CCSD's McGinley Teaches Watermelon Stereotype to AMHS Teens

Most of them were born between 1996 and 1998, long after the association of watermelons with African-Americans was banned from public discourse, so it should come as no surprise that the Academic Magnet football team, including its black player, would not have associated smashing a watermelon while making the usual football grunts and raves with being racist.

Trouble is, the Charleston County School District's superintendent was determined to teach them a lesson anyway.

And she did.

So now what the boys saw as a harmless marker of their victories has become a racist incident causing the loss of their football coach. The coach was held responsible even though not present.

Political correctness run amuck.

The super had better watch out. She can mess around with academics all she wants, but when she starts messing with football that spells trouble.

Berkeley CSD's Kovach's Indictment a Travesty

Does anyone believe that Berkeley County School District's communications director Amy Kovach dreamed up on her own the district's support of the Yes4Schools campaign in 2012? Really?

It's a dirty not-so-little not-so secret in every school district in South Carolina that every possible asset is used to push approval of school referendums. I challenge you to prove otherwise.

Why pick on Amy? According to the news story,

Already accused of improperly trying to influence the outcome of an election, Berkeley County School District's communications director now faces a second charge related to the same 2012 Yes 4 Schools referendum.

Amy Kovach, 43, was indicted by a Berkeley County grand jury Tuesday on one count of forgery, a felony that carries a fine and up to five years in jail. 

"To say that I'm shocked would be a gross understatement," Kovach's lawyer, Jerry Theos, said after the indictment was announced. "The Attorney General's Office didn't advise me in advance that they were seeking an indictment. They have not provided me ... with a copy of the indictment. I have no idea what it would be based upon, but there is no evidence whatsoever to support the charge." 

According to the indictment, Kovach created a false, backdated invoice from the district to the Yes 4 Schools campaign in November 2013 in "an attempt to establish that she had intended to have public funds repaid to the county" that were spent on campaign materials. The invoice was for less than $10,000, according to the indictment.

Why SC's High School Exit Exam Was Dropped

Last April after 30 years of requiring students to pass an exit exam to receive a high school diploma, the South Carolina state legislature, with the blessing of the education establishment in the state, dropped the requirement and even told those who had not received their diplomas in the last seven years to apply for them. What caused this change of heart?

We could surmise that the edublob feared falling scores due to implementation of Common Core.

We could conclude that, despite a continual dumbing down of the exit exam (HSAP), students were still failing at too high a rate for the comfort of the edublob.

Whatever it was, let's not forget the original purpose of that exam: students were receiving diplomas without the reading and computing skills needed to thrive in college or at work. Dropping the test will not change that  deplorable outcome one iota. If the items on the HSAP didn't correctly identify those who were deficient, then why did South Carolina pay out the millions it contracted to the edublob to create and then refine the test?

We are assured that WorkKeys and the ACT or SAT will fill the void left behind. While the purposes of those tests are valuable to students, will they truly reflect how well a particular school or school system has educated the student? Probably not.

What happened to accountability, folks?

