Charter System Background
Information
Table of Contents
This Presentation is intended to serve as a reference
•
Charter System—The Big Picture
•
Basic Components and Philosophy of the Charter System
•
What “Flexibility” Means
•
•
•
Waivable vs. Non-Waivable Laws/Rules
•
Practical Considerations for Flexibility
•
Examples of Flexibility-Driven Innovation
Increased Accountability in a Charter System
•
Goals and Expectations
•
Consequences
Distributed Leadership to Schools
•
•
•
Local School Governance Teams (“LSGT”): Role, Purpose and Requirements
Common Questions
•
Charter schools vs. Charter System Schools
•
LSGTs vs. LSACs
Flexibility in Georgia Update
2
Charter System — Basic Components
To innovate, District
Requires Flexibility
from State Law,
Policy and District
Policy
Commitment to
Innovation and
Changing District
Culture
Freedom and
Flexibility in
Exchange for
Increased
Accountability
Goals
Charter
System
Required
Distribution of
Substantial
Autonomy to School
(LSGT)
The Charter System Philosophy: A district must want to truly change how it does business and believe that, in
order to increase student achievement, schools must be operated in a different way, with greater parent and
community buy-in at every single school. Schools are empowered to develop solutions free from the
established educational bureaucracy of legislature-driven education mandates, State Board rules, and even the
district’s own policies and practices. With this freedom from the law, the district and its schools in turn agree to
be held accountable for significant increases in student achievement.
3
When we talk about "Flexibility,"
what do we mean?
The ability to waive, i.e., not observe:
A large
amount of
Georgia’s
education
laws (located
in Title 20)
State Board
Local Board
of Education Department
of Education
Rules,
of Education
Rules,
Regulations, Policies and
Policies, and
Policies, and Procedures*
Procedures
Procedures
*In practice, the most difficult to waive. Discussed more in depth on slide __.
Flexibility from Title 20 of the
Georgia Code
Duties of
Actors
How to
earn/spend
your
money
How to
treat
children
legally
Program
Mandates
The 499 pages of Georgia educational laws located in Title 20 primarily consist
of laws that can be categorized in these four areas.
Waivable areas include: Requirements for how districts spend their money
(but not how it's earned) and educational/school program
mandates/requirements (think middle school organization, # of instructional
minutes, specific character education programs)
Districts cannot waive the legal duties of actors, such as the Local Board of
Education, or requirements on how to treat children legally.
State Board of Education Rules and
Guidelines = Prime Waiver Territory
Examples
of
Waivable
State
Board of
Education
Rules
Operational Requirements: School Day/School Year,
Middle School Program Criteria, Class Size, Minimum
direct classroom expenditures
HR Requirements: Personnel Required, Mentor Teacher
Program, Salary Schedule
Programmatic Requirements: Career Education, Values &
Character Education, Work-based learning, Textbook
Selections
State Board of Education (“SBOE”) Rules present the most waivable requirements
for charter systems. Georgia’s education laws are generally high level and often
depend on the SBOE to flesh out programs, requirements, mandates, etc., through
SBOE rule. As such, most of the detailed requirements for how districts must
structure their schools and educational programs are located in SBOE rules.
What can't we waive?
See the underlined for the less obvious non-waivable areas.
Federal Law
Non-educational State
laws
Conflicts of
Interest/insurance
Health & Safety
Civil Rights
Laws related to the
concepts themselves*
How we earn funding
State mandated
testing/accountability
Unlawful conduct
*For example, a charter system cannot waive the charter schools act or charter
system rules.
Flexibility Problems in Practice
Issue 1: While charter systems can waive the state law & rule on
an issue, that doesn't mean the charter system will necessarily be
allowed to waive the corresponding GADOE
processes/procedures.
Example: A charter system school
wants to develop a new innovative
course for their students. In order for
What this means: The charter system
the district to receive funding for this
concept is still evolving at the state.
course, the course must either 1)
These types of discrepancies are being
match an approved course code on an
removed every year, but it takes time
SBOE list, or 2) go through the DOE's
to get an entire state on board with a
course approval process (9-18 month
policy reform like charter system.
process). Charter systems have not
been able to waive the course approval
process as of yet.
Flexibility Problems in Practice
Issue 2: Currently, districts earn funding based on coding the types of
classes and programs they offer, as well as the students who
participate in those classes and programs. Districts cannot waive how
they earn funding, but they can waive how they deliver the program.
