Blythewood Online 691

Category: Schools

  • BHS student published in academic journal

    BLYTHEWOOD – Blythewood High School Junior Abhimanyu Sailesh will present two papers at the prestigious peer-reviewed 2018 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI’18) to be held in Las Vegas, Dec. 13 – 15.

    The IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering) Journal, which will publish Sailesh’s papers in the fall of 2019, describes itself as the most reputed world-wide academic publication in the fields of computer science, electrical and electronic engineering.

    Sailesh’s two papers, “Comparison of two image enhancement techniques: Histogram Equalization and Gamma Method” and “High Frequency Emphasis Filter Instead of Homomorphic Filter”, were written in collaboration with Dr. Naima Naheed and two other undergraduate senior students in the department of Computer Science, Physics, and Engineering at Benedict College.

    “My papers getting published is a great achievement because I spent the entire summer working on it,” Sailesh said. “I believe it opens a lot of opportunities for me because I have gotten it published in an adult scientific journal, and I can present it at various conferences.”

    Sailesh has won numerous academic competitions and honors at BHS. He and fellow student Samuel Cathart were recognized at the State Fair last year for winning the IT-ology Innovation Challenge as the state’s top student innovators.

    Sailesh and Cathart created a portable element synthesizer that runs on solar and or water power and can be used for tasks such as charging cell phones. The project was a class assignment, but students were encouraged to submit their results to the IT-ology Innovation Challenge.

    Sailesh also finished as runner-up in the 2017 South Carolina State History Bee as well as the Bowl Championships at North Greenville University in February. Sailesh accomplished these fetes as a one-member team competing against four-member teams.

  • BHS in top 20% of SC SAT test takers

    BLYTHEWOOD – While Blythewood High School seniors taking the SAT hovered just below the state average, the school ranked near the top in the number of test takers.

    Blythewood High placed in the top 20 statewide at 71.1 percent, ranking 16th out of 230 schools, with 335 of 471 seniors taking the test, according to S.C. Department of Education figures released last week.

    Other Richland 2 schools reported high percentages, ranging between 46 and 56 percent tested.

    “Students in the Class of 2018 and their parents decided whether or not to take the SAT,” Richland 2 spokeswoman Libby Roof said via email. “We don’t have any data that would indicate why a greater percentage of students in one school chose to take the SAT than in another school.”

    Blythewood seniors averaged 1,048, scoring a point shy of the state average. The school also shed 10 points from last year’s tally of 1,058, data shows

    Blythewood’s tally this year was the second highest in Richland 2. Spring Valley High School led the district at 1,098.

    Westwood High, meantime, struggled. The school averaged 970, creeping up four points from 966 last year.

    “As the district’s total score is below the state average, we recognize there is room for growth and are committed to helping our students better prepare for this assessment,” Roof said. “That being said, these assessments don’t provide teachers with the standard or strand-level results that are needed to make informed instructional decisions.”

    Slightly less than half – 168 of 342, or 49.1 percent – of seniors took the test, data shows.

    “We avoid using SAT scores as a measure to compare our schools to each other,” Roof said. “The SAT is designed to gauge a student’s readiness to perform college level work. It is used by colleges and universities to compare the academic readiness of students and to make admission decisions.”

    In tabulating SAT data, the Department of Education counted individual students only once, regardless of how many times they took the test. The most recent score was counted, figures show.

    Accurate data comparisons to 2016 and before were not possible because the College Board, which administers the test, changed the format in 2017.

    In 2017, the College Board, which administers the SAT, revised the test to score in two critical areas – evidence-based reading and writing, or ERW, and math, according to the Department of Education website.

    The ERW portion replaced the English/Language Arts and Writing sections, which gave the SAT three components, the website states.

    The test became a two-part test in 2017, broken down into Evidence-based Reading and Writing and Math.

    While Richland 2 saw high percentages of test takers, the number of Fairfield County seniors taking the SAT continued to sag.

    Only one in five Fairfield County seniors took the SAT in 2018, and those who did take the test averaged more than 80 points below the state average.

