Editor's Note: The following excerpts are taken from an article titled, "A Summary of Arguments For and Against Charter Schools," by Elly Jo Rael. The article appeared in Education Policy Analysis Archives, Vol. 3, N. 13.
Charter schools initiate competition between schools which will improve education.***These schools will compete with current public schools for students, and hence funding. The competition will require all schools to attend to the needs of students and the desires of parents. The result will be improved education for all students, whether they remain in the traditional public school or attend a charter school.
Charter schools do not create school competition. *** Too heavy an emphasis on reducing financial expenditure will lead to cut corners and inferior safety for children, reduced breadth and depth of academic program, and a reduction in non-academic programs. The result will be reduced quality of education for all students.
Removing regulations frees charter schools to innovate. *** Many current regulations exist in order to prohibit practices which we have determined to be illegal, *** or otherwise socially unacceptable. ***Moreover, if certain regulations or practices inhibit quality education *** why not remove these regulations from all schools? ***
Charter schools are elitist. To the extent that charter schools can expel students and refuse to accept them, then regular public schools will become a dumping ground for the difficult or expensive to educate students, including those with antisocial behaviors and/or learning disabilities or physical handicaps. To the extent that they are allowed autonomy in selection of students, *** charter schools may also lead to an increased stratification and fragmentation of society along lines of class, race, gender, language, mental and physical abilities, and social, religious, and political beliefs. Not only will such stratification be educationally harmful for some, but [also] it will increase divisiveness in an already too fractured society. Rather than fragmentation, we need to revitalize a spirit of commonalty through the public school system. ***
Charter schools add financial burdens on all public schools. Charter schools are provided no capital or start-up costs and receive only a fraction of the per pupil expenditure of the public schools. So, they too must operate with inadequate funding. If successful, then charter schools, whether for-profit or not, create pressures for reductions in overall education spending while also creating pressure for freeing all schools from regulations that ensure educational corners will not be cut.
Charter schools are better focused on goals and purpose of programs. A school run by a group of faculty committed to a particular educational vision and operating with the support of sending parents, has a high chance for some version of success. Charter schools promote the development of such schools by switching the emphasis in the definition of an educational community from that of geography to that of commonalty of interest. ***
Charter schools increase local control. Through the emphasis on commonalty of interests and the possible variations among charter schools, parents, students and community members can establish group cohesion by focusing on goals and purposes of charter schools. Maintaining levels of cohesion and understanding will most likely lead to a decrease in divisiveness and interest group politics.
Charter schools decrease local control. If charter schools are directly responsible only to a state board, then local voter control over the funding and operation of those schools will be eliminated.
Charter schools will increase abuses of the public trust. Interest groups have a stake in creating charter schools for their own purposes. The purposes and aims of the charter schools will become politicized and eventually charter schools will operate on the basis of political interests. Increased local control will result in an exclusionary and segregated school system.
Parents know what is best for their children and their education. Parents can make the right choice on where to send their children to school. Limited information and/or misinformation can lead to bad-decision making. Not all parents take an active interest in their children's education. Some maintain minimal contact with teachers and school administration. Also, various definitions and aims of charter schools may not be clearly stated, misconstrued, or simply unavailable. In effect, how can we ensure that parents are informed, receive appropriate information, and know how to use it, in order to make wise decisions about where to send their child to school?
Charter schools cost less. Charter schools can operate effectively with less revenue than the public schools because they are free from the inefficiencies of public schools, namely inappropriate regulation, certified and unionized teachers on fixed pay scales, bloated administrative costs, and the failure to contract out services.
Charter schools impoverish already financially strapped schools and districts. Charter schools receive a percentage of per pupil expenditures which drains directly from the proposed annual budgets in many public schools. This will further deplete the amount of funding allotted among public schools possibly requiring the termination of teachers, programs, events, etc., lowering the overall academic standards among all public schools.
Charter schools are reconstructing existing schools and programs. Innovative programs offered by charter schools are no different from programs that are currently being offered in certain regular public schools. Charters are not necessary in order to create innovative educational programs.