SCHOOLS:

Lawmakers consider new panel to oversee charter schools

Panel would, among other roles, tackle the arduous application process

Sam Morris

Edgar Juarez, from left, Diego Alcaide and Raimundo Crespo work this week on their model of the Golden Gate Bridge at Innovations International Charter School in Las Vegas. The exercise was part of the seventh graders’ social studies class.

By Emily Richmond (contact)

Saturday, May 23, 2009 | 2 a.m.

Assembly Bill 489

Senate passes school funding bill (5-21-2009)
Stimulus money isn't coming easy (4-13-2009)

Nevada lawmakers are considering creating a new entity to oversee the state’s charter schools, a response to the State Board of Education’s 2007 moratorium on new charter school applications.

Assembly Bill 489 would create the Nevada Charter School Institute, a seven-member appointed panel to authorize new charter schools and supervise the eight charter schools sponsored by the State Board of Education.

Lawmakers say the institute — modeled on similar initiatives in Utah and Colorado — would ensure the application pipeline remains open and that adequate administrative support is available to help the alternative public schools flourish.

Nevada has been unfairly characterized as not being “charter school friendly,” said Assemblywoman Bonnie Parnell, D-Carson City, chairwoman of the Education Committee, which wrote the bill. The institute “would, most likely, sponsor schools that may be having a difficult time chartering due to moratoriums established by school districts.”

The bill, which would allocate $716,000 over the next two years to fund the institute, would give charter schools currently sponsored by school districts the option of moving under the institute’s supervision.

The state’s school districts, State Board of Education and Nevada System of Higher Education are authorized to oversee charter schools, which have greater flexibility in staffing, scheduling and instructional methods than traditional public schools. (They receive the same per-pupil funding, but many supplement their budgets with public grants and private donations.)

To start a charter school, an organizing committee must submit a lengthy application, laying out an educational program and showing that it would not duplicate offerings available in traditional public schools. Once a preliminary charter is issued, organizers must secure appropriate facilities before final approval is granted.

Statewide there are 22 charter schools, including eight in Clark County, the nation’s fifth largest district. Five charter school applications are pending with the state.

In 2007, the Clark County School District capped its charter school roster at eight, putting pressure on the state board to handle new applications.

State officials said the sudden flood of proposals overwhelmed the Education Department’s two employees assigned to cover charter schools. Soon after, the State Board of Education announced it was considering a moratorium on new charter schools, citing insufficient resources.

Despite pressure from legislators who argued that the State Board was acting beyond its authority and violating the spirit of the state’s charter school law, the board approved the moratorium. It was lifted nine months later, but not before lawmakers, long frustrated by the slow pace of the state’s charter school growth, decided to change the system.

State Board of Education President Anthony Ruggiero said relieving the board of its charter oversight role and creating the institute would merely replace one charter school licensing organization with another, without providing additional avenues to accelerate the process.

It’s “addition by subtraction,” Ruggiero said. “If you are truly a charter schools advocate, you should want more authorizers, not fewer.”

Ruggiero said he suggested an amendment to the bill that would allow the State Board to retain its authorization authority and work alongside the institute.

But state Sen. Maurice Washington, R-Sparks, said the State Board has indicated, “with its infinite wisdom in passing the moratorium,” that it does not want the responsibility of authorizing charter schools. Washington said he opposes Ruggiero’s proposed amendment because it would conflict with the institute’s responsibilities.

Ruggiero recognizes the State Board’s moratorium infuriated some lawmakers, but the decision was made for “all the right reasons. We were trying to be responsible — managerially, administratively and fiscally,” he said.

It takes Nevada Education Department staff hundreds of hours to process each application. Managing the expected workload would require two additional full-time positions, said Keith Rheault, Nevada’s superintendent of public instruction.

Rather than wanting to abdicate authority, Rheault said he made sure that oversight of charter schools’ fiscal matters and student performance would remain with the Education Department under AB489, rather than moving to the proposed institute.

“We fought hard for that,” Rheault said. “These are still public schools, spending taxpayers’ money.”

Matthew Ladner, a senior fellow at the conservative Goldwater Institute in Phoenix who recently completed a study comparing charter school programs in Arizona and Nevada, said the creation of a separate institute would be “a step in the right direction.” At the very least, a separate entity to handle Nevada’s charter schools would keep the application pipeline open, Ladner said.

But he said the argument that Nevada’s education department was overwhelmed by a few schools and pending applications “is laughable.” Arizona’s charter school institute has a staff of eight overseeing 463 schools, said Ladner, whose study was done in conjunction with the conservative Nevada Policy Research Institute.

The bill, which was awaiting a hearing in the Ways and Means Committee on Friday, would leave unchanged the state’s requirements for charter schools, which are among the nation’s most rigid and which critics say unfairly limit the educational options for the state’s students and families.

“Nevada’s laws almost treat charter schools as something the public needs to be protected against” even though charter schools come with a greater level of accountability and safeguards than traditional public schools, Ladner said. “The barriers are significant.”

If Nevada lawmakers want to encourage more charter schools, the place to start is helping them find facilities, said LeAnn Putney, an associate professor of educational psychology at UNLV and a member of the Innovations International Charter School’s governing board. It took Putney’s group three years to find a suitable location, taking over Temple Beth Shalom’s site on East Oakey Boulevard.

However, Putney and other officials at several locally sponsored charter schools told the Sun they are more than satisfied with the supervision they receive from the Clark County School District and wouldn’t likely turn to the institute for oversight if the bill becomes law.

Innovations’ enrollment is about 700 in grades K-12, with a large waiting list, Principal Connie Malin said. Class sizes are capped at 25. The school has made “adequate yearly progress” for two consecutive years, meeting the state and federal performance requirements of No Child Left Behind. The campus is finding its groove, Malin said, and the district has been instrumental in letting that happen.

“When I call about anything, I get an answer immediately,” Malin said. “At the same time I try to make the deadlines and meet the expectations they have of me, so they know I’m serious about what I’m doing.”

Discussion: 11 comments so far…

By neiman1

5/23/09 at 8:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

You see the teachers union at work. Charter schools scare them to death. To allow innovation to succeed will only let the public see how the current model has failed. They are pulling out all stops to prevent this.

The only thing that scares them more is the idea of student vouchers. Let every student have the right to a voucher for 75% of what education currently cost and let that money flow to any school they choose. Total choice, like college with federal grants and loans, letting parents and students choose public, charter, or private schools would increase performance in every school faster than any alternative.

Mothers, quit insisting on choice while the fetus in in your womb only to give up all choice when your fetus reaches 5 or 6 years of age. Instist on the ability to chose for you child and not let the government monopoly decide if your child succeeds.
By 2zero

5/23/09 at 9:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

CCSD is a colossal failure!

Who ever thought it would be a good idea to allow CCSD to oversee charter schools was out of their freaking mind!

CCSD is a monopoly and wants it to stay that way!
By ForReal

5/23/09 at 10:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

neiman1, you nothing but a pot-stirrer who has too much time on their hands.

Get off-line and get out and see what is being done in the public schools. I am sure there may be some issues on some campuses, but there is some serious education being delivered at most schools. The teachers hands are tied by the No Child Left Behind act and erupting class sizes caused by the state's taxpayers and legislators not willing to create a 2% state tax to fund education to a decent level! This state likes ignorant people. Back east, where I grew up education is funded 4 times that of Nevada and things are considerably better. NOT PERFECT, but better.

How about getting off-line and getting a teaching license and seeing what its like there buddy!

My child is receiving an education second to none in their school. The charter schools we looked at were staffed by teachers that did not get hired by a Nevada school district or were from another state that did not hire them either!
By Nick

5/23/09 at 10:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Vouchers are bad for Nevada. The religous right stealing tax dollars to push the wrong agenda. Here comes hate and discrimination and tax dollars to Mormons
By MAV

5/23/09 at 1:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

What are the chances this bill will actually pass before June 1?
By travislv86

5/23/09 at 2:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Charter schools will work, but not because they are drastically different philosophically than CCSD, they will work because they will not have to take all kids. Kids that don't behave, will be kicked out. So the teacher will have a room full of motivated, respectful kids to teach. So they will extremely successful. CCSD doesn't have that luxury, why do you think private schools fare well? Do you guys think those teachers are any better? No. These teachers didn't go to a special college; they have the luxury of teaching children who have parents that support their teachers. The result for CCSD will be disastrous in the long run, because they will be the only ones that take some of these students.
By 2zero

