Charter school question on Nov. ballot: Clarity or confusion?
Furthering the charter school discussion already under way on this blog, the AJC has a lengthy piece tonight on the amendment on the November ballot.
If approved, the amendment will counteract a state Supreme Court ruling that the state cannot overrule the will of the local community — as manifested in the elected board of education — and approve charter schools.
According to the AJC:
The intensity of the debate would make it seem that charter schools, which are public schools, will go away if voters reject the constitutional amendment. Except, they won’t.
Local school districts will still be able to consider charter applications. Amendment backers, however, fear that without a stamp of approval from voters this fall, the state’s power to authorize and fund charter schools could come under legal threat. They point to a 2011 Georgia Supreme Court decision as proof. It stripped the Georgia Charter Schools Commission of the authority to approve charter schools. Local school boards, not the state, have the constitutional authority to oversee K-12 education, the court ruled.
Before and after the ruling, the state Board of Education has approved charter applications, and charter school proponents fear that, without passage of the amendment, that power would be challenged next.
While the legal underpinnings of the charter school movement in Georgia could be strengthened by voters this fall, pro-charter state legislators have already bolstered its financial pilings.
A little-noticed — at the time — change in charter schools legislation opened up a new funding source for charter schools that are approved at the state level. That source — supplemental, state taxpayer money — will go to state-approved schools no matter what voters decide this fall.
Some charter schools could get as much as two and a half times the amount of state funding traditional public schools receive, an analysis by the Georgia Department of Education has determined.
Every nickel charter schools get from the state is one that isn’t going to traditional public schools, amendment opponents argue. Georgia spends $1 billion less on schools than it did in 2009.
Understanding how that supplemental funding fits into the total financial picture requires some understanding of how charters are approved and funded in Georgia. Charter school applicants must first apply for approval from the district where the school would be located. If they are approved, they receive federal funds, state funds and local property tax money.
If the local district rejects the charter application, the applicant can turn to the state Board of Education. Before July 1, when new legislation took effect, charter schools authorized by the state would not get local property tax money.
The new law, however, gives state-approved charters additional money. The goal was to bring them to financial parity with traditional public schools and with charter schools that receive local property tax funding.
Natilee Brown-Van, principal at Heritage Preparatory Charter School in southwest Atlanta, said the funding will be a financial lifeline for a schools like hers, which was denied a charter at the district level and receives no local property tax funds.
Elizabeth Hooper, the parent of a public high school student in Alpharetta, said amendment backers are not spelling out what specific problems in traditional public schools charter schools are supposed to fix.
Hooper is among those who say the actual ballot question — “Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended to allow state or local approval of public charter schools upon the request of local communities?” — is misleading because it gives the impression that the state is not currently approving charter applications.
Eric Gray, communications director for the Democratic Party of Georgia, said that’s because voters have not been given the facts. “We have found that once people realize these charter schools take money from the public school systems, their opinions change,” Gray said.
The Democratic Party question “was worded in a way to have people say ‘no’ and yet 250,000 Democrats still voted to give parents more options,” said Tim Melton, vice president of legislative affairs for StudentsFirst, a California-based education group that backs passage of the Georgia amendment.
“I think the handwriting is on the wall,” Melton said, predicting passage of the amendment in November.
–From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
87 comments Add your comment
Beverly Fraud
August 9th, 2012
1:37 pm
Well sneak peek, I think people are more than willing to be educated as to why they should trust an organization that lacks the ethics and integrity to rescind Beverly Hall’s Superintendent of the Year Award.
But it appears the Georgia School Superintendent’s Association doesn’t want to educate us on that issue, doesn’t it?
Gee, a part of the public school apparatus that doesn’t appear to want to educate when their own vested self interests are threatened.
And you want to know why people want OPTIONS to the status quo?
Beverly Fraud
August 9th, 2012
1:48 pm
@Not all charters, you think these parents would have any trouble sending their children to the low SES, primarily black Ron Clark Academy if they were zoned there?
You think that MIGHT have something to do with the fact that Ron Clark will hold them accountable for word AND behavior, and the public schools will NOT?
Would you want your child to go to a school like Westlake, where a child can PHYSICALLY ASSAULT a member of staff, only to be let back in 3 days later to brutalize a child?
You think that happens at the “low SES, primarily black children” Ron Clark Academy?
Ed Advocate
August 9th, 2012
1:50 pm
@ Bev Fraud: I do enjoy many of your posts, but I wish you’d drop the demands that Herb Garrett revoke Beverly Hall’s Superintendent of the Year award. What’s he supposed to do? Track her down and demand the plaque back? What happens if she won’t comply? Hit her over the head and snatch it? Let’s say she’s holed up in a dark room in the fetal position hanging on the thing for dear life. Will he pry it from her hands?
