Communities in Schools: Buying Good Press or Money to Burn?

In the past week or so, Communities in Schools (CIS), the much-touted nonprofit headed by Mayor Riley's sister, has purchased not one, but two, full-color two-page ads in the Post and Courier. If you've ever purchased even one full-page ad, you know these ads don't come cheap.

The purpose appears to be raising community awareness or raising funds or both. The website advertised takes you to a very professional website extolling the work of CIS and asking you to get involved.

Is this really an effective way to raise money assist students? Wouldn't one page be enough?

Mysteries.

EdFirstSC Finally Comes to Its Senses over CCSD's BRIDGE

Blame Bill Gates and the Obama administration.

Even though EdFirstSC finally sees the train headed for the wreck, its spokesman tries to blame SC Education Superintendent Mick Zais for the genesis of value-added teacher compensation. Zais visited the Charleston County School District to discuss Superintendent Nancy McGinley's plan to change the way teachers are compensated. EdFirstSC's members must lean heavily towards teachers who are Democrats. Yes, Republicans want teachers to be accountable, but the machinations behind BRIDGE must be laid squarely on the shoulders of the edublob and the Obama administration, especially U.S. Education Department head, Arne Duncan. They're all liberal Democrats.

Blame McGinley for applying for Race to the Top funds and accepting them. Federal money always comes with strings attached, and she knew full well what they would be. As a result of winning the grant, the district must follow Common Core standards AND implement a teacher evaluation system based on the fatally-flawed value-added model pushed by the Gates Foundation and Arne Duncan. In preparation McGinley sent Audrey Lane to the Broad Institute just to learn all about the new teacher-evaluation system and then rewarded her with a nice fat retroactive raise. And the edublob, in the form of Mathematica, got a nice $2 million (of Other People's Money) contract to figure out how to make the system fair, a goal that even those mathematicians must know is impossible.

This new system will never be fair to teachers or students. Look at the abundance of research on just this topic that Duncan, and McGinley, choose to ignore. Going after these funds and implementing the value-added compensation system in CCSD is McGinley's personal effort at her own "race to the top."

If you think testing is overrated and too important now, wait till teachers' jobs hang on these unfair results.

In CCSD, Broad Graduates Take Care of Their Own Audrey Lane

It couldn't wait. 

It was so important to reward Audrey Lane for her attendance at the Broad Institute, where she learned all about the components of BRIDGE, that fellow Broad-graduate Nancy McGinley insured an almost 19 percent raise for her prior to the district's own salary study report. And the raise is retroactive for 10 months.

Well, what can we expect in a district where at least 30 employees rack up more than $100,000 each and when the superintendent says "Jump" the Board of Trustees say "How high"? Needless to say, none of the most highly paid are teachers, who everyone agrees are the most important component in educating any child.

BROAD "a non-profit" = edublob at work 

CCSD Feeds Millions to Edublob in New Teacher Evaluation Scheme

"Will Teacher Evals Tied to Scores Work?" queries the front page headline.

YES!

The Charleston County School District's aptly-named BRIDGE initiative will work--to funnel millions of dollars to waiting members of the edublob. You know, a bridge of tax dollars.

The Princeton-based Mathematica will receive $3 million to create an algorithm to treat each student as a product. Each year what the student learns will be dubbed, "value added." It's the assembly-line, factory model of education, teachers as workers on the assembly line whose worth is measured by how much value they add to each product, i.e., child.  Somehow Mathematica will magically adjust for "other factors, such as poverty, which could affect scores."

No wonder most teachers who are brave enough (or secure enough) to speak up are skeptical.

Let's see. Will the magic formula adjust for pot use? parent in jail? homelessness? parental neglect? How much personal information on each "product" will CCSD garner?

More importantly, will the formula produce reduced expectations for the progress of that child identified as poor? Surely someone else can see where this model logically heads: high expectations for the rich; low for the poor; high for whites; low for blacks and Hispanics. Is that really what Charleston County residents want?

