Posted by karmann on August 19, 2008 at 6:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Here again CCSD seems to have forgotten Charlestowne Academy. We have been in our temporary site for several years now without a working cafeteria, paved parking lot, and without the ability to grow due to lack of space. CCSD needs to come through on the promises of the past before it makes other promises. Oh, I have yet to receive a response as to why there were no CCSD representatives at the 2008 graduation ceremony.

Posted by moonpie on August 19, 2008 at 6:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Nancy McGinley is expected to bring the board a strategy for closing and consolidating district schools."
WHY WOULD THEY CONSIDER CLOSING SCHOOLS IN THE SCHOOL YEAR? IF THIS WAS THE THINKING DO IT OVER THE SUMMER!

Posted by mlm on August 19, 2008 at 6:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The reporter says of the math and science charter school, "The price tag for providing the building is an estimated $1.6 million for the first year, not counting...setup and rental costs for ....mobile units or the $913,126 to renovate the cafeteria and gym...according to district figures." What figures are left? Figures according to whom? What district figures? I'm sure these "figures" are more disinformation from CCSD. Just like the claim that the 90,000 s.f. building that still sits empty on the Rivers campus could be rented for $2.5 million annually. The District pulls its figures out of thin air without bothering to support them. It would be helpful if the reporter pressed them on exactly what figures they mean.

I agree with both Mr. Ravenel and Mr. Douglas. There are merits to what they are saying. Charleston Development Academy and the new math and science charter schools appear to be the only schools reversing the decline in public school enrollments downtown. If CCSD wouldn't have committed itself to dumbing down the schools it manages, the enrollment decline and empty buildings might not have become an issue. Thanks to these two charter schools conditions may finally right themselves on the peninsula.

Posted by mlm on August 19, 2008 at 6:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

My mistake. It is Arthur Ravenel and Doug Berger, not Mr. Douglas, who have made two suggestions for addressing school enrollment issues downtown. Other than to suggest that Buist address verifications be held to the same standards as other magnet schools, Hillery Douglas hasn't put forward any ideas in recent years in support of downtown schools.

Posted by dogwoodroad on August 19, 2008 at 7:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Can someone tell me what the argument against charter schools is? I know there are many who are ardently opposed to them, and I figure someone on here might be able to explain the reasons...

Posted by watchdog on August 19, 2008 at 7:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Just don't let wpc3iop explain it, he is an idiot....

Posted by dogwoodroad on August 19, 2008 at 7:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

yeah....I was kind of hoping for an unbiased explanation...if that's possible in an anonymous forum!

Posted by lou9 on August 19, 2008 at 7:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sounds like the Post and Courier is siding with those on the school board who are opposed to charter schools. When this story devotes two paragraphs about the charter school for math and science and it's cost when the story is supposed to be about consolidating elementary schools it sounds like the paper has an ax to grind.

Posted by DoaMM on August 19, 2008 at 8:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Just go to "Papa" Riley...He'll give any school whatever they want!

http://www.charleston.net/news/2008/aug/...

Too many hands in the pot of government and it only appears as though it will get bigger.

Posted by dogwoodroad on August 19, 2008 at 8:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

So, are we saying it is a funding situation...i.e. people don't want federal money to go to a specialty school?

Posted by counterpoint on August 19, 2008 at 9 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Why is this pompous ass still allowed a public forum?

Posted by keystome on August 19, 2008 at 9:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I you don't have kids in the public school system, you should not be able to serve on the school board.

Posted by dogwoodroad on August 19, 2008 at 9:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

why? If you pay taxes than you are paying for the public school system...so you should be able to serve on the school board and determine how your money is spent (and represent others who are paying taxes, as well).

Not to say I agree with him, but not having kids in the system is not really a good argument against him...

Posted by lou9 on August 19, 2008 at 10:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Keystone - if having kids in the public school system was requirement for serving on the school board then just about all of the board members would have to resign. Coldbeer, I agree with you that all schools should be the same. A couple of differences I see with charter schools versus others is that parents are involved with the operations and they manage to operate within their budgets, often saving money versus wasting money. The school board could learn a lesson there in being more efficient with taxpayer dollars, but that would show how incompetent they are. That's why they don't like charter schools.

