Some propose requiring charter schools to enroll the same percentage of “special needs” students as district schools, notes an Education Next forum.
Charter schools should serve all kinds of students, argues Gary Miron, an education professor at Western Michigan University. On average, only 8 to 10 percent of charter students are in special education compared to 13.1 percent in district schools. Severely disabled students also are much less likely to attend charter schools.
Some charter schools “counsel out” disabled students, telling parents the school is not a “good fit” for their child.
Charters that recruit and enroll disabled students would receive more funding, making it possible to hire special ed staff that would help all students, he argues. And charters would be taking their “fair share.”
Special ed quotas are a bad idea, responds Robin Lake, director of the Center on Reinventing Public Education at the University of Washington.
It would create “perverse incentives for schools to overidentify students as disabled.” Some charters work hard to avoid labeling students as “learning disabled” or “emotionally disordered.”
. . . as schools of choice, not all charter schools will be equally attractive to, or effective with, kids with disabilities. A “no excuses” school may be a good fit for students who respond well to a highly structured and very strict culture but not be effective at all for others. Although a school’s “mission” should never be an excuse for a charter school to exclude students whose families feel it is the right fit, we also should not expect that all charter schools will attract an equal number of all types of students.
Disabled students should have access to schools that have the staff and resources to meet their needs, writes Pedro Noguera, professor of education at New York University. Often, they’re concentrated in low-performing schools that are overwhelmed by students’ needs.
Many high-performing district schools “employ strategies to screen out such students as well, either by not providing the services needed for special education students, or by employing admissions policies that make it difficult or unlikely for such students to gain access.”