    Fairfield Central High School climbed from 922 to 983, with 41 of 198 seniors – or 20.7 percent – taking the test, about the same as last year, state data shows.

    Fairfield’s performance still fell 81 points behind the state average of 1,064. The national average was 1,049.

    Dr. J.R. Green, district superintendent, couldn’t be reached for comment Tuesday.

    In a prior interview with The Voice about the impact of per pupil revenues on student achievement, Green said that rural districts like Fairfield, where poverty tends to be high, tend to struggle academically.

    He also noted student achievement is measured in more ways than how students score on standardized tests.

    “The reality is there are students who can be successful, but not at a four-year institution,” Green told The Voice. “It doesn’t mean these kids aren’t sufficient. Poverty has an adverse effect on a kids’ ability to be successful academically.”

  • FCHS gains 60 points on SAT, lags behind SC

    WINNSBORO — Fairfield Central High School saw a noticeable increase from 2017 in its SAT results, leaping more than 60 points, according to figures released last week by the S.C. Department of Education.

    Only one in five Fairfield County seniors, however, took the SAT in 2018, and those who did take the test averaged more than 80 points below the state average.

    In 2018, Fairfield’s average SAT score rose from 922 to 983. Forty-one of 198 seniors, or 20.7 percent, took the test, about the same as last year, state data shows.

    Fairfield’s performance still fell 81 points behind the state average of 1,064. The national average was 1,049.

    Dr. J.R. Green, district superintendent, couldn’t be reached for comment Tuesday.

    In a prior interview with The Voice about the impact of per pupil revenues on student achievement, Green said that rural districts like Fairfield, where poverty tends to be high, tend to struggle academically.

    He also noted student achievement is measured in more ways than how students score on standardized tests.

    “The reality is there are students who can be successful, but not at a four-year institution,” Green told The Voice. “It doesn’t mean these kids aren’t sufficient. Poverty has an adverse affect on a kids’ ability to be successful academically.”

    Fifteen miles away at Blythewood High School, students averaged 1,048, scoring a point shy of the state average, but also shedding 10 points from last year’s school tally of 1,058.

    Blythewood’s tally this year was the second highest in Richland 2. Spring Valley High School led the district at 1,098.

    At nearby Westwood High School, seniors averaged 970, creeping up four points from 966 last year, state data shows.

    “As the district’s total score is below the state average, we recognize there is room for growth and are committed to helping our students better prepare for this assessment,” district spokeswoman Libby Roof said via email.

    Roof said schools plan to use test results to assist in instructional planning.

    “That being said, these assessments don’t provide teachers with the standard or strand-level results that are needed to make informed instructional decisions,” she said.

    “Additionally, we avoid using SAT scores as a measure to compare our schools to each other,” Roof continued. “The SAT is designed to gauge a student’s readiness to perform college level work. It is used by colleges and universities to compare the academic readiness of students and to make admission decisions.”

    In one statistic of note, a large percentage of Blythewood seniors took the SAT.

    Blythewood High placed in the top 20 statewide at 71.1 percent, ranking 16th out of 230 schools, with 335 of 471 seniors taking the test, figures show.

    “Students in the Class of 2018 and their parents decided whether or not to take the SAT,” Roof said. “We don’t have any data that would indicate why a greater percentage of students in one school chose to take the SAT than in another school.”

    In tabulating SAT data, the Department of Education counted individual students only once, regardless of how many times they took the test. The most recent score was counted, figures show.

    Accurate data comparisons to 2016 and before were not possible because the College Board, which administers the test, changed the format in 2017.

    In 2017, the College Board, which administers the SAT, revised the test to score in two critical areas – evidence-based reading and writing, or ERW, and math, according to the Department of Education website.

    The ERW portion replaced the English/Language Arts and Writing sections, which gave the SAT three components, the website states.

    The test became a two-part test in 2017, broken down into Evidence-based Reading and Writing and Math.

    In 2016, Fairfield averaged 1,306 on the three-part test while the state averaged 1,484.

