Abstract
This study builds on previous research investigating management organizations (MOs), charter school locations, and closure by examining the effects of MO type (EMO, CMO and freestanding schools), racial enrollment, student achievement, and the community characteristics surrounding each charter school in Ohio’s eight largest counties with the largest urban school districts on the likelihood of closure between 2009 and 2018. We conducted a discrete-time survival analysis using life tables and binary logistic regression. Findings indicated that freestanding charter schools experience higher risks of closure than EMO and CMO managed charter schools in those counties. Although they are more likely to close, freestanding schools have higher student achievement in math and reading. Higher math proficiency reduces the likelihood of closure by 2.8%. However, community and enrollment characteristics are not statistically significant predictors of closure.
Highlights
During the early years of charter school development, most charter schools were opened by teachers, parents, and other community members as stand-alone schools (Bulkley & Fisler, 2003; Henig et al, 2005)
This study builds on previous research investigating management organizations (MOs), charter school locations, and closure by examining the effects of MO type (EMO, charter management organizations (CMOs) and freestanding schools), racial enrollment, student achievement, and the community characteristics surrounding each charter school in Ohio’s eight largest counties with the largest urban school districts on the likelihood of closure between 2009 and 2018
Other than math proficiency scores, which are slightly higher among operating schools, and Black percentage of enrollment, which is higher among closed schools, the enrollment and neighborhood characteristics are similar between operating and closed schools
Summary
During the early years of charter school development, most charter schools were opened by teachers, parents, and other community members as stand-alone schools (Bulkley & Fisler, 2003; Henig et al, 2005). Other studies have explored the enrollment characteristics of charter schools managed by EMOs and CMOs (Chubb, 2002; Booker et al, 2005; Ertas & Roch, 2014; Finnigan et al, 2004; Garcia et al, 2009; Lacireno-Paquet et al, 2002; Lacireno-Paquet, 2006; Miron & Nelson, 2002; Wamba & Ascher, 2003) or the strategic positioning of charter schools in areas that shape their racial and socioeconomic enrollment characteristics (Gilblom & Sang, 2019a; Gulosino & d’Entremont, 2011; Lubienski et al, 2009; LaFleur, 2016; Saultz & Yaluma, 2017). Several studies exist that examine predictors of charter school closure, including student achievement, age of school, early adopter status, and enrollment characteristics (Burdick-Will et al, 2013; Carlson & Lavertu, 2016; Gilblom & Sang, 2019b; Paino et al, 2014, 2017)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
