Charter reform

In a state awash with pointless panels, where badly needed government reforms are focused on streamlining redundant and inefficient bureaucracies, is it a good thing to create yet another appointed board with oversight of public business? In the case of the Nevada State Public Charter School Authority Board, the answer is a resounding yes.

For too long, Nevada was a school choice wasteland, where the challenge of creating competition for public school monopolies was left almost solely to private and parochial institutions. Despite provisions in state law intended to encourage the creation of charter schools, the State Board of Education (previously dominated by career public educators) and the state Department of Education were hostile to charters.

Last year, Gov. Brian Sandoval succeeded in pushing part of his education reform agenda through the Legislature, headlined by changes in teacher evaluations and the makeup of the Board of Education. A lesser-known part of the package, however, was shifting the application and approval process for charter schools, as well as the oversight of them, from the Board of Education to the new charter school authority. Director Steven Canavero already has helped make changes to the way the body authorizes and supports charter schools.

The changes are bearing fruit. Not a single Nevada charter school opened in the 2010-11 school year, but five opened this year and five more could open next year, Mr. Canavero says. The state has just 31 charter schools, a low number compared to some of Nevada’s neighbors, but the enrollment in those campuses would create the third-largest school district in the state — a fact that underscores the importance of the authority’s work.

The board has its second meeting this afternoon. Eventually, the board will formulate a legislative agenda for the 2013 session. That agenda should focus on the greatest obstacle in opening a charter school: securing a building. Although charter schools receive about the same amount of per-student support that traditional public schools do — and charter schools that enroll low-income students can now get federal Title I funding — they do not receive any taxpayer funding for facilities. Construction or building rental overhead must be raised privately or drawn from the per-student allocation. One way to eliminate that obstacle: a law that allows a charter to take over a failing public campus.

Ultimately, charter schools are judged in the same way traditional public schools are: on whether students learn anything. But charters have a higher level of accountability because the authority can shut down a campus that isn’t getting the job done.

The deck is no longer stacked against charter schools in Nevada. If the authority does its job, charter schools will be able to do theirs, too.