|
|
| Education News Archive
Parents a Silver Lining for Schools as Great Recession Persists  In the midst of the worst recession in 70 years, everyone is worried about school quality. Schools across the nation are facing devastating cutbacks, threatening everything from teacher's aides to enrichment programs to classroom supplies. Is there any good news? A new GreatSchools/Harris Interactive national study suggests that there can be -- in the form of increased parent involvement. Nearly two in three parents, 64%, believe that, because of the recession, it is more important for them to volunteer at school now than before. The majority of parents, 53%, plan to volunteer at their children's school this year, up from 44% last year--a 20% increase. The trend is most pronounced among African American parents, 60% of whom plan to volunteer, a nearly threefold increase from the 23% who say they volunteered last year. Six months ago when addressing a joint session of Congress President Obama encouraged Americans to volunteer in their communities and declared that "responsibility for our children's education must begin at home." Parents, it appears, want to answer the president's call to action. But they face barriers. When asked about the main challenges they face to being more involved in their children's education, about half of parents, 49%, cited the lack of opportunities offered by schools or teachers. Now, more than ever, both parents and schools need to reinvent parent involvement, removing barriers and creating opportunities to tap into the power of parents. Schools need to reach out in multiple ways, yes with traditional back-to-school nights and parent-teacher conferences -- offered at times to accommodate working parents -- but they also need to take advantage of new ways to connect. With Broadband adoption at ever-increasing levels, schools should offer long and varied parent involvement menus on their websites from which parents can choose volunteer opportunities both in-school and at-home (prepping for classroom projects, doing community outreach, etc.). Schools should survey parent skills and passions and create opportunities to tap into them. Easily-accessible and clear learning standards and assessment information are more vital than ever to empower parents as partners in their children's learning. So much is in parents' hands: setting high expectations, building character traits for success, starting early with college and career planning. Instead of feeling bound by school-created opportunities, parents can do their part by recognizing their role as the drivers of their children's education. From specific actions such as reading at home and helping with homework to maintaining a general sense of accountability and expectations for achievement, parents hold the keys to their children's success. The majority of parents want to share their time, expertise and resources to support their children's education. Now we need to work together to make it happen. 
VolunteeringBy lending a hand on campus, parents can transform students and schools Hands On Sacramento New Poll Finds 20% Spike in Parents’ Plans to Volunteer in Classrooms This Year Amid Concerns Over Economy and Education
California threatened with loss of funds if it doesn't use test scores in evaluating teachersU.S. education secretary is expected to withhold millions of dollars in education stimulus money if the state doesn't comply with his demand. By Jason Felch and Jason Song
July 24, 2009
California could lose out on millions of federal education dollars unless legislators change a law that prevents it from using student test scores to measure teachers' performance, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is expected to announce in a speech today.
California has among the worst records of any state in collecting and using data to evaluate teachers and schools.
Moreover, a 2006 law that created a teacher database explicitly prohibited the use of student test scores to hold teachers accountable on a statewide basis, although it did not mention local districts.
Only a few of the state's nearly 1,000 districts evaluate teachers by using their students' scores, though a dozen more are considering such moves, according to state officials. Los Angeles Unified, the state's largest, does not grade teachers based on student performance.
Data-driven school reform is a major focus of the Obama administration's education policies.
Duncan, who has repeatedly chastised states with similar laws, plans to withhold some economic stimulus money from those states, according to an advance text of his speech to be given today at the U.S. Department of Education in Washington.
Money from the administration's Race to the Top fund, about $4.35 billion, is intended to help states boost reform efforts at a time when most are facing severe budget cutbacks.
That money, a fraction of the nearly $100 billion provided for education through the economic stimulus bill, will be granted competitively in large chunks to a few states.
In recent public appearances, Duncan singled out California's law as "ridiculous" and "mind-boggling," saying that it prevents the state from identifying which of the state's 300,000 teachers are effective and which are not.
"No one in California can tell you which teacher is in which category," Duncan said at one meeting of education officials. "Something is wrong with that picture."
If Duncan stands firm on his position, state legislators may have to renegotiate the sensitive issue with the state's powerful teachers unions, which are concerned that their local collective bargaining agreements would be trumped by state law.
"We would have some very serious discussions with the Legislature" if they tried to rewrite the 2006 legislation, said David Sanchez, president of the California Teachers Assn.
"We'd suggest the state look very carefully at that before they made that move," said Gary Ravani, an official with the California Federation of Teachers.
State education officials said they have repeatedly told Duncan that the amendment -- inserted into the law at the request of teachers unions -- in no way prevents such accountability at school districts in the state, where evaluation and pay decisions are made.
The state's three top education officials wrote to Duncan earlier this month disputing his interpretation of the law.
"We want to reiterate to you that we have the capability to link teacher and student data, which is exactly what you are advocating nationally," said the July 9 letter signed by state Supt. of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell, state Board of Education President Ted Mitchell and state Secretary of Education Glen Thomas .
Duncan has not responded to the letter, but on Thursday a spokesman, Justin Hamilton, said the secretary "stands by his public comments."
And Rep. George Miller (D-Martinez), who is the chairman of the Education and Labor Committee, agreed with Duncan's interpretation and urged the state to alter its law.
"I hope states that don't presently meet the eligibility will decide to take the steps necessary to meet it. It's the right policy to take our education system to the next level," he said in a statement.
Regardless of the interpretation of the law, few would dispute that California is behind on data collection.
California ranks 41st among states in its use of education data, according to a 2008 survey by the Data Quality Campaign, a nonprofit based in Austin, Texas.
The federal guidelines have been widely anticipated for months and two other states, Arizona and Indiana, recently struck similar language from their laws to qualify for Race to the Top funds, according to the Data Quality Campaign.
Today's announcement will not be the final word on the dispute. States have a month to comment on the draft guidelines before they are finalized.
As part of that process, California's attorney general also can certify that the state law does not create a barrier to teacher accountability. State officials said they planned to argue their case forcefully.
If California is required to change its law, its reform efforts could be turned into confusion, some lawmakers say.
"My worry is that the debate over this particular provision ends up generating opposition to the whole notion of meaningful accountability and a meaningful data system," said state Sen. Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto), who wrote the 2006 legislation that created the statewide teacher database, known as CALTIDES.
"We were able to strike a balance that brought a lot of folks along on a very challenging issue. The consensus we've developed could be badly damaged."
The dispute over state laws is not the only controversial aspect of Race to the Top. The department will have spent more discretionary money on that program than any other reform in the last 29 years.
In recent speeches, Duncan has laid out four key areas of reform in which applicants must show progress: adopting rigorous academic standards; recruiting and keeping effective teachers; turning around chronically low-performing schools; and building data systems to track student achievement and teacher effectiveness.
"There are lots of things that are going to cause California and all 50 states to think differently about their education system," said Rick Miller, deputy superintendent of public instruction in California. "It fundamentally changes much of what we do."
jason.felch@latimes.com
jason.song@latimes.com From the Los Angeles Times Return to Top of Page
California schools chief reacts to U.S. criticism on teacher evaluation Jack O'Connell visits Long Beach to show that districts in the state are allowed to tie test scores to educator assessments. Obama and his Education secretary chided California on the issue last week. By Seema Mehta
10:18 PM PDT, July 28, 2009 
California's top education official sought Tuesday to counter federal criticism of the state's reluctance to use student test scores to evaluate teachers, paying a visit to Long Beach to highlight one of the few California school districts to make extensive use of such data.
The Long Beach Unified School District's use of student scores to assess the effectiveness of programs, instructional strategies and teachers is a rarity in California, and state Supt. of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell called it a model for other California school districts during a hastily arranged round-table discussion. Other participants included district administrators and staff.
"Becoming a data-oriented culture, as Long Beach is, won't be easy, and it won't be overnight," O'Connell said. "Long Beach is ahead of the curve. . . . You're a model for this new culture of data for education."
The visit followed comments last week by President Obama and U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan, in which they criticized the state for not allowing such test data to be linked to teacher performance evaluations.
On Friday, Obama singled out California for failing to use student test scores to distinguish poor teachers from good ones and Duncan warned that states that bar linking such data to evaluations will be ineligible to compete for the $4.35-billion "Race to the Top" grants. That funding is part of roughly $100 billion earmarked for education in the economic-stimulus package.
The U.S. Department of Education will be awarding the money in competitive grants to states. Applications are due in December.
Duncan has repeatedly raised the issue, including during a trip to San Francisco in May, when he called California's position "mind-boggling."
"The firewall between students and teachers is bad for children and bad for education," he said. "I challenge the state to think very, very differently about that."
At issue is a 2006 California law that prohibits use of student data to evaluate teachers at the state level. O'Connell said Obama and Duncan misunderstand the law, which does not bar local districts from using the information.
"I need to do a better job making that case," the schools chief said, adding that he would be open to amending the law to clarify the matter. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has also supported such a move, though it would probably draw opposition from the state's powerful teachers unions.
O'Connell's Long Beach visit, which a district official said was not put on the schedule until Monday, was designed to show that California school districts are already able to use student data to assess teachers.
The 87,499-student Long Beach Unified School District has won national acclaim for its students' academic performance. Obama cited the district in his first major speech on education.
"The reason we have been successful . . . is because we base all of our decisions on data," Long Beach Supt. Christopher J. Steinhauser said Tuesday.
Seven years ago, the district developed a sophisticated centralized data system that allows it to track individual student achievement, attendance and discipline over time. The system also lets the district see how students are faring collectively in a particular classroom or school, and how subsets such as English learners or special education students are performing. District officials can then use the information for staffing decisions, such as where to send specialists.
Tom Malkus, principal of Lee Elementary School, said he and other school leaders use the data to spot struggling teachers and offer coaching, professional development and other support.
If that fails, Steinhauser said, the district has "courageous conversations" with teachers that can result in their leaving the profession.
The system allows teachers to look at their students' most recent work to ensure that they understand a particular lesson, or double back to concepts that are difficult for them.
"You can look at individual students' needs and you can look at the group's needs," said Christina Benson, a teacher at Lee Elementary. "It's perfect for me."
seema.mehta@latimes.com From the Los Angeles Times Return to Top of Page
Obama chides California for not using test scores to evaluate teachersAt stake are billions in federal stimulus funds to be allocated in 'Race to the Top' grants. Schwarzenegger says state law will be amended if necessary to comply. By Jason Song and Jason Felch
July 25, 2009
President Obama singled out California on Friday for failing to use education data to distinguish poor teachers from good ones, a situation that his administration said must change for the state to receive competitive, federal school dollars.
Obama's comments echo recent criticisms by his Education secretary, Arne Duncan, who warned that states that bar the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers, as California does, are risking those funds. In an announcement Friday at the Education Department in Washington, Obama and Duncan said the "Race to the Top" awards will be allocated to school districts that institute reforms using data-driven analysis, among other things.
"You cannot ignore facts," Obama said. "That is why any state that makes it unlawful to link student progress to teacher evaluations will have to change its ways."
The remarks escalate a disagreement between the Obama administration and California education leaders. While a 2006 law prohibits the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers on a state level, it does not mention local districts, where state officials say pupil data can be used to judge instructors. A handful of districts currently are doing that; L.A. Unified is not.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Friday he would push to amend state law if necessary.
"We will seek any reforms or changes to the law deemed necessary, including changes to our data system laws, to ensure California is eligible to compete" for federal funds, Schwarzenegger said in a statement.
California's top education officials sent the Obama administration a letter earlier this month saying no changes were needed to state law and that any attempt to modify it could distract from reform efforts, but the administration has not responded.
Obama's speech could also mark the beginning of a protracted fight with teachers unions, which have resisted some of the reforms advocated by the administration, including performance pay and data-driven teacher evaluation.
The state's teachers unions have already voiced their opposition to such a move. When the 2006 law was drafted, teachers unions insisted that it include an amendment saying: "Data in the system may not be used . . . for purposes of pay, promotion, sanction, or personnel evaluation of an individual teacher or group of teachers, or of any other employment related decisions related to individual teachers."
Obama and Duncan made their position clear. "This competition will not be based on politics, ideology, or the preferences of a particular interest group," Obama said. "Instead, it will be based on the simple principle: whether a state is ready to do what works."
"Race to the Top" applicants must show progress in four key areas to compete for the $4.35 billion: adopting rigorous academic standards, recruiting and retaining talented educators, turning around chronically low-performing schools, and building data systems to track student and teacher effectiveness. But Obama also pointed out that teachers should not be judged solely on student test scores.
Seven states have already lifted restrictions on public charter schools to better compete for the funds, the Associated Press reported Friday. Other states, such as Colorado and Massachusetts, are trumpeting their recent progress on issues like merit pay and higher educational standards, which they believe will give them an inside track to secure the federal dollars.
Federal officials have said that California legislators do not have to necessarily revise current law. Instead, the attorney general could certify that the state law is not a barrier to teacher accountability.
But some California education officials questioned whether it would be possible to comply with the administration's demands.
California ranks 41st among states in collecting and using data to evaluate teachers, according to a 2008 survey by the Data Quality Campaign, a nonprofit based in Austin, Texas.
"There is . . . [a] possibility nobody will apply" for the funds, said California Deputy Supt. for Public Instruction Rick Miller, who stressed that state leaders share the Obama administration's goals. "They're asking for fundamental changes in all sorts of areas, and you have to commit to all of it by October. . . . That's a heavy lift."
The draft guidelines for the federal funding released Friday are open for public comment for 30 days. States are required to submit applications by October for the first round of grants.
The money is a portion of the roughly $100-billion educational stimulus package approved by Congress. But much of that money is expected to be used by districts to make up for state budget cuts.
Jason.song@latimes.com
Jason.felch@latimes.com
Kristina Sherry in the Washington bureau contributed to this story. From the Los Angeles Times Return to Top of Page
Federal control expands despite the rules By Laurie H. Rogers, author of "Betrayed" Columnist EducationNews.org The federal government is taking over public education. It has no legal authority to do this, but it’s doing it anyway. This is not change I believe in. New national education Common Core Standards (CCS) were released in draft form in July, reportedly “prematurely.” Critics call these supposedly “international” benchmarks vague, fuzzy and inadequate, but the most critical questions about them actually have to do with the fact of their existence. In theory, the CCS initiative was driven by the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). The standards will be followed by development of a national assessment and perhaps a national curriculum. President Barack Obama and U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan have said they support this initiative. I have questions for those who are pushing this initiative on an unsuspecting public: · Who are they? Who lurks there in the dark, behind the scenes, basketball shoes in one hand and a bully whip in the other? · How much will this initiative cost the taxpayer (who already pays ridiculous sums of money for an arrogant, secretive, ineffective, close-minded, top-heavy public-education bureaucracy)? · Under what authority does the U.S. Department of Education direct, supervise, or control “the curriculum program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system”? o (Hint: None, according to Congress.) · Where is the voter in this entire process? o (Hint: Nowhere, except as a means for more money.) Since July 1, I’ve been asking questions of the U.S. Department of Education (DoE); the Washington State Governor’s Office; the Washington State Board of Education (SBE); the Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI); the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA); the Chief Council of State School Officers (CCSSO); and Achieve, Inc. (which is partnering with the NGA and CCSSO). Here’s what’s happened so far.