Meanwhile, CCSD is licking its chops after receiving a $24 million five-year grant from the feds to provide incentives to teachers. Michael Ard, former Hunley Park Principal and BRIDGE project director, promises that "no teacher will lose money" when the district switches in three years to a new salary structure based on "quality and effectiveness." The district promises to reward with bonuses even after the grant runs out, but not lower any salaries for "low" performing teachers. The grant money for bonuses will run out after two years. Then what?

Superintendent McGinley has already primed the public relations machine by using another edublob organization, Battelle for Kids of Ohio, for public relations at the low cost of $1.3 million. Battelle will also be useful to blame if implementation of the new salary scheme becomes rocky.

Everyone (well, almost everyone) agrees that good teachers are underpaid and bad ones should be fired. No one will lose a job under this proposal, and in spite of Mathematica's formulas, no one will know under this system which teachers are really superb.

No one seems to be considering the elephant in the room: good teachers don't need incentives. They are already highly motivated, bonuses or not. Who does need incentives, then?

a) parents to then encourage their

b) students to learn.

If any teacher had the magic formula that motivates students, he or she would have retired on his or her millions long ago, and we wouldn't be having such problems in our schools.

Meanwhile, this taxpayer can easily think of many more effective ways for our government to spend $24 million.

Cook-Meyers Duo in the News Again

What do former chairmen of the Charleston County School District Board of Trustees do for an encore? Perhaps the same behavior they exhibited when on the school board.

Attorney Gregg Meyers filed a lawsuit for Nancy Cook (don't you wonder what she has on him?) as a preemptive strike in a suit brought against Cook for taking advantage of monies she received from the Veterans' Association as director of a men's shelter in North Charleston. Among other items of interest, Cook doubled her salary to $130 thousand per year.

Quite a profitable nonprofit for Cook, wouldn't you say? Who knows what additional shenanigans occurred at 75 Calhoun when the two of them were in office? Someone does.

CCSD Board Members Touch Sacred Cows

• No wonder Superintendent Nancy McGinley has brought out the big guns--letters solicited from the Mayor; scolding emails solicited from the Board chair; outraged op-eds from the NAACP.


• Now this: Four unruly Board members want to investigate what benefits the district gets for its contributions to sacred-cow nonprofits, contributions from an operating budget projecting a $26 million shortfall next year.


• In their first swing at a cow, members Moffly and Kandrac refused to vote for $50,000 awarded to the Charleston Promise Neighborhood. Not to put too fine a point on it, Board member Toya Hampton-Green's husband heads that particular non-profit, and the Superintendent sits on its Board of Directors. Can you say, "conflict of interest"?


• Although that particular sacred cow escaped with the cash, Board members Coats and Taylor now want to scrutinize the benefits gained from other nonprofits receiving funds from the district. Can you say, "edublob"?


• Surely they can't be serious? Why, they might need to scrutinize the funds paid to the nonprofit headed by the Mayor's sister!


• Long-time readers of this blog will remember the point made some time ago: nonprofit does not mean it's not profitable for someone. A good look at salaries paid to those in charge should be in order.


• Let's not forget: the money for these nonprofits comes from the operating budget, the same one whose shortage of funds has created furlough days and staff layoffs. Now's a good time to focus on the primary mission of the district.

The Old Shell Game in CCSD

When Toya Green opens her mouth, does Gregg Meyers's voice sound as loud to you as it does to me? That was my reaction to what the P & C on Friday called "Chairwoman details crisis" in its coverage of the second-round School Redesign meeting in North Charleston's Constituent District 4. [See School Officials Learn Lesson.]

CCSD has suggested so many changes and shifts in student bodies in this part of its redesign proposal that only one conclusion is possible: move those students around to the point that no one looking at test scores will be able to compare future results with present ones.

Isn't that what this is all about anyway?

Option 1:

• School A, now 6-8, will become 7-8 for one year, then switch to 3-5;
• School B, now 6-8, will close for one year, then open magnetized as 6-8;
• School C, now 6-8, will become 7-8 for one year, then magnetize as 6-8;
• School D, not on line, will become 6-7 for one year, then magnetize as 6-8;
• School E, now 9-12, will stay 9-12 for one year, then magnetize as 6-8.

