When I walked through the door of Cheyenne Mountain Charter Academy in Colorado Springs exactly 21 days before the first day of school, I had no idea what was in store for me. Just preparing to open on that first day required attention to an incredible number of details: completing the remodeling of the county warehouse space that the school would occupy; hiring a secretary; and ordering supplies, equipment, books, and all the other materials needed to run a school. Just to complete the student registration process, we had to locate and organize every one of the student record files. Most important, we had to train teachers and teacher's aides in the school's philosophy and approach. But, we did it. Cheyenne Mountain Charter Academy proudly opened its doors to the first 249 students on August 21, 1995. We were right on schedule.
A Word About Charter Schools
- the opportunity to exercise greater personal and professional judgment in creating exemplary educational programs;
- the ability to freely select curriculum, textbooks, and the instructional delivery system;
- the opportunity to create a setting permeated by a love of learning;
- the opportunity for teachers to operate as true professionals, playing key roles in determining the best educational programs for students;
- an enhanced role for district office personnel; and
- the opportunity for parents to be integral members of the education team.
Charter schools are neither educational panaceas nor fads. The charter concept allows educators to combine genuine educational diversity and cutting-edge innovation with rigorous standards and accountability. And accountability is critical in charter schools; the charter document must contain a clear statement of the standards and conditions of operation. In most states, including Colorado, violations of those standards and conditions can be grounds for revocation of the charter.
Because charter schools operate as self-contained entities within a larger school system, all the actors—board members, administrators, teachers, parents, and students—interact directly. The layers of decision-making procedures that frequently are found even in small school districts simply are not present.
In addition, charter schools are—by their nature—schools of choice for all concerned. Inherent in self-selection is the notion of increased commitment. For parents, there is a deep commitment to participating in their child's education. For teachers, there is a heightened commitment to ensuring that all students—even those who previously experienced learning or behavioral difficulties—can achieve. For students, there is a clear awareness of their purpose for being in school.
The Cheyenne Mountain Experience
Cheyenne Mountain Charter Academy was conceived in the aftermath of a textbook controversy. The district's social studies selection committee had chosen new books through the regular committee process. A group of parents objected to the choices, and when the school board refused to change the selections for the elementary and junior high levels, a core group of parents decided to write an application to create a new school. They presented their proposal for Cheyenne Mountain Charter Academy to the board in December 1994. It took several months and intense negotiations, but the board finally approved the charter in May 1995.
I came to the Cheyenne Mountain principalship at the 11th hour, with the knowledge that the charter school's board of directors had already fired their first principal. I brought with me a passionate belief in the potential of charter schools, years of experience as a school administrator, and the determination that—working together—we would overcome all obstacles.
The E. D. Hirsch Core Knowledge series was to provide the scope and sequence for the school's basic disciplines. Alpha Phonics, the Saxon math series, the SRA spelling and writing series, and the Monart drawing program were to complement the Core Knowledge series. Examples from literature and history would serve as models of virtue in action. Parents were to have significant involvement in the school, and parents constituted the board of directors. There was to be a teacher's aide in every classroom, a maximum class size of 26, a two weeks school year longer than the other schools in the district, and merit pay for employees.
As it turned out, I was in for a huge surprise. Although, before I would accept the job, I clearly articulated the need for strong leadership by the principal, literally before the construction dust had settled, the board changed its level and scope of activity dramatically. Board members began to make decisions about virtually everything—from the tiny details of the day-to-day operations to hiring new staff. Unfortunately, they often forgot to inform me, so I learned about these things from distraught teachers and irate parents, and in other disconcerting ways. In retrospect, it seems clear that they were still writing the script for their school vision. And, they were unable to communicate what they wanted others to do because they didn't know what they wanted themselves.
Board members spent most of their days at the school, observing and making decisions. To my dismay, they steadfastly neglected their commitment to create a job description for me that would clarify my evolving role. The situation became a challenge of the rarest kind, a guessing game about what the next new expectation would be.