U.S. Department of Education: From July 11-22, the DoE steadfastly refused to answer my emailed questions, repeatedly referring me to the NGA and CCSSO. I told them my questions had to do with DoE policy, but this had zero effect. I changed my tactic, calling the DoE directly. On July 25, I finally found a person willing to address my questions. Besides the CCS initiative, I’m concerned about the DoE’s changing role. For example, Race to the Top is a competition for $4.35 billion in federal grants that President Obama and Sec. Duncan formally announced July 24. President Obama reportedly “wants states to use funds to ease limits on charter schools, tie teacher pay to student achievement and move for the first time toward common academic standards” (Shear & Anderson, 2009). He reportedly said in a July 23 Oval Office interview: “What we're saying here is, if you can't decide to change these practices, we're not going to use precious dollars that we want to see creating better results; we're not going to send those dollars there.” Sec. Duncan has reportedly threatened California with the loss of federal “stimulus” funds if it doesn’t tie teacher evaluations to student achievement (Felch & Song, 2009). What does this have to do with the CCS initiative? Answer: Nothing. Do what we tell you, California was told, or you don’t get the money. Whose money is this? Ours. Whose vision is it? Good question. Federal “support” is looking more like coercion or blackmail. This behavior is inappropriate. The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution says that “powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Public education, therefore, falls outside of federal authority. Despite the Tenth Amendment, the Department of Education was created in 1980 to: a) increase equal access b) “supplement and complement” the efforts of states, schools, parents and students, and "encourage” community involvement c) improve education through research, evaluation and information sharing d) help coordinate federal programs, improve their management and efficiency, and increase their accountability to Congress, the public and the president. From its inception, the DoE’s activities were deliberately limited – especially with respect to decision-making. The original act (Public Law 96-88) says “the establishment of the Department of Education shall not increase the authority of the Federal Government over education or diminish the responsibility for education which is reserved to the States and the local school systems and other instrumentalities of the States.” According to "20 USC Sec. 3403," the DoE is prohibited from “any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system.” The DoE acknowledges this, adding that “the establishment of schools and colleges, the development of curricula, the setting of requirements for enrollment and graduation -- these are responsibilities handled by the various states and communities, as well as by public and private organizations of all kinds, not by the U.S. Department of Education.” All of this might as well be history, folks. The DoE’s 1980 budget of $14 billion skyrocketed to a 2009 budget of $140.5 billion. Its appetite for power has surpassed all intents and purposes. Its top official is a gunslinger, swaggering his way around the country. And I – the most critical stakeholder in my child’s education – can’t even get a few simple questions answered.
State Governor’s Office: On July 1, I emailed the Washington State governor’s office, asking for pertinent documentation on the CCS initiative. The legal affairs coordinator replied, sending me a heavily redacted document and a May 20 letter from the State Board of Education that had encouraged the governor to participate. One pertinent document was exempted from my request, due to “Executive Privilege.” On July 11, I sent follow-up questions and a request for the exempted document. I received that document and was directed to Senior Policy Advisor Judy Hartmann for answers to my questions. I’ve twice requested a telephone appointment with Ms. Hartmann, but so far have been unsuccessful. The exempted document is a confidential Decision Brief from Ms. Hartmann, having to do with a Memorandum of Agreement on the CCS initiative. The Brief indicates that by May 15, our governor had already decided to participate. (Therefore, the SBE’s May 20 letter, encouraging the governor to sign the MOA, was dated at least five days after her decision.) But the most interesting part about the Decision Brief is this: “Federal standards adoption. While the standards are being developed by states, CCSSO/NGA believe federal money – Race To The Top - to support this work is appropriate as well as taking the next step to developing common assessments. Discussion: The MOA does not address the possibility of federal adoption of the standards. As you know, some in Congress are looking at this issue.
Race To The Top funds. There is the possibility that one of the criteria for participation in Race To The Top funds will be participating in the Common Standards project.” (At that point, with federal adoption of the standards and federal money contingent on participation in the CCS initiative, they might as well stuff "20 USC Sec. 3403" in the shredder. ) All states need to do is say no to this siren call. On July 24, our governor met with President Obama and Sec. Duncan in Washington, DC. At home the next day, the governor reportedly said that for a chance to “win” Race to the Top money, legislators “may need to talk about teacher evaluation, teacher pay and what the state is doing for struggling schools that are not getting better.”
State Board of Education: The minutes from the May 14-15 meeting of the Washington State Board of Education note the board members’ decision to send the governor a supportive letter about the CCS initiative, but the agenda for that meeting didn’t mention their intent to discuss it. Therefore, the public wouldn’t have known. I asked the SBE executive assistant to tell me which came first – the governor’s decision or the SBE’s May 20 letter. She would say only that the letter was “in support of” the governor’s decision. She eventually referred me and my questions to the governor and OSPI’s public disclosure officer (PDO).
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction: OSPI’s PDO, a polite and helpful person, says OSPI will provide me with pertinent documents a month from now, during the last half of August. My questions were referred to Superintendent Randy Dorn. I haven’t heard from him, but on July 14, I was notified that Deputy Superintendent Alan Burke would respond in 7-14 days.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices:
Council of Chief State School Officers:
Achieve, Inc.: I sent emails to these three organizations July 11 and July 20. The NGA and the CCSSO haven’t responded. After the July 20 email, Achieve referred me to the CCSSO.
To recap: The DoE refused my questions. I persisted until someone agreed to answer them.
The governor’s office sent me documents but hasn’t answered my questions.
The SBE sent me documents, then referred my questions elsewhere.
OSPI will send me documents late in August, but has yet to answer questions.
The NGA and CCSSO haven’t acknowledged my existence, much less answered questions.
Achieve, Inc. declined to answer questions, referring me elsewhere. Welcome to your new paradigm, folks. Parents are not the “stakeholders” that matter to these bureaucrats. They behave as if we don’t know anything and have nothing to contribute. They seem to think we should sit down, shut up and stop bothering the true professionals. We are not supposed to take notice of their obvious disregard for inconvenient laws and policies. This message is coming through loud and clear, and I reject it completely. The questions I’m asking are reasonable and not difficult. The tactics illustrated thus far allow a deeply flawed process to move forward until it appears to have enough momentum where it can’t be stopped. But it can be stopped if we speak up, ask the hard questions, refuse to be diverted, stand tall in defense of the Constitution and the laws and policies of the land, demand that government agencies stay in their proper lane, fight for our children’s education, and refuse to give the government an open checkbook for poorly defined programs. Yes, we can.
EducationNews.org Return to Top of Page
Dan Walters: 2006 education bill bedevils Schwarzenegger
dwalters@sacbee.com
Published Friday, Aug. 07, 2009
The devil, it's been said, is in the details and Arnold Schwarzenegger is bedeviled by one paragraph of a bill he signed three years ago to create a new system for collecting and storing information about the state's public school teachers.
The detail that's causing Schwarzenegger some political heartburn was inserted to preclude opposition from the very influential California Teachers Association, which didn't want the teacher data to be interlinked with student achievement data, to wit:
"Data in the system may not be used … for purposes of pay, promotion, sanction, or personnel evaluation of an individual teacher or groups of teachers, or of any other employment decisions related to individual teachers."
President Barack Obama's education secretary, Arne Duncan, calls that prohibition "mindboggling" and says it precludes the state from competing for $4.35 billion in "Race to the Top" grants aimed at improving educational achievement. And Obama himself declared, "You cannot ignore facts. That is why any state that makes it unlawful to link student progress to teacher evaluations will have to change its ways."
Schwarzenegger quickly pledged to "seek any reforms or changes to the law deemed necessary, including changes to our data-system laws, to ensure California is eligible." But that might require repealing the prohibition, no easy task given the CTA position on the issue.
State schools Superintendent Jack O'Connell, meanwhile, takes a different tack, claiming that the law doesn't prohibit individual school districts from using data to evaluate teachers. He quickly flew to Long Beach, whose school system uses data for evaluation, and declared it to be a model.
"Becoming a data-oriented culture, as Long Beach is, won't be easy, and it won't be overnight," O'Connell said. "Long Beach is ahead of the curve. … You're a model for this new culture of data for education."
That a few school districts have reached agreement with their teachers to use data is clearly not the same thing as giving all schools blanket authority to do so, as the Obama administration is evidently demanding. California has appealed to the administration to reconsider, but so far the plea has fallen on deaf ears.
So why, one might ask, did Schwarzenegger sign the bill containing that language in the first place? It was 2006, Schwarzenegger was running for re-election, and his relationship with the CTA was rocky after he reneged on a $2 billion budget deal with the union and after the CTA had spent tens of millions of dollars to defeat his 2005 "year of reform" ballot measures.
After getting his ears boxed, and looking ahead to a re-election campaign in 2006, Schwarzenegger went out of his way to placate the union, perhaps the single most powerful political force in the Capitol.
The governor showered the schools with money and was not about to pick a fight with the union over its opposition to using test data for teacher evaluation.
Return to Top of Page
"Great news for California schools" says Romero of decision to accelerate stimulus funding
August 06, 2009
SACRAMENTO – Senator Gloria Romero, Chair of the Senate Education Committee, says that the U.S. Department of Education´s decision to accelerate payments to states receiving federal education recovery funds will make a huge difference for cash-strapped California schools. U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has announced that the Department will accelerate stimulus spending by making $11.37 billion in Title I, IDEA, and Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) funding as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) available to states on or around September 1, a month earlier than previously announced.
The Department of Education also released requirements for approximately $12.6 billion in Phase 2 State Fiscal Stabilization Funds and $4 billion in Race to the Top competitive grants. It will not require states to make progress on four key reform mandates as a condition for receiving the last stimulus education funding payments. Instead, states that cannot fulfill the reporting requirements will still receive the funding provided they can explain how and when compliance would be achieved.
"The race to the top is on in the Golden State with this great news for California schools," said Romero (D-East Los Angeles). "It allows for greater flexibility in the short term as schools work through severe budget cuts, while maintaining an ongoing commitment to major education reform. I will continue to work with my fellow legislators to ensure that there are no barriers preventing California schools from receiving these much-needed federal funds."
Earlier this week, Romero announced a public hearing to examine whether California is ineligible for any of the $4.35 billion in federal "Race to the Top" funds for education reform because of a state law that limits use of student achievement data in teacher evaluations. A joint hearing of the Senate Education Committee and Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance, which Romero also chairs, will be held in late August.
The "Race to the Top" fund is a separate pot of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) monies. The draft guidelines released by Education Secretary Arne Duncan make a state ineligible to apply for a grant if it has any legal barrier to using student achievement data for evaluating teachers and principals. Duncan has repeatedly criticized California's Education Code Section 10601.5 as such a barrier, or "firewall," that impedes teacher effectiveness. State education officials argue that nothing in state law prohibits a school district from using student test scores for teacher evaluation or compensation.
"With California public schools facing another $6.5 billion in state budget cuts, now is not the time for uncertainty or ambiguity," said Romero. "We must maximize every opportunity to receive federal funds. I am prepared to carry legislation to achieve the necessary reforms and help obtain federal funding so that California students have access to the best possible public education."
The four reforms being pushed by the Obama administration are: improving teacher effectiveness and the distribution of highly qualified teachers; establishing longitudinal data systems that link students from pre-K to college; enhancing quality of assessments and standards; and taking steps to improve consistently low-performing schools.
California has received $3.26 billion in federal recovery funds for K-12 and higher education so far and stands to receive another $1.6 billion in the second round of funding.
California Chronicle Return to Top of Page
'Race to Top' Guidelines Stress Use of Test Data
By Michele McNeil
The U.S. Department of Education’s proposed guidelines for awarding $4 billion in Race to the Top money send a strong message that any state hoping to land a grant must allow student test scores to be used in decisions about teacher compensation and evaluation.
According to draft plans outlined by department officials on Friday, states would be judged on 19 education reform criteria, from how friendly their charter school climates are to whether they cut state K-12 funding this year.
But only two criteria would be absolute requirements: States must have been approved by the Education Department for stabilization funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (most already have been), and states must not have any laws in place barring the use of student-achievement data for evaluating teachers and principals.
See Also Read the accompanying Commentary from Joanne Weiss, the U.S. Department of Education’s Race to the Top director, “Education's 'Race to the Top' Begins.” States not meeting those two absolutes would be ineligible to compete for aid from the Race to the Top Fund, a small but highly coveted slice of some $100 billion in federal economic-stimulus aid for education. That policy could eliminate California and New York—big states with powerful congressional delegations and a lot of students, but with legal firewalls between student and teacher data.
Being able to link teacher and student data is “absolutely fundamental—it’s a building block,” U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said in an interview. “We believe great teachers matter tremendously. When you’re reluctant or scared to make that link, you do a grave disservice to the teaching profession and to our nation’s children.”
Timetable for Grants So far, those criteria are just proposals. The public will have 30 days to comment before the Education Department makes them final in October.
States would have 60 days to apply for the first round of grants, with applications due in December. Awards would be made by the end of March. The second wave of grants would go out in September 2010, with applications due in late spring. A state that won a phase-one grant would not be eligible to win a phase-two grant.
The state’s governor would have to officially apply for the money, but the state education chief and the president of the state education board would also be required to sign off. Notably, one of the criteria states would be judged on is whether they have statewide backing for their reform plans, including from teachers’ unions. A letter of endorsement from the state union would be evidence of such support.
A winning state could use half the award however it wished, but half would have to be distributed to school districts based on the formula for the Title I program for disadvantaged students. The money would not, however, have to be spent according to Title I rules.
There will be a separate competition for the $350 million of the Race to the Top Fund that Mr. Duncan has said will be used to help spur a movement for common student assessments. Also, details will be announced later for a $650 million innovation-grant program for school districts that is not part of the fund.
The fact that the Race to the Top Fund is just $4.35 billion of the $100 billion in education aid in the $787 billion recovery act passed by Congress in February belies the fund’s importance. Mr. Duncan is using these competitive grants to cajole states into making specific policy moves, such as lifting caps on the expansion of charter schools and tapping rainy-day funds rather than cutting state funding to K-12 schools. ("Racing for an Early Edge," July 15, 2009.)
The education secretary has been crisscrossing the nation for months, making dozens of speeches foreshadowing how his department would determine which states get the money. The list of criteria, therefore, is fairly predictable, revolving around the four “assurances” that states were required to make to receive stimulus money. They call for states to adopt internationally benchmarked standards; improve the recruitment, retention, and rewarding of educators; improve data collection; and turn around the lowest-performing schools.
