Comments on: Deep in the Heart of Texas http://www.johnknoxwhite.com/2007/12/21/deep-in-the-heart-of-texas/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=deep-in-the-heart-of-texas Mindfulness in the face of challenge. Wed, 04 Jan 2012 07:24:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Mike McMahon http://www.johnknoxwhite.com/2007/12/21/deep-in-the-heart-of-texas/#comment-324 Mike McMahon Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:35:09 +0000 http://johnknoxwhite.com/?p=265#comment-324 Mark is correct is correct when he stated the funding for charter schools has been made modified, Up until last year, AUSD did have to make up the difference between the AUSD funding level and the ACLC funding level. Now ACLC funding comes directly from a state revenues as a pass through at AUSD. AUSD gets to charge an adminstrative fee for this work. The MOU between the charter school and District for other services then attempts to establish a revenue neutral agreement so the District and the charter school are not impacted. That is the theory, in reality I believe sides (AUSD & ACLC) believe there are still inequities. Mark is correct is correct when he stated the funding for charter schools has been made modified, Up until last year, AUSD did have to make up the difference between the AUSD funding level and the ACLC funding level. Now ACLC funding comes directly from a state revenues as a pass through at AUSD. AUSD gets to charge an adminstrative fee for this work. The MOU between the charter school and District for other services then attempts to establish a revenue neutral agreement so the District and the charter school are not impacted. That is the theory, in reality I believe sides (AUSD & ACLC) believe there are still inequities.

]]> By: John Knox White http://www.johnknoxwhite.com/2007/12/21/deep-in-the-heart-of-texas/#comment-323 John Knox White Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:01:54 +0000 http://johnknoxwhite.com/?p=265#comment-323 "The stars at night, are big and bright" “The stars at night, are big and bright”

]]> By: Jack B. http://www.johnknoxwhite.com/2007/12/21/deep-in-the-heart-of-texas/#comment-322 Jack B. Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:47:25 +0000 http://johnknoxwhite.com/?p=265#comment-322 One more question John.... why the title of this post? One more question John…. why the title of this post?

]]> By: Jack B. http://www.johnknoxwhite.com/2007/12/21/deep-in-the-heart-of-texas/#comment-321 Jack B. Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:37:55 +0000 http://johnknoxwhite.com/?p=265#comment-321 John, thanks for your post. The discussion has gotten so lively that I'm probably confusing some points... my cure cancer remark was more of an ideological response to Mark I than specifically about the charter school. Late night for me too. John, thanks for your post. The discussion has gotten so lively that I’m probably confusing some points… my cure cancer remark was more of an ideological response to Mark I than specifically about the charter school. Late night for me too.

]]> By: John Knox White http://www.johnknoxwhite.com/2007/12/21/deep-in-the-heart-of-texas/#comment-320 John Knox White Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:18:36 +0000 http://johnknoxwhite.com/?p=265#comment-320 jack, I'm not sure I mentioned or argued anything about privilege or self-motivation. I was solely commenting on something that I saw happening in my own thoughts, which was that somehow ACLC was a program for the bright kids of AUSD, when in fact it's a program for parents looking for a different type of educational experience for their kids (be they bright, self-motivated, or whatever). My experience in AUSD at Edison is that Self-motivated children are encouraged to be so and to go above and beyond the "average" but I also think that the ACLC model is a good one for students who respond to that type of environment. that said, it seems to be a model that is not necessarily raising the academic bar for those who may cure cancer, but instead by levelling the field in a positive way by allowing children of different temperments (bad choice of words, hopefully you know what I mean) to achieve the best that they can achieve. I wrote about it, because I think that this is the exact opposite of what it was being described as (a program for super-smart kids to excel beyond what they could achieve at AHS or EHS and the rest of AUSD). It started off as a comment on Lauren's site, became so long that it seemed ridiculous to post there, and I was literally only commenting on one tiny aspect of the overall discussion. (and I'm sorry, I didn't mean to just pick on your posts, I just ran out of time to link to a broader span of posters, the two I chose were right next to each other). I think the conversation is good, I have enjoyed all sides, I just think that it started heading somewhere not based in what's being proposed. There is a serious discussion to be had about curriculum and catering to both under-achieving and over-achieving kids and how to do that. I'm just not sure that the ACLC proposal is a part of it. jack,

I’m not sure I mentioned or argued anything about privilege or self-motivation. I was solely commenting on something that I saw happening in my own thoughts, which was that somehow ACLC was a program for the bright kids of AUSD, when in fact it’s a program for parents looking for a different type of educational experience for their kids (be they bright, self-motivated, or whatever).

My experience in AUSD at Edison is that Self-motivated children are encouraged to be so and to go above and beyond the “average” but I also think that the ACLC model is a good one for students who respond to that type of environment. that said, it seems to be a model that is not necessarily raising the academic bar for those who may cure cancer, but instead by levelling the field in a positive way by allowing children of different temperments (bad choice of words, hopefully you know what I mean) to achieve the best that they can achieve. I wrote about it, because I think that this is the exact opposite of what it was being described as (a program for super-smart kids to excel beyond what they could achieve at AHS or EHS and the rest of AUSD).

