The architect of the first charter school law in America spent three years persuading colleagues in the Minnesota legislature that independent schools started by teachers and parents could enhance public education.
Twenty-five years and 42 state laws later, doubts still persist about charter schools and the trade-offs that free them from regulations in exchange for higher performance. That skepticism can be seen in Georgia where polls show voters are leery of Gov. Nathan Deal's Opportunity School District, which is on the ballot Tuesday as Amendment One. A "yes" vote empowers the state to take control of local schools and possibly hire charter management organizations to run them.
Both sides have mounted scorched earth campaigns to sway Georgia voters and will likely spend between $3 and 4 million by the time ballots are counted. Stakes and expenses are even higher in Massachusetts where advocates and opponents are investing $33 million to influence a ballot question next week on whether the state’s cap on charter schools should be lifted.
The initial assumption that parents would select charter schools on the basis of academic performance proved wrong. "We didn’t realize the extent to which parents have a hierarchy of human needs and had other things that come first for them, safety, convenience, things like that," said Finn.
While early pioneers imagined charter schools as alternatives to traditional classrooms and laboratories for innovation, voucher and school choice proponents embraced charters as bludgeons to attack teacher unions and “government schools.” In their cynicism, they promoted charter schools as a way to provide more choices but made little effort to ensure they were better choices.
About the Author
