A proposal to allow the private sector to establish, own and run the so called ‘Charter Schools’ has prompted some protest calls fearing that it would pave the way of privatisation of the education sector.
ACT MP John Banks revealed last fortnight that the proposal, which formed a part of the Party’s Confidence and Supply Agreement with National would be established in Christchurch and South Auckland over the next three years.
Mr Banks would be Associate Minister of Education outside the Cabinet in the incoming Government, the formation of which has been delayed pending a similar agreement with the Maori Party.
A Government notification said that iwi, Pasifika groups, private companies, community organisations and not-for-profit organisations would be allowed to run schools and be eligible for government funding.
American experience
The belief is that Charter Schools will lift educational achievement in low-deciles areas and disadvantaged communities, where education underperformance has become the norm.
While the merits or otherwise of the concept and the relevance of Charter Schools to New Zealand are yet to be discussed, the Government announced that it was encouraged by the success of the system in the US.
But according to a recent study in the US, Charter Schools have not delivered the level of quality education intended. It said only 17% of the Charter Schools were superior to public schools, 37% were worse than public schools and 46% had academic gains similar to public schools.
Studies in Sweden and other countries in Europe showed similar results.
But experts believe that the rise of Charter Schools in the US has brought dynamism as these institutions are aimed at the poorest parts of the society, where aspirations are often low.
Shared ambitions
Allowing new providers may attract people who are interested in education and have a talent for organisation, but no taste for bureaucracy.
The US experience has revealed that both profit and not-for-profit innovations can work. Diversity of supply in schools concentrates minds on what kind of teaching is best, particularly in challenging places.
It also offers the freedom to set working conditions outside the restraints of local authorities and the teachers’ unions, giving heads more capacity to tailor schools to the needs of their particular pupils.
In America’s Aspire Charter schools, which have done best in the rankings, teachers follow strict guidelines to chart each pupil’s progress.
Aspire’s motto is “College for Certain”; higher education is made the ambition of teachers and pupils alike.
The Government and education providers in Britain, are studying these results closely since the country has slipped down the PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) rankings of OECD in the past few years.
Officials said that the lessons of PISA 2009 were “greater autonomy for schools; sharper accountability; raising the prestige of the profession and having greater control over discipline.”
In pursuit of a more diverse supply of schools, the British Government is expanding the number of independent academies to replace comprehensives run by local authority, and allowing Free Schools, run by parents, charities and local groups.
According to the Economist, introducing new types of schools, however, is no guarantee of better outcomes.
Sweden, admired for its independent, non-selective, state-funded Free Schools, has had a sticky period in international rankings.
Its drive to open new kinds of schools is not yet matched by rigorous inspections to help weaker schools target their failings, the publication said.
“Sceptics of America’s fairly new experiment of this kind, privately funded Charter schools, think that politicians are “too invested” in them to close them if they fail. Authorisation and renewal processes for innovative schools need to be robust, so that bad experiments are not prolonged and failures are not ignored,” it said.
While the debate on the desirability of Charter Schools would continue for some time, it is a proven fact in most OECD countries that schools free of government control and run by non-state providers are adding quality to the mix.
To date, they seem most successful where the state has been unwilling or unable to make a difference. It is still not clear whether creating archipelagos of Free Schools and charter schools will consistently drive improvement in other institutions, or whether that is wishful thinking.
Readers may respond to editor@indiannewslink.co.nz
