Charter Schools - What's up with that?

Ok, so I'm going to put a little disclaimer here before we get started - this post (and indeed this entire blog) is written from my perspective and while I try to be as accurate as possible at all times, sometimes I make mistakes. The opinions I express here are my own, and are designed to give you, my lovely readers, an idea of what your average teacher thinks of the issue surrounding education. If I get something wrong I apologise in advance. So, here we go.

First off, let's get a couple things cleared up, and brace yourself because this will be a long post!

What is a charter school?
This is a bit tricky as they can vary depending on which country you're discussing. In New Zealand the first charter school has yet to open (2014 is the likely opening date for the first one), so what a charter school will be within the New Zealand context has yet to be seen, however we do know that the charter school model implemented in New Zealand will be called Partnership Schools or Kura Hourua.

From what we have seen overseas the most common definition of a charter school is that it is a school which can be set up by an "organisation" (e.g. company, religious group, celebrity) which receives funding from the government, but isn't as accountable to explain their spending as a normal school would be. Charter schools can also raise money from sponsors, but they cannot charge tuition fees. They can set their own curriculum and employ untrained teachers and set their own pay rates, hours and term dates.

Hmmm...all things considered, this doesn't sound amazing to me. Let's unpack this a little further.

So they receive public funding?
They sure do. Charter schools will receive a operations grant which is calculated per student. Charter Schools have a sponsor (typically a person or group of persons similar to a traditional Board of Trustees who has decision making powers in the school) who will be able to decide how this money is spent. Remember that charter schools can't charge tuition fees, but they are allowed to make profits (exactly how isn't very clear but I'm not very business minded) and they are allowed to raise money from sponsors.

And they aren't accountable for reporting expenditure?
Yes and no. Charter schools are not as accountable as a state or integrated school might be, however if they fail to meet agreed targets then they will be asked to explain where the money is going and why the expected results aren't coming through.

So there are targets that charter schools have to meet?
Yes, they have to report on how their students do against National Standards or NCEA (there will be a post on National Standards coming up soon so keep your eyes peeled!) and they set targets for achievement. They must be able to show achievement and evidence of student engagement. The ministry has been a little fuzzy on some of the details; like how they will measure engagement, or what will be used to measure students who have finished National Standards, which finish at the end of Year 8, but not yet started NCEA, which starts in Year 11. Personally, I'm also wondering how they will report against these standards which are supposed to be used in combination with the New Zealand Curriculum, when they aren't required to teach the New Zealand Curriculum.

Ok, so a charter school can set their own curriculum? So what?
Great question! New Zealand has a fantastic, flexible curriculum which is pretty widely regarded as being one of the best curricula in the world. At the moment we have a great range of assessment tools, unit plan exemplars and support for use by teachers who are teaching from the New Zealand Curriculum. These would potentially be useless for use by charter schools, which leaves it entirely up to the teachers or charter schools themselves to figure out their ENTIRE learning plan - lessons, assessment, moderation, professional development - everything. Also, what happens to a child who has spent the first few years of their schooling career in a charter school and then transitions to a state school? Or vice versa? This could potentially be a very tricky transition.

And they can employ untrained teachers?!
Yes. At the moment there is a provision for untrained teachers in schools, which is called Limited Authority to Teach (LAT for short). People who are being employed for a specific teaching position can apply for LAT through the New Zealand Teachers Council; the organisation which also handles the issuing of registration to trained teachers. LAT isn't a form of registration though, and is only issued for the duration of the job/contract the applicant is going to hold. Also, LAT may only be issued when a registered teacher has not been able to be secured for the role. In my personal experience there isn't a huge number of teachers who have LAT that your average child would encounter each day. They typically are hired due to holding a special skill or ability which a registered teacher has not been able to provide to the school; such as a particular musical ability or fluency in Te Reo or another language.

Now, according to the Ministry the untrained teachers would undergo registration once they are trained, however there has been little indication of how the training process would work - would they be given a new type of on-the-job training which currently doesn't exist for the teaching profession? Or would they have to study while also working at the charter school? And if so how would they complete their professional placements (where a trainee is placed in a school with an Associate Teacher to oversee them usually for a period of several weeks)? All in all there's a lack of information out there which is  one of the things worrying teachers and parents quite a bit. For charter schools one of the upsides of employing untrained teachers is that they can set their own pay rates for staff. For staff this means they may not be able to be covered by the teachers union in the same way a teacher in a state school is.

Are you sure teachers aren't just getting upset about this because they are worried about being out of job due to charter schools being able to employ someone to do their job for less money?
I can sort of understand this view; as a teacher I do want security for my position and wage. But, to be fair, I trained for years to get to the point I am at now, and I do consider myself to be a professional. The main issue which I think most teachers have with charter schools has to do with the integrity of our profession. We train and we put in the hard work because we want to do the best job we can for the children we teach. When I started training I was very keen and excited to teach - I wanted to do a great job but I also wasn't ready to have my own class. It took a full three years before I felt confident that I had the skills and pedagogical knowledge to be able to teach effectively. And that's a key point here too - teaching isn't just about getting through the day and spouting x amount of information per week; it's about being effective, and having the skills and knowledge to be able to select the right tools for each class and each child.

I really could go on about this for a long time but I'm fairly certain you, my wonderful reader, are sick of my ramblings by now. If you have any questions about charter school/partnership schools/kura hourua please post them in the comments and I'll do my best to answer. Thanks for reading!

The views expressed in this blog are entirely my own and do not reflect on anyone else mentioned in any way, shape or form.