A new chapter for charters.

• Author: Hirsch, Eric
• Position: Includes related articles

Parents and teachers who want to create their own schools can do so in most states. In others, lawmakers are hesitant because there are incompletes on the charter school report card.

Since Minnesota passed the first law in 1991, 32 states and the District of Columbia have jumped on the charter school bandwagon. And it's getting crowded - at least three states have passed legislation every year since 1993. This trend is likely to continue since the Clinton administration has set a goal of 3,000 charter schools in 40 states by the year 2002 and continues to encourage states through substantial increases in federal assistance.

The 1998 legislative session demonstrated sustained interest in this new kind of public school that frees parents and teachers from state and local regulations and lets them plan their own schools. Although proposed laws died in Tennessee, Indiana, South Dakota, Nebraska and Washington, three more states - Utah, Idaho and Virginia - enacted legislation.

So why are some states still hesitant? As is the case with most reforms, it depends on whom you ask. But it does appear as though the remaining 18 states are approaching charter school reform with more trepidation and are enacting programs that are more limited in scope.

WHAT'S THE HOLDUP?

"There is no real sense of urgency to try charter schools," says Montana Representative Kim Gillan. That sentiment was echoed by Tennessee House Education Chairman Gene Davidson, who "sensed a slowdown" nationally in state acceptance of charter school reform. The reason may be easy to identify - a number of incompletes still remain on the charter school report card.

Seven years after the first legislation was passed, there is still no definitive research demonstrating the effectiveness of these schools. Some are performing very well and are doing so with some of the most difficult children. But overall, the research says much more about the students attending charter schools than about how successful they have been. "The uncertainty of what will happen with charter schools is causing apprehension within this state," says Davidson. "There really isn't anything concrete, and that is making lawmakers somewhat cautious. They don't know what to expect."

But Joe Nathan, director of the Center for School Change at the University of Minnesota, believes that "if a legislator wanted to increase achievement by students - especially minority, at-risk and low-income students - he or she could count on these schools to improve education." In a recent study of 30 charter schools in eight states, the Center for School Change found that 21 had improved student achievement, but it reached no conclusion in the other nine due to lack of evidence. Although Nathan asserts that "there is not enough evidence to make a definitive statement," he said the results of the study are "cautiously encouraging."

Arizona Senator John Huppenthal, who chairs the education committee, is encouraged. He calls his state's charter schools very successful. "If you look at the limited data that we have, charter public schools are performing to a higher degree than district schools," he says, citing evidence of greater parental satisfaction and commendable economic performance.

The most comprehensive research comes from the U.S. Department of Education. The first-year report of a four-year study arrives at several broad conclusions:

* Most charter schools are small. About 60 percent, in the 10 states studied, enroll fewer than 200 students; only 16 percent of other public schools have similar enrollments. The disparity is most striking at the secondary level.

* They have, on average, a racial composition roughly similar to statewide averages. Some states like Massachusetts, Michigan and Minnesota have a higher percentage of minority students.

* On average, a slightly lower proportion of students have disabilities.

* A lower proportion of students have limited English proficiency, although there is wide disparity across the states.

* They enroll approximately the same proportion of low-income students as other public schools.

Results from state studies of charter school programs are as confusing as they are illuminating. Recent evaluations from Massachusetts, Minnesota, California, Colorado and Michigan have shown mixed results. Although these reports unanimously find high levels of student, parent and teacher satisfaction, as well as a relatively diverse student population, most are inconclusive on student performance.

In Massachusetts, students in six out of eight charter schools studied made greater academic gains in a year than would normally be expected. Students at the Community Day Charter School in Lawrence, for example, advanced one and a half school years in eight months. But preliminary results from Michigan were less positive - charter schools on average compared poorly with state public schools on the...