In a surprising development, Jefferson County, the school district which has drawn most of the protest from pro-charter groups, is apparently off the hook. The sweetheart language reads,
A district that has, as of the date of this act, an established student assignment plan that includes school choice and magnet options shall not be required to authorize charter schools under this act.It's hard to imagine the status quo satisfying Jefferson County charter advocates.
This from Brad Hughes at KSBA:
KDE charter school draft addresses enrollment,
teacher tenure, may exempt Jefferson County
A draft of charter school legislation released Friday afternoon by the Kentucky Department of Education makes significant changes in the language of House Bill 109, the charter school bill passed by the state Senate late in the 2010 General Assembly but not considered by the House of Representatives.
The bill language, provided by Education Commissioner Terry Holliday in his Fast Five on Friday e-mail to state educations leaders, is described as “an attempt from KDE staff to address written concerns received at the department” from the Kentucky School Boards Association, the Kentucky Association of School Administrators and the Kentucky Education Association...
The Jefferson County Board of Education would appear to be exempted from being required to authorize charters if the bill becomes law. The district could be the only one that meets the exemption of having an existing student assignment plan, school choice and magnet schools, elementary to qualify for the exemption.
Jefferson County Schools Superintendent Sheldon Berman this week announced his opposition to House Bill 109, indicating the district might pull its endorsement of Kentucky’s Race to the Top $175 school reform funding application if such legislation becomes law in Kentucky. Commisioner Holliday has sought charter school legislation in order to strengthen the state’s second round Race to the Top application.
Revised Text of HB 109 Here:
According to the bill,
The mission of charter schools is to:A charter school shall be a public school within the school district that grants its charter and shall be accountable to the school district's local board of education for purposes of ensuring compliance with applicable laws and charter provisions.
(a) Focus on closing achievement gaps between high-performing and low-performing groups of public school students by expanding learning experiences for students who are identified as academically low-achieving;
(b) Increase pupil learning through the implementation of high, rigorous standards for pupil performance;
(c) Provide parents and students with expanded choices in the types of education opportunities that are available within the public school system; and
(d) Be allowed freedom and flexibility in exchange for exceptional levels of results-driven accountability.
Other snippets from the bill:
- A majority of the school's students [must] reside within the school district.
- [An existing school could convert to a charter on a vote of] 75% of the faculty at the school and 75% of the voting parents of students enrolled in the school
- [Charters would be] subject to all federal and state laws and constitutional provisions prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability, race, creed, color, gender, national origin, religion, ancestry, or need for special education services.
- Enrollment decisions [must be] made in a nondiscriminatory manner.
- [Charters can change instructional practices but] curriculum, assessment, and accountability [remain the province of the state].
- A charter school shall not charge tuition... [and must submit a plan] to meet students' transportation needs [and] health and food services.
- [A charter] shall be responsible for its own operation...[ and must] adhere to the same health, safety, and facility requirements as other public schools.
- The charter shall have standing to sue and be sued... [and must submit to an] annual audit of the financial and administrative operations.
- A charter school’s results on state assessments shall be included and reported in the chartering district’s assessment reports...[and] shall meet or exceed the student performance standards adopted by the state board.
- The charter school application shall ... [comply with] any locally bargained contract.
- [Must describe] rules and procedures by which students may be disciplined, including but not limited to expulsion or suspension from the school.
- No person, group, or organization may submit an application to convert a private school or a nonpublic home-based education program into a charter school or to create a charter school which is a nonpublic home-based educational program.
12 comments:
I'm not surprised, at all, that JCPS is 'off the hook'.
Home of 6 of the 10 worst performing schools in the state, yes, JCPS is indeed "special".
I noticed the charter schools make no mention of gay, lesbian, and trans-gender students. Does this mean that these students can be prohiobited from attending a charter school?
May 2, 2010 6:44 AM: No, it does not mean that. It doesn't mention straight students either.
You seem ambivalent about sexual orientation. Why no mention of sexual orientation? Is it not the job of the educated to lead? I hope I can coax you into speaking up for gay, lesbian, and trans-gendered students....
You have a voice.
May 2, 2010 11:35 PM: I'm happy to speak up for GLBT students. I believe that in the public schools, all must mean all. But help me understand how sexual orientation figures into this issue.
Lexington Fairness is offering a chance to speak up at the Public Library this week. This is a wonderful opportunity for you to tell your stories about administative indifference to the plight of gay/lesbian/tran-gender students. This will Tuesday,
May 4th, at 6:30P.M.
Clearly, the wording for charters, as for all schools, should include inclusive language in its non-discrimination policy. Gay and lesbian students suffer in the schools as a result of administative indifference. Almost everytime this issue is brought up, people receive the kind of response as posted above. ("But what does this have to do with....?"
or "We don't have language that protects straight students!")
Anonymous, May 2, 6:44 am: I'm unclear as to why it would be necessary to include specific, sexual orientation language, as well. According to Mr Day's 'snippets' from the bill,
"Enrollment decisions [must be] made in a nondiscriminatory manner."
It seems to me that 'snippet' should answer your question.
May 3, 2010 7:45 AM: Stories should be told by those who know them to be true.
I suggest that if you have something to say, that you courageously say it. It sounds like you have some passion for it.
All I know is how we handled things at Cassidy, and that the GLBT leadership in Lexington did not want to push gender issues when I was on the Equity Council.
Dr. Day, you had the opportunity to push for a better understanding of sexual orientation while you were on the Equity Council. You were approached by Jennifer Crossen on the issue, were you not? What GLBT leadership did not want the issue peushed? Maybe there is a leader, someone we could approach?
As Victor Hugo said, "There is nothing more wonderful as an aidea whose time has come."
May 5, 2010 7:31 AM: Actually, no, I approached Jennifer.
You are correct, there was an opportunity to dialogue on issues facing GLBT students in FCPS. We were not reluctant to discuss the important issues of racial equity, but sexual orientation as a topic was still taboo - or at least it seemed to be. I had just enrolled a straight student with three lesbian mothers and was interested in learning more about issues facing kids who were perceived as different. And yes, I am aware that different kids - however different may be defined - face a struggle in school.
A gay friend of mine suggested that Jennifer was the right person to approach. I gave her a quick call and got the impression that the GLBT community was doing things to raise awareness but they did not want to bring an issue before the Equity Council at that time.
To be fair to Jennifer, who I understand has done much, she didn't know me from Adam. She had no basis to trust me and a good argument could be made that leadership on GLBT issues ought not come from a straight guy. And, I'll confess that while I was willing to put the issue on the table, it was not my issue, per se. So I backed off.
Not with a bang, but a wimper.
Isn't Jack Burch chairing the Equity Council? If so, and if this still is not an issue in FCPS - why not?
I have long appreciated the Crossens. They were true advocates for viewpoints many did espouse. It is my understanding that in the 1960's Dr. Crossen offered Lexington women reproductive freedom when other physicians did not. Likewise, the Crossens held racially integrated parties at a time when such things "were not done here."
I suspect the gay community may have an ally in you yet, Dr. Day! Remember us...So many have of us to remain silent and allow the straight community to champion our cause. It can be very frustrating....
I wish I could say gay,lesbian, and trans-gendered kids get the respect they deserve in the schools, but the name calling can be brutal. So many gay/lesbian teachers in th public schools have to remain silent about their partners because that is what the community demands. One day, perhaps soon, some Kentucky educator will speak up for inclusion of sexual orienation in a non-discrimination clause. I look forward that day.
Thanks for being my views.
Post a Comment