Charter schools have come under criticism in some quarters for failing to realize one of the goals emphasized by proponents: that they would serve as laboratories in which novel ideas and methods could be tested and best practices identified for dissemination among traditional public schools. For example, a recent study of California charter schools concluded: "... the charter schools we observed ... were not serving as models of innovation from which educators in other schools could learn." A new study of personnel policy in charter schools by economists Dale Ballou and Michael Podgursky suggests just the opposite conclusion. In the areas of recruitment and staffing, pay flexibility and incentive pay, and staffing flexibility they find evidence of major differences between charter and traditional public schools.
The authors surveyed administrators of charter schools that had been in operation at least two years. They focused on seven states with relatively strong enabling legislation, exempting charter schools from many state regulations and freeing them from collective bargaining agreements unless the charter school faculty chose to unionize. While their our conclusions pertain only to those states, they certainly suggest that when given the opportunity, charter schools will pursue innovative personnel policies differing in key respects from those of traditional public schools.
In what ways did charter schools differ? Charter schools employ more teachers and aides relative to the number of students than do traditional public schools. In states where it is permitted, charter schools recruit significant numbers of uncertified teachers. In fact, many charter school administrators in their survey identified the ability to recruit uncertified teachers as an important source of recruitment flexibility.
Very few charter schools grant tenure to their instructors. Most teachers work under one-year contracts or are employees at will. In sharp contrast to traditional public schools, very few charter schools are covered by collective bargaining agreements. The average length of the teacher work day and work year are longer in charter schools. Dismissals of teachers for unsatisfactory performance are commonplace in charter schools.
Rather than adhering to traditional salary schedules, many charter schools raise salaries of teachers in hard-to-recruit subjects such as math and science. Nearly one-half of charter schools report using merit or performance-based pay. Many charter schools have broken with the common practice of awarding increases based on seniority or the accumulation of advanced degrees and college credits.
Given the modest size of their sample, it was not possible to conduct an extensive statistical analysis to determine which charter schools are most likely to adopt innovative policies. Nonetheless, their limited investigation suggests that schools in which teachers are unionized are less innovative. In addition, schools that are chartered by local school districts generally pursue more traditional personnel policies than do schools chartered by outside agencies such as state boards or higher education institutions.
Charter schools are a recent phenomenon. The practices identified by these authors may undergo further change as charter schools expand and mature. Many charter schools rely heavily on the services of relatively inexperienced teachers. Even private schools, which generally have younger teachers than public school systems, are not so dependent on teachers with less than three years' experience. Nonetheless, at the present time, personnel policies in charter schools more closely resemble those in private as compared to traditional public schools.
Personnel Policy in Charter Schools, by Michael Podgursky and Dale Ballou, The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, August 2001, http://www.edexcellence.net/detail/news.cfm?news_id=19