Implementing Charters in Canada

What do all these factors suggest for the prospects of widespread chartering of Canadian schools? The implementation of charter schools is clearly a challenge, for it requires not only a shift in operations and basic assumptions, but new roles for all players in public education.

Charter schools may only be created when laws enabling them to do so have been passed. The timetable for implementation will depend upon the degree of public pressure for legislation and the response of provincial governments in the face of opposition by much of the education establishment. Success will depend upon resolution of these key issues: equity, governance, labour relations, quality of the legislation, and support mechanisms.

Equity

Canadian society values egalitarianism. If charter schools are perceived as instruments to divide students on the basis of class or ability, they will not succeed in capturing public and policy-makers' support. New Brunswick's Minister of Education, Jim Lockyear, remarked in February, 1996, “We have categorically decided we are not doing charter schools. They go against the principle of equal opportunity which has served New Brunswick well.”     “New Brunswick Drops Boards,” Globe and Mail, February 26, 1996. -Note Several months earlier, B.C. education minister Art Charbonneau also came out “four square” against charter schools claiming, “I do not support charter schools. It would lead to a two-tiered system. I believe charter schools are elitist.”    “Charter schools conference draws fire and praise,” Vancouver Sun, November 6, 1995. -Note

Teachers' unions also couch their objections to charters in language of concern for equity. “Charters schools—a treat for the rich and influential” headlines one Ontario Secondary Teachers' Federation handout distributed to schools and parents. For the Canadian Teachers' Federation, charter schools represent an elitism which would “deplete regular schools of their activist parents.” The B.C. Teachers' Federation alleges in a blizzard of publications and media releases that charters create a “two-tiered system, encourage social fragmentation and mean the end of the neighbourhood school.” In the words of Alice McQuade, president of the BCTF, “Canadians have a choice between maintaining a public education system committed to meeting the needs of all students regardless of wealth, geography, or special needs—or a two-tiered education system: one for the rich and another for everyone else.”    ”Teachers urged to take a stand,” Vancouver Sun, March 18, 1996. -Note

The assumption underlying this claim is that all students presently enjoy equal educational opportunities, when in practice the system already has multi-tiers. Many parents who can afford choice exercise their privilege by opting for private schools or parochial schools. Beyond this tier, the quality of education available to a child is usually determined by where he or she resides. Real estate, which depends largely upon race and income, becomes the broker of schools. Wealthier parents purchase residences in the areas with better schools, ensuring their children attend with others of similar advantage. And adding a further tier, schools themselves vary tremendously in the quality of learning environment they offer their students through staff leadership, organizational effectiveness, school standards, and discipline codes. French immersion and baccalaureate schools openly appeal to upper-class families with university-bound children, while many inner-city schools are crowded with new immigrants, and blighted by hunger, poverty, violence, and racism.

Charter schools are prohibited by law from screening students, excluding special needs children, or charging tuition. This means that wealth or ability are no longer deciding factors. Charters do not favour the rich and most capable, but take the opportunities presently enjoyed only by the rich and extend them to low and middle income families. A high percentage of charters are actually designed for at-risk students. Far from rejecting those now failing in the system, charter schools are seeking them out, and with up to 25 percent of Canadian students failing to graduate successfully on time, charters may offer a remedy for this expensive problem. By offering choices to students and parents who have no other options, charters are a means to strengthen the public system.

