ellyssian: (Default)
[personal profile] ellyssian
Just got off the phone with the state contact for Project 720 and received some clarifications:

1) Some exclusions are based on the definitions of "school entity" within the scope of the various legislation. If cyber charter schools are not defined as a school entity for a particular piece of legislation, then it does not apply to them.

Some of the legislation I looked at the other night does include charter schools and cyber charter schools as school entities. Apparently, this is not the case with Project 720.

2) Dual Enrollment is a statutory program; it is not the same as Project 720.

3) Project 720 is a collection of high school initiatives. It is an administration initiative.

4) Brick & mortar charter school students are not explicitly included in the definition of "school entity" that is impacting us here, however, because they can take advantage of the public school busing of the district of residence of the student, they apparently can still get into the dual enrollment situation.

So.

In summary, a lot more information, and a lot for me to look up and research. It seems to me the job to do would be to find these places where cyber charter schools are not considered school entities and get that changed.

There is some feeling that perhaps this decision came not so much from a sudden change in the PDE for ordering them to stop, but rather from the attorneys of the cyber school advising them to stop.

There was no clear cut answer on why cyber schools were excluded - just information that, in fact, they are technically excluded.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-02-20 04:19 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] patrixa.livejournal.com
Something sounds fishy to me. If the cyber school is functioning as a school, has been for some time, and is accepted by the DoE (i.e., student grades, curriculum, state tests etc) then I do believe it constitutes a school entity whether formally designated or not. I believe this is something the state justice dept can clarify. Check out the info with a college law program from, say Lehigh?.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-02-20 04:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ellyssian.livejournal.com
That would be the argument needed to change a law, but it would not automatically be part of it.

If the law explicitly states that "for this portion of the law cola is defined as Coca-Cola and Dr. Pepper" then Pepsi would be SOL. They could attempt to get Pepsi included in the definition, but they wouldn't be included under it until they did so.

Profile

ellyssian: (Default)
Mina Ellyse

November 2024

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags