What's so scary about charter schools?

On this day before Halloween when we think of ghouls and goblins and other scary things, I wonder why some people think charter schools are so scary. I can see why some people are skeptical. I can see why they might not choose to send their kids to a charter school, but I can't seem to get my head around why people think charter schools are so scary.

So, let's say the worst is true:

Let's say that charter schools are not financially efficient because they take money away from their districts.

Let's admit that charter schools, on average, perform worse than their districts.

Let's admit that charter schools don't protect teachers the way unions do.

Is all of that really that scary? Charter schools educate less than 5% of all students in the U.S.

Do you know what is really scary to me?

Charter school opponents want more money, haven't produced results, but can't tell us how much money would be enough to help them fix their problems.

Charter school opponents fight charter schools rather than making their own schools better. Instead of fixing their own problems, they complain about all of the limitations they have.

Charter school opponents are more concerned with protecting teachers and teachers' unions than protecting and improving the lives of children.

Now, that's something to be frightened about.

On the other hand:

Charter schools do their best with the money they are given, even though they usually have to provide facilities with their per pupil revenues. In fact, the extra expense of paying for facilities out of per pupil revenue is one of the main reasons that charter schools pay teachers less money that other public schools do. The two biggest expenditures for a school system are salaries and facilities. Charter schools don't want to pay teachers less than the surrounding district schools. Most of the time, it's the only way that charter schools can meet their budget. If charter schools ultimately prove a failed idea, it won't be for lack to trying. Charter opponents on the other hand are guaranteed not to fail because their funding just keeps on flowing no matter how well or how poorly they perform. Now, that's a Halloween nightmare.

What is a charter school?

This blog isn't going to be very exciting. So, there is your warning. I'm probably not even going to talk about what you think I am. You probably think I'm going to talk about the legal definition of a charter school or how they are independent or parent focused or something like that. Most blogs or articles with a title like mine go that direction. You can find that stuff anywhere, so I want to talk about something different.

There has been a lot going on about Waiting for Superman (which I haven't seen yet) and Diane Ravitch's criticisms. People cite all sorts of statistics about the typical or average charter school. I've written on this subject before, which is why this probably isn't exciting at all, but due to this renewed criticism of the "average" or "typical" charter school, I thought it warranted at least a few brain cells at this late hour.

There is no typical charter school. Sure, you might be able to find a profile that seems typical based on statistical data, but my point is that all charter schools are individual schools. They are different. While I support the idea of charter schools, I hope that most of us on the "ed reform" side of things who support charter schools aren't silly enough to support all charter schools. I support the ideas that:

1. A great education still has some subjectivity to it. Therefore, saying that charter schools on average score below their peers on standardized tests, does not prove that charter schools are not providing a better or equivalent education.

2. Freedom is a value that our country does and should uphold. Charter schools are a way to uphold that value.

3. Great charter schools (measured by test scores, college acceptance, safety or whatever) can lead the way and provide ideas for all schools.

The other interesting thing about assessment is that it's pretty clear that no one knows how to do it. States can't compare against each other's scores. There is huge debate about what should go into a national standardized test. In addition, the 21st century folks are saying that assessment needs to change. If all of that about assessment is true, then is it even possible to say that the "typical" charter school is not outperforming its peers?

If a school is safer, provides a student with a better experience of community, but does not allow that student to score quite as well on a test, but still provides a decent education, is that a problem. We know that test scores are not what cause people to be successful in life. Many studies have been done showing that many personality factors are involved in success and that IQ and education beyond a given point are not factors that determine a person's life success.

I've wandered a bit beyond what I intended, but all of that is to say that there isn't such a thing as "a" charter school. Charter schools are different, ranging from direct instruction to experiential learning. They range from core knowledge with very rigid curriculum to schools that allow the students to choose the subject matter. To argue that charter schools are not living up to their expectation is to falsely group schools because they are part of a movement that is only united by its desire to try to do a better job of educating kids.

Board members as part of a healthy charter school community

Well, now to a touchy subject, I'll take on board members as part of a healthy community. I have to admit. I just finished going through Brian Carpenter's Charter School Board University again. While I'm not using the book for this blog, don't be surprised if you see a lot of agreement.

This is touchy because schools use different methods of attracting and selecting board members. many charter schools have largely parent board. This is something that can be a real problem if the parents are not qualified or do not understand what it means to be a board member. It's the two edged sword. Healthy parent boards can build community. Parents are naturally attached to the school and have a vested interest in its success.

On the other hand, parent boards can be detrimental to community because the parents on the board may not be popular or may be elected because of their popularity and not because of their qualifications. In additions, because parents are so emotionally vested in the school, they may put their own desires above the good of the school as a whole.

In any case, a board that helps create community is one that steers the school in line with the mission of the school. The board directs finances and policy in such a way that the school leader is empowered to carry out the mission daily. The board also knows its place. Board members know that as individuals they have no power.

