When Politics Get in the Way of the Students: Charter Educators Challenge Sacramento Priorities

AB 84 threatens personalized learning programs like Learn4Life High Schools which help tens of thousands of teens be successful every year

SACRAMENTO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--California lawmakers say they want what’s best for students, but the recent passage of AB 84 in the state assembly suggests otherwise, say educators at Learn4Life High Schools, a network of 80+ public schools that serve students who have struggled in a traditional setting. Through its personalized learning model with a flexible schedule, Learn4Life students reengage in their education and graduate high school.

Learn4Life Superintendent Shellie Hanes points out that Learn4Life assesses each student’s learning style, strengths and weaknesses, and develops a personalized learning plan. Free tutoring, life skills and job training help prepare them for adulthood. This model works well with teens who need extra attention, and is successful with students who were lost in traditional high schools, including:

• Students with disabilities who require special education (SPED)
• Those with mental health needs
• Students in foster care
• Teens who have already dropped out
• Pregnant and parenting teens
• Students experiencing homelessness
• 18- to 20-year-olds who have aged out of traditional school

The model isn’t just innovative; it’s effective. A 2023 report by the California Department of Education found that students in personalized learning charter schools had graduation rates up to 15% higher than their peers in traditional schools, particularly among historically underserved groups.

Yet California legislators would have the public believe that charter schools are taking money away from district schools and stealing all the good kids. That’s untrue. And once again, they’re proposing a new law that claims to add more oversight to charter schools but instead will divert student funding to government bureaucracy.

Now in the State Senate, the bill is based on the erroneous belief that learning can only happen when a student sits in a classroom all day. California families disagree. Almost three-quarters support a flexible education model and 89 percent say it is important to structure school to serve individual students, rather than forcing a “one-size-fits-all” approach.¹

“There is a double standard that exists for charter schools and ignores equal accountability for traditional school districts,” said Hanes. “Unlike traditional public schools, charter schools must prove their very existence every five years to continue operating.”

There have been numerous instances of fraud, misuse of funds and conflicts of interest by California school districts – yet those never prompted legislators to respond with bills that cut funding and increase oversight. Hanes questions if California charter schools need to divert more funds from serving student outcomes to bureaucracy when sufficient oversight already exists.

“California youth deserve an education system that prioritizes flexibility and innovation, not excessive policies that limit opportunity,” said Hanes. “We call on our elected leaders to join in our dedication to provide all students options and flexibility to succeed.”

For more information, visit Learn4Life.org.

About Learn4Life

Learn4Life is a network of nonprofit public high schools that provide students personalized learning, career training and life skills. Each school is locally controlled, tuition free and gives students the flexibility and one-on-one attention they need to succeed. Serving more than 64,000 students through a year-round program, we help them prepare for a future beyond high school. For more information, please visit www.learn4life.org.

______________________

^1 From Friday, March 19 through Wednesday, March 31, 2021, J. Wallin Opinion Research conducted a telephone survey of voters who are parents of one or more high-school-aged youths throughout the state of California. Eight hundred interviews were completed (plus an oversample of 71 additional African American respondents to equal 100 total of that demographic). A survey of this size yields a margin of error of +/-3.7 percent (95 percent confidence interval).