1998

Executive Summary

A National Study

ofCharter

SCHOOLS

OFFICE OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND IMPROVEMENT

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
1998

Executive Summary

A National Study

ofCharter

SCHOOLS

OFFICE OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND IMPROVEMENT

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

RPP INTERNATIONAL
U.S. Department of Education

Richard W. Riley

Secretary

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

C. Kent McGuire

Assistant Secretary

National Institute on Student Achievement, Curriculum, and Assessment

Joseph C. Conaty

Director

July 1998

A National Study of Charter SCHOOLS
3

Executive Summary 1998

Preface

This executive summary reviews highlights of the second-year report of the National Study

of Charter Schools (the Study), sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education as

authorized by the 1994 Amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The

Study is a four-year research program to document and analyze the charter school

movement. By means of both annual reports and a series of occasional papers, the Study

will provide information about how many and what kind of charter schools become

operational, about those factors that facilitate or hinder the charter schools’ development

and implementation, and about how schools are implementing their charters. The Study

will also collect data and conduct analyses of the impact of charter schools on student

achievement and on local and state public education systems. The second-year report

presents information about charter schools for the 1996–97 school year. It is based on a

telephone survey designed to collect data from all operational charter schools as well as

information collected during site visits to 91 charter schools.
4

A National Study of Charter SCHOOLS

Charter Schools in Perspective

The charter school phenomenon that seemed radical only a few years ago is now an

accepted part of public education in many parts of the country. From a slow start in a few

states, the charter movement has grown rapidly: by fall 1997 approximately 700 charters

were operating in 29 states and the District of Columbia—and their numbers are likely to

grow rapidly over the next few years.

Charter schools are public schools, but what sets them apart is their charter—a contract

with a state or local agency that provides them with public funds for a specified time

period. The charter itself states the terms under which the school can be held accountable

for improving student performance and achieving goals set out in the charter. This contract

frees charter developers from a number of regulations that otherwise apply to public

schools. 

The freedoms accorded to charter schools have raised an array of hopes and fears about

the consequences of introducing charter schools into the public system. Some people hope

that charter schools developed by local educators, parents, community members, school

boards, and other sponsors might provide both new models of schooling and competitive

pressures on public schools that will improve the current system. Others fear that charter

schools might, at best, be little more than escape valves that relieve pressure for genuine

reform and, at worst, add to centrifugal forces that threaten to pull public education apart. 

Time will tell which hopes and fears are realized. Presently, the rapid expansion of

charters testifies to widespread excitement about the charter idea, but it tells us little

about the reality of charter schools. The purpose of this Second-Year Report of the National

Study of Charter Schools is to describe how charter schools are being implemented at this

still-early stage of their evolution. Subsequent reports of the National Study will address

broad policy issues concerning the charter school movement and its potential effect on

America’s system of public education.
5

Executive Summary 1998

The Study s Focus

The Study addresses three major research questions:

■ How have charter schools been implemented?

■ Under what conditions, if any, have they improved student achievement?

■ What impact have they had on public education?

Drawing from research evidence, the Study also asks broad policy questions:

■ What models of education have charter schools developed that can be used by 

other public schools?

■ What lessons can be learned from the charter school experience for public 

education, and what implications should be drawn for state and national policy?

■ How might charter schools evolve in the coming decade?

This Report presents interim findings that focus on describing how charter schools are

being implemented. Subsequent reports will address all the questions listed above.

The Study’s research methodology consists of annual phone interview surveys of all

charter schools; repeated field visits to a sample of charter schools and their surrounding

districts; the administration of student achievement tests over time at a sample of charter

schools; the collection of existing student assessments for a sample of charter schools and

for other public schools at district and state levels; analyses across states of charter laws,

state agency rulings and procedures, court rulings, and education policy; and case studies

of how charter school policies and local practices have worked and affected public

education in five states. The findings presented in this Report rely on our second wave of

telephone surveys to all cooperating charter schools that were open to children during the

1996–97 school year,1 visits to 91 field sites across the country, and extensive analysis of

state charter laws.

