Introduction“The report of my death has been greatly exaggerated,” quipped Mark Twain in response to a newspaper reporter’s 1896 inquiry about a rumor that Twain was either dead or on his deathbed. So it may be said of alternative education in the United States. By 1975 the alternative education movement, born of the humanistic “counterculture” revolution of the 1960’s, was deemed to have met with the same dismal fate as had its stimulus. Unable to harmonize humanistic innovations with important educational goals, pressured by a threatened educational establishment, and eroded by inconsistent and insufficient funds, support for alternative schools diminished (Deal, 1975). Yet, though battered and bruised through their first decade, and conscious of the possibility for their misuse, alternative schools remained a promising laboratory for testing and evaluating bold strategies of educational reform (Barr, 1981).
Today, alternative education, including the charter school movement, holds a valuable position within the wider construct of school choice. In an increasingly pluralistic America, where nearly one million students drop out each year, schools are faced with immense pressure to cope with ever increasing diversity. It is no longer enough that schools serve as a proving ground for academic excellence. The society they once served well no longer exists. Startling, revolutionary technical advances have sufficiently diminished the demand for unskilled/moderately-skilled workers, leaving those who drop out, as well as those American businesses that must absorb the costs of sufficiently educating and training them, at an increasingly difficult disadvantage (
Mottaz, 2002).
Increasingly citing an ossification of lumberingly bureaucratic, centralized school districts, built upon what
Foster and Kaplan have termed an “invisible architecture” (2003), resistant to any fundamental change that threatens the status quo, calls are becoming louder for a complete restructuring of American public education. These provocative suggestions demand dramatic shifts in the power structures within public education, including appealing to the open-sector with teacher dominated professional partnerships and teacher owned schools. Charter schools provide a unique opportunity for interested parties, including students, parents, teachers, and community leaders, to have a more relevant voice and greater autonomy in developing and operating effective public schools, while increasing accountability for student and fiscal performance (
Dirkswager, 2002;
Newell & Buchen, 2004).
Charter Schools Defined
A charter school is a public, nonsectarian, tuition free school of choice. Its students take state tests required of other (non-charter) public school children. Charter schools may not discriminate in admissions, programs, or activities. A charter school is not any particular teaching or learning model. More properly, a charter school is an “empty” administrative structure into which creative, entrepreneurial people put some kind of different, more effective learning program. Charter school law frees such schools from many of the regulatory and procedural constraints of school districts. In return for this freedom charter schools are held to higher standards of accountability for student success. A charter school that does not perform may be closed by its sponsor.
A charter is a contract between the school and its sponsor, or authorizing agent. With the exception of the City of Milwaukee, the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee Area Technical College, and the Milwaukee School Board, each of which is allowed to authorize charter schools located within the Milwaukee School District, and the University of Wisconsin-Parkside, which may authorize one charter school, Wisconsin state law allows only local school boards to authorize charter schools. There is no limit on the number of charter schools a school board may authorize. Each charter school may serve not only those students residing within the local district, but may also attract students from other districts via Wisconsin’s open enrollment legislation. The terms of the charter may not exceed five years and the charter is renewable. Charter school teachers must be licensed by the
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
Opportunities for Social EntrepreneurshipWisconsin charter school law, §118.40(7)(a), distinguishes between charter schools that operate as instrumentalities of their local school board and those that do not (non-instrumentality). Most charter schools operate as instrumentalities of, and legally remain part of and subject to, the policies and budgetary considerations of the authorizing school district. The authorizing school board employs the charter school personnel. The option of operating a charter school that is not an instrumentality of a school district and is instead that of another entity provides exciting opportunities for entrepreneurial teachers and socially minded agencies.
School boards may authorize a charter school and then contract, either directly or via an agency of which the charter school would be an instrumentality, with a Teacher Professional Partnership (TPP). A TPP is a cooperative of teacher-owners “working together in an interdependent, collaborative way to maximize their professional roles” (
Dirkswager, 2002). It is a business entity, the bottom line of which is student learning and success. Teacher ownership recognizes the professional status and expertise of teachers and gives them the same latitude to practice their trade as can other professionals, including lawyers, doctors, and accountants. The non-instrumentality arrangement disentangles the teachers from district policy and the protections and restrictions of the bargaining agreement. Such an arrangement encourages talented teachers to implement diverse, creative, and innovative teaching strategies to affect student outcomes, and rewards the charter school with continued existence only when success is demonstrated.
ConclusionFar from come-and-gone, alternative education remains a vibrant and vital component of American public education. As Mark Twain refused to be counted out before his time, so has alternative education. Recognizing its potential to function as a breeding ground for innovative practice, the charter school movement continues to inform strategies of best practice in the education of diverse groups of students. Wisconsin charter school legislation provides an exciting forum for interested social entrepreneurs to improve the American system of public education for its millions of diverse students.
