His show jumping days well behind him, 32-year-old Chicho soaks in the morning sun while students from Boulder Preparatory High School gently feed and pet him. Chicho’s caretakers at the Medicine Horse Program say the old horse’s age and health problems will soon end his life.
But for now, Chicho has a new role as a teacher of sorts. The eight students who surround him at an airy stable in rural Boulder County got to know him this month as part of a class on brain activity. Most students at the charter school have struggled in mainstream schools while fighting problems such as substance abuse, autism, anxiety and depression. They hope their work at Boulder Prep can restart their futures.
“This is my last shot at redemption,” said 18-year-old Drake Johnson, who wants to move on to college and eventually the armed forces after graduation in May 2018.
Boulder Prep is one of Colorado’s 238 charter schools and among the oldest. Started nearly 25 years ago, charters are now firmly rooted in the state’s school landscape and, in fact, are growing faster than ever. They have attracted allies among school officials and state lawmakers, who say they spawn innovation and help kids who have left or been abandoned by traditional classrooms.
Backers are heartened by the recent appointment of choice supporter Betsy DeVos as the nation’s Education secretary. They say charters have a chance to fully blossom now that they are considered part of the educational mainstream.
“There should be celebrations that Mrs. DeVos has been confirmed,” said Pam Benigno, director of the Education Policy Center of the Independence Institute. “I am glad that she hasn’t come from within an education bureaucracy that has failed to meet the needs of so many precious children.”
But DeVos’ appointment, which comes as Colorado faces an $876 million shortfall in public school funding and possible school closures in Jefferson County and Denver, also raises the fears of public education supporters, said state Sen. Michael Merrifield.
“It’s just more chipping away at public schools, neighborhood schools and their resources,” he said. “All of those things we’re losing.”
Critics say charters siphon money and talented students from struggling neighborhood schools, pay teachers less and can bypass 18 state statutes, including competitive bidding. Some schools waive out of more than 100 district policies and laws, meaning they can play fast-and-loose with public money.
“We know charter schools can accept unlimited gifts, grants and donations from outside benefactors, and even receive millions in federal funding only designated for charters,” said Kerrie Dallman, president of the Colorado Education Association. “I’ve yet to see a charter share any of those funds with a school district.”
Fifty charter schools have closed since Colorado’s charter law went into effect in 1993, double the national average. Most shuttered because of enrollment projections that fell short, changes in leadership and lagging test scores.
All those factors helped claim Pioneer Charter School in northeast Denver. It opened in 1997 but shuttered in 2014, after data showed 80 percent of Pioneer students were more than a year below grade level in math and reading, and most were at least three years behind.
But charter supporters say the willingness to close failing charters is a good sign.
By contrast, the Colorado State Board of Education has closed just one traditional public school because of poor performance over the past 20 years, Denver’s Cole Middle School in 2004, according to the Colorado League of Charter Schools.
“Take the roughly 1,700 public schools in Colorado, multiply that by 20 years, and the odds of a district-run public school being shut down by the state is 34,000 to one,” said Alex Medler, a Boulder-based consultant who worked for six years as vice president for policy at the National Association of Charter School Authorizers. “Compare that to one in 10 charters closing — one in five for Colorado — and you’ll see the imbalance.”
“The lopsidedness of district-run school versus charter public school accountability is striking,” Medler said.
A growing presence
Boulder Prep offered Johnson a smaller, friendlier environment than his last, more traditional school. Charters are free public schools and generally operate inside local school districts. They collect public funds but are run by independent boards and use their own curriculum.
They can also hire and fire teachers outside of union contracts.
By 1997, there were 50 charter schools and by last year, charters enrolled 108,793 students — an increase of 30 percent since 2013, according to a report by the Colorado Department of Education. If put in one place, all those charter students could form the state’s largest school district.
Charters spur innovation and new learning and teaching styles not afforded in typical, mainstream schools, said Leli Adeli, headmaster at Boulder Prep.
