tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8895200797299787815.post-57029472581461572942007-11-18T16:02:00.000-06:002007-11-19T15:36:40.262-06:004K Charter School -- The Real Story<span style="color:#3333ff;"><em>The following is a post that was posted on another thread, the author asked me to start a new thread on this subject so here it is, I will comment on this post at the end of the post...</em><br /><em>Note: I did some minor editing of statements I felt were not relevant to the subject.</em></span><br /><br />Anonymous said...<br />Teresa, would you please start a thread on the Ready 4 Learning Charter School grant money not being pursued by OASD? I understand M. Monte has posted Dr. Heilmann's letter to the charter school grant consultant for DPI on her blog, followed by a bunch of questions that she says she hopes will be answered by him in a future report. Unfortunately, this is more typical Monte hypocrisy. Throw out a fact or two, followed by questions designed to stir the pot of gossip, innuendo, rumor, and speculation. Why is this hypocritical of her? Because she always tells others to go directly to the source, but refuses to do so herself AS LONG AS SHE CAN GET PEOPLE RILED UP BY NOT DOING SO. I AM SO SICKENED BY PEOPLE LIKE HER ALWAYS VIEWING THINGS AS IF THERE'S SOME CLOAK AND DAGGER MYSTERY GOING ON. EVERYTHING IN THEIR MINDS IS CLOUDED IN SUSPICION, AND YET M. MONTEHAS TALKED ABOUT BEING A POSITIVE PERSON ALWAYS LOOKING FOR SOMETHING TO SMILE ABOUT. I hope we hear answers from Dr. Heilmann too because they'll put this hypocrite in her place. He's done it to her before and I'm sure will do it again. Between now and then, might you be able to get some real answers on this from administration? If Monte knew how to work with people she could, but that isn't possible, given her reputation. Thank you for your help. You can transfer my comment to the new thread.<br />Saturday, November 17, 2007 11:04:00 PM CST<br /><br /><span style="color:#3333ff;">Teresa's Post:</span><br /><span style="color:#3333ff;">First I will explain what I know in general about the Charter School Grants process this time around, then I will address specifically what I know about the Oshkosh 4K grant. Most of the information I have comes as a result of working for the CESA 6 Grant Office, our office writes grants for school districts, including some of the grants Oshkosh has submitted in the past.<br />Sometime in April the US. Dept. of Education notified DPI about issues they had with WI Charter School Grant funding namely; schools needed to encompass more than one grade, schools with-in a school were problematic, there needed to be much more autonomy in governance of the charter school from the school district (there were other issues I can't recall at the moment but these were the main issues).<br />During this year's DPI review of the Charter School Applications DPI funded only ONE Charter Planning Application and TEN Charter Implementation Applications (last year DPI funded around 35 planning grants and 13 Initial Implementation grants). In the past, if schools were successful in their planning year they were almost always funded for the Initial Implementation so we should have seen at least 30 Initial Implementation grants NOT 10.<br />This year DPI's review of the charter grants came back with the following: Fund, pending revisions, do not fund.<br />It is my understanding that the Franklin, Shapiro and Merrill applications were all "pending revisions" and the 4K was "do not fund" --- though they did have the option of resubmitting the proposal by Oct. 15 with the required revisions and a CHANCE for funding --- the resubmit was NOT a guarantee of funding. The main reason the 4K charter was not funded was the 4K was a single grade charter --- which was fine when the planning grant was funded but then the Fed's said -- NO more single grade charters so the 4K Charter as described in the planning grant was not fundable. My understanding is to be funded the school would have to encompass more than just 4K -- just how many more grades, no one seems to know. From everyone I've spoken to this is a case of the Feds. changing the rules in the middle of the game with nothing for the district to do but adapt where possible.</span><br /><span style="color:#3333ff;"><br />Now, I will address those questions from M. Monte's blog (her questions are in <em><span style="color:#000000;">italics</span></em>) that I have answers for (my answers are in <strong>blue</strong>) :<br /><br />From M. Monte's <a href="http://monteforschoolboard.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2007-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&updated-max=2008-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&max-results=24">blog</a>:</span><br /></span><span style="color:#3333ff;"></span><br /><span style="color:#3333ff;"><em><span style="color:#000000;">Does anyone remember just a couple of years ago when Brad Caufmann sat before the BOE touting the revenue we could be expecting from four-year-old kindergarten?