UNION SUES LAUSD OVER CHARTER SCHOOLS/SINDICATO DEMANADA A LAUSD POR ESCUELAS CHARTER

Union Sues LAUSD over Charter Schools Written by Andres Chavez, San Fernando Sun Staff Reporter Wednesday, 23 December 2009  -United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA) and a group of  Los Angeles Unified School District teachers filed a law suit in Los Angeles Superior Court Monday claiming LAUSD failed to follow state requirements in its plans to open new charter schools in the 2010 school year. At a news conference at Garfield High School, members of UTLA said the state Education Code requires the approval of a majority of permanent teachers before schools like Garfield and the new Esteban Torres High School can be turned into charters. Under LAUSD's Public School Choice Program, 24 new schools and 12 existing schools will be put up for bid by third parties in the 2010-2011 school year. Interested parties can petition the School Board to convert the individual school into a charter, pilot or a cooperative venture. The 12 existing schools have been identified as "under achieving." In addition to Garfield, other under achieving schools include 28th Street Elementary School, Pico Span School, Foshay Learning Center and San Fernando Middle School. San Fernando Middle School, depending on what the school board ultimately decides, could be converted to a charter school or another school model. Five groups have filed letters of intent as parties interested in being considered as the primary or partial operators of San Fernando Middle School. A charter school is reported to be in the mix of proposals as well as a proposal for a pilot school and a proposal for a collaboration with the nonprofit organization Project Grad. Specific plans from each interested group will be submitted next month. The suit alleges that the District ignored Section 47605 (a) (2) of the state Education Code which requires that a public school charter conversion, whether it's a partial or total conversion of an existing school, must have a petition signed by 50 percent of the permanent status teachers at the school to be converted. This process has been followed in the past. The petition asks for a court order directing the LAUSD to comply with the Education Code. UTLA Attorneys filed the petition on behalf of UTLA and a group of Garfield High School teachers and parents who are slated to move to Esteban Torres High. Built to relieve overcrowding at Garfield, the new school opens next year. Teachers from other similarly affected schools will also join the lawsuit. "Public schools belong to the community," said A.J. Duffy, president of UTLA. "Especially at new schools, it is important for parents, teachers and the community to see stability in the form of teachers who they know are committed to their school and community." Monica Garcia, president of the LAUSD Board of Education, said the School Choice program is designed to provide options for the operation of low-performing campuses. She said no schools will be automatically converted to charters as the result of the program. "We are facing a crisis in our classrooms and in our district," Garcia said. "We need adults to work together for our students. The status quo is not working for too many young people. That is why I am so excited about the Public School Choice Program." UTLA said it is working with teachers, parents and community members at all 36 Public School Choice schools to create customized reform plans for schools open to all neighborhood students. The plans will focus on teaching the hands-on skills and critical thinking that students need for college work and beyond. The union is considering other legal action involving transfer rights of teachers to new schools and use of school bond funds for charter schools. Final applications from organizations interested in operating schools are due in January, with a vote expected by the school board in February.

Sindicato Demanda a LAUSD por Escuelas Charter Written by Andres Chavez, Reportero del San Fernando Sun Wednesday, 23 December 2009  - El Sindicato de Maestros de Los Angeles [UTLA] y un grupo de maestros del Distrito Escolar Unificado de Los Angeles [LAUSD] presentaron una demanda en la Corte Superior de Los Angeles el lunes alegando que el Distrito no siguió los requisitos estatales en sus planes de abrir escuelas charter nuevas en el año escolar 2010. Durante una conferencia de prensa en la secundaria Garfield, miembros de UTLA dijeron que el Código de Educación requiere la aprobación por parte de la mayoría de maestros permanentes antes que escuelas como Garfield y la nueva secundaria Esteban Torres puedan convertirse en escuelas charter. Bajo el Plan de Opción de Escuela Pública, agencias independientes podrán presentar planes para hacerse cargo de 24 nuevas escuelas y 12 planteles existentes en el año escolar 2010- 2011. Agencias interesadas pueden pedir a la junta escolar convertir escuelas públicas a charter, a escuelas piloto o una cooperativa. Las escuelas existentes han sido identificadas como "fallantes". Además de Garfield, otras escuelas que encajan en esta lista con la escuela primaria 28th Street, Foshay Learning Center y la escuela intermedia San Fernando. La escuela intermedia San Fernando, dependiendo de lo que la junta decida al final, podría convertirse en una escuela charter o un plantel bajo otro modelo. Cinco agencias presentaron cartas de intención para hacerse cargo de la escuela. Se reporta que entre los planes presentados está uno para convertirla en una escuela charter, una escuela piloto y una en colaboración con la agencia no lucrativa Project GRAD. Planes específicos de cada grupo serán presentados el próximo mes. La demanda alega que el Distrito ignoró la Sección 47605 (a) (2) del Código Educativo Estatal que requiere que la conversión de una escuela pública a una escuela charter, ya sea de forma parcial o total, debe ser aprobada por el 50% de los maestros permanentes de la escuela. Este es el proceso que se ha seguido en el pasado. La petición pide a la corte ordenar al LAUSD para que cumpla con este código. Abogados de UTLA presentaron la demanda en representación del sindicato y un grupo de maestros y padres de la secundaria Garfield en el Este de Los Angeles que serían reubicados a la secundaria Esteban Torres, que se construyó para aliviar la sobrepoblación en Garfield y que abrirá el próximo año escolar. Los maestros de otras escuelas afectadas de la misma manera también se unirán a la demanda. "Las escuelas públicas le pertenecen a la comunidad", dijo A.J. Duffy, presidente de UTLA. "Especialmente en las nuevas escuelas, es importante para los padres, maestros y la comunidad que vean estabilidad en la forma de maestros que conocen y que saben están comprometidos con su escuela y su comunidad". Monica García, presidente de la junta del LAUSD, dijo que el Plan de Opción de Escuela está diseñado para proveer opciones para la operación de escuelas que no tengan buenos logros académicos. Dijo que ninguna escuela se convertirá automáticamente a una charter como resultado del programa. "Enfrentamos una crisis en nuestros salones de clase y en nuestro distrito", dijo García. "Necesitamos que los adultos trabajen juntos por nuestros estudiantes. La forma que hemos venido haciendo las cosas no funciona para demasiados jóvenes. Es por eso que estoy tan emocionada con el Plan de Opción de Escuelas". UTLA dijo que está trabajando con los profesores, padres y miembros de la comunidad de las 36 escuelas públicas que serían parte del nuevo plan escolar para crear planes de reforma estándares para escuelas que estén abiertas a todos los estudiantes de esos vecindarios. Los planes se enfocarán en enseñar las habilidades y el pensamiento analítico que todos los alumnos necesitan para tener éxito en la Universidad y de adultos. El sindicato está considerando otras acciones legales incluyendo los derechos de transferencia de maestros a las nuevas escuelas y el uso de bonos escolares para costear escuelas charter. En enero se presentarán las aplicaciones finales de organizaciones interesadas en hacerse cargo de las escuelas y se espera que la junta escolar vote sobre estas propuestas en febrero.

THE TURNAROUND FALLACY: School turnaround efforts have consistently fallen far short of hopes and expectations.

By Andy Smarick | EducationNext | Winter 2010 / Vol. 10, No. 1

The following is edited content; full version at http://bit.ly/36pmcA

For as long as there have been struggling schools in America’s cities, there have been efforts to turn them around. The lure of dramatic improvement runs through Morgan Freeman’s big-screen portrayal of bat-wielding principal Joe Clark, philanthropic initiatives like the Gates Foundation’s “small schools” project, and No Child Left Behind (NCLB)’s restructuring mandate. The Obama administration hopes to extend this thread even further, making school turnarounds a top priority.

But overall, school turnaround efforts have consistently fallen far short of hopes and expectations. Quite simply, turnarounds are not a scalable strategy for fixing America’s troubled urban school systems.

Fortunately, findings from two generations of school improvement efforts, lessons from similar work in other industries, and a budding practice among reform-minded superintendents are pointing to a promising alternative. When conscientiously applied strategies fail to drastically improve America’s lowest-performing schools, we need to close them.

Done right, not only will this strategy help the students assigned to these failing schools, it will also have a cascading effect on other policies and practices, ultimately helping to bring about healthy systems of urban public schools.

A Body at Rest Stays at Rest

Looking back on the history of school turnaround efforts, the first and most important lesson is the “Law of Incessant Inertia.” Once persistently low performing, the majority of schools will remain low performing despite being acted upon in innumerable ways.