Just because Garrett, like many others, was fooled by Hall at one time doesn’t mean that he hasn’t provided invaluable information about the financial impact of the funding formula set up to support state-approved charter schools.
mark
August 9th, 2012
2:14 pm
i love this state. every few years we get to change our constitution with an amendment that is written so poorly that even the ones you benefit vote against it. just like the Gay marriage BS we approved. Why did people vote against their ability to collect insurance, benefits or legal rights?
LD
August 9th, 2012
3:38 pm
@Kara – there is already an appeals process. If a charter is denied by a local board, the applicant can then submit the charter to the state board for consideration. And, depending upon the attendance zone, HR 1162 does NOT require the local board to approve a charter.
@ Charter Stater 2: When you discuss the per pupil allocations for traditional and charter schools, please be sure you are comparing apples to apples. While a charter school is required to accept any student, the severely disable students do not generally apply. This roughly 10% of students costs systems approximately 30% of the operating funds. For example, removing these students and the associated dollars from Fulton County’s $814 million operating budget and 93,000 students, results in approximately $6800 per student. This is LESS than the almost $7000 of state dollars being received by state charter students under HB797 (as per the DoE’s calculations).
Before continuing, I want to make clear that I do think that charter schools have a legitimate place in education. My issues are generally not with charter schools, but with this specific legislation. CharterStarter2, I would like to know why you feel Georgia needs an appointed Charter Commission to grant the charters? From HR797, this commission can take up to 3% of charter students’ allocations for its own operating costs. Why should Georgia taxpayers support this duplication of effort? Why can’t the amendment and legislation clarify the State Board of Education’s ability to grant charters? In a state that is already cash strapped, and an education funding formula that has not been fully funded for almost a decade, I question why over a million dollars should be use to support an agency that is largely duplication of effort. Personally, I would rather see this money applied toward educating communities on how to create a charter school, than on duplication of effort.
(This next comment is not directed at anyone, it is just my personal opinion.)
I also think this legislation in the creation of a State Charter Commission is moving towards a “nanny” state. I find it patronizing by the state legislature to assume that I am unable to elect a local school board that represents my beliefs. If I and others in my community disagree with our local board’s policy on charters it is OUR job to either change the policies, recall the board, find a candidate to run against the current members, or run for school board ourselves. If the state legislature believes we, the Georgia voters, are too inept to elect local school board members, maybe the legislature should start questioning whether they were appropriately elected!
bootney farnsworth
August 9th, 2012
4:17 pm
@ Beverly
I sorta agree with Ed on the whole Herb Garrett thing. shortly after being sent to the Regents some organization which awarded Tricoli shared governor of the year or some such sent out an oops letter.
while it gave most of us a good chuckle and an no poo Sherlock moment, it didn’t fix anything. we were still catastrophically in debt, still facing GBI, FBI, CNN, S&M ect sanctions, and at least 282 of us got laid off.
I feel you – I truly do. but its not easily gonna happen, and your energy is better spent other places
bootney farnsworth
August 9th, 2012
4:21 pm
I have always been a supporter of the theory, if not reality, of the charter moment. course, I always wanted them to find corporate funding – that being a separate issue.
with the cutsie move by the imbeciles downtown, I’m reconsidering my position. it reeks of Sonny’s fishing academy
Beverly Fraud
August 9th, 2012
6:45 pm
@ Bev Fraud: I do enjoy many of your posts, but I wish you’d drop the demands that Herb Garrett revoke Beverly Hall’s Superintendent of the Year award. What’s he supposed to do? Track her down and demand the plaque back? What happens if she won’t comply?
Nope Ed Adovacate. It’s not about the PHYSICAL award. It’s about the STAND.
Just releasing the statement will do, and adding the appropriate annotation on the website. Doesn’t matter what she does, YOU (GSSA) has made a stand for integrity in the process.
It’s not unlike when the Olympics rescinds a gold medal for cheating. Doesn’t matter if the winner returns the actual medal. The RECORD stands, and in this case, for every child and every parent and every staff that was hurt by Beverly Hall’s actions, they deserve GSSA take a stand on their behalf. (Not that the Olympics doesn’t have its issues, but at least now, people know that if an athlete cheats and gets caught there is no award.)
I just don’t get how anyone can see letting her keep the award as morally right, or rescinding it as morally wrong.
Beverly Fraud
August 9th, 2012
6:50 pm
I find it patronizing by the state legislature to assume that I am unable to elect a local school board that represents my beliefs.
@LD maybe you are but your peers CLEARLY are not. Seen the Clayton County School board lately? The APS board? The DeKalb board?
