Menu
Paid Advertisement
view counter

Deadline Friday to comment on District's proposed new charter policy

By Dale Mezzacappa on Mar 5, 2014 04:50 PM

The School District is proposing an overhaul of its charter school authorizing policy to make it more rigorous and consistent and is seeking public comment on the changes.

The deadline for providing such comment is this Friday, March 7. Comments can be recorded here. Deputy Superintendent Paul Kihn said the proposed policy will be revised to take the feedback into account.

Specifically, the proposed rules are aimed to support high-quality charters and close underperforming ones, while offering more frequent monitoring, more transparency, and the opportunity for expansion to charters that meet new, higher standards and academic benchmarks.

But the District also wants to require charters to sign agreements that include enrollment caps -- a bitter point of contention among charter operators -- and enshrine in policy the notion that the District has a right to take its own financial condition into account when making charter decisions. 

The new policy rollout, to be presented to the School Reform Commission for a vote at its next meeting on March 20, comes at the same time that Pennsylvania's General Assembly is considering legislation that weakens the power of districts to control charter growth.

Among other changes, the proposed state law would allow universities to authorize charter schools, take away a district's power to set enrollment limits, and allow any charter operator with multiple sites to switch its oversight away from the district to the state.

"Any of those things would pose an existential threat to the District,"  Kihn said in an interview. 

Kihn said that Philadelphia's effort to improve the authorizing and oversight of charters has been underway for about 18 months and is not a response to the legislation.

The ultimate fate of the District's efforts and the legislation are intertwined.

Philadelphia, with more than half the state's charter schools, is clearly the district that would be most affected by any change in the state law. And some local charter operators and advocates support pieces of the bill, including those that would do away with enrollment caps and allow universities to authorize charters.

While supporting some elements of the District's proposed changes, Jonathan Cetel of the statewide advocacy group PennCAN said that the organization "remains a a strong supporter of creating additional authorizing options because we've seen the model work in other states." He said that charter schools authorized by universities in New York and Michigan are generally high-performing.

"Philadelphia will benefit from having a higher-ed authorizer that has the capacity, interest, and skill set to perform the three core functions of good authorizing: opening up new schools, providing meaningful oversight and support to existing schools, and closing bad schools," he wrote in an email. 

Cetel also disputes the idea that the District should be able to consider it own financial situation in deciding to curb charter growth.He said he was "disappointed" that the proposed new policy codifies "the District's aggressive and illegal tactic of curbing charter enrollment by threatening all charter schools with revocation if they don't comply with enrollment caps."

Lawrence Jones, president of the Pennsylvania Coalition of Public Charter Schools and head of the Richard Allen Preparatory Charter School, said that the coalition would have a detailed response to the proposed changes by the deadline Friday. 

"I take at face value that they want to improve their ability to be a solid authorizer," Jones said. "We want a good authorizer that will not only provide oversight and accountability but that also provides advocacy and support so that every public school -- charters included -- has resources to do the job well."

Resources are controlled by the state, both through the method for disbursing education aid to districts and through the charter law, which dictates how the districts distribute money to charters. Although the state's charter law was designed to provide charters with a similar level of funding as traditional public schools in the authorizing district, Jones is among those who say that charters do not get a fair piece of the pie.

"We want fair funding and strong charter school authorization," Jones said. "Whatever can get us to that point is what we support. I would hope that the District is on the same wavelength with that."

Kihn acknowledged that the District's charter authorizing has suffered from deficiencies.

"There has been some justifiable frustration on the part of some charter operators about the way in which authorizing in Philadelphia has been done," he said. "That basically has changed now. It's really a new day." He said that the charter renewal process for this year "has been met with compliments and applause from providers." 

The new policy would require annual monitoring of charters instead of the current system in which evaluations only happen during the renewal process, which occurs every five years. It would allow for charter modification requests during the term of the charter instead of waiting till renewal,

He said that the charter office, which oversees 86 schools, has a staff of eight, but also contracts out some key functions like site visits and gets help from other District offices. One part of the policy vows to "ensure ... a staffing level appropriate and sufficient to carry out all authorizing responsibilities" and "an appropriate and sufficient funding" of the charter school office.

Like most other District offices, the charter school office has suffered chronic funding shortfalls.

And largely due to the District's funding situation, the SRC has not authorized a new charter school since 2009, except  for those District schools converted to charters under the Renaissance Schools turnaround initiative. It also has closed very few charters since they were created under the 1997 law for poor performance. Four charters have been closed, and four others are now in the process for closure.

In October, 29 charters did not have signed agreements and were sent warning letters by Kihn, setting the stage for the District's more vigorous charter accountability effort.

Since then, 12 have signed agreements. Kihn said eight more are likely to sign based on the discussions, three are pending, and for six, there has been no progress in discussions. Most charters object to enrollment caps, but some object more generally to the SRC's authority over them.

Kihn said that the District has invited feedback on the proposed policy by calling all 86 charter school operators and contacting myriad community, advocacy, faith-based and parent groups. They have had "30 to 40" conversations, but so far have received only four written responses, he said.

He said the District is "getting positive feedback on the general coherence and consistency and strength of the overall policy" -- including efforts to remove enrollment "barriers to entry" -- and on the shift to allowing annual modifications of charters instead of waiting five years for the renewal process.