The California Teachers' Association, School Boards Association, School Administrators' Association, and many other education employee groups claimed that such initiatives would lead to “white flight and increased segregation.” As Canada's ethnic populations burgeon, it is important to examine whether these charges can be substantiated. In response, former U.S. Education Secretary Bennett states, “In all the choice programs around the country, we have seen a net increase in integration. That's because if you make the academic offerings attractive, almost everyone will want them, regardless of race.”    David Harmer, School Choice, 1994, p. 113. -Note     A four-year analysis of charter schools in the U.S. has recently concluded, “they are not turning into elitist academies as some had feared” and the latest evidence shows that charter schools have a higher proportion (40%) of minority youngsters enroled than do regular schools (31%)   Mark Buechler, Charter School Legislation and Results after Four Years, Indiana Education Policy Centre, 1996. -Note

There is more legitimate ground for concern where parental contracts are used as a condition for enroling students in charter schools: that these might indeed be a subtle screening device or filter. But charter schools analyst Chester Finn reports that the most demanding of these parental contracts require little more than an hour a week, and that the parent volunteer coordinators are remarkably flexible and inventive in finding ways for parents to fulfill these commitments, including weekend and evening opportunities or involvement of alternate family members. A growing number of regular schools are also now using this device to harness parental support for their children's education since the passage of the Parental Involvement Provisions of Title I of the Improving America's School Act (1994) which requires participating schools to develop a home-school compact including parent volunteerism in the school.

Teachers' unions also advance the paternalistic argument that most parents are uninformed and cannot make wise decisions regarding the best school for their child. But evidence shows that parents can and do enthusiastically grasp opportunities for choices which may provide their child with enhanced opportunities. Evidence also suggests that even disengaged parents will exercise authority and responsibility when given meaningful opportunities to do so in the charter school. The experience of one inner-city Detroit charter school illustrates that it is not only assertive, upwardly-mobile parents who seek out charter opportunities. Located in the heart of a ghetto rife with poverty, crime, and neglect, the new Wayne State University Public Charter School received no less than 5,000 applications for its 350 spaces after school board advertising in the area! Those parents understood a better education for their child was a ticket out of the ghetto.

The Mechanics of Choice

The mechanics of pupil enrolment are guided by legislation that generally stipulates that there be no discrimination on any basis other than the appropriate age or grade level the school intends to serve and the designated boundaries under the charter. The school that is designed around programs for students with an aptitude for fine arts or mathematics, for example, may not reject students on the grounds that they have limited talents in these areas. Use of testing or screening mechanisms is not permitted. This ensures that charter school populations are reflective of the broader school population at large, and that the instructional methods and resources used in the program are applicable on a large scale.

Charter schools advertise widely for registrations to ensure all families within the boundaries are made aware of the new school. Where registrations exceed capacity, as in the case of Wayne State University Charter, the lottery approach is used to ensure strict impartiality in admissions selection. Applications are sorted only by grade. Successful applicants for the available number of seats for each grade are determined by random draw, supervised by independent accounting firms.

Governance issues

The real issues are power, governance, and decision-making authority. Charter schools are the tip of a huge emerging iceberg that represents the future. That future will redefine the basic unit of education. (Arthur Ellis, Commissioner, Office of Educational Services, Colorado)

Governance is at the heart of the controversy over charter schools. By redistributing centralized power and funding to individual schools and their stakeholders, charter schools challenge the existing governance structure.

Charter schools are governed by their own charter board which is accountable to the charter authorizer, usually the school district or the state. This board may in turn create a school council comprised of all stakeholders to be the decision-making body responsible for implementing the school's mandate. Parents, staff, and community members have significant representation on the board, creating far more responsiveness to the school community's concerns. This delegation of decision-making authority to the school makes the traditional power-brokers very nervous. In some states such as California, the degree of autonomy for each charter school is subject to negotiation. The more autonomous a charter school seeks to be, the less likely it is to have support from the local school district and the union. A 1994 survey showed 52 percent of California charter schools report being hindered by district rules and 47 percent reported that union contracts were a major obstacle.      Mark Buechler, Charter School Legislation and Results After Four Years, 1996, p. 32. -Note

