Hosannas to Free Press for exposing charter failings

Let’s give credit where credit is due. The recent Detroit Free Press series on charter schools in Michigan illustrates perfectly just how vital an alert and aggressive news media is to the future of our state. How else would we have learned that:

• Nearly $1 billion in taxpayer public money goes to charter schools every year. More than 140,000 students attend state-funded charters. In 2013-14 there were 296 charters operating 370 schools. Charters represent a large and growing portion of Michigan’s education system.
• In most cases, nobody knows exactly how state money is spent by charters and by the private, often for-profit “full service management companies” that operate a majority of them. They argue that these details of how they spend taxpayer money are not subject to public disclosure. As a result, all kinds of ugly rumors persist about profiteering, self-dealing, nepotism in hiring, and collusion with unelected school boards – rumors that a fully transparent system would have cleared up (or caused to be cleaned up) long ago.
• Although charters are intended to provide families with quality alternatives to public schools and provoke educational innovation, nearly 40 percent rank in the bottom quarter of state school rankings. How charters stack up with traditional public K-12 schools is a matter of intense debate – which indicates that the answer isn't clear.
• The charter system lacks effective oversight, both by unelected school boards that often seem captives of the industry or by charter authorizers (many of them universities) which grant schools the ability to operate in Michigan and are supposed to oversee them. The Free Press found instances of long-term, very low-performing charters which had never been suspended. And the state sets no rigorous standards about who can set up a charter.

As is often the case when a newspaper breaks a bombshell story, the impact goes way beyond the headlines of the day and provokes prolonged debate about public policy.

This is how it’s supposed to work.

Momentum to reform

Governor Rick Snyder quickly announced the state should do a better job at holding all schools accountable, including charters. Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville (R-Monroe) says the state should “tighten up” charter regulations and oversight.

And State Superintendent of Public Instruction Mike Flanagan last Monday announced he is notifying charter school authorizers that he will use his “statutory authority” to stop them from giving out new charters if their oversight performance doesn’t cut it.

He directed the Department of Education to “establish rigorous principles that measure the transparency, academic and financial practices of the charter schools of each authorizer. The result of these measures will determine which authorizers would lose their chartering capabilities.”

The Free Press said the Michigan Department of Education has never suspended a charter authorizer. Some members of the State Board of Education think Flanagan has had this authority all along.

For his part, Flanagan credited the newspaper: “This series of news articles has prompted me to think differently about whether to suspend an authorizer’s ability to open new charter schools. … This is not just about getting academic results. It’s about total transparency and accountability.”

The Free Press series also triggered comment from the Michigan Council of Charter School Authorizers and Greg Richmond, president and CEO of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers. He’s urging tougher state standards for accountability and financial transparency.

Pushback

Not surprisingly, the Free Press series has drawn some comment that has been defensive and critical. Again, that’s the way it’s supposed to work. Journalists are supposed to call ‘em as they see ‘em, letting the facts be their guide. What happens downstream after publication of a big story is vigorous public debate and better focused responsibility of policy-makers and the public at large.

What lies behind these arguments about charters is far more important than political and institutional squabbles. Most families enrolled in charter schools are poor or working class, exploring schools of choice, trying something new in hopes of finding something better than their local inadequate traditional public schools.

If we continue to offer charter schools as an educational alternative, but one that doesn’t provide a clearly better educational outcome, we’re spending taxpayer money on an expensive effort that does nothing to help our most vulnerable and needful kids.

What’s the sense in that?

I wouldn’t be surprised to see serious efforts in Lansing to toughen up what have been – up to now – pretty lax standards of transparency, accountability and institutional oversight over charter schools. Of course, there will be politics and posturing, wailing and gnashing of teeth. But we owe ourselves and our children the pain and effort to make sure they get the best possible schooling. Not to mention seeing that taxpayer money is well spent.