“Diversity is Hard”: Will Charter Schools In Your Locale Choose Equity?

Screen Shot 2013-11-11 at 8.41.17 AM

I am not of the ilk that charters are all bad news (See all of Cloaking Inequity’s post on charter schools here). As I have mentioned previously, I am a charter school parent, currently serve on a charter school board, and was an instructor at an Aspire charter school. I realize that I have prominent friends and allies that are 100% anti-charter. I am okay with those feelings because I have serious concerns with equity in the charter movement.

Here in the Lone Star State I am unsure if there is a community more enamored with charters than San Antonio. This love affair has been spurred by millions of dollars in donations by the Brackenridge Foundation and other venture philanthropist involved in “Choose to Succeed.” Previously on Cloaking Inequity I have taken aim at corporate charter chains that are invading San Antonio and other communities because of my concerns with their equity for low-SES students (See Great Hearts, BASIS, and KIPP). In fact, I began Cloaking Inequity so that I could respond to a KIPP press release criticizing our peer-reviewed study about the attrition of African American students from charters in Texas (“Work Hard, Be Nice?”: A Response to KIPP).

What is the state of charter movement? Well, if you look at graduation and dropout numbers in Texas you will probably be shocked. I was. I pulled the following table from the most recent Texas dropout and completion report released by the Texas Education Agency.

Screen Shot 2013-11-04 at 8.37.14 PMAcross the entire state, the charter graduation rates is 53.9%. That is a gap of 35.1% compared to traditional districts. Charters pull down the average graduation rate across the state about 2%. The dropout rate for charters in Texas compared to traditional districts is 21.6%— a gap of 15.9%. Charters increase the dropout rate in the state of Texas by .6%. I realize that someone out there is going to say that some charters are dropout recovery schools. That is true, but traditional districts also have dropout recovery schools/programs. Furthermore, we have already demonstrated independently in the aforementioned paper (Is choice a panacea? An analysis of black secondary student attrition from KIPP, other private charters and urban districts) that charters have much higher attrition rates (dropouts and other leavers) across the board.

Clearly, the graduation and dropout rates are bad, bad news for charters. How about diversity and equity?

I recently conducted an interview with a Texas Tribune reporter that was picked up by the New York Times on Friday. In the piece Debating New Charter Schools, Their Policies and Their Effects, Morgan Smith wrote:

Along with Basis, a second Arizona-based school that opened its doors in northwest San Antonio this year, Great Hearts’ presence signifies the emergence of a new kind of charter school in Texas. Often dependent on infusions of private money and parents’ contributions to supplement their programs, these schools go after students seeking intensely focused academics in a collegiate atmosphere and acknowledge that they do not serve every kind of student. But that reliance on additional fees and other policies at the new schools have amplified an already contentious debate over charter schools’ role in the public school system.

“The schools are academically rigorous. Any kid can go, but these schools aren’t going to be for every kid, just as Harvard or Princeton isn’t for every kid,” said Phil Handler, a spokesman for Basis. “If your kid is there, we’ll do everything we can to help them keep up, but for some kids it’s not the kind of education they want.”

Unlike many Texas charters, particularly KIPP and IDEA public schools — which both formed with a mission to reach economically disadvantaged communities — Basis and Great Hearts tend to end up with student bodies that are disproportionately affluent and white.

At the 16 campuses that Great Hearts operates in the Phoenix area (where nearly 60 percent of public school students are Hispanic or black), 69 percent of the nearly 7,000 students are white. Only two of Great Hearts’ Arizona campuses participate in a federal program that offers free and reduced-price meals for low-income students. Of the almost 5,000 Basis students in Phoenix, Tucson and Scottsdale, roughly 12 percent are Hispanic and 2 percent are black. None of the eight campuses offer free and reduced-price meals, which is also the case at the San Antonio school.