  • Rent cost, no contract muddle ‘village’

    WINNSBORO – Taxpayer money, not previously mentioned by the Fairfield County School District Foundation, will help subsidize a ‘teacher village,’ a proposed residential development intended to attract and retain teachers in the District, should the plan move forward.

    Under questioning by Council members, Foundation and District officials also confirmed that they do not yet have a contract, executed or proposed, with the village investor. That did not sit well with some Council members who are being asked to approve a multi-county park agreement as well as a seven-year tax refund benefiting the investor.

    In multiple public and private pitches, Superintendent Dr. J. R. Green and Fairfield School District Education Foundation Chairman Sue Rex have said first priority for the housing would go to teachers, who would pay between $600 – $900 a month to rent the homes, which are between 1,200 and 1,600 square feet.

    District office staff, followed by first responders, could also be allowed to live in the community. After that, others in the community could be accepted as renters.

    During County Council questioning on Monday night, however, it was learned that actual rental fees would range from $900 – $1,300, not $600 – $900 a month.

    “I’m interested in how you plan to rent these houses for no more than $600 to $900 a month. It seems low for what the tenants would be getting based on the square footage,” Councilman Jimmy Ray Douglas said.

    “How will the houses be rented for rates this low?” Douglas asked. “Is it possible the school district will be subsidizing the rental fees?”

    Green answered in the affirmative. He said a proviso in the state budget includes funds that school districts can use to recruit teachers. The district would have the ability, Green said, to subsidize each home up to $300 per month, for a total of $108,000 of District subsidies each year.

    “We plan to utilize our funding to help reduce the rental rates,” Green said. “We will be supplementing those rates with that retention and recruitment funding. They are looking for a school district to do some innovative things with those funds.”

    State lawmakers inserted the proviso that Green referenced into the 2016 state budget, with funding going to the S.C. Center for Educator Recruitment, Retention & Advancement, or CERRA, legislative records show.

    CERRA received $1.5 million in 2016. Since then, the appropriation has zoomed to $9.5 million in 2017 and 2018, according to CERRA’s 2017-2018 annual report.

    Per the proviso, CERRA’s job is to help districts with teacher turnover of 11 percent or more over the past 5 years to boost teacher recruitment and retention. Fairfield County is among those districts.

    In 2017-2018, CERRA spent $12.97 million on its teacher recruitment program, accounting for a majority of its $18.95 million in total expenditures, its annual report states. Fairfield County School District received the third highest allotment, totaling close to $738,000, of all districts drawing from the fund.

    Council Chairman Billy Smith asked Green if the proviso money is permanent or if it might not be continued in the future, citing the State Legislature’s budgeting discretion. Green suggested the proviso could be built into the state budget after, perhaps, three or four years, but that is no guarantee.

    Council member response to the teacher village varied during Monday night’s meeting.

    Councilman Douglas Pauley asked several questions, including whether teachers living elsewhere in the county would receive the $300 rent subsidy as well. Green said they would not.

    Pauley also asked about whether the district has looked at other builders or financiers.

    Green said they had not. He also said Gorelick is willing to cover the $3.6 million in construction costs, and had the ability to choose the builder on their own.

    Green went on to repeat a district talking point that, in addition to recruiting teachers, the village would spur economic development.

    Green said Fairfield was the first District to be implementing this kind of teacher housing project and he wanted to have it ready to go by the start of the 2019 school year. He said other districts are beginning to look into doing something similar.

    While council members generally praised the District for thinking creatively about ways to recruit and retain teachers, Smith stated that Council would need more documentation and specifics about the project before taking any votes.

    As proposed, the Fairfield County “teacher village” would be built on 11 acres of land the district owns behind the district office off U.S. 321 Bypass in Winnsboro. There are tentative plans for a second phase on the other 11 acres.

    Rex, the foundation’s director, emphasized that the multi-county business park must be approved by the County to move the project forward.

    “We want to put together a template that works so beautifully that the school district, foundation, the county council, the private investors can work together to put this project into place and make it successful,” Rex said.

