By Walter B. Bull, Jr.
Moore County’s own charter school, The Academy of Moore, is taking the offensive against what some have called a politically motivated decision by North Carolina’s Department of Public Education to refuse to renew the school’s charter. They have engaged the Shanahan Law Group of Raleigh and will appeal the decision through an administrative process and then into Superior Court if that should become necessary.
At the heart of the dispute seems to be performance measurement statistics that have taken on a significant uptrend during the last two years. The school is educating approximately 170 students, many of whom overcome difficult transportation issues to travel to Aberdeen.
At the same time, it is reported by the Fayetteville Observer (Friday, April 30, 2010) that a federal complaint has been to the U. S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights by Eugene and Susan Slocum, the principal and a secretary of Alpha Academy, Fayetteville’s only charter school, claims that there is a double standard of performance measurement and that it is a “blatant attack on black students.”
The problem at Academy of Moore is also one of subjective analysis of performance and reasons given by the DPI do not appear to directly address the facts on the ground.
The school moved into a brand new $2.2 million dollar building that was built on donated land. Moore County Schools are overcrowded in many instances and this decision by DPI will remove classroom space from the system.
The enabling statute which became law in 1995 clearly anticipated conflict between the charter school administration and the NC Department of Public Education. Disputes were addressed in
.
Moore County’s own charter school, The Academy of Moore, is taking the offensive against what some have called a politically motivated decision by North Carolina’s Department of Public Education to refuse to renew the school’s charter. They have engaged the Shanahan Law Group of Raleigh and will appeal the decision through an administrative process and then into Superior Court if that should become necessary.
At the heart of the dispute seems to be performance measurement statistics that have taken on a significant uptrend during the last two years. The school is educating approximately 170 students, many of whom overcome difficult transportation issues to travel to Aberdeen.
At the same time, it is reported by the Fayetteville Observer (Friday, April 30, 2010) that a federal complaint has been to the U. S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights by Eugene and Susan Slocum, the principal and a secretary of Alpha Academy, Fayetteville’s only charter school, claims that there is a double standard of performance measurement and that it is a “blatant attack on black students.”
The problem at Academy of Moore is also one of subjective analysis of performance and reasons given by the DPI do not appear to directly address the facts on the ground.
The school moved into a brand new $2.2 million dollar building that was built on donated land. Moore County Schools are overcrowded in many instances and this decision by DPI will remove classroom space from the system.
The enabling statute which became law in 1995 clearly anticipated conflict between the charter school administration and the NC Department of Public Education. Disputes were addressed in
.
§ 115C 238.29G. Causes for nonrenewal or termination; disputes
(b) “The State Board of Education shall develop and implement a process to address contractual and other grievances between a charter school and its chartering entity or the local board of education during the time of its charter.”
(c) The State Board and the charter school are encouraged to make a good faith attempt to resolve the differences that may arise between them. They may agree to jointly select a mediator. The mediator shall act as a neutral facilitator of disclosures of factual information, statements of positions and contentions, and efforts to negotiate an agreement settling the differences….. (More)”
The statute further states that “Evidence of statements made and conduct occurring in a mediation are not subject to discovery and are inadmissible in any court action.”
The decision to push back against the unexpected decision may be ground breaking as far as charter schools are concerned. Organized labor does not support innovative programs-such as charter schools-believing it is not in the best interest of their rank and file and ultimately for students.
One Board member points out that a three year period of poor performance through 2008 was dramatically changed as new leadership took hold and implemented a DPI-corrective action plan. The Board and staff at the school believe that they have successfully implemented the corrective action plan approved by DPI and have asked for more specific comments concerning the vague reasons given to them. Now with lawyers in the picture that request may never be addressed in Raleigh.
The non-renewal will take effect at the end of this fiscal year on June 30th. The school would be closed and students reassigned to public schools that serve the area where they reside. Sixty percent of the school’s students are from Moore County and the balance come from other nearby counties. Some of the schools where they will be reassigned have lower performance ratings than Academy of Moore.
The clock is ticking and the process cannot wander through a meaningless arbitration. We will look to the legal team for a hint of the next steps.
(b) “The State Board of Education shall develop and implement a process to address contractual and other grievances between a charter school and its chartering entity or the local board of education during the time of its charter.”
(c) The State Board and the charter school are encouraged to make a good faith attempt to resolve the differences that may arise between them. They may agree to jointly select a mediator. The mediator shall act as a neutral facilitator of disclosures of factual information, statements of positions and contentions, and efforts to negotiate an agreement settling the differences….. (More)”
The statute further states that “Evidence of statements made and conduct occurring in a mediation are not subject to discovery and are inadmissible in any court action.”
The decision to push back against the unexpected decision may be ground breaking as far as charter schools are concerned. Organized labor does not support innovative programs-such as charter schools-believing it is not in the best interest of their rank and file and ultimately for students.
One Board member points out that a three year period of poor performance through 2008 was dramatically changed as new leadership took hold and implemented a DPI-corrective action plan. The Board and staff at the school believe that they have successfully implemented the corrective action plan approved by DPI and have asked for more specific comments concerning the vague reasons given to them. Now with lawyers in the picture that request may never be addressed in Raleigh.
The non-renewal will take effect at the end of this fiscal year on June 30th. The school would be closed and students reassigned to public schools that serve the area where they reside. Sixty percent of the school’s students are from Moore County and the balance come from other nearby counties. Some of the schools where they will be reassigned have lower performance ratings than Academy of Moore.
The clock is ticking and the process cannot wander through a meaningless arbitration. We will look to the legal team for a hint of the next steps.
Academy of Moore with Two Years of Success-To Question DPI Charter Non-Renewal and Plan to Fight Hard to Continue to Educate
Leadership for Innovation Committee and Chair Melissa Bartlett Speak Rudely and Without Open Analysis of the Facts.
"Sit Down and Shut Up" Is Hardly The Way To Make Such Important Decisions and DPI Top Officials Should Be Ashamed of The Process and Those Involved in the Decision
"Sit Down and Shut Up" Is Hardly The Way To Make Such Important Decisions and DPI Top Officials Should Be Ashamed of The Process and Those Involved in the Decision
 |
 |