5/23/09 at 4:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Please break up the monopoly! Clark County does not need or want the 5th largest school district whose peers are LA, NY & Chicago! We want multiple, still too large, school districts. What will happen is one or more will excel and the others will be held accountable!!!
By charterTeacher28

5/24/09 at 2:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

I have worked for both NV charter schools and CCSD. The quality in teachers cannot be differentiated. I chose to leave the district because of the lack of support I received when faced with a borderline-abusive principal, and I cannot imagine returning. I love to teach and have found a wonderful community at my charter school.

The biggest difference between charters and traditional schools is that charters are schools of choice and have greater freedom in implementing the curriculum while following state standards. One is not better than another in general; some methods and environments simply fit better for different individuals and families.

I am glad to hear that NV is putting greater effort into supporting the charter school movement, because there are so many students and families who need other options. If CCSD and other public school systems were doing such a bang-up job, charter school growth over the last decade would not have been so explosive. I sincerely wish there were more proactive groups willing to address traditional public education reform.
By Im_a_charter_teacher

5/24/09 at 3:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Charter schools offer choice. Within CCSD there is choice; it is labeled Zone Variance. There are children who just don't fit the mold necessary to be successful in a more traditional school. This can be traced to as many different reasons as there are children. CCSD by nature, size, and leadership require students to fit into the school's mold. Charter schools are able to manuever their mold to fit the needs of the child.

As an out-state trained and recruited former CCSD teacher, I can assure the public that our school does not pick and choose its students. We have the same ratio of special needs students to general education students as any CCSD school or the national average. We provide services to these students and we apply strategies to all our students who may struggle for one reason or another. The only difference that we have, versus CCSD, is in our ability to place the most troubled students into alternative schools such as those maintained by CCSD (i.e. Cowen behavioral school, Milley Achievement Center, Helen J. Stewart). The "regular" CCSD school adminstrators have access to these options allowing them to "cleanse their schools" of the Severly Multiply Impaired, habitual, or more aggressive students. CCSD is a district containing over 310 schools. A charter school is effectively a school district of one (1). So how can the charter school offer every choice afforded CCSD? It can't... but we do give all our students every intervention and possibility to succeed.

We are a school of choice but it's the parents of children who make that choice. Also as a publicly funded organization, we are not able to "pick" the cream of the crop as is allowed for by the CCSD owned and operated magnet schools.

Do we need more charter schools? The answer is YES. Our parents need choice and not all students are successful in the cookie cutter curriculum and teaching styles that occur in CCSD. However, for good, bad, or indifferent, we do need to follow the spirit of the No Child Left Behind Act and give our children the opportunity to succeed in an environment that best supports them.
By Patrick_R_Gibbons

5/24/09 at 6:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

It never occurred to Travis that public schools kick bad kids out and send them to special schools. It never occurred to him that charter schools accept all students who apply.

It never occurred to him that getting an education degree doesn't make you a better teacher. It never occurred to him that choice helps motivate parents into getting involved. It never occurred to him that a school that is responsive to the needs of students might actually be capable of motivating students.

It never occurred to him that the failure of CCSD is due to the fact that it is an unresponsive monopoly that faces no pressure to competition and no accountability to parents for getting kids to achieve. Charter schools offer choice and help create some real accountability since charters are only funded when a student enrolls.

Finally, Nick are you a bigot?
By Nick

5/25/09 at 11:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

Patrick you are a typical Right wing religous Right Libertarian. You have one agenda: Reliogion in schools with OUR tax dollars. Libertarians want to take freedom by forcing religous rule in America. Brainless Sarah Palin Bigots teaching the world is just a few thousand years old and is flat.

We have choice now. Public schoools or private. You want to tax me to teach hate? No thanks. Take the anti freedom libertarian/Republican (no real difference)failed principlals to Alabama where they belong.