VENICE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS REPORT CAFETERIA FOOD SHORTAGE

By Cathy Asapahu - The Oarsman Venice High School Los Angeles, CA | http://bit.ly/bt2T7I

10/28/2010 5:56:54 PM - Recently, Venice High students have been complaining that the student cafeteria has not been providing enough food for students during lunchtime. Students have reported the cafeteria running out of food five minutes after the lunch bell rings.

The recent budget cuts have affected the school cafeteria also this year. Due to layoffs, the cafeteria has been short-staffed this year. The staff has also been working overtime to make up for the extra furlough days this year.

The cafeteria has been failing to distribute enough main courses to all students during lunchtime. To make up for the lack of food, the cafeteria gives out Smucker’s Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwiches instead. Although the sandwiches meet the nutritional standards required by the school district, some students find that these sandwiches do not satisfy their appetite.

At Venice, 1,406 students receive lunch under the National School Lunch Program, according to cafeteria manager Mr. Marcelino Mejia, who has been working at Venice for over eight years. Some students who eat lunch in the cafeteria ask to leave their 5^th period classes early to ensure that they receive a lunch before students are released and food runs out.

Senior Oswaldo Hernandez, who uses meal tickets to buy food from the cafeteria almost every day, says that he has received peanut butter and jelly sandwiches at least three to five times in the past five weeks. He also said that they often did not satisfy his appetite and some of these sandwiches have been served completely frozen

Mr. Mejia explained that because students haven’t been eating lunch or breakfast regularly each week, it has been difficult for the cafeteria to get an estimate of how many meals to order. For instance, in the first week of the academic year, about 300 students were buying breakfast from the cafeteria. However, after the first week, the number of students ordering breakfast was increasing in increments of about 100 students per week. Mr. Mejia also believes that many students are eating in the cafeteria without having turned in a meal ticket application, which is compounding the problem because the amount of meals prepared is partly determined by the number of meal applications the cafeteria receives. Mr. Mejia assured students that meal shortages would not last very long and that he was addressing the problem.

“Things are getting better,” Mr. Mejia said. “For example, today I went outside and saw that 20 more meals need to be prepped.”

More information on the Los Angeles Unified School District Food Services Division can be found online at cafe-la.lausd.net.

SURVEY SAYS NEARLY HALF OF ALL STUDENTS HAVE BEEN BULLIED IN LAST YEAR

Survey says nearly half of all students have been bullied in last year

By Melissa Evans, Staff Writer | LA Daily News | http://bit.ly/dBNohB

In this Sept. 9 photo, the grave of Mentor High School student Eric Mohat, who committed suicide in 2007, is seen at the mausoleum of the Western Reserve Memorial Gardens in Chesterland, Ohio. Mohat was one of five Mentor High School teenagers who died within two and a half years. Four committed suicide. The fifth died of what her parents say was an accidental prescription drug overdose. Friends and family say bullying drove most of them to kill themselves. (AP Photo/Amy Sancetta)

28 October 2010 - Nearly half of the nation's high school students say they have been bullied in the last year and an equal number say they they taunted or teased a classmate, according to a new survey.

The survey of more than 43,000 high school students by the Josephson Institute of Ethics in Westchester comes on the heels of recent suicides by teens relentlessly tormented by bullies.

The institute found that 47 percent of respondents said they had been harassed in a way that was seriously upsetting, and half admitted to bullying a classmate. Nearly a quarter of students said they do not feel safe at school.

from THE josephson Institute of Ethics  |http://josephsoninstitute.org/ Bullying is widespread, says Institute study Results from a survey of over 40,000 high school students reveal high rates of at-risk behavior. Read the 2010 Report Card » Are your kids at risk? Take our quizzes »

"This is a real problem," said Michael Josephson, founder and president of the nonprofit institute, which runs school-based character-building programs. "The numbers are pretty disturbing."

The survey is considered an accurate bellwether of beliefs among young people. The respondents included teens from different age groups, geographic regions, academic levels and socioeconomic groups. The margin of error is less than 1 percentage point.

Conducted since 1992, the survey included questions about bullying for the first time this year. Though kids have always bullied, Josephson said it appears the growing popularity of online social networking and the Internet in general has given bullies a powerful new tool to cause harm.

"At least before you could change your school, or your environment," he said. "That doesn't work anymore.

Now you cannot escape it, and the chances of this causing deep scars and deep depression are really increasing."

A recent spate of suicides among teenagers subjected to bullying - including Tyler Clementi, a Rutgers University freshman who was videotaped having a sexual encounter with a man, then jumped off a bridge after the video was posted online - provide anecdotal evidence of this trend.

A number of politicians, including President Barack Obama, have spoken out on the issue in recent days. On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Education sent out letters to schools, colleges and universities reminding them of their federal obligations to protect students.

