Are the charter schools reporting on their techniques that they hypothesize are working?

Any chance you could help me decipher this?  The enrollment dropped from 330 to 296 from the 2014-2015 to the 2015-2016 school year for this charter school (see links below).  How can I tell where those students went?  Did they move out of the district?  Did they go back to the neighborhood school?  If they transferred, did the money stay with the charter school?

This is just one example.  I know it would be anecdotal BUT what was the cause of the school performance grade increasing from a D to a B?  Was it merely kicking out the poor performing students or is the school using techniques that the neighborhood school could adopt?

That above link says that this school had 296 students as of October and rec’d a
2016-17 School Performance Grade: B
That above link says that this school had 296 students as of October and rec’d a
2015-16 School Performance Grade: B
That above link says that the same school had 330 as of that October and rec’d a
2014-15 School Performance Grade: D
Originally I thought the idea of charter schools was to experiment with various teaching techniques.  IF a innovative technique proved valuable, then could it be incorporated into the neighborhood schools?  Are the charter schools reporting on their techniques that they hypothesize are working?  IS the technique merely to kick out the poor performing kids?

Do Charter Schools have value to the school district?
I am bothered that the guest columnist doesn’t offer substantiation for the claims. Excerpts from above link which is a guest column by Simaran Bakshi — principal of Wayman Academy of the Arts:

[Where is the link to substantiate this claim?]  A comprehensive report from the Florida Department of Education found that charters produce better outcomes for students and are more successful at narrowing achievement gaps for minority students.

[Why didn’t she stay in the school system and help all the neighborhood schools?]After turning around a failing district-run elementary school, I moved to Wayman Academy. At a public charter school, I have more power to improve outcomes for families and engage teachers.

[What strict system does she mean? Has HB 7069 changed that?] I am proud that we have a strict system that holds charter schools accountable for their performance and finances.

[Where is the link?] Florida’s results on the 2017 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) assessments show we are the only state that significantly increased scores in grade 4 mathematics, grade 8 reading and grade 8 mathematics between 2015 and 2017.
End excerpts

The guest column by Simaran was in response to this article:
Quote  from that article:

A government watchdog group called Florida’s growing system of privately-run public charter schools wasteful and said it sometimes gives rise to self-dealing and profiteering.

A quote from this article :

May’s company, Newpoint Education Partners, operated charter schools in Escambia, Bay, Broward, Duval, Hillsborough and Pinellas counties. In Duval, that includes San Jose Academy and San Jose Preparatory High on Sunbeam Road.  Marcus May was sentenced to pay a $5 million fine for using charter schools to steer millions of dollars into his personal accounts.  May was also sentenced to 20 years in prison.

I wonder if Amendment 11 will help to stop this. Another quote from the Sept 17th article:

“Some public officials who decide education policy and their families are profiting personally from ownership and employment with the charter school industry, creating the appearance of a conflict of interest,” the study says. “Lax regulation of charter schools has created opportunities for financial mismanagement and criminal corruption. … Inasmuch as charter schools can be an inefficient and wasteful option for ‘school choice,’ the legislature should evaluate the appropriate amount of funding the state can afford to offer in educational choices to parents and students.”

Why is this? What is the attraction? Would the money be better spent by improving the neighborhood school? Another quote from article:

Statewide about 10 percent, or about 296,000 students of Florida’s 2.8 million children, attend 650 charter schools.

When for-profit charters close, the public money spent on lease payments and building improvements is lost, because the school district doesn’t own their buildings, the study said.  Florida charter schools received $346 million in capital outlay funds alone in 2016-17, surpassing what traditional schools received some years, the study said. That doesn’t include the hundreds of millions more charter schools receive for operations and management.

Since its start in 1998, the charter school industry has spent more than $13 million to influence state education policy in Florida through contributions to political campaigns, the study said. Since 2007, the industry spent another $8 million on legislative lobbying.

Links to two more articles about the Amendments that are on the Florida ballot

This is a link to Florida Tax Watch’s Voter Guide:

I am glad that they recommend YES on # 4 and # 11.

They recommend a yes on #2. I have run into a few people with rental property that want us to vote yes on #2. The LWV thinks this is better done via legislation so the LWV recommends a no on #2.

I agree with the Florida Tax Watch on their explanation for a no on #3. I voted no on #3. Quote from the Florida Tax Watch link:

Gambling has always been a contentious issue in Florida, as evidenced by the Legislature not being able to pass a gambling bill for several sessions. While the amendment would likely rule out casinos for the near future, public sentiment could change. And while the amendment would make the citizens’ initiative the exclusive method to bring casino gambling to the ballot, it must be remembered that the initiative process is the least transparent method to publicly vet proposed constitutional amendments. It is easy to envision a well-funded, pro-casino group getting enough signatures to bring a casino proposal to the ballot. This would still allow the special interests supporters want to keep out of the process to craft a proposal, but there would be no input or deliberation by the Legislature.

I agree with their explanation of what a NO vote would mean BUT I wish they had suggested a yes on #9. Quote from article:

Piece 1: There would be no constitutional safeguard against offshore drilling for oil and natural gas on lands beneath all state waters. Any legislative prohibition could easily be lifted.
Piece 2: Floridians will continue to be subjected to second-hand vapor when they attend movies or restaurants and other public places.

It seems nefarious to me that they are recommending a yes on #10. Why can’t a county decide if they want these positions elected or appointed? The voters in the county should decide. Vote NO on #10. Quote from article:

Eight charter counties (Brevard, Broward, Clay, Duval, Miami-Dade, Orange, Osceola, and Volusia) have changed the manner of selection of at least one of the five constitutional officers or restructured or abolished at least one of the five constitutional offices and transferred their duties to another county office. The ballot measure, if approved, would require these eight charter counties to amend their charters to: (1) reflect that sheriff, tax collector, property appraiser,
supervisor of elections, and clerk of circuit court be elected by the voters of that county,

Here is a link to another comprehensive description of the amendments:

I don’t disagree with their description of #11 but I wish they had made a stronger statement on why you need to vote YES on #11 like this article does:
I find the link’s explanation of amendment 6 inadequate. Here is a better explanation on why you need to vote NO on 6.  Around minute 45, they tell you why to vote no on #6:

I voted yes on 4,9,11,12 and 13.  I voted no on the rest.  IF you’re still on the fence, please let me try to convince you that I’m right.

Please repeal 776.032

I do hope that in the November 2018 election, Florida will turn the GOP controlled Florida Congress blue.   And I hope the new blue Florida Congress will make it a priority to overturn this law that was passed in 2017.

Here is the link to the bill that we want the new blue Florida Congress to repeal: 
When this law passed, defendants no longer had to present evidence to prove their claim of self-defense. That’s insane, isn’t it? This bill needs to be overturned.  This is a 2017 article before the law passed and was signed into law by Rick Scott:
You can check and see who voted yes on this awful bill at this link:
Quotes from this article:
The 2017 version of the “stand your ground” law shifts the burden of proof to the prosecution after the defendant has made a prima facie claim of justified use of force, and it requires that the state (prosecutors) meet this burden of proof with clear and convincing evidence,”