YouTube: DOE MEETING WITH PARENTS: A Conversation with Parents about Parental Involvement and Education

Washington DC: May 26, 2010:
"A new era of cooperation with parents, students and families across the nation"

IN EDUCATION REFORM, SOME STATES RACE FROM THE BOTTOM: According to a report by the New Teacher Project, state laws have disqualified some states from winning Race to the Top money

---

California was one of five states ranked least likely to compete for the money, according to a report released this August by the New Teacher Project.    “California will take whatever money it can get,” said Brian Edward, a policy analyst for EdSource, a California education watchdog.

---

by Chris Linden | Medhill Reports - Northwestern University.  A Washington publication of the Medill School.

Thursday, August 27, 2009 -- WASHINGTON—State officials are scrambling to win a federal competition that encourages education reform, but as they modify their education laws to get in line, high hurdles are forcing some of the states into a race from the bottom.

At stake is $4.35 billion in federal stimulus cash from the Department of Education. The Race to the Top Fund is only a small chunk, but states are finding it’s difficult to pass up the money.

Experts suggest Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is using Race to the Top as political leverage, positioning states for an upcoming revision to No Child Left Behind. Some states are perfectly positioned, experts said, but there’s a long road ahead for others.

“California will take whatever money it can get,” said Brian Edward, a policy analyst for EdSource, a California education watchdog.

California was one of five states ranked least likely to compete for the money, according to a report released this August by the New Teacher Project. The group, which supports initiatives to train teachers and measure their performance, also rated Nevada, Wisconsin, New York and Pennsylvania as ineligible because state laws and revised stimulus requests disqualify them from the federal competition.

To qualify, states must show reformed education laws fitting four federal priorities: standardized curriculum; building new student data systems; linking teacher performance to test scores, and raising the number of charter schools.

In California, the biggest hang-up involves the use of test data to evaluate a teacher’s effectiveness. State law prevents using students’ test scores to rate a teacher, except for the purposes of local school districts, where officials can monitor a student’s progress from year to year.

Secretary Duncan has several times called those laws a “firewall” that stall reform. He has suggested student test scores should be used to evaluate a teacher’s effectiveness.

Duncan’s suggestion has met with fierce resistance from teachers and their unions, who argue that student scores should not be a sole factor in evaluating teachers.

Chris Linden/MNS

Representatives for state and national teachers unions said test scores must be combined with other factors, such as observation by a principal, lesson planning forms and portfolios. They said they fear test data vary too much from year to year and build only a partial picture of a teacher’s performance.

“Just like we think a student is more than a number, we think a teacher is more than a test score,” said Robert Kim, a senior policy analyst for the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers union.

The temptation of those federal dollars, though, is driving states to fall in line. Officials in many states are proposing changes that would better position them for a stake in that cash from Washington. But places like California and Wisconsin, where the barriers are higher, will need more time to prepare, experts said.

States can apply for the money later this year, though other states will wait for the second phase in late 2010. Most states are mobilizing now.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in late August proposed sweeping changes to state laws that would link test scores to teacher performance, lift charter school caps and provide more options for children in under-performing schools.

Given the state’s budget crisis, it’s hard to pass up additional federal money, said Edward, the California policy analyst. Despite the best of intentions, it will take time to develop the best reforms, Edward said. California has a long road ahead.

“Right now, some of those [reforms] are a dream in California,” Edwards said.

AMID FISCAL CRISIS, L.A. GIVES SCHOOL SITE COUNCILS REINS

Published Online: July 14, 2009

Published in Print: July 15, 2009

By Stephen Sawchuk | Education Week

Los Angeles -- In theory, it is every school’s dream to control its own destiny, rather than having administrators impose spending plans and reform initiatives from the central office.

At Jefferson High School, one of the largest high schools here, a governing body made up of teachers, nonclassroom-based educators, parents, and Principal Michael Taft appears to be living the dream, to the extent such a thing is possible during a staggering fiscal crisis.

The leadership team, officially known as a “school site council,” has mainly used an infusion of federal stimulus funding to keep class sizes around 25 students. With its remaining money, it has preserved a successful “eighth period”—a mandatory after-school class for students struggling to pass the California High School Exit Exam, or CAHSEE, a graduation prerequisite.

The example sums up the goal of district leaders, who have allotted nearly $114 million in Title I economic-stimulus funds to school site councils like the one at Jefferson High to spend on their own needs.

Decentralized Decisionmaking

According to the California Education Code, school site councils are elected bodies charged with setting and measuring the effectiveness of improvement strategies at the school, seeking input from other school advisory committees, revising strategies and expenditures, and creating and monitoring the approved “single plan for student achievement”—a consolidated plan requested of schools receiving state or federal school improvement funding.

The councils are made up of:
• The principal
• Representatives of teachers selected by teachers at the school
• Other school personnel selected by peers at the school
• Parents of students attending the school selected by such parents
• Students selected by students attending the school (at the middle and high school levels)

Middle and high school councils are composed to ensure parity among the principal, classroom teachers, and other school personnel. additionally, they must ensure that equal numbers of parents or other community members selected by parents and students serve on the council.

