text:
VIEWS: 2,191 PAGES: 44 CATEGORY: Education POSTED ON: 4/30/2012 Public Domain
the state of 2012 the nyc charter school sector It's about great public schools. the state of2012 the nyc charter school sector about the charter center The New York City Charter School Center envisions a future in which all of New York's students have access to a first-rate public education, so that, no matter their background, they can participate in society on fair terms. We believe that charter schools are partners in a larger effort to build and maintain a great system of public schools. We help new charter schools get started, support existing schools, and build community support so that highly effective schools can flourish. about the Data transparency InItIatIve This report is part of a multi-year effort to promote data transparency within New York City's charter school sector. To explore other available data and analysis, visit www.nycCharterSchools.org/Data project team James Merriman, CEO Daniel Hayman, Lead Analyst Christina Brown, Chief of Staff Eric Horowitz, Data Analyst Michael Regnier, Project Lead Christian Villenas, Data Analyst David Frank, Project Manager Cara Volpe, Facilitator school leaDer aDvIsory commIttee This report and the Data Transparency Initiative would not be possible without extensive effort and thoughtful advice from a committed group of charter school and network leaders. Vasthi Acosta, Ed.D. Daniel Rubenstein Amber Charter School Brooklyn Prospect Charter School Ken Byalin, Ph.D. Matt Scott John W. Lavelle Preparatory Charter School Harlem Village Academies Stacey Gauthier Alandrea Timmons Renaissance Charter School Victory Education Partners Jacob Mnookin Ka Yee Tom Coney Island Preparatory Charter School Uncommon Schools specIal thanks to New York City Charter Schools Colorado League of Charter Schools New York State Education Department Charter School Growth Fund KIPP Foundation Rodriguez Valle Creative FOCUS DC The New York City Department of Education was instrumental in providing data, context, and advice to improve the work of this project. The Department's shared commitment to data transparency, accuracy, and fairness is greatly appreciated. support for this project comes from the michael & susan Dell foundation. Responsibility for the final content and any errors is the Charter Center's alone. Contents Foreword: Looking Back to Move Ahead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .02 Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .04 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .06 What choices do NYC charter schools provide? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .08 What are NYC charter schools' results? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Who are NYC charter schools' students? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 What is the outlook for the future of NYC charter schools? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 Sources and Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 foreworD: LOOKING BACK TO move aheaD When the legislation to allow charter schools was passed in late 1998, it was hard to imagine what would arise in New York City just over a dozen years later: inarguably, the best and most vibrant char- ter school sector in the United States. Because of NYC charter schools, tens of thousands of largely disadvantaged students have received a better education.Their parents were given, often for the first time, a meaningful choice of public school. Even students who never attended a charter school have benefitted from charter schools' infusion of new ideas—and more importantly, new urgency—for a system of public schools that works for all students. While from our current vantage point, we might view the way to provide hundreds of hours of additional instruction. growth and success of charter schools as inevitable, the fact Charter schools made it their hallmark. A school-wide culture is that there was nothing inevitable about it. Certainly, many of hard work and academic focus had been an extraordinary believed and fervently hoped the effort would fail. It is worth accomplishment. Charter schools made it an expectation. reviewing, then, how we got here and why. NYC charter schools also used their flexibility to find new First, there are 136 charters schools in NYC today only be- ways to structure educators' employment in order to promote cause hundreds of dedicated educators, parents, community student achievement, re-thinking how work is divided; how members, partners, volunteers, and supporters came to- educators are compensated; and how they could be recruited, gether to create these new schools from the ground up. Many hired, developed, retained, and (if necessary) dismissed. did so when there was little organized assistance available, Over time, this flexibility and new way of thinking has started and when charter school authorizers were still figuring out to find its way into labor arrangements between charter how to oversee them and hold them accountable. The sheer schools and unions, and even between traditional districts work of building these schools (which are both educational and unions. institutions and complex not-for-profit entities) was and Even with the almost heroic commitment of NYC charter remains immense. school founders, it would be naïve to think that New York It is because of this that those pioneers who first ventured City's charter sector could have thrived without a critical de- down the charter school path must not be forgotten. If the cision by Mayor Bloomberg, Chancellor Joel Klein, and then- daunting challenge of school-building were not enough, they Deputy Mayor (now Chancellor) Dennis Walcott. Had they not faced a slew of lawsuits and political attacks (as our well made space in district school buildings available to charter established sector still faces today). Yet they persevered, schools, the sector would have faced NYC's expensive real because they saw in charter schools a way to wrest control estate market without public facility funding, and would be a of public schooling from a large, clumsy and mandate-bound fraction of its current size and strength as a result. That deci- bureaucracy and restore it to communities, passionate edu- sion reverberated throughout American education; the leader cators and the students they teach. And parents responded of the nation's largest public school system had recognized enthusiastically. that charter schools were a source of hope, not a competitive threat, and that public resources should be tied to students What would the new charter schools do with their flexibility? and results above all else. Increasingly, other districts from They worked on new ideas, but also existing theories that had across the country have adopted this approach—entering into rarely been implemented. A longer school day and longer collaboration compacts with their respective charter sectors, school year, for example, had been discussed for years as a just as has happened in NYC. 2 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools These contributions from the NYC charter sector's past should frame its approach to the present and future. Today, as this report's review of the data confirms, the state of the sector is strong and worth celebrating. But it is by no means perfect. It would be a disservice to public education's difficult work to suggest otherwise. There are old challenges still remaining, and new ones on the horizon. In particular, as charter schools establish a larger presence in the school system, and demand access to public facilities on par with their district counterparts, their role in that system will inevitably shift. That will include increasing the number of high-need students that the law requires them to enroll, retain, and teach. Equally, charter schools—like their district counterparts—will need to continue seeking improvement in the crucial subject of English Language Arts and the ultimate challenge of college readiness. Charter school educators and their supporters have every right to take pride in the sector's historic accomplishments. Of equal importance is, of course, what happens next. The NYC charter school sector must continue to stake its claim as a powerful force to improve education for all. The same elements that brought the charter sector this far—audacious effort, creative leadership, a "no excuses" mentality, ac- countability for results, transparency about those results, as well as visionary support from outside—will be essential to the sector's continued success and viability. New York City is counting on it. James Merriman CEO New York City Charter School Center the state of the new york cIty charter school sector I 3 executIve SUMMARY Charter schools were created to change things. A bold and controversial concept when they came to New York City in 1999, charter schools have had remarkable success in creating choices for families, raising students' academic achievement, and experimenting with innovative ideas for education.Today, New York City's charter school sector is higher-performing and more vibrant than any in the United States, and has grown from two schools in 1999 to 136 schools educating 47,000 students today.The accomplishments reflect the hard work of dedicated school founders and educa- tors, the support of public officials, and, of course, the commitment and trust of the families who have chosen to enroll in these independent and autonomous public schools. Having become an established (if at times controversial) part missing: meaningful, transparent, and accessible data about of a larger system of public schools, charter schools will the state of the NYC charter school sector. This State of the continue to expand, still working to refine their programs Sector report attempts to do something about that. Its ap- and obtain even better results. But as they pursue familiar proach is to offer a descriptive portrait based on data provid- goals, they will also face a new set of questions about their ed by public agencies. While it does not show all the variety scale and role. For instance, as charters move to serve ever among individual charter schools, nor does it predict what greater numbers of students, to what extent can the charter may change as these generally small and very young schools school model be adopted (and adapted) to improve traditional continue to grow, it does represent a first step toward a more district schools? To what extent are charter schools' results data-driven conversation. shaped by their differences in governance structures or en- The report focuses on four pressing questions and presents rollment patterns? And are those differences intrinsic to the the following findings. charter school model, or simply present-day features of it? Since the charter school sector was built on a commitment what choices do nyc charter schools to achievement and accountability, such questions are as provide? important as any the sector has faced—and some early, Charter schools' steady growth over 12 years has been fueled partial answers have begun to emerge. For instance, charter by enormous demand from students and families, many schools are now required to enroll and retain certain groups of whom previously had few if any choices. In last year's of at-risk students at rates comparable to the local district admissions lotteries, an estimated five students applied for schools, or risk closure, a shift that is likely to narrow differ- each available seat. Enrolling 47,000 students today, charter ences in charter and district school demographics. Charter schools will in a few years' time educate one in ten public schools are also acting collectively to share best practices for school students. Charter schools have undoubtedly provided students with special needs and make it easier for families to additional choices; but it is important to remember that find and apply to charter schools (including through a com- charter schools today are one small part of what has become mon online application). And with the signing of a District- a vast system of school choice in NYC, including many district Charter Collaboration Compact, charter schools are joining schools that require much more than an application form to their district colleagues to find new ways to work together enroll a student. and share best practices. Charter schools' freedom to implement new and unconven- As charter schools adjust to their growing size and the tional ideas about education has also broadened families' changing public debate, there is too often a key ingredient choices. Among the most prominent innovations have been 4 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools the longer school days and longer school years that allow The charter school law was amended in May 2010 to require schools to provide hundreds of hours of additional instruction charter schools to enroll and retain comparable percentages in core areas while still leaving time for art, music, humani- of ELLs, students with disabilities and low-income students. ties, and science. Parents have welcomed this innovation as That change is likely to result in a narrowing of the pres- well as charter schools' focused concentration on a purpose- ent demographic differences between charter schools and ful, college-bound culture that permeates every aspect of the district schools. school day. what is the outlook for the future of nyc what are nyc charter schools' results? charter schools? Even after controlling for student characteristics, rigorous Charter schools have a small but growing foothold in NYC, academic research consistently finds significant, positive aca- serving about four percent of all public school students, but demic benefits to attending a NYC charter school. In addition, as much as 25% of students in neighborhoods where charter charter school students consistently outperform Community schools are most concentrated. Those numbers will con- School District (CSD) averages on state Math and English tinue to increase as charter schools add more grade levels, Language Arts (ELA) exams in grades 3-8, although such com- and as more charter schools open each year. Given present parisons do not control for student demographics (and should levels of demand, there is good reason to believe that parents be used with caution in comparing the two sectors). The same will seek these