Author: Nelson Smith

In The Paperwork Pileup, authors Michael Q. McShane, Jenn Hatfield, and Elizabeth English assert that charter authorizers are often creating “onerous and lengthy” application processes that may scare off charter operators. Why keep harking back to anyone’s “original intent” when we’ve got more than two decades of actual experience to guide practice?

What we quickly discovered is that the two groups have a lot in common, starting with a keen shared interest in strong, sustainable public charter schools. The report is also a pretty good short course for anyone interested in knowing how the two sectors work.

Back in 2006, NACSA, the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, and the Thomas B. Fordham Institute issued ‘Turning the Corner to Quality,” a tough report on Ohio’s charter sector whose message … Read More

There are now more than a thousand charter school authorizers in the United States – 1,045 to be exact, according to the brand-new State of Charter School Authorizing 2013 (which in NACSA … Read More

Out today, NACSA’s new roadmap for authorizers who oversee schools that serve kids in dire straits. The title says it all: Anecdotes Aren’t Enough: An Evidence Based Approach to Accountability for Alternative … Read More

When people talk about “market accountability” for charter schools, they’re usually referring to parents; you have to keep attracting “customers” in the form of parents and students, or you close. But because … Read More

There is a really interesting thing going on in Washington, D.C.’s charter sector. The Public Charter School Board (PCSB) is moving toward approval of a new charter middle/high school (DC International or … Read More