SOURCE: California Education Code

“If parents and the community feel they have some responsibility, they’ll be accountable for the direction of the school,” said Ramon C. Cortines, the superintendent of the district. “When [a school] is faced with the draconian cuts I’ve made, ... [it] needs parents and the community to be engaged and involved on an ongoing basis.”

Decentralization has long been a rallying cry among constituents in this sprawling district of 700,000 students. But as some Los Angeles educators are discovering, it pays to be careful what you wish for.

The influx of money this year through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act carries much higher stakes for the site councils for several reasons. First, the funding will double some schools’ typical Title I allocations, and thus it will be closely scrutinized.

These are not funds for a rainy day; they are a stopgap. In preparing budgets, the councils have had to determine how many teaching positions to preserve, how small they can afford to keep class sizes, and which local initiatives are worth saving. Many are making those decisions for the first time.

In effect, the district has spread the decision about cutting programs and personnel from seven school board members to 700 councils.

The decentralization has been praised by some Los Angeles administrators for moving instructional policy closer to the schools. But it has raised the hackles of other administrators, some parent groups, and the teachers’ union.

“There was no transition plan to develop the capacity of these schools that in some cases received an embarrassment of riches,” said Bill Ring, who heads TransParent, a grassroots organization that seeks to increase parents’ voices in school decisions.

Back and Forth

Required by the California Education Code, the school site councils have been around since the 1970s. But the discretionary pots of money they oversee typically wax and wane depending on the current district leadership. Some superintendents have funneled more discretionary funding, including federal Title I aid for disadvantaged students, to the councils; others have chosen to manage those funds centrally.

Mr. Cortines, who became the district chief in 2008, has generally favored a more localized approach to school instruction. Previously, during a stint as Los Angeles’ interim superintendent, in 2000, he broke the district into subdistricts, each overseen by a superintendent.

His latest push for decentralizing is unusual, though, not only for the amount of money involved, but also in its timing.

As the councils geared up to meet this spring, Los Angeles officials watched as their tax revenues dropped and as Sacramento made a succession of cuts to state funding. To reduce the resulting shortfall, the school board canceled programming, sent out more than 4,000 layoff notices to teachers, and pared the central-office staff. Upon receiving its first stimulus allocations, the district put most of its state-stabilization money and eligible money from the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act toward its bottom-line deficit. But officials also decided to pass the Title I stimulus dollars to the councils, rather than filling in holes centrally.

With the money, schools could, for instance, “buy back” classroom teaching positions that had been eliminated under the central budget. Alternatively, they could choose to maintain after-school tutoring, preserve the jobs of school psychologists and counselors, or hire instructional coaches to help teachers make sense of the data from periodic student assessments.

More Discretionary Aid

In addition, the district liquidated a centrally run coaching program and federal Title II teacher-quality funding and disbursed those dollars to schools—a change officials said provided more discretionary aid to schools receiving small or no allocations under Title I.

The district, the Los Angeles teachers’ union, and others collaborated on a series of training sessions for school-site-council personnel, beginning last winter. Part of that training included mock council meetings to give educators clear examples of good and poor collaborative decisionmaking.

Mr. Cortines also gave each school a lot of data on student demographics and test scores to help the councils as they set their budgets.

Mr. Taft, the Jefferson High principal, and members of that school’s team—while not in agreement on every detail—felt it was worthwhile to maintain classroom teaching positions and the eighth period, and they had three years of higher scores to back up their decisions.

“Because of the success we’ve had, our parents are getting more involved in their child’s education,” Mr. Taft said. “When their child comes home and says he passed the math portion of the CAHSEE, that’s like handing them a $20 bill. They can see it, they can feel it, they understand it.”

But others say that Mr. Taft’s experience has been the exception, not the norm. Mr. Ring of the parents’ group said that the district’s efforts to build schools’ capacity to spend the money wisely have so far only scratched the surface.

“It’s exposure, not culture change,” he said of the training.

The teachers’ union, meanwhile, has grown increasingly critical of the plan, saying it has unnecessarily compromised teachers’ jobs and raised class sizes. District figures show that schools have kept a significant number of nonclassroom positions, such as coaches.

The district, officials of United Teachers Los Angeles say, shouldhave spent the stimulus money centrally to ensure a minimum class size for all elementary students and to preserve more classroom teaching positions.

“I honestly don’t think Ray [Cortines] understood that you can’t just snap your fingers and go turn an authoritarian system into a decentralized one,” said Daniel Barnhart, a UTLA board member.

The union has also accused the district of pressuring principals on the councils to maintain reading coaches over classroom teachers, and it has filed 17 grievances alleging that schools didn’t staff or conduct their councils in accordance with state law.

“Decentralization is illusory,” said Sean Leys, a teacher at Lincoln High School who went on a well-publicized hunger strike to protest the layoffs. “Without a doubt, there are hundreds of school councils that show no oversight because they have no idea what the role of the council is.”

District Response

Monica Garcia, the president of the Los Angeles school board, concedes that the district has more work to do on training. But she argues that the district’s centrally mandated strategies were not always effective for all schools.