Examples abound: In the first year of California’s Academic Performance Index, the state targeted its lowest-performing 20 percent of schools for intervention. After three years, only 11 percent of the elementary schools in this category (109 of 968) were able to make “exemplary progress.” Only 1 of the 394 middle and high schools in this category reached this mark. Just one-quarter of the schools were even able to accomplish a lesser goal: meeting schoolwide and subgroup growth targets each year.

In 2008, 52 Ohio schools were forced to restructure because of persistent failure. Even after several years of significant attention, fewer than one in three had been able to reach established academic goals, and less than half showed any student performance gains. The Columbus Dispatch concluded, “Few of them have improved significantly even after years of effort and millions in tax dollars.”

These state anecdotes align with national data on schools undergoing NCLB-mandated restructuring, the law’s most serious intervention, which follows five or more years of failing to meet minimum achievement targets. Of the schools required to restructure in 2004–05, only 19 percent were able to exit improvement status two years later.

A 2008 Center on Education Policy (CEP) study investigated the results of restructuring in five states. In California, Maryland, and Ohio, only 14, 12, and 9 percent of schools in restructuring, respectively, made adequate yearly progress (AYP) as defined by NCLB the following year. And we must consider carefully whether merely making AYP should constitute success at all: in California, for example, a school can meet its performance target if slightly more than one-third of its students reach proficiency in English language arts and math. Though the CEP study found that improvement rates in Michigan and Georgia were considerably higher, Michigan changed its accountability system during this period, and both states set their AYP bars especially low.

Though alarming, the poor record for school turnarounds in recent years should come as no surprise. A study published in 2005 by the Education Commission of the States (ECS) on state takeovers of schools and districts noted that the takeovers “have yet to produce dramatic consistent increases in student performance,” and that the impact on learning “falls short of expectations.”

Reflecting on the wide array of efforts to improve failing schools, one set of analysts concluded, “Turnaround efforts have for the most part resulted in only marginal improvements…. Promising practices have failed to work at scale when imported to troubled schools.”

Like Finding the Cure for Cancer

The second important lesson is the “Law of Ongoing Ignorance.” Despite years of experience and great expenditures of time, money, and energy, we still lack basic information about which tactics will make a struggling school excellent. A review published in January 2003 by the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation of more than 100 books, articles, and briefs on turnaround efforts concluded, “There is, at present, no strong evidence that any particular intervention type works most of the time or in most places.”

An EdSource study that sought to compare California’s low-performing schools that failed to make progress to its low-performing schools that did improve came to a confounding conclusion: clear differences avoided detection. Comparing the two groups, the authors noted, “These were schools in the same cities and districts, often serving children from the same backgrounds. Some of them also adopted the same curriculum programs, had teachers with similar backgrounds, and had similar opportunities for professional development.”

http://bit.ly/36pmcA>>article continues>>

UTLA FILES LAWSUIT ON SCHOOL GIVEAWAYS: Ed Code states that schools can’t convert to charters without majority teacher approval. + Ed Code §47605 + smf's 2¢

UTLA Press Release | http://bit.ly/6Uxeqq

21 December -- At a press conference today, UTLA announced that the union is filing a lawsuit that challenges a part of LAUSD’s implementation of the Public School Choice Resolution. The lawsuit asserts that LAUSD is not complying with the State Education Code, which requires majority permanent teacher approval before a school can be converted to a charter.

Attorneys for UTLA will file the petition on behalf of UTLA and a group of Garfield High teachers and parents who are slated to move to Esteban Torres High, a new school to be opened next year to relieve overcrowding at Garfield. Teachers who will move to new sites from other similarly impacted schools, including 28th Street, Foshay, and Pio Pico, will also join the suit.  The lawsuit focuses on new schools because LAUSD has already acknowledged that it must follow state ed code for existing schools.

Education Code Section 47605 (a) (2) requires that a public school charter conversion—whether involving a partial or total conversion of an existing school—can be accomplished only if a petition is signed by 50% of the permanent status teachers at the school to be converted.

“We support positive school change, driven by teachers, parents, and other stakeholders at the school sites, but we will stand up against violations of the law and our members’ rights,” UTLA President A.J. Duffy says. “Effective school reform can’t begin by breaking the law.”

With key deadlines fast approaching, UTLA will seek a court decision before any final decisions are made on the Public School Choice applications. Applications to run the schools up for bid are due in January, and the School Board is scheduled to make selections in February. 

UTLA could not file the lawsuit until after LAUSD established the parameters for the school choice process. UTLA continues to explore other legal avenues, including filing a grievance under Article 11 of the UTLA-LAUSD contract, which governs how teachers are transferred to new schools from their current sites.

 

____________

CALIFORNIA ED CODE 47605.| http://bit.ly/6yJab0  (a) (1) Except as set forth in paragraph (2), a petition for the establishment of a charter school within a school district may be circulated by one or more persons seeking to establish the charter school. A petition for the establishment of a charter school shall identify a single charter school that will operate within the geographic boundaries of that school district[1]. A charter school may propose to operate at multiple sites within the school district, as long as each location is identified in the charter school petition. The petition may be submitted to the governing board of the school district for review after either[2] of the following conditions are met:

   (A) The petition has been signed by a number of parents or legal guardians of pupils that is equivalent to at least one-half of the number of pupils that the charter school estimates will enroll in the school for its first year of operation[3].

   (B) The petition has been signed by a number of teachers that is equivalent to at least one-half of the number of teachers that the charter school estimates will be employed at the school during its first year of operation.

   (2) A petition that proposes to convert an existing public school to a charter school that would not be eligible for a loan pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 41365[4] may[5] be circulated by one or more persons seeking to establish the charter school. The petition may be submitted to the governing board of the school district for review after the petition has been signed by not less than 50 percent of the permanent status teachers currently employed at the public school to be converted.

   (3) A petition shall include a prominent statement that a signature on the petition means that the parent or legal guardian is meaningfully interested in having his or her child or ward attend the charter school, or in the case of a teacher's signature, means that the teacher is meaningfully interested in teaching at the charter school. The proposed charter shall be attached to the petition.

---

smf: for the sake of argument…

[1] 'a single charter school' is not a list of 24..

[2] 'either' is a killer word here, dividing parents from teachers.

[3] If these are conversion charter schools (see footnote #4) why aren't parent signatures required?

[4] Whether or not the charter law applies at all to the Public School Choice schools is arguable; LAUSD's interpretation seems to be one that it does where it's convenient and doesn't when it isn't - always tenuous legal grounds but great make-work for attorneys. UTLA's lawsuit seems to concede that the charter law applies - but is violated. UTLA may find themselves thrown out of court because the law doesn't apply - these are NOT charter schools - they are local neighborhood schools with (yet to be designed) attendance area maps! Whatever the courts decide - it appears that PSC schools do not qualify for the loans stipulated in this subsection …does this really mean that the opinion of parents is moot? Was that the legislative intent? smf

[5] 'may' allows, it does not require. The question becomes whether the school board is bound by this permitted petition.

TEACHER'S UNION SUES OVER CHARTER SCHOOL

By Dennis Romero in LA Weekly News Blog | http://bit.ly/7CUGJy

Tue., Dec. 22 2009 @ 6:04AM -- United Teachers Los Angeles filed suit against the Los Angeles Unified School District over its establishment of a charter campus that would relieve overcrowding at the Eastside's storied Garfield High School. What's wrong with charter schools, you ask? This could be about jobs.

The UTLA argues that the district is not abiding by an agreement that requires teacher approval when a campus is converted to a charter school. In this case, Garfield is not being converted directly, but when nearby Esteban Torres High opens next year it will take over some of Garfield's population. The union argues the effect will be the same.

A UTLA statement argues that half of union teachers at affected schools must approve of a charter "whether involving a partial or total conversion of an existing school." Teachers at other schools -- identified as 28th Street, Foshay, and Pio Pico -- that will shift personnel and students to new campuses have also joined the suit, according to the union.

Charters allow schools to operate without the shackles of a district's and state's normal public-school rules, which could have an impact on union jobs. Many charter school teachers prefer to work sans unions, and national teachers organizations have opposed such campuses.

"We support positive school change, driven by teachers, parents, and other stakeholders at the school sites, but we will stand up against violations of the law and our members' rights," UTLA President A.J. Duffy stated. "Effective school reform can't begin by breaking the law."

