Sentences with phrase «explicitly state the charter»

Talking to Politics.co.uk last week, Cash said the Tories» attempt to blame Labour was unfair because David Cameron's then - shadow Cabinet had failed to back his campaign to explicitly state the charter of fundamental rights would not apply to UK law at the time.

Not exact matches

After months of aggressive advocacy explicitly aimed at protecting and growing the state's charter sector, the group sent out a report detailing test scores at some of New York City's worst district schools.

the intention is clear - to cover crimes both included in the Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal, Annex to the Agreement and other crimes not explicitly stated there.

Indeed, many charter school founders explicitly state that satisfying the educational needs of a target student group is central to their mission.

In Georgia, the agency that administers the state pre-k program explicitly allows charter schools to apply for pre-k funding, but the state charter office won't allow it.

The state's charter law does not say explicitly whether district - operated charters can exist, he explained.

Clearly, the takeaway message from the RAND study — as the authors explicitly state — is that students who transfer into charters in these cities attend schools with racial compositions that are similar to the TPS attended in the prior year.

Or conversely, are states and authorizers implicitly or explicitly deciding they do not need to hold charter schools accountable for equitable access and quality programs for students with disabilities?

It does not or can not change the very real fact that state law explicitly says charters are public schools.

If TPS is to become a State sanctioned authorizer, their attitude toward charter school suitors must be explicitly positive and open to new reforms.

Although this is explicitly permitted in ESSA statute (just as it was in NCLB), history suggests that without guidance from the US Department of Education, this policy can be overlooked or misinterpreted by states, and charter autonomy and accountability can suffer.

MPS will not provide financial support to charter schools that is not explicitly required by the state.

So far states with turnaround school districts are the only ones to explicitly reference charters as a turnaround strategy.

Unlike in California and most other states, many of Michigan's charter operators are for - profit providers; therefore, it is critical for Michigan's legislation to explicitly ban these providers.

Previously, New York charters risked losing federal funding if they used such preferences — even though state law explicitly permits the practice.

Five states, Florida, Louisiana, New Hampshire, Ohio and Texas, explicitly permit certain charter schools to screen applicants by academic performance.

Mead and Green recommend that state legislatures explicitly state in their laws that charter schools aim to «enhance equitable educational outcomes for all students, particularly those who have historically struggled,» and that «charter schools must comply with all federal laws.»

With a 4 - 3 ruling this week from its supreme court, Georgia has become the second state in which a state - level commission created explicitly to approve and oversee charter schools has been struck down by legal action...

Question: Is it true that although charter schools are not explicitly required by the state to submit a Single - School District (SSD) Plan (a Local Educational Agency (LEA) Plan + a Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA)-RRB-, a direct - funded charter school is required to submit an SSD Plan as it relates to qualifying for federal funding under NCLB (Title I / III / V, etc.)?

This is why the Charter of Fundamental Rights explicitly states that «[a] ny citizen of the Union, and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State, has a right of access to documents of the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union, whatever their medium» (article 42 Charter and 15 (3) TFEU).

An institutionally related foundation may, as explicitly stated in its charter, support the covered entity as well as other covered entities or health care providers in its community.

The SCC has solidified that shift with R. v. Grant now clearly stating that where the exclusion of evidence would bring the adminsitration of justice into disrepute, courts must balance this against the severity of the Charter breach with the judicial trend now explicitly favouring admission of evidence even where it is obtained unlawfully.