States that have signed on to the common-standards movement being spearheaded by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers would be given preference under the Education Department’s draft. All but Alaska, Missouri, South Carolina, and Texas have done so. ("46 States Agree to Common Academic Standards Effort," June 10, 2009).
States that allow alternative-certification routes for teachers and principals, and have merit-pay plans for educators, also would be looked on favorably. States also would be judged on whether they used their share of the $39.5 billion State Fiscal Stabilization Fund on education reform efforts, rather than plugging budget holes.
Although Mr. Duncan has hammered on the issue of charter school caps, which he wants removed, states also would be judged on how equitably they fund charter schools compared with regular public schools, and on how much funding they provide for charter school facilities. Those criteria may answer some charter school advocates’ concerns that Mr. Duncan was focusing too much on caps and ignoring other components of of what advocates deem good charter school policy.
Use of Test Scores Secretary Duncan had also stressed his disapproval of states that have laws barring the use of student-achievement data in teacher-evaluation decisions, but the proposed criteria go further: Having such a law would automatically disqualify a state. At least two states have such laws on the books: California and New York.
“I hope states that don’t presently meet the eligibility will decide to take the steps necessary to meet it. It’s the right policy to take our education system to the next level,” said U.S. Rep. George Miller, a Democrat and the chair of the House Education and Labor Committee, whose home state of California has such a law.
The idea behind linking individual teachers to student data is to determine the extent to which teachers are contributing to students’ achievement growth. In theory, such “value added” systems can filter out elements such as students’ ethnicity or family economic levels that have a correlation with academic performance.
The two states’ laws on the matter differ somewhat. California prohibits its newly established teacher-identification database from being used for decisions about teacher pay, promotion, evaluation, or other employment matters.
In New York, state legislators barred the use of student-achievement data in tenure decisions. That law is scheduled to sunset in 2010, according to the state department of education.
Teachers’ unions harbor concerns about the technical quality of the tests that would be used to judge their members’ performance, as well as the validity of many value-added methodologies.
Although in recent weeks both Mr. Duncan and leaders of the two national teachers’ unions have underscored the need to collaborate on reforms, the notion of using test scores in pay and evaluation is an area in which there may be fundamental differences between the Obama administration and its union allies.
Policy resolutions approved by the 3.2 million-member National Education Association eschew the use of student test-score data in pay and evaluation decisions. NEA officials would not comment until they had reviewed the proposed criteria.
The president of the 1.4 million-member American Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten, has in the past said that student test-score data should be used primarily for informative and instructional purposes. ("Growth Data for Teachers Under Review," Oct. 22, 2008.)
More recently, she has said student-achievement results do have a place in evaluations, but must be incorporated in a way that is fair to all teachers—including those who teach subjects not covered by states’ standardized-testing programs.
In an interview, Ms. Weingarten demurred from commenting specifically on the proposal. “What I’ve learned about Washington is that you actually have to wait to see the exact language,” she said.
Other commentators felt that the proposed guidance sent a clear signal to the teachers’ unions.
“This is clearly poking the unions in the eye,” said Michael J. Petrilli, the vice president for national programs and policy at the Washington-based Thomas B. Fordham Institute. “What’s so good about this issue is there’s not a lot of nuance. Either you’re allowed to use this information for evaluations or you’re not.”
Although the criterion on linking teachers and student data would be an all-or-nothing eligibility requirement, still unresolved is whether any of the remaining criteria would be given more weight than others, and if so, which ones.
And, while states would be judged heavily on their plans for the Race to the Top money, it’s still unresolved how Education Department officials would balance a state’s proposed reform plan and the policies it already has in place. The department would, however, give extra weight to proposals that focused on science, technology, engineering, and math, known as the STEM subjects.
“We’re not just looking for a plan but a commitment, … what you are doing now,” Mr. Duncan said. “This is not about the hypothetical. You must demonstrate to us your plans, ideas, and capacity to deliver on this.”
Judging the applications would be a peer-review panel made up of education experts from outside the federal department. The applications would ask for evidence for the criteria, such as financial documents and copies of state laws, with the states’ respective attorneys general having to sign off on the laws.
Staff Writer Stephen Sawchuk contributed to this story. Edweek.org
Return to Top of Page
Guidance Issued on Ed-Tech Stimulus Funds 
By Katie Ash
Federal officials have issued guidance for using more than $650 million in the economic-stimulus package to boost educational technology programs in the nation’s schools.
The guidance for the federal Enhancing Education Through Technology program details how the money should be distributed by states to local grantees and what districts can use it for, and it outlines the reporting and transparency requirements attached to the funds, which are scheduled to be released to states starting today.
The bump to the Enhancing Education Through Technology, or EETT, program in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act comes at a time when the budget for the primary federal ed-tech initiative faces significant cuts—from $267 million to just $100 million—in President Obama’s proposed fiscal 2010 budget.
While ed-tech organizations have been disappointed with the budget proposal, the stimulus funds and the priority the guidance places on innovative approaches to using technology in schools provide some reasons for optimism, experts say.
“I think they’ve done a very nice job of articulating the systemic approach that is necessary for technology to make a difference in the classroom,” said Sara Hall, the deputy director of the State Educational Technology Directors Association, based in Glen Burnie, Md. “Buying stuff does not change student achievement. What changes student achievement is the technical support, the curricular support, and the ongoing, embedded professional development.”
Grant recipients, for example, must spend at least 25 percent of the total funding received on “ongoing, sustained, and intensive, high-quality professional development,” the document says.
States may retain up to 5 percent of the funding for state-level ed-tech projects, and the rest must be distributed to schools and districts.
One surprise in the guidance is how the funds may be distributed to schools, said Keith R. Krueger, the chief executive officer for the Washington-based Consortium for School Networking. The guidance requires states to award at least 50 percent, and as much as 100 percent, of the funds on a competitive basis, so that those applications deemed to be the best will share at least half of the grant awards. The other half of the funds may be awarded through a formula based on what’s used for the Title I program, which favors schools and districts serving disadvantaged students.
“I think one thing we will all be watching is how many, or if, states go 100 percent competitive for EETT, versus 50 percent formula and 50 percent competitive,” Mr. Krueger said. “It’s interesting that the U.S. Department of Education encouraged states to go 100 percent competitive with EETT funds under [the stimulus act]. That certainly spurs innovation.”
But that means that some districts in some states might not get a check, Mr. Krueger said.
The Education Department, he said, is “encouraging competition over easy distribution, which is probably good for encouraging 21st-century use of technology in education, but it may take longer to get out the money for the economic stimulus.”
Guiding Principles The four guiding principles for distributing the funds, says the document, are to “spend funds quickly to save and create jobs; improve student achievement through school improvement and reform; ensure transparency, reporting, and accountability; and invest one-time funds from the economic stimulus program thoughtfully to minimize the ‘funding cliff.’ ”
Mary Ann Wolf, the executive director of SETDA, also supports the emphasis on competitive grants.
“The strong encouragement to distribute the ARRA funds through a 100 percent competitive process provides states with the ability to conduct more rigorous evaluation and development and in-depth programs to turn around low-performing schools and address the [guidance’s] four assurances,” she said.
Another piece of the guidance many ed-tech organizations were watching closely is the reporting and transparency requirements tied to the funding. The guidance stipulates that all EETT money from the economic stimulus be tracked and reported quarterly to the public.
Specifically, states are required to report data on grantees, including the percentages of: districts that have effectively and fully integrated technology; classrooms with Internet access in high- and low-poverty schools; teachers who meet their state technology standards; and students who meet state technology standard by the end of 8th grade.
Having those requirements defined in the guidance, said Ms. Hall of SETDA, can help state and local officials begin to formulate their projects and plan systemically as the money is distributed.
Edweek.org Return to Top of Page
President Barack Obama addresses the 2009 NAACP Convention |
|
Government unions submit tax increase initiative to AG By Loren Kaye President of the California Foundation for Commerce and Education Tue, July 21st, 2009 Government employee unions and their liberal allies have mobilized to submit for title and summary a ballot measure that would repeal three tax incentives that bolster California’s competitiveness and improve fairness. First on their hit list is an important change in how multistate companies calculate their taxes that will make California more attractive for growth and investment. The Legislature agreed to reward companies who invest in new facilities and jobs in California by reducing the weight that those two factors contribute to a company's tax liability. Current law creates the perverse situation where companies that simply invest in more jobs or property here see their tax bills increase. The second change conformed California law on tax losses to common practices by the IRS and other states. Taxpayers pay taxes on income (profits) and can write off losses. But for many, their business cycles do not match the arbitrary dates of a tax year. The IRS recognizes this fact of economic life and allows taxpayers to write off losses back two tax years and forward up to 20 years. (The latter is particularly helpful for businesses with long gestation periods, like biotech.) The third change would allow companies to apply certain tax credits to all of their corporate income, making it more likely that they would participate in the behavior being incentivized by these laws: investing in enterprise zones or in more research and development, for example. Lost in the faux outrage over improving the tax climate for employers is the fact that the 2008 budget included nearly $6 billion in new or accelerated taxes on California businesses and investors. Our state’s employers gave at the office in 2008, and again in 2009 as part of the $12 billion tax increase recently adopted. Even more taxes on the backs of business will stifle any economic recovery and hurt working families in the midst of a dire recession. The government employee union strategy is two-fold: increase taxesGto prevent cuts in their ranks, and then repeal the two-thirds Legislative approval requirement for state taxes. But that is merely a recipe for economic deterioration. The fiscal health of the state will be revived only by turning around the state's economy, adding billions to the treasury without increasing taxes. This will only occur if the Governor and Legislature commit to improving our state's competitiveness to ensure a welcome environment for job creation. Fox&Hounds Blog
sfgate.com Editorial: On a spread-the-pain solution Wednesday, July 22, 2009 Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and California's legislative leaders achieved the most difficult job imaginable - bridging a $26.3 billion shortfall - in the most tortuous way possible. The refusal of the governor and Republican legislators to consider new taxes all but guaranteed that the solution would require a combination of excruciating cuts, buck passing and a dash of accounting gimmickry. And the deal announced Monday night contained all three. But before we get into the ugly details, let us pause a moment to praise the governor and top legislators for finally mustering the mettle to perform this grim duty before the Golden State plummeted into insolvency. As awful as this deal might be for Californians who work for the state or depend on its help in finding a job, going to college or getting basic health care ... this is not nearly the nightmare that would have resulted from continued gridlock. California has reached the point of issuing IOUs and watching its nation's-worst credit rating sink to near junk-bond status. Without this deal - which still must pass both houses of the Legislature - the state will keep sliding toward insolvency, with each day adding $25 million to the gap between spending and revenue. So for all the interest groups that want to pick apart this compromise in the name of saving your favorite program, we ask: Where is your solution that would survive the current political reality of Sacramento? The Republicans remain united against any new taxes - and it would take at least a few of their votes to reach the required two-thirds threshold. It seems that many of them would sooner see their children in second-rate schools and their cars on Third World roads before they would break their anti-tax pledges and put themselves at the mercy of the right-wing talk radio blowhards. It's a sad commentary on the state of governance in California, but it is a reality the Capitol's voices of responsibility must confront. "I'm just glad that once we have this passed and the governor signs it, the IOUs can stop ... that is huge," Assembly Speaker Karen Bass said Tuesday. She also said she "feels good" about tempering Schwarzenegger's plans to cut deeper into education and to dismantle a welfare-to-work program that has proved successful. "I'm feeling a sense of relief, but it's sobering because of some of the decisions we had to make," said Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg. "And yet I feel very strong and very proud of all that we fought for, and what we protected. It could have been so much worse." It must be noted that this deal also rests on an element of hope that the economy does not sink further. For now, at least, the governor and four legislative leaders have stepped up with a tough but essential step to keep the state afloat. Inside the deal: Pain, gain, gimmicks The gain -- Disaster averted: A cash shortfall has been forcing the state to issue IOUs for only the second time since the Great Depression. The state treasurer had warned that California's credit rating was deteriorating to the point that it would soon lose its ability to build roads and schools. The pain -- Education: $6 billion in cuts to K-12; $3 billion to higher ed. -- Safety net: $528 million to welfare-to-work; $1.3 billion to Medi-Cal; $124 million for child health care; $226 million for in-home care for the elderly and disabled. -- Transportation: $1 billion. -- Prisons: $1.2 billion, which would involve alternatives to incarceration for 27,000 inmates. The gimmicks -- Borrowing: $4.7 billion from cities, counties, special districts. -- Payday deferral: $1.2 billion by shifting a payday to July 1, 2010. -- From your pocket: Increases income tax withholding by 10 percent (raising $1.7 billion) and accelerates quarterly tax payments for businesses and the self-employed ($610 million) - in effect, borrowing from taxpayers. -- Privatization: Selling $1 billion of a workers' compensation fund. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/07/22/EDJN18SK0F.DTL This article appeared on page A - 14 of the San Francisco Chronicle Return to Top of Page
From the California Progress Report The Shame of the Democrats By Peter Schrag
Columnist
California Progress Report