1 There were 428 charter schools in operation as of January 1997. The Study’s quantitative

findings are based on 89 percent of these schools.
6

A National Study of Charter SCHOOLS

Growth Trends

The number of charter schools is growing. The number of charter schools in

operation continued to grow rapidly, with 279 additional charters opening in the 1997–98

school year. Taking into account 19 charter school closures, 693 charters were in operation

in the 1997–98 school year in 23 states and the District of Columbia. If the various branches

of charter schools in Arizona were counted as separate charter schools, the number of

charter schools in operation was approximately 781. During the 1997 legislative session,

four new states—Mississippi, Nevada, Ohio, and Pennsylvania—passed charter

legislation; 29 states and the District of Columbia had charter laws as of September 30,

1997. 

Fewer than one in twenty charter schools have closed. By the beginning of the

1997–98 school year, 19 charter schools of the 433 operational until that time had ceased

operation. They closed voluntarily, had their charters revoked, or merged their operations

with other charter schools. 

Charter renewals. Twenty-nine charter schools responding to the telephone survey

reported that their charter had come up for renewal. All of these schools reported that

their charters were renewed for periods ranging from one to three years.

Charter schools enroll only about 0.5 percent of public school students in

the 17 states where charter schools were operating in the 1996–97 school

year. Over 100,000 students attend charter schools. Charter school enrollment varies

from less than one-tenth of one percent of the state’s public school enrollment in Florida,

Illinois, and Louisiana to more than two percent of the state’s enrollment in Arizona.

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98

number of open charter schools

school year

THE GROWTH OF CHARTER SCHOOLS

YEAR 2 

FINDINGS
7

Executive Summary 1998

The State Role

The charter concept envisions not only improved individual schools, but also the

possibility of an alternative system of public education. Schools are given autonomy from

regulations in exchange for accountability for results. The First-Year Report (1997)

showed that the chartering statutes differ dramatically from state to state as to the extent

and nature of the autonomy they allow. State statutes also vary greatly with respect to the

number of charter schools allowed, the conditions of accountability and renewal, and the

types of charter schools permitted. Thus, different charter approaches are being tried

simultaneously across the country. 

KEY LEGISLATIVE FEATURES 

Although charter laws vary greatly across states, several key features dictate the number

and types of charter schools that are created within each state.

■ WHO CAN GRANT CHARTERS. In 11 states only the local school board can grant

charters (in five of the states, denial can be appealed to another agency); in five states,

a single state agency can grant charters; in five states a local school board and a state

board must approve the charter; in five states and the District of Columbia, more than

one agency can grant charters. The remaining three states are mixed models with the

local school board allowed to grant public school conversions and the state board

allowed to grant newly created charter schools.

■ TYPES OF SCHOOLS ALLOWED. Most states (20) allow both newly created and

conversion schools, four states only allow public conversions, and five states and the

District of Columbia allow newly created schools and public and private conversions.

1991

Minnesota(26)

1992

California(130)

1993

Colorado(50)

Georgia(21)

Massachusetts(24)

Michigan(104)

New Mexico(5)

Wisconsin(17)

1994

Arizona(140)

Hawaii(2)

Kansas(1)

1995

Alaska(15)

Arkansas(0)

Delaware(3)

N.Hampshire(0)

Louisiana(6)

Rhode Island(1)

Wyoming(0)

1996

Connecticut(12)

DC(3)

Florida(33)

Illinois(8)

New Jersey(13)

NC(34)

SC(1)

Texas(38)

1997

Mississippi(0)

Nevada(0)

Ohio(0)

Pennsylvania(6)

STATES WITH CHARTER LEGISLATION, BY YEAR OF FIRST ENACTMENT

as of September 1997
8

A National Study of Charter SCHOOLS

■ NUMBER OF SCHOOLS ALLOWED. Most states (16) and the District of Columbia

establish some limit on the number of charter schools or the number of students

enrolled in charter schools. Thirteen states have no limit on the number of schools or

students. 

■ WAIVERS OF STATE LAWS. Most states (17) and the District of Columbia allow

automatic waivers of most of the education code while in 10 states, charter schools

must apply for specific waivers. In two states, however, charter schools are

responsible for following most of the education code.

