November 27, 2023
In the realm of education, the juxtaposition of charter schools and traditional bureaucratic public schools highlights a dichotomy in approaches to achieving educational goals. Both models bear unique characteristics and principles that warrant individual exploration before delving into a comparative analysis. Bureaucratic public schools, stemming from post-WWII reforms, emphasize standardized curricula and a hierarchical structure to uphold equality and workforce preparation. In contrast, charter schools, emerging as a response to bureaucratic dissatisfaction, prioritize autonomy, flexibility, and innovative instruction. This essay will examine the distinct social goals, values, structures, and approaches of each system, followed by an in-depth exploration of their dominant content, pedagogical strategies, and resulting social and intellectual impacts. By outlining each educational paradigm, this essay aims to accentuate their individual merits and pitfalls before drawing nuanced comparisons.
To effectively compare and contrast charter schools with traditional bureaucratic public schools, it is essential to first understand the characteristics of a bureaucratic public school. For the sake of clarity, the terms ‘traditional’ and ‘bureaucratic’ will be employed to refer to schools that adhere to the conventional norms associated with the bureaucratization of education. I will examine the social goals, values, and structures of bureaucratic public schools, but to do so effectively, I first will provide a brief overview of the origin of the bureaucratization of schools. According to Henry J. Fuller in his 1956 journal article The American Biology Teacher, post-WWII reforms acted as a catalyst for increased criticism of the education system, particularly at the high school level. The war had highlighted and increased social inequalities. Post-war reforms in education were influenced by the need to address these inequalities. Initiatives focused on providing equal opportunities for all students irrespective of their backgrounds or identities. Additionally, it became clear education was a means to equip individuals with the social and professional skills to succeed in the job market. To effectively achieve these goals, the United States began to standardize education to ensure that students were getting a broad education that would allow for equal opportunity to succeed in the workforce (Fuller, 1956, p. 119-120). The bureaucratization of education served as a way to achieve societal goals such as equal access to education, social mobility, and the development of an informed and skilled citizenry. To do this, standardized curricula and assessment methods ensured a consistent level of education for all students. Values associated with the bureaucratization of education involved efficiency, accountability, and uniformity. To achieve both these social goals and values, a rigid bureaucratic structure was necessary. In his 2018 journal article Education and Bureaucracy, Robert Boyd Skipper discusses the structures and approaches of bureaucratized education. According to Skipper, bureaucratic structures in the context of schools involve hierarchical structures and formalized administrative systems. Schools are organized in a top-down manner, with clearly defined roles and responsibilities for administrators, teachers, and staff. Decision-making processes are often centralized at the top of the hierarchy, and there is a focus on rules and regulations to maintain order and uniformity. To implement these structures, there is a great deal of oversight involved. For example, to ensure the quality of teaching and learning, regular reports and assessments are given to both students and teachers. Bureaucratic approaches to education often involve the implementation of standardized curricula, centralized planning, and a reliance on quantitative measures for assessing student performance. This can lead to a more systematic and organized educational environment, but it may also limit flexibility and adaptability to individual student needs. Overall, the bureaucratization of education reflects a systematic and structured approach to achieving specific societal goals, with an emphasis on efficiency, accountability, and uniformity in educational processes. While this system aims to provide a standardized and equitable education, critics argue that it may stifle creativity and fail to address the diverse needs of individual learners (Skipper, 2018).
The United States Department of Education plays a role in the way schools are run, however, when it comes to the dominant forms of content of bureaucratized schools, it is largely up to the states. According to the United States Department of Education webpage, “The U.S. Department of Education is the agency of the federal government that establishes policy for, administers and coordinates most federal assistance to education. It assists the president in executing his education policies for the nation and in implementing laws enacted by Congress. The Department’s mission is to serve America’s students to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access…In creating the Department of Education, Congress specified that: No provision of a program administered by the Secretary or by any other officer of the Department shall be construed to authorize the Secretary or any such officer to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, over any accrediting agency or association, or over the selection or content of library resources, textbooks, or other instructional materials by any educational institution or school system, except to the extent authorized by law. (Section 103[b], Public Law 96-88)” (U.S. Department of Education, 2010, p. 3).
