Why is the UK’s charter school industry so powerful?
By contrast, in the United States, the charter sector is largely dominated by private companies that do not have to reveal their sources of funding.
In the past decade, charter schools in the US have been accused of systematically misrepresenting their funding sources and of underpaying teachers, with many parents alleging that charter schools have discriminated against them.
The American public has not yet been asked to weigh in on charter schools’ political power.
However, it appears that the charter school lobby is well aware of the stakes and is attempting to influence public opinion in the name of public education.
“Charter schools have been on the rise in the last few years, with some saying that the market is growing and they can provide an alternative to traditional public schools,” says Paul R. Toth, a professor of education policy at Rutgers University, who has written extensively about charter schools.
Toths research has shown that charter school spending has increased dramatically in the past few years.
In 2015, charter school enrollment was 2.5 times larger than the national average and spending on charter school students nearly tripled from 2010 to 2016.
The trend has been especially pronounced in states that have adopted charter school rules, such as New Jersey and Virginia.
Tills research found that charter spending increased in states with the largest number of charter schools and the lowest charter school enrolments.
“What is particularly striking about charter school growth is that the growth in charter school funding has occurred across a wide spectrum of states,” Toth says.
For example, he notes that states with charter school expansions have seen the fastest growth in enrollment.
In states with limited charter school expansion, Toth notes, the growth was mostly driven by expansion in the non-traditional high-needs areas of the country.
In 2016, charter spending in the country’s most populous states accounted for 17.6% of all charter school expenditures.
For states with high charter school enrollments, the gap between charter and traditional school spending was just 1.4 percentage points.
However the charter expansion trend is not universal.
In many states, such charter schools are not allowed to expand in the same way that traditional schools are allowed to.
And in states where charter schools aren’t allowed to serve more than 5% of the student body, they are often not allowed access to taxpayer-funded funds.
These are just a few of the reasons why the charter schools lobby is actively seeking to influence state policies.
Tides says that the influence of the charter lobby has been “disturbing”.
“The charter school movement is one of the more potent, and influential, forces that’s been in the public sector for the last 30 years,” he says.
“It has become a political weapon, and it’s very effective in that it can shape policy.”
For example he points to the expansion of charter school slots in states like Ohio and Texas, where parents have pushed to create charter school zones.
Ohio has passed a law allowing charter schools to take advantage of the state’s existing high school slots and in Texas, lawmakers have allowed charters to expand their enrollment.
But many of these laws have been challenged by charter school opponents, including the California State Assembly and the California Supreme Court.
Totshe says that while charter schools often focus on the private sector, they also play a significant role in the political process.
“There is no doubt that charters are part of the political system in a number of states.
In some states, the political landscape has changed,” he said.
“The fact that the charters have been able to move to a state where there is a majority of charter supporters, and have been effective, shows that the public is willing to invest in a system that’s well-resourced and has strong public schools.”
The impact of the public school system on charter students and charter education in general The importance of charter education for students and for education has long been an important debate.
Tottes research has found that students from the poorest families tend to attend charter schools, whereas the most affluent students do not.
In a recent report, Tottys co-author, Christina O’Neill, a sociology professor at the University of Washington, found that the percentage of charter students who attend private or parochial schools increased from 1.3% in 2010 to 2.1% in 2016.
This was due in large part to the rise of charter expansion in those states, and the expansion in charter schools that have sprung up in the aftermath of school closures.
In California, charter expansion has been most notable in cities with the most charter schools expansion, such the San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles and the Santa Clara Valley.
In New York City, charter students have been disproportionately represented in public schools, where they have received more than half of the enrollment growth since 2010.
In other states, charters were more likely to enroll students of color, such states as California, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, Virginia and Texas.
However there is no clear consensus among researchers as to why the public