Posted by mkris on August 19, 2008 at 11:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Here's my go at explaining Charleston's "Charter Schools":
is a package of the most unappealing, racist, ignorant bigotry as 'da best ting' fa' da chill'en.' It allows parents to 'charter' a separate school with da entrance requirements and goals to exclude other unacceptables. At the same time it allows the same parents to take money from the budget of other schools wit da unacceptables to give da 'acceptable chill'en' an advantage over 'da plantations'. Its Charleston's pleasant way of keeping the plantation system alive and well in Charlesotn County.

Posted by lyfe1999 on August 19, 2008 at 11:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Charleston Development Academy is a great charter school with great results, period. If the school board can agree to give up what it has to fund the Math and Science Charter School which has not even proven itself yet, it should be able to support this request to support a school that has by way of student achievement. Fair is fair. Whether you like it or not Charter Schools are here to stay unless the State Legislature eliminates them with State law which is not going to happen. Competition is good. The old Archer School will become available when the new Sanders Clyde School is built on its old site, and thus becomes a viable option for expansion. Also Courtney Middle School building is a viable option for expansion. Both options would not displace any students.
Cousin Authur has been criticized in the past for racism, but here he is fighting for African American children in district 20. Will he be commended or will his detractors find a way to attack this effort. I can hear them now- he just doing this to cover up his past rascist actions. Mr. Ravenel does what he believes is right. Period. I may not agree with everything he does but that's my right as it is his do do what he feels is his right. I personally commend this action and I am personnally glad that he has taken an interest in the small charter school by not just reading to its students, but working to help them in their greatest need.- Kwadjo

Posted by Rebel_Yell on August 19, 2008 at 11:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

plantation system, eh? What was the excuse for horrible public education before charter schools? No matter how crappy the school, if the parents support their children and are active with their education, then the chillen can achieve in my opinion. Black, white, red or yellow.

Posted by sethook on August 19, 2008 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

How do you break the Ravenel curse that plagues the people of South Carolina? That herd should have been thinned into oblivion years ago.

Posted by halfsheli on August 19, 2008 at 12:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Charter schools must follow the same guidelines as all other public schools. They have the SAME attendance and state curriculum standards; they must follow the same education laws as all other public schools. The benefit lies in not having to succumb to the same beauracracy as other public schools. There is more fiscal freedom (also more responsibility). Each charter school must prove that they are meeting the same goals as other public schools in order to maintain their charter. This is NOT a private school. They have boards of directors (community members and educators) and must answer to state and federal agencies. The freedom comes with not dealing with the paper pushers downtown. Decisions are made more efficiently and effectively, and are more specific to the needs of the scholl's specific student population.

Charter schools are a WONDERFUL thing.

Posted by halfsheli on August 19, 2008 at 12:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Charter schools (unless designated as magnet, which is a whole new ball of wax) do not have entrance requirements. Students who live within the schools district are free to attend. Unfortunately, these schools often (due to budget constraints) only have the ability to accomodate a certain number of students. That is why there are lotteries and very close attention paid to details when it comes to "getting in" these schools.

Posted by clisby on August 19, 2008 at 12:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

halfshell is right. Charter schools are completely different from magnet schools; they do not have entrance requirements, other than (possibly) residency. For example, my kids attend East Cooper Montessori Charter School in Mt. Pleasant. District 2 students get first priority (after siblings of currently enrolled kids) - but there are no academic-type entrance requirements. The students are chosen by lottery, and not all of them live in District 2. Same for the Math & Science charter school, except that the only residency requirement is living in Charleston County. This stuff is easy to look up:

http://www.scstatehouse.net/CODE/t59c040...

Posted by halfsheli on August 19, 2008 at 1:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I don't believe I asked anything! BUT to answer your question: I don't really know. Except that CCSD and CCSB would have to relinquish much of their control. Many downtown administrators would be obsolete. The concept of a charter school is that it is autonomous. While charter schools must meet state and federal guidelines and follow laws and such, Charter schools are freed from most of the mandates that come down from the local level. As far was who can attend... Many schools in Charleston County open their doors to students from all over the county. That's a No Child Left Behind thing. Parents can move their kids out of failing schools and to "better" schools within the same school system (county) if the "better" school has the ability to take more students (students within the school's district get first consideration).

