Adopted by the 1995 Session of the General Assembly, House Joint Resolution No. 551 and Senate Joint Resolution No. 334 established a nine-member joint subcommittee to study charter schools. While acknowledging variations in charter school legislation adopted in other states, the resolutions note the shared premise reflected in all charter school statutes: the establishment of locally initiated public schools, controlled by the initiating group and "relieved of state and local controls and mandates to the extent possible." The subcommittee was directed to review, among other things, the actual operations of charter schools in other states; various constitutional and funding issues; and the specific mechanics of charter school legislation, and is to make recommendations regarding the efficacy of such legislation.

The issue of educational excellence -- and the effective administration of public education -- continues to dominate headlines and legislative agendas. A number of states have grappled with school finance reform, and many have also explored initiatives such as school choice, vouchers, site-based management, school performance assessments, and teacher empowerment. Believing that the current structure of the public education system inhibits innovation and reform, some policymakers have supported alternatives that give schools increased authority and flexibility to implement programs that meet required instructional goals.

Combining various aspects of the choice and site-based management programs, the charter school concept espouses the creation of an autonomous public school, organized and operated by an individual or group pursuant to a charter or contract with a sponsor -- usually the state or local school board. Although released from compliance with various state education laws, the charter school remains accountable for its operations; the school must meet specified performance standards or lose its charter. Supporters of the charter school concept praise its cost effectiveness and its emphasis on outcomes and the empowerment of teachers and parents. Others, however, have voiced concerns regarding educational quality, pupil equity, and teacher employment issues, and contend that the mechanisms necessary to support education innovation already exist within the present system.

States contemplating the adoption of charter school legislation must consider a number of practical as well as policy questions. Not only must the sponsorship, governance, and funding of these schools be addressed, but also the participation of private schools, waivers of state education law, teacher employment issues, and the state's role in providing assistance. The 19 states that have already adopted charter school legislation -- Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming -- have resolved these issues through a number of variations of the basic charter school concept.

In the spring of 1995, nearly 240 charter schools had been approved nationwide; approximately 110 were in operation across the United States. Even if every charter application were approved, charter schools would comprise less than 2 percent of the schools in a state, and in some states, less than 0.5 percent. An August 1995 survey of about 165 charter schools -- or about two-thirds of those in operation in seven states -- indicates that most charter schools are designed to serve a cross-section of students; at-risk pupils received the next greatest focus, followed by gifted/talented and learning-disabled students. The most frequently cited reason for initiating a charter school was to provide improved instruction and learning opportunities. Also influencing decisions to create charter schools were, among other things, the desire for innovation, adherence to particular principles or educational philosophies, and interest in serving at-risk pupils. Charter schools use a variety of accountability mechanisms, including standardized tests, state assessment programs, student portfolios, and performance-based tests; however, there are no data available as yet to indicate improvement in pupil performance.

Application of the charter school concept in Virginia's system of public education necessarily includes consideration of state constitutional and statutory provisions and related policy issues regarding educational excellence, the effective administration of public education, and the responsibility and authority of local school boards. As a public school, any charter school established in the Commonwealth would be subject to those Standards of Quality (SOQ) mandated by the Constitution and established in the Code of Virginia; compliance with these minimum educational standards could not be waived by a charter agreement. Responsibility for funding a charter school would be shared by the Commonwealth and the locality, just as responsibility for funding the SOQ is now apportioned between the state and localities pursuant to the Virginia Constitution. Another significant consideration in the development of any charter school legislation in the Commonwealth is the supervisory authority of local school boards, as the Virginia Constitution vests local school boards with responsibility for the supervision and daily management of public schools.

Increased educational opportunities, educational quality, and flexibility in the implementation of educational standards have received repeated review by the legislative and executive branches in recent years. Inter- and intra-district choice programs have been statutorily authorized and are the focus of Board regulation. Recent sessions have considered not only charter schools, but also collaborative decision making, single-gender classes, and site-based management. Although the charter schools bills considered in 1995 failed to pass, the legislation raised significant issues that warranted consideration by the joint subcommittee.

