INSTITUTE BRIEF
Volume 16, Number 7 March 2009
Choice Through Charters:
Policy Analysis of Iowa Charter School Legislation
Stephen M. King, Ph.D.
Charter schools represent a growing trend in government school reform. Charter schools, which were first implemented in Minnesota in 1991 and created what some call a ・revolution・ in school choice, offer a means of reform that operates within the traditional government school system. Parents, students, and communities are demanding changes to the current broken system of traditional government education, and charter schools are trying to address that demand.
Charter schools are publicly-funded government schools that in most states are granted exemptions from following strict accreditation and other regulatory standards in return for freedom, flexibility, and innovation to create unique learning environments. These ・learning environments・ are often designed to meet the growing needs of low-income or other disadvantaged student groups, but in fact are generally open to all eligible students whose parents, and even communities, demand more from the educational system than they believe they are currently receiving.
Unfortunately, the range of charter schools, including the performance and success of charter schools, is often dependent upon the specific state-based legislation. In other words, some states are far more ・permissive・ in their legislation, allowing more flexibility and innovation to charter sponsors, than are other states. The Center for Education Reform (CER) ranks all states according to ten criteria. These criteria focus on issues ranging from diversity of chartering authorities to greater funding opportunities to ease of regulatory oversight of charter schools. CER ranked those states high whose charter legislation was more ・permissive,・ meaning that state legislation contained waivers of exemption for excessive state-based regulatory oversight, increased the number of chartering authorizers, enhanced funding opportunities, and many other options for enhanced flexibility and innovation.
When compared with neighbor states that have charter-school legislation, i.e. Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin, Iowa・s charter-school legislation is weak. In fact, CER ranked Iowa・s charter-school legislation and charter-school system next to last of the 41 states that incorporate charter schools. Iowa scores low on the most important of variables that describe a strong charter-school program, including the number of charter schools allowed, the number of chartering authorities, the variety of charter-school applicants, the number of new charter school start-ups yearly, automatic blank waivers of state bureaucratic rules that govern traditional government schools, and the need for states to grant charter schools independent legal status, so as to have the authority to govern themselves without having to come under the regulatory oversight of the state・s educational administrative and bureaucratic oversight.
A Publication of:
Public Interest Institute at Iowa Wesleyan College600 North Jackson Street, Mt. Pleasant, Iowa 52641-1328
If you wish to support our efforts, please donate by sending a check to us at the above address.
PII is a 501 (c) (3) non-profit organization and all contributions are tax deductible.
E-Mail: public.interest.institute@limitedgovernment.org
Website: www.limitedgovernment.org Phone: 319-385-3462 Fax: 319-385-3799
Charter schools provide some degree of choice within the traditional government school system. Certainly charter schools differ from state to state, even school district to school district, and thus ・diffusion of innovation・ is a major factor in determining when and where states will adopt charter school legislation. Sometimes states copy other states when it comes to establishing charter school legislation. Political, interest group, and economic factors are all possible influences in determining why one state establishes a charter school law when their next door neighbor has already established such a law. Iowa, however, effectively chose not to follow their neighbors, such as Minnesota, who have nationally recognized and successful charter school legislation and charter school programs.
Some basic changes to Iowa・s charter-school legislation and policy should include:
First, the chartering authority should be expanded to include colleges, universities, and nonprofit organizations, including special charter-school commissions that are not politically or administratively connected to the State Department of Education or the State Board of Education.
Second, the current charter legislation should be amended to grant charter schools real and effective waiver of accountability to all state and district laws, rules, and regulations that govern traditional government schools.
Third, teachers should be exempt from all state- and district-based rules and regulations that cover traditional government school teachers, including state teacher certification and collective bargaining agreements.
Fourth, funding possibilities should include, in addition to public revenues equal to that received by traditional government schools, private and nonprofit funds, particularly for capital infrastructure.
Charter schools in Iowa will only improve when current Iowa charter-school law changes, such as permitting greater flexibility, innovation, and exemption from onerous state and district-based rules and regulations.
Public Interest Institute’s POLICY STUDY, "Choice Through Charters: Policy Analysis of Iowa Charter School Legislation," can be viewed at www.limitedgovernment.org.
Volume 16, Number 7 March 2009
Dr. Stephen M. King is the former Research Vice-President of Public Interest Institute
Permission to reprint or copy in whole or part is granted, provided a version of this credit line is used:
"Reprinted by permission from INSTITUTE BRIEF, a publication of Public Interest Institute."
The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and not necessarily those of
Public Interest Institute. They are brought to you in the interest of a better-informed citizenry.
● ● ● ●