School boards faced with the growing charter schools movement have three options: decline, accept, or wait and see. The U.S. National School Boards Association (NSBA) passed a policy position in April 1996 endorsing charter schools as long as school boards maintain full control: “The NSBA supports charter schools as one of several mechanisms by which a local school board can create innovative schools provided that the school board: a) retains the authority to grant the charter, b) retains the option to decertify any school that fails to meet criteria as specified in the charter or otherwise specified by the local school board, and c) maintains accountability such as determining the criteria, standards or outcomes that will be used in establishing the charter.”     National School Boards Association, Policy Resolutions, 1996, Alexandria, VA. -Note

Dr. David Snead, General Superintendent of Detroit Public Schools, believes charter schools provide new powers for school boards. In accepting the charter challenge, the Detroit board opted for “increased influence, increased opportunities to provide services, increased revenue, minimization of outside influences and the opportunity to use public monies to create extraordinary schools in Detroit.”

It is too soon to predict the reaction of Canadian school boards. The policy manual of the Canadian School Boards Association is silent on the question of charters. There are some early indications that Alberta boards are eager to pre-empt charters by granting approval as alternative schools and retaining control of the funding. “Many of our schools with unique programs are very close to the concept of charter schools now,” asserts Edmonton board vice-chair, John Nicoll. Indeed, a number of would-be charters, including a ballet school and the Nellie McClung all-girls school, were convinced to open without charter status by the Edmonton board. The Edmonton Public School Board has made it clear that trustees “welcome the challenge of charter schools and are working with a number of groups to determine whether their needs and aspirations can be met through the creation of new alternative programs within our district.”  Assistant Superintendent Avi Habinski, Correspondence, March 16, 1995. -Note  

Additional governance questions fall into the category of labour relations.

Labour relations

Flexibility in district contracts is the nub of labour relations issues surrounding charter schools. Charter schools require the freedom to replace rigid clauses which bind every school in the district with the professional judgment of the individual school staff in light of the school goals. They also require the ability to hire staff based on merit and to fire for non-performance. These rights are essential when renewal of the school charter hinges on school performance.

In recognizing the former requirement, the American Federation of Teachers passed the following Special Order of Business in 1994: “Properly structured public charter schools can help to bring about major educational improvements through the transformation of the school from the current factory model to a modern, high-performance workplace functioning through self-directed teams. . . . If charter schools are governed . . . in a collegial, professional, and democratic manner, there is no reason for unions to insist that rules in a central contract take precedence over the judgment of the members in each school.”

Where legislation requires the existing collective agreement to apply to a charter school, all contractual protection for teachers apply, but charters may achieve waivers to the master collective agreement. Washington Charter School's charter states that “contract exceptions are to be determined by a 75 percent approval vote of those affected by the change.” It is precisely the flexibility to set working conditions to match the goals and instructional plans of the school which gives charters their competitive advantage. Those conditions may include class sizes, longer school days or year, differentiated staffing, professional development, and teacher licensing and performance reviews.

Principal Yvonne Chan of Vaughn Street School describes an emerging new role of the union for her staff, who are still union members. “Before, the union spent most of its time doing collective bargaining. Now, the union's job is to provide us with good staff development and technical assistance. It's a whole different perspective.”

Where charters are authorized by bodies other than school districts, the employees may choose to collectively bargain or not. Outside the master district contract, differentiated staffing and creative use of personnel are viable options. Performance bonuses can be negotiated into charter agreements, with the accompanying incentives this may provide. In this model, school teams function as entrepreneurial units with strong incentive to operate at maximum efficiency, meet the needs of their clients, and strive for higher student gains in learning. Teachers have sacrificed job security for autonomy and performance rewards.

Teacher tenure is portable in some states under leave of absence conditions, but charter schools are not required to afford tenure protection. In Massachusetts, teachers may take a three year leave of absence from the state teachers' union, with the option to rejoin. In California, many teachers have left the union and have salaries set by the charter board with the option of returning to regular placement within two years. Calgary has created a policy that permits teachers to be seconded to a charter school for a specific term without penalty in salary, benefits or tenure.

