Chawanakee Unified and Yosemite Unified are going to court over a new charter school based on the campus of new $75 million dollar Minaret High School.  The battle is over the distribution of educational funds that support the students which attend their campuses.  Charter school typically divert state monies from tradition school districts to run their academic programs, pay faculty and staff and to operate their campuses.  As the state continues to cut educational support battles over funding with intensify between districts and charter schools.  Currently Yosemite Unified has stopped approving transfers to Minarets High school and is seeking a court judgement to prevent the opening of the new charter school in 2011-2012. 

On one side Yosemite school officials say the new charter school will have a negative effect on their financial budgets and may destablize them.  For each student that transfers from Yosemite Unified to Chawanakee or Minaret High, Yosemite Unified will lose state educational funding.  This will leave less money to support the remaining students, teachers, administrators and their academic and sport programs.

On the other side Minaret High School leaders say that they are offering students a new way to achieve academic success as charter schools ought to be designed to do.  Administrators believe that their attendance rates are higher than the State of California, the county or national average because students enjoy going to scool and classes much more at Minarets.  School officials believe that this is in part due to their academic programs.  At Minaret students focus on project based learning to be better prepared for their future careers, professions and jobs.  Minaret High Schol also focuses on four main principals to connect students with academic success: Relationships, Rigor, Revelance and Engagement. 

For me both sides have valids points and concerns.  Traditional schools believe that they cannot offer students a quality education if the state cuts funding and charter schools divert funding.  With less money as a result of state reductions and new charter schools the traditional schools will have fewer resources for their remaining students and may lead to a negative impact on their learning. 

Charter schools and their supports will point to trending lower test scores, attendance rates and other failures as a reason for acceptance of charter schools.  They will say that even when there were no charter schools competing for funds the traditional schools were failing to educate students and so charter schools should now be allowed to help students succeed.  Charter schools supportors will point to the greater agility of charter schools when compared to tradition schools.  Charter schools can alter their academic plans, staffing levels and budgets more quickly and more effectively.

I wonder how the courts will rule on the case.