Ravitch Exposes Faults of Common Core Standards for K-3

Why the Common Core Standards for Grades K-3 Are Wrong by dianeravitch A group of early childhood educators explain here why the Common Core is inappropriate for children in grades K-3. This statement is an excerpt from their joint publication "Defending the Early Years."  The first mistake of the Common Core is that it "maps backwards" from what is needed for high school graduation and ignores the kind of learning that is developmentally appropriate for young children. "An example of a developmentally inappropriate Common Core standard for kindergarten is one that requires children to “read emergent reader texts with purpose and understanding.” Many young children are not developmentally ready to read in kindergarten and there is no research to support teaching reading in kindergarten. There is no research showing long-term advantages to reading at 5 compared to reading at 6 or 7."  The second mistake is that the CCSS assumes that all children learn at the same rate and in the same way. However, "Many of the skills mandated by the CCSS erroneously assume that all children develop and learn skills at the same rate and in the same way. Decades of child development research and theory from many disciplines (cognitive and developmental psychology, neuroscience, medicine and education) show how children progress at different rates and in different ways. For example, the average age that children start walking is 12 months. Some children begin walking as early as 9 months and others not until 15 months – and all of this falls within a normal range. Early walkers are not better walkers than later walkers. A second example is that the average age at which children learn to read independently is 6.5 years. Some begin as early as 4 years and some not until age 7 or later – and all of this falls within the normal range."  Part of the second mistake is that young children are being assessed in ways that make no sense: "The CCSS are measured using frequent and inappropriate assessments – this includes high-stakes tests, standardized tests and computer-administered assessments. States are required to use computer-based tests (such as PARCC) to assess CCSS. This is leading to mandated computer use at an early age and the misallocation of funds to purchase computers and networking systems in school districts that are already underfunded."  A third mistake was that those who wrote the CCSS did not include anyone knowledgeable about early childhood education: "The CCSS do not comply with the internationally and nationally recognized protocol for writing professional standards. They were written without due process, transparency, or participation by knowledgeable parties. Two committees made up of 135 people wrote the standards – and not one of them was a K-3 classroom teacher or early childhood education professional."  A fourth mistake was that "There is a lack of research to support the current early childhood CCSS. The standards were not pilot tested and there is no provision for ongoing research or review of their impact on children and on early childhood education." Those of us who urged field testing of the standards were ignored.  Read the rest of the article to read the other mistakes that CCSS made in writing standards for K-3. Then you will understand how foolish it was for a kindergarten class to cancel the annual class play because the children needed more time for rigorous academic studies. If educators think that CCSS cancels out the well-researched principles of child development, they make a terrible mistake.  dianeravitch | May 12, 2014 at 10:00 am | Categories: Education Reform | URL:http://wp.me/p2odLa-7OK

Who Wrote Common Core Standards? See Below

From Diane Ravitch; [italics mine]

Mercedes Schneider: Who Are the 24 People Who Wrote the Common Core Standards?

A few days ago, I posted the names of the members of the "work groups" that wrote the Common Core standards. There was one work group for English language arts and another for mathematics. There were some members who served on both work groups.

Altogether, 24 people wrote the Common Core standards. None identified himself or herself as a classroom teacher, although a few had taught in the past (not the recent past). The largest contingent on the work groups were representatives of the testing industry.

Mercedes Schneider looked more closely at the 24 members of the two work groups to determine their past experience as educators, with special attention to whether they had any classroom experience.

Here are a few noteworthy conclusions based on her review of the careers of the writers of the CCSS:

In sum, only 3 of the 15 individuals on the 2009 CCSS math work group held positions as classroom teachers of mathematics. None was a classroom teacher in 2009. None taught elementary or middle school mathematics. Three other members have other classroom teaching experience in biology, English, and social studies. None taught elementary school. None taught special education or was certified in special education or English as a Second Language (ESL).

Only one CCSS math work group member was not affiliated with an education company or nonprofit....

In sum, 5 of the 15 individuals on the CCSS ELA work group have classroom experience teaching English. None was a classroom teacher in 2009. None taught elementary grades, special education, or ESL, and none hold certifications in these areas.

Five of the 15 CCSS ELA work group members also served on the CCSS math work group. Two are from Achieve; two, from ACT, and one, from College Board.

One member of the work groups has a BA in elementary education but no record of ever having taught those grades.

Almost all members who had any classroom experience were high school teachers.

Schneider concludes:

My findings indicate that NGA and CCSSO had a clear, intentional bent toward CCSS work group members with assessment experience, not with teaching experience, and certainly not with current classroom teaching experience.

In both CCSS work groups, the number of individuals with “ACT” and “College Board” designations outnumbered those with documented classroom teaching experience.

