Dorn Turns ALE Rules/Regs on their Head for Charter Schools
There are many contradictions between what OSPI tells regular districts about Alternative Learning Experiences (ALEs) versus what is being said that will be done for charter schools and ALE programs.
(I have repeatedly tried to get clarity on these issues from OSPI. I am now using the documentation they have at their website.)
There are two main issues.
Here's the first one via a legislative document reviewing ALEs (bold mine):
For ALE, the WSLP represents the student’s academic program. It describes the course or courses the student is taking, including the learning activities for each course—it defines the student’s full alternative learning experience. Therefore, for an ALE student, there is no basis for the district to pay for any courses, experiences, or services not included in the WSLP.
That pretty much says that the WSLP is the raison d'etre for an ALE. Now the RCW doesn't have a specific time by which there has to be an WSLP but anOSPI webinar from April 2013 makes it very clear that districts have to have this plan in place for all that follows.
As well, a "certificated teacher" has to approve the WSLP prior to the start date and monthly count date for enrollment.
Referencing the Superintendent's memo from Friday to districts about taking in these charter students via ALEs, the Superintendent seems to say, "WSLP? What WSLP? We don't need those" because, despite the fact that this ALE would have to start almost immediately in mid-December, the Superintendent gives these schools until FEBRUARY to get them filed.
So what is the ALE program without a WSLP? Almost makes it look like it's just a paper shield that the charters will have until the Legislature gets around to (possibly) funding them sometime in what? mid-late February?
From the webinar:
Teacher approval is a method of documenting that a certificated teacher Seattle Schools Community Forum: Dorn Turns ALE Rules/Regs on their Head for Charter Schools:
