The State Board of Education has decided not to Race to the Top with the rest of the nation.  The Obama administration plans to allocate the $4.3 billion in Race to the Top funding based on a set of requirements outlined here.  One of the requirements is that states do “not prohibit or effectively inhibit increasing the number of charter schools in the State.”  This week the State Board denied several (6) charter school applications making it clear that they have no intention of relaxing the cap, either defacto or legal, on the number of charter schools in the state.  If the State Board maintains this anti-charter stance, they will essentially be leaving federal stimulus dollars on the table.  Apparently they feel we have enough money here in Arkansas.

So, why did the State Board deny the charter applications?  Board members often make the claim, as they did yesterday, that they are denying charter applications because the new schools would simply be duplicating services already provided by the local districts.  This is a fairly ubiquitous argument often made by those who are opposed to parental choice (Max Brantley makes it here).  I find this argument to be on its face ridiculous.  Of course charter schools would be duplicating education services, they are after all schools.  The issue is not the provision of services per se, but the quality of the service.  Check out Stuart’s post from yesterday for a more interesting treatment of this issue.  Proponents of parental choice, myself and Obama included, feel that choice and competition can be used as a mechanism to improve the quality of our education system.

Another interesting takeaway from the meeting was the Board’s very uneven response to the applications.  The two applicants from Northwest Arkansas received rather harsh interrogations, while KIPP Academy simply sailed through.  Prism Education Center organizer Misty Newcomb faced tough questions about her youth and inexperience, while the Dove organizers faced (racist?) concerns about their Turkish heritage.  It is no surprise KIPP cruised through this process.  They have done such a great job in the delta that Arkansas Law says they should be approved (search for Knowledge is Power Program).  However, I don’t believe the rough treatment of the two applicants mentioned above was in any way justified.

I hope that in the future the State Board of Education can dispense with all the ideological clap-trap and judge charter schools on the merit of their applications.  There will be both good and bad operators, but parents will be free to leave the bad schools.  And the good schools will remain.   It is an undue burden to force charter applicants to demonstrate radically new techniques or ensure high student achievement before they open their doors.  This unattainably high standard means that the Board can arbitrarily grant charters at their whim while under-served children face no choice at all.

UPDATE:  Edited for clarity.

Three more charter schools were rejected on Tuesday.

Beebe discusses desegregation and charter schools.

Max Brantly continues to make the thoroughly debunked claim that charter schools harm desegregation efforts.