The makeup of the work groups helps to explain why so many people in the field of early childhood education find the CCSS to be developmentally inappropriate. There was literally no one on the writing committee (with one possible exception) with any knowledge of how very young children learn. The same concern applies to those who educate children in the middle-school years or children with disabilities or English language learners. The knowledge of these children and their needs was not represented on the working group.

CCSD's Garrett Has Clear-Eyed View of Segregated Schools, Vague Solutions

One of the newer members of the Charleston County School Board, Todd Garrett, opined in Saturday's edition that the district has not fulfilled the promise of desegregation nearly 60 years after Brown versus Board of Education. While no one in his or her right mind could dispute Garrett's figures, other board members and district administration have tried to gloss over the details for decades. 

For sure, the disparities among schools are the result of decisions and policies of the CCSD School Board ever since its inception when Charleston schools were consolidated. The effects of decades cannot be overcome overnight. 

Most people probably assume that segregated schools in the district (15 by Garrett's count) result from homogeneous neighborhood school populations. Not in Charleston County! These schools by and large are in thoroughly integrated neighborhoods. Where homes sell for half a million dollars and up, some neighborhood schools are nearly 90 percent free and reduced lunch. We're not talking just about race here; economic background is the villain. The middle class of all ethnic backgrounds has deserted these schools for those that are succeeding. The poor would do so if they knew how.

Garrett's analysis is cogent; however, his plea that the community trust CCSD board members to fix its problems is premature. The Board needs more members such as Garrett who are willing to speak the truth and criticize blanket proposals from the McGinley administration. 

When the CCSD Board of Trustees stops rubber-stamping administration and acts as the boss, and not the underlings, perhaps desegregation will go forward.

P & C Ignores Sen. Scott's Points About Parental Responsibility

Read the State's account of Tim Scott's speech on education; then read that published by our own cherished rag. You'll wonder if they're writing about the same speech!

While the former's account emphasizes Senator Scott's emphasis on parental responsibility, using his own life and rise from near-poverty as an example, Charleston's reporter ignores this topic entirely. Instead, if you read the local paper, you'll think Scott spoke about the need to look abroad for fixes to our educational system.

Somebody's got it wrong. Why do I think it's the anti-Scott Post and Courier?

P & C headline: "Sen. Scott says education improvements can be learned from overseas."

State headline: "Tim Scott says parents, not government, hold key to education success."

Common Core: What Were Sanford and Republicans Thinking?

How did we get into this mess?

In Friday's op-ed, Dillon Jones, policy analyst at the South Carolina Policy Council, a conservative think-tank in Columbia, makes the same points regarding Common Core that I enumerated in previous posts. His most salient point, and mine, is that federal money arrives with strings attached--and right now one of those strings is adoption of the Common Core. He correctly points out that the Charleston County School District has received Race-to-the-Top millions with that string attached.

Jones points out that in 1998 in the waning days of Governor Beasley's term, the state legislature handed policy-making power to the Education Oversight Committee and the State Board of Education. In South Carolina, education bureaucrats represent the last bastion of the Democrat Party, repository of liberalism and centralization of power. Until Mick Zais's election in 2010, the Democrats had a hammer-lock on the SC Superintendent of Education's job, so why did that ill-advised power transfer occur?

No qualms would have vibrated from Education Superintendent Jim Rex. However, then-Governor Mark Sanford had to sign off on these standards before the bureaucrats could adopt them. Of course, they did.

As it stands, South Carolina school districts are rushing willy-nilly ahead with implementation.

Editorial on Teacher Merit Pay Misses Bigger Picture

Monday's lead editorial praising CCSD's foray into merit pay for teachers glosses over several conceptual weaknesses in the plan. By far the most egregious flaw is the writer's assumption that poorly motivated teachers cause the nation's public education ills.

If only it were that simple!

The U.S. Department of Education, with its grants to school districts, is perpetrating a fraud. It will squander almost $24 million of Other Peoples' Money on overpaid and unproven statistical methods of determining the "progress" of classes and motivating teachers.