Ha! That's only the middle-school proposals.

As the article stated,

"The atmosphere was more subdued than in McClellanville on Wednesday night but the crowd ignited at the mention of Charlestowne Academy, the only area school that might be closed under the proposal. . . . The district's proposal calls for Charlestowne Academy, a K-12 magnet school, to close and for its building to be used by Clark Academy, a program for high school students at risk for dropping out."

District 4's per-pupil expenditures are lower than the district overall. No purpose exists for shutting down Charlestowne Academy, considering that it stands out as a school that actually is meeting goals--rated Excellent, etc. Sound familiar? It should. The same exists for shutting down Lincoln High School. Yet if the achievers now at CTA are dispersed among the rest of North Charleston's schools, their overall scores will rise. Of course, McGinley hasn't considered that angle. Right.

Let's also consider the angle that Communities in Schools, run by Mayor Riley's sister, which is heavily involved in the development of Clark Academy, would be delighted to get its hands on the building now being used for Charlestown Academy. Disperse those higher-achieving students AND please the Mayor--how could McGinley et al resist?

Then there's the asininity of shutting down Brentwood once again and calling it something else. A rose by any other name. . . .

"Some questioned the district's spending, such as its administrative costs, and whether that has led to the district's predicament." McGinley answered with "We've done everything we can without touching the schools. . . . The (state) cuts have been so severe that we don't have anywhere else to find the dollars."

Here's a thought: how about McGinley's returning her windfall extra $300 per month in-district travel allowance now that the price of gasoline has fallen.

What? She really needs $1100 per month? What's she driving?

CCSD's Derthick Committee to Meet June 3

Speaking of handing out pork, or not--

Those interested in District 20's input to awarding grants from the Lawrence Derthick Fund may wish to know that the Committee meets Tuesday at 1 p.m. in the Superintendent's Conference Room at 75 Calhoun to dole out the funds.

CEN's Butzon Butts in on Charter School Rent

Don't you just love the edu-blob? It pretends to have the best interests of students at heart, when in fact it has its OWN interests at heart. Take Jon Butzon, of the Charleston Education Network, a Riley and Chamber-of-Commerce front--please take him!

Monday's P & C's op-ed page has a message from Butzon: The sky is falling in CCSD. Run for your life.

Butzon tries to link CCSD's financial woes to its failure to charge rent to the new Charter School for Math and Science. For example,

"Locally sponsored charter schools are already a financial albatross for school districts. When charter school proponents complain about the slow growth of charter schools in South Carolina, they typically attribute that slow growth to anti-charter sentiments among educators and school boards. But as the law is currently written, having charter schools is a financial disincentive for school boards."

What you really mean, Jon, is that school boards lose control of the money that goes to those students. I agree it's a financial disincentive but only because many on the school board have other agendas than the best interests of the students involved. You and I both know that the amount of money alloted per student in the district does not change--only who handles it.

More to the point, why should the Charleston Education Network get a chair at the table? Who elected it to decide what policies the district should have about anything? Why do so many friends of Riley and Democratic activists sit on the committee? What qualifies Jon Butzon to sound off on the finances of the district and its funding? Let's see his credentials.

As I inquired in a posting last July 27th,

Who calls the shots in this unwieldy committee of 26?
Who decides what policies to push?
Where does more than $92,000 in "public support"[as of 3 years ago] come from?
What are Butzon's qualifications for sitting in on CCSD meetings?
Why does CCSD list CEN under "parent" organizations?

Well, Jon? Why did CEN leave its offices at the Citadel? Why is it that on CEN's website not a single member of the committee is listed under "Who We Are"?

Don't you just love it?

CCSD Politics: Airheads at Play

Now obvious to the public is the political deal made between CCSD School Board members Hillery Douglas and Nancy Cook. Let's face it: the two of them may be the biggest racists on the present board, so maybe that's what they have in common.

