[Joecooool418]

Last week, I played golf with one of the deans at The Villages Charter School in Middleton. We got to talking about what parents have to do to keep their kids enrolled there, and I couldn't believe some of what he told me.

For starters, at least one parent has to work for The Villages or one of the businesses that qualifies under their enrollment rules. If that parent quits, gets fired, or gets laid off, their kids immediately lose their eligibility to attend the school. He told me they typically give parents about a week to find another qualifying job before kicking the kids out. The school's official policy does allow parents to petition for more time, but there's no guarantee they'll get it.

He said he personally knew of situations where employers had taken advantage of workers with kids in the charter school because they knew those employees couldn't afford to lose their jobs.

Think about that. Your boss knows that if you quit or get fired, your kids could get kicked out of school. How much crap would you put up with at work if you knew your kids' education was on the line?

Then he told me about the parental involvement requirements. Parents have to put in 20 hours per student every school year doing volunteer work and other approved school activities. Have one kid in middle school and another in high school? That's 40 hours a year. And if you don't meet the requirement, your kids can lose their eligibility to attend.

Imagine buying a house in Middleton, getting your kids settled into school, making friends, getting to know their teachers, and then losing your job. Now, on top of worrying about paying the bills and finding another job, you've got to worry about your kids being forced out of school too.

I understand that charter schools have different rules, but this seems pretty ridiculous for a school that's funded by taxpayers.

Why should a kid's ability to stay in a public school depend on where their parents work? And how is it acceptable for a publicly funded school to operate this way?

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by Joecooool418

Last week, I played golf with one of the deans at The Villages Charter School in Middleton. We got to talking about what parents have to do to keep their kids enrolled there, and I couldn't believe some of what he told me.

For starters, at least one parent has to work for The Villages or one of the businesses that qualifies under their enrollment rules. If that parent quits, gets fired, or gets laid off, their kids immediately lose their eligibility to attend the school. He told me they typically give parents about a week to find another qualifying job before kicking the kids out. The school's official policy does allow parents to petition for more time, but there's no guarantee they'll get it.

He said he personally knew of situations where employers had taken advantage of workers with kids in the charter school because they knew those employees couldn't afford to lose their jobs.

Think about that. Your boss knows that if you quit or get fired, your kids could get kicked out of school. How much crap would you put up with at work if you knew your kids' education was on the line?

Then he told me about the parental involvement requirements. Parents have to put in 20 hours per student every school year doing volunteer work and other approved school activities. Have one kid in middle school and another in high school? That's 40 hours a year. And if you don't meet the requirement, your kids can lose their eligibility to attend.

Imagine buying a house in Middleton, getting your kids settled into school, making friends, getting to know their teachers, and then losing your job. Now, on top of worrying about paying the bills and finding another job, you've got to worry about your kids being forced out of school too.

I understand that charter schools have different rules, but this seems pretty ridiculous for a school that's funded by taxpayers.

Why should a kid's ability to stay in a public school depend on where their parents work? And how is it acceptable for a publicly funded school to operate this way?

No different than kids with parents in military. Or when family has to move for one reason or the other.

I thought charter school wasn’t public per se? But part of Florida public education system? Even though they get school taxes funds not any tom dick or harry can enroll? IMO charter schools suck a lot of school taxes from other districts that need money IMO the developers built charter school to keep certain level of employees and collect school taxes. Somebody making money from school tax dollars? Just look at football stadium good example, how many millions do think that costs and even old one at old charter school. IMO high schools don’t need Dallas cowboys stadium…

I too don’t understand why students in district can’t apply for charter school that takes Florida education funds?

I wonder when old high school will be turned into apartments and the old stadium replaced with nursing home?

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by Joecooool418

Last week, I played golf with one of the deans at The Villages Charter School in Middleton. We got to talking about what parents have to do to keep their kids enrolled there, and I couldn't believe some of what he told me.


I understand that charter schools have different rules, but this seems pretty ridiculous for a school that's funded by taxpayers.

Why should a kid's ability to stay in a public school depend on where their parents work? And how is it acceptable for a publicly funded school to operate this way?

