When ‘School Choice’ Means the Opposite
The U.S. charter-school movement was meant to stimulate innovation. Instead, it’s enforcing uniformity.
It depends.
Photographer: Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesThis article is for subscribers only.
When Albert Shanker, the legendary teachers’ union leader, promoted the idea of charter schools 30 years ago, he was hoping to create flexibility from the constraints of education bureaucracies and union contracts so teachers and communities could experiment and innovate.
In the years since the first charter-school law was passed in Minnesota, in 1991, the charter movement has strayed far from Shanker’s original vision. Instead of community-based, educator-driven innovation, charters have grown into an industry dominated by like-minded management organizations that sometimes control hundreds of schools — some nationwide.