DOCSLIB.ORG

Charter Schools: How Charter and For-Profit Schools Can Boost Public Education

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Charter Schools: How Charter and For-Profit Schools Can Boost Public Education Free to Choose Charter Schools: How charter and for-profit schools can boost public education Trisha Jha Jennifer Buckingham Research Report | August 2015 National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication Data: Jha, Trisha, author. Free to choose charter schools : how charter and for-profit schools can boost public education / Trisha Jha ; Jennifer Buckingham. 9781922184535 (paperback) CIS research report ; 6. Charter schools. School choice. Low-income students. Academic achievement. Other Creators/Contributors: Buckingham, Jennifer, author. Centre for Independent Studies (Australia), issuing body. Dewey Number: 371.05 Free to Choose Charter Schools: How charter and for-profit schools can boost public education Trisha Jha Jennifer Buckingham Research Report 6 Related CIS publications Issue Analysis IA116 Jennifer Buckingham, Educating The Disadvantaged (2009) TARGET30 T30.09 Jennifer Buckingham, School Funding on a Budget (2014) Contents Executive Summary ...............................................................................................1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................3 Why consider charter schools?.................................................................................4 NAPLAN ........................................................................................................4 PISA ............................................................................................................5 Charter schools, free schools and school autonomy ....................................................6 Charter and free school formation ....................................................................7 United States ........................................................................................................8 What is a charter school? ................................................................................8 Management of charter schools .......................................................................8 Statistical context ..........................................................................................8 Evidence on student achievement ....................................................................9 Characteristics of high impact charter schools .................................................. 11 Segregation, equity, and heterogeneous effects ............................................... 13 Sweden ............................................................................................................. 15 Friskolor .....................................................................................................15 Evidence on student achievement .................................................................. 16 Segregation and equity ................................................................................. 17 Chile...... ............................................................................................................ 18 Independent schools.....................................................................................18 Evidence on student achievement .................................................................. 18 Segregation and equity ................................................................................. 18 England..............................................................................................................20 Free schools ...............................................................................................20 Academies .................................................................................................. 21 For-profit independent schools ....................................................................... 21 New Zealand ....................................................................................................... 22 Partnership schools...................................................................................... 22 For-profit schools................................................................................................. 23 Evidence on student achievement .................................................................. 24 For-profit schools and government funding ...................................................... 26 Private and for-profit schools in developing countries ........................................ 27 Prospects for charter schools in Australia ................................................................ 29 For-profit schools in Australia ........................................................................ 30 Policy lessons from international evidence ............................................................... 32 Charter school authorisation and governance ................................................... 32 For-profit schools and management ................................................................ 32 Cost impacts of implementing a charter school model ....................................... 