Just as we all thought that Sacramento had maxed out on budget venality, the governor and the leaders of the legislature came up with enough ugly gimmicks and even uglier slashes into California’s most vital services. Together they take the state still further down the road to Alabama and Mississippi and closer to the next fiscal crisis. The real shame here belongs to the Democrats who at this critical moment seem to have left their progressive traditions in some Orwellian time machine. The smiles with the governor and the hopeful declarations of their leaders accompanied what can only be regarded as capitulation to the anti-tax fanatics of the legislature’s Republican minority. In the process, they reinforced the illusion that you can cut megabucks out of the budget without hurting anyone very much. So the CalWorks welfare program was only decimated but not shut down altogether. So the state will grab two billion in property taxes from local governments, but they’ll muddle through. So the University of California and the California State University will be shorted by some $3 billion. But their doors are still (sort of) open. The schools and community colleges will be hit for another $4.3 billion on top of the billions they lost in the deciduous budget deals cooked last September and February. The majority of voters, few of whom have kids in school, may hardly notice. And then there are cuts of a billion in social services, two billion in health, 2.1 billion in transportation and one billion in corrections. On paper, the state will eventually pay back some $9.3 billion that the constitution mandates for K-12 education, but that won’t happen until at least 2012, which hardly helps the kids who are in school now. And just by coincidence, that commitment, such as it is, won’t come due until this governor and more than half of today’s legislators will be long gone. If the promise to the schools is serious, this, too, is a form of borrowing. It’ll take a little time to unpack and analyze everything that’s in and not in this budget. But with the earlier cuts, the real hit will be far larger than the cuts reported this week. And, given that it’s the third budget deal in less than a year, the guessing is open as to how long it will hold up. Once again, the state’s Republicans, though a shrinking minority, are the big winners. Using the constitution’s unique combination of provisions requiring a two-thirds vote to approve a budget and/or raise taxes, they again vetoed the will of the legislative majority. The other big winner is Grover “Starve the Beast” Norquist, probably America’s most hyperactive tax basher, who got them all to take the pledge. Given the fog around California’s tangled governmental system, have the Republicans done what the electorate really wants? A poll last year by PPIC, the Public Policy Institute of California, showed that a majority of voters believe the budget could be cut by as much as $20 billion – roughly 20 percent -- without affecting essential services. The damage likely to result from the new budget may be a good test of those beliefs. Both of the four –year university systems have already announced sizeable tuition increases, boosts coming on top of other increases in recent years. Course offerings will be reduced; it will take longer to graduate; the California State University will accept no new students in the coming spring semester. In most public schools expect larger classes, fewer counselors and librarians, and a slimmer menu of arts classes and athletic programs -- and maybe a tighter array of courses generally. More subtly, the quality of all services, from graduate programs at Berkeley to the condition – and maybe the safety – of the neighborhood park will decline. Will any of those things – and there are countless more – bring the realization that you can’t have a great state, or maybe even a decent one, on the cheap? What’s badly wanted here is political leadership with courageous enough to talk about that link and not celebrate surrender to the anti-tax fanatics of the right. In this current budget deal, the Democrats got a few face-savers on education funding and welfare reductions, but in the end, despite all the nervous smiles, they lost. And while we’re at it, where are the UC regents and the CSU trustees, men and women of stature and, one hopes, some community influence, who are supposed to be the defenders of their institutions and not just meekly acquiescent when the ax falls. (A rare exception at last week’s regents meeting was Lieut. Gov. John Garamendi who told his fellow regents to “stand up and fight”, in this particular case for a pending bill that would tax oil companies to help fund the university). But do any of them call their rich friends who are contributors to the anti-tax crowd? Do they phone their legislators and tell them they’re killing one of America’s great institutions and one of the indispensable engines of the state’s economic growth? The California School Boards Association has been trying to encourage its members to make such calls, though so far with limited success. But where are the regents? And where have the legislative Democrats lost their nerve? If thirty of them stood up and voted no on a budget like this, as Republicans do almost perpetually on taxes, they might change the whole ball game. Peter Schrag, whose exclusive weekly column appears every Wednesday for the California Progress Report, is the former editorial page editor and columnist of the Sacramento Bee. He is the author of Paradise Lost: California’s Experience, America’s Future and California: America’s High Stakes Experiment. His new book, Not Fit for Our Society: Nativism, Eugenics, Immigration will be published early in 2010. Posted on July 22, 2009 From the California Progress Report Return to Top of Page
Adult education enrollment rises as economy sinksPublished: Monday, Feb. 16, 2009 | Page 3B For some it's a way to acquire a high school diploma or learn new jobs skills in a depressed economy. But for Bob Reiche there's only one reason to attend Placer School for Adults: the clogging. "My wife and I saw an ad for a clogging class 17 years ago. We didn't know what it was, but we've been clogging ever since," Reiche said of the Appalachian tap dancing. While financially strapped public universities and colleges are capping enrollment, adult schools – with a vast array of class offerings – are opening their arms to new students. "Enrollment is booming. When the economy goes down, our enrollment goes up," said Debra Jones, state director of adult education. "It's the most exciting time ever and one of the most challenging," she said. Last year, 1.2 million Californians attended public adult schools, and Jones said that number is on the rise. The two largest adult school programs in the Sacramento region are also seeing a surge in students, especially those who are trying to survive the recession. Sacramento City Unified School District reports 15,000 students are enrolled at its four adult school campuses. That's "significantly higher" than last year, said Mike Brunelle, district director of career technology preparation. The adult school is one of the largest in the state and has been in existence since the 1800s. Placer School for Adults in Auburn has historically catered primarily to the region's large number of retirees. That's been turned on its head almost overnight. Judy McCoy, the school's principal, said the economy is "opening up a totally different demographic." The demand these days is for job training classes in professions such as clinical medical assisting and emergency medical technician. "We never offered an EMT class before. We didn't know how these classes would go," McCoy said. "As soon as a new class is offered, it's already full and with a waiting list." Last year, the Placer School for Adults served approximately 10,000 students. Not all of the most popular classes are job-oriented. There's still a demand for free adult basic education and high school diploma programs. And McCoy said plenty of adults are interested in fee-based community education classes, including conversational French, basic cake decorating, knitting, retirement planning, music for fun and relaxation, and an array of art courses. Artist Sonja Hamilton teaches a much-in-demand intermediate/advance watercolor class. "People have to line up at 5 a.m. to get into the class," said Suzy Knisley one of Hamilton's students. Across the hallway from Hamilton's class, two dozen seniors filled teacher Kathy Kaplan's clogging class. Over the din of steel taps, 80-year-old Janettte Haley described how she first encountered clogging at a fair in Arkansas. "I just loved it," she said. Haley's been clogging regularly for the past 18 years. Adult schools may find themselves benefiting from another casualty of the economy. With legislative analysts urging state lawmakers to cut funding of recreational classes in California's community colleges, adult schools – which offer health and fitness courses – could pick up the slack. Jones said such classes are generally more affordable at adult schools. The California Education Code allows unified or high school districts to establish separate adult schools, and the state budget supports these schools based on average daily attendance. The key to a successful adult school program "is trying to find out what isn't being done elsewhere," said McCoy. When her high school district couldn't provide sports coaching certificates because it encroached on their budget, the adult school began providing the service on a trial basis. Flexibility is an adult school advantage. McCoy said her school now offers classes to 200 county jail inmates and 30 people on probation. "We can offer a class as a pilot. We can test the waters," McCoy said.
This story is taken from Sacbee / Our Region / Top Stories
Stimulus deal could mean $26 billion for CaliforniaSome of the money is expected to go straight into the state treasury -- but it won't be enough to prevent new taxes and spending cuts. School, heathcare and transportation improvements are anticipated By Richard Simon and Evan Halper
February 13, 2009
Reporting from Sacramento and Washington — The $789-billion economic stimulus bill headed toward congressional approval is expected to pour $26 billion into California -- building roads, upgrading schools and launching other projects intended to create or save jobs.
The expectation is that the federal government will funnel at least $9.2 billion directly to the state treasury, mostly for education and healthcare, in the next 18 months. Millions of Californians will get a tax cut aimed at promoting consumer spending.
But the money will only go so far in easing the state's financial pains.
In Sacramento, lawmakers are gearing up to vote in the coming days on a state budget package that will hit Californians with nearly half a dozen new taxes and deep spending cuts in almost everything state government does. The federal windfall won't stop that from happening.
The state's deficit through mid-2010 is $41 billion, and not all of the federal money can be used to help erase it. Some won't arrive on time. Some is specifically directed to other purposes.
Still, lawmakers say the legislation's effect will be profound. "California cannot do without this bill," said Rep. Lois Capps (D-Santa Barbara).
The austere budget package in the works in Sacramento already assumes that the federal assistance will wipe out nearly a quarter of California's deficit. If it falls short of that, Californians are in for even more financial carnage; about $1 billion in extra program cuts and tax hikes would be triggered under the budget plan.
The extra cuts would apply to welfare grants, aid to the elderly and disabled, and Medi-Cal. State colleges and universities would also lose money, as would the court system.
The stimulus bill would also affect how much income tax Californians pay. A new surcharge proposed on annual state income tax bills would jump from 2.5% to 5% if California does not get all of the federal funds that budget experts anticipate.
The estimate that California would receive $26 billion comes from a preliminary analysis by the Washington-based Federal Funds Information for States, which studies how federal decisions affect states.
Included in that estimate is about $6 billion that California is projected to receive from the "state stabilization fund," designed to help states avoid layoffs and cuts in services while also creating jobs by funding projects to modernize schools and colleges.
State and local officials are eagerly awaiting the money, which is supposed to begin flowing once Congress approves the federal package of spending and tax cuts that President Obama has called crucial to turning around the economy.
The House is expected to vote on the bill today, with the Senate following shortly thereafter. Obama could sign it within a few days.
The measure has its critics. Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands), who is expected to be joined by most if not all of his fellow California Republicans in Congress in opposing the measure, said it would "spur permanent growth in government programs and spending that will hamstring future budgets and plunge our nation further into debt every year."
But some state officials say they are prepared to move swiftly once the federal funding arrives.
"Because California has a significant amount of work that's ready to go, we anticipate we'll be able to get projects out very quickly," Caltrans Director Will Kempton said Thursday.
With the state expected to receive more than $4 billion for transportation projects, Kempton was already looking at what shovel-ready projects might be funded by the bill. Among those under consideration: a project to upgrade a portion of the Long Beach Freeway. A carpool lane on Interstate 405 on Los Angeles' Westside. A railroad improvement project in Orange County.
Funds also may be made available to advance high-speed rail projects running from San Diego to San Francisco and from Southern California to Las Vegas -- the latter a priority for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who played a key role in writing the final bill.
Los Angeles County could get as much as $700 million for transit and highway projects, but transit officials need to examine the bill before knowing for certain, said Marc Littman of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
The White House said the measure would create or save 396,000 jobs in California.
"Our plan will provide urgent aid to states to save and create jobs," said Rep. George Miller (D-Martinez), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. "It allows states to invest in renovating, repairing and modernizing schools and colleges."
In a key area where California benefited from its increased clout in the House, the state will receive an estimated $11 billion in Medicaid funds -- about $650 million more than it would have received under the Senate version of the bill.
That was the result of language inserted by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, chaired by Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Beverly Hills), to give more money to states such as California where the unemployment rate has significantly increased.
The Senate bill would have given California less money in order to provide more funds for other states, a reflection of the influence wielded by lawmakers from less-populated states in that chamber.
But with Waxman, who served as a negotiator during the writing of the final stimulus bill, lawmakers roughly split the differences between the House and Senate bills.
Of importance to California, the final bill also authorizes $198 million in payments to Filipino veterans of World War II.
The provision was inserted in the measure by Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii), a decorated World War II veteran, who called it important to fulfill a promise made to the 15,000 surviving veterans, many in their 80s and 90s. A large number of the veterans live in California.
richard.simon@latimes.com
evan.halper@latimes.com
Los Angeles Times
Advocate Marian Wright Edelman fights for children
By Dwight Lewis
THE TENNESSEAN "At this miraculous moment in our history, we have a chance to reset our nation's moral compass,'' one of the country's most outspoken advocates for children started out telling her audience at Nashville's Belmont University. "To ensure hope and opportunity for every one of God's children in the United States and around the world,'' added Marian Wright Edelman, founder and president of the Washington-headquartered Children's Defense Fund. "The day after Dr. King's assassination in 1968, riots broke out all across America, including the nation's capital. "I went out into the streets and out to some of the public schools in the District of Columbia and asked the children not to loot and not to riot, and not to be violent so they would not ruin their future.'' Speaking at Belmont's Massey Performing Arts Center on Wednesday during a program on Christian faith and child advocacy, Edelman added: "A little boy about 12 looked me straight in the eye and asked, 'Lady, what future? I ain't got no future. I ain't got nothing to lose.' "I have spent 40 years trying to prove that boy wrong, and I had no idea how hard it would be in this extraordinarily rich and democratic nation.'' Before King died, Edelman told her audience, the civil rights martyr called for a poor people's campaign in 1968, and at that time there were 11 million poor children in America. "Today, there are 13.3 million poor children and the majority of their families are playing by the rules, working, can't make ends meet. And I have no doubt that if Dr. King were here today he would call for bringing economic justice to our nation. "He warned us, as he was dying, about the dangers of our wealth. It could either be our salvation or it could be our downturn. On the last day of his life, he called his mother (in Atlanta) from Memphis to give her the title of his sermon for that coming Sunday, and that was 'Why America may go to hell.' "And he said America is going to hell if we don't use her vast resources to make it possible for all of God's children to have the basic necessities of life.'' 'The cradle-to-prison pipeline' A little more than an hour before speaking at Belmont, Edelman, in her seemingly always fired-up way, reminded a journalist how important the issue of poverty and children is in America. "I just hope we can seize this moment to finish the job — the dream of the civil rights movement,'' she said. "It's economic justice. "The Charles Dickens thing,'' she said. "It's the best and worst of times. How proud I am of this country. How proud I am of this young man (President Barack Obama). It was fantastic. He out-fundraised, he out-strategized, out-visioned. I'm exceedingly proud of him, but this transformative change at the top has to be translated into transformative change for the bottom.'' She added, while sipping coffee in the Eat restaurant at Loews Vanderbilt Hotel: "He's the change that gives us the opportunity to come together as a nation to change our investment priorities and our values. He understands that we all got to come together and we all got to sacrifice because we do face an absolute economic disaster and we've got the largest gap between rich and poor that we've had since we started recording data. "The greed is so rampant, and they don't get it. But we've got to deal with growing poverty and the growing divisions between those who have and those who don't. And we have to focus in on our children because I keep saying that the biggest deficit we face is the human capital deficit. And that's going to topple us from leadership in the new century.'' Edelman, anative of Bennettsville, S.C., with a sister who attended Fisk University, suddenly asked the journalist she was meeting with: "What are we doing for our children?'' "We're locking them up,'' she added, answering her own question. "We're putting them out of schools without them being able to read and write — what are you going to do if you can't read and write in this terrible economy? "So, the cradle-to-prison pipeline, which I believe is the new American apartheid, is for me, the crisis that we all have to see and address. The Children's Defense Fund is doing a series of state and local summits. We're doing one in New York City next week, one in Sacramento, Calif., in two weeks, but we've got to wake up because if we don't address that, it's going to undo, despite this extraordinary miracle, it's going to undo the last 50 years of progress.'' Edelman, a graduate of Atlanta's Spelman College and Yale Law School, said what she calls the cradle-to-prison pipeline is fueled by poverty and continuing racial disparities. "And anybody who says this is post-racial society, despite our enormous work forward, just needs to look at the racial disparities in almost every child survey taken. You've got over 80 percent of your black and Hispanic children unable to read at grade level at fourth and eighth grade. You've got black children going off to prison or juvenile detention for the same drug offenses as white children — the disparities are enormous. "We are still more likely to be poor, still more likely to die in the first year of life, to have low birth weight. We've got hundreds of thousands of children being born already off the track for success. They never even get on the American track. They are with low birth weight, from a teen mother who didn't finish high school and an absentee father. They've got three or four strikes already against them, which is why we've got to get health care and prenatal care for every pregnant woman and child, so that we can at least begin to stop that first entry point into the cradle-to-prison pipeline.'' Don't ignore 'the sixth child' Back at Belmont, Edelman was telling her audience, "Now, imagine God visiting our very wealthy families blessed with six children. Five of them have enough to eat and comfortable rooms in which to sleep, one doesn't. She's often hungry, cold, and on some nights she has to sleep on the streets or in the shelter or even to be taken away from her neglected family and placed in foster care or a group home with strangers. "Imagine this rich family, five of its children get nourishing meals three times a day, but they send that sixth child from the table and to school hungry. "Imagine this very wealthy family making sure that five of its children get all of their (immunization) shots, regular health checkups before they get sick and immediate access to health care when illness strikes. But ignoring the sixth child, who is plagued by chronic respiratory infections and plagued with toothaches. "Imagine this family sending five of their children to good, stimulating preschool and making sure they have music after school but sending the sixth child to unsafe day care with untrained caregivers responsible for too many children. "Imagine God visiting this family and seeing five of its children being read to but leaving the other child unread to, untalked to, unsung to, unhugged but propped before a television screen or video game that feeds him violence and sex and racially and gender- charged messages, interrupted only by speechless ads with material things beyond the child's grasp. "Imagine the family sending some of their children to high-quality schools with safe neighborhoods and with enough books and computers and labs and teachers and science equipment and well-prepared teachers, and sending the sixth child to a crumbling school building with peeling ceilings and leaks and asbestos and old books, not enough of them, and teachers untrained inthe subjects they teach with low expectations. " … Our failure to invest in all of our children before they get sick, drop out of school, get pregnant or get into trouble is morally wrong and extremely costly,'' Edelman told her Belmont audience at the program co-sponsored by the school's College of Arts & Sciences and the School of Religion. Strengthening the safety net "This is why I'm for the president's stimulus package,'' Edelman, whose latest book is The Sea Is So Wide and My Boat Is So Small: Charting a Course for the Next Generation, tells the journalist. "We've got to keep in all the safety net provisions because we're having this new huge growth in poverty and extreme poverty among our children and families at a time when the safety net is weak as it has ever been. "Tennesseans also need to call Senators Alexander and Corker to urge them to vote for the stimulus package. We are talking about providing a level playing field for every child, which we do not provide. This is about poverty, poverty, poverty. It is also about early childhood investment, health care and breaking up this cradle-to-prison pipeline.'' Additional Facts The Tennessean