new seats out and demand will continue to pattern holds among students in all at-risk subgroups. outpace supply. While the overall results are strong, charter school students' Charter schools' physical place in the city is uncertain, performance in Math is stronger than in ELA (which is also however. As a rule, charter schools do not receive public true for district students). At the few charter high schools facilities support. A majority of charter schools operate in that have existed long enough to graduate students, rates district buildings, which, given the lack of facility funding, has of college readiness and college enrollment lag those of been a critical factor in charter school growth. Yet it must be district high schools. However, trends in Regents completion remembered that even schools in district buildings have no suggest that high school outcomes will improve as a larger assurance of continued access. and more representative number of these schools start to graduate students. The report finds that charter schools, on average, have higher rates of teacher and principal turnover compared to NYC Charter schools tend to have higher attendance rates than district schools. Such rates of turnover are, in part, consistent NYC district schools. On the Department of Education's with a dynamic, growing and still quite new sector, and one Learning Environment Surveys, charter school parents, which operates with different background labor rules and teachers, and secondary students respond more positively to more varied compensation structures. And while low rates of questions in every category: Academic Expectations, Engage- attrition are not an outcome valuable for its own sake, lower ment, Safety & Respect, and Communication. staff attrition could help charter schools sustain or expand their positive influence on academic achievement, while who are nyc charter schools' students? continuing to grow. Charter school leaders are paying close Three in four charter school students come from low-income attention to this issue, and seeking ways to improve educator families. Over 60% of charter school students are Black pipelines and keep effective educators on the job longer. (compared to about 30% of district school students), reflect- In sum, the present state of the NYC charter school sector ing the demand from the African-American community. is strong and the outlook for the future is very promising. At present, the charter sector serves a smaller percentage Charter schools as a sector are meant to reach at-risk stu- of students in special education than the citywide average, dents, improve their education and life prospects, and provide although this difference may partly stem from students being avenues for improvement for the larger public school system. over-identified in district schools. Charter school students The available data suggest real accomplishments to date and in special education are more likely to move toward less increasing progress on the path toward that lofty summit. restrictive settings. Every indication is that NYC charter schools intend to keep climbing. The charter sector also serves a smaller proportion of Eng- lish Language Learners (ELLs), but ELLs in charter schools To learn more about charter schools and the Data Transpar- are more likely to pass the English proficiency tests required ency Initiative, visit www.nycCharterSchools.org/Data. to leave that category. The sTaTe of the New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor the state The new york cIty charter school sector I 5 INTRODUCTION a state of change Charter schools were created to change things. When they came to New York City in 1999, the idea was something new and different: public schools run independently of a traditional district, working with unprecedented flexibility and yet accountable for academic results. It was a bold and controversial experiment, with the potential to change families' choices, educators' assumptions, and, most importantly, students' futures. Today, the NYC charter school sector serves 47,000 stu- schools. This is a conversation not just in NYC but across dents, with an estimated five applicants per available seat. the country. To what extent can the charter school model be Parents have overwhelmingly embraced this choice. NYC adopted (and adapted) in reforming and improving tradi- charter schools have sparked innovations in areas ranging tional district schools and structures? To what extent are from teacher practices, to school leadership, to integrated charter schools' results shaped by their differences in gov- student supports. Established social service agencies are ernance structures or enrollment patterns? And how much using the charter structure to create new public schools are these differences intrinsic to the charter school model or that meet local needs. Most importantly, rigorous research simply present-day features of it? has found that NYC charter schools make a significant, Whether framed by ideological critics or charter school positive difference in students' academic achievement, with educators, such questions are of obvious importance to a particularly strong results in Math. movement premised on achievement and accountability. The change continues, though, including within the NYC Indeed, that conversation has already led to the amendment charter school sector itself. While building on its past of New York State's charter school law, which now requires achievements, the sector's increasing size and maturity charter schools to meet targets for enrolling and retaining bring new kinds of challenges and opportunities. at-risk student subgroups—or risk closure. Growing organizations require larger and different systems. As charter schools work through all of these changes, and In every area—from instructional leadership, to teacher especially in the shift of public debate, there is too often a recruitment, to parent engagement, to governance—charter key ingredient missing: meaningful, transparent, and acces- schools and networks are learning to do their work on a sible data about the state of the NYC charter school sector. larger scale. Scale also brings a growing need for physical The most important charter school discussions tend to be facility space, an increasing challenge given the organized dominated by generalizations, simplifications and anec- opposition to co-location in district buildings (from constitu- dotes, while the decentralized nature of charter schooling encies who also oppose facility funding for charter schools). makes actual data hard to find and understand. The passing of years brings changes, too. No longer a novel experiment or an untested promise, the still-young charter key Questions sector has a growing track record that can be analyzed to This report represents a modest first step toward a more in- see what has worked well and what has not, and what those formed and data-driven conversation about charter schools. results may mean for reforming traditional district schools. Looking across NYC's diverse charter school sector, the Time also brings a growing interest in organizational sus- report presents information that addresses four pressing tainability at charter schools, to ensure that positive results questions: can continue over time. • What choices do NYC charter schools provide? Perhaps the most significant shift is taking place in the • What are NYC charter schools' results? public debate about charter schools. As it becomes obvi- ous that the charter sector is an integral (and growing) part • Who are NYC charter schools' students? of our public school system, discussion is turning to the • What is the outlook for the future of NYC charter schools? role it plays (and should play) in the larger system of public 6 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools Readers will note that none of these questions relates to further research any individual charter school. Descriptions of the "char- In developing this report, the Charter Center and its Advi- ter sector" are statistical abstractions, useful for thinking sory Committee of charter school leaders sought to present about trends but not a full description of any individual information that is available, accurate, important, and un- school. Many NYC charter schools have had successes, derstandable. Each of these criteria ruled out some possible some of them inspirational and even paradigm-shifting. data points, even when erring on the side of transparency. Other schools are steadily progressing, or trying to change Our hope is that, over time, better data in a wider variety of direction, or just opening their doors. Still others have formats will come to fill any gaps—and we are committed to fallen short and will be closed, as they should be. Given the pushing that process along. independence and autonomy that charter schools enjoy, wide variety is inevitable, and it is critical that all read- ers—including parents and policy makers alike—keep this in mind. sources and comparisons This report is a portrait of the NYC charter school sector, what is a charter school? not a controlled research study designed to isolate and test Charter schools are free public schools open to all New hypotheses about it. It relies almost entirely on pre-exist- York City children. ing data sets collected and provided by public agencies, and Though public, they are not run by the NYC Department of does not make use of student-level records. Education; instead they are governed by independent, not- for-profit boards of trustees, and authorized and regulated Wherever available, this report presents charter school by public agencies (including the New York State Educa- data alongside comparable data on district schools as a tion Department). Charter schools operate according to the terms of a performance contract or "charter." Charter reference point. These comparisons were constructed as schools commit to meeting specific academic goals, then carefully as possible given the data sources, for example make their own decisions about how to achieve them. If by looking at comparable grade ranges and excluding the the goals are not met, the charter may be revoked and the same special cases from both sides. (See the endnotes for school closed. more detail about the calculations of particular figures and Because they are independent from the district system, charts.) Yet the comparisons shown here are still not con- charter schools have greater flexibility in the way they trolled for outside variables, and the differences they show operate. Charter schools are free to develop their own academic programs, set budgets, choose staff, set educa- may not be statistically significant. tional goals, offer a longer school day and school year, and Especially given these limitations, it is important to under- establish their own standards for student behavior. Enroll- stand charter school data points together and in context, ment at a charter school is always by a parent's choice, never mandatory. rather than as isolated numbers or comparisons. Students' Charter schools are tuition-free and non-sectarian. Stu- characteristics and academic results are especially impor- dents are admitted by a random lottery, without regard to tant to consider together, since everyone acknowledges that their academic background. Charter schools follow state the former influences the latter. That is not to excuse unac- standards and participate in state exams. They are subject ceptable results, but to avoid drawing simplistic conclu- to health, safety, non-discrimination, and open meetings sions about causes and effects in something as complex as laws, as well as specific regulations to ensure fair admis- a public school. sions and prevent conflicts of interest. Charter schools commonly open their doors with only one Readers should also keep in mind that district schools en- or two grade levels, then gradually "build out" by adding roll 20 times as many students as charter schools do, and one grade level per year until they reach their authorized that a majority of charter schools are in their first five years grade range. of operation. Both of these factors suggest that charter sec- tor averages will be prone to vary over time, particularly in the high school grades, where charter school numbers are especially small and fast-changing. The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 7 WHAT choIces DO NYC CHARTER SCHOOLS PROVIDE? 8 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools Steady Growth, Popular applicants per Demand available In their thirteenth year of operating in New York seat City, charter schools now serve 47,000 students in NYC charter schools' admissions lotteries (estimated, spring 2011)4 in 136 schools, spread across all five boroughs. Source: Charter Center survey and analysis There is at least one charter school in 28 of the 32 Community School Districts (CSDs), but a large majority (77%) are clustered in three nyc charter schools by GraDe ranGe, authorIzer, areas: Harlem, Central Brooklyn, and the South anD network affIlIatIon, 2011-12 Bronx.1 Since families must actively choose Grade Range Network Affiliation charter schools, the sector's steady growth can K-8 6-12 9 14 be attributed to citywide demand from parents K-12 9 for better educational choices. High 11 Elementary Independent 64 CMO 60 75 Middle NYC charter schools serve all grade levels, but most are 18 elementary schools. They may be authorized by the New York Authorizer EMO 12 State Board of Regents, the Trustees of the State University of New York (SUNY), or the NYC Schools Chancellor. The Chancellor has not authorized new charter schools since SUNY NYC state law changed in 2010. 