The conversation clearly went something like the following:

Hillery: If I run for mayor of North Charleston, you'll support my candidacy.
Nancy: Yes. And then if you lose, I'll let you be Board Chairman while you support my candidacy for Charleston County Council, even if I have to run as a Republican.
Hillery: Why do you want to be on the Charleston County Council?
Nancy: Well, remember, the CCSD Board can't send funds to my shelter any longer, the way it did with the Derthick Fund. If I get on the Charleston County Council, I can get some funding from the county to replace that money. After all, the County Council puts lots of earmarks right into the budget, even if its slush fund has been under the gun lately.
Hillery: That's true. It's a deal.

Of course, the former was only an IMAGINED conversation, but it does explain Douglas's reaction to airhead Nancy's stupid remarks made earlier this week on local talk radio.

In case you've been hiding under a rock, the comments, which Cook now claims have been taken out of context, concerned sterilization and taking babies away from what used to be called "welfare mothers." THIS is her solution to high dropout rates in our nation's schools. AIRHEAD is not too strong! [See Cook's On-air Remarks Draw Fire]

Cook: We're not paying for another baby, maybe one baby, but after that, we're taking the baby. And maybe you get sterilized. I know that sounds kind of extreme and radical, but we're in times to where — think about America.

Out of context? Here's what Douglas said in response:

Cook was trying to give an answer to a problem that has most people perplexed.

"Sometimes when you try and do that off the cuff, the wrong things come out," he said. "I'm almost certain she really doesn't mean that that's the solution to it by sterilizing. I just think it was something that was said that should not have been said."

Why was it said? Because Cook is after the racist vote in North Charleston, that's why. She's no Republican. Don't kid yourself that she really doesn't think this way.

Can you imagine the firestorm from Douglas and his cronies if Sandi Engelman had made remarks even one-third as racist as these?

Why Is Jim Rex Hobnobbing with the NEA?

The National Education Association (NEA)? Hardly a powerhouse in South Carolina, which, after all, is a right-to-work state. I haven't seen statistics on unionized teachers in this state, but I can believe that percentage is very low. Certainly CCSD is not organized.

So I find it strange that State Superintendent of Education Jim Rex was more than happy to accept the funding of Communities for Quality Education. CQE "hosted a roundtable discussion between South Carolina Superintendent of Education Jim Rex and a group of SC high school students. The students shared their top education concerns and then submitted that concern via YouTube to the Presidential candidates in advance of the July 23rd primary debate." How sweet.

It turns out that Rex moderated a discussion that was carefully led into areas of interest to the NEA--measures such teacher tenure and curriculum reform, the No Child Left Behind Act, merit pay, school vouchers, and many accountability reforms. Communities for Quality Education is a shill for the NEA and is funded by the NEA, one of the most vocal opponents of real reform in public schools.

For shame, Jim!

Education Non-Profits: Profitable for Some!

Politics and money and sex.

Wow! Can you imagine a more volatile mixture? Yet that's exactly what we have with the Heritage Keepers program being used statewide and in Charleston County schools.

It's NOT new. It wasn't just adopted this year. Questions have been raised about the selection of this particular nonprofit for YEARS. Questions have been raised about how the program presents itself and who benefits from its contracts. Questions have been raised about its political protectors.

In fact, every red flag you could think of has been raised in regard to this "non-profit" that receives millions of dollars from the taxpayers of South Carolina and seems to have local political links.

Apparently, the P & C has finally decided that the issue merits newsprint in Tuesday's edition.

[See Character Program Questioned].

Let's see. So the SC House is poised to approve a five-member oversight committee for "abstinence-based programs." Why stop there? What about oversight of the rest of the non-profits in the education blob that are swilling at the public trough?

And CCSD's response to questions about the program? "The school district also has asked the state Department of Education for guidance, said Tamara Kirshstein, the district's science and health curriculum coordinator." Now, we don't know how long Ms. Kirshstein has held that position, but after years of using the program, isn't asking for guidance NOW a bit late?

Pathetic, isn't it? Or it would be if it weren't our tax dollars being wasted.

P & C Discovers the Education Blob!