When charter teachers are not employees, but owners or partners, the question of bargaining does not arise. Where teachers are employees, they are a large part of the charter school governance structure. The shared responsibility for setting school goals along with organizational and development plans ensure a high degree of teacher “ownership” of the learning environment.

Charter legislation

All charter laws are not created equal, and the quality of charter legislation is critical to successful implementation. Good charter laws function to both protect the principles of public education and build in maximum potential for promising innovations. Expansive charter laws provide the greatest flexibility, allowing for more charters to be created by more chartering authorities. Weaker laws restrict the number of choices, erect approval roadblocks, and limit the granting of charters exclusively to local school boards. Analysis in July 1995 illustrated that the first 6 states with strong charter laws approved more than 250 schools, while the first 5 states with more restrictive laws managed to create only 18 schools.   Lori Mulholland, Charter Schools: Reform and the Research, 1996, p. 2. -Note

California is an example of expansive legislation with its cap of 100 charters, its provisions for existing schools to convert to charter status, and its range of chartering authorities to whom charter applicants may appeal if the local school district rejects the proposal. Legislation, however, leaves the degree of autonomy for each charter open to negotiation, a vagueness which has plagued the process. Under expansionist laws, California has reached its cap of 100 charters within three years. Alberta legislation, on the other hand, limits the number of charters to 15 and stipulates that charters must be new and unique entities. The legislation does allow for charters that are rejected by school boards to be submitted to the Minister, ensuring that educationally sound proposals cannot be stymied by a stubborn school board.

In general, well-rounded charter legislation includes language on legal status, authorizing bodies, oversight requirements of authorizing bodies and the school, chartering process, appeal process, admissions criteria, location, enrolment district definitions, management and collective bargaining rights, funding and use of funds, and transportation of pupils. Charter legislation in Michigan, for example, ensures that

•the school is a legal corporate body, a governmental entity

•the school may not be organized by a church or religious organization

•authorizing bodies must ensure compliance with all laws

•annual certification depends upon compliance and performance

•applications must be considered on a competitive basis taking into consideration resources, populations to be served, educational goals, and curriculum

•pupil assessment methods include specified national, state, and local requirements

•a school improvement plan is in place

•no enrolment screening is permitted on the basis of test scores, intellectual or athletic abilities, physical handicap, race, colour, or religion

•there is equal funding per capita to that of other public schools in the district of location

•no tuition may be charged

•employees are permitted, but not required, to be represented by a union except where the chartering authority is a school district, in which case the existing collective agreement must apply

•there is no charge to pupils for transportation and there is no requirement for district busing to a charter school

•the school may accept or raise voluntary donations from the private sector

Any legislation drafted in Canadian provinces can be informed by the growing body of legislative experience elsewhere, and contain the best provisions to ensure that our charter schools are fair, equitable, innovative and effective.

Support mechanisms

Without a doubt, the absence of capital funding, access to conventional school facilities and start-up money to cover initial equipment and planning is the heaviest cross charter schools have to bear. When the absence of capital funding is factored in, charter schools . . . are having to make do with considerably less money. (Finn, Charter Schools in Action, 1996.)

Charter schools are seeking to redesign basic practices of public education and pilot what even the National Education Association (NEA) calls “cutting-edge reforms” in the face of entrenched opposition. It is not unthinkable they should require financial support. Start-up funds are critical to the success of new charter schools (unlike schools converting to charters) because they do not come ready-made with site facilities. A few states, Arizona among them, have provided start-up funds to be administered through chartering authorities or state boards for charter schools. More recently, all charter schools became eligible to apply for federal start-up funding, when Congress authorized $15 million for charter school development to be administered by the State Department of Education .   Ibid, p. 5. -Note      The NEA has also recently allocated $1.5 million funded through its Centre for Innovation to assist charter pilots in 6 states.   National Education Association, “Charter Schools Initiative: Exploring the Possibilities,” NEA handout, 1995. -Note     Alberta Education provides no start-up funds for charter schools.