At Los Angeles Unified, bullying is defined as "the deliberate antagonistic action or creation of a situation with the intent of inflicting emotional, physical, or psychological distress."

According to district policy, bullying can also include cyber-bullying, and recenty officials have taken special actions to target the bullying of gay students who report being harassed at higher rates than their heterosexual peers.

"Bullying is a serious issue and it's one that students are very concerned with, they talk to me about it all the time when I meet with them," Superintendent Ramon Cortines.

"I am telling all my teachers and principals to talk to their students and parents when these issues arise," he said. "I don't want them to just say these things just happen."

Cortines addressed bullying in this week's "On the Record," which airs via KLCS-TV, the LAUSD's Education Station. It will be repeated at 7 a.m. Sunday.

Josephson said parents should talk to their kids regularly, and be proactive in reporting harassment to school officials and, in some cases, to the parents of bullies. Schools, meanwhile, need to be innovative in the way they approach bullying, they said.

"We have to create much more positive environments, pro-respect environments, not just anti-bullying environments," Josephson said.

He added that children also need to be more resilient in the face of bullying, because "we're not going to be able to shield from name-calling. We need to fortify our young people to deal with that, and not take it so personally."

---

Staff Writer Connie Llanos contributed to this report.

DEFUNDING BULLIES: Schools, including colleges, will be required to adopt anti-bullying plans after an incident or face the possible loss of federal aid.

 

LA Times Editorial | http://lat.ms/95KOSX

October 28, 2010 -- School officials invariably express great sorrow when campus bullying leads to tragedy; they also usually say that they are shocked to find that anyone was being harassed, even when the victim or parents have complained. But nothing actually gets schools to change their behavior like the promise of money or the threat of its removal. That's why it was heartening to learn that the U.S. Department of Education took its first strong steps against bullying this week by announcing that schools might lose federal funding for failing to stop bullying of gay students on campus.

There are federal civil rights laws that, at least theoretically, prohibit harassment of students on the basis of race, national origin, gender or religion, and in his announcement, Education Secretary Arne Duncan told schools to use them to enforce rules against bullying. In addition, the department will use court rulings on gender discrimination to include gay and lesbian students among those protected groups. Schools, including colleges, will be required to adopt anti-bullying plans after an incident or face the possible loss of federal aid. The U.S. Department of Justice also might be brought in to investigate. The new get-tough policy came after the recent suicides of five gay teenagers who had been harassed at school, as well as the suicides of several straight teenagers who had been bullied.

The Education Department is right to use all the powers at its disposal, and it should indeed take tough legal action when schools fail to protect vulnerable populations. But federal civil rights laws are an awkward tool for changing student culture on campus, and even department officials concede that the laws would be invoked only in the most extreme cases. And what about the bullying of students who don't fall within one of the protected categories? All students have the right to feel safe on campus. The tolerant attitude toward bullying among many school officials is as unacceptable as the harassment itself.

It's too bad the Education Department took so long to take steps against bullying. It could have used the Race to the Top program, under which states receive large federal grants for agreeing to education reforms, to push for meaningful state laws that would create effective anti-bullying programs for all public schools, and require the schools to use them.

That opportunity was missed, but there will be others. Many schools have successfully changed campus culture. We already know what works — a combination of educating students and the community to understand that cruel behavior hurts others in terrible ways, and disciplining the bullies rather than trying to get the victims to change. Duncan should use both his funding clout and his bully pulpit to send an insistent message that states and individual schools must use both weapons against the kinds of bullying that make school a daily misery for too many students.

LAUSD IMPROVES ITS HIRING OVERSIGHT: Audit shows fewer conflicts of interest since 2006

By Connie Llanos, Staff Writer – LA Daily News | http://bit.ly/afLa1H

10/28/2010 - Lax oversight in the hiring of consultants in Los Angeles Unified's Facilities Department resulted in rampant conflicts of interest over a four-year period, according to an audit released Wednesday by City Controller Wendy Greuel.

The district requested the review this year after facilities consultant Bassam Raslan was indicted on conflict of interest charges for allegedly using his district position to hire employees from a company he runs.

The audit found some 225 instances between 2002 and 2006 in which consultants working in temporary management positions for the district hired others from their own firm, leading to potential conflicts.

The review also found that at least 80 consultants were hired without any kind of screening panel. And in four instances in which a screening panel was used, a member stood to benefit financially by hiring a specific consultant because they had investments with that consulting firm.

But the audit, performed by Sacramento-based Sjoberg Evashenk Consulting, also found that 2006 potential conflict of interest issues have decreased since 2006.

"Overall we found that from 2002 to 2006 the LAUSD's policies and oversight for the selection of contract professionals were lax," Greuel said at a press conference Wednesday at Miguel Contreras Learning Complex downtown.