33 Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 34 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors are grateful for comments from three anonymous reviewers on an earlier draft of this report. The authors would also like to thank Lachlan Philips for assistance with research. Any errors or omissions remain the authors' responsibility. Executive Summary ● Educational achievement levels among Australian ● A subset of high impact charter schools have been children, especially those from disadvantaged identified in the literature, most of which follow backgrounds, are not improving and in some cases the ‘no excuses’ model of high expectations of are declining. achievement, strong discipline, traditional teaching methods, and longer school days and years. ● Funding is not the problem: school funding more than doubled in the past 25 years, while enrolments ● The most successful charter schools in the US increased by only 18%. tend to be networks of schools operated by non- profit charter management organisations, serving ● A new approach is required where other schools disadvantaged student populations. A similar trend have persistently failed, and where there is demand is emerging in England. for alternatives to traditional public schools. ● Charters could extend school choice to those who ● Charter schools combine public funding with private cannot access it, provide opportunities for innovation (non-government) management. in schools, and offer a way to turn around chronically- ● Charter schools and similar school choice policies failing schools exist in the US (charter schools), Sweden (free ● Charter schools have a potential cost impact if a schools or ‘friskolor’), Chile (independent schools), student is switching from a lower subsidy Catholic England (free schools and academies) and New school to a full-subsidy charter school, but the Zealand (partnership schools). These schools relatively small difference in average costs would generally receive funding at comparative levels to arguably be offset by the productivity benefits. public schools, cannot charge fees, and cannot be selective in their students. ● In light of the evidence, state and territory governments should consider introducing charter ● Charter schools can be ‘start up’ schools — new schools. The lessons from the charter school schools established to serve growing populations or experience in other countries would allow Australian the demand for alternative provision; or ‘conversion’ governments to emulate their successes and avoid schools — existing schools that have become charter their mistakes. schools. ● For-profit companies are allowed to operate charter, ● A review of the empirical literature on charter free schools or voucher schools in all but one of the schools and their equivalents reveals small positive countries examined in this report. Studies comparing impacts on achievement levels on average, but much for-profit schools to non-profit charter schools have stronger positive effects for disadvantaged students mixed results, ranging from no difference to a small in particular. positive effect of for-profit status. Free to Choose Charter Schools: How charter and for-profit schools can boost public education | 1 ● Low-fee private and for-profit schools, either — Strong charter laws that ensure accountability corporate chains or sole-proprietor schools, are are crucial. The framework that exists between not uncommon in developing countries and are education departments and non-government patronised by poor families. Some studies suggest schools already provides a solid base for this to be the quality of these schools is superior to public developed. schools. — New start-up charter schools should be authorised ● For-profit schools are not unlawful anywhere in only where there is proven demand. Conversion Australia except Victoria. Most state governments will charter schools should be introduced where not give for-profit schools public funding, however traditional public school management has failed, the lines can sometimes be blurred between for- and where there is support from the community. profit and non-profit ownership. — For-profit companies should not be barred from ● Recommendations: operating charters if they have a proven successful track record in operating schools. However, — Charter schools should be funded at an equivalent scrutiny should be rigorous and all financial rate to government schools
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Framework for Measuring Australian Higher
    A FRAMEWORK FOR MEASURING EQUITY PERFORMANCE IN AUSTRALIAN HIGHER EDUCATION Draft Framework Document V1.6 Tim Pitman and Paul Koshy, November 2014 Make tomorrow better. ncsehe.edu.au A Framework for Measuring Equity Performance in Australian Higher Education – Draft Framework Document Contents Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Abbreviations and Acronyms ................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 6 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 8 2. Overview of the Equity Performance Framework for Australian Higher Education ........ 10 Tier 1: Context (Pre-higher education) ............................................................................................ 11 Tier 2: Performance (Higher education) .......................................................................................... 12 Tier 3: Outcome (Post-higher education) ....................................................................................... 12 Comparisons by State and Territory ................................................................................................ 13 Comparisons with the General
    [Show full text]
  • Whole Day Download the Hansard Record of the Entire Day in PDF Format. PDF File, 1
    Wednesday Volume 662 19 June 2019 No. 316 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Wednesday 19 June 2019 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2019 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 219 19 JUNE 2019 220 Drew Hendry: According to every piece of the Secretary House of Commons of State’s own Government’s analysis, there is no version of Brexit that fails to harm Scotland. New YouGov Wednesday 19 June 2019 polling shows that Tory members would prefer Scotland to be an independent country, rather than stopping Brexit. Which choice should the Scottish Secretary make: The House met at half-past Eleven o’clock a devastating no-deal Brexit Britain, or giving the people of Scotland the choice to be an independent European nation? PRAYERS David Mundell: Mr Speaker, it will not surprise you to hear me say that Scotland has already made its [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] choice on whether to be independent or part of the United Kingdom. The poll to which the hon. Gentleman referred was based on a false premise. This Government are about delivering Brexit and keeping Scotland at the Oral Answers to Questions heart of the United Kingdom. John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con): Will the Secretary of State tell us how much SCOTLAND money the Scottish Government have given to local authorities in Scotland to prepare for our exit from the The Secretary of State was asked— European Union? Leaving the EU David Mundell: As far as I understand it, the UK Government have made more than £100 million available to the Scottish Government to help to prepare for 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evaluation of the Adult Migrant English Program (AMEP) “New Business Model”