Maybe the voters shouldn’t be rescued from their sheer, total, abject stupidity, but what about the children of those parents? Again, it also has the advantage of chipping away at the education MONOLITH, never a bad thing.
Beverly Fraud
August 9th, 2012
7:14 pm
@bootney and ed advocate: I get it; give in a rest, right?
But what if we, as standard operating procedure, DIDN’T give it a rest? What if we CONSISTENTLY demanded our education leaders tell the truth?
What if, back in 2001 when Paul Donsky of the AJC broke the story of WIDESPREAD MASSIVE gains that defied logic, the school board kept PUSHING, kept PUSHING, kept PUSHING?
What if the voters had said, at every public appearance, “Why aren’t you asking these questions?”
I saw an English teacher ask Matt the Mouth Organ at DOE to comment on the insane amount of time being required to implement these standards. Don’t people get, that if every time Matt the Mouth Organ is mentioned on this blog Maureen gets OVERWHELMED with requests, there would be pressure on him to respond.
The blogsphere CAN bring pressure to bear, but it’s somehow considered “impolite” even to use it that way. And thus education is the mess it is. They players KNOW they can get away with it.
Ron F.
August 9th, 2012
7:35 pm
“with the cutsie move by the imbeciles downtown, I’m reconsidering my position. it reeks of Sonny’s fishing academy”
So THAT’S what I smell every time I read about this…I just thought it was the horse-puckey being shoveled by Deal to cover his ethics charges. Thanks for clearing that one up!
Ron F.
August 9th, 2012
7:42 pm
I have to admit, in the interest of fairness, that there are quite a few charter schools in Georgia that seem to be doing a good job. But I can guar-on-tee you when the legislature gets through with their agenda, even those schools will be struggling. As we consider this amendment, we have to keep in mind the polarized politics we’re living with right now. The corporate interests fueling this debate, the good ‘ol boy politics, and the general unabashed disregard for public education from many of our legislative body makes me very, very wary of this. They have no more interest in truly improving education for ALL than I have in kissing the pig they’ve slathered the lipstick on here.
Bernie
August 9th, 2012
11:11 pm
The true conservative is the man who has a real concern for injustices and takes thought against the day of reckoning.
Franklin D. Roosevelt, Speech in Syracuse, NY Sep. 29, 1936
CharterStarter, Too
August 10th, 2012
12:06 am
@ LD – I really appreciate your thoughtful post and will try to respond to all questions/thoughts just as thoughtfully….but it will probably be lengthy.
While I agree that students with profound disabilities rarely apply to charters (noting that this is a parent’s choice and not the charters denying entrance, because they can’t by law), your numbers are off. First, students with profound disabilities are funded at a MUCH higher level – about $16,000 per pupil. Districts, as LEAs, also have access to a state “pool” for low incidence SPED students who cost the district in excess of (I think) about $25,000.
You must also keep in mind that districts earn funding based on the averages for SPED students and thus, are able to spread staffing, etc. across the county for efficiency, which reduces costs to educate SPED students. Charters must hire a singular individual for one school, usually at market rate, and thus, the actual cost is higher. That is not a positive or negative position for either, just a function of size of each entity. We always hear that charters don’t serve Special Needs students. The data in Georgia shows 8-9% for charters and 10-11% for districts. Charters are less, but not substantially so. Charters serve students with all sorts of exceptionalities – I taught 2 students with profound autism and my co-worker taught a child with Down’s Syndrome at my charter school….along with others.
You must also consider that start up charters authorized by their districts do not have access to state funding allotments for facilities – that is another stream of money for the districts. In addition, districts have taxing and bonding authority, which provides another revenue stream for facilities. Districts receive (if voted) SPLOST funds. Start up charters “may” be provided SPLOST dollars for facilities, technology, or transportation, but generally districts do not share the funds (has happened only twice in our state and was quite a political feat in both cases). Charters pay for facilities out of their operational funds. Under HB 555, districts that have unused public buildings must allow charters to utilize them without lease fees (because the public already paid for them), but we have several districts who refuse – they prefer to use the buildings for storage, professional development, bus parking, or “future” plans than to allow students in charters to have access…and so the charters pay out of their operational dollars instead. For a balanced view though, APS has been very fair with their surplus facilities, and we are seeing DeKalb be a little more open minded to charters using surplus buildings.
Also, as LEAs, districts have access to tons of other federal grants and funds that charters cannot access. So, the funding streams for districts are much, much broader. Charters rely on state, local (if eligible), federal (if eligible), and fundraising.
Now, with 797, state charters will receive their earned proportionate share of state facilities funds, so that will help some, but without access to SPLOST or bonding and taxing authority, they will still be funding facilities out of operational costs.
