CALIFORNIA

Phaedon Sinis & Kelly Roda

Legislative History
        California has a relatively long history of educational 
reform.  The most significant of the reform efforts before 
1992 was the Hughes-Hart Educational Reform Act of 1983, 
which raised standards for schools, lengthened the school day 
and year, changed the curriculum, attracted better teachers, 
changed the textbooks, and instituted various other reforms.  
(Possibly as a result, test scores rose, drop-out rates fell, 
and diversity in higher-level courses rose.)  More recently, 
voucher programs have been proposed, and one reason charter 
school legislation was supported by some incumbent 
educational interests was to neutralize the voucher movement.  
This may have worked;  in 1994,  California's state-wide 
referendum on vouchers was defeated by an unconventional 
coalition that included teacher unions (such as the National 
Education Association) and organizations like the Ludwig von 
Mises Institute, a market-oriented think tank in Alabama.  
        It was in this political environment that charter school 
legislation passed in 1992, although some incumbent interests 
such as the NEA were also opposed to this less sweeping 
reform.  Most opponents of the charter school bill are 
described by a Southwestern Regional Laboratory (SRL) report 
as incumbents of the educational system with an interest in 
maintaining the status quo.  In general, local teachersÕ 
unions were opposed to charter schools.  These unions viewed 
the absence of licensing requirements in charter schools as a 
threat to the high salaries of the licensed, unionized 
teachers in public schools.  Another reason for opposition to 
charter school legislation was the fear of a "creaming 
effect,Ó in which the charter schools attract and recruit the 
best students and teachers from public schools, leaving the 
public schools with difficult-to-educate students and 
mediocre teachers.  Other arguments against charter schools 
cited the outflow of dollars from public schools to charter 
schools, theoretically weakening public schools, and skeptics 
dismissed charter schools as unnecessary, alleging that they 
would not result in the needed reforms.
        The American Federation of Teachers, an influential 
union, initially supported charter schools in theory but 
opposed specific charter school legislation in California 
because it granted an exemption from regulations on teacher 
licensing to charter schools and thus ran against the 
interests of the union.
        The proponents of charter schools, led by state senator 
Gary Hart, the sponsor of the bill, cited numerous reasons 
for their support.  The proponents argued that charter 
schools would introduce competition and incentives for reform 
in the educational system; that they would introduce choice, 
variety, and innovation in public schools; that they would 
result in more individual, specialized education for more 
students; that they would liberate publicly-funded schools 
from state and local educational regulations; and that the 
innovations of charter schools could serve as models for 
existing public schools, thereby improving them.

Contents of the Bill
        California's Charter School Act of 1992, passed and 
signed in September 1992, allows the establishment of 100 
charter schools throughout the state with no more than ten in 
any district.  Any individual may develop a charter but must 
have the support of 10% of the teachers in one school 
district or 50% of the teachers in one school to submit the 
charter for approval.
        Within thirty days of receiving a petition for a charter 
school, the school board must hold a public hearing on the 
provisions of the proposed charter.   A public hearing helps 
indicate how much popular support there is for the charter 
school in question.  Within sixty days of receiving the 
petition, the school board must approve or reject the 
charter.  If the charter is rejected, the petitioner can 
appeal to the county superintendent.  The county 
superintendent must then create a review panel that consists 
of three teachers from other school districts in the county.  
The review board determines if the charter was fairly 
considered and if not, the charter is returned to the 
governing board for reconsideration.  If the charter is 
rejected again, another public hearing may be held at the 
request of the petitioners, and the charter is considered one 
last time by the county board of education.
        Charter proposals are required to address a variety of 
operational procedures, including admission requirements, 
accountability, and financial audit procedures.   There are 
no regulations requiring charter schools to hire licensed 
teachers, but the charter must describe the qualifications 
used to hire employees.  Charter proposals also mention the 
goals of the school and how they are to be met.  Charters are 
granted for 5 years and subsequent renewals are awarded at 5 
year intervals.  
        Once the school has been established, it receives 100% 
of the average per-pupil spending in that school district for 
each regularly attending student.  A charter may be revoked 
by the person or group that approved the charter if the 
charter school violates a law or fails to meet its own 
criteria for operating procedures, conditions, or educational 
standards.

Results of the Law
        The fears of opponents have not been substantiated; in 
fact, many of the predictions of supporters such as those 
mentioned above have become a reality.  According to the SRL 
report, approximately one-third of the districts with charter 
schools have encouraged public schools to follow the examples 
set by charter schools in educational practices.  One fourth 
of the districts plan to restructure their systems as a 
direct result of the existence of charter schools.  This 
evidence shows that charter schools are indeed influencing 
public education in a positive manner in California.
        Despite these successes, the SRL report describes 
teacher unions who still oppose the establishment of charter 
schools in their districts.  The unions are the primary force 
that stands in the way of increasing competition through the 
expansion of the number of charter schools.  They cite the 
same reasons for their opposition as they did prior to the 
passing of the legislation.  
        Some people predicted that by limiting the number of 
schools to 100, the ability of charter schools to introduce 
competition into the public school system would also be 
limited.  Nevertheless, this limit has had no impact because 
by April 1995, only 83 charters had been approved.  According 
to the SRL report, some reasons for the slow growth in 
charter schooling are that starting a school is time-
consuming and burdensome; that developing and meeting 
standards for accountability is difficult; that there is no 
funding for starting charter schools; that the degree of 
autonomy desired will not exist; that teacher unions are 
unsupportive of charter schools, thus making hiring of 
teachers more difficult; and that there are other, more 
convenient alternatives available for parents.  
        The creaming effect predicted by opponents has not 
occurred.  The Description of Charter Schools..., a 
government publication, lists and describes the first 39 
charter schools in California.  Of these, none are targeted 
towards gifted children; in fact, five specifically cater to 
at-risk students and two focus on special education.  The 
majority of charter schools focus on new, innovative, or 
"alternative" teaching techniques for mainstream students.   
        One such school is the Open School:  Center for 
Individualization in Los Angeles.  It existed as a magnet 
elementary school and converted into an experimental 
learning center.  The unique characteristics are that 
children are not grouped by ages or grades, and there is 
team teaching.  It appears very similar to the Montessori 
style of education.  Another charter school, set up in 
Victorville, is called Options for Youth Charter School.  
This school targets students who are dropouts or potential 
dropouts, and its goal is to show such students the relevance 
of education.  It also helps  them attain a high school 
diploma and possibly go on to college,  and focuses on 
potential career options.  A third charter school in Oakland 
is called the Lazear Middle School Charter and it caters to 
students between 6th and 8th grade who are presently learning 
English as a second language.  It hopes to allow students to 
gain competence in English while continuing to develop their 
Spanish.  It focuses on communication skills and helping 
students assimilate into American society.  Although many 
unique charter schools exist in California, these three are 
representative of the diversity in education offered by 
charter schools.
        The effects of charter schools are not yet definitive, 
because they have not existed for very long.  However, the 
evidence thus far indicates that charter schools have been a 
fairly successful venture.

Conclusions & Future Prospects
          Charter school supporters predict that in the long 
term, they will improve learning by encouraging different 
methods of teaching; by enabling entrepreneurs to bring 
innovative techniques to education; and by providing an 
incentive for existing public schools to improve.  Charter 
schools have not existed long enough to yield substantial 
conclusions, but these predictions by supporters are becoming 
a reality.