Garfield, the school that inspired the 1988 film Stand And Deliver, is notoriously overcrowded.

LEAD US NOT INTO TEMPTATION: another article on the LA Weekly News Blog: Mayor V. Has 'Best Year' Ever (If You Close Your Eyes And Ignore Reality) http://bit.ly/7h7Tda

Breaking News 12/21: UTLA SUES OVER NEW SCHOOLS GIVEAWAY

 

Union sues LA school district over charter plan

San Jose Mercury News - ‎3 hours ago‎

AP LOS ANGELES—A teachers union has sued the Los Angeles Unified School District over a plan to allow a new campus to be run as a charter school. ...

 

Teachers file suit to block plan by LAUSD

Los Angeles Daily News - Connie Llanos - ‎1 hour ago‎

Hoping to block Los Angeles Unified's bold reform plan that opens the doors for charter operators and other outside entities ...

 

89.3 KPCC

United Teachers Los Angeles sues to stop hand over of 24 new schools

89.3 KPCC - ‎3 hours ago‎

Within months, the Los Angeles Unified School District is set to green-light petitions from outside groups — including charter school operators — to run ..

Teachers union files lawsuit over charter takeovers

Los Angeles Times - Howard Blume - ‎1 hour ago‎

Charter-school advocates defended the plan's legality as did the Los Angeles Unified School District. The Board of Education approved a resolution in August ...

Follow the $: SCHWARZENEGGER + ROMERO SPELL ED REFORM C-H-A-R-T-E-R-S

by Steven Harmon | Contra Costa Times

excerpted from Governor's ties to charter schools driving Race to Top goals? http://bit.ly/8ZRr2H

12/14/2009 -- "It's fair to say that Gov. Schwarzenegger has been the most important champion California has ever had for charter schools," said Jed Wallace, president and CEO of the California Charter Schools Association. "He understands and is focused on making sure nothing comes forward that would compromise charter schools."

Under Schwarzenegger, the number of charter schools operating in California has more than doubled — from 382 in 2003-04 to the current total of 809. Though the state is nowhere near its maximum of 1,350 charter schools, he wants to lift the cap — a provision in both the Senate and Assembly [Race to the Top compliance ] bills.

Schwarzenegger has packed the nine-member State Board of Education with five leaders of the charter school movement, including board President Ted Mitchell, who is president and CEO of the NewSchools Venture fund, a national San Francisco-based firm that provides startup money for charter schools.

Other state board members with ties to the charter school movement are

• Yvonne Chan, a principal of the Vaughn Next Century Learning Center, which focuses on "conversion" charter schools;
• Jonathan Williams, founder and co-director of the Accelerated School;
• Jorge Lopez, executive director of the Oakland Charter Academy; and
• Rae Belisle, president and CEO of EdVoice, a school reform lobbying group with strong ties to the charter school movement. Belisle defended the constitutionality of charter schools while serving as chief counsel to the State Board of Education.

EdVoice board members have rewarded Schwarzenegger, contributing at least $1 million to his various campaign committees.

Eli Broad, a co-founder of EdVoice and billionaire Los Angeles developer who has run a Superintendent Academy, which trains CEOs how to run schools, has contributed $430,000 to Schwarzenegger.

Don Fisher, the late Gap founder and a co-founder of EdVoice, and his family have donated $245,000 to Schwarzenegger, and Netflix founder Reed Hastings, also a co-founder of EdVoice, gave $251,491 in stock to the Proposition 1A-1E campaign pushed by Schwarzenegger this year.

Many of the same donors are beginning to bring Romero, the Los Angeles senator who is pushing Schwarzenegger-backed Race to the Top legislation, into their orbit. Romero, who is running for state superintendent of public instruction, has received at least $72,000 from various members of the EdVoice board, including $13,000 from Broad's wife, Edyth, and $6,500 from Hastings.

The Fisher family, deeply involved in school reform causes, has contributed $45,500 to her campaign.

EdVoice is likely to dig deep into their political treasury to finance Romero's campaign through unlimited independent expenditures against state Sen. Tom Torlakson, D-Antioch, who will likely have the backing of public school teacher unions.

"We haven't determined to what degree we'll support her," said Bill Lucia, EdVoice's policy director and Chief Operating Officer, "but Gloria Romero is clearly the strongest candidate for education reform and promising parental choice and not continuing to be apologetic for persistent failure."

●●smf's 2¢:

• There are about 9,898 public schools in California and 809 charter schools,
• the enrollment of a typical charter school is smaller than the enrollment of a typical traditional public school,
• A preponderance of charters are secondary schools: middle and high schools,

…yet 5 of 9 state school board seats are controlled by the charter school community.

TWO VIEWS OF RACE TO THE TOP FROM THE BAY AREA: “Threatens standards” or “on course to ‘win’”?

"Race to top" bill may threaten Palo Alto education standards

by Sophie Cornfield in the Paly Voice, the voice of online journalism at Palo Alto High School.

• Ms. Cornfield, PAHS class of 2010, is the Managing Editor/News Editor of the Paly Voice

December 16, 2009The standard of education in Palo Alto public school may be threatened in a bill being considered in California legislature. Taken up in the State Assembly on Dec. 9, two versions of "Race to the Top" propose various changes to the California public school system. This emergency education bill would help California secure a much-needed $4.35 billion from the Federal government's "Race to the Top" funds. Among the most controversial potential changes is the Senate's proposal to require open enrollment in all California school districts. This means that, if there is capacity, districts must accept students from other districts.

"It is possible that someone might say that Palo Alto has capacity," said Lauren Janov, advocacy chair for the Parent Teacher Association. "That could mean more students coming from nearby school districts and take with them the money from their struggling school districts." The State Assembly's version of the bill does not contain this provision. Therefore, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has threatened to veto this verison if it makes it to his desk. Regardless, the Senate has chosen to carry-on with its draft.

Yet another controversial provision, endorsed by Schwarzenegger, is the Common Core State Standards Initiatives in which California and other states would join together to create educational requirements. Because California's education requirements are among the highest in the nation, California's schools would be beholden to lower standards. Potentially, disadvantaged schools could graduate students ineligible for the University of California. These bills are expected to go before the Senate on Jan. 17.

 

Opinion: California's effort to secure Race to the Top funds is on track

By Karen Bass | Special to the San Jose Mercury News

• Karen Bass, D-Los Angeles, is the outgoiung Speaker of the California Assembly

12/18/2009  -- The state Assembly and Senate are actively negotiating legislation so California can compete for, and win, our share of $4.3 billion in federal Race to the Top funds. More important, we are developing comprehensive, long-term education reforms.

Critics of our effort would do well to see the eventual compromise before racing to conclusions. One premature critic, Margaret Fortune, an appointee of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, wrote a Mercury News op-ed (Opinion, Dec. 16) that mischaracterized issues surrounding the Race to the Top debate and wrongly asserted minority children would be harmed by Assembly proposals. That article ignored the process and the progress of the negotiations, and simply propped up a bill the governor wants that was written before the Race to the Top rules were developed and which would hobble us in the competition.

So where are the negotiations? We are advancing higher standards for math and language, evaluations for principals, tools for teachers at low-performing schools, and increased intervention for consistently troubled schools. These steps will improve the quality of education for minority and all children, and are key to meeting Race to the Top guidelines.

A troubling aspect of some opposition is special interests who are not minorities using the needs of minority children and the real concerns of minority parents and community leaders as fronts to promote their own business benefit or political ideology.

Minority students would particularly benefit from two provisions the Assembly has added to the discussions: The fact we want to give more money to local districts (the plan by the governor and his allies allowed the state to keep half) and our proposals making it easier to fire bad teachers and replace up to 50 percent of teachers in the lowest-performing schools. Teachers unions may not like these provisions, but we will not let that derail reform.

What could derail reform — and cost us Race to the Top — is unfounded opposition.

I, and my colleagues in the Assembly, support charter schools. We know good charter schools can play a key role in improving education. We also know, as in any enterprise, there can be bad apples. To qualify for Race to the Top, we have to ensure we have high-performing charter schools.

That's why we are discussing basic accountability to ensure high student achievement and fiscal responsibility in charter schools, especially for-profit ones:

Permitting districts to consider track records of charter school operators in deciding whether to grant them a new charter. Districts are currently prohibited from doing so.

Requiring charter school auditors to have the same qualifications as school district auditors. Currently, anyone can perform a charter school audit.

