State board exhibits double standard for community-based public schools and charters
03/13/2015

 

Yesterday, the State Board took action on two decisions that seemed to be at odds with one another regarding the way failing schools are handled. As mentioned earlier this week, two charter schools authorized by Ball State University appealed to the board to remain open, despite four or five years straight of failing grades.

 

Board members cited both high student mobility and special needs populations as reasons why these particular charters are “unique” schools meriting another year of monitoring. Several board members also justified the decision stating that these schools do not fit the typical mold for charters and should be allotted more time to improve. They even indicated that a different accountability model might be necessary.

 

Later in the meeting, the board addressed Dunbar-Pulaski in Gary – a community-based public school facing similar difficulties with financial challenges and a high-needs population. Then board member Tony Walker, who represents Gary on the State Board, issued a motion to close the school. The board voted 6-to-4 to shut down Pulaski. Superintendent Glenda Ritz voted against the measure, along with members Sarah O'Brien, Cari Whicker and Troy Albert.

 

It is understandable that certain extenuating circumstances, such as having a special needs population, may justify occasional flexibility when dealing with failing schools. Yet, this argument could apply to any number of struggling schools or low-income districts that have financial challenges and high rates of student mobility.

 

For instance, Dunbar-Pulaski has a student enrollment of 81 percent qualifying to receive free lunches, compared to just 34 percent for Options Charter School of Noblesville and 11 percent for Hoosier Academy Virtual Charter School. Those were the two charters the board chose to keep and will not take action for another year.

 

As illustrated by the preferential treatment shown to charters, it appears that a double standard exists. Proponents of charters have previously stated that closure is the accountability trigger for those schools. However, this option has yet to be used on a consistent basis in Indiana and failing charters remain open while their students continue to struggle.

 

Board member Gordon Hendry was the only vote against the motion to take no action on the two charters. Hendry stated that charters must be held accountable and that difficult circumstances are not a valid excuse. Many public schools face the same scenario and are not exempt. Dunbar-Pulaski is a clear case in point.

 

If accountability is supposed to be meaningful, schools need to be measured with equal regularity and not held to different standards.