by David Safier
I posted awhile back about the Arizona Charter Schools Association wanting to strengthen the oversight of charter schools and close the bad ones. This move is an effort by directors of some of the top (read, College Prep) charters, along with Lisa Graham Keegan, ex Ed Supe in Arizona and one of the originators of our charter school legislation — also McCain's chief advisor on education during his presidential run.
Now California is following suit:
a new way to evaluate them, one that could lead to the closure of many
low-performing schools.
[snip]
Under the organization's proposal, school districts that authorize
charter schools would review them based on their "predicted
performance" on standardized tests. That would be determined by
comparing charter students to their peers in traditional public schools
who have similar backgrounds and a past record of similar test
scores. The idea is to measure the "value added" by a charter school.
percent of charter schools next year — about eight schools. After that,
any school would be closed if it falls 10 percent or more below its
predicted performance for the three years that lead up to its
application for renewal.
If I were running a strong charter, I imagine I'd be pretty pissed at bad charters bringing down my reputation. And if I saw the legislative writing on the wall, I might want to get in there with a bit of self regulation before the state decided to do something.
Calling educational progressives! This is the time to become part of the second look at charter schools — not to get rid of them, but to get eliminate the dead wood and make sure the best survive and thrive.