NCLB+&+Charter+Schools

=No Child Left Behind and Charter Schools=

=No Child Left Behind=

NCLB is a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which was first enacted in 1965. It expands on Title 1: "Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged," placing particular emphasis on the instruction of minority and disabled students. A main goal of NCLB is to bring all students who test poorly on state and federal tests up to ". . .at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and state academic assessments." (NCLB)

Signed by former president George W. Bush in June 2002; went into effect in 2003.

Standards set by individual states. **There is, as of today, no national achievement standard.**

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) results from 2005 show test scores from students of all social groups at an all-time high. This method of retrieving data, along with the positive test scores, have been touted by many NCLB proponents in the ensuing years as evidence of the act's success. In fact, under Part E of NCLB, NAEP is provided as the secretary of education's assessment of choice for gathering data about state achievement

As has been the case during many educational reforms, the motivation behind getting states on-board with this legislation is federal funding. The schools are held to a strict level of "accountability," where their students must achieve test scores at a certain level of proficiency (in accordance with their state's set of standards) in order to continue receiving federal funds.

If a school does not test well, the punishment usually involves a //decrease// in federal funding.

Schools are also expected to demonstrate "Adequate yearly progress" in accordance to the standards set by the state, where the school must be actively involved in "narrowing the achievement gap."

Here is a brief paraphrase of the 12 standards of Title 1: Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged. These standards make a good summary for the main goals of No Child Left Behind.

Sec. 1001 Title will ensure that all children will have the opportunity to get high-quality education, as well as reach a minimum of proficiency with state-mandated standards and tests.

1. Title ensures accountability measures, highly qualified teachers, curriculum and state alignment with standards to ease the process of helping a student achieve goals. 2. "Meeting the educational needs of" minority groups of children. 3. Closing the achievement gap between high and low performing children. 4. Holding states accountable for improving achievement. 5. Targeting resources to help schools 6. Strengthening accountability by assessing students according to State-mandated standards. 7. Providing "greater decision making authority" (i.e. selective hiring of principals) 8. Develop more school-wide programs that increase amount of quality instruction. 9. **Ensure exposure to "scientifically based instructional strategies."** 10. Provide staff with chances for professional development 11. Coordinate with other agencies for child services 12. Get parents involved


 * Support**

One year after its implementation, 61% of Americans found their individual schools' accountability process to be a success. Though the school might have changed the way it operated in order to continue receiving federal funding, the added benefit of the accountability system makes sure that problem areas of instruction can be addressed and aligned with state standards.

Also, in this same year, 3 out of 4 Americans believed that improving the literacy levels of a greater number of students was preferable, and they were more accepting of the increased number of in-school standardized tests. (Winston Group, 2004)


 * Criticism**

Applying NCLB to all states makes it difficult to gauge what sort of educational changes would have been made without the act.

NCLB could make schools lower their achievement goals and "teach to the test" in order to meet their state's standards.

Critics of NCLB claim that it is fundamentally impossible to expect students to perform all at the same level. Some argue that the law requires that all students be above average, all the time.

"Only about 30 percent of American students were proficient in either reading or math by NAEP's definitions when No Child Left Behind began. In other words, by NAEP's standard, all students are not just to be brought to the average that existed when No Child Left Behind was enacted. All of them are to reach the level of students at the seventieth percentile.

Charles Murray: "Many laws are too optimistic, but the No Child Left Behind Act transcended optimism. It set a goal that was devoid of any contact with reality. How did we get to that point?" ([])

Others claim that it is too easy for schools to play the system in order to increase their level of perceived achievement. In the most famous case of this, the Houston school that Bush used to promote NCLB reported their 3000 dropouts as anything other than having dropped out of school. In some cases, the students were on-record as having left to attend private schools. This effectively made the school's dropout rate 1.5 percent, when it was in fact between 25 and 50 percent. This ability to alter a key area of progress-measuring stats led many to question the possibility of ever accurately measuring NCLB's effectiveness in school reform. ([]) Pros/Cons links:

[]

[]

=Charter Schools=

====**By Definition**: “Charter schools are public schools, open to all who wish to attend, funded with tax dollars and accountable to an authoritative public agency and its constituents for its results. But charters are different from standard-issue public schools: They can be created by almost anyone, they are independent and exempt from many state and local regulations, they are attended by youngsters and staffed by educators who are there by choice, and they can be closed for not producing satisfactory results”.==== -CBS Interactive Business Network

States Without Charter School Laws
 * Washington || Montana ||
 * North Dakota || South Dakota ||
 * Maine || Mississippi ||
 * Alabama || Kentucky ||
 * West Virginia || Vermont ||

====**The Issue**: The issue at hand in regards to charter schools is whether or not they are a good idea. Some people discredit the success of charter schools and believe that students should continue to go to regular public schools.====

====**The History of Charter Schools**: The overall concept of a charter school is relatively new. It is believed that the term "charter" came from a New England educator by the name of Ray Budde, who had the idea that teachers should be allowed to obtain contracts or “charters” from their school to try new approaches to education. This idea expanded further when Albert Shanker publicized the notion of expanding this to entire teacher unions to create their own schools. This new concept of charter schools was again refined in Minnesota, where **the creation of charter schools were based around three core values:** **opportunity, choice, and responsibility for results**. Minnesota would be the leader in this new innovative and educational idea. In 1991 Minnesota passed the first charter school law, with California following suit in 1992. By 1995, 19 states had signed laws allowing for the creation of charter schools, and by 2003 that number increased to 40 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. The concept of a charter school has gotten broad support even across party lines in Washington politics. Charter schools have been supported by both President Clinton and President George W. Bush, with both calling for the creation of more charter schools and an increase in federal funding being secured for them. Since 1991, there have been some 3,000 charter schools created because more and more states began to allow them. This growing movement towards the growth and expansion of charter schools has led some Americans away from attempting to reform traditional public schools and instead focused their attention on creating a whole new type of school. Charter schools, like other educational ideas, has its pros and cons; one of the bigger advantages to charter schools are that they can run independently of public schools and many state regulations and this allows them to tailor their approaches to help benefit the needs in the community. The below table lists the pros and cons of charter schools.====

Along with those pros and cons, there are a couple quotes from people who are linked to and have studied charter schools.
 * **Pros of Charter Schools** || **Cons of charter schools** ||
 * * They offer teachers and students a diverse array of educational options. || * Charter schools are educational establishments but also work as businesses. That means that they are apt to be interfered with by market forces which may force them to cut back or close all together – this hurts the students. ||
 * * They force competition which drives public schools to work harder to compete with the charter schools. || * Charter schools have a tendency to create segregation along racial and class lines and may have issues with accommodating students with disabilities or those students where English is not their first language. ||
 * * The easing of regulations in charter schools allows for teachers and administrators to implement and try new learning techniques. || * There are some legal issues regarding the ability to be accountable for student performance given the fact they are not susceptible to all federal regulations. Performance, therefore, may be difficult to measure or record. ||
 * * Charter schools are pushed to be good and competitive or risk closure, which leads to a focus on teaching and placing student education before all else. || * Schools are run more like businesses and not like educational institutions – this may lead to decisions being made by people “from afar”, such as a board of trustees, and not necessarily by teachers or principles that work at the school on a daily basis. ||

On a positive note, Candace Cofield stated: “One advantage is their level of accountability. Charter schools must abide by the tenets outlined in their charter contract between the school and the chartering unit, which states projected student achievement outcomes as well as penalties for failing to make these gains. If the charter school fails to measure up, parents can “vote with their feet” or, the school can lose its charter altogether.”

But other people are not so sure about charter schools. According to Dr. Diane Ravitch, a policy analyst and one time believer in charter schools, said charter schools are an “effort to upend American public education and replace it with something market-based.” In the end, Ravitch concluded that charter schools “were proving to be no better on average than regular schools, but in many cities were bleeding resources from the public system.”

After reading both the pros and cons, one would probably wonder how effective charter schools are in comparison to a normal public school. It is difficult to pass judgments on charter schools, mainly because doing so would mean that you are lumping all of them together. In other words, there is no doubt that there are some truly spectacular charter schools out there, where as there are also some poorly functioning ones -- the same goes for public schools; there are some clearly outstanding ones around the country and there are some very bad ones also. One way of gauging the effectiveness of charter schools would be to conduct a study to see if there is any discernible difference between a charter and a regular public school. One such study took place thanks in part to a research company.

