|
4401-A
Connecticut Avenue, Box 294, Washington, DC
20008
Tel: (202) 244-7535, Fax: (202) 244-7584
|
Education Exchange
Volume 2, Issue 4 -- April
1998
|
Focusing on
Education Reforms at Your School, in Your State
Legislature, and in Congress
|
Choice
Becoming an Option Through Charters
Since the phenomenon began in 1991 in Minnesota, 29
states and the District of Columbia now have legislation
permitting the formation of charter schools. A charter
school is an autonomous entity that operates on the basis of
a charter or contract between the individual or group (e.g.,
teachers, parents, others) which organizes the school and
its sponsor (e.g., local school board, county or state
board, university, or charter board). The charter specifies
such items as the school's educational plan, specific
educational outcomes and assessments, a school management
plan, and other compliance requirements. Once granted a
charter, a school begins to receive educational
formula-driven funding (e.g., average per pupil cost, plus
targeted funds).
Charter schools appeal to those who want to improve
educational choice by introducing competition into the
education system. A recent study by the U.S. Department of
Education found that "the most common reasons for founding
charter schools are to pursue an educational vision or gain
autonomy."
Charter school legislation varies widely from state to
state and the level of specificity and restrictions often
depend on the strength of the opposition from the teacher
unions, school boards, and others who hold a stake in the
status quo. Some characteristics of strong legislation
include the following:
- Open to any individual, group, or organization,
including for-profit companies;
- Exemptions from many state and local rules, including
collective bargaining contracts, and conventional teacher
certification requirements;
- Fiscal and legal autonomy --self governance through a
board of trustees;
- More than one charter-granting body and a definitive
appeals process;
- No limitation on the number of schools which can be
chartered;
- Direct state funding established at a level
equivalent to the average of all state and local
expenditures and, if possible, to include operating and
some capital revenues.
Charter school holders are directly responsible to
agencies of state government to meet certain student
performance requirements; maintain financial viability;
protect the rights of students, parents and employees; and
carry out the educational responsibilities of state
government.
As public schools, most of the 784 charter schools now
operating cannot charge tuition, teach religion, or
affiliate with religious institutions. Charter schools may
not restrict admissions on the basis of race, religion,
national origin, language, intellectual or athletic ability,
measures of achievement, or special needs. Some charter
schools, however, target specific student populations such
as special needs students.
As the dissatisfaction with government's management of
America's public schools grows, charter schools may become a
viable option. That viability increases with the stability
of an experienced management company at the helm of the
charter school.
Charter
Schools Educate a Diverse Population
No two charter schools are alike. They address different
needs, approaches, communities, and student populations.
- Most charter schools are small.
- Most charter schools are newly created.
- Charter schools have, on average, a racial
composition roughly similar to statewide averages, or
they have a higher proportion of students of color.
- Charter schools serve, on average, a slightly lower
proportion of students with disabilities, except in
Minnesota and Wisconsin.
- Charter schools serve, on average, a lower proportion
of limited English proficient (LEP) students, except in
Minnesota and Massachusetts.
- Charter schools enroll approximately the same
proportion of low-income students, on average, as other
public schools.
- Most charter schools are eligible for Title 1
funding.
Paycheck
Protection Hot Issue This Election Season
Paycheck protection is in the news, and will certainly
remain there through November. The initiatives that would,
in most cases, require employees to provide annual written
authorization in order for employers to deduct wages for
political use is showing up in states far and wide.
Though it is on the radar screen in Congress with
corresponding bills at the federal level, action on worker
paycheck protection will most effectively occur in state
legislatures as amendments to state campaign finance laws,
and through state ballot initiatives. As many as 30 states
expect to put the issue before voters on their November
ballots.
Washington state holds bragging rights for being the
first state to pass (with 70 percent of the vote) and
implement a paycheck protection/workers' rights law in 1992.
There, the proposition (I-134) was called the Fair Campaign
Practices Act. Sources say its success played a significant
role in California's current drive to pass Proposition 226
in a primary election to be held June 2. If passed,
Proposition 226 will become law on July 1, 1998.
Proposition 226 maintains high approval ratings across
the board, including 70+ percent support in union
households. The passage of California's Proposition 226 will
bring a greater degree of national publicity to the issue,
which will in turn build momentum for many other similar
state initiatives that will be voted on later in the year.
While California receives the lion's share of attention
on paycheck protection, Michigan has quietly implemented its
own law banning reverse checkoffs, a procedure whereby an
employee must request that the standard payroll deduction
for political purposes be "discontinued."
Though originally approved by the state legislature in
1994, implementation of Michigan's law was held up by a
restraining order until January 7, 1997, when the Appeals
Court upheld the ban. Receipts of the two state teacher
unions between 1994 (before the law changed) and 1997 (after
the law took effect) were dramatic: MEA-PAC (Michigan
Education Association) raised $2,567,821 from reverse
checkoff in 1994, and $140,287.65 in the first ten months of
1997; Michigan Federation of Teachers PAC raised $179,215
from reverse checkoff in 1994, and $7,855.46 in the first
ten months of 1997.
In Washington state, the level of "before and after
passage of I-134" contributors dropped from 48,000 to 8,000.
The Washington Education Association (WEA), as a result of
this massive drop in contributions, took the bold step of
implementing what it called a "Community Outreach Program."
The outreach program was "an internal ploy to raise more
WEA-PAC money," according to a deposition given by WEA
lobbyist Robert Maier. The legal investigation into the
WEA's political fundraising, spearheaded by the Evergreen
Freedom Foundation, is ongoing.
Wyoming became the third state to pass a paycheck
protection measure in March 1998. Both Houses of the Wyoming
legislature approved legislation making it illegal for labor
unions to force members to give contributions to political
causes or politicians without the written consent of
individual union members. Gov. Jim Geringer has promised to
sign the measure.
Many more states are likely to enter the fray. See the
box below for states that already have pending initiatives:
Arizona, Alaska, Mississippi, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and
Wisconsin.
Pending
State Workers' Rights Legislation
Arizona: House Bill 2412, the "Labor Organizations
Deductions Act," would preclude unions from spending
treasury money on activities that aren't directly related to
the ratification or administration of collective bargaining
agreements."
Alaska: Senate Bill 114 would prohibit private and
public employers from diverting any portion of an employee's
wages for political contributions unless the employee files
at least an annual written authorization.
Mississippi: The "Worker Paycheck Fairness Act"
would require unions to secure at least an annual written
authorization from any member before it could use any
portion of the member's dues or fees for activities that
aren't "necessary" to "performing the duties of the
exclusive representation of employees in dealing with the
employer on labor-management issues."
Oregon: Two ballot initiatives have been proposed
that are aimed at union political checkoff, one prohibiting
collection of political funds by a public entity, the other
requiring employee written authorization.
Pennsylvania: House Bill 1968 would preclude
private and public employees from making any payroll
deductions that would support any candidate, separate fund,
political action committee, legislative campaign fund,
political party, or ballot issue.
Wisconsin: Assembly Bill 624 would prohibit an
employer from making any payroll withholding for the purpose
of making a contribution to a "committee" except upon the
employee's consent, which must be secured at least annually.
PTA Explains Its
National Standards at NCPIE
Kay Luzier is chairman of the National PTA Education
Commission. Luzier, a veteran teacher from Florida, appeared
before a handful of members of the National Coalition for
Parent Involvement in Education. NCPIE is a coalition of
approximately 60 organizations which meets monthly in
Washington, DC.
Luzier explained the development of the PTA's six
national standards for parent and family involvement. These
standards are now being marketed to PTA members and others
in hopes of having the standards adopted and implemented by
school districts. The standards include promoting consistent
communication between home and school, supporting parent
skills development, urging parental roles in student
learning, training volunteers, encouraging parents to become
full partners in school decision making, and collaborating
with the community.
Despite the extensive aspects of the PTA standards for
parent involvement, the PTA can do little to assist parents
who are demanding meaningful changes within failing public
schools. Because the PTA has a policy of remaining neutral
on challenges to the teacher union hold over the PTA's
teacher members, it will not address parent concerns that
defy the teacher unions.
NBPTS
Certification Costs "Waste of Public Funds"
Republican members of the House Education and the
Workforce Committee supported Committee Chairman Bill
Goodling's proposal to shift $18.5 million to block grants
for teacher training rather than fund the National Board for
Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS).
Goodling, a former Pennsylvania public school teacher and
administrator, criticized NBPTS for wasting public funds.
According to Mary Buday, an official at NBPTS, through
January 1998, NBPTS had received $97.4 million from the
following sources: federal government, $44.9 million;
foundations, $36.5 million; corporations, $10.6 million;
candidate fees, $3.7 million; and interest, $1.7 million.
Including the teachers certified in November 1997, NBPTS
has certified 912 teachers to date. Despite the fact that
there are now 2,200 candidates for board certification, the
average cost of those certified previously is $106,798.25
per teacher. The 63-member NBPTS board, dominated by teacher
union officials and members, offers voluntary certification
for teachers whose portfolios meet designated criteria.
Post Merger,
Additional Reporting for NEA Affiliates?
As merger talks continue, one area of possible contention
between the NEA and AFT may be labor reporting requirements.
Mike Antonucci, Director of the Education Intelligence
Agency, explains, "Unions with even a small number of
members in the private sector are bound by the reporting
requirements of the Labor Management Reporting and
Disclosure Act. Public sector unions are exempted.
Because they generally organize nurses, custodians and
other private sector workers, most AFT affiliates are
therefore required to report the compensation paid to each
union officer and staffer. NEA and a small number of its
state affiliates are likewise required to report these
figures. But most NEA affiliates, including those in
California, New Jersey and Wisconsin, are not bound by
LMRDA.
Should they merge with their AFT counterparts, however,
chances are good their compensation figures would become
public record."
NEA
Attempts to Join Charter School Bandwagon
Although the NEA and AFT view charter schools as a threat
to their hard-won job protections, two years ago the NEA
pledged $1.5 million over five years to start five of its
own charter schools. Critics perceived the NEA's decision as
a public relations poly. The NEA claims the charter project
is part of the union's effort to emphasize its education
reform efforts. However, the NEA's charter school teachers
are not relieved of collective bargaining restrictions, and
in keeping with the NEA's other rules, its charter schools
are to hire only traditionally certified teachers. For its
part, the NEA, with an annual budget of over $210 million,
has provided support to its charter schools with budgeting,
staff training, and public relations.
To date, only the CIVA Charter School in Colorado Springs
and the Integrated Day Charter School in Norwich, CT, have
been newly created. The 360-student, K-6 Lanikai school in
Hawaii converted to charter status in 1996. Internal
conflicts among members, and other problems have delayed the
opening of the Ixcalli Charter School in San Diego . The
proposed schools in Georgia and Phoenix have been abandoned
.
EPI's
Education Quick Facts
- In a U.S. Department of Education survey, fifty-seven
percent of schools reported crimes during the 1996-97
school year. Two out of ten middle and high schools
witnessed at least one serious violent crime, such as
rape or armed attack. In schools with more than 1,000
students, the rate increased to one out of every three
schools. The survey included 1,234 schools and counted
only those crimes reported to police. (Source: April 3,
1998 Ed Facts, a publication of the Family
Research Council)
- Simply collecting the signed authorizations mandated
by this [paycheck protection] legislation, the AFL-CIO
estimates, would cost unions $90 million in the first
year. (Source: Michael D. Simpson, NEA Office of General
Counsel, writing in March 1998 NEA Today)
- A National Center for Education Statistics study
shows that, in the United States, mathematics and native
language instruction (English) were rated "essential" or
"very important" by more of the public than any other
subject. Mathematics received higher ratings in the U.S.
than in any other nation. Some 85 percent of the
Americans surveyed considered information technology
either essential or very important. (Source: March 1998
American Teacher, an AFT publication)
- According to Quality Counts '98: The Urban Challenge,
11 million children -- one out of four students in public
education in the United States -- attend an urban school.
Forty-three percent of the nation's minority children go
to urban public schools, as do 35 percent of poor
children. (Source: March/April 1998 Education
Hotline, a newsletter published by Editorial
Projects in Education, Inc.)
- More than two-thirds of 1,000 superintendents polled
at AASA's National Conference on Education said training
teachers would offer greater educational benefits to
their school districts than hiring teachers.
Superintendents were ambivalent about paying higher
salaries for teachers certified by a national board,
though. (Source: April 15, 1998 Leadership
News, a publication of the American Association of
School Administrators)
Copyright 1998
Education Policy Institute, PMB 294, 4401-A Connecticut
Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20008-2322 202/244-7535, Fax
202/244-7584 http://www.educationpolicy.org
|