Possible legislative trends. Several states amended their charter legislation during

the 1997 legislative session, and two trends may be emerging. Some states with older

charter legislation are relaxing their limits on the number of charter schools, and some

are providing increased flexibility in the charter-granting process. Legislation in the four

new charter states—Mississippi, Nevada, Ohio, and Pennsylvania—reflect great

differences in state approaches, with two states allowing greater opportunity for charter

developers and the other two having more restrictions. 
9

Executive Summary 1998

Characteristics of Charter Schools

School reformers have often called for small schools as ways to effect change and produce

improved student learning. As the findings below show most charter schools are small 

and newly created, which ultimately may be the most important aspect of the charter

movement, regardless of the exact nature of their educational program. 

Most charter schools are small, particularly compared to other public

schools. Charter schools have an estimated median enrollment of about 150 students,

whereas other public schools in the charter states have a median of about 500 students.

More than 60 percent of charter schools enroll fewer than 200 students, whereas about 16

percent of other public schools have fewer than 200 students. Charter schools begun

recently have a higher proportion of small schools with fewer than 100 students than

schools opened in earlier years.

Many charter schools have non-traditional grade configurations. Charter

schools include a higher proportion of K through 12, K through 8, and ungraded schools

than other public schools.

Most charter schools are newly created schools, which are smaller than

pre-existing public schools. An estimated 62 percent of charter schools were newly

created; the remainder are pre-existing public schools (25 percent) or pre-existing private

schools (13 percent) that converted to charter status. The median school size for newly

created schools is 116 students, compared to a median of more than 380 students for preexisting public schools.

About two-thirds of pre-existing charter schools were previously public

schools. Sixty-five percent of pre-existing schools were previously public schools.

Private school conversions are allowed in only four of the 16 states.

ESTIMATED ENROLLMENT IN CHARTER SCHOOLS (1996–97) AND ALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

IN THE 15 CHARTER STATES PLUS DC (1994–95)

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

under 100 100-199 200-599 600-999 1,000 

or more student enrollment

% of schools

MEDIAN ENROLLMENT

CHARTER SCHOOLS 149 ALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS 505
10

A National Study of Charter SCHOOLS

Students of Charter Schools

The Study found no evidence to support the fear that charter schools as a group

disproportionately serve White and economically advantaged students. The evidence

summarized below suggests a different picture: Most charter schools have similar

demographic characteristics as other public schools, except that about one out of three

charter schools focus on minority or economically disadvantaged students. 

Charter schools as a group generally have a similar racial/ethnic distribution

as all public schools. About one-half of charter and all public schools serve

predominantly White students, about one-quarter of charter and all public schools serve

predominantly non-White students, and the remainder serve a diverse group of students. 

Charter schools in several states have a higher proportion of schools

predominantly serving students of color. Of the states with at least ten

operational charter schools, California, Colorado, and Arizona have a somewhat higher

average school percentage of White students in charter schools than in all public schools.

Michigan, Minnesota, Texas, Massachusetts, and Wisconsin have a lower average

percentage of White students in charter schools than in all public schools, with the first

three states having a considerably lower average. Charter schools in Michigan,

Minnesota, Texas, and Wisconsin clearly serve a higher proportion of students of color

than other public schools in the corresponding state. 

Racial All public schools Charter 

categories in 15 charter schools

states plus DC

White, not of 

Hispanic origin 52.0% 56.1%

Black, not of 

Hispanic origin 15.5% 15.5%

Hispanic 22.5% 22.3%

Asian or 

Pacific Islander 4.6% 4.9%

American Indian 

or Alaska Native 4.9% 1.2%

Other1 0.5% NA

ESTIMATED RACIAL DISTRIBUTION OF CHARTER SCHOOLS (1996–97) 

AND ALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN 15 CHARTER STATES PLUS DC (1994–95)

1 The National Center for Education Statistics does not report an “other”

racial category.
11

Executive Summary 1998

Most charter schools are similar to their districts on student racial/ethnic

and income level characteristics, but about a third are more likely to serve

students of color and low-income students. The Study estimates that 60 percent

of the charter schools are not racially distinct from their surrounding district (in the sense

that the school’s percentage of White students is within 20 percent of the district’s average

percentage of White students.) About one in three charter schools serve a distinctively

higher percentage of students of color than the district. Insofar as charter schools are

racially distinctive from their surrounding districts, the evidence indicates that they are

much more likely to enroll students of color. Only five percent of charter schools enroll a

percentage of White students higher (by at least 20 percent) than the percentage of White

students served by their surrounding district. 