Only 20 years! That's all it took for the P & C to read the entrails of the "education blob." That sobriquet, coined by then-Secretary of Education William J. Bennett, describes non-profit organizations feeding at the public trough in the name of advancing education.

Saturday's paper finally provides coverage of the finances of Heritage Services, showing how (as I have stated previously in this blog) non-profit does not mean "non-profitable" to those involved. [SeeSex-ed nonprofit banks heavily on public funds ]

There's politics involved? Gasp!

Whether you are against abstinence-based sex education or not is immaterial here. What everyone can agree upon is that public funding of non-profits (and even for-profits) needs to have more oversight and transparency. Those who pay attention to CCSD's administration can easily rattle off the call letters of many--CEN, CEP, NTP, etc.--that remain shrouded in mystery as to effectiveness per dollar spent. Why do I suspect that Heritage is not alone in its important political connections, family business salaries, and lack of accountability to the taxpayers?

Maybe because I didn't fall of the turnip truck yesterday?

CCSD Superintendent: Now the Buck Stops with Her

Listen! Are those wings? Maybe a cackle or two? I know! The chickens just came home to roost! Superintendent McGinley now has the power to replace principals without consulting constituent boards; that means she also has full responsibility for what happens. And she's ready to roll.

In today's P & C McGinley hints of changes coming in administrative positions due to schools' failing performances on the state's report cards. Although the article points out that 25 schools are now rated "unsatisfactory," as usual the number is not put into context. That would be (roughly) a third of the county's schools.

Never mind that "more than half of the county's schools" have had their principals in place for less than three years, let's shuffle them again! That must mean those who have been in place for three years or more at unsatisfactory schools get to move, since McGinley promises a three-to-five-year window to prove effective leadership.

The dirty little secret is that the district has been preparing for this round of musical chairs. Schools such as Burke and North Charleston High that have been rated failing for six years MUST be restructured. No one expected a miracle to occur this year, and it didn't. The choices left to CCSD under NCLB are:

• replace all administrative professionals or
• bring in an outside agency to run the schools or
• make them into charter schools [yeah, likely] or
• have the state take over the schools [ditto].

Whatever changes McGinley makes, she will be held responsible now for the results. Well, that's assuming that three-to-five years down the road McGinley is still Superintendent.

Jordan's quoted comments pose an interesting dilemma for McGinley: she wants the Superintendent "to put those highly successful teachers [and principals] with students who need it the most," namely, those students in unsatisfactory schools where teacher turnover is high.

McGinley's got the power; does she have the guts?

Discipline and Murray Hill Academy

Done: Construction of a new single story 48,000 square foot facility [Murray Hill Academy] for Community Education Partners (CEP) under contract to CCSD for 432 students on a 10.5 acre site located on Bonds Avenue in North Charleston. The facility has four learning centers, each with three conventional classrooms and one reading/math/computer classroom. Project scope was increased to include a 4,000 square foot community space for use by the Murray Hill neighborhood and the North Charleston Recreation Department. [Description from CCSD website]

No mention on the website of the cost of this building, but we can safely assume millions.


But on CCSD's website, this school built for 432 students has 63!

CCSD's website link to Murray Hill Academy's website is dead.

The principal listed for Murray Hill on CCSD's website left the school in the middle of the 2006-07 school year. It's now the end of October. Wasn't Lee Gaillard appointed interim principal? Is he still there? Why isn't his name?

Is it true that overage students from Murray Hill were "transferred" to Sea Islands Youth Build Charter School on Johns Island? The one that needs a building? Is that why so few are at Murray Hill today?

Are CCSD students being expelled instead of being sent to Murray Hill?

Has Murray Hill solved its problems (of last year) with uncertified teachers?

How many students is CEP required to take under its contract with CCSD? McGinley lowered the number last summer, but surely it isn't under 100 at this point? Or, is it?

Mismanagement? Waste of taxpayer dollars? What do you think?

CCSD Shenanigans: The Thick of Derthick

For SIX years--SIX years--CCSD school board members voted to distribute "more money than it was supposed to" from the Lawrence Derthick Jr. Memorial Trust Fund. That's SIX years, folks, when no one watched the store, six years that, if my memory serves me correctly, encompass Don Kennedy's entire service as CCSD's chief financial officer.


