An Analysis of the Policy, Research, and Legal Issues
Surrounding the Exclusion of Charter Schools from
the Teacher Evaluation Revolution
Preston C. Green III
John and Carla Klein Professor of Urban Education
Professor of Education and Law
University of Connecticut
Charter Schools Basics
• 2013: 6,440 charter schools; 42 states and DC
• Many are publicly funded, but privately
operated
• Autonomy from many rules and regulations in
exchange for increased accountability
Differences between Traditional Public
Schools and Charter Schools
Traditional Public
Schools
Charter Schools
• Opened by school
districts
• Governed by
school districts
• Managed by public
school officials
• Opened by private
authorizers
• Governed by
private boards
• Managed by
private entities
Are Charters Public? Or Private?
• Green, P., Baker B., & Oluwole J., (2013). Having It both
ways: How charter schools try to obtain the funding of
public schools and autonomy of private schools. Emory Law
Journal, 63, 303-37.
– “Public” for purposes of funding (state constitutions)
– “Private” for purposes of teacher and student rights (federal
statutes and constitution)
– Emphasizing private nature in state law might make
charter schools ineligible for funding (state
constitutions)
Charter Schools and Teacher
Evaluation Policies
• Green, P., Donaldson, M., & Oluwole, J.
(forthcoming). An analysis of the policy, research,
and legal issues surrounding the exclusion of
charters schools from the teacher evaluation
revolution. Journal of Law and Education.
• Legal argument: If charter schools are exempted
from revised teacher evaluation policies, then…
– They might become ineligible for public funding
– Because they fall outside of an “efficient” or
“uniform” system of public schools
Claim: Charter Schools Are “Public” Because They Must
Follow Same Standards as Traditional Public Schools
• “Charter schools are also held accountable to state and
federal academic standards, ensuring a high-quality education
for their students” (National Alliance for Public Charter
Schools).
• “They must meet the same academic standards that
traditional public schools must meet” (North Carolina Alliance
for Public Charter Schools).
Wilson v. State Board of Education
(1999)
• California appellate court held that charter
schools are part of “uniform” system.
– Teachers comply with same minimum
requirements as other public school teachers
– Assessments for measuring student progress was
same as in traditional public schools
Ohio Congress of Parents & Teachers v.
State Board of Education (2006)
• Ohio Supreme Court held that charter schools
are part of “thorough and efficient” system
– Charter students had to pass same graduation
tests as students from other public schools.
– Exemptions to rules were “picayune in nature.”
– Charters could create alternative accountability
requirements To serve targeted populations.
Teacher Evaluation Revolution
Traditional Policies
• Student Progress Rarely
Considered
• Rarely Used for
Compensation, Tenure,
& Promotion
Causes for
Revolution
2013 & Student
Achievement
• Widget Effect
• Race to the Top
• ESEA Flexibility Policy
• Significant Factor: 16
states
• Preponderant Factor: 19
states and DC
• Factor for Tenure: 18
states
• Can Result in Dismissal:
22 states and DC
Source: National Council on Teacher Quality. (2013). Connecting the dots: Using evaluations of teacher effectiveness to inform policy and practice.
Arguments for Excluding Charter Schools from
Teacher Evaluation Revolution
• Charter schools are already developing innovative
teacher evaluation programs that are performancebased and aligned with their educational missions.
• Federal government policy might hinder innovation
by forcing charter schools to adopt alternative
evaluation frameworks
Studies That Have Examined Teacher
Evaluation Practices of Charters
• Podgursky, M., & Ballou, D. (2001). Personnel policy in
charter schools. Report for Thomas B. Fordham
Foundation.
• Morelock, M. (2008). Investigating promising practices
of teacher evaluation in two California charter schools.
Unpublished Ed.D. Dissertation, University of Southern
California.
• Donaldson, M. (2012). “Feedback is a gift”: Teacher
evaluation in four-high performing charter schools.
Paper presented at the Annual Conference for the
University Council for Educational Administration.
Charter States with Policies That Emphasize Achievement, Use
Standardized Tests; and Are Used in Tenure and/or Dismissals
State
Alaska
Arkansas
Connecticut
Delaware
DCPS
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Illinois
Indiana
Louisiana
Michigan
Nevada
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Does Evaluation Policy Apply to Charter Schools?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
?
?
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
?
No
No
Yes
No
Source: National Council on Teacher Quality. (2013). Connecting the dots: Using evaluations of teacher effectiveness to inform policy and practice.
Charter States with “Uniformity” and
“Efficiency” Provisions with Revised Teacher
Evaluation Policies
State
Does Evaluation Policy Apply to Charter
Schools?
Florida
Yes
Indiana
Yes
Nevada
No
New Mexico
No
North Carolina
?
What If Exclusion of Charter Schools Were
Challenged on “Efficiency” or “Uniformity”
Grounds?
Case
Test
Constitutional?
Wilson
Charter school teachers
must meet same
requirements as other
public school teachers
No
Ohio Congress of Parents & Differences allowed if:
Teachers
(1) Picayune in nature
(2) Providing educational
opportunities to
students in alternative
settings
It depends…
Why Examine Charter School Exemption in
Ohio under Ohio Congress Case?
• Ohio Congress decision came three years before
teacher evaluation revolution;
• Ohio requires that student achievement to be a
preponderant factor;
• Ohio requires evaluation system to use objective
measures;
• Ohio requires teacher evaluations to to be used
in layoff decisions; and
• Ohio grants exemptions to charter schools that
do not receive Race to the Top funding.
Exclusion of Charter Schools under
Ohio Congress Analysis
• Picayune in nature?
– Are concerns about teacher quality picayune?
• Providing educational opportunities to
students in alternative settings
– Legislative goal: Provide educational opportunities
for students in lowest-performing urban school
districts.
Ohio 2012-13 Report Cards: Grades of
D or F in “Big 8” Urban Districts
School Type
Meeting State
Standards
Student
Performance Index
Graduating in Four
Years
Traditional Public
Schools
88%
68.2%
73%
Charter Schools
86%
62.6%
93%
Thus, excluding Ohio charter schools from the state’s revised
teacher evaluation system might be a violation of “thorough and
efficient” clause.
Conclusion
• Charter schools might unwittingly make
themselves ineligible for funding by exempting
themselves from revised teacher evaluation
policies.