Charter Schools have had a significant impact on our nation’s educational system, but whether they have produced positive changes or created more complex problems remains open for debate. Barbara Burnell, professor of economics at The College of Wooster, has studied charter schools since their inception, and she shares her perspective on how they have affected education in the United States.

Q. What are charter schools and how do they differ from public schools?

A. Charter schools are public schools that are exempt from many of the state’s regulations. They are financed by local and state dollars, which accompany a student who chooses to go to a charter school. Most states will deduct the average cost of education for a student in the district from the district budget.

Q. How did charter schools come about?

A. The first charter school law was passed in 1991, and now 40 states have such laws. There are approximately 2,700 charter schools in the U.S. today, serving 684,000 students. In Ohio, there are 130 schools serving 29,000 students. There are wide variations in state laws with respect to the autonomy provided charter schools and the impact they may have on the traditional public system. State laws are ranked by a pro-choice organization (The Center for Education Reform) with respect to the ease of creating new schools. Ohio receives a grade of "B"; Massachusetts receives an "A" grade for its charter schools.

Q. How have charter schools been affected by "The No Child Left Behind Act"?

A. Passed by the Bush Administration in 2001, "The No Child Left Behind Act" is intended to provide an equal educational opportunity to all American children. Under the law, schools are required to make "adequate" yearly progress, and those that do not are penalized. The law places a great deal of emphasis on school choice and on testing. The expansion of school voucher programs and the creation of new charter schools are encouraged by the law. States claim that the law is under-funded in the amount of $8 billion. They argue that money is needed for the required testing, and to facilitate transfers for students that want to change schools.

Q. What factors have influenced the formation of charter school laws across states?

A. Charter school laws have very different histories across the country, and public reaction to them also varies considerably. Laws are different across the nation with respect to their freedom from state regulations and their accountability. Ohio’s community school system lists 16 pages of state rules that charter schools do not have to follow. Most are minor, but significant ones affect curriculum and teacher contracts. Massachusetts charter schools, despite the fact that they receive a higher grade than Ohio, have a fairly stringent procedure, involving review, visits, and annual reports that must be followed. The passage of charter school laws is as much influenced by politics as economics. My research indicates that both political and economic factors matter and that "strong" laws are more likely when public perceptions of public school quality are poor. The institutional structure of the legislature and the board of education affects outcome.

Q. What impact do charter schools have on student performance in public schools?

A. The opposing arguments are that charters will improve public education by forcing competition, versus the idea that charters will reduce the quality of education by causing good students and funding to leave the district. More specifically, proponents argue that charters afford better opportunities for low-income students and those with special abilities. The argument is that students with choices will have greater motivation and that a better matching of schools and students, as well as competition, will improve public schools. Traditional schools will be forced to "clean up their act" to compete for students and adopt the innovative programs found in charter schools. Opponents argue that the opportunity to attend charters is not equally available to all low-income students; that there is a significant adverse financial impact on school districts; and that free entry and exit, prices, and the concept of market competition is not applicable to the provision of public education.

Q. What has your research on charter schools revealed?

A. My formal analysis for school districts in the state of Massachusetts finds that increases in the performance of charter school students on standardized tests results in minor improvements in the performance of traditional public school students. It also finds that the money school districts lose to charter schools has a significant negative impact on their students’ performance. Using data on Massachusetts’s school districts and charter schools within them, these findings hold even after controlling for the socioeconomic and racial composition of charter schools and school districts. More anecdotal evidence for Ohio is that community schools are located primarily in the "Big 8" city school districts. Dayton has seen the biggest growth. All of the Big 8 districts are in a state of academic emergency or academic watch, as measured by the number of standards they have met according to school report cards; Dayton has met none of the standards. The vast majority of the charter schools in these areas face the same situation. There are increasing questions about the accountability of Ohio charter schools, in terms of not providing accurate data to the state and collecting state and local funds for students that were not attending the schools. So far, the improvement in education that charter schools provide hasn’t happened.

Q. What does the future hold for charter schools?

A. The charter school movement is still young, so more data needs to be accumulated. The evidence on the effectiveness of charter schools is mixed, but much of it is influenced by political ideologies about the desirability of competition. The loss of funds is becoming a central issue in Ohio, where many districts are cutting teachers and programs, partly as a result of funding they lose to charter schools. This adverse financial impact is important given the small proportion of students that can attend charter schools. The most important question is whether it makes sense to use a competitive market model as the basis for education reform. Education is not the same as other goods traded in competitive markets. It provides benefits for all society, and is a deeply held value in the U.S.