59 Chancellor 69 Most charter schools have been open for less than five years. About half of charter schools are affiliated with a network, Regents in most cases a nonprofit Charter Management Organiza- 8 tion (CMO). A dozen charter schools contract with a for-profit Source: Charter Center analysis Education Management Organization (EMO), but new charter schools are no longer allowed that option.2 total enrollment In nyc charter schools, 2000-20123 Grades K-4 Grades 5-8 Grades 9-12 Schools Open 50,000 47,000 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 136 25,000 125 20,000 99 78 15,000 58 60 10,000 47 32 5,000 17 18 24 4 14 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Source: NYS Report Cards, Charter Center analysis The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 9 nyc charter schools by years of operatIon, 2011-12 Extending School Choice In many cities and school districts, the ability to 0-4 Years choose among public schools is a novel propo- 80 schools sition. Not so in New York City.The NYC school 9-12 Years 17 schools system is full of public school options, including many schools that practice selective enrollment 5-8 Years 39 schools of one form or another.The result is a public school system in which the word "public" does not imply any particular form of enrollment or Source: NYS Report Cards, Charter Center analysis selectivity.Traditional neighborhood-based ad- mission is in effect at most elementary schools, about half of all middle schools, and virtually last year, In 2010-11, charter school stuDents no high schools.The other public schools are accounteD for: all, to some degree, public schools of choice. New York City's non-charter school choices include special- 3.9% of all public school students in NYC ized high schools; high schools that enroll students through a mutual "matching" process; middle schools where admission is "screened" by test scores and even personal interviews; and of public school students in schools for gifted and talented students. There are magnet 5.6% grades K-5 schools, dual-language immersion schools, and zoned schools that are high-performing, but require residence in an expen- sive neighborhood. Families of students with special needs 9.2% of public school students in also often sue the NYC Department of Education (NYC DOE) to Harlem, Central Brooklyn, and obtain placement in private schools, entirely at public expense. the South Bronx5 In a city with options like these, whether there is school choice is not the relevant question so much as which students are 25.1% of public school students in CSD 5 (Harlem) given choices, and which choices, under which terms? Many charter school leaders would respond with a more pointed question: Why shouldn't disadvantaged students have the high-quality public school choices that other students have Source: NYS Report Cards, Charter Center analysis always had? Charter schools extend families' options through a choice that does not depend on test scores or interviews, but does require a parent to complete a simple application form (see p.11). Once those forms are submitted, the enrollment lottery is random, with preference for students in the local CSD. This structure, not exactly "zoned" nor "selective," puts charters schools in a somewhat unique place on the school choice landscape. Like any enrollment policy, the charter school choice structure influences the characteristics of incoming students.6 As a result, comparisons of schools' results must be made with great caution. 10 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools Does the parent "market" for charter schools react to test scores? Since families must actively choose a charter school, do they avoid schools with poor academic results? Comparing charter schools' average proficiency rates to the applications they received per seat, two interesting patterns emerge. Parent demand is significantly correlated with test scores. For every 10 percentage points its scores increase in pro- ficiency, a charter school with 50 open seats can expect 100 additional applications.7 This suggests that parents are sensitive to academic results. (And the link is still significant when controlling for the scores in the local CSD.) Yet almost every charter school has more applicants than seats.8 Even the lowest-performing charter schools operate at full enrollment, which means that their motivations to improve academically do not include financial pressure. If the "market" alone does not enforce charter schools' promises of high achievement, then charter authorizers must—by enforcing high standards and closing schools that fail. In some cases, however, the charter school being closed may still be the best option in the neighborhood. There is no easy answer to parents who see this outcome as unfair. Is it difficult to apply to a charter school? As public schools of choice, charter schools require parents to proactively indicate their interest by submitting an ap- plication form prior to the admissions lotteries, which are conducted each April for the following school year. While the need to apply may influence the characteristics of students who ultimately attend charter schools (see discussion on p. 15), it is important not to overstate the effort required. A charter school "application" consists of one short and simple form, which asks for only basic information about the student. Since November 2011, the NYS Education Department has mandated that charter schools require only the following information:9 About the Student About the Parent/Guardian Name Name Date of Birth Relationship to Student Gender Phone Number Home Address School District / CSD (if known) Grade Applying for Enrolled Sibling, if any Charter schools may optionally request other information if it relates to approved preferences for at-risk students. They may not consider "measures of achievement or aptitude" or "require any action by a student or family (such as an admis- sions test, interview, essay, attendance at an information session, etc.)" in order to receive or submit an application. Most charter schools work extremely hard to see that all eligible students have access to the application and know about the choices they have. This year, for the first time, a large majority of charter schools offer a common online application, which further simplifies the application process. The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 11 Ideas at Work 49 teaching techniques Best practices named in the "taxonomy" developed by Doug Charter schools control their own lessons, Lemov of the Uncommon Schools charter school network and budgets, staff, schedules, and culture, with an au- implemented in Uncommon and other NYC charter schools tonomy no district school enjoys.This flexibility 135 experiments in kindergarten makes the charter school sector a place for new What students complete at Success Network charter schools, educational ideas to be tried, and for existing through 50-minute lessons every school day ideas to be applied, refined, and re-combined. 350 extra hours Many NYC charter schools operate with a longer school day Annual difference in instructional time at many NYC charter and year that provides students with hundreds of hours a year schools, compared to the NYC DOE calendar of additional instruction. This, in turn, allows charter schools to spend extra time on core subjects yet also provide music, art, science and other enrichment areas. The additional time $125,000 can also be used for teacher development. Other charter sec- Minimum teacher's salary at The Equity Project Charter School tor hallmarks include practices to reinforce an orderly and college-centered school culture and a professional focus on agriculture instructional data. Yet these are only a few themes within a High school science sequences offered at The Renaissance sector whose schools are philosophically diverse, including Charter School, making use of a rooftop greenhouse to teach approaches that are progressive, project-based, Montessori, students about environmental stewardship "No Excuses," and everything in between. Another emerging area for innovation is in the education and cheap video cameras training of new teachers. Already one new graduate school has A key tool used to record lessons for later critique at the new been founded to educate both charter and district teachers; Relay Graduate School of Education, which was co-founded other programs are deep in the planning stages. by three NYC charter school networks Given this diversity, it is no surprise that little systematic data exists on the new and old ideas at work in charter college success office schools, but here is a sampling.10 Arm of the Harlem Children's Zone providing academic, administrative, financial, and emotional support to college-en- rolled graduates of Promise Academy Charter Schools I and II co-teaching in every class Uniform practice of using two teachers per class to teach students with and without special needs, in place at a grow- ing number of charter schools 12 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools Data Days Quinoa Sessions when educators at many charter schools review Example of a lunch menu item—served with Chilled Cucumber results from interim academic assessments, administered Soup, and Tuna with Lime Vinaigrette—prepared on-site by the every six weeks, and adjust their teaching plans in response professional chef at Family Life Academy Charter School "I can't vote, but you can!" robot-building Message of the get-out-the-vote campaign run each Election One competitive enrichment activity for students at Inwood Day by Democracy Prep Charter School students in grades 6-8 Academy of Leadership Charter School Kounaikenshuu summer family projects Japanese practice in which teachers work together to Program used to help students at Bronx Charter School for continuously improve curriculum and instruction, and the Excellence integrate and apply learning, while leaving teachers inspiration for professional development at Harlem Village time to rejuvenate and plan Academies sustainable operations legal help, adolescent health services, What the Ascend charter school network calls its combination and evening meals of higher class sizes, teacher supports, and lean administra- Free services available to students at Broome Street Acad- tion, allowing schools to operate in private space without emy Charter School, which focuses on students who are or philanthropic support have been in the child welfare system, or are homeless zest mississippi One of seven character strengths measured on KIPP charter Destination of bus ride to honor the Freedom Riders, the cul- schools' "character report cards," alongside Grit, Self-Con- mination of a Civil Rights Practicum at Renaissance Charter trol, Social Intelligence, Gratitude, Optimism, and Curiosity High School for Innovation mock Doctor's office One place to practice real-world interactions at the New York Center for Autism Charter School partners Title given to master-teachers, who replace traditional administrators at Teaching Firms of America Charter School by leading and supervising colleagues while maintaining teaching duties "professional work Day" Term used in lieu of a specific number of minutes in the collec- tively bargained teachers' contract at Green Dot Charter School The sTaTe of the New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor the state The new york cIty charter school sector I 13 WHAT ARE NYC CHARTER SCHOOLS' results? 14 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools An Academic Bottom Line Every charter school's existence depends on its students' academic achievement, judged primarily by standardized test scores.The stakes are highest for the students, for whom a great public school can be life-changing, and can make the difference between high school dropout and college success. Preparing every student for college and career is a daunting and far-off goal, but successful charter school educators have seen too many changed lives to lower their sights. Because charter schools' mission is to increase academic controlled research studies achievement, it is especially important to take care in evalu- In many states and cities, charter school studies have rarely ating their academic results. Since demographic differences or never included controls for student characteristics. As Uni- are known to influence achievement, students' incoming versity of California economists Julian R. Betts and Richard C. characteristics should always be among the factors consid- Atkinson recently wrote in the journal Science, this is a serious ered when evaluating their academic outcomes. problem: "The potential for self-selection into charter schools This section presents data on NYC charter schools' academic is great, which makes naïve comparison of student outcomes results, viewed alongside the results of district schools. There at charter schools and traditional public schools misleading. are academic studies of this topic that control for student But rigorous research on charters is beginning to appear…."11 characteristics, but at this time the bulk of available evidence As Betts & Atkinson note, the NYC charter sector has actually does not include student controls. Even without such controls, been the subject of multiple academic studies with rigorous it is useful and interesting to look at charter and district school controls. Hoxby, Murarka, & Kang (2009) used a lottery-based results comparatively, to see trends, compare the size of vari- analysis to compare charter school students with students ous differences, note surprises, and simply have a reference who applied for charter schools but were not selected in the point. Readers are strongly cautioned not to treat simple test random lotteries, thus controlling for self-selection.12 CREDO score averages as straightforward measures of school quality, (2010) used a "virtual twin" method to match charter schools and to keep demographic differences in mind. Differences students with district school students with similar character- presented here are not necessarily statistically significant. istics, then compared their academic results.13 Both studies found a significantly positive effect of attending a charter school on student test scores.14 Despite a strong research base, further rigorously controlled studies of academic achievement are well warranted. The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 15 state tests for Grades 3-8 what does the "national" research After years of inflated proficiency rates for all New York State say about nyc charter schools? public schools, the 2010-11 school year marked the second year of more accurate proficiency standards on the New York When the Center for Research on Educational Outcomes at Stanford University (CREDO) issued its study of charter State Math and English Language Arts (ELA) assessments school achievement in 16 states, it found more charter in grades 3-8. It also saw the debut of tests that are longer, schools with negative academic effects than positive more writing-intensive, and intended to be less predictable by ones. Yet that study did not include New York City charter covering a broader spectrum of the content that students are schools. The next year, CREDO conducted a NYC-specific expected to master in each grade. study using the same methodology and found significantly positive results for NYC charter schools (see p. 15).15 Compared to district school students citywide, charter school Unfortunately, the two studies are regularly confused students scored Proficient at a higher rate in Math, and at a in NYC charter school debates, with some critics even virtually identical rate in ELA. Compared to the CSDs where citing the study of charter schools in other states—while charter schools with tested grades are located, however, the neglecting to mention the NYC-specific research. differences are larger in both subjects (68.5% vs. 52.7% in The CREDO reports' lead researcher, Margaret Raymond, Math, 44.6% vs. 40.1% in ELA).17 made the distinction in the Los Angeles Times: "Not only Charter school students also exceed the city average profi- were charter schools as a whole better in New York than in any other city we have studied; there also was less ciency in both subjects at every grade level, except for ELA range in quality. Although there were some underper- in Grade 5. forming charter schools in New York City, they made up a Despite the favorable comparisons, charter school performance far smaller proportion of the whole than in California or reflects some stubborn challenges, particularly with literacy— the rest of the nation."16 Raymond went on to speculate about which New York City factors, such as strong autho- one of the keys to higher-order analytic achievement. This is rizers, may have contributed to charter schools' impact. consistent with long-standing patterns in district schools. Less than half of all charter school students are Proficient in ELA, and only 1.2% of charter school students scored at the Advanced level, compared to 2.7% for district school students. Charter and district school students scored Advanced in Math more often (21.2% and 20.9%, respectively). 