Public commenters press Berkeley County school board on teacher pay, testing and hiring practices

Berkeley County School District board members heard consecutive public comments at their April 20 meeting that put teacher pay, contractual transparency, testing practices and hiring ethics at the center of community concern.

William Everett told the board the district’s $20‑per‑day payout for unused leave at retirement creates a perverse incentive to use leave during the year and then ‘‘burn’’ leave before retiring. ‘‘You’re paying the daily rate anyway plus substitute pay,’’ Everett said, urging the board to consider paying up to a full daily rate on unused leave to both reward employees and potentially reduce substitute costs.

Sarah Khalil, Berkeley County Education Association parent liaison, argued that heavy curriculum standardization has turned classrooms into ‘‘assembly lines’’ for test scores. ‘‘When curriculum is tightly scripted and tied to a textbook, teachers lose the ability to respond to the unique needs of their students,’’ Khalil said, urging the district to restore teacher autonomy, arts integration and exploratory learning.

Kat Lowe, president of the Berkeley County Education Association, criticized the district’s contract process and timing. Lowe said teachers often must accept a binding 190‑day contract ‘‘sight unseen’’ and called the document ‘‘a contract of adhesion’’ that leaves expectations vague. ‘‘If you want to show respect, give an adult contract to the adults that are working their butts off for you,’’ she said.

Lindsey Drago raised both effectiveness and data‑privacy concerns about the iReady diagnostic tool the district uses. Citing recent reviews, Drago said she found ‘‘zero randomized controlled trials’’ establishing iReady’s impact, that independent research shows minimal effects, and that a December 2025 class‑action suit alleges the vendor collects and shares sensitive student data without direct parental consent. She asked the office of curriculum and instruction to explain what steps it will take to protect student data and whether mandatory use of the tool remains justified.

Amanda Hebel accused the district of favoring connected candidates in several recent hires, naming specific relationships she said undercut public trust. ‘‘Legal does not equal ethical,’’ Hebel said, asking the board to address perceptions of favoritism and to increase transparency in hiring processes.

The board did not take action on public comments at the meeting; chair Wofford reminded attendees that public statements are heard but not acted on immediately and urged district staff to follow up where appropriate. The superintendent and board members acknowledged the concerns during later portions of the meeting and moved on to scheduled agenda business.