Posted by mlm on August 19, 2008 at 2:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

First of all, many of the complaints, fears and concerns expressed here are really applicable to magnet schools, not charter schools. Charter schools and magnet schools are very different and subject to different rules. Charter schools as some people have said here are really governed by much stricter rules than a magnet school. Charter schools can't use admissions criteria and are required to admit any applicant who would otherwise qualify for admission to any other public school in the same geographic area. In the case to the Math and Science school that would be all of Charleston County. In the case of the Montessori mentioned above, that would be Moultrie District 2 (Mt. Pleasant). If they break the rules, they may loose their charter.

Magnet schools have no such oversight. The bickering is really about magnet schools. The real irony here is that it was out of frustration with the system at Buist that parents downtown came together to try to fix the system. They receive no support from the superintendent, the administrative staff or from the majority of those on the county board. You could say the Charter School for Math and Science is a direct result of CCSD giving these parents and downtown people nothing but a brick wall on their calls for change. Charter schools seem to be the only way for parents to get their kids off the plantation and into the 21st century. No matter what spin the opponents are giving it, Charleston CSMS is meeting and exceeding all the expectations for community participation and transparency. Buist Academy magnet school and those barricaded behind the walls of 75 Calhoun could take a lesson from this optimistic start-up (up-start?).

This superintendent, just like the previous seat warmer, made it very obvious more than 2 years ago that they intended to merge the old Sanders-Clyde and Fraser once the new Sanders-Clyde was completed. They wouldn't answer questions one way or the other when asked, but the one-principal-two schools policy made it so that even the blind could see it. The reader above is correct. That merger would leave both Fraser and Archer schools vacant. Since the only growth taking place downtown is among these two charter schools, why not open both of these buildings to charter schools that are proving themselves and meeting their goals. The only people who have not been honest about these mergers and closings is Nancy McGinley.

In the case of CSMS, keep in mind, they are only occupying trailers in the backyard of the old Rivers. CCSD is trying very hard to not ever let them into the main building. I say let them have the 40 empty classrooms in the historic Rivers school building....provided they continue to prove themselves, to meet the educational needs of a significant number of students and to be seen as a positive contribution to the neighborhood.

Posted by mlm on August 19, 2008 at 2:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Let me repeat this: "I say let them [the math and science charter school] have the 40 empty classrooms in the historic Rivers school building....provided they continue to prove themselves, to meet the educational needs of a significant number of students and to be seen as a positive contribution to the neighborhood."

If the charter school meets these goals, that would be a helluva lot more than Buist Academy has done for downtown. It was more than 20 years since that magnet school took over the vacant Buist Elementary School building on Calhoun Street. It looks like we might get a decent return on our investment from the new charter school. We're still waiting to hear what Buist has really done for us downtown.

Posted by mkris on August 19, 2008 at 2:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Rebel_yell, Its the same old story. Those with money get more through the Big House (Charter Schools), those that don't get the field cabins (all the rest). Charleston is a community that revels in keeping the haves in and the have-nots out or put differently, Charleston will prefer to push someone down, rather than raise them up. Of course they do it with the utmost in polite manners, "bless thier hearts."
Charleston Schools were, are and will be, horrible because there is not enough money spent on all the schools. Until ALL the schools get better than "minimally adequate" funding, Charleston Schools will always be inadequate with some getting the better share. That is simply raise school taxes. I don't care that the wealthly pay for public education adn private tuition. That is thier choice and they can afford to send thier children to a private academy or finishing school.

Posted by mlm on August 19, 2008 at 2:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

They all can become charter schools, as they have in New Orleans after Katrina destroyed the original schools system.

There are only two reasons I see that would prevent them from becoming charter schools. One would be the lack of leadership from within and among the parents...which can be overcome with help from professional groups like the Kipp Foundation. The second reason would be the existing school board would pose roadblocks in order to retain control over the existing system. Why not? The only reason we can't (or can) is within us.

There is no law or logical reason that says we can't have a public school system totally composed of charter schools. New Orleans did it, probably because they had no other logical choice.

Posted by clisby on August 19, 2008 at 7:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

ColdBeer:

"If anyone in Charleston County can attend East Cooper Montessori Charter School than I'm pretty sure the attendance requirements are different than regular public schools."

Of course they're different. It's a charter school. If you're interested, you can look up the state charter school law - I posted the link above.

Theoretically, all the schools in Charleston County could be charter schools. However, the rules for conversion charters (like Orange Grove Elementary and James Island High School) are somewhat different from the rules for start-up charter schools like Charleston Development Academy, East Cooper Montessori, and the Math & Science Charter. It's not like some outside group can come in and say, "Hey, we propose taking over Wando and turning it into a charter school." Essentially, the move to turn an existing school into a charter requires that the existing school community back
the proposal.