In addition to start-up funds, many states have a proactive program of technical assistance to charter schools through government, higher education institutions, or the private non-profit sector. A number of universities have established centres for school reform, affiliated with teacher education faculties. Non-profit charter centres are emerging as key agents for facilitating change. Their support takes the form of connecting “would-be charters” with practical assistance through workshops and conferences, guidance in drafting proposals, legal and technical know-how, marketing, financial administrative assistance, resource and services guides, stringent assessment, and on-going support once the school is established. Alberta Education has a charter schools division but there has been no Canadian charter schools agency established.

Communication networks, including print and electronic journals, now link the U.S. charter school community. It is possible, for example, to access electronically any charter school contract, proposal, or legislation for review. Regional and national charter school conferences offer valuable networking and learning opportunities. Where the chartering body is a faculty of education, the charter school receives considerable university support as a living laboratory for research on school effectiveness. The corporate community has also been responsive to the charter school movement, providing partnership funding in many cases.

Facts About the NEA's Charter School Initiative

What?

NEA's Charter Schools Initiative is a five-year project designed to:

1)examine the efficacy of the charter model as a tool for public school reform

2)help create schools that first and foremost uphold the basic principles of public education while giving practitioners and school employees the autonomy and freedom to take risks with innovation.

Our goals are to help NEA members interested in creating new schools, and to document and assess the possibilities that charter schools present as mechanisms for systemic reform of public education.

Where?

The project will begin with six sites in six states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii and Wisconsin.

When?

NEA hopes to have the school site and founding members selected by the fall of 1995 with the new schools chartered by next spring and operating by the fall of 1996. School founders will be invited to attend NEA's National Centre for Innovation Symposium in November 1995.

Who?

NEA will be looking for diversity in the kinds of schools to be established, as well as to the student population to be served. While all NEA-supported charters will be expected to have completely open admissions, in choosing sites NEA hopes to be able to learn from schools that represent a racial, ethnic, class, and geographic cross-section of America, and that will be methodically diverse.

Reprinted by permission from Andrea DiLorenzo, Co-Director, Charter School Initiative, National Education Association, Washington, D.C. Tel. (202) 822-7334

Conclusion

The next five years will likely prove pivotal in determining the future of charter schools in Canada. We have identified the problems and the barriers to improved school performance. Charters can address many of these problems, but not all. As the evidence becomes more widely available, Canadian decision-makers must consider the positive and negative aspects of charters and the consequences of standing against the charter opportunity. Policy-makers elsewhere are now beginning to understand charter schools as system reform. There is nothing in charter law that addresses any particular curriculum or pedagogy. Some schools will fail, and many will provide valuable information for the system at large. By challenging every school to improve performance, the greatest benefit of charter schools may lie in those largely unmeasurable secondary effects to the school system. The combination of freedom, accountability, and choice inherent in the charter school idea holds promise for reinvigorating our Canadian public schools without dismantling the existing framework and values.

Properly constituted, charter schools are not a threat to our public education system. In fact they help support and improve it by allowing community-driven experimentation to take place under its umbrella.    “Charter School Bullies,” Globe and Mail editorial, September 19, 1995. -Note

Ted Kolderie of the U.S. Centre for Policy Studies asserts that “organizations in public education are behaving exactly as they are structured and rewarded to behave. State laws give districts little incentive to put students' interests first. Mandatory attendance, exclusive franchise, and per-pupil financing ensure that its customers, revenue, jobs, and security will be there, whether or not it changes and improves, and whether or not students learn. Advocacy for charter laws by governors and legislators is understandable only in terms of their sense of charter as a hopeful strategy for change that remains within public education.”   Ted Kolderie, “The Charter Idea: Progress in '94,” Public Services Redesign Project, 1995. -Note

The Canadian education system is no different. The process of creating change is a difficult one because the issues involved are complex, practices are deeply entrenched, and bureaucracy and resistance to sharing power must be overcome. But the opportunity of creating an environment in Canada that fosters educational excellence and choices for all is worth pursuing.