It started off as a comment on Lauren’s site, became so long that it seemed ridiculous to post there, and I was literally only commenting on one tiny aspect of the overall discussion. (and I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to just pick on your posts, I just ran out of time to link to a broader span of posters, the two I chose were right next to each other). I think the conversation is good, I have enjoyed all sides, I just think that it started heading somewhere not based in what’s being proposed.

There is a serious discussion to be had about curriculum and catering to both under-achieving and over-achieving kids and how to do that. I’m just not sure that the ACLC proposal is a part of it.

]]> By: Mark I http://www.johnknoxwhite.com/2007/12/21/deep-in-the-heart-of-texas/#comment-319 Mark I Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:09:36 +0000 http://johnknoxwhite.com/?p=265#comment-319 Dave, The out right subsidy I mentioned previously on Lauren's blog from AUSD to ACLC lasted ten years but is no longer in effect, but if you read the post by Barbara Mooney there yesterday you get a whole list of inequities. If a kid goes to ACLC, AUSD doesn't get any funding, ACLC gets it all and the district has to administer the funds to ACLC at a cost. But there are also three kinds of funding for charters including in district, which ACLC currently is, and not in district which the new charter proposes to be. I believe the AUSD takes a bigger hit in the latter, but this is where I am fall down on the job. I don't retain these details well because I barely comprehend them when I hear them. I hope JKW will put a finer point on his statement. Kiriwin pointed out that while B.O.E. meetings are telecast the tapes are not posted on the city web site. Two board meetings ago there was a very thorough presentation on charter school law which I watched most of live. Nobody should think they know enough until they at least give that tape a cursory review. It should be made widely available. Dave,

The out right subsidy I mentioned previously on Lauren’s blog from AUSD to ACLC lasted ten years but is no longer in effect, but if you read the post by Barbara Mooney there yesterday you get a whole list of inequities. If a kid goes to ACLC, AUSD doesn’t get any funding, ACLC gets it all and the district has to administer the funds to ACLC at a cost. But there are also three kinds of funding for charters including in district, which ACLC currently is, and not in district which the new charter proposes to be. I believe the AUSD takes a bigger hit in the latter, but this is where I am fall down on the job. I don’t retain these details well because I barely comprehend them when I hear them. I hope JKW will put a finer point on his statement.

Kiriwin pointed out that while B.O.E. meetings are telecast the tapes are not posted on the city web site. Two board meetings ago there was a very thorough presentation on charter school law which I watched most of live. Nobody should think they know enough until they at least give that tape a cursory review. It should be made widely available.

]]> By: John Knox White http://www.johnknoxwhite.com/2007/12/21/deep-in-the-heart-of-texas/#comment-318 John Knox White Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:08:17 +0000 http://johnknoxwhite.com/?p=265#comment-318 Dave - Whereas kids who drop out for private school result in AUSD losing the funding that AUSD receives from the District's Base Revenue Limit(BRL), state law requires districts to fund charter schools at the State Average BRL for each student that attends. As AUSD's BRL is lower than the State Average, each student attending a charter school results in AUSD losing the BRL for that student PLUS paying the charter the difference between the State Average and the District BRL. Dave – Whereas kids who drop out for private school result in AUSD losing the funding that AUSD receives from the District’s Base Revenue Limit(BRL), state law requires districts to fund charter schools at the State Average BRL for each student that attends. As AUSD’s BRL is lower than the State Average, each student attending a charter school results in AUSD losing the BRL for that student PLUS paying the charter the difference between the State Average and the District BRL.

]]> By: Jack B. http://www.johnknoxwhite.com/2007/12/21/deep-in-the-heart-of-texas/#comment-326 Jack B. Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:50:52 +0000 http://johnknoxwhite.com/?p=265#comment-326 John, maybe it was very early in the morning for you... but you seem to be cherry-picking some comments while not following the context of the thread. Maybe you can explain how the charter school kids are "privileged" for being self-motivated? John, maybe it was very early in the morning for you… but you seem to be cherry-picking some comments while not following the context of the thread. Maybe you can explain how the charter school kids are “privileged” for being self-motivated?

]]> By: dave http://www.johnknoxwhite.com/2007/12/21/deep-in-the-heart-of-texas/#comment-325 dave Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:12:28 +0000 http://johnknoxwhite.com/?p=265#comment-325 Splain this please: Right now, every student that heads to ACLC jr. costs the district more than if the kid just headed to private school. Totally unfair (yes), but that’s a fact. ------------------------------- If the kids goes to a private school, the district gets zip. If the kid goes to ACLC, the district gets state funding. The way I understand it, ACLC IS part of AUSD, just separately managed, an opearting subsidiary, if you will. Your post indicates the opposite. Which of us is correct? Splain this please:

Right now, every student that heads to ACLC jr. costs the district more than if the kid just headed to private school. Totally unfair (yes), but that’s a fact.

——————————-

If the kids goes to a private school, the district gets zip. If the kid goes to ACLC, the district gets state funding. The way I understand it, ACLC IS part of AUSD, just separately managed, an opearting subsidiary, if you will.
Your post indicates the opposite. Which of us is correct?

]]>