Mathematica's $3 million program will adjust for "factors such as poverty."

Does anyone else wonder what the unspecified "factors" are? Low IQ? Single-parent household? Will we be told? Why should we be expecting less progress from a child classified as "poor"? In a district such as Charleston County's will "poor" become a thinly-veiled euphemism for "black"? Didn't we back away from this kind of racist thinking decades ago?

The writer's comments that, "Opponents insist that other attempts to pay teachers based on merit have proven unsuccessful. But those arguments don't hold up," is followed by a series of non sequiturs: no discussion of what actually has happened, merely responses to objections about too much reliance on testing, stifling of creativity, time management, and the above-mentioned statistical formula. Those are not arguments about what has happened previously.

Particularly annoying is the editorial comment that "people in any profession have to learn to set priorities and manage time," implying that most teachers haven't.

The other flaws in CCSD's program involve tenured teachers who might be found substandard. They will not lose their jobs nor any of their pay. Does that make any sense if you buy into the idea that merit pay will work?

Teachers' salaries should be higher; salary schedules are too flat; public education is in deep trouble. We can all agree on these facts. What we cannot agree about is that the solution is to motivate unmotivated teachers.

"It's the parents, stupid!" should be the slogan. What does the editorial board suggest be done about that?

Don't Credit CCSD with Plethora of Charter Schools

Some readers of the Wednesday morning paper must have puzzled over the large number of charter schools that are coming to the Lowcountry this year and next. Even those with short memories can remember Superintendent McGinley's over-my-dead-body attitude about the Charleston County School Board's approving more charters, her mantra's being, "they take money away from other schools in the district."

The reporter never clearly identified how all these schools came into being. She knows perfectly well what the district's policy has been, so why the reticence?

Of all new charters mentioned, only one has the approval of CCSD--the one open to students residing in Charleston County. All of the others, open to any student residing in South Carolina, have been vetted by the state charter district without any cooperation from CCSD.

Let's not give McGinley good publicity for the work of others. Misleading? Disingenuous?

Closed-Minded Meyers Pontificates for CCSD's McGinley

We need a little communication once in a while to realize why it's such a relief that Gregg Meyers no longer sits on the Charleston County School Board. Recently, Meyers boasted in the P&C that Superintendent McGinley's long tenure has provided "continuity," a "new idea" in the district

Yes, continuity, but at what cost? McGinley's has been the least transparent and most ineffective tenure of all time. Her skill consists of puffing herself up at the expense of principals, teachers, and students. She even brags about how a lower percentage of schools are failing when she artificially created the drop by closing neighborhood schools. McGinley promised to track the affected students and show how the change benefitted them.

Seen any data yet?

McGinley has new ideas all the time--remember the A+ academy at Burke? These dazzle the public briefly, just like a firecracker, and then fizzle with little fanfare.
Keep in mind that Meyers opposes charter schools, despite his comments in the P&C that "charter schools have added helpful options for parents." He was behind the moratorium the district. In fact, years ago Meyers used his clout on the Board to create Buist and the Academic Magnet for his own children; who cares about everyone else's--let the rest of the chips fall where they may.
Meyers thinks candidates running for the school board should be asked if they support Dr. McGinley. Actually, I agree. Anyone new to the Board who mindlessly says "yes" is a potted plant and should be voted down.

Addressing Sexting & Cyberbullying In Schools

Anyone who teaches in a school knows that cyberbullying is the new rumor mill, especially in middle and high schools. Combined with pictures, it can crush those both in and out of the "popular" crowd. Just as with cheating, students refuse to tell those in authority or ask for help. This attitude needs to change. Such treatment on an ongoing basis can, and has, pushed the vulnerable over the edge to suicide.

Do preteens and teens know that such messages fall under "Internet Crimes Against Children"? Only if they hear it from school presentations or parents. Google and Facebook aren't going to tell them.