Requiring charter schools to demonstrate minimal improvement in student performance in the past three years before having their charter renewed.

Another key point in Race to the Top discussions is parental empowerment. We all want more parental empowerment and involvement — as a community organizer that's my second nature — but we have to do it right and look at all the implications, including those for minority students outside urban areas. I favor, and am confident the final legislation will reflect, a parental empowerment plan that helps and protects all our kids.

Things are moving fast in negotiations, and there may well be further changes and updates at any time. Given the negotiations, I'm optimistic the Legislature will pass and the governor will sign a strong bill that will put California on the path to win Race to the Top funding. The real prize, of course, will be better education and more opportunity for minority students and all California students.

BEVERLY HILLS SCHOOLS TO CUT NONRESIDENTS

 

By JENNIFER STEINHAUER | New York Times

December 21, 2009 -- BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. — Daniel Kahn has never lived in this city, but he has attended its legendary public schools since the fourth grade. Now in eighth grade, he is vice president of the student council, plays in two school bands and is an A student who has been preparing to tread in his sister’s footsteps at Beverly Hills High School.

But Daniel will almost certainly be looking for a new place to hang his backpack next fall. The school board here intends to do away with hundreds of slots reserved for nonresident children, most of whom live in nearby neighborhoods of Los Angeles where the homes are nice but the city’s public school system is deeply distressed.

The students used to be a financial boon for Beverly Hills, bringing millions of dollars in state aid with them. But California’s budget crisis is changing the way schools are financed in many wealthy cities, suddenly turning the out-of-towners into money losers.

The result has been raucous school board sessions, Facebook pages devoted to each side of the debate, severed friendships and an unflattering snapshot of the social dynamic between Beverly Hills — an incorporated city of “much-haves” that needs no introduction — and the often faceless Los Angeles neighborhoods of simply “haves” that surround it.

“Membership has its privileges,” said Lisa Korbatov, vice president of the Beverly Hills school board. “But anyone can be a member. I made a choice to spend more to live in a home here when I could have spent less on a bigger home in another area. But I made a choice and sacrificed.”

Children like Daniel and his parents say the board’s impending decision — which has so riled the community that the police will be called to watch over next month’s board meeting when a formal vote will be taken — is callous toward the many children who have spent years in Beverly Hills schools.

“We happen to live in L.A.” said Michelle Menna, whose 13-year-old daughter Liat will most likely not be allowed to go to Beverly Hills High next year because of the new policy. “But her life and her after-school life since she moved here is with the children of Beverly Hills. It’s like they are breaking up her family.”

Ms. Menna, like several other parents interviewed, said she resented the fact that the Beverly Hills schools were happy to have her children when they brought the district money, but now find them expendable.

“Our kids brought them the money to put programs together that they did not have before,” she said.

Beverly Hills has long enjoyed a reputation for schools that mirror the city. But with declining enrollment in past years, the school district opened its doors to outsiders; currently about one in seven of its roughly 4,800 students — or 775 — attend with out-of-district permits.

The district, like most across the state, had historically been financed by the state based on a formula that pays for each student. The out-of-district students helped fill the classrooms and allow the district to reap extra money ($6,239 per child this year).

But the higher-than-average property taxes here, combined with deep slashes to the state’s education budget because of the recession — about 18 percent this year alone — have combined to change the formula. Essentially, because the city is collecting more in property taxes designated for education than it would receive from the state for its schools, the city is required to use its tax dollars directly to finance its schools.

Suddenly, with no state financing in the mix, there is no incentive to fill empty classrooms with children from other cities. From the point of view of most of the five school board members, the out-of-town students would essentially be on scholarship, and draining money — roughly $2 million a year, according to the superintendent for the district — that could go to other programs. The district’s annual budget is about $62.5 million.

“I am incredibly compassionate and sympathetic for what is going on here,” said Jake Manaster, a board member. But, he added, “It was very generous of Beverly Hills to take 20 percent of students from the outside.”

Looked at another way, Ms. Korbatov said, a person mugged in another city would not expect Beverly Hills police officers to respond. “City services,” she said, “be they fire, police, schools, are reserved for residents and their children.”

But one long-serving board member, Myra Lurie, opposes the plan. “I am seething mad,” Ms. Lurie said. “We invited these kids in, and they have been part of the family and the fabric of our district. People are not well served in my community by looking mean-spirited or elitist.”

Some of the so-called permit students would not be affected by the proposed changes. About 110 of them are children of people who work for the district or the municipal government, an arrangement the school board says benefits both those families and the city’s ability to attract a strong work force. Roughly 50 have been granted special permission for a variety of reasons, and roughly 65 are on “diversity” permits, which are issued to some families who apply from poor neighborhoods. In addition, 45 have so-called legacy permits — their parents attended Beverly Hills schools and their grandparents still live here.

That leaves close to 500 nonresident children on “opportunity permits.” At a meeting last Friday, board members outlined a plan that would do away with those permits, while allowing some students to stay on a little longer. Under the proposal, seventh graders could apply to attend eighth grade to finish middle school before finding a new district for high school, and 10th and 11th graders would be able to stay through graduation. Families could appeal to the Los Angeles County Office of Education, which has ultimate authority on transfer matters throughout the county.

The contentious battle here is playing out elsewhere in California, where budget cuts have increased class sizes, reduced teacher rolls and, in a quirk of fate for those districts with high tax assessments, caused districts to forgo direct state financing and rely on “basic aid,” as the self-financing route is known.

In Irvine, an upscale city in Orange County, the district moved last spring to basic aid, and stopped its practice of taking children from neighboring cities like Santa Ana.

“It is going to crop up more and more,” said Peter Foggiato, a fiscal services administrator for the state’s Department of Education, “because of the increase in the deficit.” In 2007, of the state’s 975 districts, 90 used the basic aid formula; the state now has 969 districts, and 109 use basic aid.

The meeting in Beverly Hills next month is expected to be fraught.

“I’ve been called Hitler,” said Brian Goldberg, a board member. “I just want the noise to lessen.”

Liat Menna said she would attend the meeting.

“To know they don’t want me,” she said, “it hurts.”

RIVERSIDE USD DOES NOT BUY INTO RACE TO THE TOP; Superintendent says among large Southern California districts only Long Beach plans to participate

By DAYNA STRAEHLEY | Riverside  Press-Enterprise | http://bit.ly/7NNt6e

10:00 PM PST on Friday, December 18, 2009 -- Saying they don't have clear information and too little time before the deadline, Riverside school officials Friday declined to sign up for Race To The Top, the federal effort to reform education.

"It appears there's a lack of information on Race To The Top," said Riverside Unified School District Superintendent Rick Miller.

He said that among his network of superintendents of school districts in Southern and Northern California, none were participating. Among large districts, Deputy Superintendent Mike Fine said only Long Beach planned to participate.

Monday, top state education officials asked school districts, which were getting ready to close for winter break, to sign an agreement by Jan. 8 to participate in the program. However, the Legislature still hasn't passed the legislation necessary to make California eligible.

"The conference call was clear we all need to sign up, but we don't know what we're signing up for," Miller said.                 [entire story: http://bit.ly/7NNt6e]

STATE UNIVERSITY FEE HIKES ARE A TEST MANY FAMILIES CAN'T PASS: As California's promise of affordable higher education slips out of reach for many, some parents urge making a noise in Sacramento.

By Carla Rivera | LA Times | http://bit.ly/7UOEaF

December 20, 2009 -- The budget crisis afflicting California State University could not have come at a worse time for Berenice Vite and Rafael Curiel, whose son Alonso is a sophomore at Cal State Long Beach. As the university was imposing a 32% student fee hike this year, Curiel underwent two shoulder surgeries and lost his job at a medical equipment firm.

The family has missed three house payments to scrape together tuition to continue educating their son, who does not qualify for financial aid. They are frustrated and worried, and believe that their voices have not been heard as fast-moving decisions have been made to raise fees, cut enrollment and eliminate programs.

"All of these things are coming at the same time, and I'm really concerned," said Vite, 46, an instructional aide for the Los Angeles Unified School District. "I was raised learning about the importance of education, and I want my children to be educated. But we don't know if we're going to have a house or not."

Vite and Curiel echo the voices of families throughout the state who are being severely tested by the budget cuts at the Cal State, University of California and community college systems.

The fee increases, as well as mandatory staff and faculty furloughs, steep reductions in enrollment (40,000 otherwise eligible students will be turned away in the next two years at Cal State) and elimination of programs and majors have spurred student and faculty protests on many campuses.