The numbers that I quoted you considered REVENUE for only state and local, because adding them together, it evens the playing field for both (particularly rural districts) and gives the public some understanding of about how much per pupil is being paid in tax dollars. Charters generally spend their money in 3 blocks (in order of %): salaries, facilities, general operations.
As for your excellent question regarding why the Commission and why not just clarify in the law…we wish to goodness it would be that simple. Unfortunately, when the Supreme Court overturned the Superior Court and interpreted the Constitution by adding a word that wasn’t there (”exclusive”), it created a huge gray area about the authority of the state – for everything. I really encourage you to read the majority and especially the dissenting opinions from the Supreme Court on this case. Judge Nahmias was pretty scathing about the short-sidedness of the decision of the majority and warned about the potential for challenge by those opposed to the state authorizing charters or funding them. He also mentioned that the decision opened up a can of worms on non-charter related matters….i.e., if districts have EXCLUSIVE control, could they refuse to follow the state’s salary schedule? What about the fact that the state spends more than half of its budget on public education – are they just a paycheck without any oversight? The state Attorney General concurred with Nahmias. So you see, to really ensure that it is perfectly clear that the state has responsibility that is shared with the district in authorizing charters AND clarifies the role of the state in public education in general, we have to seek Constitutional clarity. The important thing to note is that the voters will make the decision – it will not be mandated by anyway. if it’s voted affirmatively, it will be the will of the people. We are seeing a lot of bi-partisan support – the majority of Republicans and nearly 50% of Democrats. That’s pretty amazing given how contentious this issue has been and how much nonsense and misinformation is being spread by districts and the GSBA and GSSA.
Something interesting to know is that the state has, in the past, been a sort of “appeals” body for charters…however, they received no local funding and were usually operating under $4000 per pupil which is not only inequitable, but unsustainable. The districts never challenged the state’s authority for doing this…not ever. The Commission provided not only an appeals process, but also more equitable, sustainable funding when it was established. I won’t get into the argument of whether or not this was fair since it’s a moot point now, but the thing to know is that the districts challenged the state’s authority for approving schools only after there was money involved. Admittedly, they lost money in the prior structure, but NOW, there is an absolute guarantee that no funds will be taken from them. ..so NOW their argument is about funds they could POTENTIALLY have. There IS a budget crisis in Georgia, but there is no guarantee that the state would fund them higher anyway. If they had desired to take .0004 of the budget and added it back to K-12 education, they could have done it at any time. They have decided to take that tiny amount of our state budget that does NOT come from K-12 education and provide it to the charters. What difference does it make? It is being invested into public school students. I find it so interesting that the districts are not being financially impacted and STILL they fight the charters. Despite their claims to “support” charters, they continually deny them (even the viable ones) and fight them even when there is no impact to their own budgets. It is clear they just don’t want charters around to challenge what they are doing. What frustrates me most is that it’s not just a philosophical difference we have – their arguments are illogical and unsubstantiated.
As for the 3% – the up to 3% takes care of the ACTUAL costs for central administration and oversight. The district approved charter schools pay their school districts up to 3% as well (meaning that the districts make money off of every charter they authorize and the charters automatically start at 97% of funding, assuming they are funded correctly, which most aren’t). Something else to consider is that every school “earns” state funds, which includes central administration, and the school districts retain this at the central office. 88% of the districts spend 1-7% on general admin. Lest you think I never say anything nice about districts, allow me to commend these districts for containing costs in areas that don’t touch children (general administration).
Columbia County 1.7%
Camden County 1.8%
Paulding County 1.9%
Lee County 2.1%
Bryan County 2.1%
Hart County 2.2%
Tift County 2.3%
Henry County 2.3%
Walker County 2.4%
Cherokee County 2.6%
Morgan County 2.6%
Catoosa County 2.7%
Rome City 2.7%
Cobb County 2.8%
Carroll County 2.9%
Decatur County 2.9%
Fannin County 2.9%
Here are some high fliers with general administration costs (keeping in mind that every dollar spent here is NOT in the classroom…you should cross reference this to some of their achievement. How many of these are rural districts that are “hurting.” Why don’t they just collaborate with a neighboring district for general administration functions so more money could go into the classrooms? The legislature asked some that question a few months ago…and they hemmed and hawed. It’s a “turf” thing, which only costs tax payers more dollars.
