The House Education and Labor Committee held a full committee hearing on H.R. 4330, the All Students Achieving through Reform Act of 2009. This bill would expand access to quality charter schools nationwide and may be included in the upcoming ESEA reauthorization. The event began with supportive remarks from committee chairman George Miller that were largely echoed by Republican members present. Bipartisanship reigned through most of the event, although a few Democrats expressed reservations at times.
While Promise Neighborhoods were not specifically referenced, charter schools are an important part of the Harlem Children’s Zone model. Promise Neighborhoods are also likely to be incorporated into ESEA reauthorization, of which this is part, and will probably be discussed more explicitly in upcoming hearings.
Chairman Miller opened the hearing with praise for high-performing charter schools that he said “are proving that the low-income and minority students can succeed when given the right tools, challenges and learning environments.” However, he noted that charters are not a “silver bullet” for fixing schools and that there are several programs that need to be shut down.
Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) voiced support from the Republican side, sharing how successful charter schools helped underserved students in his home state of Louisiana. Other committee members said there was a need to expand charter school programs, noting that there are currently 365,000 students nationwide on character school waiting lists, a population that could fill over 1,000 schools.
A few Democrats pushed back, however, including Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA), who cited a UCLA report (insert link) that we recently shared showing evidence of segregation in charter schools. Panelists explained that in some states, charters in “majority minority” communities are required to mirror the populations of their neighborhoods. Therefore, they did not consider the lack of integration a civil rights issue but rather compliance with state regulations intended to close achievement gaps. Proponents of this current system explained that forced racial integration of these schools would defeat their intended purpose of serving underprivileged communities. One panelist added that an influx of privileged students in successful inner-city charters could actually limit the ability of programs to serve their target populations.
Providing more details on their research and operations, panelists attributed the success of high-performing charter schools to the flexibility they have for innovation and reform. This was emphasized by Harlem Success Academies (unaffiliated with the HCZ) founder and CEO Eva Moskowitz:
[T]he federal government must protect the single greatest ingredient of success: autonomy. The whole concept of charters is that it is a compact between the state and the operator to deliver student achievement results in exchange for freedom.
However, when probed about systemic concerns and conclusions regarding charters, panelists explained that there is not enough data available to make any strong assessments. This is due to a lack of comprehensive research across the forty one states that each has unique charter school regulations.
On February 24, the House Education and Labor Committee held a full committee hearing on H.R. 4330, the All Students Achieving through Reform Act of 2009. This bill would expand access to quality charter schools nationwide and may be included in the upcoming ESEA reauthorization. The event began with supportive remarks from committee chairman George Miller that were largely echoed by Republican members present. Bipartisanship reigned through most of the event, although a few Democrats expressed reservations at times.
While Promise Neighborhoods were not specifically referenced, charter schools are an important part of the Harlem Children’s Zone model. Promise Neighborhoods are also likely to be incorporated into ESEA reauthorization, of which this is part, and will probably be discussed more explicitly in upcoming hearings.
Chairman Miller opened the hearing with praise for high-performing charter schools that he said “are proving that the low-income and minority students can succeed when given the right tools, challenges and learning environments.” However, he noted that charters are not a “silver bullet” for fixing schools and that there are several programs that need to be shut down.
Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) voiced support from the Republican side, sharing how successful charter schools helped underserved students in his home state of Louisiana. Other committee members said there was a need to expand charter school programs, noting that there are currently 365,000 students nationwide on character school waiting lists, a population that could fill over 1,000 schools.
A few Democrats pushed back, however, including Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA), who cited a UCLA report that we recently shared showing evidence of segregation in charter schools. Panelists explained that in some states, charters in “majority minority” communities are required to mirror the populations of their neighborhoods. Therefore, they did not consider the lack of integration a civil rights issue but rather compliance with state regulations intended to close achievement gaps. Proponents of this current system argued that forced racial integration of these schools would defeat their intended purpose of serving underprivileged communities. One panelist added that an influx of privileged students in successful inner-city charters could actually limit the ability of programs to serve their target populations.
Providing more details on their research and operations, panelists attributed the success of high-performing charter schools to the flexibility they have for innovation and reform. This was emphasized by Harlem Success Academies (unaffiliated with the HCZ) founder and CEO Eva Moskowitz:
[T]he federal government must protect the single greatest ingredient of success: autonomy. The whole concept of charters is that it is a compact between the state and the operator to deliver student achievement results in exchange for freedom.
However, when probed about systemic concerns and conclusions regarding charters, panelists explained that there is not enough data available to make any strong assessments. This is due to a lack of comprehensive research across the forty one states that each has unique charter school regulations.