It is worth noting that another version called Charter Schools is not directly related to the legislatively authorized Charter Schools described in this brief. These are local charter schools-within-schools. At local levels throughout the country, education reformers have launched schools-within-schools that predate the legislatively authorized independent Charter Schools.
For example, since 1989, charter schools-within-schools fever has swept through the old high schools of Philadelphia. In just four years, 95 charter schools-within-schools have been opened in the city's 22 comprehensive high schools.
"We were here first," notes Michelle Fine, a professor at City University of New York's Graduate Center. She served as the designing consultant for the Philadelphia Collaborative, which assists in charter formation. "We were using the language of Charter Schools before state legislation was passed in Minnesota or California."
"Many of Philadelphia's schools-within-schools are not options. Students are assigned to them." Joe Nathan
Joe Nathan, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for School Change at the University of Minnesota and an expert on choice, makes a distinction: Choice is central to the concept of Charter Schools in California, Minnesota, and other states where they are authorized by the legislature. However, this concept represents a big difference from Philadelphia's charter schools-within- schools. "Many of Philadelphia's schools-within-schools are not options. Students are assigned to them," says Nathan.
The Philadelphia charter movement began with a reform mandate from Superintendent Constance Clayton. Fine borrowed the Charter School terminology from American Federation of Teachers President Albert Shanker, who used the term in a 1988 National Press Club speech calling for a new kind of public school in which teachers make curriculum decisions, team-teach, and have a greater role in school management.
Shanker urged a move to "charter schools" that would concentrate on professional development, cooperative learning, and teacher-as-coach, and that would exhibit a strong commitment to producing improved student outcomes.
Philadelphia charter schools-within-schools break the large, comprehensive urban high schools into manageable learning families of 200 to 400 students. Students work with the same 8 to 12 teachers over a four-year period. According to the Philadelphia Public Schools Student Information office, as of July 1993 approximately 65 percent of all high school students and 1,500 teachers are learning and teaching in these charter schools- within-schools.
Some of the Philadelphia charter schools-within-schools are connected to the Coalition of Essential Schools, which tries to simplify the number of course offerings, but teaches the courses in greater depth. Some schools work with corporations and businesses to study themes such as international relations and tourism. Some are linked to local universities. Some focus on the school's relationship with its community, and students conduct community surveys, ethnic analysis, and multicultural studies. Others focus on marketing, horticulture, writing, arts, or science.
Teachers work with regular and special education students and multiple academic levels together. The teacher team has common preparation time - unusual in most schools. All of the charter schools-within-schools use interdisciplinary teaching and learning strategies.
"Most of the Charter Schools get their teachers involved in professional development around outcome-based assessment," says Fine. "They decide exactly what they want their graduates to know and then work in those areas. Charter teachers are experimenting with much more collaborative work and performance-based assessment than before the charters arrived."
The Philadelphia charter schools-within-schools are created and planned by teachers, but the Minnesota Charter Schools are no longer so restricted as to their sponsors. Both strive for innovation and a student- centered learning experience.
However, Philadelphia charter schools-within-schools are not independent legal entities. Teachers do not sign a formal agreement based on their plans, nor are the Philadelphia charter schools-within-schools limited by time or held more accountable for student outcomes than other public schools. Philadelphia's charter schools- within-schools also are not bound by a renewable performance-based contract, so there is no mechanism for revoking the charter when it is not living up to anticipated results.
In Philadelphia, local charter schools-within-schools remain part of the central system and must contend with central administrative regulations, work rules, and power struggles. "The bureaucracy is the big problem in all these large cities," observes Fine.
The Philadelphia charter schools-within-schools know from the data they have assembled that their approach is starting to work. More students come to class and more students pass their subjects in the charter environment than before. A district study showed that the 20,898 students in the smaller charter units attended class more frequently and gained better grades than their 18,905 fellow students attending traditional comprehensive high schools. Charter students had a daily attendance rate of 79.3 percent versus the 73.5 percent for other comprehensive high school students. Approximately 71 percent of the charter students passed their English classes, compared to approximately 62 percent of noncharter comprehensive high school students. In mathematics, 65 percent of charter students gained passing grades, versus 60 percent of noncharter comprehensive high school students. Both kinds of charter schools clearly offer important lessons for school reformers and policymakers.
Posted on March 6, 1995
URL: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/go/93-2LOCL.HTM