But now there is an emerging movement of parents who are speaking out and assuming a bigger advocacy role. (whole story: http://bit.ly/7UOEaF)

HIGHER ED: As state reneges on a promise, students hurt their own cause

Santa Rosa Press Democrat Editorial

Photo: NOAH BERGER / Associated Press  - A broken light marks the chancellor’s residence at UC Berkeley, where demonstrators broke windows and threw burning torches on Dec. 12.

Sunday, December 20, 2009 -- In 1960, California adopted a landmark plan to make higher education available and affordable to everyone.

Access to the University of California was guaranteed for the top 12.5 percent of the state’s high school graduates, the top third were promised spots in the state university system, and community colleges would welcome all students.

The Master Plan for Higher Education made California a national model, just as it was for K-12 education, highways and other public infrastructure. A half-century later, the Golden State’s promise of college education for all is crumbling like its highways — at great risk to its future prosperity.

As billions were cut from the budgets of the universities and community colleges, the state’s commitment to higher education declined from 17 percent of the state budget in 1980 to about 10 percent this year. Student fees, meanwhile, have soared — up fourfold in the past decade to $10,000 a year at UC, about 40 percent more than the average public university, according to the College Board.

So, instead of being guaranteed, a higher education is becoming unaffordable, especially for students working their way through school.

There’s a public cost to be paid for that.

Fewer students are completing college at a time when a growing number of jobs require at least a bachelor’s degree. By 2025, a Public Policy Institute of California study estimates that 40 percent of all jobs in the state will require a college degree, but less than a third of working-age adults will have one.

The time to address this shortfall is now.

But anyone who thinks the dangerous antics last weekend advance the cause is sadly mistaken. Eight people, including two students, were arrested after windows were broken and burning torches were thrown into the campus home of UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau on Dec. 12.

A note to students: UC officials have been among the most vocal supporters of increased state aid for higher education. Perhaps the students missed it during their sit-in demonstrations, but UC President Mark Yudof was among the first to testify at a legislative committee hearing on the state’s failure to meet its commitments under the master plan. “Our perils are real, and they are immediate,” Yudof said.

For example, colleges and universities are turning away students, despite the demand for skilled workers. The 23-campus California State University received about 610,000 applications for fall 2010, up 28 percent from last year. Yet it’s preparing to reduce its 450,000-student population by 40,000 over the next two years. By 2014, the state projects that there will be 640,000 more applicants than the state’s colleges and universities can accommodate.

Finding a solution may require help from the industries that benefit from UC research and employ students educated at state universities and colleges. Displays of ignorance and acts of vandalism won’t attract that help.

HAWAII EDUCATION TALKS FAIL; SCHOOL CLOSURES GO ON

by The Associated Press

12/6 --- Honolulu – Hawaii schools will stay closed on many Fridays after negotiators broke off talks to restore instructional days to the nation's shortest school year.

Educators, the governor's negotiators and the teachers union couldn't reach a deal Wednesday, meaning the 34 furlough days will continue this school year and next.

No further talks are scheduled, and schools will close Friday for their seventh furlough day since October.

"Education in the state of Hawaii has been dealt a horrible blow today," said Jo Curran, a member of the parent group Hawaii Education Matters. "There is nothing to lead us to believe there is much hope left for the children. It's not looking good at all."

Gov. Linda Lingle's administration blamed the Hawaii State Teachers Association for blocking a deal.

"Regrettably, the seven-member HSTA Bargaining Committee continues to stand in the way of over 170,000 children returning to class," according to a statement from Lingle's senior policy adviser, Linda Smith, and Human Resources Development Director Marie Laderta. "The HSTA has failed to seize this opportunity to solve the furlough Friday issue."

Union leaders said they would answer questions later Wednesday.

A substantial state budget shortfall prompted Lingle to cut allocations to the Department of Education earlier this year. During labor contract negotiations with the teachers union, the department and the state Board of Education agreed to furloughs as the best way to cope with the reduced allocations. The new pact, which Lingle agreed to, cut 17 days from the 180-day school year and reduced teacher pay by 8 percent.

Lingle's $50 million proposal would have reduced the pay cut by about 2.8 percent, if teachers gave up planning days in exchange for instructional days. That would have restored the 27 remaining furlough days this school year and next.

The union balked at the idea of giving up planning days or holding a vote of the state's 13,000 members on the governor's plan.

The administration's statement said the union was unwilling to have teachers supervise students during lunch hours on campuses and playgrounds, and the union didn't want teachers to voluntarily participate in after-school activities such as glee club, debate team, robotics or prom night.

The $50 million would have been available from the state's rainy day fund, which both the House and Senate were prepared to raid to restore the school year.

But without an agreement from the union, the governor's office, the Department of Education and Board of Education, the money can't be used.

SBX5–4: RttT COMPROMISE HEADS TO ASSEMBLY + smf's 2¢

by John Fensterwald in The Educated Guess

December 17th, 2009 -- Removing the annual cap on charter schools is out; giving parents in failing schools the right to transfer to  another district is in. And so is a public commission, with plenty of teachers on it, to review proposed changes to state academic standards.

In the latest twist in a battle of wills and education lobbies, the Senate yesterday passed a new version of Race to the Top legislation – SBX5-4 – and sent it to the Assembly. It’s not a done deal, but the bill followed intense negotiations involving aides for Gov. Schwarzenegger, Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg and Assembly Speak Karen Bass. Bass, in a statement, said “we have resolved all of the essential issues.’’ And the Legislature knows it has all but run out of time, with the state application for a piece of the $4.3 billion Race to the Top competition due Jan. 19.

That’s not to say the Assembly next week won’t stick in amendments that could queer the deal. Bass noted that there remains disagreement on issues “not directly related to Race to the Top.”

That’s code for parental choice.

Last week, the Assembly Education Committee defeated the original Senate bill, pushed by Schwarzenegger and Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles,  that would have given parents in low-performing schools the right of out-of-district transfer – a big change in state education policy. Also, if  50 percent of parents in a low-performing school or feeder schools signed a petition,  school trustees would have been forced to take dramatic action to turn the school around, such as hiring a new principal and staff or inviting in a charter school operator.

But what may have seemed radical two weeks ago gained momentum when parent groups in Los Angeles massed behind it as a civil rights issue. And the state could argue that parental choice could enhance a Race to  the Top application, even though it’s not explicitly tied to federal guidelines.

The compromise in SBX5-4: The parents’ petition provision will be limited to 75 schools, still a significant number, and the right of transfer will be limited to parents in the low-achieving 10 percent of schools. A representative of Los Angeles Unified testified in favor of the bill – much to my surprise.

The fight over charters

The importance of lifting the cap on charters, for additional application points, has been overstated. There are currently under 900 charter schools; the cap is 1,350 and grows 100 per year. The feds know California is charter-friendly.

The Assembly bill – ABX5-8,  sponsored by Education Committee Chairwoman Julia Brownley, lifted the cap but, in its earlier versions, included some potentially meddlesome language restricting charter growth. But differences have narrowed, so it became a battle over who has authority to regulate charters: the Legislature or the state Board of Education, appointed by the governor.

Compressed deadline for common-core standards

California and other states have been prodded by Race to the Top rules to join a hasty process to adopt national standards in math and English. The bill would commit the state to adopt, by late summer, 85 percent of the common core standards yet to be developed by National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers. Critics fear that the result will lower California’s academic standards.

Creating  an Academic Content Standards Commission, appointed by the Senate, Assembly and governor, would at least provide some oversight and an ability for the public to be heard.

SBX5-4 also requires establishing alternative training programs for aspiring teachers in science, math and technology, along with career academics – a move particularly advocated by business leaders in Silicon Valley.

●●smf's 2¢: It seems to me that if the bill fails to eliminate the cap on charter schools -- it fails to meet the requirements of RttT.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     As the bill is an attempt to qualify California  for RttT – that is the sole reason the governor called this special session of the lege -and it fails that test  -s o  it becomes doubly and egregiously disagreeable.