The article continues,

But some policies at Great Hearts and Basis have raised doubts about their commitment to economically disadvantaged or otherwise academically challenging children…

Both Great Hearts and Basis are what Julian Vasquez Heilig, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin’s College of Education, refers to as “à la carte schools,” because while they are tuition-free, they charge fees for uniforms, field trips, extracurricular activities and athletics. In some instances, that can amount to more than $1,000 per student annually. On top of those fees, parents are also encouraged to assist the schools financially through personal donations. With neither school providing transportation to their campuses, parents with limited financial means could face an additional obstacle.

In Texas, charter operators may exclude students only based on their disciplinary history. They cannot consider factors like socioeconomic background, race or past academic performance in the application process. But those prohibitions can be insufficient to prevent a practice some education policy experts call “creaming,” in which charter schools pull in only the highest-achieving or most dedicated students from traditional public schools. That can also happen after students enroll in charters, where a lack of remedial support and rigorous curriculum can lead weaker students not to return.

“Some charters have perfected the art of creating barriers to low-income kids,” Mr. Heilig said. “If you have to run a steeplechase to get into a school, most low-income parents aren’t able to do that, especially when they are working two or three jobs.” (The University of Texas at Austin is a corporate sponsor of The Texas Tribune.)

Peter Bezanson, Great Hearts’ chief academic officer, said that in Nashville, the school board had manufactured complaints about the school because it did not want the competition. He said the school’s financial inability to provide transportation created a challenge, but that parents organized car pools and distributed bus-route information and that the school never allowed financial need to keep a student from participating in a trip or extracurricular activity.

“For us, diversity is really hard,” Mr. Bezanson said. “It’s been something that is really important to us, and we’ve worked really hard to increase our access to diverse student populations and markets.”

Diversity is hard eh? More bad news for charters.

Do all charters perform poorly on academic measures? I am not 100% opposed to charters because there are islands of excellence in the charter movement. The problem is that they are the outliers, not the rule. Typically, on issues of diversity and academic achievement, traditional schools outperform charters. Here are a few examples from previous posts on Cloaking Inequity:

Do all charters approach low-SES students and diversity with disdain? I previously discussed Kevin Welner’s Dirty Dozen. He details how the research literature has documented that BASIS and Great Hearts are not just bad apples, they are part of a broader problem that charters have with diversity and equity. See Breaking News: Kevin Welner’s Charter School Dirty Dozen.

The situation at the University of Texas Charter School where my daughter attends and I am a board member is the anti-thesis of BASIS and Great Hearts. The school has a racially and economically diverse student body. The school also prioritizes serving special populations Gifted and Talented, ELL, and Special Education students. Don’t believe me? Here is internal data from UT-Austin charter school that has not previously been available to the public (I took these photos from an internal report with my IPhone, I apologize for the quality).

Charters have a choice whether they want to be racially and economically diverse schools that serve ELL, Special Education and low-SES kids. Based on the various admissions and management policies documented in the Dirty Dozen, charters choose their students, rather than families choosing their schools— in essence, school choice is charter schools choose. What will the charter schools in your locale choose? Will you hold them accountable for being diverse schools even though “diversity is hard”?

Please Facebook Like, Tweet, etc below and/or reblog to share this discussion with others.

Want to know about Cloaking Inequity’s freshly pressed conversations about educational policy? Click the “Follow blog by email” button in the upper left hand corner of this page.

Twitter: @ProfessorJVH

Click here for Vitae.

Please blame Siri for any typos.

p.s. I apologize for the quiet on Cloaking Inequity the past week— I was attending the University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA) conference in Indy. A shout out to everyone I met at the UCEA conference to who mentioned that they read Cloaking Inequity. Also, a shout out to Glen E. Singleton (who I met at the conference) for his kind email about the TFA research). Thank you!

About these ads

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Categories: Charter Schools, Dropout, KIPP

Author:Julian Vasquez Heilig

Julian Vasquez Heilig is currently an Associate Professor of Educational Policy and Planning and African and African Diaspora Studies (by courtesy) at the University of Texas at Austin.

Social Media

Subscribe to my RSS feed and social profiles to receive updates.

