A question of $80.5 millionSchool board ponders cost of an all-charter district By Diette Courrégé (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Brad Nettles Orange Grove Elementary Charter School students head to their buses after school Tuesday as they go home for the day. The school has benefitted financially since converting to charter. Past storySchool studies charter status; Drayton Hall Elementary eyes change (This has links to other stories about charter schools) The question was simple but politically loaded: How much would it cost if every school in Charleston County decided to become a charter school? The answer: $80.5 million. School Board Chairman Hillery Douglas posed the question to district leaders so charter school supporters could better understand the budgetary implications of more schools converting to charter status. Charter schools have become a controversial issue in Charleston, and one of the reasons has to do with their funding. The state charter school funding formula results in most traditional, neighborhood schools gaining hundreds of thousands, sometimes millions, of dollars by operating as charter schools. Orange Grove Elementary Charter School, for example, has gained more than $1 million per year since converting in 2006. Critics say charters take money away from other schools and could put the school district in financial peril. Supporters say the schools simply are getting the money they deserve: the district average in per pupil funding. Charleston has seen an increase in the number of and interest in charter schools in recent years. Douglas hopes the $80.5 million figure will spur the board to put a moratorium on approving any additional charter schools until the district can get a handle on its finances. The district is limited in its ability to raise taxes, and more charter schools could lead to more financial difficulties, he said. School officials need to do what's necessary to protect the entire district, and state lawmakers should take note and change the charter school funding formula, he said. "(Charter school supporters) need to take a look at what they're doing before they bankrupt the district," he said. School board members had mixed reaction to the $80 million figure. Board member Arthur Ravenel Jr. described Douglas' question as a political move. Every school does not need to be or can be a charter school, he said, and he estimated that no more than a dozen schools would want to convert to charter status. The school district is flush with money, and officials will find money for anything they want, he said. Charter schools simply are the recipients of what state law mandates, he said. District finance officials came up with the $80.5 million figure by applying the charter school funding formula to all its schools. The $80.5 million would be a 35 percent increase in the portion of the district's annual operating budget that goes to schools. But not every school would gain money by converting to charter status. About 10 schools would lose money annually. David Church, executive director of the South Carolina Charter School Association, took issue with the district's calculation and said that converting every school to a charter would result in significant savings. The Charleston school district discriminates among its schools by under-funding some, Church said. Some schools do not receive the district average in money, so that's why some, such as Orange Grove Elementary and James Island High, have benefited financially from their conversion to charter status, he said. Schools receive varying amounts based on size and the students they serve. "It's not fair for Charleston County School District to treat its own schools differently," Church said. "They should be treating all their schools the same. They should be treating them more like charter schools." Besides the money, schools convert to charter status because of governance, he said. Charter schools have more control over their budgets and other decisions than traditional schools, he said. Reach Diette Courrégé at 937-5546 or dcourrege@postandcourier.com. |
Article tools |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 41 comment(s)
Posted by belovedbliff on September 24, 2008 at 5:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Did Burke Middle/ High ever become the Triple A program where every student excels in arts, athletics, and academics?
Posted by moonpie on September 24, 2008 at 6:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
i don't get the whole charter school thing. sounds like private schools funded with public money.
Posted by karmann on September 24, 2008 at 6:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
When CCSD does not live up to its promises then what are parents to do. CCSD need to allow parents more say so in the decision making process of their schools. Charlestowne Academy made the decision to upgrade their uniform policy, and now CCSD and the district superintendent will not support it. Charter school sounds more appealing.
Posted by DoaMM on September 24, 2008 at 6:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
To sum it up:
Non-Charter Schools = Budget Cuts
Charter Schools = Budget Gains
I think the schools are just looking out for themselves. Now whether they are looking out for a better education for the students OR bigger wallets for themselves, that's the big question.
Posted by commonsence on September 24, 2008 at 7:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What Mr. Douglas fails to mention is that if the district had succesful schools, there wouldn't be a need for charter schools. As it is, going charter is the parents only recourse within the public system to increase local autonomy and accountability for the educational decisions -basically operating mostly idependently from CCSD control.
Posted by mlm on September 24, 2008 at 7:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"...sounds like private schools funded with public money." That's exactly what Meyers, Douglas, Green and McGinley want you to think. This argument is designed to polarize the debate, not explain the benefits or provide honest answers. Those wanting to keep the money and power in the same hands that brought the system to where it is now are hoping the public can't or won't do the math.
Even if this hyped up and inflamitory figure is correct (and it's not), it doesn't include the obvious savings that could be generated, even if a large percentage of Charleston County school were converted to charters. You could start with a significant reduction in the central staff and among CCSD inflated number of administrators. The savings? Millions?
Other savings would come with the reduction of CCSD's dependency on maintaining an outsourced private contract for bus service that carries more than half of CCSD's 41,000 twice a day. Too many of these students now riding the highways for hours every day are due to NCLB school failures and because parents have lost faith in the schools in their neighborhoods. How much much would this save us? Millions more?
Then there is the tricky way in which CCSD's operators and school board politicians try to get this one to slip into the public's fears. They aren't telling us (or the reporter) that most of this unsubstantiated claim that the cost will be $80 million more is based on fuzzy math. First they take CCSD's existing student enrollment (41,000). Then they take the difference in the county-wide average per student cost received by a large charter school now under the existing state law. That would be more money as opposed to the reduced funding that same large school might have received under CCSD's method of funding. Then they multiply that funding difference by the total number of CCSD students...and there you have it...$80 million.
What they aren't telling you is that the average per pupil cost would be reduced since all (or most) students would then be in charter schools. The average would be what CCSD has and is paying out, not on top of its currently inflated budget.
Let the parents, teachers and committed school administrators run the public schools. Charter schools allow this to happen. CCSD wants you to trust them to do more of the same. So far the Chamber of Commerce, City Hall and the Ministerial Alliance have done a pretty poor job of it. We need new leadership at CCSD and on the county school board that are at least willing to look at what works best in many different configurations.
If Mr. Douglas and his supporters say the cost of going totally charter will be $80 million (which is doubtful), what then is the cost to us all for keeping the failing public school system in Charleston County just as it is?
Posted by darliberty on September 24, 2008 at 7:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I definately support the charter school program, It is time the tax dollars allocated for schools actually go to the schools instead of funding the administration.
Posted by capnphil on September 24, 2008 at 8 a.m. (Suggest removal)
1. RIF the top heavy administration at all levels.
2. Support teachers instead of parents of misbehaving and irresponsible children.
3. Maintain high expectations of students and parents, (teachers are already busting their butts, if you don't think so, come in for a week straight and observe just one teacher every day.)
4. Cut down on teachers paperwork (the way the EIA of 1986 was written when Governor Richard Riley supported that as we raised the sales tax to 5 cents, WOW, remember that anyone? (P.S. The paperwork are requirements administrative bureaucrats create to justify their jobs, though the bureaucrats say it stems from the Federal level, HA.) Remember the constitution "the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people,"[2] and reserves all powers not granted to the federal government to the citizenry or States.
Posted by Teach7775 on September 24, 2008 at 8:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
75 Calhoun is shaking in their boots!!!
If Charleston County Schools were to go all Charter 95% of the people at 75 Calhoun would be out of a job.
Trim the fat!!! Put the money to fund these extraneous positions to better use....in the classrooms!!!
Posted by Teach7775 on September 24, 2008 at 8:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
ColdBeer- You have noo idea what you are talking about.....
Posted by Teach7775 on September 24, 2008 at 9:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I will explain, but will not waist too much of my time on you....
ANY school can become a Charter school, as long as they go through the application process.
I mean ANY school, low performing, high performing, Mt. Pleasant, Ravenel, etc.....
The schools complaining about the "Charter" system should take the initiatve to go through the Charter application process themselves.
The Charter school application process is very long, and detailed.... But having said this, it is fool proof. If the application is completed correctly Charleston County, nor the State of South Carolina can deny a school Charter status....
Posted by DoaMM on September 24, 2008 at 9:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Teach7775 wrote:
"If the application is completed correctly Charleston County, nor the State of South Carolina can deny a school Charter status...."
Right, but that's what they are wanting to do...deny schools because it "will cost too much". I quote the article:
"Douglas hopes the $80.5 million figure will spur the board to put a moratorium on approving any additional charter schools until the district can get a handle on its finances."
You need to be able to read before you can Teach...7775.