    Before moving forward, the district also must seek approval from the Town of Winnsboro to rezone the teacher village property, a process that could take up to six weeks.

    Councilman Dan Ruff said he’s encouraged by the teacher village’s possibilities.

    “I want to commend you and the foundation for your creative thinking in this process,” Ruff said. “I think it is fantastic and I hope it works out.”

  • Richland 2 discipline issues increase

    Blythewood – While in-school suspensions are generally trending downward in Richland 2, the opposite is true of out-of-school suspensions and expulsions, including at Blythewood area schools.

    Both Blythewood area high schools and all three middle schools reported increases, as did one elementary school, according to online state report cards published by the S.C. Department of Education.

    That’s consistent with data recently presented to the Richland 2 Board of Education. On Sept. 25, district staff said in-school suspensions (ISS) have been plummeting, but out-of-school suspensions (OSS) and expulsions are trending upward.

    “Each year, we are well under 1 percent of students that actually get expelled,” said Cleveland Smith, the district’s chief administrative officer. “Even though last year’s numbers were up, which were 0.37 percent, its still less than 1 percent.”

    Smith noted that increasing enrollment year to year has helped offset percentage increases in suspensions and expulsions.

    “99.63 percent of our students never got to that point,” he said. “In any year, 99 percent of students are not at that level of expulsion.”

    There are some key differences in how the state and district data were measured, however.

    State report cards only report OSS and expulsion data “for violent and/or criminal offenses,” according to the Department of Education website.

    District data presented on Sept. 25 included all suspensions and expulsions, regardless of the reason. The district’s data also included ISS figures, which are not listed on the state report cards.

    In the report, delivered during the Sept. 25 board meeting, district staff said out-of-school suspensions rose from 2,380 in 2016 to 2,462 last year. Expulsions increased from 52 to 102, district data shows.

    In-school suspensions dropped from 1,850 to 1,617. They had been as high as 2,382, the data shows.

    School district data, though, is likely higher. In tabulating suspension and expulsion data, the district counted by the student. If one student was suspended multiple times, the district counted it as only one suspension, Smith said.

    Dr. Monica Elkins-Johnson, the board’s vice-chair, questioned the methodology.

    “You indicated that the students, if they served in in-school suspension six or seven times, they’re only counted once,” Elkins-Johnson said. “Walk me thru that. I’m trying to figure out how we’re having an accurate account if they’re only on the chart once. Is this an accurate reflection?”

    Smith said the district used “unduplicated” data in compiling suspension and expulsion figures. He pledged to provide a more detailed report showing the total number of actual suspensions and expulsions at a later date.

    According to state data, Blythewood High School out-of-school suspensions and expulsions involving violent and/or criminal offenses rose from 2.2 to 2.5 percent in the past two school years.

    The 2017 report card lists Blythewood High’s student population at 2,001 students, resulting in about 50 suspensions and expulsions. That’s about one suspension or expulsion every 3.6 days in a 180-day school year.

    Westwood High School reported an even higher percentage of suspensions and expulsions, rising from 2.2 to 4.1 percent.

    The 4.1 percent figure translates to at least 55 suspensions and expulsions, or about one suspension or expulsion every 3.3 days, according to the data.

    Muller Road Middle (0.8 percent), Blythewood Middle (1.7 percent) and Kelly Mill Middle (1.2 percent) saw increases as well, data shows.

    Lake Carolina Elementary suspensions and expulsions rose slightly, from 1 to 1.2 percent. The rate dropped from 0.6 to zero percent at Round Top Elementary.

    Bethel-Hanberry and Langford elementary schools didn’t report any suspensions or expulsions in 2016 or 2017, state data shows.

  • Board budgets $3.5M surplus

    BLAIR – As Fairfield County school leaders seek $600,000 in tax breaks for a developer of a proposed teacher housing development, the district committed to spending $3.5 million in anticipated surplus funds on facility needs and salaries.

    At its monthly meeting Tuesday, the Fairfield County Board of Trustees voted 5-2 to appropriate the funds, with $2.5 million going to facilities, while $1 million was earmarked for salaries, though pay increases won’t come until 2019-2020.

