Wendy Lecker: Revisiting charter school 'successes'

By Wendy Lecker, Stamford Advocate

Every legislative session, charter school lobbyists proclaim how successful privately run charter schools are compared to "failing" public schools, and that charters should get a share of public money disproportionate to the 1 percent of public school children they serve. In order to illustrate the murky world of charter school statistics, here is a follow-up to two of my columns on Connecticut charters.

In September, I described the takeover of Hartford's Milner School by Jumoke charter school, as part of the "commissioner's network." Charter school lobbyists bristle when people suggest that their "successes" emanate not from unproven "innovations" but rather from educating a different population than public schools and/or having more resources. Milner is one example.

Before the takeover, 95 percent of Milner's students lived in poverty. Over 10 percent had disabilities and 25 percent were English language learners. For years, the school was not provided adequate funds, resulting in large classes, insufficient staff and a building in disrepair.

However, when given to Jumoke, the state increased funding and Hartford found $2 million to fix the building. This year, there is money for double the children to attend after-school programs and a teaching assistant in every classroom. Why did the district fail to provide these resources prior to the Jumoke takeover?

At the state Board of Education meeting where the takeover was approved, Jumoke's CEO, Michael Sharpe, proposed his methods to "stabilize" the school. One was to forbid enrollment after Oct. 1, a violation of state law. He also said that he would tell Milner parents he would refer truants to the Department of Children and Family Services. When board members challenged this harsh statement, Sharpe said that in his 15 years at Jumoke, he only referred one case to DCF.

After four months at Milner, a Department of Education review reveals that Jumoke has made an unprecedented number of referrals to DCF (six), and that there are 80 fewer students than last year. How did almost 20 percent of the students disappear, when Hartford's overall student population increased this year? Who are those 80 students?

With more resources and fewer students, we can already see that Jumoke's Milner is not the same as last year's Milner.

Charter school supporters also decry any suggestion that they rely on different data to define success for charters than they do to declare public schools failures.

In July, Jonathan Pelto and I wrote about the state's different standards for judging public and charter schools. We compared the treatment of New London, a poor district in severe financial crisis, which the state Board of Education "cured" with a takeover, to the BOE's reauthorization of several charter schools. Education Commissioner Stefan Pryor justified the takeover by pointing to New London's flat test scores, ignoring its severe resource deficit. He also used the new NCLB waiver ratings to condemn New London's schools, although that system was not even in effect yet.

The same day, two charter schools with resources to maintain small class sizes, family advocates, teacher's aides and social workers were reauthorized despite low, and in one case consistently declining, test scores. The state Department of Education declared these schools successful in narrowing the achievement gap and reauthorized them for five years. A charter advocate criticized our column, saying the charter reauthorization process is "rigorous."

Just five months after the "rigorous" decision to reauthorize those charters, the lists of schools failing under the NCLB waiver rating system were released. Those two charters, Trailblazers and Stamford Academy, were on the "focus" and "turnaround" lists, respectively.

Amistad Academy in New Haven, founded by Commissioner Pryor, is also on the focus list. It was reauthorized the same day as New London's takeover. The Department of Education's reauthorization memo claimed that Amistad "offers students a rigorous approach to learning where excuses are not accepted and success is the only option."

What landed this "no excuses" school on the failing list, just five months after the glowing report? Amistad has a dismal graduation rate of 49 percent. Despite already having this data, the DOE never mentioned Amistad's graduation rate in the reauthorization memo. Still another school recognized as a success and reauthorized on the same day, the Bridge Academy, found itself on the focus list. Of the seven charter schools reauthorized in June, four were among the lowest performing schools in the state and slated for intervention just five months later.

Despite the rhetoric, these charters have not lived up to their claims. When you hear stories of fantastic charter success, look beyond the hype -- to the facts.

Wendy Lecker is a columnist for Hearst Connecticut Media Group and is senior attorney for the Campaign for Fiscal Equity project at the Education Law Center.

Read more: http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Wendy-Lecker-Revisiting-charter-school-4224349.php#ixzz2JES1v7WS