Class Size Reduction Program Must Be Protected By: David A. Sanchez
President
California Teachers Association
The California Teachers Association, California State PTA, parent and community groups are rallying to support California’s successful Class Size Reduction (CSR) program which provides school districts extra funding to keep K-3 classrooms at 20 students or less. We fear that the final budget package being negotiated could wipe out CSR completely and, once gone, it will be nearly impossible to get this critical program back. Eliminating CSR will condemn our youngest students to more classroom overcrowding and result in poorer learning and reduced academic achievement. What’s worse, this proposal will not save the state one dime. Under the Governor’s budget proposal, school districts would still receive the same pot of money currently dedicated to categorical programs like Class Size Reduction. However, they would be able to redirect these funds away from smaller classes and even away from the classroom altogether. That’s less accountability of our tax dollars. Parents and teachers certainly support local control, but “flexibility” should not erode smaller class sizes. Make no mistake: allowing districts to redirect CSR funding will result in the wide-scale increasing of K-3 class sizes, particularly in lower-income schools and schools with higher levels of high-needs and ethnic minority students. We need only look back 12 years to K-3 classrooms prior to the enactment of Class Size Reduction. It was not uncommon to have K-3 classes with 30 or more 5 year olds. And that’s exactly what will happen again if we dismantle Class Size Reduction. Research demonstrates smaller K-3 classes improve academic achievement, especially for ethnic minority and low-income students. According to a 2002 study by the Public Policy Institute of California, five of the state’s largest school districts reported significant test score gains since the state’s class size reduction program began in 1996. Third-grade test scores increased 14% in math and 9% in reading in schools with mostly low-income students. And a 2005 study by the Princeton University Department of Economics showed that California’s CSR program led to significantly better scores by students on National Assessment of Education Program (NAEP) exams. There’s no question that draconian cuts to education are going to force tough choices by districts locally. And that’s why the education community is united around the need to increase revenues and prevent even deeper cuts to our students and schools. But eliminating class size reduction and increasing classes for our youngest students and those who need it most is the wrong thing to do. You can watch the video of the CTA ad campaign by clicking here. David Sanchez is the elected President of the California Teachers Association. The California Teachers Association (CTA) is California's largest professional employee organization, representing more than 340,000 public school teachers, counselors, psychologists, librarians, other non-supervisory certificated personnel, and Education Support Professionals. CTA is affiliated with the 3.2 million-member National Education Association. Posted on February 06, 2009 California Progress Report
Budget gap endangers valued school programsNanette Asimov, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, February 6, 2009 (02-05) 19:32 PST -- Parents in San Ramon fear their program for gifted students will vanish. Oakland residents want to save adult education. And teachers across the state are demanding that lawmakers preserve small class sizes they say kids need. The $14 billion that pays for dozens of cherished programs is not actually being cut, despite a $42 billion state budget gap that threatens school funding by about $10 billion. What has parents and teachers in such a sweat is that lawmakers negotiating the state budget are considering Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposal to free schools - for the first time in decades - from having to spend billions of dollars on specific state-required programs. There are more than 60 such programs, including art and music, bilingual teacher training, and vocational training in agriculture. Billed as financial flexibility, the governor's proposal would be a boon for school districts that want greater freedom to spend the earmarked money. "One-size-fits-all does not work," said Brian Lewis, executive director of the California Association of School Business Officials. But to those who depend on such programs, flexibility is just another word for siphoning the money away. "No matter what words you use, it's still taking away from the people who need it," said Jordan Lancaster of Oakland, who lost his drugstore job last spring and enrolled in adult education to become a nursing assistant. Lancaster, 27, earned his certificate last month. "I know there are other people like me who want to better themselves. I've got to fight for them," said Lancaster, who helped deliver 300 letters Wednesday urging lawmakers to protect the $800 million adult education program. Citizen lobbying is just one approach. The California Teachers Association is defending small classes through a TV campaign, while others have sent out press releases on behalf of the arts. In San Ramon, more than 1,500 students are enrolled in a program for gifted students. "Philosophically, I think it's good to give districts flexibility," said Ellen Sato, who credits the state's $55 million gifted student program with keeping her two daughters engaged in school. "On the other hand, if they do that, I assume it will go away. Moneys tend to go to the kids who are behind rather than the kids who are ahead." About a third of the state's $50 billion education budget must be spent on specific programs. Some, like special education, are federally mandated and can't be eliminated. Passionate supportersBut most are state programs layered in year after year "like sedimentary rock dating back to the Cretaceous period," said Mike Kirst, a former president of the state Board of Education. He and other education experts have long advocated more financial flexibility for schools. The state's nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office, for example, is offering a competing flexibility plan that would collapse most programs into three basic categories. But efforts to reform what state schools chief Jack O'Connell called "a byzantine system" this week have always failed because the programs have passionate constituents. "The major education groups in the state have opposed it - but we're seeing the first breach in the wall" as schools face the worst fiscal crisis in years, Kirst said. School administrators are now speaking out for flexibility, and school board members are warming to it also. One group that has not embraced the mantra is the California Teachers Association, which says the granddaddy of all state programs would die: class-size reduction. The $1.3 billion program begun a decade ago caused kindergarten to third-grade classes to plunge from about 30 children to a strict limit of 20. The impact was immediate. Thousands of new teachers were hired - not all of them qualified. Portable classrooms sprang up. Private school kids returned to public school. And teachers glowed. Struggle of large classesRuth McHale, a second-grade teacher at Westlake Elementary in Daly City, remembers the days of 33 children per class. "You couldn't possibly meet with each child for even one minute," she said. Her worst moment was the day she took her class to the zoo. As her children mingled with strangers on the city bus, McHale suddenly knew she could not ensure the safety of so many students. "It was frightening!" she said. She called her husband to come help at the zoo. Everything's different with 20, she said. The other day, two 7-year-old boys squabbled on the playground. McHale's class formed a "community circle" to help the boys. It turned into a lesson on managing personal conflicts. Trying to cover costs"If I had 33 students, there's no way I could have worked this out with them," McHale said. "This was just as important as curriculum." But small classes are expensive, and the state money doesn't cover the cost. "School districts are telling us that they will have no choice but to do away with it," said Lewis, of the school business group. He and others say that with flexibility they could lower class size in more grades - not to 20, but maybe 25. The teachers union isn't buying it. Union President David Sanchez said changing the program he says has helped countless children and teachers "is a line that simply cannot be crossed." http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/06/BAT715KE7O.DTL This article appeared on page B - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Schools Chief Jack O'Connell Delivers
2009 State of Education Address Outlines Proposals to Help Schools Survive State's Economic Crisis SACRAMENTO — State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell today delivered his sixth annual State of Education address. As California grapples with an unprecedented budget shortfall and the nation's economic crisis, O'Connell made the case for school-funding reform and increased investment in public education as keys to California's economic recovery. O'Connell also urged educators and policymakers to continue the focus on closing the achievement gap even as schools prepare for staggering cuts in funding. "The state of public education in California is precarious," O'Connell said. "Beyond the immediate crisis and even more alarming to me is the long-term future of our common education system. If we continue down the road we are on, our public schools and our state itself face certain, perhaps irreparable, damage." "Downturns like this hit the most vulnerable among us the hardest," O'Connell said. "Sadly this comes after a long-term California focus on closing achievement gaps is now just starting to show modest progress. Let me be crystal clear, all of our progress as a high-expectation state is at-risk unless we commit ourselves now to being innovative, flexible, and focused as never before. It is time for us to prioritize and to focus on things we know are working to close the achievement gap and help all students succeed." As an example of his call for thinking differently, O'Connell announced that he has ordered the California Department of Education (CDE) to immediately suspend all non-mandated on-site district monitoring visits. CDE typically conducts monitoring visits every year for a quarter of all districts in the state to ensure that fiscal and program requirements are being met. O'Connell has directed CDE staff to use the time and resources saved from not conducting on-site reviews to conduct a top-to-bottom review of the compliance monitoring system. "I want to see a redesigned system that will focus the greatest attention on those schools that need the most assistance. It should be based on student achievement results, not bureaucratic agendas," O'Connell said, pledging to work with Senate President pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg, Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, and U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan to seek more flexibility in the way California monitors and requires state and federal funding to be spent. O'Connell also has announced that he has suspended the California School Technology Survey, which will save many hours of work for teachers and administrators. In addition, he has directed CDE staff to make some data elements optional for the first year of reporting under California's new longitudinal data system known as CALPADS. ‘We cannot eliminate federal reporting, and we will not eliminate critical data needed to asses the achievement gaps — such as graduation or dropout rates. But I have asked my staff to find relief for school districts by making some data elements this first year optional, rather than required," he said. "We have worked long and hard to finally reach this juncture of having a longitudinal data system. While we must not turn back the clock on its implementation, we must be mindful of how much new work school districts can accomplish during these days of fiscal crisis." To help school districts raise desperately needed funds, O'Connell announced his support for Senate Constitutional Amendment 6 by state Senator Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto), to lower the threshold for parcel taxes from the current two-thirds majority to 55 percent. O'Connell said that legislative passage of this measure should be tied to any budget agreement that cuts funding to schools. He also announced that he is sponsoring a bill by Assembly member Julia Brownley (D-Santa Monica) to place a major school facilities bond on the next statewide ballot. "This measure will create jobs," O'Connell said. "It will help stimulate the construction of schools designed for 21st century learning as well as energy efficient high-performing "green" schools that will help tomorrow's students achieve and compete. This economy will recover, and school construction will help to revive it." O'Connell noted that even with the current challenges, California schools are making progress in improving student achievement. He also provided an update on his plan for addressing the achievement gap, which he outlined in his State of Education speech last year. Please see the detailed update on the progress made on implementing the recommendations from O'Connell's statewide P-16 Council at P-16 Council Recommendations.
Jack O'Connell — State Superintendent of Public Instruction
Communications Division, Room 5206, 916-319-0818, Fax 916-319-0100 California Department of Education Web Site Return to Top of Page
L.A. teachers' union calls for boycott of testingAxing 'periodic assessments' would save money, UTLA says. But district leaders want teachers to give the exams, which a Times analysis suggests are boosting scores in algebra and English. By Howard Blume
January 28, 2009
The Los Angeles teachers union and the city's school district are battling over a district practice that, a Times' analysis suggests, contributes to higher scores on state tests.
The practice is "periodic assessments," a bureaucratic name for exams administered by the Los Angeles Unified School District. The goal is to give teachers insight into what students need to learn while there remains time in the current school year to adjust instruction.The union Tuesday directed teachers to refuse to give them to students on the grounds that the tests are costly and counterproductive.
But there could be a downside.
The local exams, given three or four times a year at secondary schools, appear to be boosting state scores in 10th-grade English and Algebra 1 -- the two subjects examined by The Times -- and therefore perhaps other subjects as well.
The district tests, which have gradually permeated most core academic subjects and most grade levels, have become central to a debate over the proliferation of testing, whether it interrupts instruction and can narrow the depth and breadth of what's taught. The philosophical dispute sharpened this week amid protracted, stalled negotiations over a teachers contract and the need to slash millions to address an ongoing budget crisis.
Axing these district assessments would spare jobs by saving millions of dollars -- and would improve instruction at the same time, said A.J. Duffy, president of United Teachers Los Angeles.
The union's call for a boycott of the tests has emerged as an early trial for new Supt. Ramon C. Cortines, who took over Jan. 1.
Cortines asserted that the assessments are part of teachers' assigned duties -- they are not optional. He also said he has and will amend aspects of the tests that need fixing. But he won't toss them out because, he said, they have contributed strongly to rising performance on the state's own annual tests.
He may be right, based on a Times' analysis of last year's improved state test scores in 10th-grade English and Algebra 1.
The Times found that greater participation in the district assessments was associated with better scores. In 10th-grade English, the correlation was fairly strong, accounting for nearly half the improvement.
The link was more moderate in Algebra 1, explaining about one-third of the gains for high school students in that subject.
The Times looked at these two subjects in part because the data were available -- it isn't for all subjects -- and also because of importance of these courses. Algebra 1, for example, is considered a "gateway" course to academic success.
The district has not produced its own analysis on the effect of increased participation but has collected less-conclusive data showing that students who do well on the district's tests also excel on the state's tests.
Duffy remains skeptical.
"The pig does not get fatter when you weigh it 10 times a day," Duffy said. "And if the test scores do go up, isn't it phony? Because what you are doing is teaching to the test, teaching a subject that has been narrowed down radically. We're not creating smarter kids. We're creating smarter test takers."
Duffy announced the boycott Tuesday at Emerson Middle School on the Westside, where teachers said the district tests were too burdensome on top of already mandated state and federal testing.
"We are supposed to be teaching, not testing," said Emerson English teacher Cecily Myart-Cruz. "We can come up with our own assessments in our classroom, and we do -- every day."