16 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools nyc stuDent performance on ny state exams, 2010-1118 CHATER SCHOOlS DISTRICT SCHOOlS Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic M AT H ELA 21.2% 1.2% 20.9% 2.7% 47.3% 36.4% 43.4% 41.2% 27.8% 33.0% 46.4% 42.8% 3.8% 9.6% 13.3% 9.0% Charter District Charter District Schools Schools Schools Schools Source: NYSED Grade 3-8 State Test Results all nyc stuDents: rates of profIcIent or aDvanceD performance, by GraDe level, 2010-1119 Charter Schools District Schools M AT H ELA 80% 80% 72% 70% 69% 70% 67% 68% 70% 66% 62% 63% 60% 60% 55% 56% 56% 52% 52% 53% 51% 50% 50% 48% 49% 45% 44% 41% 40% 40% 37% 36% 36% 35% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% 0% 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 5 6 7 8 Source: NYSED Grade 3-8 State Test Results The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 17 Comparing within student subgroups, charter school stu- dents consistently have higher proficiency rates in Math than the district school average. In ELA, charter school students score about the same among the Low-Income, Special Edu- cation, and ELL groups. Among Black students and Hispanic students, ELA proficiency is higher at charter schools. nyc stuDent subGroup performance on ny state exams, GraDes 3-8, 2010-1120 CHARTER SCHOOlS DISTRICT SCHOOlS Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic students in special education english language learners students from low Income families M AT H ELA M AT H ELA M AT H ELA 20.3% 6.3% 19.9% 0.9% 2.1% 6.9% 5.0% 6.9% 33.5% 0.2% 0.3% 47.5% 41.9% 40.8% 38.8% 0.2% 37.5% 23.8% 28.4% 0.1% 15.1% 14.5% 14.6% 12.7% 28.6% 33.8% 43.4% 44.6% 49.4% 47.8% 44.5% 45.9% 46.6% 49.4% 55.4% 54.4% 3.7% 8.8% 10.9% 20.1% 9.4% 12.6% 29.8% 37.8% 14.3% 24.6% 30.3% 35.8% black students hispanic students M AT H ELA M AT H ELA 19.2% 19.6% 0.9% 12.8% 0.9% 10.7% 1.1% 1.0% 47.6% 47.6% 35.4% 41.4% 35.4% 37.8% 40.2% 34.6% 29.1% 29.0% 42.3% 38.9% 47.8% 50.2% 49.0% 49.1% 4.1% 3.7% 11.5% 10.5% 9.9% 13.3% 9.9% 15.2% Source: NYS Report Cards 18 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools academic Growth in middle school Academic proficiency standards reflect crucial goals, but they On the other hand, charter middle school students made are an incomplete standard for evaluating schools' success academic gains as a group since Grade 4, by 0.121 proficiency with students. A student who arrives at school far below the levels. Nearly all charter middle schools can claim to be proficiency standard may make dramatic progress in a year, moving their students in the right direction. yet still not be Proficient. Similarly, a student who arrives far District middle schools in the same CSDs did not make above proficiency may regress over the year, yet still exceed academic gains as a group since Grade 4, actually decreas- the standard. ing by 0.011 levels. It is not clear how much this pattern may In New York State, the Board of Regents has proposed be influenced by students who enrolled in district middle holding schools accountable using a new combination of schools without fourth-grade test scores. If such students proficiency and student growth—calculated by a method that arrived with academic disadvantages, this measure would be compares students' progress against other students with a poor indication of academic growth. At the very least, it is similar scores in the prior year. A similar calculation has another reason for public school observers to look forward to been part of NYC DOE's School Progress Reports, although the release of student growth data.21 it is not available in unadjusted form. In the next few years, NYC charter schools will likely have public data on student growth from one or both of those sources. Until that point, one (much rougher and more limited) growth indicator is available: a comparison of charter and district middle school students' test performance to the same students' performance in Grade 4 (where available). This comparison, also from the NYC DOE Progress Reports, shows two interest- ing patterns. In 2010-11, there were 29 charter middle schools operating in NYC. Their students had higher fourth-grade proficiency scores than district middle school students, by 0.067 on aver- age (where a full performance level is equal to 1). Overall, 62% of charter middle schools had higher incoming profi- ciency scores than students at district middle schools in their respective CSDs. The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 19 regents exams Before considering high school results, it must be noted nyc GraDe 8 stuDents receIvInG hIGh school creDIt, that the high school share of the charter sector is extremely 2010-1123 small; only seven charter schools serving high school grades have had a graduating class. As the high school portion of 100% the charter sector matures, there will be more data available 80% about how charter school students are being prepared for college. In 2011-12, there are 25 charter schools serving high 60% school grades, which means they will all have data on all high school metrics to report in the near future. 40% 37% In high school, New York State public school students do not 23% 20% sit for grade-level tests. Instead, they take course-culminat- ing Regents exams, which are administered three times per 0% year and may be taken more than once. Students must pass Charter District Schools Schools Regents exams in five different subjects in order to graduate. On the Regents exams in Integrated Algebra and English Source: NYC DOE Progress Reports (which both fulfill graduation requirements), charter high school students passed at a higher rate than students in district high schools. Charter school students reach the top scoring category (at least 85 points out of 100) at the same rate as district school students in English, but a lower rate in Integrated Algebra. Regents exams are sometimes also administered in grade 8, allowing middle school students a head start on their high school graduation requirements. Eighth-grade students at charter schools are more likely to pass a Regents exam and the corresponding course, thereby earning high school credit, than their counterparts at district schools. nyc reGents passInG rate, 2010-1122 CHATER SCHOOlS DISTRICT SCHOOlS Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic MATH ENGLISH 8.2% 22.7% 22.7% 9.2% 68.7% 60.3% 53.5% 52.8% 14.2% 19.2% 10.3% 9.9% 8.9% 13.8% 6.7% 18.7% Charter District Charter District Schools Schools Schools Schools Source: NYS Report Cards 20 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools Graduation and beyond High school achievement is measured by more than Regents all nyc stuDents: hIGh school outcome rates, 2010-1125 exams. A critical indicator, obviously, is graduation rate. Charter Schools District Schools Among students who entered high school in the fall of 2007, 80% the graduation rate after four school years (in spring 2011) 74.9% 71% was higher in charter high schools than district high schools. 70% Of this same cohort of students, however, district high school students demonstrated college readiness by earning high 60% marks on their Regents exams and/or SATs at more than twice 51.3% 50% 48.8% the rate of charter high school students. After high school, college enrollment data are available for 40% the cohort of students who entered high school in fall 2006. 30% 26.9% District school graduates in this cohort were more likely than charter school graduates to be enrolled in a degree program 20% at a 2-year or 4-year college by December 31, 2010. NYC 10.2% students who do enroll in college are hardly guaranteed to be 10% successful. Citywide, a large majority (74%) of public school graduates who enroll in CUNY community colleges are re- 0% 4-Year Graduation College Readiness College Enrollment quired to take remedial, non-credit coursework.24 Relying on recent data about high school seniors paints an Source: NYC DOE Progress Reports incomplete picture of the charter sector, however, because only seven charter schools serving high school grades have had a graduating class. nyc reGents completIon rates, 2010-1126 To gain some insight into charter high schools that have Charter Schools District Schools not yet built out to 12th grade, it is useful to compare the 100% "completion rate of remaining Regents exams," a metric included in the NYC DOE's School Progress Reports. This 88.3% metric shows the number of Regents exams that the aver- 80% 73.6% age student successfully completed during the year, as a percentage of the tests he or she should have passed to be 60.6% 60% 57.8% 56.1% on track for graduation. Among high schools without a 12th 54.5% grade, Regents completion rates were higher at charter schools than district schools. 40% 20% 0% Schools serving Schools serving Schools serving grades 9-10 grades 9-11 grades 9-12 Source: NYC DOE Progress Reports The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 21 nyc progress report letter Grades One of the most recognized measures of NYC public school nyc proGress reports, percent of overall GraDes performance is the letter grade assigned to each charter receIveD, 2010-11 and district public school as part of the annual NYC DOE Progress Reports. Letter grades are based on measures of student performance, student progress, and school environ- 27% A ment, with some (but not all) measures weighted by student 33% A characteristics. Within each category, a school's results are compared primarily to schools that serve similar student populations, and also to schools citywide that serve the same grade levels. It is important to note that, except for high schools, the grades are assigned from a fixed distribution, 34% B 28% B which means that NYC DOE pre-determines how many of each grade will be assigned across the city. Because the letter grades are based on such a complex for- mula, with weightings based on NYC DOE policy judgments, they should not be viewed as the only "quality" measure of 26% C 29% C a school. Nevertheless, the grades offer a common point of comparison across all public schools, which—unlike similar systems elsewhere—takes steps to account for student char- 9% D 7% D acteristics and to measure student academic progress. 3% F 3% F Charter District On the 2010-11 Progress Reports, charter schools received a Schools Schools higher percentage of A grades than district schools (33% vs. 27%) and the same proportion A or B grades (61%). Charter Source: NYC DOE Progress Reports schools received a higher proportion of D grades (9% vs. 7%), but the same proportion of C, D, or F grades (39%). Among charter schools, charter middle schools received the highest proportion of A grades (52% vs. 23% for district middle schools) and charter schools serving grades K-8 received the lowest proportion of A grades (22% vs. 26% for district K-8 schools). 22 I new york cIty charter school center It's about great public schools conditions for success Spurred by their commitment to be judged by academic Looking across categories and school grade ranges, charter outcomes, the best charter schools pay deliberate attention schools receive higher average scores in every case, with the to everything that goes into creating a successful learning exception of Engagement in high school. community. While the metrics presented below may not be considered educational outcomes, they reflect charter schools' attendance fulfillment of important social commitments—and arguably Attendance at school is critical to academic success for can serve as leading indicators of academic success. each student; for a school community, it can reflect overall engagement with students and families. Compared to district parent, teacher, and student surveys schools, charter schools have higher attendance rates across The NYC DOE's "Learning Environment Surveys" gauge the all grade levels. opinions of all teachers, all parents, and students in grades 6-12, at both charter and district schools. The survey poses multiple questions about four topics, resulting in a composite score for each. nyc DaIly attenDance rate, 2010-1128 Charter Schools District Schools Survey Category Questions Designed to Measure… Academic Expectations …whether the school encourages students 94.6% to "do their best by developing rigorous Elem 93.5% and meaningful goals." 