"However since 2006, the LAUSD's oversight and adherence to its own policies have improved dramatically. While some policies still need to be strengthened, the district has done a much better job reducing the potential for a conflict of interest to occur and ensuring the integrity of the program."

The 24-page audit - the first the district has ever requested from the city controller - cost LAUSD $72,000.

It covered contracts awarded by LAUSD's $20 billion school construction program from 2002 through this year. During that period the district hired about 1,000 contract professionals.

Greuel's audit was far less critical then previous reviews by LAUSD's Inspector General, including one performed in 2007 that authorities said led to Raslan's indictment.

Raslan pleaded not guilty in April and his case is expected to go to trial this year.

Guy Mehula was the chief facilities executive from 2002 until he resigned in September 2009. He could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

District Superintendent Ramon Cortines, who could not attend the news conference, said he was pleased with the audit, noting it indicates significant improvements over the last four years including the last two that he has spent at the helm of LAUSD.

"In their review the auditors found consistent compliance with our district's policies and procedures for retaining contract professionals in place for the past three years, and appropriate and needed controls were in place to avoid potential conflicts of interest," Cortines said via a written statement.

"We are very pleased the results of the audit are generally quite positive."

The school district has used large numbers of contract professionals during its $20 billion building program - funded by four voter approved bonds and one of the nation's largest public works projects.

Voters also approved a fifth bond, Measure Q, in November of 2008, totalling $7 billion which will largely go towardmodernizing existing schools. That construction is not expected to start until 2016 because of the financial crisis.

District officials have defended the use of consultants in the building program, saying it allows them to attract top talent and hire only the workers needed for a given project.

Neil Gamble, LAUSD's deputy chief facilities executive, said as the district nears completion of its new construction bond program, the use of contract professionals has been sharply reduced.

The facilities department currently employs about 400 consultants, Gamble said.

However, several facilities consultants have been hired by the district in management positions, including Chief Facilities Executive James Sohn, who succeeded Mehula in 2009.

According to district officials, 32 senior facilities executives previously worked as consultants to LAUSD.

jfkld;safdsafd

The shift of consultants into district leadership posts has been a major concern for employee unions, who questioned the validity of Greuel's audit.

"It appears to our local union that only upper management and consultants were asked to provide information about whether they are doing a good job and apparently they have answered in the affirmative," said Lourdes Garcia, general counsel for Teamsters Local 527, which represents many district facilities workers.

"In our view the audit is incomplete and not a true reflection of what is actually going on in the facilities branch."

LAUSD general counsel David Holmquist said the district will investigate and take appropriate action on the four cases of direct conflicts of interest identified in the audit.

The names of the individuals or companies involved were not released, and Holmquist would not say whether the employees were still with the district.

Holmquist also said the district plans to implement the audit's recommendations, including a requirement that contract professionals file financial disclosure forms to reveal any potential conflicts.

CITY AUDIT OF L.A. UNIFIED IS RELEASED; REPORT FOCUSES ON SYSTEMIC PROBLEMS

by Howard Blume – LA Times/LA Now | http://lat.ms/cd2ch0

October 27, 2010 | 10:00 am - The $20-billion school construction program of the nation’s second-largest school system was rife with conflicts of interest, but most problems were eliminated after 2006, independent auditors have concluded.

These findings emerged from a long-awaited audit, released Wednesday morning, that was conducted under the supervision of Los Angeles City Controller Wendy Greuel. The review was commissioned by the Los Angeles Unified School District after the April indictment of senior manager Bassam Raslan for allegedly funneling business from the district's massive school-building effort to a company he co-owned.

The school district has relied heavily on contractors to supervise projects, defending the practice as a way to attract higher-quality employees while providing the flexibility to increase or reduce their numbers as needed.

This latest audit named no individuals, nor did it accuse anyone of wrongdoing. Instead, it focused on serious systemic problems.

“Overall, we found that from 2002 to 2006 the LAUSD’s policies and oversight for the selection of [contractors] were lax,” Greuel wrote in her cover letter.

The audit found 225 instances in which consultant hiring panels included people from the same company as the applicant. Eighty hires were made without using the required panels at all. And auditors identified four instances in which someone participating in a hiring panel “stood to receive a direct financial benefit because they selected a [consultant] from a firm in which they had an investment,” Greuel wrote.

In some respects, this latest review was tamer than some others. This year’s grand jury report alleged criminal wrongdoing and returned indictments. An earlier audit from the school district’s own inspector general singled out specific companies as having engaged in alleged improper conduct.

“Because the LAUSD is our client, we can't name the names independently,” said deputy city controller Ben Golombek. “We've turned all of our findings over to the district for additional investigation.”

