Education Reform: Getting District and Charter Schools to Work Together

By Christopher Kent Chiang

Chris Chiang proposes allowing whole school districts, if they voluntarily choose, to convert their entire district into a charter district, with the full authority to retain and pursue parcel taxes and school bonds. Districts would receive funding in the form of a general purpose grants, so they, rather than Sacramento, would be able to decide how to use their funds best. These proposed charter districts would continue under their existing locally negotiated teacher agreements.

Chris Chiang proposes allowing whole school districts, if they voluntarily choose, to convert their entire district into a charter district, with the full authority to retain and pursue parcel taxes and school bonds. Districts would receive funding in the form of a general purpose grants, so they, rather than Sacramento, would be able to decide how to use their funds best. These proposed charter districts would continue under their existing locally negotiated teacher agreements.

The goal isn't to have charters compete with district schools or for district schools to escape from locally bargained agreements with their teachers, but to give district schools the same means to innovate as they had pre-Prop 13. You have no choice but to take initiative when you are making all your own decisions. We can't turn back funding overnight, but we can give back to our schools and principals the freedom to redesign their schools for the 21st century.

As with all charters, these proposed charter districts must academically perform and complete financial audits to keep their freedom. They must abide by all laws that protect students with disabilities. If the charter district fails to perform, it will be reverted back to a traditional district. This bold reform will direct dollars away from bureaucracy and into the classroom.

The focus of the state must be to improve district schools. Six million students attend district schools compared to the less than half a million attend charter schools. Logistically charters are not able to replace the majority of district schools. Rather, we need to focus on creating an environment where charter school innovations can transfer over to district schools.

The legislature has been too passive in guiding charter schools towards collaboration with district schools. Prop 39 gave the legislature the power to define how school property needs to be shared between district and charter schools. The state's lack of leadership has allowed Prop 39 to become a growing source of contention between charters and districts.

Accepting that charters should be a testing ground for new ideas rather than replacements for district schools means we should expect a high rate of failure. If we want innovation from charter schools, we must also expect many will fail. Those that do should be shut down quickly, but risk is necessary for new ideas. Those that succeed, their practices should be quickly shared with district schools. Seeing charters as a tool for district reform brings needed clarity to state policy.