Top officials, however, had concluded that too many instructors failed to enforce high standards or didn't focus properly on teaching the specific skills and knowledge required by the state.
"This is not to be onerous for teachers and principals and schools," Cortines said. "It is to be helpful."
Unraveling the apparent benefit can be complex, said retired district official Roger Rasmussen, who long headed the district's analysis unit. Schools that are able to perform the assessments correctly, he said, may be those that have developed a cohesive staff, for example, which may be the real driver of improvement.
Cortines' predecessor, David L. Brewer, a retired Navy vice admiral, tackled inconsistent participation in the tests at high schools by ordering a 95% participation rate. He credited that directive with last year's rise in test scores, the biggest jump in five years.
But districtwide, the high school participation rate in English barely budged, and while the increase was greater in math, it still fell far short of Brewer's target.
Yet, the schools with increased participation generally reaped benefits. The lackluster overall response resulted in part from problems at schools. The assessments have occurred at the wrong time, for example, at some year-round campuses, where students start their school year at various times.
"My students would be tested on Mendelian genetics when we're just getting to how chromosomes separate," said Joseph Rowland, who taught science at Roosevelt High School for 22 years before moving to Franklin High this year. "It's ridiculous."
Rowland once found that his class' data had been combined with that of another teacher, rendering it pointless as a guide to future instruction. Like other teachers interviewed, he also complained about never getting data back or getting it late, though the current process is for teachers to go online and retrieve the data themselves.
Manual Arts High School English teacher Travis Miller said two rounds of his own class assessments did not count last year. Once, his tests weren't picked up on time, and once, he didn't receive all materials until the period for submitting them had closed.
Miller also knows teachers who simply refuse to give the assessments. Manual Arts' official participation rate last year was 61% in English and 14% in math.
Emerson's record on giving assessments is relatively strong, despite its prominence at the center of Tuesday's protest.
On state tests, Emerson ranks a little below average overall but well above average when compared with schools that serve a similar student population.
"This school is full of creative people and they need to have their hands untied to shine," said UCLA professor Allen F. Roberts, the parent of an Emerson 8th-grader.
The district puts the cost of the assessments at $3 million to $5 million per year. The teachers' union offers a so-far unsubstantiated figure of $150 million -- based on its interpretation of indirect costs, such as the related use of math and reading coaches to assist teachers.
howard.blume@latimes.com
Times staff writer Doug Smith provided data analysis.
From the Los Angeles Times Return to Top of Page
California's economic crisis is also an educational crisisBy Hamid Shirvanilast updated: January 25, 2009 02:54:10 AM We live in an increasingly complex and volatile world. Well-established companies are closing their doors, people are losing their homes, and unemployment has risen to levels not seen in decades. California, once touted as the eighth-largest economy in the world, has amassed a $15 billion budget deficit that grows with each passing day and is projected to reach $41 billion in 2010. The question of how we reached this point is less important than how quickly we can recover and move forward. California's economic crisis is inextricably linked to its education crisis. According to a recent study by The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning, in 2008 only 43 percent of California students scored at the proficient level or above in mathematics and only 46 percent in English language arts. For underserved communities the numbers are even worse. In addition, 6 out of 10 high school graduates who enter the California State University system require remediation in English, math, or both. A thriving economy in California depends on the state's ability to produce a well-trained and well-educated work force, as well as highly qualified and competent leaders for our government and private sectors. A report on California's future work force, released in December by the Public Policy Institute of California, points out that the state's growing need for college-educated workers is outpacing its ability to produce them. This gap in education levels will severely limit the state's ability to recover and grow its economy. The report's author, Deborah Reed, stated that "By focusing on the quality of education at all levels, from preschool to the state's universities, policy makers can improve opportunities for Californians and create a work force to fuel future economic growth." Unfortunately, as lawmakers continue to bicker over budget cuts and economic stimulus plans, decisions are being made in Sacramento that are counterproductive to recovery efforts and will force even greater numbers of workers onto the unemployment rolls. For example, the order to stop construction on important capital facilities projects, including at public universities, will invariably lead to higher costs for those projects later on, as well as delays in meeting the needs for which those facilities were approved in the first place. For the first time in its history, the CSU system has been forced to limit enrollment growth in order to preserve the integrity of its programs and services, and to again consider increasing fees. These actions, in combination with another recent decision in Sacramento to not only cut funding for crucial financial aid programs that help the neediest students, but also to withhold disbursement of all Cal Grant funds, place the CSU system, its campuses and its students in an untenable position. For California State University, Stanislaus, the current and proposed budget cuts, combined with costly unfunded mandates and severe budget cuts that continue to plague us from earlier economic downturns, force us to look at options that are detrimental to the health of our great universities and, in turn, to the economic recovery of our state and nation. In an effort to balance the budget, CSUS has taken steps that will wipe out one-time funding of $2.4 million generated through our recent agreement with Clearwire, reduce all division budgets by $1.9 million, and deplete the University- wide Trust Fund ($960,000), for a total of $5.36 million in identified cuts, plus an additional $445,000 yet to be determined. This brings our total cut in the current fiscal year to about $5.8 million. Since the majority of cuts identified represent one-time dollars, not base, we will have to go back to the drawing board to identify base cuts for 2009-10, knowing that we have no more reserves or one-time dollars from which to draw. The magnitude of the impact on our programs and services and on our students and work force -- and ultimately on communities -- will be more clearly defined in the coming months, but we know it won't be pretty. Through it all, CSUS is committed to providing a top-quality higher education experience for our students. We remain true to our vision "to become a major center of learning, intellectual pursuit, artistic excellence and cultural engagement for California's greater Central Valley and beyond. We will serve our diverse student body, communities and state by creating programs, partnerships and leaders that respond effectively to an evolving and interconnected world." The CSU system prepares the majority of California's work force, providing more than 90,000 graduates every year. For every dollar the state invests in the CSU, $4.41 is returned to the economy. Restricting the number of graduates that our public colleges and universities are able to produce will only exacerbate the state's ability to meet both short- and long-term needs for a more educated work force. Please join me in reminding our state leaders that severely cutting education budgets during difficult economic times is a counterintuitive measure with tremendous cost implications for the future. To truly restore California's position and influence in the world's economy, the governor and Legislature must prioritize and reinvest in the education of its residents. Shirvani is president of California State University, Stanislaus. The Modesto Bee Return to Top of Page
Study Sees an Obama Effect as Lifting Black Test-Takers
Educators and policy makers, including Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, have said in recent days that they hope President Obama’s example as a model student could inspire millions of American students, especially blacks, to higher academic performance. Now researchers have documented what they call an Obama effect, showing that a performance gap between African-Americans and whites on a 20-question test administered before Mr. Obama’s nomination all but disappeared when the exam was administered after his acceptance speech and again after the presidential election. The inspiring role model that Mr. Obama projected helped blacks overcome anxieties about racial stereotypes that had been shown, in earlier research, to lower the test-taking proficiency of African-Americans, the researchers conclude in a report summarizing their results. “Obama is obviously inspirational, but we wondered whether he would contribute to an improvement in something as important as black test-taking,” said Ray Friedman, a management professor at Vanderbilt University, one of the study’s three authors. “We were skeptical that we would find any effect, but our results surprised us.” The study has not yet undergone peer review, and two academics who read it on Thursday said they would be interested to see if other researchers would be able to replicate its results. Dr. Friedman and his fellow researchers, David M. Marx, a professor of social psychology at San Diego State University, and Sei Jin Ko, a visiting professor in management and organizations at Northwestern, have submitted their study for review to The Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Dr. Friedman said. “It’s a very small sample, but certainly a provocative study,” said Ronald F. Ferguson, a Harvard professor who studies the factors that have affected the achievement gap between white and nonwhite students, which shows up on nearly every standardized test. “There is a certainly a theoretical foundation and some empirical support for the proposition that Obama’s election could increase the sense of competence among African-Americans, and it could reduce the anxiety associated with taking difficult test questions.” Researchers in the last decade assembled university students with identical SAT scores and administered tests to them, discovering that blacks performed significantly poorer when asked at the start to fill out a form identifying themselves by race. The researchers attributed those results to anxiety that caused them to tighten up during exams in which they risked confirming a racial stereotype. In the study made public on Thursday, Dr. Friedman and his colleagues compiled a brief test, drawing 20 questions from the verbal sections of the Graduate Record Exam, and administering it four times to about 120 white and black test-takers during last year’s presidential campaign. In total, 472 Americans — 84 blacks and 388 whites — took the exam. Both white and black test-takers ranged in age from 18 to 63, and their educational attainment ranged from high school dropout to Ph.D. On the initial test last summer, whites on average correctly answered about 12 of 20 questions, compared with about 8.5 correct answers for blacks, Dr. Friedman said. But on the tests administered immediately after Mr. Obama’s nomination acceptance speech, and just after his election victory, black performance improved, rendering the white-black gap “statistically nonsignificant,” he said. “It’s a nice piece of work,” said G. Gage Kingsbury, a testing expert who is a director at the Northwest Evaluation Association, who read the study on Thursday. But Dr. Kingsbury wondered whether the Obama effect would extend beyond the election, or prove transitory. “I’d want to see another study replicating their results before I get too excited about it,” he said. The New York Times Return to Top of Page
President Obama Signs American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
Secretary Arne Duncan praised the President and Congress, saying that the Act presents a "historic opportunity to create jobs and advance education reform." ED.Gov 'School Improvement' Gets $1 Billion Bonus in Stimulus Posted: 17 Feb 2009 11:38 AM CST After the economic-stimulus bill left the U.S. House of Representatives, education programs lost money. Except for one. Funding for the "school improvement grant" program under NCLB's Title I fell to $1 billion in the Senate bill from $2 billion in the House bill. But in the final version, it's up to $3 billion. For a complete breakdown, see page 168 of the bill language on the House Appropriations Committee Web site. The additional money for school improvement came at the expense of Title I grants to districts. Funding for those grants fell by $1 billion, to $10 billion in the final deal from $11 billion in the House bill. The $3 billion for school improvement will be spread over fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The money marks a huge increase over what was available in the Bush years. The program received $125 million in fiscal 2007 and $491 million in fiscal 2008. If you want to see how the money will be spent, you can read the NCLB law for yourself, starting at Section 1003. |
For Education Chief, Stimulus Means Power and Risk
SAM DILLON
Published: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 at 4:13 a.m.
Last Modified: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 at 4:13 a.m. WASHINGTON — The $100 billion in emergency aid for public schools and colleges in the economic stimulus bill could transform Arne Duncan into an exceptional figure in the history of federal education policy: a secretary of education loaded with money and the power to spend large chunks of it as he sees fit. But the money also poses challenges and risks for Mr. Duncan, the 44-year-old former Chicago schools chief who now heads the Department of Education. Mr. Duncan must develop procedures on the fly for disbursing a budget that has, overnight, more than doubled, and communicate the rules quickly to all 50 states and the nation’s 14,000 school districts. And he faces thousands of tricky decisions about how much money to give to whom and for what. “It’ll be wonderful fun for a time for his team — it’ll be like Christmas,” said Chester Finn, a former Department of Education official who has watched education secretaries or commissioners come and go here since the mid-1960s. “But the thing about discretionary spending is that it makes more people angry than it makes happy.” The bill, which President Obama is expected to sign on Tuesday, doubles federal spending on disadvantaged and disabled children, includes hefty increases in the main federal college scholarship program and for Head Start, and, for the first time, makes billions in federal dollars available for school renovation. Expectations are running so high, and the appetite for information is so large among the nation’s educators, that when Mr. Duncan organized a conference call last Wednesday to begin explaining the stimulus bill’s terms to a few dozen state and district superintendents, 800 callers swamped the switchboard. Most of Mr. Duncan’s unusual power would come in disbursing a $54 billion stabilization fund intended to prevent public sector layoffs, mostly in schools. The bill sets aside $5 billion of that to reward states, districts and schools for setting high standards and narrowing achievement gaps between poor and affluent students. The law lets Mr. Duncan decide which states deserve awards and which programs merit special financing. “It’s hard to imagine moving that much money that quickly,” said Margaret Spellings, Mr. Duncan’s predecessor, who turned her seventh-floor office over to him last month. “The point is, it’s never been done before, and as much confidence as I have in Arne Duncan, there’s an awesome opportunity for slippage with that much money moving through the meat grinder.” Maybe Ms. Spellings is slightly jealous, since she and other secretaries stretching back decades had only small amounts of money for favored projects. “Teeny, teeny,” said Amy Wilkins, who as vice president at the Education Trust, a civil rights group, has studied the budgets of several of Mr. Duncan’s predecessors. “Margaret was looking for quarters in her pencil drawer.” Mr. Duncan said he understood the unusual circumstances. “There’s going to be this extraordinary influx of resources,” he said in an interview. “So people say, ‘You’re going to be the most powerful secretary ever,’ but I have no interest in that. Power has never motivated me. What I love is opportunity, and this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to do something special, to drive change, to make our schools better.” Mr. Duncan said he intended to reward school districts, charter schools and nonprofit organizations that had demonstrated success at raising student achievement — “islands of excellence,” he called them. Programs that tie teacher pay to classroom performance will most likely receive money, as will other approaches intended to raise teacher quality, including training efforts that pair novice instructors with veteran mentors, and after-school and weekend tutoring programs. The stimulus money will help states avert some, but most likely not all, of the education cutbacks for the 2009-10 school year resulting from state budget shortfalls that currently total some $132 billion. California, for instance, is facing a $41 billion budget shortfall, much of it in school spending, but will receive some $11 billion in education money from the stimulus, estimates the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers union. The positions of deputy secretary, under secretary and chief of staff and dozens of other senior posts at the Education Department remain unfilled, so Mr. Duncan is relying on help from career officers and consultants. He has appointed teams to develop procedures for distributing the stimulus billions quickly, and many aides, he said, have been working evenings and weekends to begin organizing the effort. “I want all of us to work hard enough and smart enough to take full advantage of this, because it’ll never happen again,” Mr. Duncan said last month in his first speech to hundreds of civil servants at department headquarters, as the outlines of the huge stimulus package were taking shape in Congress. Urging department employees not to be deferential, he described the reception he got on his first visit to his headquarters. “It was like, ‘Hello, Mr. Secretary-designate-nominee,’ and it didn’t feel right,” Mr. Duncan said. “My name is Arne. It’s not Mr. Secretary. Please just call me Arne.” That line drew a standing ovation. He has hit it off well with Congress, too, so far. His wife, Karen, whom Mr. Duncan met in Australia, where he played professional basketball after his 1987 graduation from Harvard, accompanied him to his Senate confirmation, along with their daughter, Claire, 7, and son, Ryan, 4, who sat quietly during the hearing, reading storybooks. “If you and your wife have done such a great job with Ryan, who is so well behaved, I hope you can do that with every child in American classrooms,” said Senator Johnny Isakson, Republican of Georgia. Another Republican senator, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, said Mr. Obama had made “several distinguished cabinet appointments.” “I think you’re the best,” Mr. Alexander, who was education secretary under the first President Bush, said to Mr. Duncan. But now comes the hard part. Last year the Education Department distributed about $59 billion to states, school districts and colleges, most of it along well-worn financing paths mapped out by Congress. “Congress usually spends two years debating the rules for how to spend $50 million,” said Jack Jennings, president of the Center on Education Policy, a research organization in Washington. “But this time they’re providing money without spelling out how it should be spent, so Arne Duncan and his staff are going to have to work out rules themselves in just weeks. He’s going to have his hands full.” Congress has stipulated some rules, of course. To receive a share of the $54 billion stabilization fund, governors must make several “assurances” to Mr. Duncan, intended to drive school reforms: that they are developing statewide data systems that can allow schools to track individual students’ academic progress, that they are assigning experienced teachers fairly to rich and poor schools alike, and so on. Mr. Duncan has the ticklish job of ruling on whether the governors’ assurances are convincing. And Congress has given him a $5 billion incentive fund that he can use to reward states that are raising student achievement and withhold money from states that are not. “We have states that tell the public that 90 percent of kids are meeting state standards,” Mr. Duncan said, “but when we look at how they’re doing on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, it’s nowhere close. I’m not going to reward that. I want to be transparent about the good, bad and the ugly.” Some states and districts will get less than what they believe is their share, which could create powerful enemies. “Secretary Duncan has a very challenging job,” said Joel Packer, a lobbyist for the National Education Association. “It’ll take a lot of effort to get this right.”