The curriculum selection process proved to be one of the biggest challenges. The board president told me how curriculum had been chosen for Cheyenne Mountain. She said that "The founders were engaged in a continuing process of research and review that did not end with the December 1994 submission of their application."
Several parents and some teachers told me they had volunteered repeatedly to help review curriculum materials, but the board rejected their offers. In retrospect, that should have been at least a yellow flag about how the board intended to run the school. The board members had made it clear by their actions that they alone would decide what would be taught and how it would be taught.
A Question of Semantics
In late fall, after the opening of the school, I began to understand the true nature of the school's problems. The founding board intended that the "parent-run school" they had established would be something quite different from what they had communicated to the parent body. It became increasingly clear that the founders intended that they, being parents, would run the school. Although this is a perfectly legitimate interpretation, it surprised most of the other parents, who had selected the school in part because of the perceived opportunity to become more involved with their children's education. And, these parents learned, they had no recourse: The bylaws protected board members from recall except by a majority vote of the board.
In spite of this, I do believe that the board members had good intentions. They were working to create the school of their dreams, and they were determined not to let anyone or anything get in their way. That determination ensured that the school continued to operate and to move forward. Unfortunately, few of the other people involved understood at the outset where the board was headed, and this resulted in disappointment and confusion.
Nevertheless, many parents continued to assume that they would be involved in any additional changes in the curriculum. But when the board switched from an intensive, systematic phonics reading program to another program with no input from parents or staff, parents began to realize how little influence they had. One of the promises the board had made before the school opened was that they would not violate parental values. Yet, when a number of parents pointed to curricular materials that they found objectionable, the board was not responsive to them. As the school year progressed, the board-controlled curriculum and materials selection process led to continued dissatisfaction from parents and teachers.
Some Lessons Learned
With all of this, one might wonder why anyone would want the headache of being part of a charter school. The answer is easy. In spite of the confusion, the students benefited enormously. I attribute that noteworthy accomplishment to the very nature of a charter school. Everyone who was there—every teacher, every parent, and I—had chosen to be there. We were passionately committed to making the school work for the good of the students, even though we were unable in that first year to function as we had envisioned. Just as the Cheyenne Mountain Board worked so diligently to create their vision, other groups can create charter schools to reflect their own priorities and educational philosophy.
And, when the founders build in safeguards during the planning phase, charter schools also can reflect the beliefs of both staff members and parents. In the Cheyenne Mountain case, some well-framed questions could have identified the potential pitfalls. If the founders had, at the outset, established a clear avenue for making changes, they would have minimized or avoided many other potentially disruptive situations.
I believe more strongly than ever that when a group of committed people work together to create their ideal school, the advantages will far outweigh the disadvantages. When teachers help to create such a school, they can feel free to work as the professionals they want to be. When the governance structure is planned thoughtfully and with consideration for all stakeholders, the school can enjoy an extraordinary level of commitment from all participants. When their involvement is defined in ways that contribute to maximum student achievement, parents can participate at the most meaningful level. And, because charter schools will be closed if they are not accountable for results, they can serve as laboratories for educational innovation and experimentation and models for other schools throughout the country.
Even with the pitfalls, there were enormous triumphs at Cheyenne Mountain Charter Academy. For example, one 5th grader who entered Cheyenne Mountain at the 1st grade reading level completed the year reading on grade level. A 2nd grader who entered scoring at the 4th percentile ended the year scoring at the 30th percentile. An 8th grader who could barely read and write when he entered the school could write acceptable compositions by the end of the year. All students benefited from the rich curriculum and the rigorous standards. Most of all, the students benefited from the fact that their parents and teachers had chosen the school and were wholeheartedly committed to making a difference.
Charter schools provide the local control with accountability that many educators support and thousands of parents and community members want. With collaborative, cooperative planning, charter schools can prove to be a boon to regular public schools. They can provide an infusion of inspiration and energy from within the public school system itself.
It is in the best interest of all public schools to help charter schools succeed. Everyone—especially our students—will benefit.
