Pulling Back the Welcome Mat

The front page of Saturday's Washington Post included an article on why there are so many charter schools in D.C. and yet so few in neighboring Maryland and Virginia. The article does a good job of outlining how differences in state law impact whether charter schools open - in Virginia, for instance, charter schools must get approval from the district they're proposing to take students away from. This is a likely reason that three of the four charter schools in Virginia target students at risk of dropping out - basically students the district was likely to lose anyway.

But what the article only briefly touches on is how, once a charter school has been approved and opened, districts can essentially pull the welcome mat out from under the school's (and the students') feet. Districts are under no obligation to be easy to work with in getting adequate facilities or ensuring funding is sent to the school in a timely manner, and in fact have motivation to make those processes as difficult as possible. Take the example from the article of KIPP's school in Anne Arundel County, Maryland:

In 2005, the Anne Arundel County school board rejected a charter for the Knowledge Is Power Program, one of the most successful charter-school operators in the nation, for fear of losing students. Two weeks later, amid public outcry, the board reversed itself.

But the school closed in 2007 in an acrimonious dispute over classroom space. It was the first time in 13 years a KIPP school had shut down. "Clearly, we weren't welcome," said Steve Mancini, a KIPP spokesman.

Parents and students lost a good school option, despite public demand, because the school district was able to play enough political tricks to get KIPP to leave, and the district was under no obligation to assist the school or the students attending it. When districts are able to put up political hoops that charter schools must jump through, it is the students that suffer most. These games distract charter school operators and teachers from their core mission of serving students, and instead focus attention on adult interests.

A charter school planning to open in Richmond, VA in 2010 is staring down the same obstacle course that the KIPP school faced. After getting a hard fought approval from the Richmond City School Board (it would be the only charter school in the city), the school faces continued resistance from the Board and an uncertain future because the school board--an elected body whose membership changes regularly--can revoke the charter at any time.

It is not enough to change the charter school laws in these states to make it easier to open a quality charter school - the laws also need to ensure that charters are sufficiently insulated from the politics and obstacles that districts can throw their way. Improvements in state charter school laws wouldn't just help make the lives of charter school operators a little easier - it would also protect the interests of the students and families that choose these new, public school options.