With all their warts and controversies, charter schools have for years been the last best hope of parents who can't homeschool or afford private schools yet desperately seek a better educational alternative for their children. While some charter schools may be lacking academically or are under foreign influence (as reported in the March 2022 Education Reporter), others provide a viable option. But if the Biden Administration's proposed new regulation takes effect, charter schools may soon disappear.

The Federalist reported on April 14 that during 2020-2021, "public school attendance decreased 3.3 percent while charter school attendance grew 7.1 percent." This doesn't sit well with the most powerful and formidable enemy of charter schools, the teachers' unions. Since most charter-school teachers are not unionized, their hard-earned dollars are not confiscated to subsidize far-left political causes and the inflated salaries of union leaders. The Biden Administration's new rule aims to do an end-around to fix all that.

What's in the proposal?

According to The Federalist, the administration "quietly released a proposal for a new administrative rule that will require charter schools to prove their commitment to far-left politics or risk losing federal funding." This 14-page proposal, published by the U.S. Department of Education on March 14, clearly shows that the administration intends to hamstring existing charter schools and make it harder for new ones to open.

"The proposal includes a detailed list of requirements that charters will have to meet before they can receive funding, along with guidelines they will have to follow to continue keeping doors open." Should the proposal pass, charter schools will be required to partner "with at least one ‘traditional' public school in their area. Greedy teachers' unions will be thrilled with this arrangement," writes The Federalist, "as charters will be on the hook to help provide things like curriculum, ‘professional development opportunities,' and a ‘shared transportation system' with their public partners, not to mention providing for the students already in their care."

Furthermore, the rule "will require new charters to prove their allegiance to leftist politics. It will be mandatory for charters to showcase their commitment to social justice and discourage school choice.

"To prove that they are indeed making a difference in the social justice movement, the schools will be expected to provide a ‘community impact analysis' to showcase their efforts and impact in this area. This analysis will be mandatory for charters seeking federal funding and must be presented upon application. Ignoring that black and Hispanic students are the majority in many charter schools already, this will enforce the creation of ‘demographic projections' that will be compared to local public schools. These projections will eventually lead to greater emphasis on race or ethnicity rather than on the individual students."

The Federalist laments: "Politicizing classrooms by forcing ‘social justice' agendas on students should not be a priority in education. Racial agendas inherent in doctrines like critical race theory do nothing but hurt students. All that matters to the Department of Education and this administration is pushing their poisonous agenda and captivating the minds of the next generation."

An analysis of the proposal by The Fordham Institute calls the new regulation "unprecedented," not only for the federal Charter Schools Program (CSP) "but for all federal K-12 programs." Fordham says the rule will "add pages of new requirements for applicants that are not in the statute and are unrelated to student outcomes..." Essentially, the new rule will stifle charter schools, which are currently free of governmental micromanagement, by empowering the Department of Education to "act like a national charter school board, complete with one-size-fits-all rules for when a charter school should open (or not)."

Fordham believes the regulation "would have a chilling effect on the number of CSP applicants, even as parental and student demand for slots in high-quality charter schools continues to rise across the country. While the rules include some reasonable provisions regarding transparency around management contracts, their overall effect signals that the administration wants to rein in charter schools—and to force its own narrow ‘vision' of when and where they should be allowed to operate."

The administration and the Democrat Party say charter schools were never intended to be "for profit" enterprises, and so the rule includes banning for-profit private charter schools from receiving federal grant funding, despite the fact that they are already barred from receiving federal charter school funds. Just nine percent, or slightly more than 700 charter schools are operated by Education Management Organizations, or EMOs, which are for-profit companies, but the charter schools they manage are considered non-profit entities. Interestingly, some public schools are also managed by EMOs.

Teachers' union bidding?

Last October, U.S. News & World Report quoted James Bacon, former staffing director of Boston Public Schools and current director of outreach and operations for the education technology firm, Edficiency, as writing: "Charters add more options and different models of schools to the system, which usually gives parents more choice. In many ways, the biggest pros and cons of charter schools stem from the same fact: That in most cases, charter schools are given more freedom than traditional public schools."

A fair question then becomes whether or not the Biden Education Department, in introducing its proposed rule, is merely doing the bidding of the teachers' unions. As The Federalist pointed out: "This [proposal] comes at a time when school choice is gaining supporters across the nation. As horrifying reports from public schools become more common, parents are desiring a better education for their kids.

"The numbers back this. Teachers' unions and government schools are threatened by the recent upswing of support for school choice and the move toward charter schools, and they will protect what they have at all costs — even if it harms young Americans in the process."

