Editorial: Work with charters

Philadelphia schools Superintendent Arlene Ackerman should move forward with a proposal to raise the performance bar for the city's charter schools. But she should not include provisions that would put unfair enrollment restrictions on successful charters and limit opportunities for students.

More oversight and accountability are long overdue for charters, which educate 30,000 city students using more than $279 million in taxpayers' funds.

Ackerman, though, also wants the School Reform Commission to unfairly limit when charters can enroll more students or change their grade configurations. Under the proposal, a charter could apply to grow only in three-year intervals or at its license renewal, which is usually every five years.

That's too long to wait for students and parents who want desperately to get out of a failing regular public school.

The district must gauge carefully when a charter is successful enough academically to expand, and it must consider the impact of that expansion on nearby traditional schools. But it should not impose arbitrary timelines that prevent children from changing schools in a timely fashion.

Under Ackerman's proposal, charters would be required to demonstrate strong academic performance and good management and financial practices. The district must monitor those areas on a regular basis, not just when the charter comes up for renewal.

Setting strong standards will make it easier for the SRC to consider renewal applications. Currently, it has no policy for evaluating charters, instead considering each on a case-by-case basis.

The commission is expected to consider Ackerman's proposals later this month.

In a compromise, she wisely backed down from an even less flexible plan and said the district would now consider prior requests for grade changes and enrollment increases. To qualify, schools must be close to achieving academic standards under the federal No Child Left Behind Act. Schools with proven results deserve a chance to expand.

Ultimately, deciding when a charter can expand may be resolved by legislation pending in Harrisburg that would shift their oversight from local districts to the state Department of Education. That makes sense since the host districts too often have done a poor job of monitoring their charter schools, which many see only as the competition.

In some cases, the host district's neglect to work more closely with charter operators has left the door open for fraud and abuse, as seen with a federal probe into at least six Philadelphia area charters for allegations of nepotism, conflicts of interest, and financial mismanagement.

Charter schools are a viable alternative to failing public schools. Instead of putting up roadblocks, stakeholders should find ways to help successful operators expand to accommodate more children.