94.9% Engagement …whether parents, students, and teachers K-3 93.9% feel "engaged in an active and vibrant partnership to promote learning." 94.7% K-8 93.0% Safety and Respect …whether "all members of the school community feel physically and emotionally 96.2% Middle 92.5% secure, allowing everyone to focus on student learning." 92.2% High 86.4% Communications …whether the school provides "informa- tion about the school's educational goals and offers appropriate feedback on each 0 20 40 60 80 100 student's learning outcomes." Source: NYC DOE Progress Reports nyc survey scores (2010-11): charter DIfference vs. nyc DIstrIct schools27 School Type Academic Expectations Engagement Safety and Respect Communication Elementary 0.22 0.11 0.18 0.34 K-8 0.24 0.23 0.37 0.37 Middle 0.32 0.28 0.42 0.49 High 0.04 -0.25 0.28 0.15 NYC Average NYC Average NYC Average NYC Average Source: NYC DOE. Learning Environment Surveys The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 23 WHO ARE NYC CHARTER SCHOOLS' stuDents? 24 I new york cIty charter school center It's about great public schools Reaching and Teaching At-Risk Students One of the original purposes for New York State charter schools was to "increase learning opportunities for all students, with special emphasis on expanded learning experiences for students who are at-risk of academic failure. 29 The charter sector will always be judged against that mission, which requires a " two-part plan of action. First, charter schools must reach at-risk students. To allow students from low-Income families that to happen, at-risk students and their families must One at-risk group is students from low-income families, who first learn about the charter school; apply to the admissions are identified by their eligibility for Free or Reduced-Price lottery (by filling out a simple form); be selected in the lot- Lunch (FRPL). Compared to other public schools citywide, tery, or from a waiting list when a space becomes available; charter schools serve an equal share of FRPL-eligible decide to enroll; and decide to remain enrolled over time. students. Charter schools' share of students in the lowest- Charter schools can influence what happens at each of these income Free Lunch category, though, is smaller (65.2% of all stages by offering an appealing educational experience, students vs. 67.6%). actively recruiting students, and doing the labor-intensive Compared to the CSDs where they are located, however, only work of community outreach. (For many charter schools 32% of charter schools have an equal or higher percentage of and networks, proactively soliciting applications requires a FRPL-eligible students (20% for Free Lunch only). This sug- substantial investment of staff time and resources.) Depend- gests that, while charter schools serve low-income students ing on the student group, a charter school may also receive in low-income neighborhoods, most have not attracted an permission to employ a lottery preference for students economically representative sample of local families. considered at-risk, e.g., students receiving special educa- tion services, though by law the selection of students always remains random. A number of charter schools have recently nyc enrollment of stuDents elIGIble for free or reDuceD-prIce lunch, 2010-1130 implemented such preferences, which are likely to become a Free Lunch Reduced more commonly used tool in the coming years. 65.2% Price 10.4% Charter Schools FRPL 75.6% Charter schools' second and crucial task is to actually teach at-risk students—to "expand" their "learning experiences," Free Lunch Reduced 67.6% Price 7.4% as the law says—and thereby keep risk from becoming reality. District Schools FRPL 75.0% Charter school students' academic results were described in the last section. This section describes the students they 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 100% enroll, including patterns of movement in and out of at-risk Source: NYS Report Cards31 categories. enrollment of stuDents elIGIble for free or reDuceD-prIce lunch, nyc charter schools, 2010-1132 Compared to the local CSD: At or Above Mean for District At or Below 10th Percentile Among Schools in Same CSD District Schools in Same CSD 32% of Charter Schools 18% of Charter Schools Source: NYS Report Cards, Charter Center analysis The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 25 students with special education needs nyc enrollment of stuDents wIth Ieps, 2010-1134 Students with physical, emotional, and/or cognitive disabilities Charter 12.9% are at significant risk for academic failure.33 These students Schools may enroll at any public charter school through the lottery pro- cess, and a growing number of charter schools place a special District 14.4% emphasis on serving them. Schools Similar to district schools, however, a given charter school may 0% 10% 20% not offer every special education service that may be listed on Source: NYC DOE, Charter Center analysis a student's Individualized Education Program (IEP), but charter schools also have the flexibility to work out alternative arrange- ments to meet students' special needs—often by inclusion in a mainstream classroom with extra supports. enrollment of stuDents wIth Ieps, nyc charter schools, 2010-1135 Compared to district schools in NYC, charter schools enroll Compared to the local CSD: a lower percentage of students with IEPs—both citywide and At or Below 10th Percentile Among At or Above Mean for District compared to the CSDs where they are located. This pattern Schools in Same CSD District Schools in Same CSD varies by grade level: charter schools that first enroll students in Kindergarten have a smaller share of students with IEPs than district schools, but charter middle and high schools have 28% of Charter Schools 23% a larger share (see p. 27). This is consistent with the idea that of Charter Schools charter schools may be more effective at preventing referrals to special education, but a more detailed study would be required Source: NYC DOE, Charter Center analysis to test that hypothesis. Among such students, charter school students also tend to spend a lower percentage of the school day receiving special education services. This is consistent with the fact that charter intensive special services collectively, across charter school schools offer fewer self-contained classes for students with networks for example, but the legality of this approach is not special needs. Many charter schools operate at small scale, clear and charter advocates' legislative efforts to make it easier which presents a serious logistical obstacle when consider- to accomplish have not gained support. ing how to offer self-contained classes. Out of several hundred spots, a charter school lottery may select only a few students NYC DOE also tracks which students with IEPs have moved who require a self-contained classroom, and those students toward less time receiving services. While this is not the ap- might be spread across different grade levels. The logistical dif- propriate educational decision in every case, movement toward ficulty is exacerbated by the lack of facility funding, at least for more-inclusive settings can be a sign of student progress and those charter schools in private space. an indication that the school is oriented toward supporting the progress of all students. What is the proper response to this situation? Some students with IEPs that require a self-contained classroom can be served Charter schools are more likely to have students who have better in more inclusive settings. For others, creating a self- moved toward spending less time receiving special education contained classroom when even a single student requires it services over the last four years, either due to progress made would be financially prohibitive, but allowing lack of scale to at the charter school or after re-evaluation of an incoming become an excuse—and simply referring such students back student's needs. In fact, charter school students in special edu- to the district—is not consistent with the charter school vision. cation average nearly one full move across NYC DOE's service Charter school leaders have been exploring options to provide classifications over a four-year comparison period. 26 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools nyc enrollment of stuDents wIth Ieps by school GraDes serveD, 2010-1136 Charter Schools District Schools Does nyc over-identify students 20% with special needs, under-serve 18.1% 16.4% them, or both? 14.6% 14.4% 14.7% 15% 13.0% Special education needs are identified by the schools 12.7% 11.5% 10.9% 11.6% themselves through the NYC DOE's Committees on Spe- 10% cial Education, with input from teachers and with parent permission. As a practical matter such identification can 5% move a challenging student to a separate classroom or even a different school. Given this arrangement, it is fair 0% to ask whether Individualized Education Program (IEP) K-3 Elementary K-8 Middle High rates reflect students' underlying needs, or may be dis- Source: NYC DOE, Charter Center analysis torted by other factors. In fact, ample evidence suggests that certain students— particularly African-American males from low-income families—are disproportionately identified for special averaGe moves towarD less restrIctIve education, and in more restrictive settings. This may envIronments (nyc stuDents wIth Ieps, last four be due to many factors such as systematic shortfalls in years), 2010-1137 classroom management or differentiated instruction, or Charter Schools District Schools cultural differences. Among students in special educa- tion, a higher percentage receives services at least 60% 1.0 0.97 of the day in New York State, than any other state except 0.8 one. Only Hawaii has a higher percentage.38 In New York City, consecutive Schools Chancellors have 0.6 led an ongoing reform effort aimed to promote inclusive 0.4 0.37 and flexible educational strategies and reduce the num- ber of recommendations for more restrictive settings. 0.2 Recently, the city's selective middle and high schools have been explicitly instructed to enroll greater numbers of 0.0 qualified students with special education needs. Based on classifications of time spent receiving special education services: None Despite nascent reforms, the use of service rates as a (General Education), <20%, 20-60%, >60%. Moves toward more restrictive settings proxy for actual disability places educators in a difficult not available, so net movement not available. position, setting up a perverse incentive to place students Source: NYC DOE Progress Reports in inappropriately restrictive settings. For charter school educators, this danger will only heighten as charter school authorizers implement the enrollment and retention tar- get-setting process now required by state law (p. 29). At the same time, there exists a perception that some charter schools have discouraged applications from parents of students with special needs. While there is little documented evidence of this, the perception itself has the potential to depress the number of such parents who apply. Charter school leaders and their authorizers recognize charter schools' obligation to actively welcome all stu- dents and prevent ethical or legal violations. There is also increasing interest in using the charter model to create schools that are devoted to serving those children most at-risk, including special needs students. The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 27 english language learners nyc enrollment of enGlIsh lanGuaGe learners, 2010-1143 Students identified as English Language Learners (ELLs)39 Charter Schools District Schools comprise another group of largely at-risk learners, though one that is extremely diverse. As the National Governors Associa- 20% tion notes, "ELLs are a heterogeneous group with differences in ethnic background, first language, socioeconomic status, 15.0% 15% quality of prior schooling, and levels of English language proficiency."40 NYC charter schools enroll ELLs at lower rates than district 10% schools, both citywide and in the CSDs where they are located. The geographic patterns of immigration and housing within 5.8% 5% individual CSDs do not explain away these differences. As the word "Learner" suggests, ELL status is not meant 0% to be forever: all ELLs should eventually leave the category, which occurs when the student scores Proficient in both Source: NYS Report Cards components (Reading and Writing, and Speaking and Listen- ing) of the New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test (NYSESLAT). Yet, among citywide public nyc enGlIsh lanGuaGe learners achIevInG profIcIency schools, progress in turning ELLs into non-ELL students is on nyseslat, 2010-1144 woefully scarce. By one study, more than one third of NYC Charter Schools District Schools students classified as ELLs by age six are still ELLs by the time they finish seventh grade.41 60% Recent cohort comparisons are not available, but a comparison 50.8% of proficiency (i.e. passing) rates on the NYSESLAT suggests 50% 44.2% that charter schools are more successful on average in moving students out of ELL status. More careful study would be re- 40% quired to determine whether ELLs in charter schools have any meaningful differences from the citywide ELL population. 30% 26.0% enrollment of enGlIsh lanGuaGe learners, nyc 21.1% 20% charter schools, 2010-1142 Compared to the local CSD: At or Above Mean for District At or Below 10th Percentile Among Schools in Same CSD District Schools in Same CSD 10% 4% of Charter Schools 28% 0% Reading and Speaking and of Charter Schools Writing Listening Source: NYS Report Cards Source: NYS Report Cards, Charter Center analysis 28 I new york cIty charter school center It's about great public schools race and ethnicity nyc charter anD DIstrIct school enrollment by race/ ethnIcIty, 2010-1145 Although they are not a pedagogical category, Black and Hispanic* students are often described as being statistically Charter Schools at-risk for academic failure. NYC charter schools enroll more than twice the share of Black students as the overall district school system, and a lower share of every other category of Hispanic race/ethnicity including Hispanic. There is no evidence that 30.9% charter schools' racial and ethnic enrollment patterns are Black caused by discrimination, let alone a desire to "segregate" 61.9% Asian 1.8% Black students. There are other explanations, including charter White schools' concentration in Black neighborhoods and the fact 3.0% that Black families show more interest in charter schools than American Indian other groups—a phenomenon that is not evident in every state, 0.2% Multi-Racial and deserves more study. 