Because the content taught in bureaucratized schools is primarily up to the state it resides in, I will be using the state of Virginia as a case study. Instruction in Virginia public schools is determined in part by the governor, which is currently Republican Glenn Youngkin. Additionally, Virginia public schools are guided by the “Standards of Learning” (SOL). These standards highlight the Commonwealth of Virginia’s expectations for student learning and achievement in grades K-12. These subjects include: Computer Science, Digital Learning Integration, Driver Education, Economics & Personal Finance, English, Family Life Education, Fine Arts, Health Education, History and Social Science, Mathematics, Physical Education, Science, and World Language. (Virginia Department of Education, 2022). While teachers do not have an exact agenda and way in which to teach, they are required to ensure their students can achieve the Standards of Learning for each subject they teach. At the end of each school year, students are required to take an SOL examination for each class that requires one so that the state can assess the status of their teachers and students.
I will now take a moment to discuss the pedagogical strategies involved in bureaucratized schools. Namely, I will discuss the strategies of standardized curriculum, standardized testing, and teacher accountability and teaching methods. Because bureaucratized schools are, as mentioned, trying to ensure that students achieve a well-rounded uniform education that prepares them for the workforce, a standardized curriculum is needed. This often involves the use of pre established textbooks and teaching materials. Again, while teachers do have some autonomy in the way they teach the material, ultimately, they must ensure their students can pass the standardized tests used to measure academic achievement. Moreover, many bureaucratized schools utilize standardized performance evaluations and assessments to monitor teacher effectiveness. In some cases, power holders may encourage the use of specific teaching methods to ensure that students are getting a uniform education, regardless of who their teachers are.
Next, I will discuss some of the outcomes and general social and intellectual impacts of bureaucratized schools. Bureaucratized schools have unique positives and potentially limiting social and intellectual aspects. In retrospect, this standardized kind of education aims to provide equal access, ensure accountability, and prepare students for the workforce. The extreme emphasis on uniformity and standardized measures may be restricting to individualized needs, whether that be the needs of the parents, teachers, and/or students. That being said, more standardized education can help contribute to the goal of equal access to education. This is because students across each state have access to education irrespective of their background. Moreover, tailoring education requirements to the demands of the job market can help prepare students for the workforce post-graduation. When it comes to efficiency, there are of course inherent benefits of a smooth well-oiled machine, however, an overregulated environment may hinder creativity and prevent teachers from adjusting their teaching methods to the needs of their individual students. Along those same lines, uniformity can help promote consistency, but overuse of standardized education practices such as standardized testing, can prevent educators from taking a holistic approach to education. High-stakes standardized testing for example may lead to teachers teaching to the test. In other words, teachers would be teaching students how to pass required exams in order to pass both student and teacher benchmarks. Similarly, strict performance evaluations of teachers in an effort to maintain accountability and uniformity may cause overwhelming pressure on teachers leading to burnout, a lack of innovation, and a lack of passion for their jobs. Skipper believes that the mission and purpose of the education system clash with the mission and purpose of a bureaucracy. As mentioned, the goals of education are to promote equality and to prepare students for their future by broadening their horizons. Additionally, education is meant to humanize students in the sense that they are to be given the resources they need to be contributing members of society, especially in terms of the workforce. However, Skipper argues, the core qualities inherent to bureaucratization prevent a harmonious union of education and bureaucracy. The narrowing qualities such as standardized curriculum and assessments inherent to bureaucratization defeat the purpose of education’s goal to broaden student’s horizons. Moreover, the dehumanization of teachers and students by failing to view them as more than numbers defeats the purpose of humanizing individuals (Skipper, 2018).
