MILLBURN, NJ - The auditorium at Millburn High School Monday, May 9 was not packed, but the talk was loaded as a panel of five educators and experts discussed the “storm” of controversy surrounding charter schools and the “wave” of applications and legislation being proposed in New Jersey.
Prompted by applications for two Mandarin Immersion charter schools covering five neighboring communities -- Millburn/Short Hills, Livingston, Maplewood/South Orange, West Orange and Union Township -- and hosted by Millburn Superintendent James Crisfield, the meeting was explicitly intended for Superintendents and School Boards of those towns to gather information. Local residents and representatives of charter organizations were welcome to attend, but not to ask questions. Future meetings will be scheduled in each of the towns for the public to get involved in the conversation.
Providing an overview of charters was Dr. Katrina Bulkley, who has been studying the schools since 1995. Dr. Bulkley described herself as a researcher, “neither advocate nor opponent” of the charter schools. According to Dr. Bulkley, some charters are “excellent, some middle, some abysmal.” She spoke of a 2010 national study in which 17% of charter schools outperformed traditional public schools in their districts, 50% were the same, and one third were worse.
Lynne Strickland, of the Garden State Coalition Of Schools, talked about the various concerns her member districts are already facing, such as recession, diminishing programs, reduction or elimination of state aid. Given that local districts transfer money out of their general fund to support each student who chooses to attend a charter -- 90% of the average per pupil cost -- there is a worry that districts will have to make cuts in order to pay for the charters. Ms. Strickland said that charters would be of less concern “if the funding were different.”
She also described how the issue of charters is “pitting folks within a community against one another.” An example she used is the Hebrew Language charter school in East Brunswick, which has generated a fight over revenue issues. In one instance, there had been several failed referendums on implementing full day kindergarten in the public schools. While soliciting students, the charter advertised “free full day kindergarten.”
Speaking from experience about the impact of charter schools were two school leaders from Princeton. President of the Princeton Board of Education Rebecca Cox described the expansion of the ten year old charter in her district. What once was a $300,000 budget line being paid by the district to the charter is now $4.5 million this year. Ms. Cox said she’s stayed active because “We really need to tell people. As a voter, you have no say whether you have a charter.”
Dr. Judy Wilson, Superintendent of Princeton Regional District, says she sees the value of charter schools in places where there are failing schools, but not in districts like hers where the public schools excel. Dr. Wilson warns that currently “charters are being approved all across the spectrum.”
In speaking of the lack of control a district has over a charter, Dr. Wilson complains, “We have no say aside from writing a check.” At one point, there was an Arts charter in the district. The school closed a few months after Dr. Wilson had paid them the money owed for a full year, but nothing was ever returned to the district. Dr. Wilson is concerned that “as dollars are more scarce, it is hard to maintain a balanced budget.” She spoke of the irony of the fact that Princeton has had to cut World Language to support the Mandarin charter school.
According to Attorney Anthony Sciarrello, when New Jersey’s first charter school legislation was written there was a very different financial picture. The legislation was “property tax blind” in 1994-95. “In 2011 things have changed,” says Sciarrello, “but the legislation is a snapshot in time.” On another subject he warned, “There are private schools closing, and opening the next day as charters.”
Lynne Strickland brought up the fact that when charter school legislation first passed, the qualification was based on “need.” Recently, she feels the context has expanded to “want,” as in “We want this district to do something new.”
Dr. Wilson was asked by Bill Gaudell, a Maplewood-South Orange School Board member, if there was value in adding bilingual immersion programs in the public schools as a reaction to the language charters. She responded that Princeton’s Mandarin program was in place prior to the charter proposal. She then warned, “You can’t keep splintering focus and changing programs...This year is Mandarin. Next year it could be Gaelic, ceramics or bagpipes.”
When asked how the charter school students do when they enter Princeton High School, Dr. Wilson said that “they don’t excel over our students from Cranbury or Princeton.” She did commend the Princeton charter parents for their overall involvement in the district.
According to Dr. Wilson there are “two great organizations” supporting schools and communities on the issue of charters. The first is the Garden State Coalition Of Schools, which represents over 100 suburban districts. The other is Save Our Schools, SOSnj.
There is also legislation being proposed. Assemblywomen Mila Jasey, and Senator Barbara Buono are sponsoring various bills to clarify the approval process, define district “need,” and require local votes before charters can open.
As Dr. Wilson puts it, “The more there is a struggle over resources, the more critical decisions become…I worry about eroding public education.”