Previous audits by the district inspector-general have led to some changes in the use of consultants, which the controller cited as largely effective. The controller's audit, however, include recommendations for additional safeguards. Auditors suggested that contractors be required to fill out additional financial disclosure forms and that senior district administrators should review them more carefully.

So far the school system has been billed $72,000 for the work, which was completed by Sacramento-based Sjoberg Evashenk Consulting.

CITY CONTROLLER RELEASES PERFORMANCE AUDIT OF LAUSD’S FACILITIES SERVICES DIVISION, NEW CONSTRUCTION BRANCH: SELECTION PROCESS OF CONTRACT PROFESSIONALS USING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CONTRACTS

October 27, 2010

Ray Cortines, Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent
John Deasy, Los Angeles Unified School District Deputy Superintendent
The Honorable Los Angeles Unified School District Board Members

The enclosed audit represents a new chapter in the relationship between the City Controller and the LAUSD, because it’s the first time the City Controller has audited the school district. I appreciate that you sought out my Office to conduct an independent audit and look forward to partnering with you in the future as we strive to ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent both efficiently and effectively.

As you are well aware, since 1997, voters in Southern California have approved more than $20 billion in bonds, overseen by the LAUSD, to finance the largest school construction program in America. From July 2002 to present, the LAUSD hired more than 1,000 Contract Professionals to provide a range of construction and project management services to the New Construction Program (NCP).

You sought our assistance immediately following the April, 2010 indictment of a Contract Professional (CP) acting as a District employee, who allegedly funneled business from the NCP to a company he co-owned. We agreed to audit the Program to identify any other potential conflicts of interest.

Overall, we found that from 2002 to 2006 the LAUSD’s policies and oversight for the selection of Cps were lax. While LAUSD has a requirement that Cps selected to participate in hiring panels should not be from the same firm as the CP seeking to be hired, we found that in more than 225 instances during this time, a CP or a regional director sat on a panel which selected a person employed by their employer – thus creating a potential conflict of interest.

The audit uncovered 80 CP appointments that were made without any hiring panel being convened. We also identified four instances where someone participating in a hiring panel stood to receive a direct financial benefit because they selected a CP from a firm in which they had an investment.

However, since 2006, the LAUSD’s oversight and adherence to its own policies have improved dramatically. While some policies still need to be strengthened, the district has done a much better job reducing the potential for a conflict of interest to occur and ensuring the integrity of the program.

Some of the specific audit findings include:

• From 2002 to 2006 LAUSD’s hiring policies are unclear and the district lacks documentation of whether policies were followed.
• LAUSD was unable to locate their original Staff hiring Procedures policy making it difficult to determine the strength of their policies and whether they complied with them.
• In the first 12 months of the program, nearly 80 percent of the selection panels, which decide the CP that is hired, did not meet with the LAUSD’s updated policies requiring that there are at least 3 panelists and that at least one of them be an LAUSD employee.
• Since 2006 the district has created clearer policies and more thorough documentation, which reduces the risk of a conflict of interest.
• The District has greatly improved its processes and requires specific steps and recordkeeping procedures that include uniform candidate information forms and post-interview summaries from individual hiring panelists, which provides greater transparency of the panel’s decision.
• Moreover, the District is currently following these CP hiring processes that will reduce potential conflicts of interest.
• There is still room to improve the program’s oversight and certain policies need to be strengthened.
• CPs should file a Form 700 (Statement of Economic Interest) when they are hired and when they leave LAUSD employment, not just every April.
• Ensure that newly hired Cps – particularly those in senior management are trained on LAUSD’s conflict of interest policies, Form 700 filing requirements and New Construction hiring procedures.

As City Controller, I believe that ensuring our children are receiving a quality education requires everyone in our community – parents, teachers, non-profits and the City – be involved. I’m glad this historic partnership could occur and I’m optimistic we can work together in the future to ensure our taxpayer dollars are being spent appropriately by the LAUSD.

Sincerely,

/s/Wendy Greuel

City Controller

THE COMPLETE AUDIT IS AVAILALE HERE: http://bit.ly/cktdjb

smf notes:

• This is a commissioned performance audit, neither a financial audit nor an investigation.
• It was commissioned and paid for by the School District from bond funds - who contracted with the Controller as an independent auditor.
• The Controller’s Office contracted the audit out to an outside firm: SJOBERG-EVASHENK CONSULTING INC. of Sacramento.
• The City Controller has appointed a member to the LAUSD Bond Oversight Committee since the first BB Bond in 1997.
  