    Board members Annie McDaniel and Paula Hartman dissented.

    McDaniel, a frequent critic of employee pay, said she only opposed the motion because she thought the district isn’t doing enough to increase pay.

    “I am happy that we put some money for salaries, but I am a little disappointed that we still have some people making $13,000, $14,000 [a year],” McDaniel said. “Do we have any money in the budget for bonuses?”

    Dr. J.R. Green, district superintendent, said the budget includes enough money for $200 holiday bonuses for every employee, the same as last year.

    McDaniel thought the bonus should be higher, but only for lower paid employees. Her motion to amend the original motion to approve the $3.5 million called for a $500 bonus for every employee making less than $20,000. The motion died due to a lack of a second.

    Green said the $1 million would be placed into the general fund for the 2019-2020 budget. He said the district is preparing a “very substantial salary proposal” for next year, but didn’t disclose specifics.

    Setting aside $1 million now would provide some financial wiggle room when the time comes to implement the proposal, he said.

    “We are preparing for a very, very robust salary proposal,” Green said.

    “I understand robust, Dr. Green, but what about equity and fairness?” McDaniel responded. “$13,000? Come on, really?

    “I’m not sorry that I put it [the motion] on the floor,” McDaniel continued. “I’m sorry that you people don’t care about people who make $13,000.”

    Board secretary Sylvia Harrison said she’s not against higher bonuses, but thought bonuses should be uniform for all employees.

    “If you’re going to give it to some, I say give it to all,” Harrison said.

    Staff also recommended appropriating $2.5 million to the district’s capital projects fund to pay for various facility needs, according to board documents.

    Leading the laundry list of items was field turf at $615,000, followed by security upgrades at $300,000. The district also plans to spend $200,000 on each of the following projects: bathroom upgrades, computer and Chromebook replacements, and auditorium seating.

    Other facility needs listed in board documents included playground equipment and rubber mulch, fencing and a new scoreboard.

    In other business, the board received an update on the proposed “Teacher Village,” a proposal to build teacher housing on 22 acres behind the district off U.S. 321 Bypass in Winnsboro.

    Green said he wanted to clarify comments made during the September board meeting. He noted that $600,000 of the estimated $3.6 million price tag consists of tax abatements that would be awarded the developer.

    “The tax incentive will provide about $600,000 over a seven-year period,” Green said. “It’s not that the school district or the county needs to come up with money on the front end.”

    Fairfield County has not said whether or not it will agree to grant a tax abatement. School officials presented the teacher village proposal to a county subcommittee Monday, and also plan to address County Council on Monday, Oct. 22.

  • Teacher Village to cost $3.6M

    WINNSBORO – A housing project proposed by the Fairfield County school district aims to keep teachers – along with their salaries – within Fairfield County.

    But for the plan to move forward, school officials say the county must also pitch in with tax incentives.

    Dubbed a “teacher village,” the approximately $3.6 million project is designed to build at least 30 homes off U.S. 321 Bypass, on 22 acres behind the district administration building.

    The purpose is to attract and retain high quality teachers by providing housing that’s affordable and attractive, said Sue Rex, chairwoman of the Fairfield County Education Foundation.

    “We have a major teacher shortage in our state, and especially in the rural districts,” Rex said during a presentation at the Sept. 19 school board meeting. “It’s far to drive to the school districts, and there are not a lot of affordable, attractive housing arrangements available.”

    No votes were taken on the teacher village.

    According to the plan, an investment company would front $3 million of the required revenue. The remaining $600,000 would come from seven-year tax abatements requested of the school district and county.

    When asked why abating county taxes for a school district project is necessary, Superintendent Dr. J.R. Green noted the district doesn’t receive any tax revenues from fee in lieu of tax agreement the county creates to attract industry.

    It’s only fair, he said, that the county contribute.

    “The school district can’t do it all,” Green said. “It needs to be done in conjunction with the county.”

