Special Education in American Charter Schools: State level policy, practices and tensions

Rhim, Lauren Morando; McLaughlin, Margaret J.

doi:10.1080/03057640120086611

Cited by 26 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Colorado and Wisconsin studies report reduced access to charters for students who qualify for Special Education (McLaughlin & Henderson, 1998;Drame, 2011) which echoes qualitative findings at the national level (Rhim & McLaughlin, 2010). Additionally, in an empirical related study, charters that did enroll Special Education students at rates similar to district averages had negative growth outcomes in both reading and math for both the general population and, more pronouncedly, for those enrolled in Special Education (Drame, 2010).…”

Section: Access and Provision By Program Special Education And Englimentioning

confidence: 71%

“…Therefore, we turn to six districts, summarized in Table 2, all with over 25% enrollment in charter schools. As a recap, based on prior research, namely (Drame, 2011;Frankenburg et al, 2010;McLaughlin & Henderson, 1998;Rhim & McLaughlin, 2010) our hypotheses are that charter schools will enroll a lower percentage of students in specific subgroups (Special Education students, English Learners, and students receiving FRL) and may enroll lower percentages of African American and Latinx students. The race/ethnicity hypothesis varies by known differences in certain group interests in charter schools.…”

Section: Differences Between Public and Charter Schools In Demographimentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Education privatization in the United States: Increasing saturation and segregation

Adamson

Galloway

2019

EPAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article outlines different forms of education privatization operating globally, examines their prevalence within the United States, and analyzes whether student marginalization and segregation occurs at the local level. We analyze six U.S. districts with higher saturation levels of charter schools, the most predominant type of privatization (Camden, NJ, Washington DC, Flint, MI, Detroit, MI, Natomas, CA, and Oakland, CA). We find education privatization increasing in the US, but unevenly dispersed, with charter schools concentrated primarily in urban areas serving students of color. Furthermore, segregation in education remains a major issue for all types of schools, with students of color in urban contexts often attending intensely segregated schools (over 90% students of color). Instead of mitigating the segregation problem, student selection by charter school appears to exacerbate it, specifically for special education students.

show abstract

Section: Access and Provision By Program Special Education And Englimentioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Differences Between Public and Charter Schools In Demographimentioning

confidence: 99%

Education privatization in the United States: Increasing saturation and segregation

Adamson

Galloway

2019

EPAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most charter districts are small, but located in urban, densely populated areas. Charter districts tend to serve a higher percent of low-income students, but fewer English language learners and students in special education, career and technical education, or gifted programs (Cremata et al, 2013;Rhim & McLaughlin, 2001). Directly applying a state's TPS district sector school finance model to the charter sector may not be appropriate, for reasons we describe below.…”

Section: Using Horizontal and Vertical Equity To Understand Charter Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Do charter schools receive their fair share of funding? School finance equity for charter and traditional public schools

Knight

Toenjes

2020

EPAA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

U.S. charter schools are publicly funded through state school finance formulas that often mirror the traditional public school finance systems. While charter school advocates and critics disagree over whether charters receive an equitable share of funding, few discussions are based on rigorous analyses of funding and expenditures. Most prior analyses, especially those presented in policy briefs or white papers, examine average funding differences without exploring underlying cost factors between the two sectors. Our purpose is to demonstrate how careful analysis of charter school funding with appropriate methodological approaches can shed light on disagreements about charter school finance policy. Using detailed school finance data from Texas as a case study, we find that after accounting for differences in accounting structures and cost factors, charter schools receive significantly more state and local funding compared to traditional public schools with similar structural characteristics and student demographics. However, many small charter schools are actually underfunded relative to their traditional public school counterparts. Policy simulations demonstrate that on average, each student who transfers to a charter school increases the cost to the state by $1,500. We discuss the implications of these findings for both school finance policy in Texas and nationally.

show abstract

“…From the 1999-2000 to 2013-2014 school years, student enrollment in charter schools has increased from 0.3 to 2.7 million students, which accounts for 5% of the total national student enrollment in public schools (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2017). SRSES are also enrolling in growing numbers in charter schools, accounting for 10.5% of the student enrollment (Rhim, Gumz, & Henderson, 2015).…”

Section: Enter Charter Schoolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thirteen percent of SRSES in charter schools were moderately included (i.e., between 40% and 79% of time in general education classrooms) and only 6.7% of SRSES in charter schools were experiencing low inclusion (i.e., less than 40% of time in general education classrooms), while those rates for SRSES in traditional public schools were 22.5% and 15.5%, respectively. More recently, Rhim and colleagues (2015) found that 84% of SRSES in charter schools, in comparison with 67% of SRSES in NS, were placed in the high inclusion category. Only 9% and 4% of SRSES in charter schools were placed in the moderate and low inclusion category (respectively) in comparison with 19% and 12% (respectively) of SRSES in NS.…”

Section: Institutional Theory and Charter Schools Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Charter Schools Address Racial Inequities Evidenced in Access to the General Education Classroom? A Longitudinal Study in Chicago Public Schools

Waitoller

Maggin

2018

Remedial and Special Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study presents a longitudinal analysis of racial inequities evidenced in placement patterns in the least restrictive environment (LRE). We compared placement trends in neighborhoods and charter schools for Black and White students receiving special education services (SRSES). Drawing from the concept of institutional isomorphism and using a longitudinal analysis of odds ratio, we examined annual school data from 2008 to 2012 on students’ placement in the LRE in Chicago Public Schools (CPS). Our findings indicate that over time charter schools mirror neighborhood schools’ (NS) racial inequities evidenced in access to general education classrooms.

show abstract

Special Education in American Charter Schools: State level policy, practices and tensions

Cited by 26 publications

References 1 publication

Education privatization in the United States: Increasing saturation and segregation

Education privatization in the United States: Increasing saturation and segregation

Do charter schools receive their fair share of funding? School finance equity for charter and traditional public schools

Can Charter Schools Address Racial Inequities Evidenced in Access to the General Education Classroom? A Longitudinal Study in Chicago Public Schools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About