To quote Friday's P & C, "The committee administering the fund has given out more money than the fund earned for the past six years. In the future, the district's finance department will notify the board chair of the amount available to be awarded."


Umm. In the future? And the Board weren't notified previously how much was available? What kind of crazy system is that?


Needless to say, the taxpayers will foot the bill for this foolishness, which member Brian Moody called "over-funding" of "worthy and legitimate causes." Moody himself is an accountant, but he didn't notice that a fund that contained $150,000 gave out $50,000 in one year, seriously depleting its principal. Fortunately, member David Engelman pointed out the discrepancy, or as he has said, "what $150,000 investment makes $50,000 in one year?"

Truth to tell, board members used the fund as a personal charity for favored groups, some undoubtedly deserving, and some, like the one run by Nancy Cook, an apparent conflict of interest. Two CCSD board members, unnamed in the article (but one is Hillery Douglas) and a third from the District 20 constituent board make the recommendations to the full CCSD board each year.

As the P & C points out, "The fund isn't supposed to fall below its principal amount, but that happened this year after the board doled out too many grants. The fund has earned an average of $500 in monthly interest for the past four years, but at that rate, the fund would take more than seven years to rebuild itself to the principal amount."

Where IS Al Parish when we need him?

McGinley:Deja Vu All Over Again

Welcome to Goodloe-Johnson redux.


New Superintendent McGinley did not promise change to get her position; in fact, she had to indicate that her tenure would be more of the same. If the days between August 21st, the first day of school, and September 21st, the first day of fall, are a leading indicator, she's holding true to that promise.


Let's look at the record.

• Is CCSD still throwing everything but the kitchen sink in the path of the new Charter High School of Math and Science?
• Are meetings being held in CCSD in violation of the Freedom of Information Act?
• Has any progress been made on the details of the phantom "AP Academy" at Burke or the phantom "High-Tech High" at Rivers?
• Has any progress been made on ending de facto segregation in District 20?
• Does Fraser still have half a principal and multiple substitute teachers instead of permanent ones?
• Has Charleston Progressive received any of the resources that would make it a true magnet school instead of a magnet in name only?
• Is Buist Academy still hiding vacancies in its upper grades while a thousands-strong waiting list, well, waits?
• Have the Superintendent and Bill Lewis surprised an unsuspecting District 20 with the planned destruction of two neighborhood schools?
• Is the District now channeling resources that should have gone to CPA into a school it plans to destroy?
• Has the overflow of disgruntled Buist applicants channeled by fiat into St. Andrews Elementary caused multiple ongoing problems and an overcrowded school?
• Has the Superintendent allowed a free flow of conversation with any constituency in CCSD besides the school board?
• Is CCSD still channeling dollars into non-profits that don't produce?
• Is the Mayor still meddling in CCSD and claiming not to?

Apparently the one constant here is NO CHANGE.

No trust, either.

County Council & State: What About City Council?

So the editors of the Post and Courier find it appropriate to criticize the state "competitive grants" program, as I have? They side with a lawsuit brought against it by a "citizens reform group," do they? [See today's editorial page.]


How about closer to home, editors? You've now editorialized about the Charleston County Council's handouts and the state's pork. What about funds given to charities and nonprofits that are hidden in the City Council's budget? They don't count?


Don't you wonder what the City-Council equivalents are of our state-tax dollars for "the Hilarity Festival, the Come-See-Me Festival, the Mighty Mo Festival, the Flopeye Fish Festival and Squealing on the Square"?


Let's not be hypocrites.

I Told You So: $15,250 Per Hire

By my calculations eight months ago, even if all parameters had fallen into place with Teach Charleston, each hire would have cost about $5500.

See:

Tuesday, January 16, 2007: Non-Profit Does Not Mean Non-Profitable
Thursday, July 12, 2007: P & C Discovers the Broad Foundation!
Thursday, August 09, 2007: CCSD: You Mean We Can Do It Ourselves?