    AUSTRALIAN COUNCIL OF TESOL ASSOCIATIONS SUBMISSION TO The Evaluation of the Adult Migrant English Program (AMEP) “new business model” March-April 2019 CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 RECOMMENDATIONS 9 Introduction 13 1. The goals of the Adult Migrant English Program (AMEP) 14 2. The goals of the Skills for Employment and Education (SEE) Program 16 3. Where does the AMEP belong? 18 4. Targeted Tuition Streams (requirement 1a) 20 4.1 Rationale 20 4.2 Overlap between the AMEP pre-employment stream and the SEE Program 23 4.3 ACTA Recommendations on streaming in the AMEP 23 5. Extra tuition hours - the Special Preparatory Program (SPP) and AMEP Extend (requirements 1b & c) 23 5.1 The SPP 23 5.2 AMEP Extend 26 6. Assessment – use of the Australian Core Skills Framework (ACSF) as a benchmark and to align the AMEP and SEE Program (requirements 1e and 4) 28 6.1 The stated rationale for mandating the ACSF 28 6.2 The ACIL Allen recommendation 29 6.3 The ACSF as “a tool for measuring language proficiency” 31 6.3.1 The ACSF: is it reliable? Implications for its role as the basis for a KPI 32 6.3.2 The ACSF: is it a valid tool for assessing English language proficiency and progress? 34 6.4 The ISLPR 38 6.5 The ACSF – facilitating greater [sic] pathways between the AMEP and other training programs and the tertiary education sector 41 6.6 Use of the ACSF in aligning the AMEP and SEE Program 43 7. Performance management (requirement 1f) 46 7.1 Engagement 47 7.1.1 Continuous enrolment/rolling intakes 47 7.1.2 Monitoring attendance and accounting for absences.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Territory Department of Education Submission
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Northern Territory Department of Education Submission Inquiry into the Education of Students in Remote and Complex Environments The Northern Territory (NT) Department of Education seeks to provide a submission to the inquiry into the education of students in remote and complex environments, commissioned by the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training. The submission aims to highlight the unique circumstances experienced by students in NT remote and very remote communities and how the department is adapting its service delivery, using innovative approaches, to meet their needs. The NT Government recognises the critical role of culture, family, community and country in delivering better outcomes, particularly for Aboriginal people. There are a number of initiatives underway that target these core factors while balancing the complexities of delivering government services in remote and very remote communities. Remote and very remote Territory context The NT is the most remote jurisdiction in Australia, with approximately 245 000 people spread across one sixth of Australia’s land mass. Over 40 per cent of the population is considered to live in remote or very remote areas. The overwhelming majority of residents living in remote communities are Aboriginal Territorians, with a much younger population on average than other parts of Australia. Unemployment is high and there are significant health issues. Fifty-four per cent of remote households and 12 per cent of very remote communities speak English in the home. Most children attending school in remote or very remote communities only speak English at school, not in their community or in their home. The transitional nature of community life, and movement of families between communities can be disruptive to a child’s education, particularly when this movement occurs across multiple jurisdictions, such as the NT, Western Australia and South Australia borders.
    [Show full text]
  • REFORM Provided by Digital Education Resource Archive
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE REFORM provided by Digital Education Resource Archive Every teacher matters Dale Bassett Andrew Haldenby Will Tanner Kimberley Trewhitt November 2010 Every teacher matters The authors Dale Bassett is Research Director at Reform. Andrew Haldenby is Director of Reform. Will Tanner is a Researcher at Reform. Kimberley Trewhitt is a Researcher at Reform. 1 Every teacher matters Reform Reform is an independent, non-party think tank whose mission is to set out a better way to deliver public services and economic prosperity. Reform is a registered charity, the Reform Research Trust, charity no. 1103739. This publication is the property of the Reform Research Trust. We believe that by reforming the public sector, increasing investment and extending choice, high quality services can be made available for everyone. Our vision is of a Britain with 21st Century healthcare, high standards in schools, a modern and efficient transport system, safe streets, and a free, dynamic and competitive economy. 2 Every teacher matters Dale Bassett Andrew Haldenby Will Tanner Kimberley Trewhitt November 2010 3 Every teacher matters Contents Executive summary 5 1. The importance of teachers 7 2. Central and local government have taken responsibility for teacher quality 14 3. Losing the battle 20 4. The path to performance 26 5. A new approach? 35 6. An action plan for great teaching 38 References 41 Appendix 1: Statutory teaching standards 45 Appendix 2: David Young Community Academy performance management regime 51 Appendix 3: Transcription of ‘Supporting quality teaching’ 55 Appendix 4: Model capability procedure 66 4 Every teacher matters Executive summary The new Government wants to improve the quality of teaching.
