Connecticut Charter Schools Not Supported by Governor

January 05, 2006

Yesterday's Wall Street Journal reports that Governor Jodi Rell of Connecticut isn't very supportive of that state's charter schools, which are currently at their quota limit, and cannot grow without legislative help. Connecticut has a weak charter school law, which means that it is all the more difficult for charter proponents and operators to open new schools and run them effectively. What is needed is intervention, and Governor Rell isn't lifting a finger.

There are a number of charter schools in Connecticut serving heavily-minority youngsters which are showing tremendous educational gains in comparison to the nearby government-run public schools.

As it happens, Connecticut boasts some of the finest charter schools in the country. In June, the Hartford Courant reported that at "New Haven's Amistad Academy, where 98 percent of students are African American or Hispanic, math and reading scores have risen to triple those of neighboring public schools and equal to scores in [wealthier and predominantly white] Greenwich."

While not every charter school will be such a rousing success, they deserve the chance to serve parents and students.

Ironically enough it is Democrats in the Connecticut statehouse which are running with the ball to help get more charters up and running. So why is the Governor doing nothing? The Journal indicates the possibility that she's trying to keep good ties with the teacher unions, which are polically very powerful, and which are sworn enemies of charter schools. Rell is up for reelection this year.

But apathy, or at least a commitment to the status quo, could be a factor. Last year at this time the Center for Education Reform noted that in Governor Rell's State of the State address, she failed to mention anything of note regarding education. In today's state of education, when our students have circles run 'round them by students from most other developed nations, ignoring the issue is unacceptable.

Charter schools have tremendous potential, and real-world preformance gains in many cases (but not all).

Charter schools are independently-run, publicly funded schools, and have been authorized in forty states in America. In every state, charter schools make do with less per-pupil funds, and often have other obstacles such as the need to find a suitable building, as opposed to existing public schools, which simply have to maintain the buildings they already have.

Charter schools give parents a choice, as they cannot select their students, as with government-run public schools.

But one thing charter schools have which government schools do not is accountability. If a charter school fails to make educational progress with its students, it runs the risk of not having its charter renewed. This is a very real possibility, as charters across the country have been shuttered for inadequate performance. Closing government-run schools, in contrast, is simply not an option, because it's a political hot button. Teacher unions have fought school closures vehemently, so much so that the best some large districts can do (politically speaking) is replace the principal.

Charter schools make no guarantees of performance, but they are held accountable.

Connecticut needs to expand its slate of charter schools. It is time for Governor Rell to act.