Schools likely to benefit most under the shift are big high schools like Jefferson, which serves 2,800 students, many disadvantaged. At Jefferson, Mr. Taft estimates that during the upcoming school year, the council will oversee a total of $8 million to $9 million in regular Title I money, stimulus funding, and other state and federal bilingual education grants, for instance.

“For the first time, our large high schools have a good chunk of money to do things with,” Ms. Garcia said. “I think that is probably the silver lining, that these large underperforming high schools got attention on what they needed, rather than what we prescribed.”

And district officials flatly deny the union’s charge that they have acted as puppetmaster over councils and principals.

“It’s very frustrating because [the union] supported decentralization in 2000,” Mr. Cortines said. “But it came to the bottom line. If [the council] didn’t spend the money the way UTLA wanted, it was wrong.”Michelle King, a local area superintendent in west Los Angeles, said that schools there did make classroom teachers a priority.

But councils nevertheless struggled with the buy-back process because of seniority provisions in the district contract, she said. Local schools budget classroom “positions,” so buy-backs do not guarantee the return of beloved instructors—merely teachers who fit the appropriate categories and are next on the seniority roll.

“I think of all the messages, that was the one we had to repeat over and over,” Ms. King said.

Still, Ms. King expects councils to take on more responsibilities over time, such as promoting school safety and ensuring spending is aligned with academic goals.

“[Decentralization] was a shock to the system, but it’s something the community has been asking for a long time,” she said.

Observers hope for the best, but some harbor doubts. David Tokofsky, a consultant for the principals’ union and a former school board member, worries not just about the logistics of the move, but has a philosophical concern, too.

While it may complete Mr. Cortines’ long-held decentralization plans, it may not satisfy the reform-minded rhetoric coming from President Barack Obama’s administration on the use of stimulus funds, he suggested.

“They say all politics are local politics. Well, in Los Angeles, we say all politics are ‘loco’ politics,” Mr. Tokofsky said. “And right now, the politics of the past are racing forward at the very time that Obama is putting more money and attention toward education.”

Coverage of leadership is supported in part by a grant from The Wallace Foundation, at www.wallacefoundation.org.

The news that didn’t fit from April 19th

THE TWO MAJOR CALIFORNIA TEACHERS UNIONS AGREE THAT THE STATE OWES EDUCATION BILLION$, CTA Goes to the Ballot Box, CFT to the Courts
Thursday, April 16, 2009 11:43 PM
The latest on California politics and government  Posted by Kevin Yamamura, SACBEE  April 16 - The California Teachers Association has pumped $5 million so far into a campaign to pass Propositions 1A and 1B, with the carrot of $9.3 billion in total additional education revenues starting in 2011-12 under 1B.  But the California Federation of Teachers believes there's a different way to get that

L.A. ACADEMY SPEAKS OUT AGAINST PROPOSED LAUSD TEACHER CUTS
Saturday, April 18, 2009 12:57 PM
by Nadra Kareem | Contributing Writer The Watts Times  April 16, 2009 -- Lamar Queen considered applying to three school districts in Southern California upon graduating from Louisiana’s Grambling State University. In the end, the math teacher settled on the Los Angeles Unified School District.  “They had a nice incentive program for new teachers who were going to teach math, so I went with

YouTube: CTA’s YES ON 1A & 1B COMMERCIAL
Thursday, April 16, 2009 6:16 AM
4LAKIDS unenthusiastically recommends  YES votes on 1A, 1B & 1C. We don’t like any of them, but they are the best we are going to get in this economy with politics-as-unusual in Sacramento.     1D  and 1E hold early childhood education and mental health programs temporary hostage for education, if you can accept that – vote YES.     1E is a no brainer.    Familiarize yourself with the measures

NY Times’ Los Angeles Journal: GIVING LESSONS IN TRAFFIC SAFETY AT MIDDLE SCHOOLS
Thursday, April 16, 2009 5:18 AM
By JENNIFER STEINHAUER | NEW YORK TIMES    Michal Czerwonka for The New York Times - Mitchell Summer, the dean of students at Florence Nightingale Middle School in Los Angeles, helps students cross the street  April 10, 2009 — LOS ANGELES — At 2:58 each weekday afternoon, the adults brace for traffic chaos at Florence Nightingale Middle School.  The bell sounds, and children dash to the left

5000? 5400? 6850? THE NUMBERS OF LAUSD LAYOFFS LIKE THE SIZE OF THE BUDGET DEFICIT AND THE SIZE OF THE FEDERAL STIMULUS REMAINS UNKNOWN. BUT HOWEVER MANY OF THEM THERE ARE THEY ARE LIKE, SO FIRED! OR NOT.

