The expansion of school choice alternatives is hot. Real hot. In the past few years, several states have adopted or expanded educational spending/savings accounts (ESA). According to EdChoice, there are now 17 states with some form of ESA. The number of students who have taken advantage of ESAs now exceeds a million. Similar expansion is true for tax credit scholarship programs.
Whether due to consequences magnified by forced school closings, abysmal and sinking student achievement, or by families tired of being held captive by failing schools, enrollment in traditional public schools (TPS) is down and school choice alternative enrollment is up.
Curiously, the oldest and most popular widespread form of school choice seems to be forgotten in the fervor. Charter schools, first established in Minnesota in the early ‘90s, are now a public school alternative in 46 states (Montana became the 46th last year) and Washington D.C. There are more than 8,000 charter schools around the country educating more than 3.7 million students.
Kansas has had a charter school law since 1994, but you wouldn’t know it given the dearth of charter schools in the state. As the adjoining table shows, there are a whopping 9 charter schools in Kansas. In the last school year these charters served 2,407 students.
And those schools are nothing more than alternative schools within school districts. This “charter school” approach violates the basic spirit and approach of charter schools. Charter schools are defined by the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools (NAPCS) this way. They are
“public schools that offer parents the opportunity to pick a school that best fits the needs of their child. There is never a cost to attend and they are open to all students regardless of their school zoning. Charter schools make decisions close to the students, empowering teachers to provide innovative, high-quality instruction and giving them the autonomy to design a classroom that fits their students’ needs.”
Why so few charter schools? Is it because students and parents are so enamored by their captive schools? Is it because parents have so many other school choice alternatives, charter schools are an afterthought? Are Kansans philosophically opposed to the idea of freedom of choice? I’m kidding, of course.
No, the real reason for the lack of charter school in Kansas lies in when the law was established, and continues to be the same. The only authorizers of charter schools are the districts themselves. In other words, you wanna open a charter school? You gotta get the approval of the school board in which to operate the charter school. You know, be an education competitor. And we all know what school districts in Kansas think about competition. Kansas is one of only six states that exclusively put charter school authorization in the hands of the local school districts.
Charter school authorization and the state constitution.
Yes, Virginia, there are lawmakers who would like to change the law to expand charter schools. However, a common refrain is that the language of the state constitution precludes any other authorizers. In particular, Article 6,§5 states:
“(l)ocal public schools under the general supervision of the state board of education shall be maintained, developed and operated by locally elected boards.”
And since charter schools are “local public schools”, they are subject to the provisions of this section of the constitution. Therefore, by default, only local school boards can authorize charter schools, correct?
Not necessarily.
Article 6,§2 provides for the state board of education and the board of regents.
“The legislature shall provide for a state board of regents and for its control and supervision of public institutions of higher education. Public institutions of higher education shall include universities and colleges granting baccalaureate or postbaccalaureate degrees and such other institutions and educational interests as may be provided by law. The state board of regents shall perform such other duties as may be prescribed by law.” (emphasis added)
Clearly, charter schools could be considered “institutions and educational interests” by the state board of regents. In practical terms, it would be to the benefit of the board of regents to have those entering their colleges and universities be the most prepared.
Given this provision under the state constitution, I don’t see how any challenges to allowing the board of regents be charter school authorizers be successful.
And don’t just take my word for it. According to the National Association of Charter School Authorizers (NACSA) 16 states allow a higher education institution (such as a college or university) to authorize a charter school.
Given the constitutional basis, nothing would preclude the board of regents to designate a state college or university to authorize a charter school under the board of regents umbrella.
The constitution and “state” education facilities.
There are at least three “schools” operating in Kansas that were not established and are not operated by locally elected school boards: the School for the Blind, the School for the Deaf, and Lawrence Gardner High School. (LGHS is a fully accredited, specialized school designed for juveniles housed at the correctional facility located in Topeka.) Some would not classify these technically as schools, however, students in each of these took the state assessments in 2023. A rose by any other name…
You don’t hear any clamoring to close these facilities because they are not provided for in the constitution. Nor should they be closed.
Well, if it can be said that these schools deserve to be open (I certainly don’t dispute that) because they serve students with special needs, what’s the difference, at least conceptually, between these schools and charter schools? Many students who attend charters have special needs, perhaps not as explicit as deaf, blind, or youth in correctional settings, but that’s how the entire charter movement began and took off like it has over the last three decades: students and families with special needs (not to be confused with special education).
It all comes down to the same thing over and over. It’s all about political will. The opportunity is there, it’s whether there is leadership to get something like a change in charter school laws across the finish line.
With a new legislature convening in less than five months, the time is now to prepare to fight to give parents and students educational alternatives that fit their individual needs.
