You may have thought that the McCleary basic education funding debate would be the big issue in education this legislative session, but think again.

In a packed hearing on Tuesday, the Senate Early Learning & K-12 Education Committee considered proposals to reinstate funding for Washington’s charter schools. After approval by a public initiative in 2012 that narrowly passed, a Supreme Court decision ruled their funding unconstitutional. Now nine schools and some 1200 students are at risk of permanently losing funding.

On the pro side, students and teachers from local charters, plus voices from the business community, argued that charter schools have changed the lives of students who were poorly served by traditional public schools and created space for innovation and specialization.

The con side began with a carefully worded rebuttal from Superintendent of Public Instruction Randy Dorn, who reminded legislators that he once voted for charter schools, but opposed the initiative because of constitutional concerns. Other opponents claimed that charter schools drain funds from existing public schools and privatize education.

Students with “Keep Charter Schools Open” shirts were part of the crowd.

Comparing the Bills

There are two bills on the table. Senate Bill 6163, sponsored by Senators Michael Baumgartner (R) and Andy Billig (D) gives local school boards the authority to authorize charter schools within their district and declares them “common schools,” meaning they can constitutionally receive money from the general fund. This bill only preserves two of Washington’s charter schools– those in Spokane, which have friendly relationship with Spokane Public Schools.

Senate Bill 6194, sponsored by Senator Steve Litzow (R), would not declare charters as common schools, but would fund them from a different account. This bill also allows charter schools the continued freedom to operate outside of most state and district regulations.

Party Lines

Nationally, there are supporters of charter schools in both liberal and conservative camps. In Washington, the debate is more clear cut. Tough comments from Senator’s Joe Fain (R) and Litzow (R) towards opponents of charter schools revealed the political divisions around the issue. For Republicans, charter schools not only represent freedom from government regulation, but a chance to offer solutions to the achievement gap that reflect conservative values.

Democrats, on the other hand, have their hands tied by the Washington Education Association, who is adamantly opposed to charters. Senator Christine Rolfes (D) stated, “A big concern is that if not properly handled, legislation can lead to the slippery slope of privatization of our public education system, as well as the cannibalization of local school programs in the smaller districts outside of the Tacoma-Seattle urban area.” Although Democrats are keeping quiet on this issue, Rolfes revealed that “there is sentiment among some for figuring out a solution that is constitutional for those 1,000 students impacted.”

Politics Aside

In an earlier statement on charter schools, Senator Litzow, (R), Chair of the Senate Education Committee, lead sponsor, said: “Public charter schools provide a meaningful opportunity for students – especially minority children from low-income families – who are disproportionately failed by Washington’s inequitable public school system.” Many of the parents and children at Tuesday’s hearing fit that description. Their grievances ranged from ineffective teachers to blatant racism.

It’s true that minorities and low-income students are not doing well in the state’s public schools. Seattle, for example, has the second largest achievement gap in the nation. An analysis by the Center on Reinventing Public Education, found that white children in Seattle are almost ten times as likely as black kids to attend an elementary or middle school with reading tests scores that rank in the top 20 percent citywide.

According to Maggie Meyers, of Washington State Charter Schools Association, over 70% of the students in Washington’s charter schools are students of color and two thirds qualify for free and reduced lunch. As for whether charter schools actually serve these students better, it’s hard to say. First of all, in Washington there is no outcome data, since charter schools only came into existence last fall. Second, studies from other states are conflicting.

Clash of the Studies

As per usual, opponents and proponents cited the studies that proved their point, while discounting those that didn’t.

The room heated up as a particularly fiery opponent of charter schools sited several studies unfavorable to charter schools. One such study, the widely circulated CREDO study, points to below or average outcomes for charter schools. The study examined 26 states, accounting for 95 percent of the nation’s charter school students. What he didn’t mention is that the findings differed by race and ethnicity.

According to Margaret Raymond, director of CREDO at Stanford University, “Charter schools are benefiting low-income, disadvantaged and special education students,”  Black charter school students were found to gain an equivalent of 14 extra days of learning in both math and reading, with English language learners gaining 36 days in both subjects over their traditional school peers. But for white students, charter school attendance was found to be detrimental, with students losing out on the equivalent of 14 days of reading and 50 days of math.

Although some have critiqued the CREDO study, it is by far the most comprehensive available.

Will It Pass?

Legislators heard many legitimate arguments both for and against charters on Tuesday. Some advocates simply hope that the competition between charters and traditional public schools will induce systemic change. Others truly believe that charter schools are the answer to our public school system’s woes. Opponents bemoan the lack of accountability and decry the involvement of private sector entities.

Few would predict if either SB 6163 or 6194 will pass the legislature this session. The debate is complicated and we are approaching an election year. Time will tell, and, in this short legislative session, it will be sooner rather than later.

Your support matters.

Public service journalism is important today as ever. If you get something from our coverage, please consider making a donation to support our work. Thanks for reading our stuff.