The debate over how to educate children in the United States has established innovative ways of teaching our youth for the future. Not just public and private schools, but the implementation of “charter schools”. In 1992, the State of California introduced the “Charter Schools Act of 1992”, which was then amended in 1996. As of the 2015-16 academic school year, there has been over 1,230 charter schools in the state of California[1]. But the debate has not been about the difference in academic style, rather the debate is over the funding provided for these schools. Section 47603 of the act in particular is the provision that has been contested not only in the state of California, but across the nation. The issue being raised is whether or not Charter schools should receive public funding like many other public schools. The intention of these charter schools is to provide opportunities for outside agents (teachers, parents, community members etc.) to establish schools that operate independently from existing school district structure, as a method to accomplish improved pupil learning, expand learning experiences, encourage the use of different and innovative teaching methods, and many other goals stated in the general provisions of the act.
In late 2015, the state of Washington ruled that charter schools are unconstitutional, expressing that charter schools aren’t “common schools” because they are governed by appointed rather than elected boards. Most recently, grassroots efforts have helped propose an initiative to eliminate all charter schools in the state of California and repeal the California Charter Act of 1992, as those who agree argue that charter schools take money from the public education system and do not provide enough for lower-income demographics as they are discriminatory and extremely segregated [2]. What Section 47603 and many other provisions of the California Charter Act does is state that a charter school can receive public funding from the state or federal government like any other public school, but they can also receive funds from the private person or organization operating the charter school [3]. Those who oppose charter schools (such as many public school teachers and local administrators ) find it unconstitutional for the government to provide funds for charter schools as there is an unfair advantage in resources and funding provided by private outside agents that operate the schools.
Historically, charter schools were not prevalent until 1992 when Senator Gary Hart introduced the bill. This bill was enacted at the same time schools vouchers for private schools in California were starting to heat up. The bill was introduced to provide a free public education, with the curriculum and academic quality being held to rigorous standards like a private school (Burr and Hart, 1996)[4]. This was in response to the public’s frustration with public schools and the way the system unfairly treated low-income demographic areas. However, since 1998, the number of charter schools jumped from 177 campuses to 746 in 2008, and 1,230 campuses by 2015. Supporters of these charter schools, such as Governor Jerry Brown, believe that these independently ran schools provide top quality education for free and give parents the choice between public school and charter school. But opponents of the bill claim that taxpayers’ money should not fund these privately operated schools because it takes advantage of government provided funds to a private agent that takes money away from public education districts. The increasing number of charter schools are not prevalent without discussing the controversy surrounded by them. Many of the provisions within the Charter School Act state how these schools are independently ran by private sectors, and that although they receive public funds like many public schools, they do not have to follow the protocols or curriculum of many public schools ([5]. The local school administration must help run and fund these charter schools, which has shown criticism from many faculty and educators of public school.
California’s Charter School Act of 1992 and its provisions have had created a stir in how free public education should be ran. Is it fair to assess schools with independent education implementation through public funding? Or it unconstitutional? Charter Schools have both failed and succeeded. But there are many issues regarding the funding provided to charter schools, especially towards charter schools with less resources of affordability. But with recent proposals to repeal the Charter School Act, it calls into question the overall fairness between charter schools and public schools and how government funding plays a big role in the difference of quality in education and resources.
On Paper, the California’s Charter School Act is innovative and is a unique way to educate students, since these schools do not follow traditional educational systems. The way this law is put into action, shows both the positives and negatives of implementing a charter school system within the state. The debate over the California Charters School Act of 1992, specifically section 47603, is a topic of debate in how funding for public education should be allocated. To understand the debate over funding for charter schools, we must further evaluate how this act is used outside of the books and further analyze the procedures used to enforce this act, specifically under section 47603.
Many of the procedures used to enforce the act are through methods of funding by state and local sectors. Just like other public schools in the state of California, charter schools must also operate under the regulations of both federal and state laws. The state requires that charter schools must abide to the health and safety laws of the school and they also have oversight from authorizers such as the local school district, county and/or State boards of education. In order to receive funding and resources from the state, charter schools must follow the guidelines of their authorizers who also have the ability to revoke a charter school if it is in violation of any laws or fiscal management.[6] On the other hand, Charter Schools can be operated by private organizations or people. They can operate and run the way the school teaches, which also means, they can provide more resources, better equipment, offer better pay to teacher, have more qualified teachers, and create an overall advanced educational facility. However, that means other charter schools operate with less, creating a wide disparity in quality of education.
The most recent legislative decisions for the Charter Schools Act of 1992 still protect charter schools in receiving public funding According to Education Code 47630, “It is the intent of the legislature that each charter school be provided with operational funding that is equal to the total funding that would be available to a similar school district serving a similar pupil population…[7]” In California, charter schools are funded under the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), which uses state and local tax dollars to public education facilities based on the number of students in each grade level[8] This essentially credits charter schools as public schools since they are funded by the public’s tax dollars. However, the difference in funding compared to public schools, is that charter schools receive funding based on the number of students, grade level, and any other additional needs. Charter schools, receive less per student, thus leading to significant funding inequality between charter and traditional school districts[9].