Recommendations

To facilitate early and most effective introduction of charter schools into the Canadian education system, it is recommended that:

1.Provincial ministries of education and local school boards establish task forces to examine all aspects of charter schooling and share information with the public and education partners.

2.Provincial governments be encouraged to prepare draft charter legislation for discussion with a view to enacting it by 1997. Such legislation must pay particular attention to equity and governance issues.

3.The Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, encourage charter schooling through its National Education Agenda which includes promoting innovations in successful education practice.

4.A Canadian Charter Schools Agency with provincial branches be established to support charter school development.

5.Detailed, impartial studies be undertaken from the outset to collect, analyze and disseminate the findings on the results and impact of charter schools in Canada.

Appendix: An Overview of Charter Schools

What they are

•New model of public schools

•Equal access, open-enrolment, attended by choice

•Offer mandated curriculum

•Equally funded—same per pupil allotment as all public schools

•Have parent and staff consensus on instructional approach

•Governed by own charter board responsible to government body

•Have autonomy over spending of funds and delivery of programs

•Reduced bureaucracy in exchange for greater responsibility

•Accountable for learning results, or charter revoked

What they are not

•not for profit—may not charge tuition

•may not require admission test—not elitist

•non-sectarian, no religious instruction

Benefits to education system

•choice and options for parents, teachers and students

•empowerment for educators

•larger percent of funding goes directly to instruction

•better match of learning and teaching styles

•increased parental and community involvement

•improved school climate and student commitment

•incentives to discover “what works”

•improved learning outcomes

What they are saying

U.S. President Clinton

“Charter schools are a powerful tool to provide communities, schools and teachers the maximum flexibility to give students more opportunity to reach high standards of achievement, to improve teaching and learning in our schools.”

The National Education Association (NEA—2,200,000 teachers)

“As a group these schools will reflect the cutting edge of what is known about teaching, learning, curriculum, and the conditions which support quality schooling. Our goal is to help NEA members interested in creating charter schools, and to document and assess the possibilities that charter schools present as mechanisms for systemic reform of public education.”

Yvonne Chan, Charter School Principal

“The charter takes the handcuffs off the principal, the teacher, and the parents—the people who know the kids best. In return we are held responsible for how well kids do.”

Halvar Jonson, Alberta Minister of Education

“Charter schools are an opportunity to seek innovative methods and learning environments that will lead to improved student learning and build on the many good things already happening in education.”

Arizona State

“The statutory purpose of the Charter Schools Act is to improve pupil achievement and provide additional choices for parents and pupils.”

The Alberta Charter School Initiative 

Reprinted with permission from the Charter Schools Handbook, Alberta Education, pp. 2-3. -Note

Overview

We live in a dynamic world which requires us to respond to new challenges, opportunities and technologies. Albertans have always been open to new ideas, concepts and developments. Our education system reflects this openness to change. Today more than ever, our education system must move in new directions to prepare students for the next century and changing nature of the world in which they live.

Recognizing the need for change, on March 31, 1994, the Honourable Halvar C. Jonson, Minster of Education, introduced Bill 19, the School Amendment Act (1994), which provided for the establishment of charter schools. These schools would be autonomous public schools which would provide innovative or enhanced means of delivering education to improve student learning. On May 25, 1994, Bill 19 was proclaimed law, making Alberta the first province in Canada to take such a bold initiative.

What is a charter school?

Alberta, through its system of public schools, has been continually expanding the range of educational services available to students to improve their learning. The addition of charter schools to its public system is a continuation of this precedent. The expectation for the educational services offered by charter schools is that they will be different from what is locally available and likely will vary from one charter to another. Charter schools must demonstrate the potential to improve the learning of students. In general, charter schools will complement the educational services provided in the local public system. They represent another opportunity for successful educational practices to be recognized and adopted by other public schools for the benefit of more Albertans. Although charter schools likely will vary across the province, there are certain common characteristics that set them apart from other public schools.