However, as an article in last week's P&C reported, all students know such agression goes on in our community, and most have been touched by it in one way or another.

The problem of "sexting" becomes even more serious. It is appalling to suggest, as one recent article in the P&C did, that "they're going to do it, so let's show them how to do it safely." What planet does the author live on? There is no "safely" with pictures that can live forever and attract the attention of adult predators.

Ask yourself why a preteen boy would text a girl to send nude pictures of herself and why she wouldn't tell her parents about the request. Every parent or guardian should be vigilant in monitoring media use by his or her child. It's not a joke any more.

And don't think it doesn't happen here every day.

P & C Editorial: On the One Hand, On the Other Hand

If voters are looking to the editors of the P & C for guidance concerning the school board election in November, FORGETABOUTIT.

Monday's editorial lays out the territory without making the case. What other multi-million dollar institution in Charleston County allows voters to determine to whom its CEO answers? Despite appearances to the contrary, the voters elect the Board of Trustees hold the Superintendent responsible for district administration, not to rubber stamp the superintendent's recommendations without having all of the facts.

The editorial writer forgot to mention that the CCSD Board of Trustees regularly violates the Open Meetings Act by deciding behind closed doors what its members should discuss in open session. Imagine the frustration of the minority of Board members over that and the manipulation of the Board's agenda to suit the superintendent's purposes.

At present Superintendent McGinley answers to no one, a dangerous situation for the voters and taxpayers of the county. She would like to keep it that way, and thus the "Gang of Four" comes forward.

And we wonder why the district has so many failures. Really.

Unfairness:CCSD Principal Versus Teacher Bonuses

Three-year contracts for principals at North Charleston and Burke High Schools do make sense. However, who is really on the front line at these schools? Whose daily efforts will make or break these schools' performances in their attempts to become "average"?

The principals are receiving tens of thousands of dollars extra per year for leading these at-risk schools. Are such bonuses paid to the teachers who agree to teach there? If the schools meet the goals (set by administration) over the three-year contract period, why do the principals, not the teachers, get the bonuses? Why wouldn't sharing be fair?

This is educrat-think at its worst.

Thinking Outside the Box on Stall and Greg Mathis

Sadly, both Stall High School and Greg Mathis Charter are on the list of Palmetto Priority Schools, those South Carolina schools that are failing so badly that the state has taken a special interest in them. The Charleston County School District now has nine out of the 35 schools on the list. Is that the most of any school district in the state? Probably.

The administration and boards of trustees of CCSD have brought us to this sorry place over many decades of problems. No one has any reason to believe that somehow Charleston County lacks the resources that other districts have to be successful. Perhaps we go to the top of the list in our excellent facilities, but we go to the bottom in academics.

The upcoming school board election is another chance to fix the problem by electing trustees that actually know how the district works and can hold administration accountable.

Principals at Stall and Greg Mathis have their hands full, but tweaking the lessons taught by teachers, as one suggests, is not the answer. Greg Mathis is a charter school; therefore, why should its charter be renewed if it is failing? Stall has a beautiful new state-of-the-art building. Now, if Superintendent McGinley allows its administrators and teachers to use experience and common sense to address its problems, perhaps they will arrive at solutions that state "experts" couldn't possibly imagine. One might be to throw out edublob thinking.

Burke's and NCHS's Failures McGinley's Fault

Regardless of her credentials from the Broad Institute (or maybe because of them), Superintendent Nancy McGinley of the Charleston County School District simply does not know what to do with Burke and North Charleston High Schools. If it weren't for NCLB, she wouldn't even care. As it is, that embarrassing time has rolled around once again: the threat of a state takeover.

Incompetence can be defined as tinkering with the edges of a poorly-understood problem and calling that success. Thus, in her latest statements McGinley points out how she has cut the number of failing schools in the district. True, by closing them. What does that prove?