THE BEST SCHOOL DISTRICT SOME BILLIONAIRES CAN BUY? Some Qs, fewer As, more Qs, some outrage and an org chart

Excerpted from the AALA Update – with  smf's 2¢

4LAKids is publishing the following excerpt - with our 2¢ worth - from the Dec 14 edition of the Associated Administrators of Los Angeles Update. The whole thing - complete with contract negotiation rhetorical outrage (hyperbole of another color) is here: http://bit.ly/6YoVCt

Dec 14 - In mid-November, AALA President Judy Perez asked the Superintendent the following questions:

1. a. What monetary loss does LAUSD suffer when a District school is taken over by an independent charter?
b. How much will implementation of the Public School Choice Resolution cost the District?
2. Will this potential loss of funds affect your decisions regarding the selection of school proposals during the Public School Choice process?

LAUSD Chief Financial Officer, Megan Reilly, provided some answers to the first question, and the Superintendent responded to the second. Here is a summary of their written responses:

1. The District loses significant funds when District schools become charters, but the amount varies from school to school. In the case of Birmingham High School, which converted to charter status in July 2009, the District lost a minimum of $15 million.

Mrs. Reilly did not provide an answer to the second part of Question #1 because the District has not calculated the costs associated with implementation of Public School Choice.

smf: This, if correct, is the smoking gun in the PSC debacle. "The District has not calculated the costs…" is an either an accusation or a confession of fiduciary incompetence, possibly malfeasance.

1. On Dec. 10, 2009, the Superintendent wrote in a memo to Judy, “I do not believe that I will be considering a funding loss in selecting plans for implementation of the Public School Choice Resolution. I do not believe it is about dollars but it is about the best education for students going forward in those schools that are engaged in the Public School Choice.”

smf: The superintendent's concern about the 'best education for students going forward' is well placed …but it needs to be for all the students of LAUSD. The very real concern here is that PSC is advantageous to the schools that are engaged in PSC at the expense of the rest of the schools.

Considering the answers we have received so far, here are further questions for the Superintendent:

1. In this time of financial crisis, how can the District embark upon a potentially expensive course of action without determining the cost in advance?
2. How much of the District’s deficit would be eliminated if all focus and new schools under Public School Choice remained District schools?
3. Given the District’s budget crisis, is it wise or prudent to bleed the District of funds that could be used to help mitigate our enormous deficit?
4. What “strings” are the Broad, Walton and Wasserman Foundations pulling at Beaudry?

The Update continues:

We are questioning the continuing personnel additions that are floating through and around the 24th floor.

AALA’s concerns are especially heightened when matched with the Superintendent’s threats to cut large numbers of administrators, teachers and classified staff.

As reported in a memo to the Board of Education, dated December 13, 2009, Matt Hill, Administrative Officer, stated that 13 Senior Staff members have been hired. Their positions are funded by the Broad, Wasserman, and Walton Foundations.

Perhaps the District is in the throes of a “takeover” by the Wasserman, Walton and Broad Foundations.

If so, that would explain the potential selling off of schools and the Superintendent’s threats of layoffs of loyal, hardworking District employees.

Let’s try and understand senior staff’s motivation! The Superintendent has repeatedly said the District needs to support the schools by providing available resources to local sites. Yet administrators, teachers and classified staff at schools have been reduced in force and the aforementioned foundations are funding numerous additions to the Superintendent’s staff. Further, it is reported that these new foundation-funded employees receive District-provided health benefits.

Here is an Org Chart for the new hires.

TEACHERS LEARN TOO + CYBER-BULLYING LESSONS

Letters to the LA Times | December 19, 2009

Teachers learn too

Re “Controlling a classroom isn’t as easy as ABC,” Dec. 14

I am a school volunteer going into my fifth year running an after-school program in a Los Angeles Unified elementary school.

When I started, I was overwhelmed by classroom chaos. I went into this venture filled with romance. Many teachers start their careers the same way.

Teachers told me they did not receive training to deal with the chaos. Nobody knows about it until they are in a classroom, alone, faced with the reality of the power play.

I continue to find my way controlling the room. It feels perilous at times. The best piece of advice I was given: Don't think about whether they like you; abandon all notions of being liked.

Mel Ryane  | Los Angeles

::

May I offer a few suggestions for Brent Walmsley at Daniel Webster Middle School, based on 31 years of classroom experience?

First, move your desk to the front of the room. Students need to know that you are looking at them.

Second, get on your feet and circulate around the room, even while taking attendance. A teacher standing next to a seated student has a positive effect on that student's behavior.

Third, while moving around the room, offer reinforcement (verbal or otherwise) to those who are on task, and give the silent stare to those who are not.

Fourth, learn students' names.

Finally, develop a system of rewards and consequences, and follow through consistently.

Hang in there, Brent. Let the students know that you care enough about them to demand high standards. Share a little of yourself with them, and try to give each student some positive attention every day.

Donald Kerns  | Garden Grove

::

I was shocked by this article. In particular, I could not get over the incident between Walmsley and a recalcitrant female student in his class.

Why would that poor teacher or anyone else want to be in a classroom with such disrespectful young people? How is this student allowed to get away with speaking to an adult -- any adult -- in that manner, and how will Walmsley ever assert authority in the classroom now that the other students have seen her get away with it?

And most of all, what is the matter with our society that we seem to be raising a generation of children with zero respect for any adults -- as human beings, let alone as authority figures -- and nobody seems to think this is a problem?

Gayle K. Brunelle | Fullerton

::

As someone who has been teaching English for nearly 20 years, I was delighted to see coverage of the difficulties faced by teachers seeking to maintain a balance of order and encouragement in classrooms.

However, there is a blind spot in your report: the role administrators play in supporting teachers who seek to reinforce classroom or school policies.

I have noticed a disturbing pattern of administrative (and often parental) discouragement, and even direct undermining, of faculty who seek simple and coherent follow-through about missed classes and tardiness, poor grades, cheating or plagiarism, and even threatening behavior. This problem seems most acute in suburban settings.

As they absorb this alarming lesson, new teachers who do become veterans may, over time, amend or modify interventions because they absorb institutional and cultural messages that isolate them as "the enemy."

Jo Scott-Coe | Riverside

::

I teach English at Webster Middle School, and like many of our faculty, I had to shake my head at your article.

Not mentioned: The countless, thankless, unpaid hours that Walmsley spends after school every day to plan and make disciplinary phone calls; and that he is already turning his tough situation around.

The intense pressure and exasperation a new teacher feels made the front page courtesy of a Times reporter visiting his room. Bravo.

And people wonder why new teachers don't stick around.

Richard Mandl  | Los Angeles

Cyber-bullying lessons

Re “A right for students to be cruel online?” Dec. 13

As a local school board member and the parent of three public school graduates, I was interested in the article about the middle school student who sued Beverly Hills Unified School District, which disciplined her for cyber-bullying a classmate. The plaintiff had posted a YouTube video that ridiculed, abused and humiliated a fellow eighth-grade girl, and, after being nabbed and suspended by the middle school, sued to expunge the blot on her record.

Schools stand in loco parentis -- in the place of parents -- while children are at school. When the plaintiff's school found out about her cyber-bullying, it did what I think any responsible parent would do: It tried to teach the bully not to do it again.

I guess the Beverly Hills schools didn't realize that some of the parents it stands in the place of are OK with their kids posting offensive videos about other children.

After all, the plaintiff's attorney in the lawsuit was her own father. He won for his daughter the right to be mean. Is that something to be proud of?

Kathi Smith  | Ojai

::

How gratifying it is to see America's youngsters exercising with such enthusiasm their constitutional right to free expression.

For those frustrated administrators and teachers who wish they could do more to rein in students when they use said rights to denigrate and shame their classmates,

I would like to point out that free speech is a gift we all enjoy. Anyone, for instance, may write a letter to a college admissions board if he feels a prospective candidate has demonstrated behavior of a noncollegiate nature.

Perhaps we all should be more mindful of the blessings and pitfalls of unfettered expression. Just because one can say something doesn't mean one should.

Brandon Crist  | Torrance

US CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CALIFORNIA EDUCATION REPORT CARD

from Leaders and Laggards State Report Cards http://bit.ly/5M8pr5

California Academic Achievement Student performance in California is very poor—the state ranks among the lowest in the nation on academic achievement. The state’s 4th graders stand 9 percentage points below the national average in the percentage at or above the proficient level on the NAEP reading exam.

Academic Achievement of Low-Income and Minority Students California posts failing marks in this category. Only 10% of Hispanic 4th graders score at or above the proficient level on the NAEP reading exam. The national average for Hispanic 4th graders is 15%.

Return on Investment California’s student achievement is low relative to state spending on education (after controlling for student poverty, the percentage of students with special needs, and cost of living). The state’s poor return on investment earns it a D in our ranking.