Pelham City 7.1%
Gwinnett County 7.1%
Pulaski County 7.2%
Taliaferro County 7.5%
Chickamauga City 7.5%
Clinch County 7.6%
Social Circle City 7.7%
Treutlen County 7.9%
Twiggs County 8.1%
Miller County 8.4%
Warren County 8.5%
Talbot County 8.8%
Marion County 8.8%
Glascock County 9.0%
Randolph County 9.1%
Bleckley County 9.2%
Turner County 10.0%
Webster County 10.9%
Stewart County 11.3%
Calhoun County 11.6%
Clay County 11.7%
Chattahoochee County 12.5%
Quitman County 13.0%
Hancock County 15.1%
Baker County 16.4%
Atlanta Public Schools 21.3%
Here’s what the charter sector desires (and always has desired): when a group of parents/community members feel that there is a need to provide for an alternative option for education for purposes of either 1) raising achievement and/or 2) providing options, they should be able to take a quality application to the school district and receive a fair evaluation. Districts and charters should be able to collaborate to share best practices to meet all students’ needs in the community. Charters should be able to count on their districts to provide fair and equitable funding for charter students. Charters should not have to worry about being renewed if they have excellent academic results and good fiscal stewardship (we’ve had some explicit and implicit threats by districts for charters coming up for renewal and a recent closure.)
If all of those things happen, you should never see a charter go to the Commission. It won’t be needed. Since the legislators had the fore thought to provide an incentive to work with districts (by only providing supplement at average of the lowest 5 districts in the state), and charters will be taking on the role of LEA, which is a great deal more responsibility, only those where districts fail to be fair would elect the Commission route. It is a checks and balances. And keep in mind that funding is ALWAYS subject to appropriation (that’s in the law).
I hope I answered your concerns. Please let me know if you have others. Since you are a quality charter supporter, I hope you’ll reconsider your position on the Constitutional Amendment and vote yes so that the districts will be more compelled to deal fairly with charters applying first through them.
And for the teachers out there reading this blog – I really, really hope you are thinking about this. If charters challenge your districts to rethink their priorities (and hopefully pipe resources to kids instead of central office bloat), rethink school morale, etc., that benefits YOU. For parents, you should support quality charters for the exact same reason – it raises the bar for everyone. Don’t let the districts shirk from the challenge.
CharterStarter, Too
August 10th, 2012
7:21 am
@ Ron – with all due respect, I am not corporate. And you can bet your last bottom dollar I called and visited my legislators regularly, as did hundreds of other parents I know. I really don’t understand the continual reference to corporate push on this issue. Waiting by the ropes to talk to my legislator during last session, I wasn’t surrounded by management company lobbyists. I was surrounded by other moms and dads.
The fact of the matter is that even if a charter group wants to work with a management company, they will STILL have to have a quality charter plan, they will STILL have to first go through the local district, and if denied and the plan is not viable, the state will affirm the district’s decision and deny them (and should). I find it so odd the people are willing to place more trust in the decision making integrity of local boards who have a vested interested in denial versus an objective commission with no dog in the fight. Odd.
The only “corporate” push behind this thing in Georgia is the hundreds of businesses who are tired of getting unqualified graduates. The Chambers in smaller communities should be behind this since local economies are heavily dependent on a strong public education system, which is lacking in lots of our communities. In rural communities (like Pataula Charter’s), businesses are leaving the area because of the dismal failure of the districts, which further places a strain on local economies. The colleges and universities SHOULD be behind it because you constantly hear them complaining about how many kids enter the university system unprepared and having to take remedial courses.
I also don’t understand what is tricky about the ballot question. I really, really have looked at it and tried to consider what might trip people up, but from what I can tell, it’s pretty straight forward. 1) Should the districts and state have shared authority to approve schools 2) the schools should be based on community request. There is no inflection in any of the words chosen, no word in there that has a negative connotation (unlike the Democratic party’s straw question that said “override”)…and even still, nearly half of the Democrats supported state having a role in authorizing. I think the main source of the “beef’ with the question is that charter opponents fear the public won’t support their position.
As you can see from all of my posts, I try to very hard to stand on logic and facts, so please help me to understand from where you are getting your reasoning or facts that this is a corporate driven initiatives. Thanks for clarifying.
living in an outdated ed system
August 10th, 2012
9:51 am
@CharterStarter – you rock!!
PMC
August 10th, 2012
10:04 am
It would be a great service if the AJC would do a big piece like they did on school cheating recently to highlight the benefits and or costs of charter schools.
Inman Park Boy
August 10th, 2012
10:04 am
One word: Vouchers. Lets schools stand or fall based on parental CHOICE! Or has “choice” suddenly become a dirty word?
EDuc
August 10th, 2012
10:32 am
these blogs don’t matter—the rules are made by the powerbrokers in the legislature and school board and they could not care less what the people want or need.