Back in mid-June, McGinley gushed in an op-ed about how these two schools were really "dream-making 'opportunity centers."" She complains of the short-sightedness of those who think schools with unconscionably high dropout rates should be labeled as "at risk" or "failing." After all, she points out, some students do achieve and graduate!

Later in the month, NAACP vice-president Joe Darby echoed this drivel in a similar op-ed. He and the NAACP should be ashamed of themselves.

McGinley has had plenty of time to turn around these high schools; obviously she doesn't know how. If it weren't for CCSD Board members who follow her in lockstep, the Board would have voted her out of her position long ago. 

The person most responsible for the poor performances of both schools is the Superintendent. Prior to reaching that position, she was chief academic officer. Once named superintendent, she has appointed the district supervisors and the principals. They are her responsibility and she has blown it.

Whether the state takes over the schools, a private organization such as KIPP is called in, or these schools go charter, McGinley has shown she should not be trusted with the education of the students in and headed for these schools.

But of course Wando, Buist, and the Academic Magnet continue to do well. Apparently that is all McGinley supporters care about.

What Lies Beneath. . . Buist?

Does history of the Charleston peninsula matter? Apparently not to CCSD's Bill Lewis and his boss, Superintendent Nancy McGinley.

How else to explain their treatment of the land upon which the Buist school sits? What if, indeed as is possible, that land reveals artifacts of early settlements of African-Americans, even of slaves?

We'll never know what history has been lost. The Charleston County School District has shown its disdain for the past from the beginning of its campaign to replace the old school building.

Nevertheless, we can ask questions. Alert observers of CCSD have plenty of them.

1. Work on reopening Buist in August of 2013 remains on track, in fact, at "full speed, damn the torpedoes" speed while the promised replacement of Memminger, James Simons, and Courtenay has ground to "dead slow," aiming at 2014 or later.
2. In the dead of night, residents near Buist have been awakened by noise of construction on the site. Working at night because?
3. Perhaps the removal of truckloads of excavated soil given to a member of the public and not examined for artifacts is easier then. For all we know, graves are being removed--they would just slow down the work.
4. Rumors abound of the pocketing of coins and even slave tags by workers involved with the pile and foundation work. No one thought there might be below-ground historical assets?
5. On the same topic, the area was part of the city's defense lines during the American Revolution's siege of Charleston before its surrender in May of 1780. Just sayin.'
6. If CCSD could order a seismic survey, why did it not order an archeological survey and recovery plan to be included in its original time line?
7. Did anyone consider using the valuable expertise of staff at the Charleston Museum? Why will CCSD not release its Board-ordered archeological surveys done before the work was started? Were Final Reports even made?

Let's face it--Memminger is also in an area that begs for archeological study.

Back in the 1950s the Charleston Historical Society banded together to save architectural gems in danger of destruction. Without its efforts, the old city of Charleston would be half the gem it is today.

There could easily be as much history below ground as what we see above, but the administrative structure of the Charleston County School District echoes Rhett Butler: "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn."

P&C Ignores CCSD McGinley's Power Grab

The Charleston County School District Superintendent, Nancy McGinley, has flexed her muscles. Seeing her majority on the Board of Trustees, she determined to grab as much power from the Board as possible. The erstwhile editors ( there are some, right?) of the Post and Courier don't see her legal violation of her contract as a problem, just "insider baseball." Would that were true!

Long-time observers in CCSD and the minority of non-McGinley sycophants on the Board of Trustees see matters coming to a crisis next Monday, March 12. Used to agenda sleight-of-hand, they have recoiled at the illegal subterfuges now underway to subvert the governing structure of the district. What follow are remarks from one such observer.

For a public school district as large and as diverse as this one, concentrating absolute power and decision making authority in the hands of one person, with few checks and balances in place, isn't healthy. In this case it isn't legal, either.