In pursuing its study, the joint subcommittee reviewed in great detail pertinent state constitutional provisions and case law regarding the administration of public education in Virginia. The joint subcommittee considered required educational standards and methods of implementing these standards as well as flexibility within the present educational system. The actual operations of charter schools in other states also merited review, as did the specific components of charter school legislation. Finally, the joint subcommittee examined funding and policy issues, including any financial incentives or disincentives for establishing a charter school, access and admissions criteria, and teacher employment concerns.

The joint subcommittee therefore recommends the following parameters for charter schools legislation:

• Charter school as public school. Charter schools may be created as new public schools or through the conversion of an existing public school; no private schools or nonpublic home-based educational program could become a charter school. Further, as a public school, a Virginia charter school would be "free" -- no tuition could be charged, except as is currently permitted for nonresident students pursuant to § 22.1-5. Subject to the SOQ, state and federal anti-discrimination laws, and court-ordered desegregation plans, these schools are deemed part of the school division and are accountable to the local school board.

• Local option. To preserve local option and to prevent administrative and fiscal problems prompted by unsolicited charter applications, local school boards would have to affirmatively act to announce their intention to receive, review, and approve charter school applications. Further, a school board should craft its own schedule for review, public input, and approvals.

• Role of State Board of Education. Because the Virginia Constitution vests the "general supervision" of the public schools in the Board of Education (BOE) and makes the Board primarily responsible for "effectuating the educational policy," the operation of any charter schools in Virginia must necessarily be consistent with this state education policy.

• Educational Standards. As a public school, any charter school established in the Commonwealth would be subject to the SOQ mandated by the Constitution and established in the Code of Virginia; compliance with these minimum educational standards could not be waived by a charter agreement.

• Funding. Responsibility for funding a charter school should be shared by the Commonwealth and the locality. Funding should be based on a mechanism similar to that used for some Governor's Schools and some alternative education programs. While the details of particular funding arrangements should be negotiated in the charter agreement to accurately reflect actual support services and expenses, legislation must nonetheless be carefully crafted to ensure that no additional requirements are placed on state or local education funds to support charter schools:

• Charter application. Any person, group, or organization may apply to operate a charter school. Each charter application must include a school mission statement; goals and performance standards; evidence of parental, teacher, and pupil support; a statement of need; a plan for displaced pupils and teachers; and a description of governance, employment conditions, and other related matters.

• Approval authority and appeals. Ultimate authority for the approval of charter schools should rest exclusively with local school boards; decisions of the local school board to grant, deny, revoke, or to fail to renew a charter should be final and not subject to appeal. The school board has no obligation to renew a charter contract.

• Local school board authority. Consistent with the supervisory authority of local school boards articulated in the Virginia Constitution, charter schools legislation should provide for the negotiation of operations issues, but preserve the local board's authority over matters that are seen as "essential and indispensable" to this supervisory power.

• Flexibility and waivers. Waivers from state and local regulations should be specifically negotiated in the charter agreement, rather than through a "superwaiver" provision in any charter schools legislation. Because the state Board, and not the local school board, retains authority over state education regulations, any legislation should include some provision for waivers granted on a case-by-case basis pursuant to each charter agreement. Special care must be taken to ensure compliance with regulations governing health and safety, federal law and regulation, and the SOQ and standards that meet or exceed the Standards of Learning (SOL).

• Admissions policies. While enrollment should be open to all children in the school division, charter schools should be given the flexibility to address particular curricula or pupil populations, such as the at-risk or gifted. In no event, however, should admissions policies be allowed to violate state and federal antidiscrimination laws or any court-ordered desegregation plans.

• Teacher licensure. Charter school legislation should specify that instructional personnel employed by a charter school be licensed by the Board of Education.

• Restrictions on Number and Term of Charters. The school board may restrict the number of charters granted, and no more than 2 charters may be granted per division before July 1, 1998. The term of any charter -- whether initial or renewed -- may not exceed three years.

• Evaluation. To ensure accountability, an annual evaluation of charter schools should be incorporated in charter schools legislation. In addition, the State Board should report annually to the Governor and the General Assembly regarding the operations of these special schools.

• Technical Assistance. The Department of Education should provide technical assistance to those school boards that permit the establishment of charter schools.