Research
A federally commissioned study was performed by Mathematica Policy Research, of Princeton, N.J. The research group assigned kids to a charter school or public school based on a lottery system. If you won the lottery, you were allowed to attend one of the areas charter schools. 2,330 students applied to 36 charter schools across 15 states. According to research, “Students who won lotteries to attend charter middle schools performed, on average, no better in mathematics and reading than their peers who lost out in the random admissions process and enrolled in nearby regular public schools”. Even though there appeared to be no advantage to attending a charter school, the study did find one interesting tidbit of information. The study found that the charter middle schools serving the most economically disadvantaged students — especially those in urban areas — were more successful than their counterparts serving higher-achieving, more affluent students in producing gains in mathematics”. This is not to say that every charter school should be set up for only underprivileged students nor can you conclude that high income students will not succeed at a charter school. What could be concluded is that charter schools do appear to offer low-income students a better shot at an education than traditional public schools might in their area.

Links to educational Philosophies:
I would say that of the four philosophies, the existentialist would be the most likely to fully agree with the use of charter schools. An existentialist believes that people should make choices that better their lives and try to figure out why they were put here on earth. On a purely educational basis, existentialists do not believe in tracking, measurement, and standardization based on the belief that these hamper a student’s ability to choose for himself or herself – this fits in well with charter schools because they are often allowed to run with fewer federal standards and can afford to create individual education plans for each student that allow for choice and modification. A charter schools seems almost perfect for someone who follows existential beliefs.

I would say that in general theory, a pragmatist would be open to the use of charter schools based on the notion that charter schools are being created in response to an ever-changing and diverse world; many advocates of charter schools claim that they are better suited to meet the needs of today’s students based on their ability to teach new and different materials along with fostering competition in education; this created competition is meant to not only make the charter school better but make the other public schools around them better because they need to be able to compete.

In a unique way of looking upon education and charter schools, I think that a realist would agree to the use of charter schools based upon what the research shows. A realist places heavy emphasis on the use of research and development and would most likely point to the fact that students who come from a lower socio-economic level tend to do better in a charter school than they do in a regular, public school. A realist also believes strongly that teachers need to know their content and be able to convey key information and concepts – with a well-funded charter school, it is possible for them to acquire the best teachers they can find based upon more freedom to teach the materials they want and a possibility for a higher rate of pay. The one thing that a realist would balk at when it comes to charter schools is testing. A realist believes in testing of students for understanding and many charter schools tend to shy away from the use of tests, especially those of the standardized variety.

Overall, I would say that an idealist would be the one who would have the most difficulty working within a charter school. Both sides would agree on the importance of learning and mastering an idea, but I would contest that they would heavily differ in their approach. For an idealist, the biggest concept is making sure that the idea is above all else; they are typically not student-centered. On the other hand, a charter school is built around being student-centered and has the opportunity to offer more options and therefore choice to their students. The one thing that both would most likely agree on would be the importance of teachers. An idealist believes that students need a clear leader and someone to look up to, and for them it usually comes in the form of a teacher – a charter school is more likely to go out and try to hand select teachers that they think will fit the mold of the school and therefore will produce quality teachers.

Personal Philosophy:
When it comes to my own educational philosophy, I am still not quite sure how I feel about the use of charter schools; I feel as though both sides, pro and con, offer decent evidence. What I do like about charter schools is their ability to offer more choice to both students and teachers when it comes to the curriculum. I also like the fact that they are able to run more independently, which means less of a need to “teach for the test” and instead teachers can teach students what they need to learn to be successful. Another positive is that the use of charter schools makes other schools have to be more competitive and force them to change so that they can better suit the needs of a 21st century student. On the negative side, charter schools do tend to lack comprehensive special education classes and modifications; there have been some comments about their lack of diversity in the schools; and another problem is that they are often run like businesses. In the event that the school is not doing well, they will close down and force the students to go else where, which can create anxiety and forced change. I would say it is hard to pass judgment on charter schools and that you would need to focus more on individual schools than the charter program in general.

