Superintendent Speaks Out Against the Proposed Charter School in Montclair

On June 3, at a well-attended meeting organized by the League of Women Voters in the firehouse on Bloomfield Avenue, Superintendent, Dr. Frank Alvarez and Dr. Katrina Bulkley, Associate Professor of Education Leadership at Montclair State University, provided information about charter schools in general, and the impact the proposed charter school for Montclair would have on our school district. Unfortunately the author of the proposal for the charter school did not attend, so many questions about the specifics of the proposed school remained unanswered.

Superintendent Alvarez opened his remarks by saying that, at another time in another place, he might have been a supporter of charter schools. But, like school reformer Diane Ravitch, he has changed his mind. And, as superintendent of our schools, he is unalterably opposed to the creation of the charter school for three reasons: financial, social and educational.

• Financial: a school of 160 students will mean Montclair taxpayers will have to come up with $2.1 million more than they do already to fund the school. And this would be an annual cost. Federal law requires that each charter school student gets 90 percent of per-pupil costs. If the current charter school proposal is approved, this new cost to taxpayers would begin in 2011-12.

  Even with 160 fewer students at Montclair High School, services will still be needed for the remaining students. A cut of over $2 million would mean many more layoffs. And, he told the audience, students at the charter school may well come from parochial or private schools, and not from the public high school at all.

• Social: Montclair’s magnet system is known nationally as a high-quality, successfully integrated school district, by gender, race and economic status. Our recently reorganized system (see article on School Integration Task Force's recommendations) meets the requirements of the recent Supreme Court decision concerning diversity. Seattle and Louisville are looking carefully at us today to see how they can adapt what we have developed in their own cities. Montclair residents are so accustomed to our magnet system that they may not realize that all school districts do not operate this way, or value diversity as highly as we do.

  Given that schools without such a system always attract like-minded parents, how would the creation of a publicly funded charter school in our town that is exempt from the desegregation plan affect this carefully crafted balance of diversity?

  And how would this small school be able to provide services for our many residents in need of special education services? Almost certainly they would continue to need the services of the Montclair Public Schools.

• Educational: Montclair has a thriving, comprehensive high school, with many small learning communities, and excellent academic support. We have 27 AP classes, 50 athletic teams, and 75 after-school activities. We are academically strong, and improving. Five percent of our graduating class will attend Ivy-League schools,.

  Dr. Alvarez added that the new principal of the high school was selected partly because of his experience with small learning communities, and said that the district is planning more of this type of school within a school, which would address a major concern voiced by the charter school advocates.
  
  Said Dr. Alvarez: “It’s important to note that ours is not a failing district, unlike the districts in which many charter schools are implemented and are successful.” He added, “We need to work on soutions that will benefit all students, not just a few.”

Charter School Overview

Montclair State University’s Dr.Katrina Bulkley, who writes and lectures on school reform, particularly school choice and charter schools, provided a detailed overview of the history of charter schools in this country, a brief discussion of their pros and cons, and some — occasionally surprising — facts and figures about them.

Among some of the highlights:

• Charter schools date from around 1991, and were originally supported by the American Federation of Teachers, which envisioned schools run by like-minded teachers unfettered by bureaucratic rules. The concept was taken up, among others, by advocates of school vouchers who saw charter schools as a way to introduce their concept of educational choice.

• There are around 5,000 charter schools in the United States, serving around 1.5 million students, or two percent of the school-age population.

• The majority of New Jersey’s 78 charter schools are in low-income areas such as Newark and Camden, with a few notable successes. Princeton, a more affluent town, also runs a charter school.

• Charter schools are public schools, publicly funded, and must take all students who apply. If there are more students than seats, the school may not select students, but must run a lottery to fill the available places.

• Charter schools exchange accountability for autonomy. In other words, they are freer to introduce experimental ideas, but are NOT accountable to the residents of the towns and cities who fund them. They are only accountable to the “authorizer” — in New Jersey's case, the single person at the Department of Education who oversees ALL aspects (including finances and performance) of the 78 charter schools in the state. In fact, Dr. Bulkley noted during the question-and-answer period that residents had virtually no recourse at all if they felt that a charter school was not performing well.

• They are subject to federal laws such as the requirements of “No Child Left Behind,” but not necessarily of state mandates. New Jersey tends to impose more mandates on charter schools than other states.

• Students are self-selected; contrary to accepted belief, charter schools do not skim the very brightest kids, but the most involved parents. Most charter school applicants are average and below average students.

• Since parents tend to gravitate to schools with similar populations (“like” attracts “like”), charter schools are expected to develop plans to actively recruit a more diverse student body.

• Their “charter” with the government requires them to demonstrate success within five years or the charter will not be renewed. In practice, this rarely happens, and the schools continue. No one likes to close a school.

• In New Jersey, charter schools are funded by the taxpayers of the school district where they are located. This, of course, will be less noticeable in the budgets of Abbott districts which have a very high percentage of state aid.

• Teachers, unless they choose to, are not unionized. They are nearly always younger and less experienced. Some may think this is an advantage, some may see it as a disadvantage.

• There is a continuing debate about the success rate of charter schools, but the most widely accepted study, the Stanford CREDO study of 2009, while stating that test scores are by no means the only way to measure success, nevertheless came up with some startling findings. Using statistics from 15 states and the District of Columbia, the report found that nearly half of the charter schools nationwide have results that are no different from the local public school options, 17 percent provide superior education opportunities for their students, and over a third, 34 percent, provide results that are significantly worse than their students would have realized had they remained in traditional public schools.

Dr. Bulkley summarized her remarks by saying that supporters of charter schools cite: the advantage of choice; the perception (right or wrong) that test scores are higher and the curriculum more rigorous; the possibility of smaller class size and a smaller total population; the elimination of many bureaucratic rules; the ability to be innovative; and they point to some really exceptional examples of charter schools. Typically the parents are seeking relief from inner city issues, which might include school violence, failing performance, dangerous neighborhoods, issues which we do not face in Montclair. Many outside the education field are also ideologically committed to the concept of competition.

Those opposing charter schools object to having to support a school which is not accountable to them, and object to losing funds from the local public schools they prefer. They believe that charter schools siphon off the active parents who are essential to a well-run district, cite the lack of diversity, especially in a successfully integrated district like Montclair, and the inability to handle the needs of special education students.

Questions and Answers

There were a number of questions and answers. Unfortunately, many of which about the specifics of the proposed school could not be answered since no one involved in the preparation of the application was present. Some members of the audience said that they would convey the questions to the charter school advocates, and said they would make sure that the answers would be publicized. Other questions were answered by Dr. Alvarez and Dr. Bulkley. Most asked for clarification of the points made during the presentations.