He said that the District has also heard from people "a desire that District-managed schools are held to the same standard as charter schools." The policy calls for new charters to set up formal mechanisms for parent engagement and feedback, but some people said they would like to see a requirement that parents be included on the charter's governing board.

Philadelphia's 86 charter schools enroll more than 60,000 students, one-third of all the students in the city's publicly funded schools. Balancing the pressure for charter growth and the need for the District to maintain a sound fiscal footing is a defining issue for local officials and policymakers.

Paying charter schools has become one of the District's single largest expenses, exceeding $700 million. Charter funding is determined by state law. 

"There are, of course, those within the charter sector and advocates who believe charters are the solution to the educational ills of Philadelphia," Kihn said. "We don't believe that. We believe charters are part of the solution, and we also believe that well-managed District neighborhood schools are an equally important part of the solution. Advocacy in support of any state law that would allow unfettered growth of all kinds of charter schools in Philadelphia would be detrimental to families here."

 

view counter

Comments (9)

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on March 6, 2014 8:38 am
If Paul Kihn is receiving the information you can rest assured that if it doesn't meet what he wants to do it won't be included. Save your breath.
Submitted by Lisa Haver on March 6, 2014 9:37 am
"Kihn said that the District has invited feedback on the proposed policy by calling all 86 charter school operators and contacting myriad community, advocacy, faith-based and parent groups. They have had "30 to 40" conversations, but so far have received only four written responses, he said." Calling people to ask how they feel is a far cry from holding community meetings with advance notice to which all are invited to come and speak. This seems to be a continuation of district management's move toward non-transparency. Last year, they abruptly cancelled six meetings on PSI when parents at the first one expressed their skepticism and frustration. When the new policy is presented in March, does that mean that the SRC votes on it without any comment, as they do with most resolutions, or will there be an actual presentation? Will the SRC allow the parents and community members in the audience to ask questions? Mr. Green refused to answer any questions at the February meeting, either during testimony or during the resolution voting. He should explain why, under his Chairmanship, the SRC will no longer answer questions on resolutions before voting on them.
Submitted by Joe K. (not verified) on March 6, 2014 11:47 am
Exactly--another version of the hidden ball trick, pin the tail on the donkey.
Submitted by Alex (not verified) on April 22, 2014 1:49 am
Nice information
Submitted by Rich Migliore (not verified) on March 6, 2014 10:33 am
Yes Paul, I agree with Lisa. You know I support the district's efforts to govern and regulate charter schools and support all of your efforts to be inclusive, transparent, open, collaborative, and to give all stakeholders a true voice in what happens to their supposedly public schools. You know I believe strongly that all schools which are publicly funded should be "actually operated" as public schools. However, again this looks like you are rushing this through in order to hurry up and rush-rush the turning more schools over to private entities. You also know that most of us, who do not have a special self interest in the privatization of our schools, want us to focus on "improving all schools" and stop focusing on "turning schools over" to private entities. Since these are "public policies" I advise you, Dr. Hite and the SRC to hold public policy meetings on a Monday evening like you have done for the other issues. Even I do not have the time to fully comment in writing at this time. Please consider this public comment a submission to your receptor. Thank you Paul, for your efforts. We are all learners in this, and we are all citizens in a democracy who deserve fair opportunity to participate in the governance of our public schools. That is not only a 'best practice" but it is a "Constitutional guarantee."
Submitted by germantowntaxpayer (not verified) on March 7, 2014 11:56 am
Rich, I agree with you. In addition, one of my questions regarding oversight of charter schools is the following: Why are they able to maintain a 'Fund Balance' of Public Money, should not those funds return to the School District that provide the funding?
Submitted by Rich Migliore (not verified) on March 7, 2014 12:15 pm
You know, that is a very good question. I have not even considered it before. Off of the top of my head though, I do not think the district has any power or authority to get any money back from charter schools. They are all private entities in reality. The legal question I have always asked is, if charter schools say they are "public schools," who owns their assets? Does the public own their assets or do the charter schools as private entities own the assets. You can not honestly have it both ways. A question I ask in public is, when Mastery buys that school from the school district, in whose name is the deed going to be titled? Is that school building then "public property" or private property? Hmmmmmm. But we all know the answer now don't we.
Submitted by Mary Byars (not verified) on March 12, 2014 1:01 am
The time is gone. I did not know about it. I wish I could be able to comment on the very subject.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on October 10, 2014 3:27 am

You know, that is a very good question.aaawatchesite.com

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. We reserve the right to delete or remove any material deemed to be in violation of this rule, and to ban anyone who violates this rule. Please see our "Terms of Usage" for more detail concerning your obligations as a user of this service. Reader comments are limited to 500 words. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

Follow Us On

Read the latest print issue

Philly Ed Feed

Become a Notebook member

 

Recent Comments

Top

Public School Notebook

699 Ranstead St.
Third Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Phone: (215) 839-0082
Fax: (215) 238-2300
notebook@thenotebook.org

© Copyright 2013 The Philadelphia Public School Notebook. All Rights Reserved.
Terms of Usage and Privacy Policy