LD
August 10th, 2012
10:50 am
@CharterStarter2 : Thank you for all the information. I had understood the need to clarify the state’s role in the constitution (thus the amendment), but I still do not understand why the State School Board cannot be the granting entity for state charters (regardless of QBE and other funding allocations). If the state needs a separate entity to approve charters, should each local system also create an appointed board to review and grant charters? But then, wouldn’t this increase their central administration costs and have the taxpayers crying “foul”? I have not yet heard (in my opinion) a legitimate reason as to why the state level approval process could not be done through our State School Board and elected superintendent. I realize that HB797 does not outline this scenario; HB797 creates the commission and the chartering process (among other things). For me, the creating of an appointed commission comes down to “good ole boy” politics, and appointments will be given as political favors. While I would hope that the appointments would be based solely on knowledge and ability and not politics, I highly doubt that this is what will happen. At least with the State School Board, there is one elected official directly answerable to me, the voter. I would have fewer issues with the commission if the seats were elected positions, not appointed. But regardless of how members get their seats, I still think the commission is duplication of effort.
DJ Sniper
August 10th, 2012
10:58 am
I’ll admit that I don’t know all the details about charter schools, but I do have one question: Are any of them going to be religious based like the ones in Louisiana that plan on teaching children all kinds of incorrect information? If so, our kids are in trouble.
CharterStarter, Too
August 10th, 2012
11:08 am
@ LD – I understand where you’re coming from, but consider these 2 things…
1. The state board has a million other responsibilities in K-12 education. The kind of oversight of a singular group of schools would be impossible to do as effectively as an objective Commission who only has that responsibility. The Commission did and will be voluntary. The Commission staff, when it was in existence, only took about 1 or 2% for administrative fees to cover costs for its staff. Compare that to a district approved charter who pays their district 3% of their total revenue. This is a cost savings, not an addition.
2. The charter sector would LOVE for districts to have external boards to review and make recommendations for approval or denial. Bringing in objectivity would help so much. Currently, APS, who I believe is the best authorizer we have in this state (excellent charter school office – tough, but very fair.), has people come in from outside the state to serve on interview committees to provide the objectivity. The 3% fees that charters pay cover the costs of travel/review fees, which is pretty modest (I think national standard is about $100 per application). This would work great and probably yield much more fair processes and transparency IF the boards at the district level would take the politics out of it and rely on the objective recommendations of an external review panel.
3. As for “elected” positions….consider it this way, these individuals are appointed by individuals who ARE elected. The state board is also appointed and not elected. District boards take recommendations from hired staff who are NOT elected. I think a way to look at it is IF the appointing individual or body makes a poor choice in the appointment, the buck stops with them, as their constituents will hold them accountable. If I was in the position of making appointments, I think I’d be ULTRA careful in my selection, as once they get into the position, their actions are outside of your control. And as for the appointed Commissioners, they are business professionals who are well respected in their communities (or the ones we had were). They don’t want to jeopardize their reputation. Just my general thoughts on that.
I am really enjoying the dialogue.
CharterStarter, Too
August 10th, 2012
11:11 am
@ DJ, thanks for asking a clarifying question. Our law is different than Louisian’s so the answer is no. The Charter Schools Act prohibits this. Here is the link: http://archives.gadoe.org/DMGetDocument.aspx/TITLE%2020%20Charter%20Schools%20Act%20of%201998%20as%20Amended%20July%201%202009.pdf?p=6CC6799F8C1371F6EAA2AF24ACB0BEBC5871519FA348829658DA33163C3678F8&Type=D
You can find this specifically addressed in the definitions where it talks about who may petition for a charter. I hope this helps relieve your mind.
DJ Sniper
August 10th, 2012
11:29 am
Thank you CharterStarter. Like I said, I’m not real familiar with all the pros and cons related to charter schools, so I have a lot to catch up on.
Grumps
August 10th, 2012
11:33 am
Some of you folks need to go back to school and take a course in critical thinking.
Given: Poverty is negatively correlated with educational success.
Hypothesis 1: Poverty causes the lack of educational success.
Hypothesis 2: Lack of education causes poverty.
Hypothesis 3: Some other factor (iq, family values, peer values) causes both.
Which is it? Answer.. Undetermined – it could be any of them or a combination of them or the correlation is simply coincidence.
Think, people.
Ron F.
August 10th, 2012
11:34 am
” I find it so odd the people are willing to place more trust in the decision making integrity of local boards who have a vested interested in denial versus an objective commission with no dog in the fight. Odd”
Looking at APS, Dekalb, and Clayton, it really is odd, I agree. I’m in a small town and what it boils down to is this: we elect our local board. In my county, and many throughout the state, the members are local folks who are known. You see them in the grocery store, and at the post office; you know their kids and grandkids. Most of them you grew up with and knew their teenage vices and sins. They have a vested interest in the community. If it sounds a little “Mayberry-ish”, it’s because in much of the state, there is still the loyalty to local folks. It’s a tough sell to get people to accept that a group of folks in Atlanta could override their decisions. Sometimes the differences are about more than geography. Progressive is NOT a word I’d use to describe attitudes beyond the metropolitan Atlanta area. As I’ve noted before, I work in a town where racial divisions like those in Delhi, LA would happen between the public and charter schools.