31 Comments on ““Diversity is Hard”: Will Charter Schools In Your Locale Choose Equity?”

  1. November 11, 2013 at 9:14 am #

    I appreciate your analysis, although I do not agree with your statement that charters have a choice about whether to serve children with special education needs. At least, they do not have have a legal choice to refuse to serve them, since they are public schools and must comply with the IDEA, the ADA, and other civil rights laws.

    • November 11, 2013 at 9:48 am #

      Agreed. We have documented in Texas how they are counseled out by charters. We are working on turning a dissertation on the topic into a peer reviewed paper soon.

  2. Monty J. Thornburg, Ph.D.
    November 11, 2013 at 9:51 am #

    In CA Charters have a financial disincentive, generally, to NOT serve students of Low SES, & ELLs, or to promote diversity. Sometimes its a mission or in their interest to do so. There are so many kinds of charters it’s a difficult question.

    The “public” district charters are governed by county and district boards so they must meet certain basic guidelines. Mega charter corporations operate differently, I believe.

    One charter in my area just closed this September due to financial mismanagement and it was an academic sham! I now have many students in my school and our district who transferred back and their transcripts, and testing indicate a “sham.” This “attitude” on my part is based on direct instruction and assessments to determine basic academic placement and needs!

    Student comments, too, indicate previous lack of supervision, lack of “accountability” for learning, overworked teachers who operated in disorganized teaching situations, coupled with the misuse of “online learning” to boost attendance. Plus the misappropriation of funds seems evident which was why the school closed.

    This is but one charter, in a rural area, but, how many are there out there failing students that the public schools will have to pick up after the failures?

  3. November 11, 2013 at 10:09 am #

    There are bound to be islands of excellence here and there. This seems normal and expected but does not justify the construct and does not erase seas of trouble all around.
    If it is equity we seek, then we need to build our arguments as to why it is the moral, ethical and just path, and additionally, the smartest.
    And then we need to work to get it done.

    • November 11, 2013 at 10:29 am #

      Really? I didn’t know that it wasn’t obvious that equity is a goal in and of itself. Isn’t that why we have passed every civil rights law of the past 50 years?

  4. JB
    November 11, 2013 at 11:40 am #

    I know this isn’t the point of your post, but as a special education professional, I can’t help but point out that Down syndrome is the correct name as opposed to downs syndrome. I noticed this when looking at the screenshots you shared.

    Thanks for sharing–I hope someone shares this with my state’s superintendent of public instruction, who recently said she was ashamed that we do not have more charters here. She’s not exactly known for using or analyzing data constructively however, as she is primarily in doing what Jeb Bush wants her to do.

  5. Monty J. Thornburg, Ph.D.
    November 14, 2013 at 10:14 am #

    Dear Systemschageconsulting: Yes, “every civil rights law of the past 50 years” HOWEVER, the shift toward “privatization’ … in response to those laws, beginning with the Nixon strategy in the South, and with the shameful Department of Agriculture and the shift to a Dept. of Education from H.E.W., coupled with push back led by Dixie Democrats/turned Republican inside government, have all managed to Cloak Inequity- and increase it! Those efforts inside and outside education, (look at ALEC for example) have been effective at pushing back the legal efforts to create civil rights, human rights and economic justice. Thanks to Dr. Vasques Heilig, in my opinion, the impediments to equity are being (Un) Cloaked through e-dialogue and research.

    • November 14, 2013 at 5:51 pm #

      As a civil rights attorney for nearly 30 years, I completely understand that civil rights laws have not been enforced sufficiently, and the communities they were designed to protect, have not received their full benefit. Nevertheless, there is NO DOUBT that without those laws, rampant and overt discrimination would run amok, as it did prior to their passage. As Martin Luther King, Jr., Barack Obama and many others have said, “The arc of history is long, but it bends towards justice.”