“A criticism of the American and other educational systems is that they are outdated and based on centuries of old learning styles and societies,” Adeli said. “Some school districts are trying to adapt and upgrade, but they are confined by antiquated school laws. Charters get to be creative and come up with new methods to meet the demands of 21st-century learners.”
Charter students also outperform peers in district-run schools on state tests, according to the CDE report. On the English test, 44 percent of charter school students met or exceeded grade level, compared with 39 percent of students at district-run schools. Charter students at every grade level but fifth also performed better than students at district schools by up to 7 percentage points, according to the report.
Special education students and those from low-income families also did better on state tests than peers in district-run schools.
But charters serve a lower percentage of students with disabilities — only about 8 percent of charter school students had disabilities, compared with 13 percent at district-run schools.
Charter teachers and principals are also paid at least $15,000 less than counterparts in district-run schools, mainly because they are less experienced.
Senate Bill 61
Opponents say those are typical attributes of charters, which are part of a vanguard of a school choice movement seeking to convert mainstream schools into tuition-based private schools. And they are getting help from Colorado lawmakers from a variety of measures, including this year’s Senate Bill 61.
If passed, it would require school districts to equally share money from local tax increases with charter schools. Currently, districts decide whether to share revenues from local tax increases with charters. The total amount of local revenue distributed to charter schools would be $96.4 million for 2017-2018, according to a legislative report.
The report notes that based on past years, about two-thirds of that $96.4 million was already distributed, meaning about $33.1 million in new revenue would go to charters.
Given the rapid growth of charters, it is only fair they get a bigger share of the funding pie, said Sen. Owen Hill, a Colorado Springs Republican.
“This is about fair funding for our kids, who are our future, not collateral damage in political games,” Hill said.
But others say the bill virtually erases a time-honored virtue in Colorado education — local control over curriculum and where dollars are spent.
It is a “mandate from the state which would force districts to funnel funds raised in local mill levy elections to charter schools, even if those schools did not exist when the election was held,” said Amie Baca-Oehlert, vice president of the CEA. “This bill is fundamentally unnecessary and sends a message that the state does not value local control in K-12 education decisions.”
Charters already get some help from Washington. Since 2010, more than $82 million in federal funds have been allotted to help jump-start new and expanding charter schools in Colorado.
Charters typically get only 80 cents for every $1 spent on traditional public schools, said Dan Schaller, director of government affairs for the Colorado League of Charter Schools.
“It really is a question funding fairness for charters and it needs to be addressed,” Schaller said. “People forget these funding shortfalls hit us (charter schools) as well.”
New support
Charters seem to be getting more backing from the Colorado Board of Education, at least in recent years. The seven-member board can hear appeals from charter school leaders who feel the local school district is not giving them a fair chance to open.
Since January 2015, the board has heard nine charter appeals and remanded seven of those back to the district for reconsideration, according to the CDE.
Rico Munn, a former state board member and now superintendent of Aurora Public Schools, said the board was fairly balanced in the past when it came to charter appeals. But lately, the board appears to believe charters should “rise and fall only on parental choice” and not any other factors.
The Aurora district last year closed branches of HOPE Online Learning Academy that were not meeting performance standards. The state board later overturned that decision.
“If we are not allowed to hold schools accountable for not providing quality education, it’s tough to figure out what they should be held accountable for,” Munn said.
Great Work Montessori has come under fire by Jefferson County School officials over worries about the school’s financial stability, worries over enrollment projections and lack of transparency. But the state board overruled the local board’s objections, said Jeffco board president Ron Mitchell.
“We had real concerns they didn’t have a maintenance budget, they (the state board) said that’s not a big deal, the kids could clean the school,” Mitchell said. “We said we had concerns about not having an adequate materials budget. … One state board member said the teachers could make up the material.”
The state board, which is led by a Democratic majority for the first time in decades, gives each charter application careful consideration, but there is no clear pattern over time that the body favors charters, said Angelika Schroeder, the new board chair.
“It’s very hard to create a charter school,” Schroeder said. “It’s not like opening a store. It takes a lot of thoughtful planning. And despite there being waivers for charters, it takes a whole lot of people and guidance.”
