I get a myriad of email through my inbox. To date, I have more than 1400. Every once in a while, one sparks my interest. This particular one may even spark the interest of Paul Herdman and Rodel's Vision Network.
This came through earlier this week:
A Delaware Charter School has raised an issue of Charter Law - specifically violations of Title 14, Chapter 5, 506 (c.3). This clause states that families enrolling their student in a charter school for the first time must sign a one-time one year contract committing them to keep their child at said charter school for the full year. The request to DOE was about enforcement capabilities as some parents and students signed the contract and then withdrew their students and enrolled them in the traditional public schools. The traditional public schools appear complacent to violate the law as they did not stop the enrollment from occurring.
While I have to admit that I don't quite get the law itself, I wasn't around when it was written. My guess is that it was to stem students from committing to several schools and then waiting for the last minute to decide which school to go to - which makes it difficult for schools/districts to hire teaching staff and purchase materials within budget.
Here's the response to the query:
From: Cruce Daniel
To: XXXX
Cc: XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX,
Sent: Wed, Sep 28, 2011
Subject: RE: Charter student contracts
Thank you for raising your concerns regarding this issue After reviewing the issue with our internal team, it has been determined that students not in attendance at your school during the last 10 days of September do not qualify for inclusion in the September 30th unit count.
I would like to illuminate several points below germane to this issue:
The first year agreement letter, signed by parents per 14 Del.C. §506 (c) (3), is a written confirmation between the charter school and the parent. This written confirmation, or violation of this written confirmation, is exclusively between the charter school and the parent.
State funding is based on where a student is enrolled and attending during the last 10 days of school in September.
Students not in attendance during the last 10 days of school in September cannot be included in a district or charter school unit count as outlined in 14 DE Admin.Code 701 Unit Count 2.1.
DDOE addresses all regulations and requirements for the inclusion and exclusion of students in the September 30th unit count in our Unit Count training sessions.
o These training sessions require representation from all districts and charter schools.
The summary document and multiple other related resources are available in the Unit Count PLUS program under Help & Documentation.
We understand the concerns this issue raises at your school and appreciate the opportunity to reiterate the above clarifications. As stated previously, we want to ensure the success of all schools while also ensuring that unit count regulations are specifically followed. Inherent in this effort is the intent that parents have the information they need to make informed decisions about their child's education.
Respectfully-
Dan
------------------------------------
Here's my admittedly under-educated take:
1) Directing the conversation to the Sept. 30th unit count is a diversion tactic. Deflect from the real issue.
2) The Real Issue: DOE chooses which laws to enforce. DOE via RTTT claims to be pro-charter. However, DOE, and vicariously, the Governor are not willing to enforce Charter law and regulation. What DOE says and what DOE does are two very different things. And this is just another indication that DOE is NOT pro-charter, despite 'sclaims otherwise. DOE is pro-business. My predication is that the movement of charters in Delaware will go down like this : instead of home grown localized charters, outside Charter Management Organizations are poised to enter the Delaware market, either through take over as seen at Moyer or via Innovative Schools which seems to have a monopoly on the Charter School economy in Delaware. You name the service you need, Innovative has it. One-stop-shopping. Wonder how many sole-source contracts Innovative has gotten over the last two-three years?
Yeah, so I'm a conspiracy theorist. At the end of the day, the law's the LAW. DOE should enforce it and that enforcement capability occurs on the receiving end - those districts that take kids despite signed contracts when good cause does not exist. Why should the Charter school be punished for plannnig according to committments via loss of funds on Sept. 30th and why should a district benefit from the violation of state law? Maybe DOE needs to look at withholding funding for any student in violation of the 1 year contract provision. Districts must adhere to the law. Despite the lure of funding, they need to set the example for parents who are trying to game the system. They need to work in partnership with Charters to ensure choice is not corrupted.
If districts don't set a good example for students when parents are playing the system, who will?
Maybe Paul Herdmann and Vision will step up to the plate and actually advocate for the charters they claim to support. DOE has no mind to listen to me. But, they might be compelled to enforce the law if the power-brokers at Vision are up in arms.
No comments: