What is "A" Charter School?

A blog post retrieved from Charter School Insights Blog by Doug Hering

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.