No Charter School for Cheatham County, Tennessee

7 Comments Post your own or leave a trackback: Trackback URL

1. Joe Nashville says:

   August 20, 2014 at 12:12 am

   That’s a good thing and not surprising. Even if the board wanted the charter, they’d have a hard time affording it (not to mention getting the budget approved by the county commission). I hope this sets an example for other counties.

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. jcgrim says:

   August 20, 2014 at 5:59 am

   Unfortunately, this did not influence Knox County School board. They approved the first charter school in Knox Co. Emerald Charter. Knox County’s Broad Superintendent and Gov Haslam (who happens to be on the board of Emerald) had the school board eating out of their hands.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Chiara says:

     August 20, 2014 at 6:34 am

     They’re basing that charter on the “e prep” chain in Cleveland.

     I challenge you to read this article and determine whether the Ohio “e prep” schools are doing well or not 🙂

     I have no idea. They discard the “performance” index (where some are graded ‘D’) in favor of a “growth” index (where they do better) and then add the schools together and average the scores.

     I have no idea if they’re doing well or poorly and I am willing to bet the Ohio Department of Education doesn’t have any idea either. They have so spun these numbers it is impossible to figure out from what is reported.

     http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/08/charter_schools_receiving_clev.html

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • jcgrim says:

       August 20, 2014 at 8:59 pm

       Chiara, I can’t make heads or tails of that data in the news report. Three-fourths of the value-added data for kiddos with disabilities isn’t reported. I guess those scores weren’t so good- or maybe they don’t serve any kiddos with disabilities.
       The overall grades for the growth scores are are in the tank so instead of using growth models they averaged the scores of the state exams. Breakthrough got 98%- that # can’t be correct with the low growth scores. That would mean every kid in Breakthrough scored between about 96 -100.
       Their scores were calculated using the same formula as the Cuban elections.

       LikeLike

3. Chiara says:

   August 20, 2014 at 6:11 am

   I read the “statement” portion of the proposal and it said that they had or planned to have private funding for the transportation and facilities costs. They’d need transportation because without it they’d be pre-selecting students based on the ability or means to find a way to get to school. I wondered who was funding it and what the plan was for when the transportation donations ended. If they don’t have dedicated funding to cover actual anticipated costs, they’re relying on growth to cover projected costs which is a risky way to fund something like a school. If the growth doesn’t materialize they can’t leverage economies of scale and they don’t have enough money.
   I read the Detroit EAA plan (revealed only after a FOIA demand) and in my opinion that was based on a growth model too. They needed to grow quickly to replace the donated money once it ran out, which is why they were lobbying the legislature so hard to expand the reach of the privatized district once the schools were open for a while and enrollment dropped 25%. They needed a constant infusion of new students.
   This type of plan is okay for something like a small business because there’s a recognition that most small businesses fail and everyone understands the risk and of course that’s not public money. I wonder about it as a way to fund “public schools”. It’s really risky and will inevitably result in lobbying to “create demand” and expand the reach of the potential customer base, as I believe happened in Detroit.

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. Duane Swacker says:

   August 20, 2014 at 6:49 am

   Is the market saturated there too???

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. Chiara says:

   August 20, 2014 at 7:03 am

   Great letter from an Ohio teacher turning down 5000 bucks from StudentsFirst:

   “A few months ago, Chris Roberts, a young teacher in Northeast Ohio, received an email through StudentsFirst recommending that he sign up for their Teachers for Transformation Academy. He signed up for their mailing list a few years ago because he was initially attracted to the StudentsFirst talking points. A self described libertarian-leaning Republican, Chris was intrigued and decided to apply for the position. After some recent phone interviews, Chris was offered the position of Ohio’s Teacher for Transformation Fellow along with an attractive $5,000 stipend – a very nice paycheck for the young teacher and father of three.

   As the fourth-year teacher researched into their agenda in preparation for the work ahead, Chris realized that he no longer believed in the work of StudentsFirst as he once had. His personal experiences as a teacher and a father had caused him to realize that StudentsFirst doesn’t actually put students first, but instead promotes the ongoing attack on teachers that we see in society today.”

   So they pay the advocates 5000 dollars to push StudentsFirst policy? I didn’t know that.

   http://www.plunderbund.com/2014/08/19/ohio-teacher-turns-down-studentsfirst-in-spectacular-fashion/

   LikeLike

   Reply