Charter Schools impact on my being a teacher:
First and foremost, when you are a teacher looking for a job you are hopefully trying to find a place that fits you and would make a good match. After researching charter schools, I would not be against working at one as long as it is the right fit for me; I like the thought of being able to work more independently and teaching my students the materials that will make them successful in life and not just on some state-sponsored test. Having said that, I am also interested in teaching in a school that has some strong diversity – I feel that diversity is what leads teachers and students to try no things and to listen to new ideas that you might not normally listen to. That still seems to be an issue in a number of charter schools; they do not quite have the diversity that a true public school would and that could very easily sway my vote. As much as it might affect job placement, I don’t think the concept of a charter school would change my way of teaching. Either way, I am going to be the type of teacher who gets my students thinking, gets them questioning, and try to give them the skills necessary to be successful both in school and in the future; I can’t see the type of school that I teach in really affected my overall philosophy on how to teach.

Insights Gained:
By doing this project, I learned what a charter school is, how it is run, and the pros and cons of attending a charter school. Just that alone has improved my knowledge base and makes me a better educator. I think that it really did point out to me how much I want to teach in a diverse district and school, which is something that might not happen if I teach at a charter school. Doing this research also makes me think about how much I dislike the use of standardized tests, and how I feel strongly that we need to be much more focused on the students and giving them choices in their education so that they can be successful. I would say that a charter school allows, generally, for more choice for students in their education because charter schools do not have to succumb to standardized tests. As I mentioned earlier, it is tough to talk about this because you have to generalize about all charter schools; like public schools, every charter school is different and you cannot really make generalizations about how they make you feel. = =

= =

Resources
Works Cited Carnell, Yvette. "Is Money and Profit What’s Behind Charter School Fever?" //The Atlanta Post//. 24 Sept. 2010. Web. 07 Oct. 2010. .- **This article discusses what might the driving force be behind charter schools; one argument is based upon making money and the other is because people are tired of traditional public schools. It has some great insight and discussion from one of the women featured in the PBS series.**

The Center for Educational Reform. "Center for Education Reform - Charter Connection." //Center for Education Reform - Home//. 2009. Web. 07 Oct. 2010. .-**This is a really great website that has all sorts of information about charter schools. It shows the pros and cons of a charter school along with interactive maps of states with charter schools. The website also offers books and articles that discuss charter schools more in depth.**

Cofield, Candance. "Pros and Cons of Charter Schools: School Choice Advantages and Disadvantages." //Suite101.com: Online Magazine and Writers' Network//. 18 Dec. 2009. Web. 07 Oct. 2010. .**This is an online article that lists the pros and cons of a charter school education. It goes a lot more in depth about what makes them successful and what makes then a risk. It is well written and gives some interesting view points.**

Education Commision of the States. "ECS Education Policy Issue Site: Charter Schools." //Education Commission of the States--Helping State Leaders Shape Education Policy//. 2010. Web. 07 Oct. 2010. . **This website I used to compose the table of the pros and cons. I liked this site because it was the first one I found while researching and it simply lays out the arguments for each side of the debate. Because of this website, I then branched out to find information about the bullets.**

Manno, Brunno V. "The Case Against Charter Schools | School Administrator | Find Articles at BNET." //Find Articles at BNET | News Articles, Magazine Back Issues & Reference Articles on All Topics//. 7 Oct. 2010. Web. 07 Oct. 2010. .- **This article comes from CBS and is composed of both a historical background of charter schools along with information regarding policies and rules that may influence a charter school. It is really quite long, but it gives a more business-side perspective to how a charter school operates and what that means for education.**

Maxwell, Lesli A. "No Clear Edge for Charter Schools Found in 15-State Study." //Education Week// 14 July 2010. //Teacher Reference Center//. Web. 7 Oct. 2010.- **This is article that I found on the education data base from Ursus. It talks about the Princeton study of charter schools and gives some interesting information as to whether or not charter schools actually work.** **It offers some surprising information, that probably does not make all charter schools excited.**