Wednesday, April 15, 2009 3:17 PM
Update 4/15 | 3pm:           Before yesterday’s vote to “save” 1996 elementary school jobs Reduction in Force/RIF/layoff  notices  had been sent to 10,571 employees.            The final vote technically authorized 8,541 layoffs,             Superintendent Ramon Cortines and Chief Financial Officer Megan Reilly said the district would route state funding to individual schools, allowing them to

“DO THE RIGHT THING FOR KIDS …AND THE RIGHT THING IS NOT TO PROCEED WITH THIS BUDGET”
Saturday, April 18, 2009 2:48 PM
“You have heard from Jackie Goldberg and John Mockler;  you have heard from teachers and parents and student. Listen to them.” 

smf to the Board of Ed at the April 14th Meeting:  Members of the Board of Education, I speak today as Vice President of Los Angeles Tenth District PTA and I bring the greetings of Thirty-first District. Together we represent the entirely of PTA in LAUSD.   I am here in

LABOR ORGANIZES AGAINST BUDGET MEASURE 1-A + Strange 1A fellows move their beds closer together
Tuesday, April 14, 2009 8:10 AM
By Kevin Yamamura | Sacramento Bee     Monday, Apr. 13, 2009 - A powerful California public employee union formed a campaign committee Monday with two other labor groups to oppose Proposition 1A, a May 19 ballot measure that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders have said will solve future budget problems.  Service Employees International Union's California State Council, which says

 

COALITION OF LAUSD UNIONS & H.O.P.E PARENT COALITION TALKING POINTS

Saturday, April 11, 2009 10:34 PM
Spend the Stimulus monies to ensure a future for the kids  &  Deny the District’s self-defeating and rash cuts.     Guiding Principle From 4/6 Meetings                        Public Interest Message of Hope· Maintain level of consistency of instructional and operational support.· Equity.           ·

THE LAUSD BUDGET: What we know/What we don't know.

by smf for 4LAKids

●THIS MUCH WE KNOW:

· The Federal government though the stimulus package is committed to maintain and create jobs in public education – that is the goal of this initial phase of the stimulus. Reform comes later, with different dollars.

· LAUSD's budget, approved last Tuesday, is reform and 'rightsizing' driven: the Board of Ed voted to reduce and eliminate, not save and create jobs, positions and programs.

· Yes, 1996 elementary teacher positions from a Reduction-in-Force (RIF) pool of over ten thousand were 'saved' – but 8,541 jobs were done away with Tuesday. The possibility of saving 3,167 of these jobs through the federal stimulus was relegated to the school sites' discretion – if they can find the money and can figure out the district, state and federal mandate. 5,374 jobs cannot be saved under the 4/13 budget plan.

· The California Ed Code says that only the Board of Education has hiring and firing authority.

· The first of the Federal Stimulus was released by the feds to the state Friday; California was the first state in the nation to receive the funding.

· The feds say the governor has authority and responsibility to send the money to school districts. The legislature says the California Constitution gives them that sole authority. Where the California Superintendent of Public Instruction – the state's premiere elected official in education fits in is unclear – but he has weighed in (see $3.1-BILLION ECONOMIC STIMULUS WINDFALL OFFERS A CHANCE TO REFORM CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS, TOP EDUCATION OFFICIAL SAYS, following) In LAUSD the Board of Ed and the superintendent are at odds with O'Connell's advice to come up with "creative solutions that benefit all students" while saving jobs of teachers, administrators and employees. They are intent on rightsizing – pushing the decision making authority on saving jobs out to the 900 school sites.

· The March 10th Board of Ed meeting – the first reading of the district budget – was held with no public witnesses, broadcast by a single TV camera controlled by the board from am undisclosed location behind locked doors, inaccessible to the public — in extremely dubious compliance with the state's open meeting law.

· At the next Board of Ed budget hearing on March 31^st Dr. Vladovic recused himself – removing himself from the process – citing a conflict of interest. His son was subject to layoff under the proposed RIF proposal.

· Absent consensus, under pressure of the District's congressional delegation and in deference to the public the board voted to postpone to a certain time (the regular April 13^th meeting) the motion on the floor (the budget resolution).

· Immediately prior to the April 13^th meeting a special meeting was held and Dr. Vladovic's son and 1995 other teachers were removed from the RIF list. Dr. Vladovic did not participate in the special meeting.

· At the April 13 regular meeting – at which the budget resolution was reconsidered as amended – Dr. Vladovic was recorded at the opening roll call as absent. Whether he was ever recorded as present is unclear. From time to time he came and left. At no time did he announce he was no longer recused.

· When the final vote was taken there was a 3 to 3 tie; Dr. Vladovic not being present. In a tie vote the motion would have failed – but the vote was left open pending Dr. Vladovic's return

· When Vladovic returned he explained his absence as illness (…with perhaps more detail then was required!) Asked for his vote he made an inquiry of counsel: [LATimes: "He then asked for a legal opinion on whether the district could spend more restricted money to save jobs. The district's top lawyer warned against it." — this in itself is parliamentarily questionable, no further information should be provided during a vote], He got a reply and recorded an Aye vote. 4 to 3 the motion carried.

● WHAT WE DO NOT KNOW:

· Questions arise as to whether Dr. Vladovic's participation was correct in light of his:

1. previous recusal on a continued motion,

2. absence at the roll call and

3. absence at the vote – which was understood by some witnesses as his continued recusal.

· There is also question as to whether the decision to save the 1996 elementary positions was engineered to secure Vladovic's participation.