The Result: Charter systems have What this means: The way QBE
a hard time coding for funding
funding is earned does not mesh
because how they want to offer
well with diverging from the
the programs might result in less
state’s education laws, SBOE
funding. The state's answer so far Rules, etc.,. The Governor's new
is for districts to provide
QBE reforms expected next year
commensurate programming to
should hopefully resolve these
what they're coding for—a pretty
conflicts before APS ever
imprecise "solution."
becomes a charter system.
Flexibility Problems in Practice
Points to Consider
• Even with these issues, the flexibility a charter system is
afforded allows the system to reform and reinvent itself in
innovative ways, free from many educational requirements
handed down from the state.
• That flexibility comes with meaningful cost savings and
benefits.
• The Charter system concept is still a work in progress. As
such, there’s a fair amount of advocacy work approved
charter systems take on. Through continued collaboration
with the state, charter systems can advocate for state-level
improvements on how charter systems are allowed to
operate. Each year, improvements are made, but there’s
still work to be done until the machinery operates perfectly.
Specific Examples of Flexibility-Driven Innovation
at the District-Level
Personnel
• Waiver of certain educator contracting requirements to allow an introductory
probationary period (90 days) to ensure good fit with the school placement. This allows
the district to unboard or transfer new teachers without incurring Fair Dismissal Act
requirements.
• Waiver of teacher certification requirements in non-core subjects
Academic
Programs
• Waiving programmatic delivery requirements of English Language Learner programs—
instead of offering a limited # of segments a week, the district used more push-in
services and offered a consolidated six-week summer language institute.
• Waiving # instructional minute requirements and course-credit hour requirements to
allow mastery-based learning differentiated for student pacing needs.
Finances
• Waiving class size requirements and minimum direct expenditure requirements to allow
districts to spend the money they receive to meet the needs of their students.
• Waiving the built-in spending requirements in QBE for funded programs to allow them
to provide services differently than prescribed in law/SBOE rule.
Note: these examples are from other GA charter systems and are by way of example only.
Specific Examples of Flexibility-Driven Innovations
at the School Level
Academic
Program
• Development of Graphic Arts curriculum at the K-6 level (waiver of approved
course requirements)
• Increased student work-based learning (waiver of student age/grade
requirements for participation)
School
Operations
• Shortening class periods by four minutes each to create new advisory period
for college/career/work-based learning opportunities (waiver of instructional
minutes)
• Increasing professional development days for staff (waiver of school year
requirements)
Miscellaneous
• Allowing Students to waive PE requirements at High School level if
participating in varsity sports or band (PE course requirement waiver)
Increased Accountability for
Charter Systems
Part of the bargain is that, in exchange for increased flexibility, a charter system
promises to do better. These promises are encapsulated in academic and operational
goals contained in the charter system application and ultimately, the charter system
contract.
Academic
Performance Goals
• State Required
• CCRPI-based goals
(meet/exceed state
averages)
• Student growth
goals
Fiscal Performance
Goals
• Optional
• APS can include
goals re: clean
audits, balanced
budgets, etc.
District Culture Goals
• Optional
• APS can include
goals re:
decreasing
student/staff
absenteeism,
increasing staff
retention, school
discipline, parent
satisfaction
Consequences
If APS does not meet its goals, the following consequences could result:
Termination of Charter
System Contract (more
extreme)
Non-Renewal of Charter
System Contract after
end of 5-year term
Schools failing to meet
charter system goals &
meeting Opportunity
School district criteria
subject to state takeover.
Other State Interventions
for failing schools
Central Requirements of a Charter System
To innovate, District
Requires Flexibility
from State Law,
Policy and District
Policy
Commitment to
Innovation and
Changing District
Culture
Freedom and
Flexibility in
Exchange for
Increased
Accountability Goals
Charter
System
Required
Distribution of
Substantial
Autonomy to School
(LSGT)
Beyond the use of flexibility to drive academic and operational achievement, a charter
system must also distribute meaningful decision-making power to the school level
through the creation of Local School Governance Teams (LSGTs). Each school will have
its own LSGT that is, by law, delegated power in certain areas.
Charter systems must distribute
decision-making authority to LSGTs in these areas:
Curriculum &
Instruction
Personnel
School
Improvement
Budget &
Resource
Allocations
School
Operations
What does decision-making authority in these areas really look like?
