This chapter examines two public military-themed charter schools that meet researcher-developed minimum thresholds for academic and socioemotional success. Through document review, extensive on-site observations, and comprehensive interviews, the researchers examine the two schools in comparison to a conceptual framework developed almost 20 years ago by one of the researchers. The conceptual framework is predicated on four pillars present to varying degrees in military schools and colleges across the United States – academics, leadership, citizenship, and athletics. Careful analysis of both schools through the lens of all four pillars of the conceptual framework validates the framework as a successful means of evaluating the efficacy of a military-themed charter school.
TopIntroduction
In the past decade, a host of articles and studies have highlighted the seemingly ever worsening plight facing minority and low-income youth and the intractable struggles that our public education system has faced in trying to meet their academic and socio-emotional needs (Hajjar, 2005). A relatively new type of public educational institution may be poised to remedy this situation. Several states are experimenting with military-themed charter schools (MCS) (Erickson, 2019). While some of these schools have struggled to realize their initial promise of offering a free, high-quality military academy experience to low-income students, a number of these institutions are performing well above district achievement standards on most metrics (Johnson, 2009).
Historically, the structures and supports provided by military academies have been reserved for those families who could afford to send their sons (and in some cases daughters) off to private military boarding schools (Shane, Maldonado, Lacey, & Thompson, 2008). However, with the advent of military-themed charter school, this option is now being made available to low-income youth in a number of communities across the United States in spite of some opposition from educational groups (Hajjar, 2005).
Since the inception of JROTC (Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps in 1912), many in the educational community have been ideologically opposed to the idea of inviting the military into the public school system (Hajjar, 2005). The National Education Association initially took a strong stand against military training in public schools at its 1915 meeting (Hajjar, 2005). And more recently, some researchers have claimed that military involvement in public education is simply a thinly veiled attempt to recruit young people for military service and that these schools ostensibly serve as military indoctrination centers (Galaviz, Palafox, Meiners, & Quinn, 2011; Prichard, 2003). Notwithstanding these criticisms, military schools, as a whole, have helped thousands of minority graduates succeed academically and go on to lead successful lives and serve in both the public and military sectors (Wooley, 2005). Unfortunately, the general public is often completely unaware of the positive contributions these schools have made in shaping academic trajectories of countless low-income, minority students (Hajjar, 2005).