A board in a healthy community is one that is united once it has made a decision. In addition, a board is part of a healthy community when it communicates clearly on important issues with parents and leaders. This is especially true on difficult subjects such as finances or conflict resolution policies. The community must understand the direction and policies that guide behavior. Clear policies set expectations of all community members.

Board member should be appreciated and respected, but ought not think more of themselves other than that they are caretakers of the mission and ensure compliance with legal requirements.

All in all, board members act best as part of the community when they set the standard for the community, and do so clearly.

Financial strategies for the lifecycle

I'll be presenting on charter school lifecycles and strategies for each stage. I've presented this before, but this will be the first time coming up at the Florida conference in early November.

I do not have this presentation publicly available yet, here is a link to the lifecycle theory itself that I'll use in the presentation.

Most charter schools ignore their stage in the lifecycle to the detriment of strategy, marketing, programming, etc. All of this is tied directly to the school's financial strategies. That's why I developed this session.

I hope you enjoy the life cycle model and find it useful. I also hope that you'll come see me present the model with financial strategies in Florida and in Texas.

Take care,

Doug

PS More on the charter school community series over the weekend.

The financial manager as a part of a healthy charter school community

Depending on the school, it's founding, and the leadership, financial management of charter schools often takes a back seat to other concerns. I recently reviewed budgets for potential start up schools that included less than $5,000 total for their first year's financial management and audit.

While a financial manager is not the first person that a school hires, it might well consider it the second position to be hired. A school is not its financial manager, but the financial manager can support the school's success by ensuring that budgets are met and that long term financial projections are made to ensure that this year's budget does not cause problems for future years.

Often it is the financial manager or outside financial management company that directs and educates the school leaders and the board in financial matters and the financial pitfalls of decisions. Because so many charter school failures occur because of poor financial management, the financial function increases in its value to the community.

Because of the community feel of many charter schools, financial managers within a school often wear additional hats. They often interact with faculty members and students in ways that they would not in a non-charter situation. Often the financial manager is at a district office, away from parents and the school. In most charter schools, the financial manager is sitting right next to the principal's office. I've seen cases in which the financial manager almost ends up being the assistant principal. This requires skills that go far beyond the ability to ensure compliance with state account codes and present financial reports.

The community must support the financial manager by ensuring that at least some board members understand financial reports and can support the financial manager or outsourced accountant. The principal should also learn the budget and the account codes so that the financial manager isn't the only voice for the budget to the authorizer.

Parents also must either trust the financial leader or else learn enough about the way the school's budget works to make intelligent comments about it. In addition, the because the budget is ultimately the responsibility of the board, the parent community must understand (and it's the board's role to educate parents) the budget, the budget process, and the limitations in the budget and how priorities were developed.

The financial manager along with the board must ensure that in an active community, both the board and the parent community understand the budget limitations and priorities. In this way, the community can embrace (even if they don't like) the budget and support it. This also allows an honest discussion about the ways in which priorities should change over time and at different stages of the school lifecycles.

So many times the financial manager is seen as someone off to the side, in an office set away from everyone else, paying bills, making sure people get paid, and making sure no one spends any money. The truth is that a good financial manager is constantly thinking of ways that the budget can be rearranged and re-prioritized to bring students the greatest value for the dollars provided to the school. While that is not a popular job, it is crucial to the charter school and must be seen as an integral part of the community.

The principal as a healthy part of a charter school community

Someone might ask, "Wait a minute, the principal is automatically part of the community. The principal is the community." HMMM. It seems to me that kind of a statements shows just how unhealthy a charter school community might be.

The principal is the academic leader. In small schools, the principal might also be the administrative, facilities and financial leader. However, the position is not the community. Leadership is a part of the community.

The principal plays a vital role. The principal must work well with the board, both doing what the board wants, but also often developing the board and challenging the board when the board is not fulfilling its role. In a larger school in which a director or other administrator supervises the principal, the principal still must work well with the director--both developing and challenging that leader.

The principal is also naturally the person that parents look to for guidance, advice, appropriate discipline as well as questions about the color of the carpet and walls.

For this reason, the principal also must develop parents' understanding of the mission of the school as well as the activities that the charter school will or will not pursue. Therefore, the principal must support the mission of the school. The principal is also responsible for making sure that teachers and other employees implement the mission of the school. Community works best when members are directed toward the same goal. One of the principal's main roles in the community is to help people see and follow that goal.

The community must strive to support the principal as long as the principal is upholding his or her role. The community is also responsible to fairly and honestly hold the principal accountable for performing this role. The board must not allow the principal to take the school in a direction away from the mission, but should also encourage and reward the principal for performing the role well. Parents and teachers need to understand the difficulty of the principal's role. This is, perhaps, the greatest weakness of the community--understanding just how difficult the role is.

The difference between the principal role in the charter school community and other roles is that the principal is expected to be both "one of the gang" and the leader of the gang. Board members can often hold a little more distance and do not have to be as intimately involved. In fact, because they provide oversight, there is a sense in which they can't be intimately involved.