· 4LAKids questions what the intended and unintended consequences of saving the 1996 elementary teachers will be. The initial RIF was proposed to facilitate class size increase; now 2000 more teachers are available but the class size increase mandate was not addressed in the budget. What exactly will those teachers are doing?

· How School Site Councils – charged under this budget with determining which RIFed teachers and staff will be rehired — and untrained and unprepared for this fiduciary and ethical responsibility – will function when they are likely to be composed of RIFed employees and their co-workers – and by parents whose children will be served by impacted employees.

· The composition of SSCs is statutory, they are elected bodies and their makeup is formulated to create equitable representation of employees, administration, parents and community, and in secondary: students. Wholesale recusal would disturb the equity

· SSC meetings, normally open, will be closed as they would be discussing personnel matters. This creates both the appearance-of and actual conflicts of interest of biblical proportions with little or no transparency, accountability or oversight. Stay tuned.

Tune in and watch: The April 13th Board meeting will be rebroadcast Sunday, April 19, 10:24 AM on KLCS/Channel 58 - CHANNEL 58.1 Check your cable listings for which channel it is carried.

LA UNIFIED MOVES TO CUT 5000 TEACHERS AND OTHERS

The board's 4-3 vote closes most of a $596.1-million deficit for next year and will lead to larger classes. But the battle over funding will rage on for weeks.

An LAPD officer stands in front of demonstrators at the LAUSD building as school district officials moved forward with plans to lay off more than 5,000 teachers, counselors and other employees. (smf: He is actually an LA School Police Officer0

By Howard Blume | LA Times

April 15, 2009 -- Los Angeles school district officials moved forward Tuesday with plans to lay off more than 5,000 teachers, counselors, custodians, clerks and other employees, but the battle over funding will rage on for weeks -- affecting who goes, who stays and what schools and classrooms will look like for students next year.
The Board of Education's 4-3 vote, after more than four hours of pleading and debate, closed most of a $596.1-million deficit for next year in the nation's second-largest school system.

Related Content

• 

  Photos: LAUSD cuts

• 

  As LAUSD layoffs loom, debate over...

• L.A. Unified to rescind layoff notices to about 2,000 teachers

• California Schools Guide: Test scores, demographics and comments

"Anger is appropriate and outrage is appropriate," said school board President Monica Garcia, who voted with the majority. "Nobody wants to do these layoffs."

No one expects every employee with a layoff notice in the Los Angeles Unified School District to be out of work, and most observers believe the current budget plan will evolve, perhaps considerably.

The board action affects about 3,500 newer teachers who have yet to earn tenure protections as well as administrators, nursing staff, library aides, computer programmers and others.

The teachers will lose positions as a result of larger classes, which could rise from 20 to 24 students in the early grades. Sixth-grade classes would rise to 35 students. The average high school class would be larger still.

Much of the contention centers on how much money will be available from the federal stimulus package and how that money could and should be used. Opponents of the cuts have added up federal dollars and come up with figures that surpass the current deficit.

District officials insist that their math is wishful thinking.

But there's also a strategic disagreement. Supt. Ramon C. Cortines has decided to spread the federal money over the next two budget years. Even with the cuts, the district faces an additional deficit in 2010-11. Using most of the federal money now, Cortines said, would create an untenable funding cliff when the dollars ran out.

His top advisors have also yet to factor in some additional funding that they fear could be poached by other government agencies. And some of the money has restrictions that limit the district's flexibility in saving jobs and programs.

• Initially, the budget proposal deadlocked on the seven-member board at 3 to 3, with Richard Vladovic suddenly becoming the swing vote. He missed the first roll call, explaining when he returned that recent food poisoning had forced him to leave for several minutes.
• He then asked for a legal opinion on whether the district could spend more restricted money to save jobs. The district's top lawyer warned against it, and Vladovic tipped the scale for the Cortines plan.
• Vladovic had recused himself from some recent budget votes because his son, a teacher, had received a layoff notice. But that conflict evaporated earlier Tuesday when Cortines recommended rescinding notices of possible layoff that had been sent to nearly 2,000 tenured teachers, including Vladovic's son.

Those still at risk include all teachers without tenure: 1,605 at the elementary level and 1,872 at middle and high schools. The notices also went to 498 other employees with teaching credentials and to 2,875 administrators. Most of those administrators will keep their jobs, but some small campuses will lose a full-time principal.

At one point, a group of Spanish-speaking parents cited security fears and other concerns should their children's campus lack a principal at all times.

Some principals are likely to be replaced by administrators with more seniority.

The "bumping" process, officials acknowledged, could become a nightmare, because more than 1,200 positions will be cut from central and regional offices.

These cuts are not just to save money, but also about decentralizing operations, which is a key Cortines goal and a longtime demand of the teachers union. In the short run, at least, this approach could bump teachers out of their jobs.

Some campuses could be especially hard hit, among them Del Olmo Elementary in Koreatown, where test scores surged in 2008.

At Del Olmo, nearly two-thirds of teachers received notice that they could be laid off. About half of these, however, were spared when permanent teachers got their reprieve.