Posted by Lovely_One on September 24, 2008 at 9:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I know this is petty, but if Teach7775 is, in fact, a teacher, being able to use the correct word in a sentence is a must. "...will not 'waist' too much of my time on you..." Yeah, that should be W-A-S-T-E. Okay, I am getting out of English/Language Arts teacher mode now. Carry on with your debate of Charter vs. Non-charter!
Posted by Teach7775 on September 24, 2008 at 9:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh, give it up. I was in a rush....Have agood day!!!
Posted by Teach7775 on September 24, 2008 at 10:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Doa, I see what you are saying. The part that bugs me is that Charleston County WASTES soooooo much money. Millions I am sure................
Posted by mkris on September 24, 2008 at 10:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Can't drink champagane on a budweiser pocketbook.
Posted by Teach7775 on September 24, 2008 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
like I said...... Have a good day!!!
Posted by DoaMM on September 24, 2008 at 10:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Teach wrote:
"The part that bugs me is that Charleston County WASTES soooooo much money."
You are correct. The wasting of money on crap laws and projects creates the never-ending, ever-increasing loss of money for non-charter public schools.
Posted by Lovely_One on September 24, 2008 at 10:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by Teach7775 : "Oh, give it up. I was in a rush....Have agood day!!!"
Um, yeah, I already did. You didn't get that from my post? Man, can't read, comprehend, or spell (well you can spell you just didn't use the word in the correct context) and we have you teaching our children. No wonder we are last in education and all things good. And I see that you spelled WASTES correctly in your last post. Very good. You get a gold star and a smiley face for that.
Posted by DoaMM on September 24, 2008 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Lovely,
Wow...rough mornin'? You're showing your merciless side this fine day!
:)
Posted by Lovely_One on September 24, 2008 at 10:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Okay, I quit. I am being a butt today and I should not be. I apologize for that. Some days I allow my hormones to take over and today just happens to be that day. {Backing away from the computer}.
Posted by Lovely_One on September 24, 2008 at 10:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
DoaMM, yeah. I am being very bad and out of character. I need to take a chill pill!!!! Again, I apologize to everyone and especially to Teach7775!
Posted by DoaMM on September 24, 2008 at 10:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Lovely,
Don't apologize! That's just what every sap wants you to do...
"...{Backing away from the computer}."
Man, and I was about to take your leash off and let you run free to take random bites out of everyone!
hehe :)
Posted by Lovely_One on September 24, 2008 at 10:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
DoaMM, please don't let the leash go. I can be a real "pitbull in lipstick" at times. And no, I am not a hockey mom, I think Hockey sucks, but Football RULES!!!! Lol!
Posted by nikkiP on September 24, 2008 at 12:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
But if they were to put all schools on the same cirriculum, as ColdBeer has suggested, who sets the pace? the lower or higher end? Even in the middle poses problems. Smarter children are punished when the cirriculum is too easy, slower kids are punished if they can't keep up. And while some are just lazy, and should fail anyway, what do you do with the ones trying to keep up and just can't do it?
And why is it always about CCSD? is it that bad? I have no clue, to be honest. I can't imagine it's horrible, but i do know several recently graduated teachers that are refusing to work in CCSD. not only because of the bad reputation, but also because they don't want to get mugged by their students.
Posted by Teach7775 on September 24, 2008 at 12:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Early, I don't see your point..
Posted by clisby on September 24, 2008 at 1:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
From Early: "Teach, respectfully I think you are wrong and CB is right. A charter school does not have to follow district policies in which they can say yea or nay who comes in their school. They also do not have to MANDATORY pass 97% of the student grade as CCSD mandates."
I'm not sure exactly what you're saying. A charter school cannot "say yea or nay" to students wanting to enroll - enrollment is entirely by lottery. A charter school cannot require certain grades or test scores, or have an entrance exam.
(I certainly hope they don't have to pass 97% of students - that would be crazy.)
Posted by FindingMyself on September 24, 2008 at 1:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Early,
They actually have that law? Why not allow the teachers to be more creative and involved in how they teach, so that 97% passes on their own, without being slid through on some law? I've never heard of anything like that before. But then, I'm from the *other* Carolina, lol.
Also, don't be too hard on Teach. I work at a psychiatric facility, and I therefore have access to the patients' medical and mental health records/charts. You wouldn't believe some of the grammar and spelling errors I see in such "professional" documents!