As I posted, I’ve read about and know people working in some of the successful charter schools. Much like public, there are some good and some bad, and we generally hear more about the bad. I know there are good ones out there. Help me understand this: who audits the charter schools? Is there a clear chain of command about who has access to their records? The local BOE and state audit us every year. How is this done in charter schools for the tax dollars they receive? I’m thinking about all the issues brought up with stalling and withholding records at FSAMS as I type this.
My concern about corporate management of charter schools ties into the accountability issue. If the state is investing dollars in the school, does it have any rights currently to audits? How far does the state’s right to information reach when a private entity is running the school?
Thanks for the answers. I am reading and considering, even when I get up on my high horse about the issue.
3schoolkids
August 10th, 2012
11:53 am
Charter Starter Too, can you remove Georgia Cyber Academy and Connections Academy from your Special Needs calculations and then report those percentages? If you do, you will see a much higher disparity between Charters and Local systems. You are right that it is the parents option when they are told the services may not be the same at the Charter, just like it is the parents option to enroll in a Charter that requires agreement to corporal punishment, a dress code, fees for bus service and extra-curriculars, volunteer hours or money in place of hours, etc.. The point is that if the Charter is truly a Public school there shouldn’t BE a difference in services. Special Needs parents have had to endure years of Austerity cuts, just the like the General Ed population. It means having to fight for services guaranteed by Federal Law.
The legislature had hoped, I’m sure, that offering the Special Needs Scholarship would alleviate complaints of this nature, but then they went and included all sorts of private and religious schools that don’t provide any Special Needs services (except for the schools that truly are Special Needs and the tuition is so high the Scholarship won’t even cover half the tuition). What you are left with is discriminatory practices in the Special Needs Scholarship, and at the Charter level and parents who stay in (or “choose” to go back to) the local public schools still fighting like the devil to get what their child is guaranteed under law.
3schoolkids
August 10th, 2012
11:59 am
Am I the only poster on here that thinks the “dialogue” between Charter Starter, Too and other posters is actually a “dialogue” with him/herself? If it’s a given that it will be an overwhelming Yes on the Charter Referendum, why the need for such a lengthy “dialogue”?
Pride and Joy
August 10th, 2012
2:40 pm
COPY AND PASTE
Regardless of the time and date, when the topic of charter schools comes up, the same old tired responses arise.
If the blogger is an employee of the traditional publc school system, the post predicts that charters will destroy the public school system in America.
I could copy and paste all the responses from the 25 other charter posts into this one and they’d all say the same thing.
So, I’ll go ahead and acknowledge all the fears from the traditional public schools:
YES, charter schools will mean less money for the local public school.
YES, because the local public school will get less money, some employees will lose their job.
YES, this is the right thing to do.
We the people have a right to have a say how our tax dollars are spent.
The days of the monopoly of public schools is nearing an end.
We taxpayers and parents demand change.
If you want to call that a revolution, I’d agree. It’s time for one.
MB
August 10th, 2012
5:57 pm
Sneak Peek: Have you seen the Reuters article? Private firms eyeing profits from U.S. public schools http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/08/02/usa-education-investment-idINL2E8J15FR20120802
Ron F.
August 10th, 2012
7:00 pm
From the Reuters article:
“The charter school chain Rocketship, a nonprofit based in San Jose, California, turns kids over to DreamBox for two hours a day. The chain boasts that it pays its teachers more because it needs fewer of them, thanks to such programs. Last year, Rocketship commissioned a study that showed students who used DreamBox heavily for 16 weeks scored on average 2.3 points higher on a standardized math test than their peers.”
Okay, so the charter schools run by Rocketship spend money to turn kids over to a computer for TWO HOURS a day for 2.3 points in test score improvement? Really? And we think that won’t happen in Georgia…hmmmm, me thinks Sonny’s fishing academy debacle is starting to look like nothing.
Truth in Moderation
August 10th, 2012
8:42 pm
“Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended…”
I always vote “no” to any change with that wording. However, I would vote “yes” if it read, “Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended to repeal the compulsory education statute?” That would solve all of the complaints on this board. The corrupt educrats, who have helped bankrupt this nation and lower education standards to cater to the Globalists, would be thrown out. All the public school facilities could be leased to the highest bidder and TAXPAYERS would get the rent money. Most would then be able to afford a nice private school. Free market pressure would produce a variety of schools to suit different needs. Good teachers would be rewarded, bad ones would be out of work. REAL education would be unleashed! What are we waiting for?
