The charter school movement has been the most prominent and controversial education reform in the United States in the last twenty years. Similarly, rapidly shifting demographics in the United States have been the source of much research and attention. The convergence of these two trends is under-represented in scholarly literature. Given the dramatic growth in charter schools, authorizers and diverse populations in the past two decades, more research is needed to understand what conditions are associated with the most effective authorizer practices and how authorizers differentiate their practices for at-risk populations. There is also need to update the authorizing literature in general and, particularly, to examine multicultural authorizing
…show more content…
Their three guiding principles state that authorizers should: (1) maintain high standards for all charter schools, (2) uphold school autonomy so that charters may uniquely help students achieve excellence, and (3) protect student rights and public interests. However, these standards continue to be refined as the body of research grows and changes. More research is needed to understand which authorizing practices are most effective, especially with regard to at-risk student populations, and what external and internal conditions support quality authorizing.
Charter school accountability differs from conventional public schools in two general ways: First, a charter school can be closed if it fails to meet the criteria of its charter or performance contract. Second, a charter school can be closed if it fails to maintain internal or external accountability, or both. This topic has not been extensively researched.
This study begins to fill that gap by examining the role that charter school authorizers might play to ensure that at-risk students have equitable access to charter schools and that those schools provide diverse students with high-quality, research-based programs that build on their assets and …show more content…
Authorizers may operate with some discretion, but ultimately, they must function within the bounds set by the state statutes. In Utah, the two overarching measurements for charter school accountability are performance and compliance. Once a charter school has reached turnaround status if it does not raise its school grade, the authorizer’s decision-making ability is seriously restricted.
This study will examine author decision-making on renewal, non-renewal and revocation of school charters. Most importantly, charter school performance and accountability will be explored, as well as authorizer decision-making, through a multicultural lens.
Lazarin & Ortiz-Licon (2010) point out that as English Language Learners disproportionately attend chronically failing schools, the limited capacity of these schools might inhibit them from making the requirements of the mandate. Authorizers do not typically have the levers to build the capacities of low-performing schools. Mandates set minimum standards. If elements of capacity are not built, it is not likely that schools that serve diverse or at-risk students will be able to rise above the bar of compliance and consequently, they would be closed.
I plan to accomplish the objectives of this study by addressing the following research
Their three guiding principles state that authorizers should: (1) maintain high standards for all charter schools, (2) uphold school autonomy so that charters may uniquely help students achieve excellence, and (3) protect student rights and public interests. However, these standards continue to be refined as the body of research grows and changes. More research is needed to understand which authorizing practices are most effective, especially with regard to at-risk student populations, and what external and internal conditions support quality authorizing.
Charter school accountability differs from conventional public schools in two general ways: First, a charter school can be closed if it fails to meet the criteria of its charter or performance contract. Second, a charter school can be closed if it fails to maintain internal or external accountability, or both. This topic has not been extensively researched.
This study begins to fill that gap by examining the role that charter school authorizers might play to ensure that at-risk students have equitable access to charter schools and that those schools provide diverse students with high-quality, research-based programs that build on their assets and …show more content…
Authorizers may operate with some discretion, but ultimately, they must function within the bounds set by the state statutes. In Utah, the two overarching measurements for charter school accountability are performance and compliance. Once a charter school has reached turnaround status if it does not raise its school grade, the authorizer’s decision-making ability is seriously restricted.
This study will examine author decision-making on renewal, non-renewal and revocation of school charters. Most importantly, charter school performance and accountability will be explored, as well as authorizer decision-making, through a multicultural lens.
Lazarin & Ortiz-Licon (2010) point out that as English Language Learners disproportionately attend chronically failing schools, the limited capacity of these schools might inhibit them from making the requirements of the mandate. Authorizers do not typically have the levers to build the capacities of low-performing schools. Mandates set minimum standards. If elements of capacity are not built, it is not likely that schools that serve diverse or at-risk students will be able to rise above the bar of compliance and consequently, they would be closed.
I plan to accomplish the objectives of this study by addressing the following research