Statement by MTA President Paul Toner on “An Act Relative to Improving Student Achievement”

The House Ways and Means Committee is considering a bill (House 3984) that would make changes in state laws governing low-performing schools and charter schools. MTA President Paul Toner has issued the following statement on the legislation. A legislative summary of the bill – which resulted from an Education Committee draft – follows the statement. The summary was provided by the Joint Committee on Education.

 

Statement by MTA President Paul Toner on “An Act Relative to Improving Student Achievement”

 

The legislation now being considered has some strong points and would take certain steps that the MTA opposes.

We support the bill’s proposal to authorize the commissioner of education to identify “Challenge Schools” from among the lowest-performing 20 percent of schools. The goal is for the stakeholders in these schools to collaboratively develop improvement plans – with significant input from teachers and their local associations through collective bargaining – to improve student achievement.

We strongly believe that collaboration is the right path for our students. It will allow educators to have a real voice in the process and make appropriate use of their classroom expertise, which has helped make Massachusetts number one in the nation in student achievement.

If the parties agree on an improvement plan, a Level 3 school would avoid the designation of “underperforming” and the Level 4 process, under which teachers lose significant collective bargaining rights.

We do not, however, support the plan contained in the bill to increase net spending on charter schools because it is unnecessary. The current limit of 18 percent is still being phased in and has not been reached in any district.

The bill does not change either the current cap of 72 Commonwealth Charter Schools statewide or the current exception to that cap in the lowest-performing 10 percent of districts. The bill contains language that would allow net school spending on charter schools to increase in those districts, either by increasing the number of seats in existing charter schools that have been successful in improving student outcomes or by authorizing new charters operated by providers with proven track records. If new charters are authorized in these districts, it would push the number of Commonwealth Charter Schools beyond 72.

Under this plan, the process of increasing the charter schools’ share of net school spending in certain districts from 18 percent to 23 percent would not start until 2018. The limit would rise 1 percentage point annually through 2022.

Instead of increasing net school spending on charters, we believe that all schools – charter schools and regular district schools – should share best practices. Many schools have developed strategies to narrow the achievement gap that are replicable and are having a positive impact on students.

Although opposed to the increase in net school spending on charter schools, we do appreciate the effort by the bill’s sponsor to hold charter schools that wish to expand more accountable and to restrict the kinds of charter schools that can expand.

This would be achieved by requiring that charters enroll student populations from these categories, among others:  at-risk students, English language learners and special education students. In addition, the charter school applicant would have to agree to an opt-out admissions policy, or the school’s primary purpose would have to be to provide an alternative setting for dropouts or students at risk of not graduating on time.

The intent of these approaches is to ensure that any new charter schools actually reflect the demographics of the students in the area and to prevent charter schools from “skimming” student populations through enrollment practices and selective attrition – practices that the MTA has long opposed.

We will monitor this legislation carefully in the coming months and support appropriate steps to help all students succeed. The bill contains positive proposals concerning low-performing schools, and we believe they deserve detailed consideration by the Legislature. In addition, we urge the Legislature to fully fund charter reimbursements to local districts each year.

 

An Act Relative to Improving Student Achievement

Summary Provided by The Joint Committee on Education

 

Level 3 “Challenge” Schools

 

·       The bill authorizes the commissioner to designate a subset of Level 3 schools as “challenge schools,” which include schools that score in the lowest performing 20% statewide that are most likely to be designated as underperforming (Level 4).

 

·       “Challenge schools” are required to develop 2-year turnaround plans, similar to the turnaround plans required for underperforming (Level 4) and chronically underperforming (Level 5) schools.

 

Charter Schools

 

·       Maintains the statewide cap on the total number of charter schools that can operate at any given time (72 commonwealth and 48 Horace Mann charter schools). Also maintains that not more than 14 of the 48 Horace Manns shall be “Horace Mann III” charter schools, 4 of which are reserved for municipalities with more than 500,000 residents. [MTA note: As stated above, there are exceptions to the cap in the lowest-performing 10 percent of districts.]

 

·       Lifts the current spending cap on charter school tuition in the lowest performing 10% districts from 18% to 23% of net school spending (NSS), provided that in such districts, that the board shall only approve an application for the establishment or expansion of a charter school above the 18% NSS limit if the proposed charter school meets one or more of the following criteria:

 

(1)          The school uses an “opt-out” lottery process to enroll students

-        Under the “opt-out” lottery process, all students who would be eligible to attend the charter school under the district’s assignment policy if it were a district school shall be deemed eligible for enrollment in the charter school without any required application process for the school, and shall be automatically included in the lottery. Parents of students selected for admission through the opt-out lottery process may choose not to accept the admission offer.

-OR-

(2)          The school is specifically designed to serve at-risk students and/or dropouts

-        In such schools, not less than 75% of students enrolled at the school shall qualify as at-risk students or students who have dropped out of school.

 

-        Such schools may offer enrollment preferences or limit admissions to at-risk students or students who have dropped out of school.

 

·       Allows the net school spending cap to be lifted in the lowest performing 10% districts through a phased-in process, increasing to 19% in fiscal year 2018 and increasing 1% each year thereafter until reaching 23% in 2022.

 

·       Allows the board to give preference to expansion applications submitted by existing charter schools that have an average 3-year attrition rate that is equal to or less than the average 3-year attrition rate of the schools within the sending districts. Expansion applications submitted by existing charter schools that have an average 3-year attrition rate that is greater than the average 3-year attrition rate of the schools within the sending district shall include a plan to reduce the attrition rates in said charter schools.

 

·       Allows charter schools to offer geographic enrollment preferences to students, provided that within such geographic preference area, the percentage of students who qualify for the free or reduced price lunch is equal to or higher than the district’s overall percentage.

 

·       Allows charter schools located within the same municipality to voluntarily establish a common lottery process, which may provide student applicants with a single offer for admission (subject to approval by the commissioner).

 

·       Provides that school districts with surplus building space must offer to sell or lease the space at fair market value to a commonwealth charter school before it can be leased to any other entity.

 

·       Requires the department of elementary and secondary education to annually collect and publish attrition data from charter schools, including information onthe number of students leaving each charter school and the reasons for leaving the school.

 

·       Directs the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to establish a charter school transportation working group in order to study the financial impacts of charter school student transportation patterns on district finances and to identify opportunities to improve efficiency.