The principal is both everyone's friend and everyone's leader. This can create tension in those who are people pleasers. It can also create difficulty for those who are great organizers and technicians, but who do not have good people skills. To develop a healthy community a principal must be able to both work well with people as well as understand the organizational structure that allows the school to work.

In addition, the principal must be able to evaluate and develop excellent teaching. It would be nice if every teacher hired was excellent. It would be nice if every teacher hired understood and taught using the methods supported by the school. However, sometimes teachers are hired that are not yet excellent or do not know the methods used by the school. The principal must be able to recognize which teachers need help and must provide that help.

The healthy charter school community both respects this principal role as well as supports and encourages the principal. At the same time, the healthy charter school community accepts the principal's guidance without allowing the principal absolute monarchy. It's a tough balance, but necessary to maintain the community.

Parents as a part of a healthy charter school community

One of the comments I received on my first post in this series was about charter schools being welcoming to parents. I thought about the comment for a while. I suppose this is different from school to school.

I'm guessing that in relatively affluent charter schools this problem is more common. I have witnessed the overbearing parent that has too much time on his time hands and wants to run the school. I've seen the parent who shows up at every board meeting, not for a specific issue, not because of general interest in the school, but because of distrust. These are obviously not healthy examples of parent interaction in the community. These are parents that I'm not sure I'd want to make more welcome at my charter school.

On the other hand, there are parents who don't naturally get involved. Sometimes it's because they are working two jobs or because they work long hours or because they assume all is taken care of. In some cases, we can see that it would be really difficult for parents to be highly involved, at least if we equate being highly involved with spending a lot of time at the school.

These parents need to be welcomed into the community. Leaders of the school, especially paid leaders of the school should be required as part of their job description to welcome and involve parents in positive ways. Building a community can help (although not prevent) parents who are really angry or really distrustful.

Events can be as simple as after school fun get togethers that show off student work. Why not turn the school musical into a social event? Why not have a school work day that is sort of just because? You don't have to be building a new playground to gather people together.

Another healthy way to involve parents is to ask them to help in the classroom or on lunch breaks. My wife led a reading group once a week at lunch time last year. About fifteen kids who might not have normally associated with each other got together to read good books.

I've seen schools do international nights, family sock hops, silent auctions, square dances and other activities that were family activities that brought people together.

Parents who want to run the school can also be handled if the school develops good policies about governance. These parents, if qualified, can be encouraged to become board members.

School leaders also help healthy parent involvement by working with the problem parents, but also by letting them know what the boundaries are. The point is not to quiet dissent, but to channel it in the right ways and make sure that dissent or problems are dealt with according to policy. A healthy board (which I'll discuss in another post) supports the hired leaders in this endeavor. While discussion and differences of opinion should be welcome, outright disregard for the policies of the school should not. Parents, for a healthy community, must abide by the school's mission and it's policies for executing that mission.

Another way to deal with parent community is to have periodic parent training meetings. Those of us in business understand the necessity of training new employees. Why not train parents? Why not have a parent orientation that is more than about the way the school works? Why not have an orientation that is about how the parent fits into the school? It could include things such as some of the basic board policies, board member names and roles, recent issues at the school, ways that parents can be involved, conflict resolution procedures, etc.

Let's face it, in many charter schools, parents are key to the success of the school. They often volunteer more. They often provide transportation. They are expected to be more involved at home. School leaders who ignore their responsibility to provide a healthy parent community and work with parents toward that goal do both themselves and the school community a disservice.

The charter school as a community

One of the interesting sides of many charter schools is a sense of community. The average enrollment for charter schools is about 300 students. This, for many suburban and urban areas especially, is a very small school. Of course, averages are deceiving and there are charter schools who will not fit well into what I'm about to say, but for most charter schools the school size allows most families to know each other. It allows a sense of community that is not easily achieved at larger schools. For example, in the district I live in, the average elementary school is about 550 students. That is almost double the size of the average charter.

In addition, many charter schools set themselves up to develop a sense of community stronger than what is achieved by their local non-charter schools. This is achieved because of school size as well as the fact that parents choose the charter school and have to make a conscious change in order to attend the charter school. Because many charter schools have waiting lists, it also means that parents may be more grateful for their charter school than parents are for their local non-charter schools.

The point is that it seems that community building should be easier at a charter school than a non-charter school. If that's true, then charter school leaders need to incorporate their staff in that community. Community builds trust, which is important for education to happen. If students feel supported, even if they fail, then they are more likely to try to succeed.

The challenge is that community also means that some times people let you down. How do you handle that? How do you accept everyone, but still keep the high standards that charter schools are supposed to meet?

I've been thinking about this a lot lately. I would appreciate your thoughts. I'll be providing some thoughts in the next week or two about various roles in the school and my thoughts about the proper way to make sure that parents, administrators, teachers and others both are made to feel a part of the community and are held to high standards.