CSBA President Chris Ungar testifies at Senate hearing on charter schools
Published: August 3, 2016
"CSBA considers the role that its members play in approving and overseeing charters as an important part of a board’s responsibility to the community it serves – and the list of challenges that governing boards face today in carrying out their responsibilities is growing,” CSBA President Chris Ungar told the Senate Education Committee today, during its informational “Charter School Oversight in California” hearing at the Capitol.
Click here to view an archive of the hearing – Chris Ungar’s comments can be viewed at 1:49:00
Stretching to nearly three hours, the hearing featured two extensive panel presentations on the charter school petition process and the role of charter authorizers, as well as a background presentation from the Legislative Analyst and more than 45 minutes of public comments.
Ungar testified during the hearing as part of the panel entitled “Charter Petition Process: What is working and what is in need of reform?,” which also featured CSBA Delegate and Sacramento County Board of Education Vice President Greg Geeting and Ventura COE Director of Charter School Support and Oversight Richard Urias. Bob Lawson of In the Public Interest and Nicole Assisi of Thrive Public Schools rounded out the panel.
Mirroring the quickly-developing work of CSBA’s recently-convened Charter Schools Task Force, Ungar emphasized the importance of the role of local governance in the charter petition process, focusing his comments on appeals and oversight costs, as well as issues related to the quality and innovation of curriculum provided by charter schools:
“As more time and effort is spent on identifying innovation in charter schools, we should ask ourselves why this freedom to innovate is not available to all public schools,” Ungar said. “With additional flexibility, traditional schools can do more to serve students who do not have the opportunity to attend a charter.”
“The Charter School Act was intended to encourage innovation and lead to improvements in all public schools - unfortunately, there is little incentive to identify and share practices that improve learning among all students, particular those who are struggling with low academic achievement,” he added. “This is an area where all students in the public school system could benefit from the independence and flexibility afforded under the Act.
The quality of all public schools, including charter schools is of significant concern to CSBA. While we praise the strong work of the highest performing charter schools in our communities, more can done to deliver a quality education to our students. We should also focus on how we can empower elected boards to ensure that only those charter schools with strong evidence of potential success are approved and shutting down those that are not achieving results.”
Also testifying as part of the panel, Geeting offered several potential recommendations for improvements to be made in the charter petition process, such as refocusing existing requirements for charters to maintain an equitable racial and ethnic balance on the surrounding geographic area that a charter school serves rather than on the district in which it operates, and establishing a statewide clearinghouse of charter petitions, to ensure that petitions “maintain their integrity” throughout the approval process.
“Very often, a petition adopted on appeal was not the same petition that we reviewed,” Geeting said.
The second panel, “Role of Charter School Authorizers: Are there mechanisms in place to ensure sufficient oversight and accountability?,” featured Director of Quality Diverse Providers for Oakland USD Silke Bradford, LACOE Charter School Office Director Dina Wilson and Charter Authorizers Regional Support Network (CARSNet) Director Gail Ann Greely.
Resources
CSBA Charter Schools page
LAO Overview of Charter Schools in California
ACLU Report: “Unequal Access: How Some California Charter Schools Illegally Restrict Enrollment”
In The Public Interest Report: “Fiscal Impact of Charter Schools on LAUSD”
Additional Highlights:
- Throughout the meeting, there was a palpable push by various members of the Education Committee for more extensive and accurate statewide data to be available on the scope of charter schools, including numbers of independent versus dependent charters
- Richard Urias of Ventura COE spoke on the importance of a system of “common documents, common language and common processes.”
- Bob Lawson of ITPI offered two immediate policy recommendations: 1) that districts be provided with the same “soft landing” protections for students who move from a district to a charter as they would be afforded when students move to other districts, and 2) that an economic and educational impact statement be required for each new charter petition.
- Silke Bradford of Oakland USD spoke to the importance of charters operating as “pure public schools", outlining a series of ongoing issues including: the 18 percent of California charters that do not provide student meals, the lack of accountability measures for charters to ensure a proper racial and ethnic balance in their student body and problems with equal access in charter lottery systems.