    Green said he’s spoken to several council members individually, and that they’re supportive of the idea. He declined to name them.

    In exchange for the investment firm providing capital, the school district would also deed the 22 acres to the developer. The land coupled with the tax abatements would be the school district’s only liabilities, Green said.

    Thirty homes would be built on half of the parcel, with 30 to 40 additional homes possible on the other 11 acres.

    If only half the property is developed, the undeveloped half would consist of nature trails and green space, Rex said.

    Should the plan moves forward, teachers would be given first priority in the village, where rent would range from $600 to $900 a month.

    District office staff would come next, followed potentially by Fairfield County first responders.

    Homes would feature two, three and four bedrooms, and be between 1,200 and 1,700 square feet, Green said.

    “We’re talking about granite countertops, we’re talking about wood floors,” he said. “We’re talking about very nice homes our staff would be very excited about living in. This takes it to another level.”

    Board members, including Henry Miller, were generally in favor of the teacher village. Miller said Fairfield County’s population has been stagnant for years, but thinks the village could be a catalyst for growth.

    “We have to step outside of the box. I ask, how can Lexington land all these different jobs? Its recruitment, it’s a competition,” Miller said. “Nobody is going to give you anything, you’ve got to go out and snatch it.”

    Board Chairman William Frick said other school districts are pursuing teacher villages, though he said Fairfield’s is the most ambitious.

    Frick noted that Dillon County is doing something similar with duplexes, while Allendale County is providing dorm spaces for teachers at USC Salkehatchie.

    “I’m not talking about fancy dorm rooms at [the University of South] Carolina. I’m talking about teeny, little twin beds, and they’re charging those people $500 a month and they’re filled,” Frick said of the USC Salkehatchie rooms.

    “Dillon County is investing in duplexes and they’re getting people there,” Frick continued. “I think it’s something a lot more school districts are going to get involved in.”

    Not every board member was sold, however.

    Board member Paula Hartman wanted to know what happens if homes aren’t built for educators as advertised.

    Frick and Green said language could be written into the deed in which the property would revert to the district if homes weren’t built, though Green acknowledged that solution isn’t a certainty.

    “That’s something that we would have to continue to negotiate,” Green said. “Once we transfer land, they understand what our motivations are, which are to provide housing for our staff members as well as first responders.”

    Frick viewed the project as a traditional economic development deal.

    “I think that’s how economic development works,” Frick said. “They draw up fee in lieu of [tax] agreements and tax abatements to draw people there. This is simply an economic development project, it appears, to me.”

    Hartman raised additional concerns about setting a precedent for future developers. She also worried the tax abatement would negatively impact the district and county.

    “There is a risk to the children because the money is not going to be there,” she said. “I don’t see how the school board can do that, or the county for that matter.”

    Green said aside from the 22 acres, the district has virtually nothing to lose.

    “Right now we aren’t collecting any taxes because there are no properties,” he said. “We are not foregoing anything that we are currently receiving.”

  • R2 bond discussion set for WHS

    BLYTHEWOOD – Another school bond referendum presentation will be held in Blythewood on Oct. 8 at 6 p.m. at Westwood High School, located at 180 Turkey Farm Road. Richland School District Two is inviting the community and media to learn more about the bond referendum at two upcoming information presentations.

    Two bond referendum questions will appear on the Nov. 6 ballot. One asks voters to approve the issuance of bonds not to exceed $468,406,000. Richland 2 School District is billing the referendum as a safety/security bond that will bring improvements at schools and for buses, improvements to academic learning spaces, additions and improvements to arts/athletic facilities and technology infrastructure improvements.

    Find information about the bond referendum at www.richland2.org/bond.

  • FCSD per pupil revenue highest in state

    WINNSBORO – There’s no apparent shortage of revenue flowing into the Fairfield County school district.

    A recent S.C. Department of Education report estimates the Fairfield school district is projected to receive $21,803 in per pupil revenues in 2017-2018, the highest in South Carolina.

    Clarendon 1 came second at $19,137, followed by Richland 1 ($18,791) and McCormick ($18,139). The state average was $13,214, according to the report.

