Search

What supports were needed to enable the small learning communities, or pods, that emerged in 2020 and 2021? While learning pods may have emerged as a temporary response to a crisis, some persisted in fall 2021, either because of continued uncertainty over the pandemic's trajectory or because of their potential value as part of new structure for public education. This working paper maps the ecosystem of organizations needed to support a small subset of these learning communities, and offers conclusions to help leaders make the most of this opportunity: (1) Start with the "organizer"; (2) Focus on ecosystem gaps; (3) Attend to funding; (4) Move (with caution!) toward accountability; and (5) Pursue equity.

This report documents how education "quarterbacks" (formerly known as harbormasters) have supported governance reform in three cities, and why and how they were effective. This exploration of why districts need governance reform and how to catalyze and implement it focuses on the following questions: (1) Why did the education quarterbacks in these cities take the steps they did? (2) How did those actions ultimately lead to and support a new governance structure? (3) What lessons can other city-based education organizations take from their pioneering experiences? The report identifies eight actions consistently observed among the three profiled quarterbacks: The Mind Trust (Indianapolis), Empower Schools (Springfield), and New Schools for New Orleans. Although the conditions, people, and steps are specific to each city, all three education quarterbacks performed most, if not all, of these actions to catalyze governance reform and support successful implementation.

State and district leaders have a chance under ESSA (the 2016 Every Student Succeeds Act) to use their new funding flexibility to take a new approach that focuses on excellence for teachers, and students. This brief explains four opportunities to go beyond the requirements of ESSA to achieve a culture of excellence, one that attracts even more talented educators, keeps them for long careers, and helps them excel.

As charter school authorizers and states have increased performance expectations and grown less hesitant to close failing schools, "authorizer shopping" has emerged as a growing threat to overall charter school quality. Authorizer shopping happens when a charter school chooses or changes its authorizer specifically to avoid accountability. A low-performing school may shop for a new authorizer to avoid closure, or reopen under a new authorizer after closure. This report considers five examples of authorizer shopping in action and provides specific guidance to authorizers, policymakers, and advocates to address authorizer shopping. The following are appended: (1) Example 1: "Recycling--When Is a New School Really New?"; (2) Example 2: "Shopping or Finding the Best Fit?"; (3) Example 3: "Authorizer Shopping in a Virtual World"; (4) Example 4: "Unintended Consequences of Increased Accountability"; (5) Example 5: "Many Authorizers, Little Consistency"; and (6) Appendix Endnotes.

Drawing on deep expertise and diverse experiences in the sector, the National Association of Charter School Authorizers (NACSA) and the Charter School Growth Fund (CSGF) have collaborated to identify a set of key policies and practices that could dramatically accelerate the replication and growth of high-performing charter schools and charter networks. The work has generated a set of detailed recommendations that legislators, authorizers, and state education agencies (SEAs) can use to build a policy environment that will substantially increase the prevalence and impact of high-quality charter schools. The policy recommendations in this report provide a roadmap for systematically improving the quality of the charter sector. By differentiating among charter operators based on performance levels, building system capacity to cultivate and support high-performing schools and networks, reducing barriers and adding support to facilitate quality replication, and accelerating the closure of low-performing schools, the charter sector can create excellent educational opportunities for a dramatically greater number of children.

Research continues to confirm that without consistently excellent teaching, most students who start behind stay behind, and too few middling and advanced students leap ahead. Even hardworking, solid teachers who achieve one year of learning progress leave achievement gaps intact. When schools create an opportunity culture for teachers and students, they allow excellent teachers to extend their reach for more pay, within budget, and create new roles and in-school time for all teachers to learn on the job from the best, contribute to excellence immediately, improve their teaching skills, and pursue career advancement. Once policymakers commit to reaching every student with excellent teaching consistently, they can focus on the policies needed to enable an opportunity culture statewide. This brief details the policies that states and districts need to implement to achieve these goals. (Additional support in the writing of this brief was provided by Sharon Kebschull Barrett and Christen Holly.) [For "Seizing Opportunity at the Top II: State Policies to Reach Every Student with Excellent Teaching. Policymakers' Checklist," see ED560188.]

In 2005, the Task Force on Charter School Quality and Accountability issued "Renewing the Compact," a position statement for the charter school sector that presented recommendations for achieving the goals of growth and quality. This report evaluates the sector's progress on those goals and recommends bold actions to capitalize on its successes while confronting persistent challenges. By taking these bold actions now, critical stakeholders can build a breakthrough sector and create a results-driven culture, which will improve the impact of charter schools on student outcomes and the education system. Appended are: (1) Seven Principles of Quality Chartering, from Original "Renewing the Compact" Position Statement; (2) Reflections and Recommendations from Original "Renewing the Compact" Position Statement; (3) Research Framework; (4) List of Key Resources; (5) List of Interviewees; and (6) How the Charter Sector Can Transform Public Education. (Contains 26 endnotes.) [This report was prepared for the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools by Public Impact.]

