CHARTER SCHOOLS DESERVE BETTER THAN THIS

You would think colleges and universities, of all places, would want to be on the cutting edge of innovation, particularly the paradigm shifts that quite possibly could contribute to a revolution in American education.

So why are colleges and universities in the eastern half of Missouri dragging their heels on charter schools in St. Louis?

A 1998 Missouri law on charter schools is restrictive, to say the least. It permits charter schools only in Kansas City and St. Louis. And it requires charter schools to be sponsored by public institutions of higher learning. The law was expanded last year to allow more colleges and universities, including Southeast Missouri State University, to become charter-school sponsors.

What exactly is a charter school? The answer depends on whether you are talking to a supporter of the charter-school concept or an opponent, whose numbers have been sufficient to keep any schools from being chartered in eastern Missouri since the law was passed.

Supporters say charter schools allow for experimentation and nontraditional teaching concepts that likely would produce better educated elementary and high school students. There are several charter schools operating in Kansas City, and it's too early to tell yet whether the schools there are living up to the hopes and dreams of their founders. Around the nation, charter schools are drawing mixed reviews, but there are instances of not just success, but smashing success.

This is what the charter-school movement is all about. No one ever believed every charter school would solve every problem of today's public schools. The vision was and still is that some charter schools might work so well that they would be copied by other schools, thereby enhancing the overall quality of education.

Charter-school opponents continue to argue that charter schools are all bad. They would draw funding from traditional public schools. They would skim the cream of the students in nearby schools. They would undermine the efforts of school administrators who deal with the quagmire of state and federal bureaucracies all the time.

The claims of both sides need to be weighed carefully. The point is, no one knows what would happen if there were charter schools in every one of the 524 public schools districts in the state, not just those in Kansas City and St. Louis. And, unless charter schools are given an opportunity to succeed -- or fail -- Missouri students will never benefit from any good that might come from such experimentation.

This is where colleges and universities come in. Most public colleges and universities have teacher-training programs. Some, like Southeast, owe their very existence to the recognized need for a pool of trained teachers. These colleges and universities have long been laboratories for new teaching techniques, curriculum and administrative training.

So why are these institutions dragging their feet?

For one thing, charter schools have become a political hot potato. In large part, charter schools are endorsed by conservatives in general and Republicans in particular. Like school vouchers and other ideas that have the potential to loose the bureaucratic bonds of public education, charter schools have been tossed on the heap of polarizing issues that too rarely get appropriate review and discussion, which leads to misunderstandings and an unwillingness to work toward the common good even if it means trying something different, something whose outcome isn't clear from the start.

Here's an opportunity for colleges and universities to lead the way. If they don't, it will be education in general that will wind up the loser. Institutions that hold themselves up to be beacons of learning and discovery should take heed.