MELROSE ELEMENTARY KIDS GET THEIR HANDS DIRTY WITH WOOLLY SCHOOL GARDENS AND CHEF ANDREA CAVALIRE

LA Weekly Blog | By Jessica Ritz | http://bit.ly/a0LaDx

J. Ritz - Chef Andrea Cavaliere from Cecconi's and schoolyard gardeners in training.

Mon., Oct. 25 2010 @ 1:03PM :: There must be statistics, somewhere, detailing the amount of chain link fencing in the possession of the Los Angeles Unified School District. It seems entirely possible that the sum of the practical-yet-dreary material surrounding LAUSD sites might stretch from the Pacific to some destination on the Atlantic coast, or even circle the globe a few times.

But thankfully there are ways to use all this metal as more than just a containment device. Last Friday morning, in collaboration with modular garden company Woolly Pocket's Woolly School Garden program and First Lady Michelle Obama's Chefs Move to Schools and Let's Move! initiatives, Chef Andrea Cavaliere from Cecconi's and Woolly Pocket representatives were on hand to begin a partnership with Melrose Elementary School Math/ Science/Technology Magnet. This is the first school Cecconi's and Cavaliere have "adopted" to work on local gardening and nutrition education efforts.

J. Ritz

Woolly Pocket founder Miguel Nelson -- who has plenty of experience shaping crazy creative environments in unexpected places -- hopes to see schools transformed into urban farms. So the fence along Detroit Avenue and a portion of the schoolyard just north of Melrose Avenue is a fine example of how to start. "The timing is right," he says, given interest and concern for food quality in general, locally grown produce, and school lunch programs. "This is the only solution out there that gives you a school garden without red tape. Anyone who wants one will get a garden." The cost might be prohibitive to many institutions, but in addition to ready-to-go, streamlined gardening kits, Woolly School Garden helps take care of some of the fundraising details, too. Since the program launched on Earth Day, approximately 100 schools in the L.A. areas have signed on, and Nelson aims to have 10,000 school gardens set up nationwide by next year.

The sight of kids engaging in urban gardening isn't as novel now as when this movement started, but just about anyone with a pulse will think it's still pretty cool and awfully cute. A group of mostly fourth graders on Friday were getting their hands dirty, feeling and smelling plants, and asking questions about different varieties of herbs and veggies growing in Woolly Pockets vertical planters and in raised beds set up on the dark asphalt. Some of the children were sketching pictures of the garden in their journals, jotting down ideas for future meals using the future harvest, and talking about how this project related to science lessons.

J. Ritz - Cavaliere discussing an artist's rendering of the new garden, followed by an Italian pronunciation lesson.

"It's better than class," said Kayla, 9. Classmate Katherine was psyched about the project because "we get to create more nature." She in particular was looking forward to monitoring the eggplant's progress. Meanwhile, fellow fourth-grader Dominique hoped that the school garden could produce some onions for her family's adobo recipe.

Cavaliere plans to visit the school weekly to check on the garden's growth, teach kids about nutrition, see how the school's expanded salad and fresh food offerings are working out, and purchase herbs to bring back to his kitchen at Cecconi's. Funds raised from these sales will be reinvested in the expanding the garden. The project is about "fun, learning, and eating better," Cavaliere said. Sounds like a perfect way to bring these lessons full circle.

While on the topic of schools, food, and good deeds: El Cholo will comp dinners for all teachers and educators (with proof of school I.D.) tonight, October 25th, from 5 p.m. through closing at the original Western Avenue, Downtown, Santa Monica, La Habra, and Irvin locations. Plus there will be a raffle for teachers to win $250 worth of supplies for their school or classroom.

SAN PEDRO HIGH SCHOOL TO HOUSE TRUANCY CENTER: One of eight new Attendance Improvement Centers in LAUSD + LAUSD News Release

Daily Breeze - From staff reports | http://bit.ly/9cMTFY

10/25/2010 08:35:42 AM PDT - SAN PEDRO :: San Pedro High School will house one of eight new truancy intervention centers being set up by the Los Angeles Unified School District.

The so-called Attendance Improvement Centers are set to open Nov. 1.

Instead of getting a citation for skipping school, students will be taken to the centers, where they will be provided grade-level instruction while they wait for parent pickup. 

"The district is working on expanding educational options for students that do not fit the typical protocol of a student," said LAUSD Chief Academic Officer Judy Elliott in a press release. "The AIC is but one way to provide a multipronged approach to keeping students in schools and off the streets."

Referrals to community resources and services and other assistance will be provided for students or parents who are facing problems related to truancy, the district said.

The centers will be open Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. They are a collaboration between the school district, local law enforcement agencies, the courts and the community.

LAUSD Announces Opening of Attendance Improvement Centers

The eight centers will serve as an alternative to truancy citations issued for curfew violations

LAUSD news Release | http://bit.ly/aJ9tUs

October 22, 2010 - Los Angeles—The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) is investing in a deterrent/intervention program for truants with the opening of eight new Attendance Improvement Centers (AIC) across the District beginning November 1. These centers will serve as an alternative to truancy citations that are issued for daytime curfew violations.