States seeking to prepare all high school graduates for college and careers need a strategy for responding to their lowest-performing high schools, which are responsible for a disproportionate number of students who drop out or graduate unprepared for what's ahead. Continuing to rely upon incremental change strategies will not lead to effective change in these schools. Instead, states need to build capacity to undertake dramatic improvement in these schools via turnarounds and fresh starts. At the same time, many individual students in better performing high schools do not graduate ready for college and careers. As a result, a complete state strategy must identify and segment schools by level of under-performance and mobilize different interventions to match each school's circumstances so that all students--no matter where they go to school--can graduate prepared for success in college and careers. This paper provides guidance for states about putting in place powerful ways of addressing chronically struggling schools as part of any Race to the Top (RTTT) application while also addressing the broader imperative to help all of a state's schools prepare students for college and careers. (Contains 2 tables and 22 endnotes.)

President Obama and Secretary Duncan have called upon states, districts, and education leaders to change the lives of millions of children by dramatically improving the nation's 5,000 lowest performing schools. These chronically failing schools will require intensive intervention to turn around performance that has fallen short of expectations for many years. States and districts are likely to try a variety of approaches to improve performance, such as contracting with external providers, who often bring in new leadership and staff; closing schools outright and giving students the option to attend nearby, higher performing schools; or bringing in a "turnaround leader" to carry out drastic improvements. This last option is known in other sectors as a "turnaround" effort--a quick, dramatic, and sustained change driven by a highly capable leader. District leaders deploying this strategy in chronically failing schools can learn from the experiences of classic turnarounds that have worked. This brief draws from the cross-sector research base on successful turnarounds to offer seven steps for district leaders to support turnaround principals and maximize their chances of success. (Contains 2 figures.)

At the request of Ohio's top government and education leaders, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, National Association of Charter School Authorizers, and National Alliance for Public Charter Schools have issued a report seeking to strengthen the state's charter school program. Among its 17 recommendations are calls for closing low-performing charter schools and holding sponsors more accountable for oversight of the growing charter movement while also helping more high-performance schools to open and succeed in Ohio. In return for sharply stepped-up accountability, restrictions on the formation of high-quality charters should be removed, and charter schools should receive more equitable funding. This report bases its findings on research and analysis of Ohio school performance data; a review of best practices in other states; input from experts in charter school finance, sponsorship, accountability and policy; and evaluation of dozens of policy options. The report seeks to help Ohio meet four broad goals, under which the 17 specific recommendations are placed: (1) Keep the accountability/autonomy promise by which charter schools are granted greater operational freedom than traditional public schools in exchange for meeting exacting results-based standards; (2) Strengthen Ohio's system of charter school sponsors to ensure that all are held to account for their performance in this vital role; (3) Fund charter schools fairly and address the overwhelming challenge that Ohio charters face in accessing suitable facilities; and (4) With new accountability systems in place, encourage more high-quality schools by removing caps and other restrictions. (Contains 5 tables and 5 figures.)

This report has describes how the young Indianapolis charter school initiative can claim a number of successes: (1) Many community leaders have stepped forward to spearhead the creation of charter schools, bringing new energy and resources into public education; (2) Parents have flocked to the new schools, lining up on waiting lists and noting increasing satisfaction with their children's experiences; (3) Students in most charter schools are making steady progress in reading, language, and math, and in many cases outpacing Indiana and national norms for growth; and (4) The mayor has established a comprehensive accountability system for the schools, with high expectations and transparent sharing of data about the schools with the public. As is the case elsewhere, the charter sector in Indianapolis will ultimately be judged by its effects on students, families, neighborhoods, and the city as a whole, and those long-term effects remain to be seen. Though the elementary and middle schools are making good progress, they are still young. The one high school open in 2003-2004 struggled in its first year, and faces significant challenges as it enters its second year. In addition, the initiative's growth in 2004-2005 (doubling from five schools to 10) represents a much faster expansion than in the initiative's first two years, which could tax the mayor's systems. As of the spring of 2004, mayor-sponsored charter schools in Indianapolis represents a small fraction of the city's students--less than 1 percent. But just the schools already chartered will double that fraction by 2005 and triple it by 2008. If all goes as planned, more high-quality applicants will receive charters in the coming years. The result should be a large, vibrant sector of newly formed public schools. If successful, these schools will provide excellent educations for the children who attend them, forge new models that can serve as examples for other schools, demonstrate effective accountability in action, and exert a wide, positive impact on public schooling in Indianapolis. (Contains 6 tables and 22 endnotes.)