"I'm glad to hear some teachers' jobs will be saved," Del Olmo second-grade teacher Regina Ramos said, "but it's not enough. . . . What type of reform is it if quality teachers are being let go?"

There was little solace for middle schools and high schools, especially those with less-experienced teachers.

Marla Mattenson, 38, who teaches at Bernstein High in Hollywood, changed careers to become one of the district's new and badly needed math teachers. "But I got a little letter in the mail," she said referring to her layoff notice.

Board member Tamar Galatzan lined up with the budget plan skeptics and financial optimists, as did most of the parents who spoke before the board.

"I don't think the stimulus money should be saved for a rainy day," Galatzan said. "I think we should look outside and see a storm brewing."

Several district officials, including some board members, have alluded to "shared sacrifice," the same words used by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa on Monday when he discussed the district's budget crisis. The term has become de facto code for the idea that employee unions need to accept lower wages to save jobs.

The United Teachers Los Angeles leadership has maintained that there is no need to lay off teachers or reduce their pay. Other unions have signaled a willingness to discuss unpaid furlough days.

The board vote could put additional pressure on the unions to discuss furloughs or other wage concessions that the mayor and Cortines have suggested.

The superintendent's push to decentralize includes millions of dollars for schools to "buy back" some lost staff. That process will unfold in the coming weeks, as will the debate over the federal money. Cortines insisted that he would entertain all options.

"We should continue the conversation," he said. "We need to exhaust every avenue."

4/7 - Today’s headlines: PLAYING THE UNION CARDS

LAUSD, unions to discuss options

Los Angeles Daily News - ‎6 hours ago‎

Los Angeles Unified School District staff and union officials have until next Tuesday to find alternatives for the 8500 proposed layoffs. ...

LAUSD, UTLA continue negotiations

abc7.com - ‎11 hours ago‎

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES (KABC) -- Formal negotiations continued Monday afternoon between United Teachers Los Angeles and the LA Unified School District in an ...

Teachers from 2 L.A. schools offer to take pay cuts to avoid layoffs

Los Angeles Times - ‎12 hours ago‎

... LA Schools Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines and leaders of United Teachers Los Angeles, the teachers union for the Los Angeles Unified School District. ...

LAist

Furloughs Are Better Than Pink Slips Say Some LAUSD Teachers

LAist - ‎20 hours ago‎

(Photo by Norma*Iriz* via Flickr) Under pressure from United Teachers Los Angeles, the union representing educators working in the LAUSD, ...

LA school board chief meets with teachers willing to accept pay cuts

Los Angeles Times - ‎22 hours ago‎

A top Los Angeles school district official is meeting this morning with teachers who are breaking with their union to support pay cuts as a way to avoid ...

REAL TRANSPARENCY WILL BE TRICKY WITH STIMULUS SPENDING: Following the money will be the hard part

Obama says he wants the public to know exactly where the stimulus aid is going. But watchdogs complain that the White House disclosure guidelines have loopholes.

By Paul West | The Baltimore Sun | From the Los Angeles Times

March 21, 2009 — Reporting from Washington — Barack Obama says unprecedented transparency will be a hallmark of his presidency. But following the money in the stimulus package won't be easy.

Many of the most important spending decisions aren't being made in Washington. They're getting thrashed out at state and local levels, where accountability is a wild card and there's no guarantee that taxpayers will get the dollar-by-dollar information Obama is promising.

In some cases, money that goes to a local government may be impossible to follow under White House guidelines, advocates of open government say.

"It could go to the mayor's brother-in-law. We don't know," said Craig Jennings of OMB Watch, a Washington-based watchdog group.

It is up to the states, for example, to decide how to divvy up the $28 billion for "shovel-ready" highway projects.

In Maryland, for example, none of the funding that will flow to subcontractors on highway projects will be disclosed, said David Buck, a State Highway Administration spokesman. The state also doesn't provide detailed information about the location of most resurfacing projects, which will account for the largest share of highway spending under the stimulus plan.

Under the Obama administration's transparency guidelines, "the money disappears after it changes hands twice," said Greg LeRoy of Good Jobs First, a watchdog group.

As things stand, the federal government will disclose how much money it gives to a state, and the state must report back on how the money is distributed to a private company or to a local government. Beyond that point, there is no requirement for disclosing where the money ends up, LeRoy said.

His group is part of the Coalition for an Accountable Recovery, which has warned there could be "corruption on a massive scale" as stimulus and financial bailout funds are spent.

The "only antidote is millions of eyeballs watching the money," LeRoy said, referring to ordinary citizens tracking the spending on government websites.

Obama emphasized transparency in his 2008 campaign and is continuing that theme.

"Instead of politicians doling out money behind closed doors, the important decisions about where taxpayer dollars are invested will be yours to scrutinize," Obama says on recovery.gov, an administration website.

Some states have created stimulus websites, but at least 18 -- including California -- have not.

Pennsylvania Gov. Edward G. Rendell said states should go the extra mile in laying out exactly how federal money gets spent, even if it means providing more information than the administration requires.

"I think this is the biggest test of government in my lifetime," the 65-year-old Democrat, who also chairs the National Governors Assn., told a group of reporters.

"I don't want people to say, 'You hid this. You hid that,' " he said. "Regardless of the federal requirement, I'm hopeful that a lot of us will try to make this the most transparent, because it's important."

LAUSD BUDGET UPDATE AS OF 2/18/09

Subject to change based on updates from the State

from the office of superintendent Ramón C. Cortines

OVERVIEW

1. Based on current projections from the State, our projected district shortfall is between $600 and $700 million and the prospects do not look any brighter for future years. We also do not know if we will have class size or categorical flexibility, so we must prepare for the worst case scenario.

2. My philosophy for moving forward will be the same as the 2000 Plan adopted by the Board

a) Central offices are to be right-sized and to focus on core operations, monitoring and oversight

b) The local districts are to provide support and service to schools

c) The schools are the heart of our District and are where teaching and learning takes place

3. Federal Stimulus money will provide some temporary relief, since the money is for one time expenses (spread over two years). Flexibility and use of this money still has not been determined.

a) Although the stimulus money has yet to be finalized, I will recommend that the majority of any unrestricted resources to be set aside to protect the schools.

CENTRAL – RIGHT-SIZED

We will be streamlining the central office to ensure the majority of our resources are at the school site.

1. I have recommended a 30% reduction in most central offices. We are in the process of reviewing the budgets and discussing how to implement our decentralized governance model.

2. Further, I am considering a recommendation to reduce the work year for most non-school based employees. Besides providing substantial savings, it will emphasize that our highest priority is support of the local school.

3. We are also reviewing outside contractors with the goal of substantially reducing costs and administered accounts.

LOCAL DISTRICT OFFICES SUPPORT AND SERVICE TO SCHOOLS

Via the decentralization of the central office, the local district offices will be responsible for working with their schools to ensure each school receives the service and support they need.

1. However, I am recommending that local district offices be cut up to 50%. I will expect my leaders in the local districts to work smarter to target services to the schools that need the most support.

2. While we have benefited from many ancillary programs that support our student population, we must now cut some of these programs to focus our limited resources on our core instructional program.

LOCAL SCHOOLS – WHERE TEACHING AND LEARNING TAKES PLACE

My approach is to build a school district from the classroom out, so that we can minimize the impact on teachers. The percentage of cuts will be the lowest at the school level, but given the cumulative size of our school budgets, the dollar amount will be large.

1. Since we don't have all of the necessary budget information from the State, we must be conservative by noticing a potentially larger number of certificated employees on March 15^th

a. All certificated administrators will be notified

b. Since central and local district certificated employees have rights to the classroom, we will need to notify some permanent teachers.

c. To ease the impact on our novice teachers, we have implemented an aggressive early retirement incentive program (ERIP)

NEXT STEPS

February 26^th: 2009-10 Budget Development process with recommendation for March 15^th letters

March –June: Hold public reviews of the budget to ensure we all agree on our priorities

Council of Great City Schools – Update on Stimulus Package 2/17/09

Disclaimer – details have not been finalized on how and when the funds will be allocated to LAUSD, especially the State Fiscal Stabilization funds

Overview of Federal Stimulus Package - Jeff Simmering

Five major types of aid to be expended over a 2 yr period (potential for flexibility to spread over 3 yrs)

1. Non Categorical Aid – State Fiscal Stabilization: $40B for education (broadly defined)
   1. Proportionally allocated based on split b/w K-12 and higher education state reductions
   2. Distribution of funds will vary state by state, but can be used to backfill state cuts
   3. Distributed on per capita basis
   4. Use of funds are based on ESEA, IDEA, Perkins, School modernization or repair
2. Categorical IDEA: $12.2 B ($11.3B traditional part B, $400M early Childhood, $500M infant and toddler)
   1. 50% of funds can be used to offset Spec Ed use of General Funds
3. Categorical Title I: $13B ($10B Regular, $3B School Improvement)
   1. Allocated by targeted and equity formulas
   2. 95% will be passed through to LEAs
   3. 1% used for State Administration
   4. 4% school improvement activities
4. Secretary Bonus or Incentive: states that have made good progress will be awarded $5B ($2.5 allocated on basis of Title I)
   1. Progress defined as states that are increasing equitable distribution of teachers, improved data systems, and improved assessments
5. School Construction Bonds - $22B tax subsidizes or bonding authority
   1. After you sell your bonds the interest that you pay will be given a tax credit
   2. Can be used as new construction and land acquisition

Council of Great City Schools estimate of stimulus for LAUSD (over two years)

- Title I: $398M

- IDEA: $168M

- Ed-Tech: $9.7M

- State Stabilization has not been determined

Key Takeaways for LAUSD

1. We will need to be flexible in our projections until we receive the final allocations from the State

2. We need to be conservative with our projected use of our funds, because we do not know the magnitude of the cuts that from the State

3. Stimulus funds are one time funds, so we can not rely on using them to cover ongoing expenses

4. Depending on the cuts from the State, we will use the majority of the funds to help schools offset some of their reductions

THE ACTION AMERICANS NEED

“Now is the time to give our children every advantage they need to compete by upgrading 10,000 schools with state-of-the-art classrooms, libraries and labs; by training our teachers in math and science; and by bringing the dream of a college education within reach for millions of Americans.”