</span></em></span><br /><span style="color:#3333ff;"><em><span style="color:#000000;"></span></em><br /><strong>See, these are the kind of comments that frustrate anonymous (Nov. 17) and me. The fact is Mr. Cauffman wasn't "touting" the revenue he was simply explaining that after conferences with DPI and the design of the 4K plan (mind you this has NOTHING to do with the 4K Charter School) namely it being community based with parent involvement as a component, the district could count the 4K students as .6 instead of the usual .4 which would result in a small (I don't recall the figure now) positive balance in the budget, rather than the initial reports of a cost to the district (again I'm not sure of the exact figure but I believe it was in the $30,000 range). See, first when 4K was proposed those opposed to it (or just opposed to the district?) said 4K was nice but the district just couldn't afford it. Then, when it is discovered that in fact, with the additional .2, 4K wouldn't cost the district anything and would bring in a small amount the first year -- suddenly those same naysayers we saying the district was making 4 year olds go to school just to raise money. Such a distortion of the facts, but they keep on saying it hoping people will believe them</strong>.<br /><br /><span style="color:#000000;"><em>How about the argument that we have no choice but to go to universal 4K to get state funding or lose the 4K ESL program. Anyone remember when I questioned such a claim or other parents asking when children will be allowed to be children?</em></span><br /><em><span style="color:#000000;"></span></em><br /><strong>The first part of the question is still true, DPI told the district that if they didn't implement a universal 4K program, they would no longer get ANY funding for the 4K ESL program. Again, this has NOTHING to do with the 4K Charter as that was NOT universal 4K that was a Charter School with a special focus for 4K students in the charter. The district has already begun implementing 4K and is expanding the available sites as they can. As to the second part of the question: NO ONE I repeat NO ONE is required to send their child to 4K (or 5K for that matter) compulsory education in WI starts at age SIX!</strong><br /><strong></strong><br /><span style="color:#000000;"><em>Were the conditions DPI placed on the grant so difficult that we would throw away money for a program we have already implemented?</em></span><br /><br /><strong>Right now I don't know specifically what conditions DPI placed on the 4K grant (but I will get that information) but I do know that ALL charters were told they cannot have a charter with only ONE grade so one of the conditions would have been to expand the 4K charter to more grades --- which as Dr. Heilmann wrote in his letter, would expand the charter beyond its original intent --- I also wonder just how loud M. Monte would be screaming if the district decided to do this JUST to get the money????</strong> <strong>Not to mention, resubmitting the application was NOT a guarantee of funding.<br /></strong><br /><em><span style="color:#000000;">How are we going to pay for 4K for this year and in years to come? Are we going to cut the program? What about all the children desperate for the leg up before regular kindergarten?</span></em><br /><br /><strong>Um, I thought M. Monte said 4 K was implemented for the money ---so if she is right about that, what is the problem? Sorry, I guess I need to repeat, the Charter School was a separate program from the district's universal 4K, it was a CHARTER SCHOOL --- it will have no affect on the universal 4K program and the district's ability to fund that. The only affect it will have on those who were to attend the charter school, but I'm guessing the school is operating this year anyway so it will just be a matter of running the program without the added dollars, since Charter School funding NEVER covers teachers' salaries, the staff is still there, it is things like bringing in experts for intensive staff development (and subs for staff to attend such workshops), furniture, supplies etc. that either will not be funded or the funding will come from elsewhere (knowing Patti Vickman this is probably already in the works ---but that is JUST ME speculating) the lack of charter funding may result in the charter school not existing next year --- that is something else I will check on and report back on</strong>.<br /><br /><span style="color:#000000;"><em>Can we now let 4-year-olds be children if they want to be?</em></span><br /><em><span style="color:#000000;"></span></em><br /><strong>Again, a repeat but I guess it bears repeating--- NO CHILD in The OASD has EVER been required to attend 4K, that is a parent's choice. (Remember in WI you don't have to start school till you are SIX!!). (SIDE NOTE: when parents of 3 year olds were surveyed before 4K was implemented the VAST MAJORITY were in favor of the district instituting 4K). So if you believe keeping your 4 year old home to "let 4-year-olds be children if they want to be" you have EVERY right to do so, where M. Monte got the idea you couldn't is beyond me.</strong><br /><strong></strong><br /><span style="color:#000000;"><em>What about 4-year-old ESL?</em></span><br /><em><span style="color:#000000;"></span></em><br /><strong>What about it? The district has implemented UNIVERSAL 4K therefore they are in compliance with DPI requirements and can continue the 4K ESL program with funding (in terms of fte) from the state.</strong><br /><br />Anonymous (Nov. 17) and anyone else who cares about what the facts are, I hope this helps... as Anonymous (Nov. 17) wrote, a simple phone call or e-mail to either Mrs. Vickman or Dr. Heilmann would have given M. Monte all the answers she needed. And those of you who are going to post about me attacking M. Monte don't bother --- I am NOT attacking her, I'm simply pointing out where her facts or her understanding or BOTH are in error.</span><br /></span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/8895200797299787815-5702947258146157294?l=oshkoshstudents.blogspot.com'/></div>Questioningnoreply@blogger.com19