TimesDaily.com
Sacramento school district seeks tenants for its office space rfaturechi@sacbee.com Published Tuesday, Feb. 17, 2009
When college students run low on cash, they often give up the luxury of their own room and put feelers out for a roommate or two.
Apparently, the same goes for school districts.
Expecting up to $15 million in midyear funding cuts from the state, the Sacramento City Unified School District is looking to expand a program that rents office space at the district headquarters to outside groups.
"I guess it's like a person who has a home and has more space than they need," said district spokeswoman Maria Lopez.
When the Serna Center was built about six years ago at 5735 47th Ave., about 100 more employees worked at the facility than do now.
Due to layoffs and attrition over the years, space has opened up, leaving more than 10,000 square feet of office space vacant.
Since the district owns the building, administrators hope to lure city organizations, community groups or private businesses.
The district is offering roughly 15 percent of its office space at the Serna Center for $1 to $2 per square foot.
"We need to take advantage of our assets," said Deputy Superintendent Tom Barentson.
"We needed to do this anyway whether the budget crisis was here or not. But obviously this has accelerated it."
Barentson said the district will be working to rearrange rentable office space to allow for easy accessibility to tenants, placing leased offices on the first floor with their own entrances and locks.
A parks and recreation organization – a fourth "R" – is already renting 2,285 square feet of office space at the Serna Center for $3,770.25 a month including utilities.
The organization's operations manager, Dave Mitchell, said the facility sharing has gone smoothly.
The organization's 12 staffers get their own entrance, address and security alarms.
"It's all separate so we can operate independent of the school district," Mitchell said.
Though the district is reaching out to a variety of organizations, administrators said they wouldn't rent to just anyone, leery of getting stuck with an incompatible roommate.
Organizations involved with tobacco and alcohol sales, and other groups the district deemed unsavory, would be barred.
"You know, no tattoo parlors," Lopez said.
This story is taken from Sacbee / Our Region / Top Stories
Can merit pay for Michigan teachers boost student performance?
BY PEGGY WALSH-SARNECKI
FREE PRESS EDUCATION WRITER A major push to tie teacher pay in Michigan to student performance is expected in the coming months, with President Barack Obama and his choice to lead the U.S. Department of Education having expressed their support for the once-taboo notion. Teacher pay has been based almost entirely on seniority and education for the last 80 years. But at least three Michigan school districts have some form of merit pay, and report mostly positive results -- although they all shy away from using the term "merit pay." Two others -- Grand Rapids and Fennville -- considered it before discussions fizzled in the past two years. It's too early to tell exactly how the president's stated support for merit pay and Education Secretary Arne Duncan's use of it while in charge of Chicago Public Schools will translate to the classroom, but educators say it's certain that giving a little extra to teachers for students doing well will be part of their education strategy. "The public supports paying teachers on the basis of performance," said Thomas Toch, codirector of Education Sector, an independent think tank. "They believe that there are good teachers and bad teachers and they want to do anything that increases the number of good teachers." Union leaders caution that there is no conclusive evidence that incentive plans work. Early experiments rewarding teachers individually led to questions about whether such systems were a disincentive for collaboration and teamwork. And teachers generally do not support incentive plans that reward some teachers in a building more than others. "That's pitting professional against professional," said Michael Fields, a third-grade teacher in Au Gres-Sims Public Schools, which has an incentive pay plan that rewards the entire staff in a given school. Critics charge that systems that don't take into account student performance are inherently unfair because they reward the best teachers the same as the worst. "There's nothing in there on how well you teach or how well you actually impact student achievement," said Steve Kimball, a researcher with the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The questions to critics of tenure-based systems are what form should merit pay take, and how to pay for it. Some plans focus on student performance, usually measured by standardized tests. Teachers generally favor multiple measures and oppose being rated on test scores alone. One survey found only one-third of teachers in schools that have merit pay based on multiple measures said performance pay is a negative influence, compared with twice that many teachers opposing merit pay in other surveys, Toch said. "We're not universally opposed to merit pay, especially the kinds of programs that President Obama is talking about," said Doug Pratt, Michigan Education Association spokesman. Obama almost certainly would have to fuel any merit pay plans with federal dollars. His economic stimulus package is expected to include money for merit pay, said Jane Glickman, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Education. "If the state cuts back on what they're supposed to pay the districts, the districts are going to be having to cut back somewhere," said Jim Phillips, a physical education and health teacher in Grand Blanc Community Schools, where teachers work under an incentive system. "Not everybody can afford this." Contact PEGGY WALSH-SARNECKI at 586-826-7262 or mmwalsh@freepress.com. Additional Facts Detroit Free Press
The feds give, California takes : So, how much money do we have? By Denis C. Theriault
Mercury News
Posted: 02/14/2009 05:03:23 PM PST
In case you haven't heard, the federal government is about to give: It's offering tax breaks, college grants, unemployment help, even money to weatherize your house.
But California, wouldn't you know it, wants to take away: It's planning cuts in education and health care benefits for the poor, and to increase taxes on everything from your T-shirt to your car — and the gasoline you'll need to put in it.
Which raises an interesting question: Just how much will any of us actually be getting? Yeah, good luck with that one.
"Go ahead and give me $800," Susy Rivera, 55, of Milpitas quipped last week about the federal tax credit. "Arnie's just going to grab it all."
Chalk it up to bad timing. Saturday, elected officials in Sacramento finally were on the verge of approving a bandage big enough for California's $40 billion budget gash after months of trying, and Monday, President Barack Obama is expected to sign the largest (so far) one-time splurge in the history of our republic.
The two appear destined for an awkward collision, all over our pocketbooks, spreadsheets and savings accounts.
Consider a few examples:
Washington wants to give back hundreds of dollars to every middle-class and poor family; Sacramento will raise the gas tax 12 cents a gallon and add a surcharge on income tax. Washington wants to give college students an extra $500 to pay for school; Sacramento will whack education funding, reducing available spots for students.
'Catch-22'
And while Sacramento will charge you more for sales tax if you buy a new car, Washington will let you write that tax off.
"It's a Catch-22," said Dean Bishop, a sales manager at San Jose's Mission Valley Ford Truck Sales, which — like most dealers across the state — has seen better days. "Raising the sales tax is going to kill us."
To be fair, it's not like lawmakers meant to make things more complicated. Sacramento has never seen a budget mess like this one. And it would be cutting even more if not for the billions of dollars in extra gravy soon to flow from Washington — money on top of what the federal government normally spends on the state.
But if it's tough enough to craft a budget in OK times, the unprecedented uncertainty — and now the difficult math of figuring out which federal gains might replace all the state losses — has left things, well, insane.
"This is by far the worst year ever. Absolutely," said Ann Jones, budget czar for the San Jose Unified School District. She has to coordinate "literally thousands" of different sums from both Sacramento and Washington.
At least now, she said, there's a hint of resolution, if even if it's not pretty.
"We need our leaders to make decisions," she said. "We can move forward if we have a decision."
That's not good enough for Martha Kanter, chancellor of the Foothill-De Anza Community College District. Her staff members might finally get going on the district's budget now, but whatever they come up with won't ease her mind.
"We're not expecting any kind of miracle cure from Washington," she said, noting that the fed's one-time largesse won't solve California's systemic cash-flow problems. "It's a wonderful gift, but the relief is not structural relief."
Waiting for ink to dry
For some taxpayers and business owners, though, the charts and spreadsheets comparing how the federal credits match against the state's increases have been plain overwhelming.
"I don't think a lot of people are thinking about it yet," said Tony Robinson, 48, of San Jose, who owns Texas Roadhouse restaurant in Union City. "Because you don't know how it affects you until it does."
Added Alan, a 50-year-old from Salinas who declined to give his last name: "It's not worth anything on paper until it's signed. Then it'll be something I'll be looking at."
And then there's Rivera, the Milpitas woman, out of work since October and attending classes to become a medical assistant. She's already looked, at least a little bit, and she hasn't liked what she's seen so far — even without the governor's grab.
"Eight hundred dollars?" she said of the federal tax break. "It'll buy groceries for a few weeks."
Contact Denis C. Theriault at dtheriault@mercurynews.com or (408) 275-2002.
mercurynews.com
Stimulus Includes $5 Billion Flexible Fund for Education Innovation
By Maria Glod Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, February 14, 2009; A10
Education Secretary Arne Duncan would have $5 billion under the stimulus bill to back new approaches to improve schools, a fund that could prod states to raise standards and reward top teachers as the Obama administration presides over a massive infusion of federal education aid.
The Race to the Top Fund, as Duncan calls it, is part of about $100 billion the bill would channel to public schools, universities and early childhood education programs nationwide, helping stave off teacher layoffs, keep class sizes in check and jump-start efforts to revamp aging schools.
But the windfall also could mark the beginning of a deeper transformation of schools seven years after the No Child Left Behind law mandated an expansion of testing and new systems for school accountability.
"This is what I see as just an absolute historic opportunity," Duncan told reporters yesterday. He said the stimulus bill would help the Obama administration hammer three themes: "First and foremost, protecting children. Secondly, saving and creating jobs. And third, pushing a significant reform agenda."
President Obama in recent days has repeatedly stressed a bold approach to improve public education. In a surprise foray out of the White House last week to read to schoolchildren, he chose a D.C. public charter school as a backdrop.
"What I've asked Arne Duncan to do is to make sure that he works as hard as he can over the next several years to make sure that we're reforming our schools, that we're rewarding innovation the way that it's taking place here," Obama said at Capital City Public Charter School.
Obama campaigned on promises to increase federal funding for schools, responding to complaints from teachers unions and many educators who have long argued that Washington has made demands on schools without paying its fair share. But he also said he would shake up the status quo, drawing on a host of methods, including performance-pay plans with teachers' blessing, alternative teacher training programs and charter schools, which are publicly financed but independently run.
The stimulus presents an unheard-of opportunity to push both agendas -- at least in the short term.
"You're not creating winners or losers," said Brown University education professor Martin West. "It's a lot easier to innovate when you can do it with new money."
Even as school leaders line up projects to overhaul old schools and seek ways to soften budget cuts, they also are on the lookout for innovative programs worthy of federal dollars and the national spotlight.
Arlington County Superintendent Robert G. Smith said he might seek a grant from Duncan to expand a program that provides extra support for Latino and African American students in Advanced Placement classes.
Montgomery County Superintendent Jerry D. Weast said federal backing for innovation is "a smart move" because some of the best school reform strategies percolate from the ground up. "The reason why Montgomery County does so well . . . is innovative teaching and learning, so there's no doubt our people have great ideas."
Over two years, the stimulus bill would funnel $53.6 billion to states to prevent layoffs and create jobs, and the bulk of that would go to schools and universities, including funds to modernize aging buildings. Another $25 billion would help students who are disabled or in poverty, groups the federal government has long pitched in to educate.
The package includes $17 billion to increase the maximum Pell Grant for needy college students by $500, to $5,350, and about $4 billion to expand federal preschool classes and child-care programs.
Duncan's $5 billion fund would be a pot of discretionary money much larger than any of his predecessors had, former education secretary Margaret Spellings said. It would allow Duncan to award grants to states that show progress in boosting student achievement, and he said it would support efforts to create better tests and shore up data systems to track student achievement.
He said he also would seek to use the fund "to really challenge states and partner with them to dramatically raise standards . . . and think very differently about how we recruit great teachers, reward them, recognize and incent them."
The fund would include $650 million to support partnerships between schools, or schools and nonprofit groups, to "scale up what works," Duncan said. Separately, the stimulus bill would include $200 million for teacher performance-pay programs.
Alexa Marrero, spokeswoman for Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (Calif.), ranking Republican on the House Education and Labor Committee, said there is broad support for many of the initiatives Duncan is likely to push. But she said education policy should be crafted through debate over reauthorization of the 2002 No Child Left Behind law, not as part of the stimulus package.
"Congress has really worked hard to set out a path for reforming No Child Left Behind and for education reform more broadly," Marrero said. "The fact that legislation that is supposed to be about economic stimulus is being used to enact substantive education reform without the benefit of open debate and the inclusion of the American people, that's where the concern lies."
Education committee Chairman George Miller (D-Calif.) said the fund will be critical to improving professional development for teachers and creating career incentives for those who take on additional responsibilities.
"This is a very serious amount of money in its total amount for education," Miller said. "Both the president and the secretary do not want to lose a year or two in the efforts to achieve reform that are necessary to create a modern, effective school system throughout this country."
Washington Post
Secretary Arne Duncan Speaks at the 91st Annual Meeting of the American Council on Education
FOR RELEASE: February 9, 2009 Speaker sometimes deviates from text.
U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan delivered remarks today at the American Council on Education's (ACE) 2009 Annual Meeting in Washington, D.C. The ACE represents accredited, degree-granting colleges and universities and higher education in the U.S. Together, ACE member institutions represent almost 80 percent of today's college students.
Good afternoon and thank you.
It's hard to believe Barack Obama was sworn in less than three weeks ago. This city seems to pack three or four days into every 24-hour period—and the news changes so frequently that it's hard to stay abreast.
On the other hand, 91 years ago—when the American Council on Education was founded—we had an academic in the White House, we were a nation at war—and we were confronting a new global economic and political reality that required us to think differently and act boldly.