Posted by holly123 on September 24, 2008 at 2:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Not ALL CCSD schools use the Plan For Excellence curriculum. In fact schools that reach Gold standard or excellent can opt out of the cohesive curriculum and they do. The standards are low and it isn't as "cohesive" as they would have you think. Schools like Buist, School of the Arts and the Magnet High, to name a few, know that one size does not fit all. A parent should be able to choose the curriculum that best suits their child.
Posted by bkeelin on September 24, 2008 at 2:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Again, I'm so glad we home school. If more parents could home school their children then CCSD, BCSD, Dor Dist 2&4 would see a decrease in funding and start waking up to the fact that they are teaching information based on half truths, liberal agenda's and wasting tax payers money. I pay taxes to BCSD but my children receive a much better education at home, and in a whole lot less time.
I commented on this question in yesterdays paper, I'm glad to see the P&C decided to follow up on this ridiculous 80 Million dollar price tag. Notice the Charter School Association said the district would save money. How do we get such different results looking at the same data?
Posted by now_here_this on September 24, 2008 at 2:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I have to question the mandatory 97% pass rate for CCSD. I counted 17 elementary schools in CCSD with greater than 3% retention rate according to the 2007 state report cards. Perhaps that is a policy of that particular school's principal.
On another note. CCSD has 8 charter schools. ONE has an excellent rating; the tiny Charleston Development Academy with 34 students in tested grades (3-6). James Island Charter has slipped from Excellent to Good in its Absolute rating. Its Improvement rating has been unsatisfactory for 2 straight years. Not even East Cooper Montesorri(sp?) has an excellent rating. It seems that Charter status isn't the be-all and end-all either. The problem is far more complex than money.
Posted by holly123 on September 24, 2008 at 2:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
In 2007 CCSD paid around 9930.00 per student for District 20 excluding Buist. If all of District 20 had been Charter that year they would have paid around 8102.00 per student, less actually because D20 is part of the inflated problem. But the point is, a savings of about 1800.00 per student is a real possibility by using the funding formula. Cut out the crazy over the top CCSD office and save, save, save!
Posted by DoaMM on September 24, 2008 at 2:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
holly123,
You're doing math...stop it. That's not what they want you to do.
Just take the "facts" they give you and go away. It'll be better if you don't stir the pot.
<sarcasm, if you couldn't tell>
Posted by jordan81 on September 24, 2008 at 3:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
wow, truly the reason for the failure of this country is ignorance. Amazing what the press can do to your blinded minds. For few of use, topics as such have clear reasoning. Very simple, administration would like to keep their jobs. More funding for class rooms equals less administration. I would be willing to go way out on a limb and say, "CCSD administration is going to do and say about anything to keep that from happening."
America THINK!
Posted by Lovely_One on September 24, 2008 at 3:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
CB,
I was just about to say the same thing....
Huh?
Posted by Teach7775 on September 24, 2008 at 3:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am hearing people make many good points.
But, for the life of me I can't think of a good reason why Charter Schools are not good for children.....The benefits of a Charter school all but negate the negative influences of being in such a poor district, or so I have been told...
Posted by holly123 on September 24, 2008 at 4:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The failing schools in CCSD are not going to turn around w/o charter intervention. Adding choices that will appeal to the middle class is the only way to integrate these schools. There are many children out there depending on the stability that will come along with the middle class. But if the only curriculum offered is CCSD cohesive... The middle class will continue to get transfers to better schools or move to better districts.
Posted by Teach7775 on September 24, 2008 at 4:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I know ColdBeer-
The reality is that all schools should be set up and run like charter schools without actually being Charter Schools. If that makes sense.
Can all schools be set up the same way?? Different poplulations of children have different needs....
The sad reality is that if Charleston County schools weren't in such bad shape their may not be such an overwhelming need for Charter Schools.....
Posted by clisby on September 24, 2008 at 7:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
now_here_this: Charleston Development Academy has an average rating, not excellent (at least for 2007 - I haven't seen the rating for 2008). It did have an excellent improvement rating for 2007, though; and last year it was the only D20 school besides Buist to rank as high as average. I'm not counting Sanders-Clyde, for obvious reasons.
For anybody who's interested, the 2007 school report cards are available on the CCSD website.
