Theory versus Reality in Charter Schools in Colombia

Charter schools are among the most prevalent public-private partnerships in the education sector. Too frequently, charter schools are assessed only by measuring outputs such as enrollment and test scores. This paper assesses the logic model behind charter schools, specifically the mechanisms of accountability and competition. This paper examines these mechanisms through study of the Concession Schools (Colegios en Concesión and hereafter referred to as CEC) in Bogotá, Colombia, using a realist evaluation methodology. The authors find that both accountability and competition do not work as conceived by charter school proponents. The findings of this paper demonstrate that successfully operationalizing the charter model represented by the CEC program requires that the mechanisms underlying each segment in the model are carefully designed, that they directly connect, and that the functioning (or not) of one does not adversely impact the others—a difficult task given the dynamic and sensitive nature of many of the mechanisms. More specifically, both a lack of competition in the bidding process and poorly designed contracts affect the ability of the government to hold schools accountable; similarly, insufficient choice for parents—or, parental choice on an insufficient scale—affects the development of competitive dynamics among schools. Keywords: charter schools, Colombia, realist evaluation, public-private partnerships, accountability, competition CHARTER SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY AND COMPETITION Accountability and Competition for Charter Schools? Theory versus Reality in Concession Schools in Bogotá, Colombia At the broadest level, public-private partnerships (PPPs) can be defined as “cooperation of some sort of durability between public and private actors, in which they jointly develop products and services and share risks, costs and resources which are connected with these products” (Hodge & Greve, 2010, p.4). As should be clear from this definition, the PPP label can apply to multiple reforms, which promote private sector involvement (both individual and institutional) and introduce market-based values and mechanisms (Wolff, Navarro & González, 2005). In education, the most well-known PPP policies are vouchers and charter schools, though a wide range of other PPP arrangements exist. In education, not only have PPP educational policies gained traction globally in the past 10 years (ADB, 2010; Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, & Guáqueta, 2009; Robertson, Mundy, Verger, & Meashy, 2012; UNICEF, 2011), but they appear to be increasing in influence. There are many indications of this, such as the continuing growth and rising political clout of privately managed schools in the United States, the inclusion of PPPs as a central theme set forth by the European Union in its EU2020 vision for sustainable and inclusive growth, and the prominence of PPPs in the process of defining the post-2015 development agenda for education (Au & Ferrare, 2014; European Commission, 2010; Fabricant & Fine, 2012; United Nations, 2013). In promoting PPPs, policy entrepreneurs often highlight four pathways through which these arrangements can lead to positive educational outcomes. These include: (a) operational flexibility of private entities (i.e., the ability to customize one’s organization and service 1 We are grateful to Toni Verger for his assistance in the framing of this introduction. 2 These other arrangements include any instance in which private actors contribute some aspect of the provision of public education, ranging from building construction to cleaning services, for example (Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, & Guáqueta, 2009). CHARTER SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY AND COMPETITION 4 offerings), (b) bidding and selection processes (through which government agencies select private companies to provide a given service), (c) risk-sharing between the government and private sector (such that private companies will enter the market, knowing that they do not bear the full burden of failure), and (d) competition (through which public schools react to the threat of losing students) (Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, & Guáqueta, 2009). However, despite the somewhat specific nature of these pathways, and despite the many assumptions embedded in the operation of each one, the debate in education tends to boil down, more often than not, to findings related to such outcomes as student achievement or student dropout rates. (Fabricant & Fine, 2012; Lubienski, 2003; Lubienski & Lubienski, 2006; Miron & Nelson, 2002). The problem with this is that essential aspects of the operation of PPPs are overlooked. If debates and studies tend to be restricted to input-output research that assesses outcomes alone without unpacking the mechanisms or pathways by which those outcomes are achieved, then essential information is missing. On one hand, we are left with a partial understanding of the various interactions and processes that connect private providers and government agencies; on the other hand, we are left with an incomplete view of the dynamics among schools in competitive environments. The present paper attempts to address this issue through the presentation of findings from a study of charter schools in Bogotá, Colombia. The charter model of interest is known as Concession Schools (or, in Spanish, Colegios en Concesión, CECs). It began in 1999, is intended to provide education that is high quality, privately managed, and publicly funded to poor students in specific areas of Bogotá. This program has become a well-known and relatively high-profile reform. It has been promoted by the World Bank (see, e.g., Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, & 3 It is worth noting, as well, that broad reviews have shown the impacts of charter schools on student achievement to be mixed at best and typically no better than traditional public schools (CREDO, 2009; Jeynes, 2012; Lubienski & Lubienski, 2006; Zimmer, Gill, Booker, Lavertu & Witte, 2012). CHARTER SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY AND COMPETITION 5 Guáqueta, 2009) and its founder has continued to feature in key conferences in the United States on private education led by such actors as the International Finance Corporation (2014) and the Brookings Institute (2015). This program thus reflects education reform trends in the United States and internationally while also serving as a reform example itself that encourages the continuation of the PPP trend. These characteristics make the CEC program particularly salient for understanding multiple aspects of how charter school programs operate. In the present paper, we will trace and unpack—through the application of a realist evaluation methodology—each of the mechanisms embedded in the theory of action of the CEC program. As will be shown, the findings from this study have implications for the extent to which mechanisms of accountability and competition can be expected to materialize in practice through the introduction of charter-type programs. Importantly, the relationships of interest are not only those between parents and schools but also those between charter management organizations and the central office managers who oversee them. Notably, these relationships are an under-studied aspect of charter school programs, as the literature review in the next section makes clear. To address the above-mentioned issues, this paper moves through a number of sections. First, we review the relevant theory and evidence on charter schools. Second, we detail the methodology employed for the study. Third, we situate the CEC program within Colombia by explaining the national and city-level context out of which it emerged. Fourth, we then discuss the specific policy provisions and the theory of action that guide this program. Fifth, we present the results of this study, which relate specifically to the processes of accountability and to the dynamics of competition that accompanied the Concession Schools. The final sections offer discussion, implications, and conclusion. CHARTER SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY AND COMPETITION 6 Theory vs. Reality in the Literature The literature on PPPs generally and on charter schools specifically has discussed for many years the theory of accountability and competition in education markets (Chubb & Moe, 1990; Lubienski, 2006; Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, & Guáqueta, 2009). The former typically relates to the ability of a school district, for example, to monitor and, if necessary, to take action against those private entities that are providing services related public education (Crew & Anderson, 2003). Key aspects of this arrangement are the use of contracts and open-bidding processes. In theory, the open-bidding process should be transparent and competitive and the contracts themselves should not only be awarded on the basis of past performance but should also include clear stipulations regarding performance requirements (Patrinos, Barrera-Osorio, & Guáqueta, 2009). Subsequently, those officials responsible for overseeing charter schools or other service providers can carefully monitor administrative behavior and/or academic outcomes, thereafter using poor performance as a justification for revoking charters or for cancelling contracts (Crew & Anderson, 2003). Of course, the logic of this arrangement presumes that performance criteria are clearly established, that public managers regularly collect the necessary decision-making information, and that those public managers have the ability to exercise their authority (Lubienski, 2006). The idea of competition in education markets also rests on a number of assumptions. In the case of charter schools, the primary assumption is that, as a result of the creation of multiple choices from which parents can choose, schools will be pressured to improve the quality of the education offered (Chubb & Moe, 1990; Lubienski, 2003). Improvement is thought to be achieved through administrative and pedagogical innovation (Lubienski, 2003) and/or simply by strategically employing