So in some ways things haven't changed. Today we're fighting a war that diverts us from other priorities. We face a new global reality that requires us to think differently and act boldly. And once again we have an academic for a president.
But this President is different from all of the others who came before him.
Unlike most of them, he did not grow up in privilege. Everything he and the First Lady have is because of their education and their hard work.
Unlike all of them, he and his wife are African-American—and the fact that they are minorities provides an extraordinary opportunity to inspire all Americans to learn.
I call it the Barack effect. It's the soft power that accompanies the symbolism of an African-American president who has made education cool and exciting and infinitely promising.
This is not insignificant. I grew up on the South Side of Chicago working and living with young children of color.
These kids were threatened every day. They lacked role models to protect them and guide them to a safe place where learning was valued and rewarded.
Barack and Michelle Obama can be those role models on a national scale—and that's just one reason I am hopeful.
I am also hopeful because the leadership in Congress is so committed to education. They are very passionate about the issue—and they recognize its importance to our future.
I am hopeful because of the incredible progress in school districts, colleges and universities all across the country—developing new learning models—new educational approaches—and bringing new energy and ideas to the field of education.
From Teach for America to the KIPP charter schools to instructional innovations at colleges and universities, we have proven strategies ready to go to scale.
We also have the greatest higher education system in the world for people who can access it.
And I am especially hopeful because the stimulus package on the Hill includes a historic level of one-time education funding that will not only save or create jobs but will also lay the groundwork for a generation of education reform and progress.
While the numbers are still fluid and the Senate bill is different from the House, it appears that there will be enough money to close the shortfall in Pell grant funding and boost grants by several hundred dollars.
There will also be an expanded tuition tax credit to make college more affordable.
There will be some money to help stabilize states—though not nearly as much as we need. The Senate version is only half of what the House approved.
During the conference process, we need to push for every dollar we can get because public universities and community colleges desperately need that money to avert cuts—and it is crucial that it pass quickly.
This is not just good education policy. It's good economic policy.
According to a University of Washington study that will be released later today, almost 600,000 education jobs are at risk of state budget cuts.
Without that state money, hundreds of thousands teachers and professors will be collecting unemployment instead of teaching children and young people.
Astonishingly, the Senate proposal has dropped the money for school modernization that was approved by the House—which makes no sense—since it would create new jobs quickly.
There are shovel-ready education projects in schools and universities all across America.
Later this week I will be traveling to a suburban community college with projects just waiting for funding—so I am hopeful that the construction money survives.
Finally, I am very excited about a $15 billion "Race to the Top" fund approved by the House. The Senate version is somewhat smaller but it is still significant.
The President is deeply committed to this program because it will enable us to spur reform on a national scale—driving school systems to adopt college and career-ready, internationally benchmarked standards.
It will incent them to put in place state of the art data collection systems, assessments and curricula to meet these higher standards.
And it will encourage states to recruit, train, mentor and support a great, new generation of teachers who can better prepare our students for college and work.
Taken together—the Barack effect—the leadership on the Hill—the proven strategies—and the money in the stimulus package—represent what I call—the perfect storm for reform—a historic alignment of interests and events that could lift American education to an entirely new level.
Given the state of our economy, the pace of technological change, and the scope of our collective challenges—no other issue is more pressing.
While we have a vital higher education system in America and a research arm that is the envy of the world—college is beyond the reach of most Americans—and high school is not nearly enough.
I don't need to tell you that America has lost its global leadership in education.
K-12 achievement levels leave millions of young people unprepared for work or for college.
This is a national crisis that is rapidly creating an entire class of Americans who are unable to share in the benefits of a modern, progressive and productive society.
There simply are no good jobs for people without an education.
As all of you know—the rubber meets the road when they show up at your school. Too many of them need remedial programs just to keep up.
Too many take too long to finish.
Two year programs stretch to three or four years. Four year degrees stretch to six.
Many students simply never get through—either for academic or financial reasons—or because they just don't get the support they need.
And the question is, what can we do about it? What can we do together—not only to make college more accessible—but to boost our overall success rate?
We have to start by recognizing that our system of education is not aligned. Every state has different high school standards.
If we accomplish one thing in the coming years—it should be to eliminate the extreme variation in standards across America.
I know that talking about standards can make people nervous—but the notion that we have fifty different goalposts is absolutely ridiculous.
A high school diploma needs to mean something—no matter where it's from.
We need standards that are college-ready and career-ready, and benchmarked against challenging international standards.
We also need to break the culture of blame in which colleges blame high schools and high schools blame grade schools and grade schools blame parents for our failures.
We are all part of one system of learning that begins at birth and never stops.
The President talked about responsibility in his inaugural speech.
He tells parents that raising children is a job that requires time, energy, resources, love and commitment.
He tells unions that with American education in crisis—we can't be limited by ideology.
We all must honestly acknowledge failed strategies of the past and explore new ones—from charter schools to performance pay—and if they're not working we must be honest about that also.
So—I'm here today to extend that message to the higher education community. We face a number of challenges—starting with graduation rates.
We must work together to ensure that young people are not overwhelmed by financial, social or academic pressures and choose to drop out.
We are all defined by their success.
We can make the financial aid process simpler and make college more affordable—both in good economic times and in bad ones.
We need to ensure that federal loans continue to be available to every student and parent that qualifies—and we must do more to keep college affordable.
We can work together to strengthen colleges of education that will produce the next generation of teachers.
We need to challenge ourselves at the Department of Education as well.
Instead of being a compliance-driven bureaucracy we must become an engine of innovation, reform and support. I know from my time as a superintendent that we are a long way from meeting that goal.
So today, I offer my hand in partnership to you. I pledge the full power and authority of this administration to help advance the educational interests of our students.
Our education system—at every level—can and should be the best.
We remain the world's melting pot—welcoming people of every culture and offering them an opportunity that no other country in the world provides.
We are still a beacon of hope to people throughout the world who live under tyranny, ignorance and poverty.
For the millions and millions of struggling Americans who wake up each day and worry about the uncertain future that awaits their children—we remain their only path to a meaningful and rewarding life.
Providing every child in America with a good education is both a moral imperative and an economic imperative.
It's also a matter of social justice. It is the civil rights issue of our generation—the one and only way to overcome the differences of wealth, background and race that divide us and deny us our future.
I came to Washington with one goal—to give every single child in America the very best education possible.
I know that you and so many others share that goal—and I am absolutely confident that with your help, the President's leadership, and the support of our Congress and the American people, that goal will be met.
Thank you. www.ed.gov Return to Top of Page
Redwood City district to take over charter school By Shaun Bishop
Daily News Staff Writer
Posted: 02/11/2009 11:55:24 PM PST
Faced with crippling cuts in state funding, Garfield Charter School officials have decided not to seek a renewal of the school's charter and will let the Redwood City School District take over next school year.
The board for the K-8 school, located in unincorporated North Fair Oaks, voted unanimously Monday to let Garfield's charter expire on June 30, ending its 15-year run as a charter school.
Executive Director Alexander Hunt said administrators were expecting to have to cut about $650,000 out of Garfield's $5.5 million budget, based on several state budget proposals that are floating around Sacramento.
"They were really looking at what they would be able to offer students given the kinds of cuts we would need to stay in operation," Hunt said.
"Essentially, students would be able to receive more service and support as part of the district."
Some of the reductions on the table included cutting teacher development, reducing summer school programs and shortening the regular school day by 20 minutes, Hunt said.
The nine-member Garfield board, made up of parents, teachers and community members, decided reverting to the district was a better option for the 675 students.
"It comes down to what we can do for kids," Hunt said.
Garfield was founded in 1994 as the 49th charter school in California. Becoming a public school will allow Garfield to eliminate administrative functions — such as human resources and a business manager — that the school currently has to provide itself.
Because all of Garfield's teachers and staff are employees of the school and not the district, they will all have to reapply for jobs with the district, said Superintendent Jan Christensen.
She said officials will be discussing a transition plan, including whether the district will have open jobs for all of Garfield's employees.
"It's unfortunate because I know it has had a long history, and we hope to be able to work in collaboration with the Garfield board and Alex (Hunt) to have a smooth transition," Christensen said.
Christensen said there will likely be changes in the school's academics, though the school has recently begun using more strategies and curriculum materials that other district schools use. Hunt said the school will use the same campus at 3600 Middlefield Road.
The district is facing financial trouble of its own and is considering laying off 70 people, though the cuts are speculative until a budget deal is finalized in Sacramento.
"The sooner we know that, we'll know what our economic situation is," Christensen said.
The conversion of a charter school into a public school has happened in only a "small handful" of cases, said Gary Larson, spokesman for the California Charter Schools Association.
"In the midst of budget cuts, this is a unique situation," Larson said.
E-mail Shaun Bishop at sbishop@dailynewsgroup.com. San Jose Mercury News
GOP Legislators Get an "F" in Education You don't expect to see school superintendents leading a protest march. But after facing several years of cutting staff, slashing already tight budgets, and begging foundations and businesses to help pay for education basics, the state's local school administrators have reached the limits of their patience. California currently ranks 46th in per-student spending, with the nation's most overcrowded classrooms and severe shortages of teachers, counselors, nurses, and librarians.
If Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and his Republican colleagues in the state legislature get their way, California could soon have the dubious distinction of ranking last among states in its commitment to public education.
So this Wednesday (February 11) , school chiefs from around the state will travel to Sacramento and rally in front of the State Capital to protest further budget cuts.
To address the state's budget deficit, Schwarzenegger has proposed slashing another $ 9.7 billion in school spending (in addition to the $2.8 billion in cuts made in mid-year). If approved by the legislature, these cuts would push California dangerously close to the bottom of the 50 states. The cuts would force local school districts to lay off teachers, close schools, increase class sizes, and eliminate arts and music, advanced placement, tutoring, counseling, and other key programs. A $9.7 billion cut to K-12 schools is equivalent to shutting down every school across the state for 34 days; or increasing class sizes statewide by more than 50 percent; or laying off 140,000 classroom teachers or 240,000 bus drivers, janitors, food service workers, maintenance workers, and other education support professionals; or eliminating all music, art and career technical education programs statewide. As California Superintendent of School Jack O'Connell recently remarked, "Every teacher, every principal, and every superintendent I speak with wonders how we will make it through the next school year." Seven states - New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Maine, Wyoming, Vermont, and Alaska -- spend over $12,000 per student. The national average is $9,963. California ranks 46th at $7,571. To increase California's public school funding to the national average would require adding over $15 billion.
In California, public schools are mostly funded by the state government because a 1970s state court decision ruled that relying primarily on local funding widened the disparities between rich and poor districts. But no court has yet ruled that the state must provide sufficient funding to guarantee that every child gets a good education. So what we have in California are public schools that lack the basics that children should be able to take for granted, such as computers in classrooms, up-to-date textbooks, modern science labs, school nurses, library books and librarians, and instruments for music instruction and band. As we get deeper into the 21st century, California's school children are falling further and further behind their counterparts around the country -- a disastrous trend that can only handicap California's competitiveness in the national and global economy and undermine its future economic prosperity. And this chronic underfunding of education in California directly impacts our national competitiveness because one in eight school children in the entire country is educated in California public schools.
California's school budget crisis is a symptom of something deeper. California is one of only three states that require a two-thirds vote of the state legislature to pass a budget and raise taxes. This rule paralyzes state government from raising the revenues needed to meet basic needs. Even though the Democrats have large majorities in both houses of the state legislature, they still need three Republicans in each house to reach the two-thirds "supermajority" to pass a budget. And the way lawmakers have gerrymandered legislative districts, Republicans feel they are "safe" from defeat by any Democrat. Instead, they worry that they might face a challenge from any even more right-wing Republican. So they refuse to violate the GOP loyalty oath against raising taxes, even as they are about to run California off a fiscal cliff.
Schwartznegger, meanwhile, lacks the political courage to use his popularity to twist the arms of his fellow Republicans in the legislature, by, among other things, threatening to campaign against them. The major pro-education lobby groups have been holding local events throughout the state, as well as rallies in Sacramento, but they haven't yet shown the strength needed to make GOP legislators nervous in their own backyards . These groups -- the Parent Teacher Association (PTA), the California Teachers Association, the California School Boards Association , and the Association of California School Administrators (the superintendents) -- been trying to raise public awareness about the state's education crisis. But so far they haven't been able to mobilize enough support to pressure three Republican Assemblymembers and three Republican Senators to vote to raise taxes and adopt a responsible budget.
There is no quick fix to a budget problem that has been festering for years. In the short term, though, the most obvious solution is for the state legislature andGov. Schwarzenegger to agree to raise taxes . A recent poll by the Public Policy Institute of California found that "more Californians say they would rather pay higher taxes and have a state government that provides more services than pay lower taxes and have a state government that provides fewer services." And of all areas of state spending, they want most to protect K-12 school spending from cuts. The Governor and legislature could, for example, restore the Vehicle License Fee. When Schwarzenegger first ran for governor, he promised to kill the "car tax," a politically clever but fiscally irresponsible move that, with the legislature's approval, has cost the state over $27 billion in revenues in the past five years. Restoring this progressive tax back to the level that it stood at for 50 years -- equal to 2% of a car or truck's values -- would raise more than $5 billion a year. In addition, a 1.5 cent increase in the state sales tax would generate over $7 billion next year . If targeted for public schools, these revenues would stem the expected lay-offs of teachers and cuts to school programs, although California would still be far below the national average in per-student spending. California should be embarrassed by its failure to support public education. Currently, 4.4 percent of the state's personal income is spent on public schools, If that number were increased to the 5.6 percent level in 1972, when Ronald Reagan was governor, the state would take in an additional $22 billion. Although he was a conservative Reopublican , Reagan actually raised taxes while he was governor. In fact, his tax increase of $1 billion on a $6 billion budget was proportionately the biggest tax increase in California history. The budget deadlock isn't the result of the current economic downtown. The "supermajority" rule results in political paralysis and chronically late budgets in good times and bad times. Right now the state suffers from a $40 billion budget shortfall -- about $15 billion for the rest of this fiscal year and $25 next year, according to the nonpartisan California Budget Project. A handful of reactionary Republicans are able to hold California hostage by refusing to vote for a budget unless Democrats agree to slash school spending, environmental protections, rest breaks for workers, and other things that a civilized society should take for granted. Ultimately, California needs to get rid of the ridiculous rule that requires a "supermajority" two-thirds vote to pass a budget and to raise taxes. In the meantime, though, parents, teachers, and other supporters of public schools throughout California should let Governor Schwarzenegger and their state legislators know that our children deserve better than this. They can get more information from the California Education Coalition . Peter Dreier, professor of politics and chair of the Urban & Environmental Policy program at Occidental College, has two children in the Pasadena public schools. HuffingtonPost.com
| |
|