Of the 34 percent of charter schools that serve predominantly low-income children, two out

of three (63 percent) serve a distinctively higher percentage of poor children than their

district average; most of the other such schools are not distinct from their districts. In

contrast, about half the charter schools serve primarily students who are not low-income.

Fifty-one percent of these schools are similar to their district in terms of the percentage of

economically disadvantaged students. 

A sizeable minority of charter schools serve special populations. The Study

estimates that approximately one-fifth of charter schools may serve a particular student

population. At least 32 charter schools serve more than two-thirds African-American

students, 13 serve more than two-thirds Native American children, 22 have more than twothirds Hispanic students, and eight serve more than 50 percent special education

students. In general, the Study estimates that the percentage of students with limited

English proficiency (LEP) served in charter schools (12.7 percent) is about the same as in

all public schools (11.5 percent). Without regard to differences across states, the reported

percentage of students with disabilities at charter schools (8 percent) is somewhat less

than for all public schools in these states (11 percent). 

ESTIMATED RACIAL DISTINCTIVENESS OF CHARTER SCHOOLS

COMPARED TO SURROUNDING DISTRICTS (1996–97)

not distinct from district

60%

higher concentrations

of non-white students

35%

lower concentration of

non-white students

5%
12

A National Study of Charter SCHOOLS

Why Charter Schools are Started

and What Attracts Parents to Them

Charters start from the inspiration of individual educators, groups of parents, community

leaders, or teachers with a dream. They want something different for children. They

gather support, overcome skeptics and political resistance if they need to—and they often

do—and create a proposal that says why they want to start their charter school, what

students they want to serve, and what they plan to do. Once a charter school is founded,

parents and students make deeply personal decisions, exercise their choice and take a

chance on enrolling in this new opportunity. Their reasons vary greatly, as one might

expect. 

Most charter schools are in demand. More than 70 percent of charter schools in

the telephone sample said they had more applicants than could attend their school.

Many parents with students in charter schools were dissatisfied with their

experience in other public schools. In focus group discussions, parents and

students consistently voiced dissatisfaction with their previous public schools, expressing

concerns about low academic standards, a dehumanizing culture, student safety, and

unresponsiveness to serious parent involvement.

ESTIMATED PERCENTAGE OF STATE ENROLLMENT OF LEP STUDENTS,

STUDENTS ELIGIBLE FOR FREE AND REDUCED LUNCH, AND STUDENTS

WITH DISABILITIES FOR 15 CHARTER STATES PLUS DC 

% Eligible for % LEP % Students 

Free and Students with

Reduced Lunch Disabilities

Charter 

Schools 36% 13% 8%

All Public 

Schools in 15 

Charter States 

plus DC 40% 12% 11%
13

Executive Summary 1998

Newly created charter schools tend to be established to realize an

alternative vision for public education. The majority of charter schools are newly

created, and most such schools seek to realize an alternative vision of schooling or to serve

a special target population of students. Public schools that convert to charter status also

seek an educational vision, but often start from an established—and frequently a highly

regarded—program. The primary reason why most such schools are begun is to gain

autonomy from their districts or by-pass various regulations. Private schools that convert

to charter status seek public funds so that they can stabilize their finances and attract

students, often students whose families could not afford private school tuition. 

Most charter schools say they attract parents and students by focusing on

academics, but they also feature other attractions. Charter schools tend to focus

on one or a combination of the following themes in seeking to attract students—a quality

academic program with high standards, a supportive environment often based on small

school size, a flexible approach to educational and cultural programming, or, in sharp

contrast, a highly structured environment.

