By Dr. Amy Burkman
Program Director, M.Ed. in Administration and Supervision
As school choice continues to shape public debate, charter schools—often called “charters”—have become an increasingly visible part of the K–12 landscape. Although many charters are promoted as alternatives to traditional public schools, it is important to remember that charter schools are public schools by definition. They share fundamental characteristics with traditional public schools while also operating under different rules that are intended to encourage innovation.
Key ways charter schools are similar to traditional public schools include:
- Charter schools cannot charge tuition. They are financed by public education funds and may also receive grants and philanthropic support.
- Charters must provide open enrollment until they reach full capacity. Once full, they are required to select new students through an impartial random lottery and must not discriminate in admissions.
- Students in charter schools are held to the same state and federal academic requirements that apply to all public schools, including standardized assessments and accountability measures.
Both charter and traditional public schools are accountable for student achievement and for the appropriate use of public funds. Where they diverge is primarily in how they deliver instruction, manage operations, and pursue improvement.
Charter schools were conceived as settings where educators can try new approaches to teaching and learning with fewer of the constraints that sometimes limit traditional districts. These differences often include:
- By charter law, a charter school must outline an innovative approach to education. A charter is typically not approved for an operation that is simply a replica of existing local schools; rather, approval rests on the proposal’s promise of distinctive methods or structures.
- Charter administrators have flexibility to meet academic standards in a variety of ways, as long as they remain accountable for results. That flexibility can include blended learning models, partnerships with subject-matter experts, project-based curricula, extended school days, or other strategies that aim to improve student outcomes.
- Many charter schools operate as “laboratories” for educational innovation: their purpose is to discover and refine effective strategies that can be shared with the wider public school community.
- In many jurisdictions, charter schools are permitted to hire staff who are not required to hold the same state teaching certificates as those in district schools. This can enable schools to recruit professionals with specialized backgrounds or industry experience.
- A significant number of charter schools employ staff on an at-will basis rather than through multi-year collective bargaining contracts, which can give leaders more staffing flexibility, but also affects job security and working conditions for educators.
Because charters must demonstrate student achievement to maintain their authorization, authorizers monitor performance closely. When a charter school fails to meet required standards over time, authorizers can revoke the charter and close the campus so that resources can be redirected or a new operator can be selected. This accountability mechanism is central to how charter systems aim to ensure quality.
One issue that receives comparatively little attention in public discussion is the relationship between charter schools and teacher unions. National data show that only a small share of charter schools are unionized—roughly 12 percent, according to the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. Except where state or local law mandates union participation, the choice to organize is usually made at the individual school level. In some urban areas, including Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia, unions and charter schools have formed partnerships or pursued innovative labor agreements, demonstrating that collaborative models are possible.
At its core, the charter concept was developed to create environments where promising educational practices can be tested, evaluated, and, if successful, shared more broadly. Charters often appear in communities with underperforming schools as one option intended to increase families’ choices and to accelerate improvement. By piloting new curricula, organizational structures, and accountability practices—and by reporting on both successes and challenges—charter schools can contribute lessons that benefit the wider public school system and, ultimately, all students.
About the Author:
Amy Burkman is the director of the M.Ed. in Educational Leadership program at APUS. Before moving into higher education she worked as a school administrator, teacher, and school librarian. She earned her Doctor of Education from Texas Christian University and holds educator certification in Texas, where she resides with her family.