2.1% District Schools One study also suggests another factor: enrollment trends that self-perpetuate. Hoxby, Murarka, and Kang (2009) find that students who enroll in charter schools, then voluntarily transfer to a district school, are more likely to be White or Asian Hispanic 15.8% Asian. The researchers speculate that parents' desire to 40.4% avoid racial isolation may explain this correlation. White *This is the term used in city and state education data. 14.8% Black 28.6% nyc enrollment of black nyc enrollment of American Indian stuDents, 2010-11 hIspanIc stuDents, 2010-11 0.5% Compared to the local CSD: Compared to the local CSD: At or Above Mean for District At or Above Mean for District Source: NYS Report Cards, Charter Center analysis Schools in Same CSD Schools in Same CSD 93% of Charter Schools 14% of Charter Schools Do charter and district schools serve "comparable" populations? At or Below 10th Percentile Among At or Below 10th Percentile Among When the New York State Charter Schools Act was revised District Schools in Same CSD District Schools in Same CSD in 2010, a new provision was added to strongly encourage charter schools to be more demographically similar to 2% of Charter Schools 40% of Charter Schools their local districts or CSDs. By law, charter school authorizers must set enrollment and retention "targets" for each charter school, in each of three categories: low-income (FRPl-eligible), special Source: NYS Report Cards, Charter Center analysis education students, and English language learners. Failure to meet the targets can result in school closure (via charter non-renewal). The first set of targets will be released later this year. The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 29 school would have 107. (Since that is a net change, many more than seven students may have come and/or gone in can charter schools value the meantime.) Charter high school cohorts also tend to diversity, too? decrease, by nearly seven percent year-to-year, but district Many families and educators value public schools that are high school losses amount to 16% (a rate strongly influenced racially and economically diverse. If diversity is important, by dropout). it can seem odd to compare enrollments of minority or low-income students—as if charters should strive for Data on NYC schools' student transfers out (attrition) and in 100% enrollment of each group. To be clear, this report ("backfill") provide some richer detail about enrollment for implies no such thing. the 2010-11 school year (between October and May), and for Diversity also creates a political catch-22 for charter tested grades only. Notably, charter schools have lower rates schools. If charter schools locate in largely Black and of transfer in both directions, suggesting a higher level of in- Hispanic neighborhoods, they are accused of segregation; year stability in the student population. when they locate in middle-class neighborhoods, the charge is that they are "creaming" easier-to-serve students. There is no enrollment change information available about the summer period, when many transfers occur. A central difference between district schools and charter schools is that many charters have the option not to backfill student mobility when a student transfers out, rather leaving that seat empty A full view of the charter school sector, and its academic re- (and foregoing that portion of per-pupil funding). Although sults, also requires a sense of how students enter and leave many charter schools do backfill, this is a key point of con- charter schools over time. For example, if charter schools trast: it is not that charter schools lose more students—it is lose struggling students each year and do not replace them, possible that they lose fewer—but that they do not consis- achievement results in the upper grades will be affected by tently replace them. this pattern. Although data about student mobility is woefully NYC charter school leaders have mixed opinions about backfill limited, it is possible to glean some general patterns from the enrollment. By one view, charter schools should embrace available information. backfill in order to serve a community mission and be exem- First, state data sources can be used to show how charter plars for the larger school system. Since all students, even schools' individual cohorts change in size from one year to the next—for example, from the fall of the cohort's third-grade year to the fall of their fourth-grade year. Although these nyc year-to-year net enrollment chanGe by GraDe calculations only show net changes in cohort size, without iso- ranGe, fall 2010 to fall 201146 lating patterns of student transfer in and out of the cohort, they Charter Schools District Schools can still test for the "shrinking class" phenomenon. 5% 3.2% Overall, the average cohort sizes of returning grades 1.0% 0.6% 0.5% shrink at a lower rate at NYC charter schools than at dis- 0% trict schools. It is more useful, however, to compare cohort -1.1% -0.3% change at different grade ranges. For elementary and K-8 -3.7% -5% schools, the differences between charter and district schools -5.9% -6.7% are negligible. -10% Charter middle schools tend to see their cohort sizes de- crease by about six percent, year to year, while district middle -15% schools grow by more than three percent. At that rate, a -16.0% charter school with 100 students at the start of sixth grade -20% would open eighth grade with only 89 students; a district Total Elementary K-8 Middle High School School Source: NYS Report Cards, Charter Center analysis 30 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools newcomers to the district, must enroll somewhere, charter In-year stuDent attrItIon anD backfIll at nyc schools should not be out of the question when they have charter anD DIstrIct schools, GraDes 3-8 only, space available. 2010-1148 Charter Schools Attrition District Schools Attrition By another view, backfill—especially in older grades—of Charter Schools Backfill District Schools Backfill large numbers of students undermines a promise to families: 10% to take students with large academic deficits, establish an 9.1% 8.5% extraordinary culture and work ethic, and put those same 8.1% 7.8% 8% 7.3% students on track for academic success. By this reason- ing, a charter school that makes such a promise should be 6.2% 6.3% 6% expected to assimilate older students only if they would be 4.8% academically similar to their new classmates—or could be 4% placed at a more appropriate grade level. 3.6% 2.6% 2.4%2.2% From an observer's standpoint, charter schools' differences 2% in student mobility could color their academic results in two possible ways. To the extent that enrollment change is 0% selective, with low performers leaving, charter schools' aver- Elementary K-8 Middle age test scores would be skewed in a positive direction. The Source: NYS Report Cards, Charter Center analysis one longitudinal study that has tested this found no signifi- cant achievement difference between students who leave NYC charter schools for district schools, and students who remain.47 Common sense suggests that struggling students may be more likely to leave, but there are also nonacademic what does grade retention have to do causes of attrition. Depending on the charter school and its with student mobility? grade range, students may even leave for positive academic The wildcard at play in charter school student mobility reasons, such as entry into a selective middle or high school. debates is grade-level retention, i.e. students being held back for academic reasons. In 2009-2010 about 4.7% of Enrollment patterns also may have an impact through what charter students were retained in grade, according to researchers call "peer effects," or the impact of being sur- state data that, unfortunately, does not include district rounded by one group of classmates rather than another. If schools.49 charter schools' mobility patterns select for better students, Grade-retained students are not part of student attrition, there may also be positive peer effects at work. Yet even if a distinction some analysts have overlooked. (It is be- students who remain at charter schools are not better aca- cause of grade retention that we cannot measure student demically, charter school critics point out that they may still mobility by the size of test-taking cohorts each year, for be a better "fit" to the particular charter school's culture and example.) Still, deciding to hold a student back may affect expectations. For many charter school leaders, this latter mobility patterns. In the best case, a successful reten- tion can put a student on track to graduate rather than kind of "peer effect" is not an unfair advantage—it's an ad- dropout. Sometimes, though, students who would have vantage that more schools should offer. By this logic, schools been retained in-grade will instead elect to transfer to should be full of students who share a common culture of the school district, which typically has a less demanding learning, provided that the culture is not defined in an exclu- promotion standard. sive fashion. Indeed, in a city full of public school choice, a student who leaves one school to find a better fit at another should be considered a success story. Whatever its possible interpretations, data about student mo- bility in NYC are incomplete for charter and district schools alike. The more detailed information that can be collected and made public, the better educators and observers will be able to test their theories about this critical facet of life in a district or charter school. The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 31 WHAT IS THE outlook FOR THE FUTURE OF NYC CHARTER SCHOOLS? 32 I new york cIty charter school center It's about great public schools Room to Grow Building Uncertainty The NYC charter sector is on a path to In New York State, charter schools receive a continued growth, as existing schools expand per-pupil share of each dollar the local school and new schools open their doors. district spends on school operations.When it Most NYC charter schools (68%) are still "building out" by comes to school facilities, however, charter adding grade levels each year. Across NYC, existing charter schools have no reliable source of public funding. schools have 24,000 authorized seats still to add. Thus, while the sector is now 13 years old, many of its schools are still Since every school needs a building, charter schools around teaching new grades for the very first time. By fall 2017, it is the state make mortgage or rent payments by diverting op- expected that charter schools will enroll 10% of all NYC public erating funds, raising private donations, or both. In New York school students.50 Given past demand, there is every reason to City, there is sometimes another option. NYC DOE houses a expect that parents will seek to enroll their children in these majority of the city's charter schools in district buildings, new and growing schools. typically in shared space with one or more other public schools. (Such "co-location" is common across the school State law limits the number of charter schools allowable in system. In fact, a vast majority of co-locations are one dis- NYC. Under that cap, 116 new charter schools are still allow- trict school with another, with no charter school involved.) able, 31 of which have already been chartered to open in future Reflecting the view that all public school students are equally years. As new charter schools open, others may be closed for worthy of access to public school space, NYC DOE does not poor academic performance or mismanagement. charge an occupancy fee to charter schools (just as it does not charge its own schools). Charter schools must pay use fees, however, when they operate with longer school days current anD projecteD enrollment: nyc charter and/or school years in DOE facilities. schools operatInG In 2011-12 only Built Out Enrollment 2011–12 Enrollment Charter schools' access to district space is in accordance with an important principle: charter schools are public schools, 8,000 serving public school students, and therefore worthy of public 7,000 resources. 