CharterStarter, Too
August 11th, 2012
12:32 am
@ Ron F. – Charters are required to follow all Open Records/Meetings laws, so the public has the right to view any information that they would have the right to view with traditional schools or districts. So even if it is managed by an EMO, they still must comply.
In addition, the state department requires an annual charter schools report each year which includes reporting on progress against charter performance goals (both academic and operational/fiscal), and charters must also submit an independent audit by a Georgia CPA to the state as well. The information gleaned fro these reports are published in an annual report by the state and is published on the charter schools division website. Some districts have reporting requirements for charters monthly or quarterly. And of course, charters must submit any other data to local, state, or federal agencies.
Regarding FSA…despite what Fulton County tried to spin, the school did NOT withhold any information. Fulton County officials were welcomed in the building immediately. FSA does have a part time business manager, so the county had to work around that, but they did not Fulton access to data. in fact, they gave Fulton access to their Quickbook account. What FSA DID do was request documentation from the non-Fulton County individuals that wanted to come and get into the schools records (which would mean a violation of FERPA)…they just asked for verification and allowed the individuals to come in as soon as it was received. They were complying with the law (FERPA). It is so interesting that Fulton County violated FERPA when they published their “audit” with student names and information. In addition, they had every document and substantiation for the county “findings” publishing on their website – in an attempt to demonstrate transparency. One should note that FSA was open and successful for 10 years…and in 10 years Fulton never “caught” anything, despite being on of the most structured authorizers in the state.
CharterStarter, Too
August 11th, 2012
12:35 am
Good authorizer = approve only quality charters through a fair and transparent process and provide appropriate oversight to ensure academic achievement and fiscal stewardship while not compromising the school’s autonomy.
Ron F.
August 11th, 2012
9:51 am
@CharterStarter: thanks for the information. It helps to hear it from the supportive side as well. I think the issues with FSA point out the need for careful stewardship, just as we should expect from all schools dependent upon tax dollars. If the state commission is reinstated and grants charters, I’m assuming they’ll follow the same process for fiscal accountability, correct?
I’m still not sold on the idea, but assuming the amendment will pass in November, I truly want to have as many facts as possible. Thanks for sharing insight from the charter point of view. I still must cautiously consider how this could affect a small, more rural system like my own. Where larger counties with very diverse needs could benefit from more options, I think smaller systems will have to weigh these options very carefully. I think we’ll see a significant increase in charter applications in the next few years, and it will be a difficult choice in the rural areas where cuts in state funding have had a huge impact. Our local tax base cannot absorb much more, and I’m not sure that we would be better off even if the school system ceased operations and turned our schools into charter schools. At this point, I am trying to consider all the possible scenarios should a group of parents decide they want a charter school in our area.
LD
August 11th, 2012
12:30 pm
@Charter Starter 2″ I find it so odd the people are willing to place more trust in the decision making integrity of local boards who have a vested interested in denial versus an objective commission with no dog in the fight.”
This is my main concern in that the people on the commission WILL have “..a dog in the fight.” I have little faith in the officials in Atlanta to appoint positions based on ability rather than given as a favor. I worry that the people on the commission will have a vested financial interest in some way for many of the applications that come before them.
Ros Dalton
August 11th, 2012
1:18 pm
The fundamental problem with this legislation is the nature of the individuals to whom this power is being given. We’re not talking about former educators or elected officials or anyone who answers to the people at all, no the commission, if brought back to power, will be stocked with the Lt. Gov.’s best friend’s nephews once again and they’ll be making decisions about how the money my school is currently getting will be spent. This isn’t about choice, this is about who has access to power and money. Right now my local school board, the people I elect and who live here in my community with their home addresses and phone numbers in my phone book, the men and women I run into at the grocery store and whose community meetings I attend; they decide if a charter school deserves our dollars or not. If I don’t like their decision they hear about it, straight from the horse’s mouth so to speak. If I think they screwed up (I’m in Fulton, so FSA and the failed Music Matters program last year come to mind) I can call them out on it and hear what they have to say about it.
None of that is possible with the nebulous State Charter Schools Commission. Their decisions are made behind closed doors on criteria that are private and unexamined. Katie around the corner isn’t going to start raking in bribes to green light the next ridiculous fad in education without me noticing, but Bob down at the capital can do a couple of months on the Commission and never answer to anyone about why he made a particular decision or where his new Lexus was bought. My only recourse is to pay for it until the Court strikes it down again and our kids are the ones who suffer.
You should have a voice. You should have control. Not in some one off vote to approve a politically appointed committee member, but in the direct vote for the exact individuals making the decision. Support your local school board or replace them with one you can. I’ve never yet seen a good thing come from surrendering my power and my influence to a man whom I can’t reach with my voice and my hands.