Op Ed By Barack Obama | Washington Post

Thursday, February 5, 2009 -- By now, it's clear to everyone that we have inherited an economic crisis as deep and dire as any since the days of the Great Depression. Millions of jobs that Americans relied on just a year ago are gone; millions more of the nest eggs families worked so hard to build have vanished. People everywhere are worried about what tomorrow will bring.

What Americans expect from Washington is action that matches the urgency they feel in their daily lives -- action that's swift, bold and wise enough for us to climb out of this crisis.

Because each day we wait to begin the work of turning our economy around, more people lose their jobs, their savings and their homes. And if nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.

That's why I feel such a sense of urgency about the recovery plan before Congress. With it, we will create or save more than 3 million jobs over the next two years, provide immediate tax relief to 95 percent of American workers, ignite spending by businesses and consumers alike, and take steps to strengthen our country for years to come.

This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for America's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, health care and education. And it's a strategy that will be implemented with unprecedented transparency and accountability, so Americans know where their tax dollars are going and how they are being spent.

In recent days, there have been misguided criticisms of this plan that echo the failed theories that helped lead us into this crisis -- the notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems; that we can meet our enormous tests with half-steps and piecemeal measures; that we can ignore fundamental challenges such as energy independence and the high cost of health care and still expect our economy and our country to thrive.

I reject these theories, and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change. They know that we have tried it those ways for too long. And because we have, our health-care costs still rise faster than inflation. Our dependence on foreign oil still threatens our economy and our security. Our children still study in schools that put them at a disadvantage. We've seen the tragic consequences when our bridges crumble and our levees fail.

Every day, our economy gets sicker -- and the time for a remedy that puts Americans back to work, jump-starts our economy and invests in lasting growth is now.

Now is the time to protect health insurance for the more than 8 million Americans at risk of losing their coverage and to computerize the health-care records of every American within five years, saving billions of dollars and countless lives in the process.

Now is the time to save billions by making 2 million homes and 75 percent of federal buildings more energy-efficient, and to double our capacity to generate alternative sources of energy within three years.

Now is the time to give our children every advantage they need to compete by upgrading 10,000 schools with state-of-the-art classrooms, libraries and labs; by training our teachers in math and science; and by bringing the dream of a college education within reach for millions of Americans.

And now is the time to create the jobs that remake America for the 21st century by rebuilding aging roads, bridges and levees; designing a smart electrical grid; and connecting every corner of the country to the information superhighway.

These are the actions Americans expect us to take without delay. They're patient enough to know that our economic recovery will be measured in years, not months. But they have no patience for the same old partisan gridlock that stands in the way of action while our economy continues to slide.

So we have a choice to make. We can once again let Washington's bad habits stand in the way of progress. Or we can pull together and say that in America, our destiny isn't written for us but by us. We can place good ideas ahead of old ideological battles, and a sense of purpose above the same narrow partisanship. We can act boldly to turn crisis into opportunity and, together, write the next great chapter in our history and meet the test of our time.

The writer is president of the United States.

FOLLOW THE LEADER: The federal stimulus package should serve as an impetus to state legislators to fully fund the education system.

By Senior Editorial Board | The Daily Californian Online

The Daily Californian is an independent, student-run newspaper serving the UC Berkeley campus and its surrounding community, publishing Monday through Friday during the academic year and twice a week during the summer. Established in 1871, The Daily Californian is one of the oldest newspapers on the West Coast and one of the oldest college newspapers in the country.

Tuesday, February 3, 2009 - Year in and year out, the fate awaiting California's education system has been the same-cut after cut after cut. State legislators, though alleged believers in education as the greatest investment for the future, have yet to demonstrate that belief with adequate state funding.

Last week, the federal government acted on that belief when the U.S. House of Representatives passed President Obama's $819 billion stimulus package, a much-needed jolt designed to create jobs.

The package could translate into millions of dollars for California's public schools and higher education systems, the University of California and the California State University.

If passed in the U.S. Senate, those critical funds will go towards infrastructure on university campuses, saving jobs in California's school districts and a $500 boost to the maximum Pell Grant award amount.

This significant show of support for education, especially in a time when funding is being cut left and right, is something we firmly stand behind and hope to see become a priority in Obama's administration.

The funding, unfortunately, can only go so far. Bill Huyett, superintendent of Berkeley schools, has already said that because of state funding decreases, the federal funds won't be enough to dramatically improve the quality of education.

Furthermore, although the package's provisions for financial aid and research could help the university greatly, state budget cuts are still projected to continue.

As of Sunday, $13 million in Cal Grants are being delayed by the State Controller's Office, plus millions of dollars in tax refunds-a move that is certain to hurt thousands of UC students dependent on those funds.

Rather than eliminating the need for state funds, the stimulus package reinforces the importance that funding for education should carry; state legislators ought to take a cue from the President and Congress and immediately resolve to pass a budget that prioritizes education.