New Ranking of Charter School Laws Fails Principles of Sound Policy Research
NACSA Says Washington State Is The Best
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 7, 2016
WASHINGTON, DC — A group claiming to represent the interests of charter school authorizers released a report yesterday rating Washington State among the top three charter school laws for authorizing, despite serious deficiencies in that state’s law. The National Association of Charter School Authorizers (NACSA) also gave low marks to Washington DC’s vibrant charter policy.
The inadequacy of NACSA’s charter school policy is best seen through a comparison of the two Washingtons. Among the key differences:
- Schools: In comparison to other states with charter laws, Washington state currently has among the fewest charter schools. The new charter law ensures it will continue to remain near the bottom in this regard, limiting the number of new charter schools to 40 across the entire state for the next five years, with no more than eight per year. The DC charter law permits more charter schools per year in a single district and has resulted in close to half of its public school students
being educated in charter schools, including many in high quality charter schools. - Serving the poor: Washington state charter law discourages charter schools focused on serving disadvantaged students and other special populations by requiring default non-renewal for charters in the bottom quartile of the state’s achievement index (other than in “exceptional circumstances”). The DC charter law allows contains no such provision, enabling the charter authorizer to consider a broader range of factors.
- Authorizers: The only non-district charter authorizer permitted by the Washington state charter law is a state commission that, while technically independent, is administered within the office of the state superintendent. The DC charter law established a separate charter board that is administered separately from the existing education bureaucracy.
(See: Charter School Authorizers: The Truth About State Commissions)
- Autonomy: The Washington state charter law directs the state charter authorizing commission to administer charter schools “in the same manner” as local districts manage regular public schools, encouraging similarly high levels of regulation and control. The DC charter law includes no such requirement and encourages operational autonomy for charter schools.
- Flexibility: The Washington state charter law requires that charter authorizers implement “nationally recognized” standards (i.e., those by NACSA), perhaps one reason why NACSA regards this law so positively. The DC charter law allows charter authorizers flexibility in managing their procedures.
“If only this were an ‘oops’ moment for NACSA and they had mixed up Washington State and Washington DC,” said CER Founder and CEO Jeanne Allen.
NACSA’s report also undervalues other strong laws, such as New York and Arizona, both of which show the importance of freedom and flexibility from government intrusion when providing new opportunities for students.
To learn more about CER’s charter school law rankings and recommendations for what constitutes a strong charter school law, please visit 2024.edreform.com.
About the Center for Education Reform
Founded in 1993, the Center for Education Reform aims to expand educational opportunities that lead to improved economic outcomes for all Americans — particularly our youth — ensuring that the conditions are ripe for innovation, freedom and flexibility throughout U.S. education.