Truth in Advertising About Student Proficiency California gets solid marks on the credibility of its student proficiency scores. The grade is based on the difference between the percentage of students identified as proficient in reading and math on 2005 state assessments and the percentage identified as proficient on the NAEP in 2005.

Rigor of Standards California receives an excellent grade for the rigor of its standards. The state’s English, math, and science curriculum standards all receive high marks, and it has enacted a rigorous exit exam that students must pass to graduate.

Postsecondary and Workforce Readiness California earns a solid grade in this category. Seventy-one percent of its 9th grade students receive a diploma within four years, and the state’s 11th and 12th graders perform very well on core Advanced Placement exams.

21st Century Teaching Force California earns high marks for its teacher workforce policies. The state tests incoming teachers on their basic skills, requires high school teachers to pass subject knowledge tests, and requires alternative route participants to demonstrate subject matter expertise.

Flexibility in Management and Policy California receives an above average grade on how much freedom and flexibility it gives its schools and principals. The state’s charter school laws earn high marks, and 77% of principals report a major degree of influence over how their school budgets are spent.

Data Quality California gets low marks for its efforts to collect and report high-quality education data. The state does not have the ability to match individual students’ test records from year to year to measure academic growth and it does not collect graduation and dropout data.

BRIEFLY: CA ED NEWS 12/18

from UCLA IDEA CA News Roundup

Does grading bias apply to education reports?

• 12-17-2009

By Bob Williams/Teacher Magazine(subscription required)

In my efforts to increase student interest in understanding probability, I often do a magic trick where I repeatedly shuffle a deck of cards and have three different students pick a card. Using the counting principle, students see that if we went through this process more than 132,000 times, theoretically I would guess the selected card of all three students only once. Of course, since I know how to trick my students into selecting the three cards I want them to select, I get the answers I want every time. Last month, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Enterprise Institute, and the Center for American Progress published a damning report on education titled Leaders and Laggards that I believe uses similar sleight of hand. The report is presented as a fair, research-based, and data-supported assessment to determine how states are doing in innovation of education. (more...)

The Leaders and Laggards Report

Preparation and support faulty for many California teachers

• 12-17-2009

By Adolfo Guzman-Lopez/KPCC

Many teachers in public high schools aren’t getting the preparation and support they need to carry out school district-mandated reforms, according to a study commissioned by the Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning. Cliques aside, it used to be that two kinds of students predominated at high schools: the college-bound, and everyone else. "Now, with the economies changing, everybody needs to be prepared for post-secondary education," said Patrick Shields, of the nonprofit Center for Education Policy, the group that conducted the research. "That doesn’t mean everybody has to go to UC Berkeley." But Shields says many should attend community colleges to learn technical and analytical skills. That’ll improve their lifetime earnings and the state’s prospects for strengthening its workforce. (more...)

Debt service to crowd out education spending – and everything else

• 12-17-2009

http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=800

Over the years, Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell has developed a sixth sense for steering clear of political potholes. So it was puzzling to hear him call for $9.9 billion worth of bonds for school construction one day after state Treasurer Bill Lockyer warned that California is already bonded up to its eyeballs — at its peril. “There is an obvious need to improve school facilities throughout California, and we cannot afford to wait to meet this need,” O’Connell said in a press release after testifying at a Senate hearing on school facilities. But wait we probably will. According to Lockyer’s lastest report on debt, by 2013, a record $10 billion in interest and principal on state debt will eat up a whopping 11 percent of estimated $91 billion in state revenue. Most of the money will pay off general obligation bonds, but more than $2 billion will cover short-term borrowing that bailed the state out of this year’s financial crisis. (more...)

 

Who's watching charter schools

• 12-17-2009

Letter by Jed Wallace/Los Angeles Times

In its Dec. 9 editorial, "Learning about ethics," The Times calls for state charter school laws to be "changed accordingly" in relation to publicly disclosing the expenditures of taxpayers' money. Readers may come away with the impression that charter operators are subject to little accountability compared to traditional public school districts. The truth is that charter schools are public schools, and as with any other public entity, they are already required to make information available to the public. There are mechanisms, laws and regulations on public disclosure already in place to which charter schools must adhere in terms of public reporting and transparency. In other words, charters are held to standards much like those that apply to traditional public schools and districts. (more...)

smf: Wallace is a charter schools spokesman. The legal requirements he refers to exist but are widely ignored and rarely enforced. Oversight is overlooked.

Pasadena Unified considers closing libraries, cancelling summer school and laying off 82 teachers

• 12-17-2009

By Caroline An/Pasadena Star News

Pasadena Unified students could face a future with no school libraries, no summer school and at least 82 less teachers, according to a preliminary budget plan approved by the school board late Tuesday. The Pasadena Unified School District faces an $18.8 million shortfall in the 2010-11 school year, and $1.2 million in cuts the next year, according to district figures. The district's budget is about $200 million. Eliminating summer school would save PUSD about $460,000 and closing libraries would save about $1.4 million, officials said. Teacher layoffs would save $3.5 million. Office staff reductions would save $2.175 million. Other smaller cuts also were proposed. The proposed reductions would cover the entire deficit for the next two years, but state budget problems could force deeper cuts. (more...)

 

Broad Foundation training percolates deeply into L.A.'s school leadership

• 12-17-2009

Blog by Howard Blume/LA Now Los Angeles Times

School improvement efforts funded by local billionaire philanthropist Eli Broad are reaching ever deeper into the Los Angeles Unified School District. A notable example is the presence of Matt Hill, who is managing the district’s highest-profile reform initiative, through which 30 campuses could be taken over by groups inside or outside the school system. As reported in today’s paper, Hill’s position, except for benefits, is funded by the Broad Foundation. Other L.A. Unified senior managers also went through Broad-funded training. Parker Hudnut is the recently hired executive director of the district’s innovation and charter division. Yumi Takahashi is the budget director. The district pays for these positions, which were filled through the normal hiring process. (more...)

Fremont High protesters oppose “reconstitution”

• 12-17-2009

By Leilani Albano/Intersections L.A.

The superintendent of L.A.'s schools wants to close down Fremont High School in South L.A. and reopen it with new administrators and teachers. The LAUSD’s move to shut down the school comes after reports the school had scored way below the state average on standardized tests in recent years. Leilani Albano of Annenberg Radio News has a report on the students' rally. (more...)

RttT/NCLB v 2.0: STATE SENATE PASSES NEW COMPROMISE EDUCATION BILL

Calif. Senate passes new compromise education bill

By JULIET WILLIAMS | Associated Press

Dec. 18 -- SACRAMENTO, Calif. — The state Senate on Thursday approved legislation that would clear the way for California to compete in a $4.3 billion school funding competition from the Obama administration, but the state's chances of securing a slice of the money remained in limbo.

After late-night negotiations lasting several days, state Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, introduced new legislation Thursday that attempted to forge a compromise between the two houses on education reform. Divisions remained, however, and Romero said she would work through the holidays to complete a bill with broad support and which Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger would sign.

Senate President Pro Tem Darrel Steinberg, D-Sacramento, urged Senators to support the package, despite a process he called "herky-jerky" that has pitted Democrats against one another and left many legislators torn between interest groups.

The bill passed the Senate on a bipartisan 21-7 vote.

The Senate Education Committee approved the bill earlier Thursday after a contentious 3-hour hearing in which fellow Democrats badgered her over details they said were missing, and interest groups complained the legislation was drafted too hastily.

The bill is California's latest attempt at making California eligible for the federal "Race to the Top" program, in which California could get up to $700 million for school reforms in a competition with other states.

An Assembly committee failed to pass Romero's previous legislation, which Schwarzenegger supported, after the powerful California Teachers Association and other groups lobbied against it. It instead passed legislation by Assemblywoman Julia Brownley, D-Santa Monica, which she revoked Thursday morning.

The proposed changes released Thursday retain several controversial elements, including allowing parents to petition to close or drastically revamp a badly failing school and allowing them to transfer children out of a failing school to another district.

School districts have serious concerns about how that would work and whether they would end up bearing the cost of taking on new students. Education groups that advocate on behalf of minority children worry that without strong language preventing it, school districts could reject poor or special needs students who would cost more to educate.

The legislation also would spell out consequences for identifying and intervening in around 180 chronically failing California schools, Steinberg said.