Charter

A charter is an agreement between a school board or the Minister of Education and an individual group regarding the establishment and administration of a school. Essentially the charter describes the unique educational service the school will provide, how the school will operate, and the student outcomes it tends to achieve. If they are prepared to establish the charter school within their jurisdiction, the local school boards will recommend that the Minister approve the agreement.

Purpose

Charter schools are expected to provide a different educational environment to improve student learning. The intent goes beyond simply creating a few new or alternative programs. Therefore charter schools will have flexibility and considerable autonomy to implement innovative or enhanced educational services which will broaden the range of educational opportunities and enhance student learning. Enhanced student learning means improved acquisition in some measurable way of skills, attitudes and knowledge.

Specialization

Charter schools likely will specialize in a particular educational service to address a specific need. They may complement or add to existing local programs where there are a sufficient number of students who could benefit from the program.

Governance

A charter school is operated by a corporate body in accordance with section 24.1(1) of the School Act. A charter board, which will represent parents and teachers of students in a charter school, may be constituted by the corporate body to govern the charter school. Where a distinct charter board is not formed, then the board of directors for the corporation shall be the charter board. In accordance with the provisions of the incorporating Act, the charter board must have by-laws and policies for governance of the boards as well as governance of the charter school.

Autonomy

A charter board has the authority and autonomy to run the day-to-day operations of the school. A charter board will develop policies subject to its charter agreement with the local school board or the Minister of Education. These policies need not comply with nor be congruent to those of the local school board.

Accountability

The charter board is accountable for the charter school. This board is responsible for ensuring that the charter school complies with charter board policies, the terms of the charter and provincial legislation, regulation and policies.

As well, a charter board is accountable to the local school board or to the Minister of Education depending upon who established the charter school. The local school board or the Minister, as the case may be, must ensure that the charter school is operated according to the charter, and achieves the results outlined in the charter and as required by provincial legislation, regulation, and policies.

Choice

A charter school will provide enhanced or innovative delivery of public education to students. This means that parents and students have increased opportunity to choose an education that best serves student needs.

Canada’s First Charter Schools (Alberta)

Click here to view Table: Canada’s First Charter Schools (Alberta)

Bibliography

Alberta Chamber of Resources. (1992) International Comparisons in Education. Edmonton.

Alberta Education. (1995) Accountability in Education Policy Framework. Edmonton.

Alberta Education. (1996) Charter School Handbook. Edmonton.

Alberta Teachers' Association. “What are Alternative and Charter Schools?” ATA News. Nov. 28, 1995.

B.C. Ministry of Education. (1995) Annual Report 1993-94. Victoria, B.C.

Barrett, Michael. (1995) Charter Schools: Moving Beyond Anecdotal Evidence. Washington, D.C.: Centre for Education Reform.

Berthelot, Jocelyn. (1995) On a Democratic Course or Drifting to Market Models? Ottawa: Canadian Teachers' Federation.

Bosetti, Lynn. (1995) “Charter Schools in Alberta.” Paper prepared for presentation to Charting a New Course conference, Richmond, B.C. November 1995.

Buechler, Marc. (1996) Charter School Legislation and Results after Four Years. Indiana University, Bloomington: Indiana Education Policy Centre.

Caldwell, Gary. (1996) “Diagnosis of a Troubled System: Quebec's `Estates General' on Education.” Inroads, vol. 5.

Chilliwack School District. (1995) Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Traditional Schools.

Chubb, J. and Moe, T. (1990) Politics, Markets and American Schools. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institute.

Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. (1995) A Report on Education in Canada. Toronto.

Department for Education. (1994) Grant Maintained Schools. London, England.

Downey, James. (1990) To Be Our Best: Learning for the Future. Montreal: Corporate Higher-Education Forum.

Drucker, Peter. (1994) “The Age of Social Transformation.” Atlantic Monthly, November 1994.