    [Show full text]
  • Opening a Studio School a Guide for Studio School Proposer Groups on the Pre-Opening Stage
    Opening a studio school A guide for studio school proposer groups on the pre-opening stage August 2014 Contents Introduction 3 Section 1 - Who does what - roles and responsibilities? 5 Section 2 - Managing your project 10 Section 3 – Governance 12 Section 4 - Pupil recruitment and admissions 21 Section 5 - Statutory consultation 33 Section 6 - Staffing and education plans 36 Section 7 - Site and buildings 42 Section 8 – Finance 56 Section 9 - Procurement and additional support 63 Section 10 - Funding Agreement 67 Section 11 - The equality duty 71 Section 12 - Preparing to open 73 Section 13 - Once your school is open 80 Annex A - RSC regions and Local authorities 82 2 Introduction Congratulations! All your planning and preparation has paid off, and the Secretary of State for Education has agreed that your application to open a studio school should move to the next stage of the process – known as the ‘pre-opening’ stage. This is the stage between the approval of your application and the opening of the school. The setting up of a studio school is a challenging but ultimately very rewarding task and it will require significant commitment and time from sponsors and partners. Your original application set out your plans for establishing the studio school, from the education vision and the admission of pupils to the recruitment of staff and the curriculum. Now your application has been approved, you must begin work to implement these plans. The letter of approval you received from the Department for Education (DfE) sets out important conditions of approval. It is vital that you consider these conditions carefully in planning your priorities and what you need to focus on next.
    [Show full text]
  • Constructing the Australian School History Curriculum: Ideology, High Politics and the History Wars in the Howard Years
    Chapter 2 Constructing the Australian School History Curriculum: Ideology, High Politics and the History Wars in the Howard Years Tony Taylor This chapter is a substantially revised and expanded version of a keynote address “Disputed Territory: Who Owns History in Schools?” given at the Australian National University Research School of Social Sciences’ conference “Governing by looking back” 12–14 December (2007). The relevant official government papers for the summit, including an edited transcript of proceedings, have been archived on the Department of Employment Education and Workplace Relations website at http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/school_education/ policy_initiatives_reviews/key_issues/Australian_History/ (as at July 2009) 2.1 Background to Policy and History Curriculum In 1996, a Liberal/National conservative coalition was victorious in the Australian March general election and coalition leader, John Howard, became the nation’s 25th prime minister. Howard’s accession, bolstered by a large majority, came following his own long and difficult political apprenticeship and after 13 years of Labour federal government. Although focused throughout his next three administrations on the big political issue including race relations, immigration policy, Middle East conflict, privatisation and industrial relations, Howard still kept time for history, which, after small beginnings, began to loom increasingly large in the prime minister’s con- sciousness. This incipient public attention to history began in 1996 in his Sir Thomas Playford memorial speech where he accused “cultural dieticians in our midst” of attempting to “rewrite Australian history in the service of a partisan political cause.”1 His comments were aimed at academics and others who favoured what had already been referred to by conservatively inclined historian Geoffrey Blainey as the “black armband” view of Australia’s past.
    [Show full text]
  • Title of Paper
    Free Schools in England: the Future of British Education? Franziska Florack University of Bradford (UK) [email protected] Abstract On the 18 June 2010, Michael Gove and the conservative party announced that they would allow ambitious teachers and community groups to start their own schools. These ‘Free Schools’ would be privately governed but state funded. In September 2011, the first 24 Free Schools opened their doors to students and by the end of 2013, 244 schools had been accepted into the program. Due to a lack of research into Free Schools (which as its best is limited and paints a very confusing picture), little is known about their attainment and motivation. Most writings on the topic are highly politicized and cause frequent storms in the media. Criticisms focus on the high expense of Free Schools, their small year groups and independence from local education authorities (LEAs). This paper gives a brief introduction to the political and historical background of Free Schools and outlines the reactions to their introduction in the UK. It argues that while some initial claims can be made about their success, more research is needed to determine their impact on the UK education landscape. 1. Introduction On the 18 June 2010, Michael Gove and the conservative party announced that they would allow ambitious teachers and community groups to start their own schools. These ‘Free Schools’ would be privately governed but state funded. One of the primary reasons for this change in the UK education system had been that Gove wanted to narrow the gap in provision between poorer families and their wealthier counterparts.