Posted by mlm on September 24, 2008 at 8:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Here's a math problem to consider. Under the NCLB legislation, the goal was to rate schools as "excellent" for having improved by 10% over the previous year's performance level. So if a school was rated "excellent" every year, consecutively, how long would it take for a school to be "off the charts" or "reinventing itself" in a parallel universe? More directly to the point, a 10% annual improvement rate is easier for historically low performing schools. To an already successful school it's virtually impossible to improve by 10% a year beyond a certain point, unless they are being more creative about how they cheat than what supposedly happened at that other school.
I don't put much stock in how CCSD plays this game of labeling schools. I look at the curriculum, the teachers and where the students are going after they finish their course work at a particular school. That's the data CCSD won't give you unless you insist. JICHS is still among the 4 leading high schools in Charleston County in terms of total academic performance of their students. The others are the Academic Magnet, School of the Arts and Wando. By misusing these report cards or selectively choosing whatever data serves a desired end, you can make any school look good or bad, regardless of the truth, if there is an agenda to be served.
Remember that Gregg Meyers and Toya Green both claimed to be concerned that James Island Charter High had "slipped" to "Average" on the state report cards. Then they tried to use that as justification to vote against endorsing the school's formal charter renewal application last year. I don't hear either of them concerned about other schools that have sat in the basement for years with no chance of success in sight. Many of the CCSD employees on the line at these schools might consider giving their right arm to be rated as "Average" just once.
I still don't put much value in school or district report cards alone, but that's the game currently on the table and we are still required to play it in order to continue receiving state and federal funding for our schools. Charter schools can at least put this paper chase in proper perspective and avoid the meaningless petty competition so encouraged by CCSD. Instead of playing "Simon says" with Calhoun Street, traditional charter schools can work on what successful schools are supposed to be doing: teaching students and encouraging inquiring minds.
As for 10% annual improvement ratings compounded...that's not honestly possible after 10 years, even if a school began flat on the floor with a rating lower than dirt. Claims against one school or for another using these reports are little more than school yard taunts used by CCSD and their lackeys to undercut the opposition. Of course certain schools are beyond reach. But even they would have to fudge the records in order to continue their winning streak under the current NCLB law. Check it out. Do the math.
Posted by mlm on September 24, 2008 at 9:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I’m glad to see there is a good discussion going on with good questions being asked about both CCSD and charter schools. The truth is available, it’s just not likely to be coming from the Superintendent or the Chairman of the County School Board.
The bottom line is this. CCSD will use whatever it takes to support their position. It’s not just a random school principal at one school who is under the gun of this annual school performance rating system. CCSD is rated just like the schools it controls. Superintendents and school board members are rated as well with bonuses, contract extensions and ultimately their jobs on the line based on how the report cards are interpreted.
School district officials here have often withheld (and will likely continue to withhold) information if they believed the information didn't serve their individual or administrative objectives. This is intended to maintain CCSD just as it is. They are not inexperienced in the art of blaming others for their repeated failures and shortcomings. CCSD is a bureaucracy that is understandably focused on its own survival.
To that end CCSD officials have worked hard to have the newspaper go along with them whether it’s to “cry wolf” about state funding or just to take another sow’s ear and call it a silk purse as with its AP Academy at Burke which is virtually D.O.A. CCSD’s administrative legions know the P&C editors are not big on checking the facts, be it for lack of money, time, understanding or genuine interest, it doesn’t matter. That's just the way it is and CCSD is using the P&C to their advantage. (Sometimes the P&C does get it, but not often.)
Unfortunately, we, the public tend to believe anything that appears in print. We all need to be more skeptical when public officials throw around facts which are so extreme and could easily be used to polarize opinions just in time for an election. We owe it to ourselves and to our neighbors to air our concerns and share our knowledge so that political extremes can’t cultivate and take advantage of our fears and prejudices. That's why our fourth grade math teachers taught us how to check our work. So why not check the work (and assertions) of our public officials? This might also include fact-checking what is being put out by the editors and news directors of our local press. The rush to meet deadlines or space limitations can keep even the best of them from seeing and reporting the larger story.
Charter schools are part of a much larger story than just balancing CCSD’s budget. Mr. Douglas will be gone in less than two months and this budget issue is just the latest weapon being used by his faction in one more attempt to kill the charter movement by appealing to legitimate public fears. Even with this story’s high profile on the front page of Wednesday’s paper, the facts don’t support his claims.