California's education system was once considered a national model that bred a generation of scientists and entrepreneurs, but the state has fallen to near the bottom among states in school funding and academics, earning a D in academic achievement this year from Education Week magazine's annual national schools survey. Students perform below the national average on nearly all measures, with black, Hispanic and poor children faring worst.

Romero removed another school reform element that proved too controversial: removing California's cap on the number of charter schools that can operate.

Despite the bill's passage Thursday, the state faces a tight timeline to enter the competition for federal funds. Applications are due Jan. 19 and the legislation still needs approval from the state Assembly, which is unlikely to meet again until the new year. In seeking votes, Romero also promised to bring the bill back to Senate committees after amendments are made, adding to the anticipated time crunch.

Romero acknowledged there were gaps in the legislation, but she told lawmakers she is confident compromise can still be reached; she reminded them that President Barack Obama has called for a fundamental change in how states deal with the worst-of-the-worst schools.

Obama announced Race to the Top in August, and Schwarzenegger called a special session of the state Legislature shortly afterward.

"We have delayed. We have waited. The clock has ticked," Romero said. "The nation's not waiting."

12/19 for 12/20: TOMORROW'S LAUSD NEWS TODAY

from Google News

LA schools chief orders weak new teachers ousted

Los Angeles Times - Jason Song, Jason Felch – 12/19 for 12/20

Teachers must be let go by seniority, according to state law, which has forced the Los Angeles Unified School District to ignore performance in its ...

 

Cortines: No more coddling substandard teachers in LAUSD

Contra Costa Times - Connie Llanos - 12/19 for 12/20

AJ Duffy, president of United Teachers Los Angeles, said the ability to remove probationary teachers is already within the rights of district administrators ...

 

LAUSD, UTLA vote for creation of 20 more pilot schools

Daily Breeze - Connie Llanos - 12/19 for 12/20

"I am so delighted that both the members of (United Teachers Los Angeles) and our district have reached this decision that will be the most beneficial ...

89.3 KPCC

LA Unified targets ineffective beginning teachers

89.3 KPCC - Jonathan Pobre -12/19 for 12/20

United Teachers Los Angeles president AJ Duffy says the Cortines proposal is misguided. To improve teacher quality, Duffy says the district should work with ...

LA schools chief targets poor-performing teachers

Los Angeles Times - 12/19 for 12/20

Ramon C. Cortines today announced that the Los Angeles Unified School District would begin aggressively weeding out poor-performing teachers and ...

RttT/NCLB v.2.0: MEIER: 'THE ALTERNATIVE?' TRANSPARENCY & HONEST DATA

by Deborah Meier - from the Bridging Differences EdWeek blog exchange between Diane Ravitch and Deborah Meier

Meier is currently on the faculty of New York University’s Steinhardt School of Education, as senior scholar and adjunct professor as well as Board member and director of New Ventures at Mission Hill, director and advisor to Forum for Democracy and Education, and on the Board of The Coalition of Essential Schools.  (more: http://bit.ly/7wvw0r)

On Tuesday Ravitch wrote: "NLCB and the Race to the Top are really the same, except that President Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan's 'Race' has nearly $5 billion as a lure to persuade states to climb aboard the express train to privatization."        http://bit.ly/8cF7Zo

December 17, 2009

Dear Diane,

Time to rest up and maybe start 2010 in a more hopeful mood.

I just put down an article in The New Yorker by Atul Gawande entitled "Testing, Testing." But it's not about schooling, but medical tests. The author is a doctor at Boston's Brigham and Women's Hospital and grew up in Athens County, Ohio (his parents were doctors, not farmers). He uses his experience and inquiring mind to think about the advantages of not having a master plan for curing our ills. He describes the history of the government's role in agricultural reforms and suggests that maybe the hodge-podge we call our latest medical reform plan might lead to interesting places if we pursue the trial-and-error pilots that the bill proposes.

Assuming, which many don't, that we trust that most school people (and parents), like most doctors and farmers, want to do their best, and even think they are, what can we learn from Gawande's ideas, Diane? What would happen if we spent more time and money on actual trial-and-error pilots and then neutrally spread the word about what happens when....? If we collected honest data, not to bribe folks or to get them to comply, but on the assumption that information is desirable, sought after, and needs no bribe? Or, at least, that enough people don't need bribes or mandates to spread the best ideas—over time.

That was our idea in NYC when we proposed the Annenberg Network for School Renewal. It was the idea behind Boston's Pilot Schools. It was the idea behind—going back still further—Ralph Tyler's Eight-Year Study, Lillian Weber's Open Corridor program, the Central Park East schools, and the networks that grew out of them. Suppose these experiments had been supported wholeheartedly. Suppose we had visited each other, not competitively, but supportively. What if we had initiated a climate of inquiry into "what works"—which would have required (and, this is where medicine and agriculture may have it easier) laying out our different definitions about "what works" means? The Annenberg project, incidentally, did not include only "progressive-style" educators. Our alliance included New Visions (eclectic, lots of moneyed backing, etc), the Manhattan Institute (conservative, even pro-voucher), and a few nascent schools connected to ACORN's community organizing work and Ted Sizer's Coalition schools. What if we had learned the lesson economist Paul Samuelson talked about? (See "P.S. 2" below.)

The mindset behind this work requires three essential agreements:

(1) that our purpose is not to mandate "our approach" vs. "your approach,"

(2) that we make the work transparent and public, and

(3) that school decisions be responsive to their own constituents.

It would require that schools and "networks" have a lot of flexibility and autonomy, and that the central authorities mostly be in the business of collecting data, making it accessible, bringing people together, plus monitoring basic financial, health, and civil rights compliance to state law. A very thin master contract between management and labor—such as was agreed to by UFT locals in Boston and NYC—supplemented by schools developing their own work agreements. The data we collect—none of it high stakes—could include exams of many sorts—perhaps one that we all use—alongside sampled data on potentially intriguing practices and experiences and a Tyler-type study of long-term impact. I'm laying this out for the umpteenth time because people keep asking me: "What's the alternative?"

Why not?? It was Rudy Crew and Richard Mills who vetoed our plan after we had gotten the go-ahead from their predecessors. State Commissioner Mills said that it would have worked in his old job in Vermont (a small state), but wouldn't work in N.Y., so why experiment? Crew said he was in too much of a hurry to have an impact on NYC to wait five years, but that he would borrow some of our ideas.

It is painful to think of where we might now be if we had 15 years worth of such data collected by NYU and Teachers College, not to mention the city and state! Now the states are rushing to reinvent public schools in the model of privately managed chains of schools. (The Massachusetts state Senate has passed a shocking bill to that effect. Massachusetts was one of those states whose test data outperformed virtually all international competitors before NCLB and charters!)

Two recent books bring together the two ends of my obsession with schools. Sam Chaltain's American Schools: The Art of Creating a Democratic Learning Community, and Elizabeth MacDonald and Dennis Shirley's The Mindful Teacher. Chaltain tackles the Big Issue through specific experiences in democratic communities, and MacDonald and Shirley start with a close look at what good teaching and learning is about, and tease out its implications for schooling writ large. Both suggest some "practical" directions.

Meanwhile back at the ranch (NYC's schools): Mayor Bloomberg will be holding one evening public meeting before the vote to close 22 mostly neighborhood high schools, move a bunch of other schools to new sites, implement new rules for procuring supplies, and new regulations regarding the role of parents and communities in their schools' operations. Speakers will have 45 minutes to comment on one and all, followed by a vote by the mayor's largely hand-selected semi-board. Then—"it's done."

He has won his election, and nothing will stop him, not even a state law requiring greater participation by parents and the public under mayoral control. Democracy may be a fragile and utopian idea at best. But this is "democracy" as satire.

Deb

P.S. The Mass Transit Authority (MTA) has just voted for a budget that would eliminate free and reduced transit fares for NYC schoolchildren. Since schools Chancellor Joel Klein and the mayor have built their master plan around kids being able to travel from "x" to "y," this means their initiatives would now be restricted to those families ready to pay nearly $1,000 a year per child in transit costs!

P.S.2: According to a WBUR report, the late Nobel economist Paul Samuelson "lamented that the financial industry's blind faith in numbers helped cause the current recession. 'Fiendish, Frankenstein monsters of financial engineering had been created,' he said at a forum at Boston University. 'A lot of them at MIT. Some of them by people like me.' " And, now, it seems number-obsessed financiers are taking over our public school system! Who could have believed that the very hedge-funders who have gotten us into our current financial and unemployment crisis are now going to use their smarts to rescue and remake our educational system—in their image?