“We are thrilled to be offering an alternative to truancy and citations for our LAUSD youth. The Attendance Improvement Centers (AICs) are places where we intend to get students back on track by providing options to truancy and drop out,” said Dr. Judy Elliott, LAUSD’s Chief Academic Officer.

“The District is working on expanding educational options for students that do not fit the typical protocol of a student. We have increased our use of technology and online courses for credit recoupment and acceleration. The AIC is but one way to provide a multi-pronged approach to keeping students in schools and off the streets. Our goal is 100 percent graduation. To that end, we must create the options our students need,” she added.

Under the Los Angeles Municipal Code (45.04), juveniles are prohibited from loitering during the hours of the day when school, which the minor would normally attend, is in session, on days when that school is in session. Additionally, California’s Compulsory Education Law (EC section 48200) requires that every child between the ages of 6-18 years old must attend school every day and on time.

LAUSD officials believe the AICs will not only provide a service to the District’s neediest students by preventing them from becoming victims or perpetrators of crimes, but help them on their path to becoming productive members of society.

Currently, school truancy is one of several patterns of behavior known to increase the likelihood of delinquency. Youth who do not attend school are more likely to become involved with drugs, alcohol, gangs and violence than youth who attend school. Truancy can cause students to fall behind in school, which can lead them to dropout. Dropouts have higher rates of incarceration and addiction, lower-paying jobs and a greater tendency for unemployment over their lifetime.

The Attendance Improvement Centers also provide truant students with a safe educational program during the school day while they await parent pick up. While at the AICs, students

will receive instruction and are required to complete grade-level work assigned to them.

Students held at the AICs must exhibit appropriate behavior in the AIC classroom. The objective is to teach students to assume responsibility for their actions, to learn to exercise self-control, and to provide them with an intervention that can guide them towards success.

The AICs will be located on the campuses of:

• Sepulveda MS (Local District 2)
  

• Belmont SH (Local District 4)

• Burbank MS (Local District 4)

• Santee Education Complex (Local District 5)

• El Sereno MS (Local District 5)

• Gage MS (Local District 6)

• Washington Preparatory SH (Local District 8)

• San Pedro SH (Local District 8)

During the school year, the Attendance Improvement Centers will be open from 8 a.m. until 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.

The Attendance Improvement Centers are a collaborative effort involving the LAUSD, local law enforcement agencies, the courts, and the community. The centers’ goals are to ensure an education for every child, improve attendance, reduce juvenile crimes, and increase parent involvement and accountability. Assistance will be provided to students/parents who may be experiencing problems or issues related to truancy. Referrals to resources and services in the community will be provided so families can seek additional help.

To learn more about the Attendance Improvement Centers, please call (213) 241-3844.

Los Angeles Unified School District

OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS & MEDIA RELATIONS

333 S. Beaudry Ave., 24th Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90017

Phone: 213-241-6766

Fax: 213-241-8952

www.lausd.net

THE LOWDOWN ON HOMEWORK: How much homework is too much?

Grade-by-grade guidelines for what kids can reasonably be expected to do.

By GreatSchools Staff | http://bit.ly/dpd45a

●●smf's2¢: This is a controversial topic – and is not presented as an endorsement – though 4LAKids believes that “less-is-better” …especially for very-youngsters. The definitive pieces on homework as far as I’m concerned are Orson Scott Card’s essays: Homework, Part I: THE WORST JOB IN THE WORLD | http://bit.ly/a0YCa9   and   Homework, Part II: WHY DO WE STILL GET HOMEWORK? | http://bit.ly/d2VSdf If you are concerned about your child’s homework load have a discussion with the teacher. Listen to the teacher and insist that the teacher listen to you – insist that the discussion be about your child, not ‘children this age’. If that is unsatisfactory have the discussion with the principal. Understand that there are widely varying opinions among educators on the subject. And that GreatSchools – the author of this article - is much like USA Today or 4LAKids – a good place to start but not the last word!

 

The lowdown on homework

In the wake of No Child Left Behind, some U.S. schools are putting more emphasis on homework. But the push for higher academic standards has left many parents wondering about the value of their children's assignments — especially if the grownups are the ones who end up frantically finishing reports or art projects. Just how much homework should kids be doing anyway?

Adding to the confusion, the sheer number of schools with varying curricula can pose a challenge for parents looking for consistency. Even within a single district or school, homework expectations can vary widely depending on the whims of teachers. While some first-graders are slaving away for two hours each night, fourth-graders might be getting by with almost no outside work. So what role does homework play in learning? And how much is too much — or too little?