Posted by AAE on August 19, 2008 at 8:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

They can be opposed because the funding formula is different. In some cases, such as JICHS and OGCES, they end up taking more of the cut of District money than they had before. If some of these smaller schools attempted to convert charter, the funding formula would not benefit them. They would lose money from what they currently get to operate. So, they are opposed because if a huge school like Wando went charter, it would fiscally drain the district finances at the cost of the other schools. It can force robbing peter to pay paul.

Posted by mlm on August 19, 2008 at 9:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

AAE is correct, but this is really a reflection of a flaw in the state law which created charter schools. Expecting local school board opposition, the law was written with a single “average” formula in an attempt to ensure that local school districts would not arbitrarily withhold funds. Some school districts indicated they might openly obstruct charter schools. Some public school district administrations have long been fundamentally opposed to sharing power with a parent run autonomous school which is what a charter school was designed to be.

The problem rests in that funding formulas are based on straight line assumptions about per pupil costs. A large school benefits from an economy of scale (i.e. "cheaper by the dozen") whereas small schools would have fixed administrative costs spread over fewer numbers of students so their overall costs would be naturally higher. The state law uses a district average which is seldom a true reflection of how schools are traditionally funded in districts where school sizes vary widely. So the example AAE gives reflects the one aspect of the law that is unfair, but this flaw was more than likely also unintentional since local school districts had successfully blocked the formation of charter schools in South Carolina until this law was passed.

If school districts like CCSD were more supportive of the charter school concept then they might get the legislature and the public to work with them on correcting this funding inequity. But as long as CCSD officials continue to support a guerrilla war against schools like James Island, Orange Grove, Charleston CSMS and Charleston Development Academy, there will probably be no change in how the state says these schools are to be funded locally. More than any other school district in the state, CCSD’s own actions have helped to paint it into this corner while some charter schools benefit more than others. It’s not the fault of the school who are effectively being rewarded a little more than seems fair, if only for their success.

Posted by District20Dad on August 20, 2008 at 12:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Another flaw in the SC Charter Act of 1996 is its provision (or lack of provision) for facilities for start-up charter schools - like Charleston Development Academy. As accurately described by mlm above, the act provides charter schools with the average that every other public school gets FOR OPERATIONS. But it provides nothing for facilities.

In round numbers, the Charleston County School District spends $500 million per year - $300 M on operations and $200 M on facilities (a.k.a. capital expenditures.)
Divide that operations budgets by 40,000 students and you have the per pupil allocation for charters in Charleston County, which is roughly $7500. That's what charters get, whether they have 100, 200 or 1500 students.

As for the other 40% of the $500 Million CCSD annual budget - the $200 Million CCSD spends to provide facilities to Buist, Memminger, Burke, Wando, etc - Charleston Development Academy receives no funding; and CCSD provides it with no building. In other words, it receives 40% less than traditional and magnet schools.

The precipitous decline in enrollments among the traditional D20 schools has emptied so many classrooms that the superintentent's planning to merge schools, empty buildings and, possibly, sell them. Ravenel and mlm (at 2:04) are suggesting that the public school in D20 that is actually growing - Charleston Development Academy - be allowed to use one of these buildings, on the same terms that it was provided to its former occupant - ie. no rent.

These buildings were built for public school students. Charter school students are public school students. Act 189, a 2005 amendment to the Charleston County School Consolidation Act (1967), states that the Charleston County School District cannot deny a charter school student anything that it provides to any other public school student in Charleston County.

This is the basis on which the Charleston Charter School for Math & Science requested and was granted use of the 95% vacant Rivers campus. Its argument was buttressed in October of 2007 by the SC Attorney General who agreed that, under Act 189, CCSD could not charge it rent for using this public school facility.

Ravenel and others are simply applying the same logic, precedent and common sense to Charleston Development Academy, which is serving high poverty students, raising their test scores and building a waiting list. They are proactively getting in front of CCSD's plans to merge schools and empty buildings.

Do we want another D20 school building to be converted to condos (like Murray Vocational?) Why shouldn't a successful public school in D20 be rewarded with some genuine support from CCSD - something more than empty rhetoric in support of "school choice." How about genuine support, proven with something Charleston Development Academy can use? How about some classrooms that are not being used because parents have been pulling their children out of these failing schools?