Ironically, when the charter schooling concept was in its infancy, former American Federation of Teachers (AFT) President Albert Shanker supported it. In fact, his support helped move the concept forward. But as charter schools grew in number and diversity without unionization, all that changed. Teachers' unions withdrew their support and became enemies of the movement.

In her stunning book, Standing Up To Goliath, published in 2018, Rebecca Friedrichs shows that it's all about the money. (See our Book Review in this issue.) The teachers' unions cannot collect valuable dues from most charter school teachers, leaving a potential fortune on the table. Friedrichs describes how, for this and other reasons, the unions "fight against charter schools, and union-funded politicians dominate most school boards." Many charters are therefore rejected and never get the opportunity to open. "Many that do open — and even thrive," Friedrichs writes, "are burdened with constant attacks against their charters by union-inspired forces that watch them like hawks hoping to find some way to threaten their existence."

Her book includes heartbreaking real-life accounts of children, some with disabilities, who were flourishing in their charter schools but were forced out when the schools closed as a result of teachers' union efforts to shut them down.

Current environment

Approximately three-and-a-half million children attend more than 7,700 charter schools in 44 states, and the demand is high. In New York alone, as many as 50,000 students are on waiting lists to attend charter schools.

According to National Review, "75 percent of Americans are supportive of parents getting the final say in where their children go to school," including "86 percent of Republicans, 65 percent of Democrats, 74 percent of independents, 83 percent of blacks, and 77 percent of Hispanics."

Charter schools allegedly don't have a formal admissions process, and parents and concerned citizens often question why not. Lawyer, writer, and treasurer of Phyllis Schlafly Eagles, John Schlafly believes that admitting students by lottery, as charters typically do when the number of potential students exceeds available slots, is a recipe for dumbing down schools. "The way to improve schools is to track students by ability," he says, "such as the Thomas Jefferson public school does in Virginia, for example. By using a competitive examination and then placing the brighter or higher scoring students into separate classes where they can advance at their own rate, charter schools could really make a positive difference in education."

To Schlafly's point, although charter schools do purportedly use a lottery system to admit students, with the exception of returning students or their siblings, reports of a different reality have surfaced over the years. For example, a 2013 report claimed that charter school applicants were being asked to submit research papers, short stories, or handwritten essays for evaluation prior to admission. Some schools were said to hold family interviews or require assessment exams.

A 2016 report by KPCC Public Radio of Southern California claimed that one in five charter schools was "illegally" screening applicants for admission. If true, these practices were likely undertaken to bolster student achievement and avoid the threat of closure for poor performance. Then as now, charter school applications may request previous report cards, test scores, disciplinary records, teacher recommendations, and medical records.

AmeriSchools Academy of Arizona

One group of elementary charter schools in Arizona, called AmeriSchools Academy, operates four campuses and has a program for gifted students which it promotes as a benefit "that would not be available through a traditional public-school curriculum and environment."

The AmeriSchools' website states: "A charter elementary school offers several benefits to gifted children that a public school usually does not. At AmeriSchools Academy, we are not bound by the restrictions and curriculum regulations that public schools must adhere to in order to satisfy state requirements. We offer curriculum flexibility as well as immersive learning—both of which benefit gifted children."

But this could all be changing, not only for AmeriSchools but for charter schools nationwide if the Biden Administration's new proposal is adopted. Whether or not the rule will apply to charters operating under the tutelage of foreign nationals at the expense of U.S. taxpayers remains to be seen.

Abbreviated comment period

The comment period for the new rule was restricted to just over one month, ending on Wednesday, April 13. A 60-day comment period is the norm for regulatory proposals.

According to the Washington Examiner, former Department of Education Official Robert Eitel said the proposed regulation would force a number of charter schools to close. "This is a very controversial regulatory initiative that requires more than 30 days for the public to comment," Eitel said. "It's unfair, it's inappropriate, and it has the aroma of a gotcha moment that is offensive to true, fair, and proper regulatory activity."

Eitel explained: "There's been an ideological realignment within the Democratic Party that is reflected in this, in these priorities. This is confirmation that the Democratic Party has shifted hard to the left on education issues and that they're no longer supportive of the charter school."

No doubt teachers' union leaders are collectively smiling and applauding.

Want to be notified of new Education Reporter content?
Your information will NOT be sold or shared and will ONLY be used to notify you of new content.
Click Here

Return to Home PageEducation Reporter Online - April 2022