Next, I will introduce and discuss an alternative to traditional bureaucratized public schools: charter schools. According to a 2023 U.S. News article Understanding Charter Schools by Jacob Fischler and Cole Claybourn, “Charter schools are public schools that offer parents the opportunity to pick a school that best fits the needs of their child. There is never a cost to attend and they are open to all students regardless of their school zoning. Charter schools make decisions close to the students, empowering teachers to provide innovative, high-quality instruction and giving them the autonomy to design a classroom that fits their students’ needs. Charter schools are led by principals who have the flexibility to create a school culture that best fits the needs and demands of their surrounding community. Charter schools are obligated to meet performance standards and are held accountable by their communities and authorizers” (Fischler and Claybourn, 2023). In order to effectively discuss the social goals, values, structures, and approaches of charter schools, I will provide a brief background on the rise and purpose of this alternative type of education. “The charter school movement gained prominence in the late 1980s and early 1990s and has been gaining ground since. Charter schools operated in 35 states in the 2000-2001 school year, and that number has risen to 45, according to the Education Commission of the States… Charter school enrollment has grown nationally in recent years, particularly over the past decade. Nearly 3.7 million students were enrolled in charter schools during the 2021-2022 school year, or about 7% of all public school students, according to NCES. That’s up from about 2 million students enrolled in charters in the 2011-2012 school year, or about 4% of public school students” (Fischler and Claybourn, 2023). Now why might parents choose to send their children to a charter school over traditional public schools? Why has there been an increase in charter school enrollment? According to James R. Crawford in his 2001 article Teacher Autonomy and Accountability in Charter Schools, the creation of charter schools, at least in part, aims to address the failures associated with bureaucratic education systems. “Public criticism and dissatisfaction with the bureaucracy of public education over the past several decades has led politicians, legislators, and other reformers to create school choice legislation that encourages the creation of alternatives to the current bureaucratic system of schooling in the United States. Murphy (1999) suggests that public dissatisfaction with governmental institutions in general has formed the public perception that schools in the United States are inept. This dissatisfaction has arisen from perceptions that government has become too big, too intrusive, and extremely inefficient and incompetent. This publicly perceived governmental incompetence has fostered “a taxpayer revolt, and has given birth to an array of citizen initiatives to seize control away from existing governmental structures” (p. 409).
School choice legislation, particularly charter school legislation, has focused on the elimination of the bureaucracy from public education so that schools and the teachers within those schools can be held accountable. The central tenet of the charter school movement as proposed by advocates is the “bar-gain of autonomy for accountability” (Millot, 1996, p. 108). Light (1993) maintains that the definition of accountability has remained constant over the past 50 years-“limit bureaucratic discretion through compliance with tightly drawn rules and regulations” (p. 12).
The search for accountability in education has led to a great fascination with private schools, voucher programs, and charter schools. Proponents of these alternatives to public education proclaim that these new institutions are and will be more responsive to the needs of students and parents and are and will be capable of creating a better, more stringent educational program that is not only more flexible but accountable to parents, states, and society for student achievement.” (Crawford, 2001, p. 186)
Charter schools offer families more choice in their children’s education. By promoting the social goals and values of autonomy, flexibility, creativity, and accountability charter schools offer families a unique educational opportunity. This is especially important for families without the means or desire to send their children to private school or to homeschool. “Given the ability to operate through these agreements, individual charter schools can tailor their curriculum, academic focus, staffing ratios, discipline policies and other matters generally decided at the school district or state board level. In exchange for that flexibility, charter schools are supposed to be accountable to parents and the state or local governments that authorize them” (Fischler and Claybourn, 2023). It is important to note that while charter schools offer the chance to break free from a more rigid and restrictive school system, there are still structures in place to ensure students are getting a proper education. The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools (National Alliance), for example, works to ensure charter schools are not only available to those who desire them, but that the schools themselves are advancing and maintaining a competitive and holistic edge. According to the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools webpage, “The National Alliance works with policymakers on behalf of the charter school community at the national, state, and local levels, including advocating for resources to launch and expand charter schools and a supportive policy environment. We work closely with charter school stakeholders, state departments of education, the U.S. Department of Education, and key members of Congress to ensure that charter schools are treated fairly in policy, funding, and regulations,” (National Alliance).
In terms of approach, content, and pedagogical strategies, charter schools tend to tailor these things to their stakeholders. This entails aligning their approach, classroom content, and pedagogical strategies in line with parents, teachers, and student needs, location, legislative standards, etc. “Each of the 7,800 charter schools is unique—both inside and out. Some focus on college prep, some follow a STEM curriculum, and others integrate the arts into each subject. Most charter schools are located in cities, but there are charter schools in suburban and rural areas as well. Some charter schools require uniforms, others have longer school days, and some teach their entire curriculum in two languages. The possibilities are endless, but charter schools aim to provide a range of options so that parents can choose the public school that best fits their child” (National Alliance).
Charter schools offer more autonomy and flexibility to all stakeholders, allowing schools to better foster creativity. Instead of curriculum and standards being determined by traditional public school districts, charter schools operate more autonomously using avenues such as individual agreements, otherwise known as charters, in tandem with state or local governments. That being said, while charter schools do have more freedom over how they run their schools, there is still a major reliance on testing as a metric of success. Similarly to traditional public schools, charter school students are subjected to take standardized tests to determine their understanding of the topics outlined by their specific school. While these topics may not always be the exact same as traditional public schools, students are tested on them nonetheless. Again, using Virginia as an example, Virginia charter schools are required to take the SOL exams like any other public school (Virginia Law, 2023).
