Imagine Mableton Charter Petition in Jeopardy

None of the five charter school petitions on the Cobb County Board of Education’s agenda Wednesday will carry a positive recommendation into the board’s regular meeting June 23, if they make it to that meeting at all.

  was one of the four schools for which Superintendent Fred Sanderson recommended rejection of its charter renewal.

The meeting room was packed with sign-carrying children from the school, and  three of the four speakers during the public-comment session were supporters of the school.

The five-year-old Mableton school is seeking a two-year charter extension and, like its sister school in Smyrna, is considering breaking with Imagine Schools.

“I think the school is doing an outstanding job in educating students,” the Rev. Thaddeus Jones, a school parent, told the board. “It seems to me the kids are being punished for some perceived slights of the managing companies. That’s a travesty of justice. … As elected officials and as parents, we have a responsibility to make sure our kids are learning.”

Board of Education member David Morgan said the school has some financial and curriculum challenges.

When deciding the fate of charter renewals, Morgan said "Student achievement –that's a huge priority for any school."

As for the student achievement of Imagine Mableton, Morgan said, "I was hoping their performance would be better across the board."

However, many schools in South Cobb have high percentages of students earning scores on CRCT and ITBS below the district's average.

What Morgan said makes Imagine Mableton different is that as a charter, "you literally have a contract with the district of what you will attain," Morgan explained. "There are too many instances of that not manifesting itself."

Robert Benson, the assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction, offered a sample of the concerns about the school, including overstated estimates for enrollment growth and a curriculum that is not special except for the proposed adoption of the International Baccalaureate program. The IB organization has not accepted the school.

Benson did not have information at hand on the school’s academic results.

“If we remember why we’re here, which is to provide the best opportunity for our students, the least we could do is go by and visit,” said Artesius Miller, whose younger sister attends the school.

Imagine and the other petitioners did not see the school district’s reports on them until the meeting. Rather than ask them to respond on the spot, board Chairwoman Alison Bartlett promised the schools five minutes each to address the board at the June 23 meeting.

IIAM and , which has dropped “Imagine” from the start of its name as it severs its relationship with management company Imagine Schools, requested and were granted a 30-day delay in the consideration of their petitions for charter renewals.

IAS' petition for a five-year renewal was the only petition for which the administration didn’t have a recommendation.

The stated rationale for each recommendation was the same: “Several concerns exist including, but not limited to: accountability, financial planning, facility, and planned services to federally identified populations of students.”

Noting the similarity in the criticisms of all the petitions, Morgan and East Cobb board member Scott Sweeney suggested the school district do more to lay out the requirements upfront and to direct people to organizations such as the Georgia Charter Schools Association that could help them through the process.

The other petitions came from proposed schools: Foundation Charter School Inc. (Cobb Charter Academy), STEAM Academy of Cobb and Turning Point Charter Leadership Academy School of Excellence.

It is Foundation’s third consecutive year petitioning for a school. No one attended the meeting on behalf of the petition, so the board placed it on the consent agenda for rejection June 23.

STEAM, which also petitioned the , and Turning Point representatives will have a chance to speak that night, and their proposals are on the discussion agenda, albeit with negative recommendations.