Board Chairman Chris Fraser and Superintendent McGinley are attempting to intervene in the the Policy Committee's selection of chairman and vice-chairman, currently Elizabeth Moffly and Chris Fraser. In spite of board policies and applicable parliamentary rules to the contrary, Fraser and McGinley have engaged McGinley's own attorney, John Emerson, to outline the case for having the full board select new Policy Committee officers.


In a separate matter, Emerson has also drafted an agenda item purported to come from the Policy Committee meeting that authorizes the Board to delegate its statutory responsibilities to hear certain appeals to the Superintendent. For example, the county school board would no longer hear certain student disciplinary hearings . Appeals will end with the Superintendent.

The plot thickens.Mr. Emerson's report on Monday's agenda implies that the Policy Committee has approved an amendment to the Student Code of Conduct doing exactly the opposite of what its chairman, Ms. Moffly, proposed.
 
In discussions involving a pending disciplinary appeal first presented last month , Ms. Moffly and others on the board moved to repeal the offending statement in the Code of Conduct which barred lawful appeals to the Board. The statement conflicts with state laws guaranteeing due process and appeal rights. McGinley was against the repeal. Emerson's report to the Board from the Policy Committee appears as a complete fabrication designed to advance McGinley's


In this tug of war, McGinley is using Fraser to further isolate elected Board members who most often vote with the minority. Through her legal counsel, McGinley is grabbing the power to set Board policy and select Board officers. She plans to set the organization on its head: the Board will serve her; she will not serve the Board.
The Post and Courier, although it has been warned, probably doesn't want to understand the ramifications of McGinley's plans. Just as it is a violation for Board members to interfere with the superintendent's job, she is required to respect limits that separate her from being involved in the Board's governing and oversight functions. By ignoring this line, she is in breach of contract. With an independent Board, she could be found insubordinate and subject to termination for cause.


A few years ago, we witnessed a systematic dismantling of the statutory responsibilities reserved to the constituent boards that have been part of CCSD's structure since its inception. Those boards are emasculated with not even the power to express an opinion in the selection of principals or the quality of teachers in their constituent jurisdictions. Even their role in the establishment of attendence zones has been taken over by--you guessed it--the Superintendent.

Centralization of power began shortly after McGinley became CCSD's chief academic officer. Erosion of the constituent boards' legal authority accelerated rapidly and aggressively when she became superintendent. Now the same process is spreading to the county board. To whom will the Superintendent be responsible in the future?

No one. Certainly not voters or taxpayers. Superintendent Czar.

Outsourced Day-Porters' Class Action Vs. CCSD

Last week one of CCSD's outsourced day porters filed a class-action lawsuit against the Charleston County School District. As you know, problems concerning final paychecks have been festering ever since those day porters were outsourced. Superintendent McGinley neglected to inform the Board last Monday night, but finally did after Monday's meeting when a Board member inquired why he had not been told.

The class action is for $7500 for the individual, but perhaps a hundred individuals are involved. The jury is still out on whether this outsourcing, which saved the district money on the backs of its least-advantaged former employees, will even save money.

Meanwhile, CCSD appears to have outsourced its maintenance supply and equipment warehouse to Grainger, a private company. As Grainger takes over control of the district's orders, will it reprice materials at a higher rate from its own catalogue?

Just another example of how CCSD handles OPM. Time for an audit.

Artful Dodging on School of the Arts Vacancies

Who gave Principal James Reinhart of the Charleston County School District's School of the Arts the idea that he should recruit students from out of county? The district's own forced audit turned up nine miscreants. Reinhart (or should I say, McGinley) defends not filling those slots with county residents by pointing out that no remaining students are on the waiting lists for those particular "majors."

If there are any on waiting lists for other "majors," perhaps some idiot has misjudged how many slots are needed for each. Could that be possible, given that the number of vacant seats at SOA is actually quite a bit larger than those sitting empty at AMHS?

Can you say "Mismanagement McGinley"?