Next, I will examine some of the outcomes related to charter schools. More specifically, I will touch on some of the social and intellectual impacts of charter schools. Many charter schools hold closing the achievement gap between white students and students of color as a core mission. Fischer and Claybourn highlight the fact that charter schools, particularly in urban areas, demonstrate overwhelming evidence that they are achieving their mission of narrowing the achievement gap, but they acknowledge there is more work to be done. “In a recent landmark study, researchers at Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes, which studies charter schools, found that Black and Hispanic charter school students advanced more than their counterparts in traditional public schools “by large margins” in math and reading. The study also found stronger “academic growth” among charter school students living in poverty and English-language learners, compared with similar students at traditional public schools” (Fischler and Claybourn, 2023). However, while there have been outstanding social and intellectual impacts of charter schools, especially within minority communities, charter schools have not eliminated the issue altogether. “Many of the same problems that plague traditional public schools, however, are found in charters. New Orleans, where nearly all public schools became charters after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, still deals with a racial achievement gap despite the increased funding and promises of improvement, says Adamson, who has studied the impact of charter schools in New Orleans” (Fischler and Claybourn, 2023). Some charter schools in different states other than Virginia may be exempt from forms of standardized testing such as the SOL exams. However, charter schools that reside in states where standardized testing is of extreme importance and influence, risk the negative outcomes associated with ‘teaching to the test’. However, some may argue that this is an opportunity for charter schools to remain on par with traditional public school curricula.
Now that I have touched on both traditional bureaucratized public schools and public charter schools I would like to compare and contrast the two education systems. While both bureaucratized public schools and charter schools share a commitment to student achievement and accountability, they differ significantly in terms of autonomy, flexibility, decision-making structures, and approaches to curriculum development and teacher autonomy. Charter schools, in particular, have emerged as an alternative with a focus on addressing the limitations associated with bureaucratic education systems. Both bureaucratized public schools and charter schools have commitments to student achievement. In terms of social goals and values, both education systems work to increase opportunities and outcomes for minority groups, but they differ in their strategies to do so. For example, bureaucratized schools do so by standardizing their curriculum to make it available to everyone, regardless of their background. Charter schools on the other hand aim to increase opportunities and outcomes for minority students by more heavily weighing stakeholder preferences, whether that be teachers, parents, students, etc. In terms of structure, both educational systems emphasize the importance of accountability. Both charter and traditional public schools typically adhere to state educational standards, ensuring a certain level of academic achievement and both utilize standardized testing to assess student achievement and school performance. That being said, bureaucratized schools have a much more rigid structure with centralized decision-making. While charter schools have more autonomy and flexibility in decision-making. In regard to approach, content, and pedagogical strategies, both bureaucratized schools and charter schools may teach similar content and may teach it in a similar way due to the fact that schools reflect the culture around them, but when it comes to their approach and pedagogical strategies, the schools differ greatly. Bureaucratized schools follow a standardized curriculum, often determined at the state level, allowing for less flexibility at the individual level. Charter schools, however, while they have to adhere to some guidelines, they have the freedom to design their own curriculum, aligning it with the needs of their community-based stakeholders. Some schools will have more freedom than others, depending on the cultural and governmental influences in that area. Additionally, when it comes to how the content is taught to students, while bureaucratized schools do offer teachers some freedom, the bureaucratic nature of these schools stifles creativity and deviation from the norm.
When it comes to the similarities and differences in social and intellectual outcomes, things get more complicated. Because charter schools are relatively new, there is limited data on the outcomes of the practices that charter schools instill. Sarah R. Cohodes and Katharine S. Parham discusses some of the differences in outcomes between charter schools and bureaucratized schools in their 2021 research paper entitled Charter Schools’ Effectiveness, Mechanism, and Competitive, Influence. I will utilize Cohodes and Parham’s paper as a basis for examining and highlighting the similarities and differences in the impacts of each educational system, focusing on their social goals, values, structures, and approaches. Additionally, I will explore the effects of the prevalent forms of content and pedagogical strategies employed by both systems. “In the almost 30 years since their founding, charter schools in the United States have continually increased their market share of the public school system, though they still educate a small minority of students. Lottery-based studies of urban charter schools consistently show that charters improve students’ academic achievement and some longer-term outcomes, particularly among Black and Latinx students, students with disabilities, and low-performing students. These findings are limited to oversubscribed schools, but results from observational studies in similar contexts are consistent with this conclusion. However, both lottery and observational studies from a broader array of contexts, including nation- and state-wide studies, offer a more mixed picture of effectiveness. The broader the sample of charter schools studied, the more likely for it to appear that the average charter school produces academic outcomes no different than those from traditional public schools” (Cohodes and Parham, 2021, p. 28). In other words, while charter schools may show charter schools do a better job of closing the achievement gap than their bureaucratic counterparts, more research needs to be done on the impacts of these practices on long-term academic achievement and other longer-term outcomes. When it comes to structure, approaches, and content, Cohodes and Parham suggest we be weary about jumping to conclusions because of the overreliance on test scores to demonstrate educational outcomes and effectiveness. Similarly, it’s not entirely clear which pedagogical strategies work better than others because of the lack of holistic data.