6,000 The principle is not fully reflected in law, however, so charter 5,000 school co-locations only exist at the discretion of the NYC Schools Chancellor and, in some instances, by approval by the 4,000 Panel for Education Policy. Co-located charter schools do not 3,000 even have lease agreements to rely on. 2,000 The use of NYC DOE buildings has been, and continues to 1,000 be, a tremendous boon to the NYC charter school sector, 0 including charter school students and their families. Without K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 free space, the charter sector's present size and growth rate Source: NYS Report Cards, Charter Center analysis would have been unthinkable. Many of the city's success- ful charter schools would not exist in such a scenario, with reduced educational options in many disadvantaged neigh- borhoods as a result. Despite the opportunities provided for by co-location, it is still only a finite opportunity with inherent challenges. Whether or not a charter school is involved, multiple schools sharing a single building is an exercise in communication and compro- mise. The process to seek co-location creates an enormous The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 33 nyc co-locateD facIlItIes by school type(s), 2010-11 None of these disadvantages changes the great importance of NYC DOE space to a charter school. Unfortunately, not all Charter charter schools have access to DOE space, which creates a with District serious resource gap between schools in public and private School 16% space. To the extent that the debate over NYC school facilities is about equity, the lack of facilities support available to all charter schools should be recognized as fundamentally unfair. District Schools To date, advocates who have historically fought to equalize Together funding between districts in New York State have not advocated 84% for such equity between charter and district schools. Source: NYC DOE, NYC School Construction Authority, Charter Center analysis are crowded facilities a charter nyc charter schools by facIlIty type(s), 2011-12 school phenomenon? No. Critics sometimes point to New York City charter DOE & schools co-locating in district buildings as a driving cause Non-DOE/Private 4% for school overcrowding across the city, but an analysis of building utilization rates from the City's "Blue Books" (2009-10 and 2010-11) does not support that theory. On average, co-located schools are less crowded than single- school buildings. Co-located buildings with charter Non- schools are less crowded than those without, on aver- DOE/Private age (76% vs. 85%). Even within co-located buildings that DOE 37% contain charter schools, there tends to be less crowding 58% on the district school side. These differences are wider than the Blue Book margin of error estimated by the Office of the NYC Comptroller (7.22%). School crowding and charter school co-location are both important, but they are separate issues. Source: Charter Center analysis NYC SCHOOl BUIlDING UTIlIzATION RATES, 2009-1051 Single-school Co-located Co-located buildings buildings buildings with time and resource burden, and its outcome can be uncertain. charter school Once co-located, the lack of control over an NYC DOE building Average may limit charter school autonomy. New co-locations require utilization 103.7% 84.7% 75.7% regular attention and communication. Ultimately, of course, most co-located schools work through any conflicts with pro- Buildings 991 389 63 fessionalism, and some even find opportunities to collaborate. Source: NYC Independent Budget Office, Charter Center analysis, both based on NYC DOE building utilization data In addition, when a charter school does secure space in an NYC DOE facility, it is not always a lasting solution—even if the school could act as if it had a lease agreement—because many growing charter schools are sited in "incubation" spaces that will not house all the grade levels the schools will ultimately serve. In the coming years, an increasing number of charter schools currently housed in DOE buildings will experience this squeeze, leading them to seek additional DOE space or find resources to secure a non-DOE or private facility. 34 I new york cIty charter school center It's about great public schools Staff Changes nyc teacher turnover rate53 Charter Schools District Schools While charter school student achievement in 35% 33% NYC is high, there are myriad factors that, over 31% 30% 30% time, can affect whether it will be sustainable 27% 26% and even improved upon. One of the less-stud- 25% ied aspects of the sector is charter schools' ability to attract, develop and retain effective 20% 16% 16% school teachers and leaders. 15% 14% 13% 13% Citywide data about charter school educators' professional skills and development are unfortunately scarce, but the New 10% York State BEDS Survey of all public schools provides inter- esting insight into teacher and principal turnover—although 0% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 even here the numbers are imprecise. The BEDS data do not capture why teachers left their positions or where they went, Source: NYS Report Cards. Includes turnover due to promotion. so there is no way to tell how many departing teachers left voluntarily vs. involuntarily; how many moved to other charter schools; or even how many left the classroom because they nyc annual prIncIpal turnover rate (conservatIve were promoted within the same charter school or network. estImate), 2006-201154 Even considering these limitations, the trends are striking: 20% 26%-33% of charter school teachers leave their positions 18.7% annually, while teacher turnover at district schools is in the 13-16% range. 15% The data on principal turnover are also notable; the BEDS Survey does not report this directly, but it is possible to arrive 10% at a conservative estimate by tabulating changes in the "prin- cipal name" field. (Since the Survey is administered once per year, this method of analysis would not capture when a school 5% 3.6% changes school leaders more than once in a year.) Based on data for school years 2005-06 through 2010-11, the average 0% year-to-year turnover among principals was at least 18.7% for Charter Schools District Schools the charter sector, compared to at least 3.6% across district Source: NYS Report Cards, Charter Center analysis schools. Charter schools' teacher turnover rates may be related to their use of younger and less experienced teachers, who would be more likely to change jobs in any context. In the 2010-11 school year, BEDS data indicate that 29% of charter teachers had no more than three years of teaching experi- ence, compared to five percent of district teachers.52 Both The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 35 teacher and principal turnover rates may also be influenced by the demanding nature of any school in "start-up mode"— A Movement in Motion as most charter schools are for years as they recruit stu- dents, hire staff, and otherwise build a school from scratch. If the New York City charter school sector is in a state of change, its outlook continues to To be clear, high staff retention is not an end itself, nor a sign of an effective school. Some schools consistently produce low be profoundly promising and exciting. Charter levels of academic achievement, despite high staff retention. schools have shown their ability to make a (It was precisely that pattern that led to such strong support positive difference in academic achievement, for charter schools from legislators, educators and parents in the first place.) There are also instances of "turnover" that attracting families and trying out new ideas can be a net help to a school, as when an under-performing along the way.With many schools chartered to staffer is dismissed, or a successful teacher takes a leader- add new grade levels, and with room to grow ship position as a charter school or charter network grows. under the statewide charter limit, NYC charter Nevertheless, NYC charter school leaders are paying close attention to turnover. It is financially and educationally costly schools are poised to become an even more to lose teachers, especially before they reach their prime established part of the city's choice-infused years of effectiveness.55 Losing a school leader may be even system of public schools. As that happens, they more costly, especially for young charter schools still facing the numerous challenges of starting up and building out. More- will only gain momentum as a force to improve over, as the sector scales, increased stability in personnel education and raise academic achievement. will become more important. Finding ways to grow capable Data from public sources highlight several difficult chal- leaders and keep teachers longer, including through the lenges that the charter sector faces. Strengthening academic phase of life when many decide to start families, are goals achievement, especially in the high school grades and in many charter schools and networks see as critical to sus- reading and writing, is still job number one. Attracting and taining their success, and building on it, even as they grow. retaining effective educators is another challenge, and there is a critical need to maintain access to public facility space. Also, while differences in enrollment have arisen for many reasons, the task falls to the charter sector to serve more students with disabilities, more English Language Learners, and even more students from low-income families. Doing so would provide expanded opportunity to those students and ensure that charter schools remain relevant to the larger school system. Making progress in these areas is eminently possible, and individual charter schools and networks are already hard at work. 36 I NEW YORK CITY charter school CENTER It's about great public schools To further this last goal, the sector is also acting collectively, with support from the New York City Charter School Center: • The sector supported, and will soon be responding to, a new system of targets for the enrollment and retention of special student populations—set by reference to the sur- rounding district schools. • A new NYC Special Education Collaborative now connects 125 charter schools and networks for professional develop- ment and practice sharing. • A common online charter school application is in place, with translations into multiple languages, to help more families apply to charter schools with ease. Over 100 NYC charter schools are participating in this project, and at the time of this publication they had received over 21,000 applications. • Work has begun under New York City's District-Charter Collaboration Compact, which promotes sharing and col- laboration across different types of public schools. The NYC charter sector has brought new resources, attention and energy to public education. It has provided choice to par- ents who previously had little or none, which is why parents are flocking to enroll their children in these schools. Overall, it has improved academic achievement, and become a national model for how much charter schools can accomplish. It has done this through the hard work and dedication of its lead- ers, teachers, staff, parents, students and board members, who collectively created new school communities that enrich our city's system of public schools with their success. We owe them, as we owe all those who are dedicated to improving pub- lic schools, our deepest thanks and our strongest support in the years to come. Get the latest For updates, or to download this report, visit: www.nycCharterSchools.org/Data the state of the new york cIty charter school sector I 37 note on comparison methods Hoxby, C. M., Murarka, S., and Kang, J. (2009). How New York City's Charter 12 Schools Affect Achievement, August 2009 Report. Cambridge, MA: New York City This report includes comparisons of charter schools and district schools. Such Charter Schools Evaluation Project. p. VI-1. Web. 27 March 2012. http://www.nber. comparisons reflect the weightings and exclusions described below. Overview org/~schools/charterschoolseval/how_NYC_charter_schools_affect_achieve- figures that do not show comparisons do not reflect weightings or exclusions. ment_sept2009.pdf Weightings 13 Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO). (2010). Charter School Figures that collectively describe "charter schools" / "charter sector" or "district Performance in New York City, Palo Alto: CA. Web. 27 March 2012. http://credo. schools" are weighted averages of the results for all charter schools in the indicated stanford.edu/reports/NYC%202009%20_CREDO.pdf grade(s) and school year(s), with the exclusions noted below. Specific weightings are described in the notes below. In general, results are weighted by student enrollment, 14 This report does not focus on performance at individual charter schools or net- from the same grade level(s) if possible, and from the same data source if possible. works, but other controlled studies have. See, for example: Exclusions Dobie, Will & Roland G. Fryer, Jr. "Are High-Quality Schools Enough to Increase Charter sector figures exclude two schools: the New York Center for Autism Char- Achievement Among the Poor? Evidence from the Harlem Children's Zone." Amer- ter School (an ungraded school serving students with autism) and John V. Lindsay ican Economic Journal: Applied Economics. 3.3 (2011): 158-87. Web. 20 Feb. 2012. Wildcat Academy (a "transfer high school" for students who have dropped out or Tuttle, Christina C., Bing-ru Teh, Ira Nichols-Barrer, Brian P. Gill, and Philip are at serious risk of doing so). District school figures exclude special education Gleason. "Student Characteristics and Achievement in 22 KIPP Middle Schools." schools in District 75, all transfer high schools, and all other alternative schools Mathematica Policy Research Inc. June 2010. and programs in District 79. Teh, Bing-ru Teh, Moira McCullough, and Brian P. Gill, "Student Achievement in New York City Middle Schools Affiliated with Achievement First and Uncommon endnotes Schools." Mathematica Policy Research Inc. July 2010. 1 Harlem is defined as CSD 4, 5; Central Brooklyn 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 32; 15 Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO). (2009). Multiple Choice: South Bronx 7, 8, 9. Charter School Performance in 16 States, Palo Alto: CA. Web. 23 March 2012. 2 There are also no more than six charters available for charter schools with for- http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/MULTIPLE_CHOICE_CREDO.pdf profit management partners, statewide, which remain from a previous version of 16 Raymond, Margaret. "L.A. Could Learn a Lot About Charter Schools from the Big the law. These charters may or may not go to charter schools with such arrange- Apple." Los Angeles Times. 1 Feb. 2010, n. pag. Web. 20 Feb. 2012. http://articles. ments in New York City. latimes.com/2010/feb/01/opinion/la-oe-raymond1-2010feb01 3 2012 enrollments are projected. Some 2000-2002 grade levels are estimated. All 17 Source: NYSED 3-8 Grade State Test Results, with charter and district school ag- enrollments exclude ungraded students. gregates weighted based on the number of test takers. CSDs 20, 24, 25, 26 did not 4 Lottery applicants are the estimated unique applicants to the charter sector in have charter schools during the 2010-11 school year. Spring 2011; this is not an estimate of total applications. 18 Performance levels are labeled with their informal, conventional names ("Ad- 5 For neighborhood definitions, see Note 1. vanced" through "Below Basic"). Officially, the levels are Exceeds Proficiency Stan- dard (Level 4), Meets Proficiency Standard (Level 3), Meets Basic Standard (Level 2), 6 As Commissioner John B. King, Jr. has written of a charter school he co-founded and Below Standard (Level 1). "Proficiency" generally refers to Level 3 + Level 4. in Boston, "[S]election bias (as a result of requiring parental applications) must be Charter and district school aggregates are weighted based on the number of test acknowledged as a factor in Roxbury Prep's impressive results…" although other takers. factors mitigate against that bias. "Thus, important lessons can be learned from Roxbury Prep's experience even if one assumes that some portion of the school's 19 Charter and district school aggregates are weighted based on the number of test success can be traced to student inputs." King Jr., John B. "Fulfilling the Hope of takers. Brown V. Board of Education Through Charter Schools." The Emancipatory Promise 20 Subgroup performance data are from NYS Report Cards. Charter and district of Charter Schools: Toward a Progressive Politics of School Choice. Eds. Eric Rofes school aggregates are weighted based on the number of test takers. Students and Lisa M. Stulberg. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2004. 64. Print. are considered low income if their family participates in economic assistance for 7 Analysis is based on combined proficiency rates in Math and English Language one of the following: free or reduced-price lunch (family income below 185% of Arts, on 2010-11 NYS exams. Significance is at p<0.05. federal poverty line), social security insurance, food stamps, foster care, refugee assistance, earned income tax credit, home energy assistance program, safety 8 Charter Center survey and analysis net assistance, Bureau of Indian Affairs, or temporary assistance for needy 9 New York State Education Department. (2011) New York State Charter School families. Subgroup test result aggregates are affected by NYSED data suppres- Uniform Application Form. Web. 27 March 2012. http://www.p12.nysed.gov/psc/ sion rules designed to protect student confidentiality at the school level. https:// documents/CSUniformAppFormNov2011.pdf reportcards.nysed.gov/ 10 Selected sources for "Ideas at Work": 21 Incoming proficiency level is an average of grade 4 ELA and Math exams for all Harlem Children's Zone. (2008). A Look Inside. Web. 20 Feb. 2012. http://www.hcz. students currently enrolled at the school. Proficiency level gain is the difference org/images/stories/pdfs/ali_college_success_office.pdf between incoming proficiency and 2010-11 averaged ELA and Math proficiency. Charter and district school aggregates are weighted based on individual school Otterman, Sharon. "Ed Schools' Pedagogical Puzzle." New York Times 21 July sample sizes for the indicated measure as provided by NYC DOE. 2011, n. pag. Web. 20 Feb. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/education/ edlife/edl-24teacher-t.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all 22 A scaled score of 65 or higher is considered a passing Regents score. The district school comparison group includes all non-charter, non-transfer NYC high Anderson, Jenny. "Bronx Charter Makes Eating Well Part of Its Philosophy." schools, weighted for number of test takers. New York Times 10 May 2011. Web. 20 Feb. 2012. http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes. com/2011/05/10/bronx-charter-makes-eating-well-part-of-its-philosophy/ 23 Eighth-grade students receive high school credit for passing both a Regents exam and the course aimed at preparing the student for the exam. Charter and district "Autism Now: Demand for Educational Resources for Children Outstrips Sup- school aggregates are weighted based on individual school sample sizes for the ply." PBS Newshour. PBS. 2011. Web. 27 March 2012. http://video.pbs.org/ 8th grade high school credit Progress Report measure as provided by NYC DOE. video/1891154014 24 Logue, Alexandra W. Evaluating the Impact of College Remediation at Commu- "Lunch Calendar and Recipes." Family Life Academy Charter School. n.p., n.d. nity Colleges and Other Postsecondary Institutions. Testimony Before the New Web. 20 Feb. 2012. http://www.flacsnyc.com/special-programs/wellness/lunch- York City Council Committee on Higher Education. 24 Oct. 2011. Web. 27 March calendar-recipies/index.aspx 2012. http://www1.cuny.edu/mu/academic-news/files/2011/11/Testimony_ Tough, Paul. "What if the Secret to Success Is Failure?" New York Times Magazine. AWL_10_24_111.pdf 14 Sept. 2011: n. page. Web. 20 Feb. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/ 25 The four-year graduation rate is the percentage of students in the four-year 2010 magazine/what-if-the-secret-to-success-is-failure.html?pagewanted=1&_ graduating cohort who graduate with a Regents or Local Diploma, including r=2&sq=kipp&st=cse&scp=3 August graduates. The four-year cohort includes all students who first entered 11 Betts, Julian R. & Richard C. Atkinson. "Better research needed on the impact of high school in the 2007-2008 school year. These are unofficial graduation rates. charter schools." Science. 335.6065 (2012): 171-172. Print. Official graduation rates for 2010-11 have yet to be released by NYSED. The col- lege enrollment rate measures the percentage of students in the four year 2010 38 U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. "Table 2-2. graduating cohort who graduate and enroll in a degree program at a two- or Number of students ages 6 through 21 served under IDEA, Part B, by educa- four-year college or university by December 31 of their graduation year. The col- tional environment and state: Fall 2010" https://www.ideadata.org/arc_toc12. lege readiness index is included in the NYC DOE annual Progress Reports. This asp#partbLRE metric measures the percentage of students in the 2011 cohort (all students who 39 Students are classified as English Language Learners at intake based on Home entered high school four years earlier) who graduated and met the standards for Language Survey and LAB-R test results. passing out of remedial coursework at the City University of New York (CUNY), by August 2011. The standards are: (1) graduating with a Regents diploma; and 40 "Application of Common Core Standards For English Language Learners." (2) (a) earning a 75 or higher on the English Regents or (b) scoring 480 or higher Common Core State Standards Initiative. Web. 27 March 2012. http://www.cores- on the Critical Reading SAT; and (3) (a) earning an 80 or higher on one Math tandards.org/assets/application-for-english-learners.pdf Regents and completing coursework in Algebra II/Trigonometry or a higher-level 41 Success Charter Network. (2011) The Parking Lot of Broken Dreams: How English Math subject, or (b) scoring 480 or higher on the Math SAT. Charter and district Language Learner programs in NYC Hurt Children. Web. 27 March 2012. http:// school aggregates are weighted based on individual school sample sizes for the www.successacademies.org/uploaded//SCN_NYSESLAT_Report_March_2011.pdf indicated Progress Report measures as provided by NYC DOE. 42 School data are based on registered students as of BEDS day, 2010, and the ELL 26 Each year students must pass a certain number of remaining Regents exams status of those students as updated by schools up through January, 2011. to stay on track for graduation. The "Regents completion rate" metric gives the percentage of those Regents passed by students in grade 10 grade or higher. 43 School data are based on registered students as of BEDS day, 2010, and the Charter and district school aggregates are weighted based on individual school ELL status of those students as updated by schools up through January, 2011. sample sizes for the remaining Regents completion Progress Report measure as Charter and district school aggregates are weighted based on BEDS day overall provided by NYC DOE. enrollment. 27 Learning environment survey scores are based on responses of parents, middle 44 Charter and district school aggregates are weighted based on number of test takers. and high-school students, and teachers on a school survey included in the NYC 45 School data are based on registered students as of BEDS day, 2010. Charter and DOE annual Progress Reports. These scores are recorded in four categories: district school aggregates are weighted based on BEDS day overall enrollment. academic expectations, engagement, safety and respect, and communication. Charter and district school aggregates are weighted based on total October 31, 46 Net enrollment change is the percent change in the number of students within 2010 enrollment. Schools with K-12 grade configurations are classified with K-8 expected returning cohorts of students from year to year. Data are from the fall of schools, and schools with 6-12 grade configurations are classified with middle 2010 to the fall of 2011 from NYS Report Cards. schools. 47 Hoxby, Murarka, and Kang (2009). See Note 12. 28 The "attendance rate" is the average daily attendance rate for the 2010-11 school 48 Backfill measures the percentage of students entering a school between October year. Charter and district school aggregates are weighted based on total October and spring state test administration, in terms of October enrollment. Data are for 31, 2010 enrollment. Schools' grade configurations are based on progress report the 2010-11 school year, from the difference between test time total enrollment classifications, with K-2 and K-3 early childhood schools combined into one and continuous enrollments reported by NYSED for NCLB accountability pur- category. poses. Attrition measures the percentage of students leaving the school between 29 See NYS Ed. Law, Article 56 §2850 2. October and spring state test administration. Data are for the 2010-11 school year, from the difference between NYSED BEDS day enrollment and test time 30 Students with a family income below 130% of the federal poverty threshold continuous enrollments reported by NYSED for NCLB accountability purposes on qualify for free lunch. Students with a family income between 130% and 185% of NYS Report Cards. the federal poverty threshold qualify for reduced-price lunch. Counts are based on registered students as of the first Wednesday in October, 2010, and the lunch 49 NYS Education Department, Fall 2010 BEDS Survey Data, by request from NYSED. form status of those students updated by schools up through January, 2011. 50 Projections are based on historical patterns of size and growth in the NYC charter Charter and district school aggregates are weighted based on overall enrollment sector. on the first Wednesday in October ("BEDS day"). By common practice, students at charter or district schools participating in the Universal School Meals program, 51 See NYC Independent Budget Office, NYC Public School Indicators (2011), an NYC DOE program that allows schools with high FRPL eligibility to give all adapted from p. 23, Table 3.19. Note that "Number of buildings" is incorrectly students free lunch, are counted based on their personal eligibility, and are not labeled "Number of schools" in Table 3.19. Values include District 75 schools, per automatically assumed to be free lunch eligible. IBO methodology. 31 NYSED data reflect school lunch forms reported in October, as well as updates 52 Source: NYS Report Cards submitted through January, 2011. Later in the year, school or NYC DOE totals may 53 The teacher attrition rate is the percent of teachers who leave the school from be higher, especially for charter schools. The new enrollment and retention targets one year to the next. The district school comparison group includes all non-charter for FRPL eligible students in charter schools will be calculated based on NYSED NYC teachers. The 2011 rate is for the percent of teachers leaving between the data. 2009-10 school year and the 2010-11 school year. The 2010 rate is for the percent 32 School data based on registered students as of BEDS day, and the lunch form of teachers leaving between the 2008-09 school year and the 2009-10 school year. status of those students updated by schools up through January, 2011. The 2009 rate is for the percent of teachers leaving between the 2007-08 school year and the 2008-09 school year. The 2008 rate is for the percent of teachers 33 Students in one of 13 disability categories may have special education needs. Not leaving between the 2006-07 school year and the 2007-08 school year. The 2007 all disabled students require special education. rate is for the percent of teachers leaving between the 2005-06 school year and 34 Charter school data are based on October 31, 2010 registered students with the 2006-07 school year. Charter and district aggregates are weighted by number biographic information updated at the end of the school year. District school data of teachers. are based on October 31, 2010 registered students. Charter and district school 54 Principal turnover measures how often schools changed leaders between 2006 aggregates are weighted based on total October 31, 2010 enrollment. and 2011. The metric is calculated by taking one less than the number of leaders 35 Charter school data are based on October 31, 2010 registered students with a school had between 2006 and 2011, and dividing it by one less than number of biographic information updated at the end of the school year. District school data years the school was in existence between 2006 and 2011. This gives the percent- are based on October 31, 2010 registered students. age of school years in which a school had a new school leader on BEDS day. 36 Charter school data are based on October 31, 2010 registered students with 55 For example, see Stuit, D. A. and Thomas M. Smith. (2009). Teacher Turnover in biographic information updated at the end of the school year. District school data Charter Schools. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University. Web. 27 March 2012. http:// are based on October 31, 2010 registered students. Charter and district school www.vanderbilt.edu/schoolchoice/documents/briefs/brief_stuit_smith_ncspe.pdf aggregates are weighted based on total October 31, 2010 enrollment. Schools Also see discussion in Brill, Steven. Class Warfare: Inside the Fight to Fix America's with K-12 grade configurations are classified with K-8 schools, and schools with Schools. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2011. Print. 6-12 grade configurations are classified with middle schools. 37 Charter and district school aggregates are weighted based on individual school sample sizes for the LRE Progress Report measure as provided by NYC DOE. The sTaTe of The New York CiTY CharTer sChool seCTor I 39 111 Broadway, Suite 604 New York, NY 10006 212.437.8300 www.nycCharterSchools.org Read Our Blog: http://www.nyccharterschools.org/blog Like us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/NYCCharterCenter Follow us on Twitter: twitter.com/Charter411
Pages to are hidden for
"state-of-the-sector-2012"Please download to view full document