  6. Monty J. Thornburg, Ph.D.
    November 15, 2013 at 10:45 am #

    Hello, Civil Rights Attorney: I agree with you almost completely and I honor and thank you for your work!
    Today, using a different political iteration than in the 60s the current Republican Governor of Louisiana, Bobby Jendal has made vouchers a high priority- again. Also, another possible Republican Presidential candidate Jeb Bush has vocally come out against Eric Holder and the U.S. Attn. General’s Office for bringing the issue of vouchers to court.
    It’s well documented that in the 60s that the 1962 (Louisiana Voucher) Act, 147 was stuck down by a three Judge Louisiana Federal District Court panel. In that (1967) Pondexter case, the panel stated that, “acts generally lawful may become unlawful when done to accomplish an unlawful end.” Some seem to be using “Cloaked” language and calling their mission “Civil Rights” to achieve “unethical” if not “unlawful” ends in my opinion.

    • November 15, 2013 at 1:19 pm #

      Sadly, you are correct about the modern misuse of the terminology of civil rights. However, as an attorney, I recognize and assert the strength of those laws as they are written.

  7. BASIS Parent
    December 14, 2013 at 12:26 pm #

    It is extremely important to distinguish what a particular school has been chartered for. Your post does not do this. BASIS was chartered for academic rigor and their whole structure is centered around that. There is a TON of extra help for students who are struggling. The school chooses to invest their money in academic excellence (teacher salaries, hiring experts in their field and encouraging the teachers to go the extra mile). In AZ, they receive less monies than public schools and therefore are unable to provide additional services or extra curricular activities without parent contribution.

    The bottom line is that a charter school exists for a particular purpose and parents should have the right to choose that charter school if they support that purpose. Charter schools absolutely can solve the ills of our school system but not any one charter school can. This is why our public schools are failing. They each try to serve everyone all at once which results in trade offs that inevitably hurt one population or other. Enabling a system of charter schools each focused on a smaller spectrum of needs allows us to be more efficient in our use of public funds while doing a much better job at meeting the needs of students across the educational spectrum.

    You would probably argue that the current structure results in too much homogeneity in some charter schools – driven by socioeconomic capability which is directly linked to race. I would agree. However, this is not because of the specific focus of that charter but rather because they are less funded than public schools and unable to provide the services (lunches and buses) that would enable diversity of socioeconomic status.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Vote for 2013 Educational Policy Turkey of the Year Award | Cloaking Inequity - November 26, 2013

    […] charters (Click here). Because The wealthy need segregated charters too!? (1 and 2), “Diversity is too hard” and What BASIS?: Nepotism and aggrandizement in charters Notably, the Texas State Board of […]

  2. Common College Ideas For All College Students « AmeriSchools Academy - December 16, 2013

    […] “Diversity is Hard”: Will Charter Schools In Your Locale Choose … – AmeriSchools Academy – phoenix charter school – Another Delaware charter school facing […]

  3. Charter Failure and Corruption | Btx3's Blog - January 10, 2014

    […] that these schools tend to do poorly on state and national tests and fail at providing equitable education to underserved […]

  4. empathyeducates – The Truth About Charter Schools - January 10, 2014

    […] report after report showing that these schools tend to do poorly on state and national tests and fail at providing equitable education to underserved […]

  5. Charter schools are sold as an answer. With awful discipline and shocking scandals, many really cause new problems | ΕΝΙΑΙΟ ΜΕΤΩΠΟ ΠΑΙΔΕΙΑΣ - January 11, 2014

    […] report after report showing that these schools tend to do poorly on state and national tests and fail at providing equitable education to underserved […]

  6. The Ugly Truth about Charter Schools: Padded Cells, Corruption, Lousy Instruction and Worse Results | ΕΝΙΑΙΟ ΜΕΤΩΠΟ ΠΑΙΔΕΙΑΣ - January 13, 2014

    […] report after report showing that these schools tend to do poorly on state and national tests and fail at providing equitable education to underserved […]

  7. Salon.com: National Charter Management Organizations Exposed | Larry Miller's Blog: Educate All Students! - January 20, 2014

    […] report after report showing that these schools tend to do poorly on state and national tests and fail at providing equitable education to underserved […]

