Bill would expand charters to more adults in Indiana

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

More adults could have a chance to attend a charter school under a bill an Indiana Senate committee debated Wednesday.

Senate Bill 159, authored by Sen. Luke Kenley, R-Noblesville, would allow the creation of new adult high schools and create an appropriation for the charter schools so they don’t pull their funding from K-12 funds.

The Excel Center has nine adult charter schools in Anderson, Indianapolis, Kokomo, Lafayette and Richmond. It allows adults ages 18 and older who have dropped out of high school to obtain a high school diploma instead of a GED. The centers also offer daycare to help parents make it to their classes.

During an Education and Career Development Committee meeting, Kenley said the schools are “a very positive and promising activity” and “appear to be having a great deal of success.”

The existing bill requires that the hours of operation for the adult schools are flexible, that no more than 25 percent of schooling can be completed online. The schools must follow up with graduates to track their success outside of the program.

Scott Bess, an officer of Goodwill Education Initiatives Inc., told lawmakers about success stories from the Excel center, including a mother who graduated from the Anderson center and is a now full-time student at Indiana State University studying education. He said she planned to return to the Excel Center as a high school math instructor. Bess also highlighted the accomplishments of another graduate who is now working for Coca-Cola.

The demand for the schools, according to Bess, has been on the rise since the first center opened in August 2010 with 300 students. Bess said the numbers jumped to 3,000 by March 2011.

“These people wanted something additional,” Bess said.

A similar bill, House Bill 1028, is currently before lawmakers. However, Sally Sloan of the American Federation of Teachers, and John Barnes, director of Legislative Affairs for the Department of Education, believe the Senate bill is better because of the separate funding measures that ensure no money is withdrawn from K-12 funding, which was a concern with the House bill.

There was no opposition to SB 159 but committee chair, Sen. Dennis Kruse, R-Auburn, decided to amend the bill before presenting it for a vote next week.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.