Are charter schools improving the overall public school system? If so, how? If not, what about them is detrimental?


Manya Whitaker, PhD, Developmental/Educational Psychologist; Assistant Professor of Education; Educational Consultant

User avatar for Manya Whitaker, PhD

First, it is important to note that charter schools are public schools so I appreciate that your question positions them as such. Second, it is hard to discuss charter schools as a conglomerate because each charter school/charter school organization operates within the framework of their individual charter that has been negotiated with their local public school district. Some charters are college prep schools while others focus on fine arts or technology. The best way to evaluate charter schools is to compare their performance to the performance of traditional public schools in the same district serving a similar demographic at the same grade level (phew!).

If I were forced to say how charter schools might be improving the overall quality of public schools, I'd point to two things: innovation and academic support. Many charter schools have additional funds beyond those provided by the state and local property taxes. These additional funds are often used to supplement academic experiences with tutors, after school programs, and a more diverse curriculum. Further, because charter schools don't have the strict rules that traditional schools have in terms of scheduling, class sizes, etc., they can often structure their school calendar to include innovative enhancements to learning such as Saturday school, extended school days, field trips, and community-based learning opportunities among others. They also have more resources and leeway to experiment with different academic models like multi-age classrooms and different pedagogical techniques like inquiry-based learning. So for those reasons, charter schools have upped the bar in terms of what parents and families can expect to be happening in public schools.

But on the downside, charter schools are getting a bad reputation because they can only serve a portion of the population who wants to attend. Almost all charter schools admit students via a lottery, but some charter schools also include an extensive application and interview process that some say is designed to weed out students whom they perceive to be academic underachievers. Further, a lot of college prep charter schools have very strict discipline policies including zero tolerance. The high number of suspensions and expulsions have caused some parents to compare their child's charter school to a prison. Finally, charter schools are contributing to the increased number of unlicensed teachers in public schools. Because charters can make their own hiring rules, many charter schools hire teachers who have temporary licenses granted through alternative teacher preparation programs such as Teach for America. While these teachers have great intentions, they begin their career without the proper training, coursework and experience necessary to be successful teaching in the low income, racially and linguistically diverse schools in which they are most often placed. A lot of data shows that teachers without professional licenses have lower student outcomes than teachers with professional licenses.

So all in all, it depends who you ask what you will hear about how charter schools help or hurt the public schooling system. Just remember that charter schools are only one option among many when it comes to school choice.

Amy McElroy, Former Attorney, Writer, Editor, parent of a junior high and high school student

User avatar for Amy McElroy

I think the way Charter schools are improving the public school system is also potentially a way they could be hurting it--similar to how the thing you like the most about someone is the thing you have to put up with sometimes: providing a wider choice of free public education for your children.

While each family has a broader range of choices for its children, the standard public schools may lose some good students because families who seek out alternative education options often raise motivated, education-focused children. On the other hand, charter schools also attract many children who have not been able to cope with the traditional learning environments of the standard public schools because of learning or behavioral challenges. Therefore, so as long as access does not become an issue at the charter school--for example, lottery systems are fair and the location is convenient within the school district--on balance, charter schools should not hurt the other public schools.

However, if numerous good students are fleeing the other public schools to apply to a charter, I suggest examining what that particular charter school is doing right to determine why students and families are attracted to it.

As the other expert pointed out, every charter is different--with strengths and limitations--and you have to evaluate the merits of each based on the needs of your children.

We chose to sacrifice our daughters' attendance at a school two blocks from our house, where they would've had many more neighborhood friends, to drive to the other end of the county. Herein lies a weakness of our own charter school: we do have an access problem that needs to be addressed. But in exchange, our kids were able to attend a K-8 school where they learned music, art, theater, P.E., Spanish, and agriculture, as part of the standard curriculum, plus numerous electives, all in a project based learning style, on campus that felt comfortable.

While the expert above pointed out many risks, the charter school where my daughters attended did not allow unlicensed teachers or have overstrict discipline policies (in fact, perhaps the opposite).

But given our options, I wouldn't change our decision.

Your Answer