Charter school renewal policy proposal sparks testy State Board of Education debate

Proposed policy changes governing charter school renewals touched off testy exchanges among members of the State Board of Education on Thursday.

The policy changes are intended to align the renewal process with a new state law that handed many of the state board’s oversight responsibilities for charter schools to the new Charter Schools Review Board the law established.

At issue is whether state law requires such changes to school renewal policy to be developed by the review board and whether the review board had adequate input in the development of the proposed changes. Some state board members also said they are concerned that the review board will not have adequate time to discuss and review the changes before having to vote on them at its meeting next week.

“Doesn’t the law say that recommendations will come from the review board to us?” state board member Olivia Oxendine asked. “Is that not the way it reads rather than the [state] board making revisions and then presenting it?”

The state board plans to adopt the changes when it meets in February.

State board Chairman Eric Davis insisted that the draft version of the policy changes was compiled with input from the review board and the Office of Charter Schools.

State Superintendent Catherine Truitt agreed that a recommendation to make changes to the renewal process came from the review board but said the recommended changes did not.

“I want to be very clear that those recommendations did not come from the Charter Schools Review Board or from the Office of Charter Schools and that was stated yesterday that they were, and we need to be clear that they were not,” Truitt said.

The superintendent is referring to state board and staff statements made during the board’s work session on Wednesday.

On Thursday, Davis said state board members and review board Chairman Bruce Friend will meet soon to discuss concerns about the policy changes.

“We’ve agreed to take the next step, which demonstrates both of our willingness for our two boards to work together in collaboration on this draft,” Davis said.

The state board is still open to receiving input before final policy adoption, Davis said.

“This is a standard process for the way we develop policy and particularly the way we want to interact with a board that reports to us,” Davis said.

A proposed change to the method used to compare student performance at charter schools to that of students in local districts drew more questions from Oxendine. A charter school is currently considered to have comparable scores on state tests if proficiency scores are within five points of the district schools in which they operate. The policy change would reduce that number to two points.

The comparisons are used to determine whether charters are renewed. Oxendine said the change could have a “significant” impact on charter renewals.

“Was that [the proposed change] based on some research or a recommendation from the [review board]?” Oxendine asked. “How did we arrive at the five points down to two?”

State board attorney Alison Schafer said the proposed change came from members of the state board.

Davis said the change is an attempt to “reward charter schools that are performing to the academic standard” the state board would like to see. He said the draft is superior to current policy and previous drafts.

“First, it clarifies the expectations we have of the department and fulfilling our management oversight and compliance responsibilities that the state board has from the Constitution,” Davis said.

Davis said the new policy also clarifies the parameters in which the review board can conduct its work.

“There’s particular benefit to the review board operating within those parameters in that it provides greater protection from potential litigation to operate within the policy parameters of the State Board of Education,” he said. “But the third reason why this is particularly better policy than what we currently have is that this draft emphasizes quality. It recognizes those schools that are achieving the quality standard in academics, financial management, conflict of interest and rewards them with a longer term and that’s appropriate because we need that stability.”

School can receive charter renewals for 3, 5, 7 or 10 years. Schools that are academically, fiscally and operationally sound receive 10 year-renewals.

Schools that cannot meet that standard of academic performance, financial management or conflict of interests should not continue to operate, Davis said.

State board vice Chairman Alan Duncan said the proposed policy is “built to go forward into the future.” Duncan said schools up for renewal should not be held to the new standards.

The new Republican-backed law giving the review board many of the oversight responsibilities previously held by the state board has been controversial.

House Bill 618 gave the review board the power to approve, renew, amend and terminate charters. The state board is responsible for rulemaking, funding, assuring accountability and hearing appeals of review board decisions. The state board also has the final say on appeals.

Gov. Roy Cooper vetoed HB 618, contending the state constitution gives the state board oversight authority for public schools, including charter schools. The governor’s veto was overridden on Aug. 16.

Davis also opposed the legislation. In a letter to lawmakers, Davis said the current process “clearly shows that quality charter school proposals with the recommendation of CSAB and the background provided by the [NC Department of Public Instruction] DPI’s Office of Charter Schools, are receiving a fair review.”