According to Harris Cooper, a homework expert and psychology professor at Duke University, homework is valuable to a point, and researchers have found that some kinds provide more benefits than others. Homework may be most useful as a way to develop study habits and practice skills that can be acquired through repetition, he says. Think spelling, vocabulary, multiplication tables, number placement, and grammar rules for foreign languages: "The biggest homework effects do come from these kinds of skill areas."

As for what constitutes an appropriate amount, one easy-to-remember tip is Cooper’s "10-minute rule," which calls for 10 minutes of homework per day per grade and is endorsed by the National Education Association. Looking for more grade-by-grade guidelines? GreatSchools weighs in with this primer on how much homework is best.

Kindergarten

None. The fact is that a lot of kindergarten teachers assign homework. When New York Times Magazine writer Peggy Orenstein took an informal survey of her local schools, she found that every one boasted daily homework requirements for kindergartners. But studies have shown homework has few benefits for young kids and could even have negative effects. (In The Battle Over Homework, Cooper found that assigning homework in elementary school did not improve test scores and that too much of it decreased motivation.) Then there's Finland, where students perform at or near the top of all countries on standardized tests, and children don't even begin school until age 7.

Instead of worrying about homework in kindergarten, involve your children in family activities to boost their brainpower, like talking, playing pretend, and reading together before bed. Just setting aside time for conversations can be an incredibly valuable way to connect with your child.

First grade

0-10 minutes. Again, the jury's still out on whether homework helps at this young of an age. If it does, it's in the hard-to-measure areas of study skills and time management. Reviewing the current homework debate, Slate senior editor Emily Bazelon has made the case that no elementary school student should be required to do homework. So spend time playing, talking, and interacting as a family. With some brainstorming, everyday activities like eating or shopping can be turned into opportunities for learning.

Second grade

0-20 minutes. In second grade continue to cook together, play games as a family, and spend time outside. Depending on the school and teacher, your child’s homework may increase somewhat. That's OK, but don’t let your kid spend excessive amounts of time on assignments — more than 20 minutes per night is probably overkill.

On the other hand, second grade is not too early to encourage your child to start reading age-appropriate books on his or her own, whether they’re pretty picture books or the Harry Potter series. Either way, it’s important for children to develop solid reading habits at this age. A good rule of thumb is at least 15 minutes of reading time every night (together or alone), even if it’s not part of their homework. Know your child's interests and recommend a few books to match. Studies have shown that even a little bit of time spent reading increases children’s comprehension, vocabulary, and understanding of the larger world.

Third grade

0-30 minutes. Homework will probably increase somewhat in third grade, as will the expectation that your child begin mastering a lot of math, reading, and spelling facts (which good homework habits can help with). Still, assignments for third-graders should remain low-key. Reading, collecting dandelions for a science project, and spending a few minutes building vocabulary are all good examples of reasonable projects.

If your child’s assignments routinely last more than half an hour or cause excessive frustration, you may want to speak to his or her teacher about working out a reasonable alternative. It may be a sign of two things: Your child’s teacher believes in a lot of homework (maybe more than studies find is effective), or your child may be struggling with a learning issue and need extra help.

Fourth grade

0-40 minutes. By fourth grade, you can expect your child to be more independent, keeping track of different assignments and asking for your help only when it’s needed. If your child can’t work alone, you may need to reassess him or her (for learning or emotional issues) as well as the teacher’s expectations.

As a parent, it's important to be attuned to your child's needs, and some kids benefit from more emotional support when it comes to homework. Explain the importance of homework and, if possible, the real-world applications of the assignments. It won’t benefit your child if you give all the answers — even to a problem he or she has been wrestling with. In fact, it may frustrate your fourth-grader more and undermine his or her confidence. Parents should make sure kids understand the concepts being taught in their assignments.

Fifth grade

Up to 50 minutes. By fifth grade, you probably won't need to monitor your child's homework as closely. Good study habits can be developed organically. Help your child stay organized with a planner and notebooks for completing assignments as well as a clean, well-lit place to work.

If assignments are getting long, you may want to keep an eye on your kid for signs of frustration or tiredness. If you notice either, that could be an indication of too much homework or a learning problem that needs attention. Through more-complex reading, math, and science assignments, fifth-graders hone their basic skills while increasing their understanding of U.S. history and culture.

Middle school

Up to 90 minutes. In middle school there's more separation between subject areas, so expect your child to have different teachers for math and humanities classes. Some schools also offer electives. Though teachers know their students are taking other classes, it's easy for the workload to pile up. Keep an eye on what's being asked of your child — and help him or her get organized.

Following the 10-minute rule, Cooper recommends middle-schoolers spend anywhere from 60 to 90 minutes completing their assignments. To help your tween perform his or her best, make sure there’s a quiet, private study space at home.