How powerful is this feature in attracting Powerful or

parents and students to your school? very powerful

Nurturing environment 93%

Safe environment 90%

Value system 88%

Quality of academic program 84%

High standards for achievement 83%

Small class size 83%

Specialized curriculum focus 78%

Small School Size 73%

Clear goals for each student 73%

Structured environment 71%

Adaptive environment 69%

Central parent role 68%

Dress/behavior code 50%

Extensive use of technology 47%

Flexible school schedule 43%

Services for disabled students 34%

Extensive community service programs 29%

Focus on cultural/ethnic needs 33%

Longer school year 19%

Support for home schooling 14%

WHY PARENTS AND STUDENTS MIGHT BE ATTRACTED TO CHARTER SCHOOLS
Challenges Implementing 

Charter Schools

Regardless of how they started, practically all charter schools have had to overcome

obstacles and problems during their development. 

Most charter schools cite resource limitations as a serious implementation

difficulty. Lack of start-up funds was the most frequently cited difficulty—almost six out

of ten charter schools reported it as difficult or very difficult. Inadequate operating funds,

cited by four out of ten charter schools, was the second most commonly reported difficulty. 

Newly created charter schools are more likely to cite resource limitations

as a major difficulty than pre-existing charter schools. Nearly two-thirds of

newly created charter schools reported lack of start-up funding as the most difficult

obstacle faced by the school while about four out of ten pre-existing schools did so.

Inadequate facilities and lack of planning time also posed more serious difficulties for

newly created schools than for pre-existing schools.

Political resistance and regulations caused implementation problems for

some schools. State or local board opposition and district and state level resistance and

regulations were cited as difficulties by 15 to 25 percent of charter schools. 

Some charter schools struggle to overcome internal conflicts. One in five

charter schools cited internal conflicts of various forms as posing serious difficulties.

Newly created schools were more likely to cite such issues than pre-existing schools.

A small percentage of pre-existing public schools cite difficulties with

union relationships. About ten percent of charter schools indicated that they had

difficult or very difficult relationships concerning teacher unions or collective bargaining

agreements.

Some challenges facing the newer generation of charter schools may be

less difficult. Schools opening in the early years of the charter movement faced greater

implementation difficulties with state or local boards, district regulations, and with state

department of education resistance and regulations, than schools opening in later years.

14

A National Study of Charter SCHOOLS
15

Executive Summary 1998

ESTIMATED PERCENTAGE OF SCHOOLS REPORTING DIFFICULTIES IN 

DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING THEIR CHARTERS

Barriers % of schools 

reporting 

barriers were 

difficult or 

very difficult

Lack of start-up funds 57.6%

Inadequate operating funds 41.1%

Inadequate facilities 38.6%

Lack of planning time 38.4%

State or local board opposition 23.1%

District resistance or regulations 18.3%

Internal conflicts 18.2%

State department of education 

resistance or regulations 14.8%

Union or bargaining 

unit resistance 11.3%

Health/safety regulations 10.4%

Accountability requirements 9.7%

Bargaining agreements 9.0%

Hiring staff 8.8%

Community opposition 6.9%

Federal regulations 6.3%

Teacher certification 

requirements 4.4%
16

A National Study of Charter SCHOOLS

About This Study

At the recommendation of Congress, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) is sponsoring

a National Study of Charter Schools. The Study is funded under contract number RC 95

196001 to RPP International, and is monitored by the National Institute on Student

Achievement, Curriculum, and Assessment. The research contract is coordinated with the

other ED charter school activities, including the State Grant Program, monitored by the

Department’s Office of Elementary and Secondary Education. 

The four year study includes:

■ An annual survey of all charter schools;

■ An ethnographic study of a stratified random sample of charter schools;

■ Longitudinal data on student achievement at a sample of charter schools;

■ Comparison of student achievement data in a sample of charter schools and 

their districts; and

■ State-level policy studies.

An electronic copy of this report, its Executive Summary, and other material from the

National Study also may be found at the following World Wide Web sites:

http://www.rppintl.com/

http://www.ed.gov/pubs/

http://www.uscharterschools.org/