    Fairfield revenues have steadily risen since 2013-2014, when they were $18,023 per pupil.

    In addition, more than 200 fewer students are enrolled today than four years ago. Per pupil revenue still rose despite enrollment that fell from 2,652 to 2,421, records show.

    Figures in the report are based on estimates that were current as of Sept. 6, 2017. They do not reflect bond revenues, which would exclude the district’s $20 million bond issue in 2013 to build a new career center.

    “Projections for FY 2016-17 and FY 2017-18 are estimates based upon recent and historical trends in local, state, and federal funding and are subject to revision,” the Department of Education website states.

    “These figures include revisions made since the adoption of the [2017] Appropriation Act,” the website continues. “Please note that pupil estimates are based on 135-day enrollment figures for K5-12 and do not include 4 year olds.”

    While year-to-year funding has consistently hit new plateaus in Fairfield, student achievement has not.

    The school district has reported generally favorable graduations rates of 90 percent or higher since 2015, greater than the 84.6 percent state average, according to Department of Education report card data.

    Between 2012 and 2014, the district averaged between 76.6 and 80.8 percent, trailing state averages at the time.

    Fairfield, however, substantially lags in the number of students seeking two- or four-year college degrees, data shows.

    In 2016, less than half (48.9 percent) of Fairfield graduates pursued post-secondary study, far behind the state average of 70.8, according to 2017 report cards, the most recent available.

    Fairfield’s college enrollment rate plunged to 37.2 percent in 2014, report card shows.

    District Superintendent Dr. J.R. Green said student success is measured in different ways.

    “It’s not as simple as saying if you spend a certain amount of money, you get a certain amount of results,” he said. “We’re investing in every way we can to move the achievement needle.

    “The reality is there are students who can be successful, but not at a four-year institution,” Green continued. “It doesn’t mean these kids aren’t sufficient. Poverty has an adverse affect on a kids’ ability to be successful academically.”

    The Department of Education report comes amid public criticism from one Fairfield County council member who recently questioned the amount of tax revenues the district receives.

    During the Sept. 10 council meeting, Councilman Jimmy Ray Douglas publicly stated from the dais that the district has improperly received more than $11 million in tax revenues, attributing the overages to inflated millage rates.

    Green has vociferously denied the district received any windfalls.

    He did, however, say per pupil revenues don’t paint a full picture of district revenue streams.

    Green said while Fairfield is a high-poverty county, the district is unique from other struggling South Carolina districts in that it receives substantial boost via the V.C. Summer nuclear plant.

    “We are exceptional in that we have a nuclear facility that funds $1 out of every $2 in support of our students. If the nuclear plant didn’t exist, we’d be in extremely poor shape.”

    Green said revenues pay not only for educational expenses, but also capital improvements and other non-instructional costs.

    He noted that some Fairfield per pupil revenues are actually spent in neighboring Chester County, per a Supreme Court ruling that requires the school district to pay about $3,542 in local funds for every student in the Mitford community who attends school in Chester County.

    The ruling impacts between 100 and 200 students.

    In 2018-2019, student transfers are expected to cost Fairfield County schools about $626,000, an increase of $74,150 over last year, according to district budget figures.

  • R2 Board extends Super’s contract

    COLUMBIA – On Tuesday, Sept. 18, 2018 the Richland School District Two Board of Trustees met to conduct the superintendent’s performance evaluation for Dr. Baron Davis.

    Davis, Superintendent for Richland School District Two,  was given an overall distinguished evaluation for the 2017-18 school year, his first year as superintendent of the district, by the School Board, it was announced at Tuesday evening’s school board meeting.

    Board Chair Amelia McKie also announced that the board approved a motion to extend Davis’ contract with the district by one year, to June 30, 2021, and to increase the contribution to his annual annuity by 2.5 percent effective Sept. 30, 2019.

    Board members assessed Davis’ performance in the areas of policy and governance; planning and assessment; instructional leadership; organizational management; communications and community relations; and professionalism.