That's what Charter schools are all about and nationwide, they seem to do a good job. It's an ingenuous system that helps make The Villages what it is.

If parents don't want to make the sacrifices necessary to keep their kids in the school, some other parent will.

[Babubhat]

It’s what a charter school is created for. The rest of the information is a irrelevant.

[jimhoward]

I would imagine the reason is that it is in the charter. I wonder if parents would support or oppose a change to the charter. On the one hand, they risk their kids getting kicked out of the best school in the area if they lose their job. On the other hand, they are not competing with every family in the area for the limited enrollment spots at the school.

People love exclusivity when they are included, but hate it when they are excluded.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by Topspinmo

No different than kids with parents in military. Or when family has to move for one reason or the other.

I thought charter school wasn’t public per se? But part of Florida public education system? Even though they get school taxes funds not any tom dick or harry can enroll? IMO charter schools suck a lot of school taxes from other districts that need money IMO the developers built charter school to keep certain level of employees and collect school taxes. Somebody making money from school tax dollars? Just look at football stadium good example, how many millions do think that costs and even old one at old charter school. IMO high schools don’t need Dallas cowboys stadium…

I too don’t understand why students in district can’t apply for charter school that takes Florida education funds?

I wonder when old high school will be turned into apartments and the old stadium replaced with nursing home?

I read somewhere that The Villages built the buildings other structures…….and then donated to the school.
I have no reference point to support this.

[Rainger99]

Apparently these workplace charter schools are rare.

The first one in Florida was the Ryder Elementary Charter School in Miami-Dade. It appears that it closed in 2008. The Villages Charter School also opened in 1999.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

One of the oldest "systems" of schools in the country are the Waldorf Schools. They were founded to provide education for employees of the Waldorf-Astoria Cigarette Factory in Germany, back in 1919. Some friends of mine went to one in California. Obviously the ones in the States aren't for employees of a cigarette factory in Germany, but that is how it was created and why. So the concept of employer-provided charter schools isn't new. It's just not common.

[thelegges]

Originally Posted by Joecooool418

Last week, I played golf with one of the deans at The Villages Charter School in Middleton. We got to talking about what parents have to do to keep their kids enrolled there, and I couldn't believe some of what he told me.

For starters, at least one parent has to work for The Villages or one of the businesses that qualifies under their enrollment rules. If that parent quits, gets fired, or gets laid off, their kids immediately lose their eligibility to attend the school. He told me they typically give parents about a week to find another qualifying job before kicking the kids out. The school's official policy does allow parents to petition for more time, but there's no guarantee they'll get it.

He said he personally knew of situations where employers had taken advantage of workers with kids in the charter school because they knew those employees couldn't afford to lose their jobs.

Think about that. Your boss knows that if you quit or get fired, your kids could get kicked out of school. How much crap would you put up with at work if you knew your kids' education was on the line?

Then he told me about the parental involvement requirements. Parents have to put in 20 hours per student every school year doing volunteer work and other approved school activities. Have one kid in middle school and another in high school? That's 40 hours a year. And if you don't meet the requirement, your kids can lose their eligibility to attend.

Imagine buying a house in Middleton, getting your kids settled into school, making friends, getting to know their teachers, and then losing your job. Now, on top of worrying about paying the bills and finding another job, you've got to worry about your kids being forced out of school too.

I understand that charter schools have different rules, but this seems pretty ridiculous for a school that's funded by taxpayers.

Why should a kid's ability to stay in a public school depend on where their parents work? And how is it acceptable for a publicly funded school to operate this way?

The same rules were in place in 2007, when we first arrived in TV. I am sure the policy’s started on opening of the Charter There’s no hidden agenda, rules always clear…..ability to attend TV Charter required a parent or guardian work for the developer, volunteer hours non negotiable.

On the positive side every parent understands the policies, with zero exceptions. Not much difference than the education many spend on private schools. With higher amounts of volunteer hours, potentially loss of education if rules were broken, and $$$ out of parents pockets unless scholarships were in place. And even those scholarships could be removed.