Pennsylvania’s charter school law mandates that charters provide innovative educational options to increase the chance of student success. Today, however, there is scant talk about innovation and instead school choice proponents pitch charters as a “refuge” for struggling students who are trapped in “failing public schools.”
The problem with this claim is that charter schools have failed to deliver. Black, Hispanic and low-income students were expected to benefit most from charter schools, but according to new research from Children First’s PA Charter Performance Center, over half of all charter school students are failing in English and over three-quarters are failing math.
To make matters worse, charter schools are largely stuck in the same gear. English and math outcomes for Black students and low-income students showed no improvement in state assessments between 2015 and 2019 with only slight gains for Hispanic students.
These disappointing outcomes are part of the reason why we don’t see large numbers of students fleeing public school districts. The reality is that the number of students attending brick and mortar charter schools decreased by 2,380 (-2.2%) this year – the second straight year of decline – while school district enrollment was virtually unchanged (-0.02%).
To paraphrase Mark Twain’s famous quote, rumors that families are fleeing failing public schools are greatly exaggerated.
To be sure, Black, Hispanic and low-income students are also failing at too high a rate in traditional public schools and more needs to be done to ensure student success in both charter and district-run schools.
The root cause of the problem is that Pennsylvania’s school funding system does not meet the needs of students in general and especially fails students growing up in low-wealth communities. According to the state’s own calculations in its costing out study, state funding for K-12 schools is short by at least $4 billion. Pennsylvania ranks 43rd in the nation when it comes to the share of revenue that the state provides local school districts. This lack of resources holds students back.
Because charter school funding is calculated based on expenditures in their home school district, reforming K-12 funding in traditional public schools will directly affect charter school funding. In short, all public schools have a shared interest in addressing the funding gap.
Cyber charter school funding is even more wildly unacceptable with many of them opting to profit off reserves rather than invest in students. Pennsylvania cyber charter schools are currently sitting on a quarter of a billion dollars surplus. That’s money we could use to benefit students or return it to the taxpayers. We as legislators should set a statewide cyber charter tuition rate and cap unrestricted reserves at 10% of budgeted total expenditures. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Education, cyber charter schools’ surplus grew by 648% since 2019, while public school districts grew 41%.
In 2022, the cyber surplus per student was two and a half times the comparable school district surplus -- $4,407 per student enrolled in a cyber charter compared to $1,743 per student enrolled in a district-run school.
Pennsylvania should also take steps to improve quality by expanding high-quality charter schools and turning around or closing low performers. Since 2012, at least 23 states including Indiana, Ohio, and Texas have amended their laws to improve the quality of charter schools.
Finally, Pennsylvania should also adopt an accountability matrix to ensure that local school boards can base their decisions about renewing or closing charter schools on solid data, not general impressions. The matrix should cover academics, operations, governance, and fiscal factors accompanied by quality benchmarks based on comparable schools to give local authorizers the information they need to improve charter school quality.
State Reps. Mary Isaacson (District 175 / Philadelphia County) and Tarah Probst (District 189 - which includes parts of Pike and Montgomery counties)