[an error occurred while processing this directive]

LATEST SUBMISSIONS

Moore op-ed self-serving

Saturday, April 21 at 12:01 AM

This Speakout has not been edited

By Kathy Strand, Fort Collins

Terrence Moore's recent editorial is long on his personal grievances, but short on facts that illustrate valid local and statewide concerns about charter schools. We are fortunate in Colorado that parents and taxpayers have strongly supported school choice. But those supporters have a right to expect public schools to meet their responsibilities in a manner that is accountable to their contracts, operationally transparent, and demonstrably fair to all parties. Under the current law, charter schools enjoy broad latitude and very little oversight, an unfortunate circumstance that has resulted in documented harm to students.

Moore's editorial seized upon Mike Merrifield's recent intemperate email in order to assail his own local Poudre School District. He accuses the district of using heavy-handed tactics against Ridgeview Classical charter school, where Moore currently serves as principal. But a look at Ridgeview's troubling history tells a different story. From Ridgeview's beginning almost six years ago, Poudre School District has received a litany of complaints from current and former Ridgeview parents, teachers, students, members of the governing board, and even one of the school's founders, all of whom have called for stricter oversight of Ridgeview's adherence to its charter. Complaints filed with Poudre School District about RCS have documented mistreatment of students and teachers, retribution against those who have asked questions or expressed concerns about school actions and/or policies, governance improprieties, and charter violations. Ridgeview has routinely responded to its critics with personal attacks on their motives rather than a principled and fact-based defense of its actions, policies or governance. Indeed, Moore himself has gone further, characterizing demands for accountability as an existential threat to the school itself.

Unfortunately, Poudre School District has been unable to address these ongoing complaints under the terms of the original charter contract. In his editorial, Moore makes the simplistic claim that "Ridgeview was treated to a grueling re-chartering process spearheaded by a notoriously anti-charter lawyer ..." But the facts are unambiguous, and they confirm that the district's actions were in fact a response to appeals from members of the community to address ongoing problems at the school.

Moore further makes the false claim that "...the school knew it had the option of seeking a charter though the state Charter School Institute, an option that at least allowed our teachers and parents to sleep at night during the months of unnecessary 'negotiations' ...". As Moore is no doubt aware, the deadline for applying to the Charter School Institute was long past before Ridgeview submitted its charter renewal application to Poudre School District.

Finally, Moore appears to be most dissatisfied with the new contract because it contains a new provision that closes a funding loophole that had permitted Ridgeview to retain full funding of students who left the school after October 1 of the academic year. But Moore neglects to mention his school's high attrition rate. That attrition rate makes it more than reasonable for Ridgeview's new contract to include a provision that proportional funding follow students who either enter or leave the school after the October 1 count. Long-time observers of Ridgeview were not surprised when the school filed a lawsuit against the district on this funding issue. They were even less surprised when the court dismissed the suit. They knew - and apparently the court agreed - that the new funding provisions will ensure that Ridgeview is more sensitive to its high turnover rate. In other words, they will be more accountable. It's as simple as that.

READER COMMENTS