These models that enforce the charter school law, create an issue of bias for charters that receive more allocation through private agencies. For instance, a problem also lies in the admissions and enrollment for these students. Although, charter schools are open to all children, there is a limit to the amount of students a charter school can have, in many cases using a lottery system to randomly select students, this can create an issue of bias among private agencies with more to offer. This can cause disparity and funding inequality between charter schools who are also funded by private agencies or organizations due to the amount of funding charters can receive outside of the state and local governments. Many school districts in California want stricter rules for authorizing charters because of these issues. Many districts approve of charters to operate in other districts because they can receive a portion of the charter school’s revenue (Magee, 2016)[10]. In essence, many of these charter schools have a wide disparity of financial support, some are underfunded and lack the resources, while others are heavily funded by private institutions, which leads to more a racial and economic segregation of charter schools. This brings an issue on whether or not, charter schools are being created in order for districts to receive more funding. According to Margaret Raymond, director of Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO), she states “If a charter … is just a way of infusing a school or a group of schools with additional resources, that’s just a money grab” (Butrymowicz, 2016)[11]. Recently, in 2014, Governor Jerry Brown vetoed a legislation that would have threatened the financial incentive received by districts that approve of charter schools to operate within their authorization. But, the California Charter School Association opposed Brown’s veto along with a bill that would prevent school districts of poor financial standing from approving charters because it could create an inequality gap among certain populations (Magee, 2016)[12].
Charters schools are meant to help low income areas receive top quality education, but a problem lies with how funding is distributed to these schools. While they do receive public funding like other public schools, private agencies and organizations that operate some of these charter schools, provide an unfair advantage against public schools due to public funds being shared amongst both charter and public school systems. The effectiveness of the Charter School Act has does have a problem. The problem lies within the fact that there is discretion to how private agencies can operate and run the school. They are able to allocate more funds and resources to their school and still receive public funding form the state. This inevitably, creates an unfair balance in free public education. Funding charters schools creates an inequality disparity, especially if charters are being operated by private institutions, since it could create issues pertaining to race and economic status.
The debate over the privatization of charter schools is disputed among many people. While many find it essential to provide a free education with independent implementation, others argue that it is unfair and unconstitutional to provide charter schools with public funds. Advocates for both sides have issued ideas and considerations to reform the act. In 2015, the state of Washington made charters “constitutional” due to the grounds that “money that is dedicated to common schools in unconstitutionally diverted to charter schools” and “improperly diverting public school funds to private organizations that are not subject to local voter control”(Governed by appointed board members) (Higgins, 2015) [13]. Another idea to reform the Charter School Act is to have State and Local Board Officials reform districts by approving charters to the district depending on that districts financial standing (Magee, 2016)[14]. This would ensure that inequality disparity between income and segregation is solved, creating more balanced and equally funded schools.
There is no question that The Charter Schools Act of 1992, particularly section 47603 needs to be reformed. One problem is that there is too much discretion with government and private agents and although charter schools provide a unique way to implement and teach education, providing public funds to private operators and organizations has marked dispute on whether that violates constitutional law. The Charter School Act of 1992 has effective laws that need to be reformed in order to serve an equal and fair distribution of free public education in the state of California.
REFERENCES
Magee, Maureen (2016, Feb. 18). Inside the fight against California’s charter schools. http://www.latimes.com/local/education/charter-schools/la-me-edu-inside-fight-against-california-charter-schools-san-diego-20160217-story.html
Mack, Julie (2012, Jan. 16). Weighing the pros and cons of charter schools. http://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/index.ssf/2012/01/comparing_charters_and_regular.html
Butrymowicz, Sarah (2014, Jan. 23). Some California Charter Schools Are Opening For the Wrong Reasons, Expert Say. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/07/california-charters-financial-reasons_n_4555086.html
Taylor, Mac (2012, Jan. 26). Comparing Funding For Charter Schools and Their School District Peers. http://lao.ca.gov/reports/2012/edu/charter-schools/charter-schools-012612.pdf
Higgins, Josh (2015, Sept. 4). State Supreme Court: Charter schools are unconstitutional. http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/state-supreme-court-charter-schools-are-unconstitutional
Young, Minney, & Corp, LLP (2016, Jan. 1). Key California Charter School Laws And Regulations. http://mycharterlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/FINAL-YMC-BOOKLET.pdf
Chen, Grace (2016, June 20). Charter Schools vs. Traditional Schools: Which one is Under-Performing. http://www.publicschoolreview.com/blog/charter-schools-vs-traditional-public-schools-which-one-is-under-performing
Strauss, Valerie (2016, Sept. 9). How messed up is California’s charter school sector? You won’t believe how much. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2016/09/09/how-messed-up-is-californias-charter-school-sector-you-wont-believe-how-much/?utm_term=.9d7947933aae
Burr, Sue; Hart, Gary K. ( 1996, Sept.). The Story of California’s Charter School Legislation. Phi Delta Kappan Academic Journal. https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-18751786/the-story-of-california-s-charter-school-legislation
[1] http://www.ccsa.org/understanding/what-are-charter-schools.html
[2] http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016/02/09/initiative-that-would-shut-down-charter-schools-in-california-cleared-to-gather-signatures/
[3] http://mycharterlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/FINAL-YMC-BOOKLET.pdf
[4] https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-18751786/the-story-of-california-s-charter-school-legislation
[5] http://mycharterlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/FINAL-YMC-BOOKLET.pdf
[6] http://www.ccsa.org/understanding/faqs/
[7] http://www.ccsa.org/advocacy/funding/
[8] Ibid.
[9] http://www.ccsa.org/understanding/faqs/
[10] http://www.latimes.com/local/education/charter-schools/la-me-edu-inside-fight-against-california-charter-schools-san-diego-20160217-story.html
[11] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/07/california-charters-financial-reasons_n_4555086.html
[12] http://www.latimes.com/local/education/charter-schools/la-me-edu-inside-fight-against-california-charter-schools-san-diego-20160217-story.html
[13] http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/education/state-supreme-court-charter-schools-are-unconstitutional/
[14] http://www.latimes.com/local/education/charter-schools/la-me-edu-inside-fight-against-california-charter-schools-san-diego-20160217-story.html
foundations of law and society 