Cohodesand Parham continue by stating: “Most evidence on charter school effectiveness comes from impacts on math and reading test scores. These are important guideposts, but ultimately outcomes like college attendance, college graduation, employment, and earnings are better suited to determining whether charter schools change the life trajectories of the students they serve. There is promising lottery-based evidence from some urban charters that test score gains persist through college, but the number of studies is small and the time horizon relatively short. Longer-term impacts necessitate a longer time horizon and additional data collection, and researchers should endeavor to collect college and employment evidence on a broader sample of schools outside well-studied urban areas. Additionally, alternative measures of charter school effectiveness can broaden the picture beyond academics. Research examining charter school safety (see Hamlin, 2017) and parent satisfaction (see Oberfield, 2019), for example, are highly relevant to broader discussions of charter success, but are beyond the scope of this review. Research on public schools shows that the impact of successful traditional schools goes beyond test scores, and that schools that promote socioemotional development increase educational attainment and decrease risky behaviors (Jackson, Porter, Easton, Blanchard, & Kiguel, 2020); charter schools would benefit from a similar examination. In addition to understanding impacts on longer-term outcomes for a broader set of schools, future research should more generally seek to understand where charters are effective, for whom, and why—not only to better understand the impact of charters themselves, but because educational strategies used in charter schools may be applicable in traditional public schools, following through on the “laboratories of innovation” motivation for charters” (Cohodes and Parham, 2021, p. 28-29).
Conclusively, the comparative analysis of charter schools and traditional bureaucratic public schools unveils a tapestry of divergent educational philosophies. Bureaucratic schools, underpinned by a mission to standardize education for societal equality, embody a structured, hierarchical ethos that prioritizes accountability and efficiency. This method, while aiming for uniformity, may inadvertently stifle creativity and neglect individualized needs. In contrast, charter schools, fueled by a quest for autonomy and responsiveness, offer a dynamic, diverse educational landscape that tailors instruction to stakeholder preferences. Despite charter schools showing promise in narrowing achievement gaps, challenges persist, particularly in the realm of standardized testing. Future research should scrutinize long-term outcomes and varied contexts, providing a comprehensive understanding of the nuanced impact of these educational models. This comparative exploration underscores the imperative for informed policy decisions and ongoing improvements in the ever-evolving landscape of education.
Works Cited
Charter schools’ effectiveness, mechanisms, and competitive … – NBER. (n.d.-a). https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w28477/w28477.pdf
Crawford, J. R. (2001). Teacher autonomy and accountability in Charter Schools. Education and Urban Society, 33(2), 186–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124501332007
Fischler, J., & Claybourn, C. (2023). Understanding charter schools vs. Public Schools – U.S. News & World Report. Understanding Charter Schools vs. Public Schools. https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/articles/understanding-charter-schools-vs-public-schools
Fuller, H. J. (1956). The bureaucracy of Education. The American Biology Teacher, 18(3), 119–123. https://doi.org/10.2307/4438785
K-12 standards & instruction | Virginia Department of Education. (n.d.-b). https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/instruction
National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. (n.d.-c). https://publiccharters.org/
Skipper, R. B. (2018). Education and bureaucracy. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 32(1), 57–76. https://doi.org/10.5840/ijap2018828101
US Department of Education (ED). (2018, May 14). An overview of the U.S. Department of Education– PG 3. Home. https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/focus/what_pg3.html
Virginia law. Code of Virginia Code – Article 1.2. Establishment of Charter Schools. (n.d.). https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodefull/title22.1/chapter13/article1.2/
