Sentences with phrase «authorizers doing»

What are the nation's best charter school authorizers doing differently to achieve great outcomes within their communities?

This is not to say that authorizers don't have a role to play in creating stronger standards for alternative - school accountability — only that the state is responsible for creating the framework.

Some authorizers do great work (e.g. the District of Columbia's Public Charter School Board, the Massachusetts Department of Education and the State University of New York) but too many others display mixed motives, are influenced by perverse incentives, and lack judgment, courage, or expertise.

In the meantime, there is obviously much work ahead for NACSA, for disability advocates, and for leaders in the charter community to make sure that authorizers do their part in promoting special education transparency, equal access, and effectiveness.

However, three data points cause concern: in combination, they indicate that many of the responding authorizers do not 1) require special education outcomes as part of charter performance contracts; 2) see persistent failure to serve students with disabilities as a behavior that merits serious consequence; or 3) identify themselves as responsible for enforcing special education enrollment proportionality.

«If an authorizer does not step as has occurred in this case, then the state can step in,» says Redelman.

And most authorizers don't place as much value on the new and innovative teaching models, school culture, and community involvement, as they do on test scores.

In Michigan, DeVos» home state — the state with the most for - profit charter management organizations — education research has found that most charter authorizers did a poor job of monitoring quality in the schools.

What ought authorizers do to ensure that the charter schools they approve provide a quality education to students with disabilities who enroll in their school?

When authorizers do their job well, they create brighter futures for our nation's kids.

The second thing great authorizers do is build the capacity to charter schools, oversee and support their operations, and evaluate their performance in a top - quality manner.

In other words, these authorizers don't assume the risk of charter school failure.

That means that if something happens with the charter school, the authorizers don't have to clean up the mess.

To address both of these problems — providing a non-LEA option while ensuring that low - quality or under - resourced authorizers do not proliferate — NACSA recommends that states create independent chartering boards (ICBs): statewide, independent entities tasked with the sole purpose of authorizing charter schools.

Not exact matches

Technically, the authorizers in this case are the State University of New York trustees, who recognize the value of locking in renewals now and asked the Regents to OK them: Doing so will give the schools, Bronx Better Learning and eight Success Academy charters, certainty about their futures, particularly as they consider expansions.

Kim said the only appropriate oversight is that done by Success» authorizer, the SUNY Charter Schools Institute.

If the integrity of the chartering strategy is to be upheld, authorizers need to do a better job of closing schools that fail to deliver results for students.

Arizona, Colorado, and Utah also did not perform evaluations of authorizers, another part of NACSA's recommended policy framework.

The demographic and political characteristics of a state and character of the state law authorizing charter schools undoubtedly matter in some way for the fate of charter schools in a state, but most decisions about charter school formation and attendance are made within school districts — by founders who decide to start a new school, by authorizers who empower them to do so, and, ultimately, by parents who decide to enroll their students.

What difference do good authorizers make, and is authorizing getting better?

Behind the Headline Authorizers: See What Replacing Failing Charter Schools, Replicating Great Ones Can Do 3/19/13 Education Next

• Manage the actions of the dozen charter authorizers, the Detroit Public Schools, and the Educational Achievement Agency to make sure schools that don't meet a quality bar are closed and replaced with something better.

To be effective, these authorizers must want to be in the charter schooling business, need to have the resources and staff to do the work, and must be committed to the idea of charter school autonomy.

This places a heavy burden on authorizers to do careful due diligence before awarding charters and to perform ongoing reviews — without clamping down in classic bureaucratic fashion.

So if the charter board, local authorizer, and parents think a school is doing a good job even if test scores look «bad,» we should defer to them.

This points to the critical role of charter school authorizers and the tremendous work that Greg Richmond, head of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers (NACSA), has done in carrying the banner for more rigorous charter accountability (full disclosure: I sit on the NACSA board of authorizers and the tremendous work that Greg Richmond, head of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers (NACSA), has done in carrying the banner for more rigorous charter accountability (full disclosure: I sit on the NACSA board of Authorizers (NACSA), has done in carrying the banner for more rigorous charter accountability (full disclosure: I sit on the NACSA board of directors).

At the local level, few schools or authorizers are willing to do anything that might threaten their ability to attract and retain families.

Similarly, Osborne's swift critique of policies allowing multiple charter authorizers to operate in one area doesn't engage with the legitimate concern that a single - authorizer environment can constrain school supply, homogenize offerings, and concentrate too much power in one government body.

Authorizers, not SEA staff, would hold those schools accountable, and they would do it in a nuanced way — by crafting school - specific performance contracts with each.

NACSA, on the other hand, «has helped our nation's charter school authorizers improve how they do their jobs for over 15 years.»

They do great work to help charter authorizers significantly improve their practices.

The signers of the Counter-Manifesto are consistent with the sentiments of the Founders, the legislative authorizers of the Department of Education, and the American people in understanding that education standards, curriculum, and high - stakes assessments should not be done at the national level.

It is troubling that many authorizers still don't have high - quality practices in place for this work.

Continuing a long - term trend, authorizers are increasingly picky shoppers — they approve far fewer applications than they did back in the day.

Nor do they obviate an authorizer's responsibility to carefully evaluate every element of a charter application.

So do authorizers that derive their income via a formula keyed to student enrollments.»

If the school isn't financially sustainable, then do we really need the authorizer to shut it down?

But when it comes to expanding schools, if this research holds, I will rely less on positive test scores, and I think authorizers should do the same.

2) How many charter authorizers actually do a good job of judging school quality — how representative is the highly idealized, romantic fantasy Mike has provided here of the way charter authorizers typically work back here on Earth Prime?

From an authorizer perspective, so long as a school does not have significantly negative test scores, perhaps the school should be able to expand so long as there is parent demand.

It rightfully focuses on authorizers as the lynchpin of charter quality; they are, after all, the entities that screen and approve new charter schools and then hold them accountable for results (or — as is sometimes the case — do not).

Districts aren't really designed to give individual schools full autonomy, nor are they staffed to serve as authorizers, nor do most districts provide full school choice to their families.

RH: How do you think about the relationship with Greg Richmond and the National Association of Charter School Authorizers?

Even some charter school advocates say charter sponsors, or «authorizers,» aren't doing enough to oversee existing charters and weed out bad operators.

That said, authorizers have other avenues for ensuring representativeness of the community and responsiveness to the community's needs that do not infringe on charter autonomy.

Much has been done to make authorizing a rigorous undertaking — witness the work of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers.

Great authorizers are doing outstanding work; see the DCPCSB accountability approach.

It has an authorizer, DCPCSB, * that does not operate schools.

And what does it mean for Cincinnati, say, to be responsible for educating a child who is enrolled in the Ohio Virtual Academy or in a charter school operated by a New York firm and supervised by a Toledo - based authorizer?

NR: We currently don't have a formal relationship, and part of what I'm going to do over the next ninety days is to see if we can come up with informal ways of working more closely with groups like NACSA, especially since the discussion around quality is so focused on what authorizers are doing and how quickly they're shutting down poorly performing schools... Of course, it's very difficult to shut down a school that has a following, but I don't think our sector has done a very good job of explaining to families what a good, high quality school looks like and why it's so important to not tolerate poor performance.