara Charter Middle School has implemented a program to teach middle schoolers how to look at the world with an aim at non-violence.

The program, "Alternatives to Violence" (AVP), is an initiative that began in 1975 as collaboration between inmates in Green Haven Prison and Quakers interested in working with youth gangs and teens at risk.

Students will learn how to communicate with compassion and how to show concern for others in this three day program. These middle school students will then mentor others in the spring. The program allows students to voice their concerns and to explore solutions.

The program is a refreshing change of pace to the academic day and given research that shows that good character promotes good academic habits, may actually improve academic education as well.

Santa Barbara Charter School strives to give students experiences through which they construct their own learning. This is one way of developing good citizenship in our next generation.

Another case of money vs. what's right for kids?

In what appears to be another case of fighting for money versus what is right for kids, citizens demanded that a charter school have it's charter revoked. A school for the arts in downtown Gloucester, Massachusetts is being assailed by anti-charter school citizens. The citizens have a number of reasons they think the school should be closed, but apparently none of those reasons have anything to do with whether the school is effective or not.

In a telling quote, the mayor says, "In a way, this is a fight about money." Aha, who cares what happens to the kids, as long as we get our money. Of course, as I've argued before, the money deserves to follow the kids. If it's anyone's money, it's the kids' money. The money is provided by taxpayers to educate children. If the children are being educated, then there shouldn't be a problem.

See this also from Boston.com