Economic Council of Canada. (1992) A Lot to Learn. Ottawa.

Education Week Special Report. (November, 1995) Breaking Away: The Charter School Revolution.

Finn, Berlein, and Manno. (1996) Charter Schools in Action. Washington: Hudson Institute.

Fliegel, Seymour. (1993) Miracle in East Harlem. New York: Random House.

Freedman, J. (1995) The Charter School Idea. Red Deer, Full Court Press: Society for Advancing Educational Research.

Gaskell, Jane. (1995) Dilemmas of Educational Choice. Canadian Teachers' Federation. Ottawa.

Gaskell, Jane. (1995) Secondary Schools in Canada. Canadian Education Association. Ottawa.

Geiger, Keith. (1996) Next Challenges for the New NEA. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association.

Glenn, Charles. (1989) Choice of Schools in Six Nations. Washington, D.C.: US. Government Printing Office.

Harmer, David. (1994) School Choice. Cato Institute. Washington, D.C.

Horlock, Carole. (1994) Washington Charter School. California: Palm Desert Unified School District.

Jonson, Halvar, Alberta Min. of Education (1995) Address to Charter Schools Conference. Richmond, B.C. November 4, 1995.

Kolderie, Ted. (1994) Public Services Redesign Project. St. Paul, MN: Centre for Policy Studies.

Kuehn, Larry. (1995) What's the Problem with Charter Schools? Vancouver: B.C. Teachers' Federation.

Lawton, Stephen (1995) Busting Bureaucracy to Reclaim our Schools. Montreal: Renouf.

McLellan, R. and Gosset, D. (1994) Understanding Michigan's Charter School Law. Lansing, MI: Michigan Centre for Charter Schools.

Millot, Marc Dean. (1995) What Are Charter Schools? Washington, D.C.: Rand Corporation.

Mulholland, Lori. (1996) Charter Schools: The Reform and the Research. Tempe, AZ, Arizona State University: Morrison Institute for Public Policy.

Nathan & Power. (1996) Policy-Makers View the Charter School Movement. University of Minnesota, Humphrey Institute: Centre for School Change.

National Association of School Principals (1995) “School Choice: How Do We Solve That Puzzle?” Bulletin, September 1995.

North York Board of Education. (1995) School & System Profiles. North York, Ontario.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (1994) School: A Matter of Choice. Paris.

OECD and Statistics Canada. (1994) Literacy, Economy and Society: Results of the International Literacy Survey. Paris and Ottawa.

OECD. (1996) Innovations in Education. Issue 1. Spring 1996. Paris.

Premack, Eric. (1996) A Profile of California's Charter Schools. San Diego: Chamber of Commerce Business Roundtable for Education.

Province of Alberta. (1995) School Act. Edmonton: Queen's Printer.

Royal Commission on Learning. (1994) For Love of Learning. Toronto: Publications Ontario.

Schweitzer, Thomas T. (1995) The State of Education in Canada. Montreal: Renouf.

Smith, Lockwood. (1995) “The New Zealand Experience.” Speech for presentation to Charting a New Course conference in Richmond, B.C., November 1995.

Snead, David. (1995) Charter Schools: New Opportunities. Speech for presentation to Charting a New Course conference in Richmond, B.C., November 1995.

U.S. Department of Education. (1991) America 2000: An Education Strategy. Washington, D.C.

Vanourek, Greg. (1996) “Sweden's Voucher Experiment.” Network News & Views: January/February 1996.

Wallis, Claudia. (1994) “A Class of Their Own.” Time Magazine, Oct. 31, 1994.

Wilkenson, Bruce. (1994) Educational Choice. Montreal: Renouf.

info@fraserinstitute.ca You can contact us at the above email address for any comments or information requests. Please report any dead links or technical problems.

If you know someone who would be interested in this web page, please enter their email address below, and we will forward this URL to them: Email Address:

Last Modified: Wednesday, October 20, 1999.