Arizona's charter experience over the past decade has clearly shown the power of a relatively open chartering system. Schools have sprung up in all corners of the state; parents and teachers have flocked to them in great numbers. Interesting new approaches have emerged. Quite a few of the schools have been strikingly successful. In many places, charter schools have achieved an impressive market share, and districts have begun to respond more vigorously in Arizona than in most charter school states. The experience has also demonstrated some of the pitfalls of the open approach: (1) a raft of questionable schools; (2) charges and confirmed cases of various kinds of misdeeds; and (3) the resulting calls for a crackdown that could endanger the schools' autonomy and variety. As policymakers in Arizona seek to reset the balance, it is worth repeating that "there's no place on Earth like the Grand Canyon State." Arizona has an opportunity to continue its leadership in this area, forging a new kind of accountability system--one that fulfills basic public responsibilities while still fostering the open charter environment that is the state's hallmark. (Contains 81 endnotes.)

Research continues to confirm that without consistently excellent teaching, most students who start behind stay behind, and too few middling and advanced students leap ahead. Even hardworking, solid teachers who achieve one year of learning progress leave achievement gaps intact. When schools create an opportunity culture for teachers and students, they allow excellent teachers to extend their reach for more pay, within budget, and create new roles and in-school time for all teachers to learn on the job from the best, contribute to excellence immediately, improve their teaching skills, and pursue career advancement. Once policymakers commit to reaching every student with excellent teaching consistently, they can focus on the policies needed to enable an opportunity culture statewide. This checklist details the policies that states and districts need to implement to achieve these goals. (Additional support in the writing of this checklist was provided by Sharon Kebschull Barrett and Christen Holly.) [For "Seizing Opportunity at the Top II: State Policies to Reach Every Student with Excellent Teaching," see ED560185.]

English Learners (ELs) constitute one of the fastest growing demographic groups among school children in the United States, with the number of ELs in K-12 public schools increasing by about 14% over the seven-year period from 2002-03 to 2010-11. This rapid growth in ELs has coincided with the growth in charter schools. Although charter schools enjoy greater autonomy, they are still required to follow federal and state laws and statutes. Against this backdrop, the National Charter School Resource Center developed this white paper to examine the legal parameters that charter schools need to be aware of as they attempt to serve the needs of ELs. In Section I of this paper, the authors outline the broad legal framework governing equal educational access for ELs in charter schools as established by federal law. Section II highlights state laws that have been enacted to clarify, extend or implement federal requirements. Section III discusses issues related to the availability and quality of available data on ELs in charter schools. Finally, informed by analyses and discussion, the authors outline policy implications at the federal and state levels in Section IV.

Among many publicly-funded school choice initiatives that have earned Florida the label "school choice central", none has reached as many children and families as charter schools. Charter schools have flourished in Florida largely because of the state's rapid population growth: many of the districts that are experiencing more than a 10 percent increase in student enrollment have more than 10 percent of their students in charter schools. The charter school movement in Florida enjoys strong and bipartisan political support. Several of the state's institutions of higher education and the Urban League of Greater Miami have also actively supported charter schools, and many legislators send their children to charter schools. Measured by volume, Florida's first decade of charter schooling has seen the number of charter schools grown from five to 334. But the rapid growth has raised its own problems. Most notably, the second half of the charter school autonomy-accountability bargain has been largely unfulfilled. Although 62 Florida charter schools have been closed, the majority have been shut down due to financial and enrollment issues; academic laggards have largely been allowed to remain open. To some, this situation represents the charter school ideal: free market experimentation that gives parents a wide range of choices. But it also gives ammunition to charter school critics, who argue that some charter school operators fail to serve their students and squander state and federal dollars. In response, the state has passed some measures that help weed out unsuccessful operators, particularly by strengthening local application and review standards and enforcing charter revocation provisions. This report examines both the achievements and the shortfalls of Florida's first decade of charter schooling. Principal findings include: (1) Charter schools have strong support; (2) Florida has embraced innovative charter programs; (3) School accountability is spotty; (4) Student achievement is mixed; (5) District authorizing is ineffective; and (6) Florida's charter schools are underfunded. The report provides recommendations to improve the vitality and quality of charter schools: (1) Enhance the quality of charter school authorizing; (2) Strengthen charter school performance; (3) Ensure charter schools' financial viability; (4) Extend charter schools' exemption from the class size amendment; (5) Improve measures of charter school performance; (6) Insulate charter schools from the Florida Supreme Court voucher decision; and (7) Coalesce charter support. (Contains 32 endnotes, 5 figures, and 7 tables.)

Discusses the growth and challenges of charter schools. Asserts that small stand-alone charter schools may not be the basis for a sustainable, large-scale movement for change in education. Education management organizations and other similar service providers may be needed to help charter schools become a serious force for change. (WFA)