The Work of the LSGT
IPT = Input, AUT = Autonomy. More information about the LSGT’s specific work will
be provided during the Board Retreat Charter System Presentation
Domain
Required by State
APS is Considering Additionally
Personnel
IPT: Selection of Principal
IPT: Annual feedback on principal's
performance/interaction with LSGT
IPT: Interview Principal
Finance &
Resource
Allocations
IPT: Final recs for school budget
IPT: #/type of personnel, curriculum
costs, supply, equipment, maintenance,
operations costs
AUT: Develop/manage requests for
funding to support new innovative
proposals.
Curriculum
IPT: Curriculum and accompanying
instructional materials
IPT/AUT: Align school's curriculum
offerings and modes of delivery to
cluster theme.
School
Improveme
nt
AUT: Establish/monitor achievement of
school improvement goals
AUT: Approval of school improvement
plan and oversight of its implementation
AUT: Create strategic plan that
incorporates school improvement
and Title I planning.
School
Operations
IPT: school operations that relate to
AUT: Development of community
school improvement goals and/or charter communication strategies and
system goals
creation of Parent/community
involvement/engagement plan
IPT: School system calendar and
district-wide initiatives
Common Question:
If APS is granted charter system status,
its traditional schools will become charter system schools.
So, what's the difference between charter schools and charter system
schools?
APS Charter School
• School is governed by its own
Governing Board, an individual
legal entity that’s operated under
District's high-level control &
oversight
• Governing Board legally
responsible for overseeing
principal, school operations, and
performance
• Governing Board is individually
responsible for the goals in the
charter contract between the
school, district, and state
APS Charter System School
• Part of the District, overall
governed by the Superintendent
and the Board of Education.
• Local School Governance Team
(LSGT) responsible for strategic
vision and deep thinking to
increase school performance—not
involved in day-to-day
management of school
• LSGT is not individually responsible
for accountability goals in charter
system contract between APS and
state.
Charter System vs. Charter School
Charter System
•
Governed by Board of
Education
•
Contract is between system
and SBOE
•
Local School Governance Team
has decision-making authority
in certain areas
•
•
Schools are not independently
responsible for all goals stated
in charter contract
Not privatization
Charter School
Commonalities
•
Governed by non-profit
board of directors
•
Public
•
•
Operate under a
charter contract
Contract is between school,
school district and state
•
The Governing board can
contract with an independent
operator to manage and run
the school
•
Schools are independent and
have flexibility from state
and district policies
•
Receive flexibility from
certain state laws
•
Subject to GA statewide
accountability
assessments
What happens to APS's Charter Schools after the
transition to Charter System?
• Short answer: Nothing. APS's transition to charter system
status does not affect APS charter schools. The charter
contract between APS, the charter school, and the state
still govern the relationship and responsibilities of the
charter school, APS, and the state.
• Charter petitioners can still submit charter petitions to
start new charter schools to APS after APS’s transition to
a charter system.
• A conversion charter school can choose to terminate its
charter contract to become an APS charter system school
instead, but it requires school, district, and state
approval.
Common Question:
What is the difference between Local
School Governance Teams (LSGTs)
required for Charter Systems and
Local School Councils (LSCs) required
for traditional systems?
LSGTs vs. LSCs
Characteristics
LSGT
LSC
Structure
Voting Body: LSGTs have
defined input and autonomy
in certain areas whereas
LSACs could only advise.
Advisory Body
Primary Purpose
Set strategic direction for
school and vote on school
improvement initiatives
Advise and make
recommendations to school
leadership
Required?
Mandatory for charter
systems
Mandatory for traditional
systems (replaced by LSGT in
charter system)
Legal Status
Legally a part of the district
Legally a part of the district
Membership
Strict requirements
established by the State and
APS
Minimum requirements
established by the State
Flexibility Update for Georgia
Where does the rest of the state stand with
the June 30th deadline to choose a model?
As of April 2015, there
are:
•32 Approved Charter
Systems
•4 Approved IE2 Systems
•16 Letters of Intent for
Charter System
•20 Letters of Intent for
IE2
•108 Systems Undecided
Deadline: June 30,
2015 to submit a letter
of intent.
Application Deadline
for Charter System:
November 1st.
APS is on track to
submitting its
application early during
summer 2015.
Information taken from GADOE presentation and
SBOE Meeting summaries
After submission:
The Charter System Approval Process
After APS submits its charter system to the LBOE for approval in summer of 2015, it
will then be submitted to the GADOE for processing. The Charter Advisory
Committee will then review and make recommendations to the SBOE to ultimately
approve or deny APS's application.
Information taken from GADOE March 2015 presentation
Thank you!
For questions or comments regarding APS’s
charter system model,
contact Angela Smith
aksmith@atlantak12.ga.us