Now today's P & C: "District to scrap teacher recruiter: Company hired to find teachers will get $305,000." by Diette Courrege.

"The New Teacher Project was supposed to recruit at least 90 teachers for eight of Charleston County's hardest-to-staff schools, but the nonprofit only found 20 teachers for the district by the first day of school. The school board responded on Monday night by unanimously agreeing to end the district's two-year contract now, one year early."

"'If we had continued the contract [italics added], we would've wasted money,' said board Chairwoman Nancy Cook. 'We've done a better job of recruiting. They didn't follow through on what they said they could do.'" Maybe because there was no great incentive to do so, as I proved previously?

And where is the half funded by the community (as promised last January)? According to Don Kennedy, "the district has raised $27,500 in private donations to help cover that expense. . . . The state also has promised the district a $100,000 grant that could be used toward the contract cost, but the district has not yet received that money." That falls short of half, Don, and what "state" agency has promised this grant?

"Superintendent Nancy McGinley said the project didn't have a clear understanding of the state's teacher certification laws, which meant some of the recruits didn't meet state requirements." Well, whose idea was it to hire them? If they're such experts, why wouldn't they understand the certification laws?

"Charleston also is an expensive airport destination, and prospective teachers often had to pay their way, which was a deterrent to interviewing for a job here, she said." And we didn't know that last January?

"Officials initially sought the services of the New Teacher Project because they were looking for innovative ways to solve the teacher vacancy problem, McGinley said." Those would be nameless officials, right? Ones who had no clue about air expenses and state teacher certification? The school board voted to approve this boondoggle--they bear responsibility here also.

Okay, here's the best part, a McGinley quote: "larger cities are different than Charleston." Good. I hope she remembers that in the future and stops thinking in the Broad-Fellow mode.

CCSD: You Mean We Can Do It Ourselves?

For the edification of those just finding this blog I have reprinted below my posting of last January. This is in response to the Post and Courier's article today on CCSD's success this year in filling teacher slots. The success is truly a turn=around from previous years, with only 37 vacancies remaining at a time when usually 100 or more remain.

No doubt this success is linked to district efforts on many fronts, as Supt. McGinley states.

HOWEVER, the hiring of the New Teacher Project (known as Teach Charleston) is NOT one of them. McGinley acknowledges such. Apparently the number actually signed up by Teach Charleston is unmentionable, but it clearly does not approach the 90 in the contract with this nonprofit.

Is anyone going to admit a mistake here? Teach Charleston has a two-year contract that will be quite profitable even if it never signs another teacher!
See below:

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Non-Profit Does Not Mean Non-Profitable

Today's Newsless Courier announces that CCSD has signed a contract with The New Teacher Project (TNTP) [ see their website http://www.tntp.org/ ] to recruit "enough good teachers" for school years 2007-08 and 2008-09. Admirable goal, that.Who cannot sympathize with Stall High School's principal (and students) as they limp through this school year minus three math teachers? Who cannot help but notice that the schools listed to benefit from this recruiting are the "usual suspects."Noticing the numbers, however, forces the reader to contemplate this: for every teacher short of 90 each year that is not recruited, TNTP will pay back the district $1500; however, each teacher being successfully recruited (assuming 200 over two years) will cost the district $5500.DO THE MATH: that's $4000 NOT paid back to the district per recruiting shortfall.Of course, TNTP is a non-profit. What would be profit is paid out in salaries, expenses, and bonuses. Let's not assume that it is not a money-making venture! And exactly what WAS Nancy McGinley's connection to them? The article says "[she] worked with TNTP in Philadelphia." As an administrator? As an employee of TNTP? As a teacher? Not clear, Diette.According to the article, "half of the money [that's $550,000 by my count] will come from the district, and officials want to collect the other half from the community." [italics mine] So far the district seems to have collected $40,000 of that other half, meaning another half-a-million dollars will either be raised from the community OR be paid by the district, since the contract was signed before even 10 percent was raised from the community. Good luck. I hope someone, or several someones, has deep pockets!