Perhaps the most common question asked about charter districts is how to get there from here. How do traditionally organized school districts convert to charter district governance? Not surprisingly, the policy ideas in this area are closely aligned with the Education Commission of the States' report on school governance. The report detailed two models of school governance designed to leverage greater autonomy and performance. The first model was a purely site-based management style in which the district runs all the schools but they are independent and autonomous. The second model is a contracting model in which the school district contracts with various school operators to create a charter district. Several districts, notably Cincinnati and Seattle, are innovating substantially with the site-based approach, and many others are tentatively working toward that method, either by moving in a site-based direction or through increasing the number of charter schools and putting some schools under contract.
The charter district model has advantages for all school districts, not only those that are low-performing. One state, however, stands out for taking a bold approach to the charter district idea and the contracting model to try to turn around a chronically low-performing school district. In Pennsylvania the state has taken over a low-performing district and put all the operations of the schools out for bid, essentially creating a charter district. What is happening in Chester-Upland provides an interesting perspective on a district beginning this process and will provide important information about the benefits and challenges of this approach to school governance.
High poverty Chester-Upland, located near Philadelphia, has long been one of Pennsylvania's lowest-performing school districts and a frustration for educators in the state. An abysmal 68 percent of the district's 6,780 students are in the bottom group of students statewide in reading and math performance. Early in 2000, Pennsylvania passed a law allowing state takeover of chronically low-performing districts after three years of low performance on Pennsylvania's assessments. The law included a special provision allowing immediate action in Chester-Upland and Harrisburg.
In Chester-Upland, Pennsylvania officials are putting 11 of the district's 14 schools out to bid for outside management to take over. The three other schools were already independent public charter schools. The state solicited contractors and ultimately four different providers were certified to bid for the right to run schools in Chester-Upland. All four of the bidders were for-profit entities, although one, Edison Schools, partnered with the local teachers union to submit a joint proposal. The other competitors were LearnNow Inc., Mosaica Education Inc., and the SABIS Educational System.
The state established criteria for the districts, including intradistrict public school choice, school autonomy, high standards, and quality assessments. Potential school operators submitted proposals that outlined their educational philosophy and school management and design model, and they detailed how their proposal would improve education in Chester-Upland, submitting clear timetables and goals for improving student achievement.
In March contracts for the 11 schools were awarded. Edison Schools will take over six of the schools, LearnNow will manage four schools, including the district's high school, and Mosaica will run one elementary school.
This move certainly hasn't been without controversy. The takeover provisions were challenged in court by the state teachers unions, and the idea of bringing in for-profit companies to manage the schools sparked a predictable outcry. In addition, many officials in Chester-Upland opposed the state intervention.
Only time will tell whether the reforms in Upland and the new contract model will succeed in improving the quality of education for the students there. So while some districts move timidly toward the charter district model, the experience of Chester-Upland as it embarks on this dramatic reform deserves analysis so that the results will inform efforts to improve education around the country. The Chester-Upland model certainly isn't the only model for charter districts, but it is the most radical.