  8. The hype and reality of ‘school choice’ - January 28, 2014

    […] report showing that these schools tend to do poorly on state and national tests and fail at providing equitable education to underserved […]

  9. 4 Most Profound Ways Privatization Perverts Education - February 17, 2014

    […] traditional schools in all grade/subject combinations. Texas charters had a much lower graduation rate in 2012 than traditional schools. In Louisiana, where Governor Bobby Jindal […]

  10. How Privatization Perverts Education | New Deal Progressives - February 17, 2014

    […] were deemed inferior to traditional schools in all grade/subject combinations. Texas charters had a much lower graduation rate in 2012 than traditional schools. In Louisiana, where Governor Bobby Jindal proudly announced that […]

  11. empathyeducates – The 4 Most Profound Ways Privatization Perverts Education - February 20, 2014

    […] deemed inferior to traditional schools in all grade/subject combinations. Texas charters had a much lower graduation rate in 2012 than traditional schools. In Louisiana, where Governor Bobby Jindal proudly announced that […]

  12. How Privatization Perverts Education |  SHOAH - February 21, 2014

    […] traditional schools in all grade/subject combinations. Texas charters had a much lower graduation rate in 2012 than traditional schools. In Louisiana, where Governor Bobby Jindal […]

  13. Charter Op-Ed Misrepresents (Big Tree): My Response That They Won’t Print (Small Axe) | Cloaking Inequity - March 5, 2014

    […] Great Heart charters say “Diversity is too hard” […]

  14. Photo Essay: This Charter School is Lovely | Cloaking Inequity - March 19, 2014

    […] recently asked me in class if there was a charter school I would recommend in Austin besides the UT-Austin Elementary Charter School. This afternoon I visited one such school. There are some “reformers” in Austin that have […]

  15. Happy Birthday!: A Conversation About Education With César E. Chávez | Cloaking Inequity - March 31, 2014

    […] Also see: “Diversity is Hard”: Will Charter Schools In Your Locale Choose Equity? […]

  16. 12 Problems with Charter Schools | Yinzercation - May 2, 2014

    […] 7. Contribute to the re-segregation of U.S. education. For a number of years, researchers have noted the trend towards re-segregation in public education and the role that charters may be playing in that process. A recent report warns, “the proliferation of charter schools risks increasing current levels of segregation based on race, ethnicity, and income.” [Phi Delta Kappan, 2-2014] Dr. Julian Vasquez Heilig, of University of Texas at Austin, writes about some charter schools that claim they would like to be more diverse, but that it’s “hard to do.” He explains, “Charters have a choice whether they want to be racially and economically diverse schools that serve ELL, Special Education and low-SES kids. Based on the various admissions and management policies … charters choose their students, rather than families choosing their schools— in essence, school choice is charter schools choose.” [Cloaking Inequality, 11-11-13] […]

  17. Is Teachers’ Union Right on H.R. 10 Charter Bill? #edreform | Cloaking Inequity - May 8, 2014

    […] The U.S. House is currently debating H.R.10,  a potentially important Charter school bill. Previously I wrote: […]

  18. A dozen problems with charter schools - May 20, 2014

    […] 7. Contribute to the re-segregation of U.S. education. For a number of years, researchers have noted the trend towards re-segregation in public education and the role that charters may be playing in that process. A recent report warns, “the proliferation of charter schools risks increasing current levels of segregation based on race, ethnicity, and income.” [Phi Delta Kappan, 2-2014] Dr. Julian Vasquez Heilig, of University of Texas at Austin, writes about some charter schools that claim they would like to be more diverse, but that it’s “hard to do.” He explains, “Charters have a choice whether they want to be racially and economically diverse schools that serve ELL, Special Education and low-SES kids. Based on the various admissions and management policies … charters choose their students, rather than families choosing their schools— in essence, school choice is charter schools choose.” [Cloaking Inequality, 11-11-13] […]

  19. Food, Money, and Education… | Dancing Along the Days - July 24, 2014

    […] Or this one… […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,374 other followers

%d bloggers like this: