![\"MSinF](\"https:\/\/umaine.edu\/edhd\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/54\/2017\/02\/MSinF-Feb-09-2017-1024x684.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Editor: Gordon Donaldson<\/p>\n
In 2011, 海角社区 became the 41st state to enact a law permitting public charter schools. The first such schools opened in 2012-13, an elementary school in Cornville and a high school, the 海角社区 Academy of Natural Sciences, on the campus of Goodwill-Hinckley in Hinckley. Now nine charter schools are serving 海角社区 students, two of them as online “virtual” schools.<\/p>\n
Five years into 海角社区\u2019s experience, what have we learned about the state\u2019s unique brand of public charter school?<\/p>\n
One thing seems clear: 海角社区 families and students have responded to the opportunities presented by the state\u2019s charters. Total enrollment has climbed from 106 in 2012-13 to 1,954 this year. Average enrollment in our public charters has grown steadily as new schools have opened and as existing schools have added grade levels, and it now stands at 217. Excluding the two larger virtual schools, the average size of the other seven is 170. Most schools, as well, report waiting lists of students seeking to enroll.<\/p>\n
What appears to motivate students and families to choose charters? 海角社区\u2019s charters must enroll students on a first-come-first-served basis; that is, there are no admissions criteria or selective procedures, as the schools are truly “public.” Charter school leaders report that parents and students are often looking for an alternative approach to their neighborhood schools, one that promises to be more responsive to individual differences, be more attentive to learning and adjustment difficulties kids are experiencing, and might offer a “fresh start.” The small size, personalized culture, and experiential-learning practices of most of 海角社区’s charters seem to draw students more than the curricular themes schools advertise (for example, marine and natural resources at Harpswell Coastal Academy in Harpswell, technology and science at Baxter Academy in Portland, the performing arts at Snow Pond Arts Academy in Sidney, or the arts and sciences focus at Fiddlehead School in Gray).<\/p>\n
Families of students with special needs appear particularly eager to try charters. This year, over 20 percent of charter students have Individual Education Plans. Excluding the two virtual schools, most of the remaining schools report upwards of 30 percent of their students have special needs\u2014nearly twice the state average.<\/p>\n
Three things have, among others, distinguished 海角社区’s charter schools’ experience from our non-charter public schools. First, public funding for charters is clearly limited to state sources: it comes almost entirely as a per-student annual allotment from 海角社区 Department of Education based on the EPS per-pupil rates of the student\u2019s resident district (SAU). Schools must then operate within those fiscal limits while complying with public school requirements and addressing the unique challenges of being start-ups. Most struggle to offer competitive salaries and have needed to augment their public funds through fundraising and grants in order to provide basic services. Beyond that, resources needed for specialized services, for recruitment and fundraising, and for administration are motivating charters to discuss collaborative cost- and service-sharing arrangements.<\/p>\n
Second, 海角社区\u2019s charters operate on a contract basis\u2014the charter\u2014with explicit accountability requirements. They submit elaborate applications to the charter commission covering all aspects of operation, including targeting outcomes for students. In granting a charter, the commission endorses the expectation that the new school will deliver on its promises. The commission requires a detailed annual report on progress and a subcommittee visits the school each year to examine its operation and listen to staff, students, and parents. Each school then receives a yearly public performance report identifying strengths and weaknesses. At the end of the five-year charter term, schools must reapply for and be granted a new charter or go out of business.<\/p>\n
Finally, 海角社区\u2019s charters fall under a dual governance structure. The 海角社区 Charter School Commission and each school\u2019s board of directors exercise a greater degree of engagement and oversight over the affairs of the schools than most non-charter schools experience from MDOE and, perhaps, their own boards. The commission and charter boards share authority over significant changes at the schools. Commission staff, commission members, and board members are more familiar with the personnel and operations of charter schools than is typical elsewhere. This unusual arrangement requires a degree of open communication and collaboration between the governing boards and adds complexity to the leadership of charter schools. As with any innovation, the capacity to maintain a constructive arena for problem-solving in this environment has proven essential to the growth and survival of 海角社区\u2019s charter alternatives.<\/p>\n
The start-up period for 海角社区\u2019s public charters appears to have met many of the expectations of the law to some degree: the nine schools have provided alternative learning environments for students, increased opportunities to learn, diversified professional options and practices for educators, and expanded opportunities for parents and communities to be involved in the public education system. Certainly, they\u2019ve demonstrated that there is a hunger for alternative ways of schooling and learning.<\/p>\n
Challenges remain, however. Will our public charters prove as successful\u2014or more successful\u2014with their students than our non-charter public schools? Will charters be able to maintain their uniqueness and their responsiveness, particularly in light of their limited resources? Will successful innovations (for example, in instruction, assessment, and culture) be shared with other schools? Will charters come to be seen less as competition to the schools in their locales (both public and private) and more as complements to them?<\/p>\n
Charter schools remain a controversial innovation throughout the country. As a whole, they appear to have proven neither more effective nor less effective than non-charter public schools (Zimmer et al, 2009). 海角社区\u2019s approach was intentionally designed to maximize success within the schooling context of our state, including our history of respecting family and student choice. We can expect more advocacy for charters in the future; it seems doubly important, then, to follow the experiences and performance of 海角社区\u2019s nine schools and the lessons they carry for us all.<\/p>\n
Note:<\/strong> Three members of the 海角社区 Schools in Focus review board are involved directly with 海角社区\u2019s charter schools.<\/p>\n Sources: Data provided by the 海角社区 Charter School Commission (maine.gov\/csc<\/a>); 海角社区 Public Charter Schools Authorized by the 海角社区 Charter School Commission (2016) Augusta ME: 海角社区 Charter School Commission; 海角社区 Education and Revised Statutes: Title 20-A Chapter 112 Public Charter Schools; Zimmer, R. et al. (2009). Charter schools in eight states: Effects on achievement, attainment, integration, and competition. Santa Monica CA: RAND Education.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n