    [Show full text]
  • International Comparative Study: the Australian Curriculum and the Singapore Curriculum
    INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE STUDY: THE AUSTRALIAN CURRICULUM AND THE SINGAPORE CURRICULUM © Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) 2018 This work is copyright. You may only download, display, print and reproduce this material in unaltered form only (retaining this notice) for your personal non-commercial educational use or non-commercial educational use within your organisation. All other rights are reserved. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to: ACARA Copyright Administration Level 10 255 Pitt Street Sydney NSW 2000 [email protected] 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................4 1 PROGRAM OF RESEARCH .............................................................8 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 8 2 CONTEXTUAL DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS ........................... 14 2.1 Preamble ......................................................................................................................... 14 2.2 Demographic comparison: Australia and Singapore ........................................................ 15 2.3 Curriculum design principles and purpose ....................................................................... 31 2.3.1 Education Policy ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Navitas Submission
    Submission: Draft National Strategy for International Education About Navitas Navitas Ltd is an Australian global education partner providing pre-university and university programs, English language courses, migrant education and settlement services, creative media education, student recruitment, professional development and corporate training services to more than 80,000 students across a network of over 120 colleges and campuses in 27 countries. Navitas listed on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) in 2004 and is now an S&P/ASX Top 100 Company, employing more than 5,800 staff globally. General comments Navitas commends the Government for: Responding positively to, and adopting, all the recommendations of the report of the International Education Advisory Council, chaired by Michael Chaney AO, Australia – Educating Globally. Recognising the critical importance of international education to Australia, developing a national vision, strategy and approach, and establishing ‘a ministerially led coordinating council for international education’. Developing a 10-year market development strategy, Australia International Education 2025, to inform, support and focus investment and actions in delivering on the national strategy. Consulting with the international education sector, business and industry, and communities on the development of the strategies and their implementation. Navitas welcomes the support given by various levels of government to international and transnational education, and the recognition by governments of the contribution the international education sector makes to economies and societies, both in Australia and globally. In the Strategic Actions we endorse the progress that is being made on a whole of government effort, including current reviews and consultations into the student visa framework, ESOS Act and National Code, all of which are integral to an integrated regulatory and support framework for the sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Toby Young Bre Eds Contempt
    TOBY YOUNG BRE EDS CONTEMPT. AFTER Thby Young's controversial AFTER Boris Johnson appointment to the board Of the Office fe"' Young walk "an Weld man for the for Students, comments he had (al leasi, he was when Lye )t, made on Radio 4 about "progressive press), reciprocating the sopporl ha eugenics" were shared far and wide. d offered in his ,rrC:u eolooms wio.LO But his interest in the area has made .11111111S0111 was London mayor, Mat h:,,.1 him some friends. Cove endorsed dial verdict rionit,• Last year Young was invited by right too"). No surprise, as t;ove and leased just before Christmas psychologist James Thompson to attend Young have a long and fond history. he shady Legatum Institute a secretive conference at UCL called the Fri on 2010 until Gove was irif ,v(.(1 intinues to wheedle its way London Conference on Intelligence (1_ CI). reshuffle in 2014, Young regularly (k "Attendees were only told the venue at the last (;five in his columns, hailing him as "thy radical education secretary since :hall meetings reveal that minute... and asked not to share the the <m,t light and arch hard- information," Young recalled. What he kept 1() World War". r Singham was welcomed himself was why the conference he attended Then. in June 2016, alter David ( resignation, Young talked up (iove's tr;(1,..ro )ffice to meet Britain's top was so secretive. feremy Heywood, on the Although a request for the invitation-only as successor to the prime minister in thr. :;11V1 .y:rri ay's Florence speech.
    [Show full text]
  • The Importance of Teaching the Schools White Paper 2010 Department for Education
    The Importance of Teaching The Schools White Paper 2010 Department for Education The Importance of Teaching Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Education by Command of Her Majesty November 2010 Cm 7980 £19.75 © Crown Copyright 2010 You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected]. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at www.education.gov.uk/help/contactus. This publication is also available on http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/ ISBN: 9780101798020 Printed in the UK by The Stationery Office Limited on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ID P002401441 11/10 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. 1 Contents Foreword by the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister 3 Foreword by the Secretary of State for Education 6 Executive Summary 8 1. Introduction – the future of schools 16 2. Teaching and Leadership 19 3. Behaviour 31 4. Curriculum, Assessment and Qualifications 39 5. New Schools System 50 6. Accountability 65 7. School Improvement 72 8. School Funding 78 Endnotes 91 2 The Importance of Teaching 3 Foreword by the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister So much of the education debate in this country is backward looking: have standards fallen? Have exams got easier? These debates will continue, but what really matters is how we’re doing compared with our international competitors.
    [Show full text]