High school

Up to two hours. "The strongest case for homework is at the high school level," says John Buell, the author of The End of Homework: How Homework Disrupts Families, Overburdens Children, and Limits Learning and Closing the Book on Homework: Enhancing Public Education and Freeing Family Time. But Buell cautions that even at this stage "many scholars suggest that capable and well-motivated students do homework rather than homework yielding better academic achievement."

Your teen must learn to handle competing assignments in different subject areas — from geometry to AP U.S. history. Finding a way to juggle the myriad demands of high school is key to succeeding in college and in life.

---

Related Articles

• Does homework really work?
• The case against homework
• How homework affects families
• Homework case study #1: The foot-dragger
• Homework case study #2: The refuser
• Homework case study #3: Scattershot syndrome
• Homework case study #4: Disorganization disorder

---

Comments from GreatSchools.org readers

10/18/2010:

"I would question this 'research' done by so-called experts and anything that is recommended by the lobbyist union NEA. All the money, time, and experimentation that has been going on for 50 years points to the fact that nothing is working. Children continue to lose ground or remain static. Now this idea that academics and grades are not important is permeating academia. Charter schools have a totally different philosophy. Hard work, memorization, homework, and well-educated teachers are making great strides in teaching children how to become educated, responsible adults. That is an experiment that the unions fight with everything they have. But, they are losing! Thanks to dedicated teachers and determined parents, changes are coming."

09/30/2010:

"My daughter has up to 3 hrs a night of homework in 1 subject (Algegra). I feel this it totally over the top for one subject. We are contacting the teacher. I now understand why people home school their children. This is out of control! There is no time for family or for her other subjects. Studying for tests are impossible. She is not in bed before 11:30 and has to be up by 6:15. It's not enough sleep for a 12 year old. The same teacher gives homework every night inluding weekends."

07/19/2010:

"I'm a little bit confused. Are you saying that even if my child's teacher assigns much more homework than is appropriate, I should simply not make my child do the work? How do the teachers on this site feel about that stance? Personally, I think homework in kindergarten and first grade are totally counter-productive, but my son's teacher does not seem to agree."

03/15/2010:

"Please send this article to all the parochial schools in Illinois!! My son is a 3rd grader, and there are times that he gets 2 hours of homework. If he has tests the next day, and we want to put in some study time, the homework is even longer. It is not every night, but I think even the few times a month he has this amount is completely unacceptable. He is so stressed afterwards, that he can't sleep well for awhile. Kids need to play and relax after school, not slave over homework. I wonder if the teachers are not teaching everything in school. By the way, my son gets mostly A's and B's, so it is not like he is not a smart child and just takes too long to do simple things."

02/23/2010:

"i think us middle schoolers have way too much home work. my older brother and i are in middle school. we spend a long time on our home work so there is less time to play out side. parents say kids need to go out side and play. the truth is we dont have time because we have too much home work."

02/2/2010:

"I'm a junior in high school and my school says that each class can't assign more than 45 minutes of homework per night - but most teachers ignore this. So, I take six classes so I usually have about four hours of homework every night - and that's if I'm lucky. Up to two hours isn't realistic. Then again, I go to one of the hardest independent schools in the nation..."

01/25/2010:

"My children are in high school (11th) and one just graduated last year and they have maybe 30 - 40 minutes of homework a week. If they spend more than 20 minutes an evening doing work, they get testy and argumentative. They get As and Bs on classroom work in class but get Ds and Fs on the tests. The counselor says this is normal that a lot children don't test well and that we put too much pressure on them when we ask them if they studied for tests. School is much different than I remember it."

01/25/2010:

"Also, when checking with the teacher on the amount of homework ask how much time is allowed in class to start the work. I know in my school most students finish their work in class because they use their time wisely. Most of our classes, especially English and Math because they have longer class periods, the last 20 minutes are to start their work. Most get it done but those that don't use the time have more to do at home."

01/25/2010:

"I'm in the 7th grade and I have up to 2 hours of homework/studying a day. I have after school commitments and that sometimes take up to hours at a time and your telling me that I need to stay up till midnight studying and doing homework and then get up at 6:55 in the morning to go back to it. That's just crazy. What about friends? Am i not allowed friends either?"

01/25/2010:

"I am in the 7th grade and I have up to 60-90 minutes of homework for only 4 classes. Then I have to study for tests and quizzes for like an hour or two and then get up early the next morning and do the same thing again for 4 different classes. I also have after school priorities that I have to attend. And I also would like some time to hang out with my friends more often than I do."

01/25/2010:

"I'm in the 7th grade and I have up to 2 hours of homework and after school commitments. Sometimes it can take me till midnight to get everything done and your telling me I have to get up at 6:55 to go back to it. That's just crazy. What about a thing called friends and fun?"

01/25/2010:

" This is very true but in reality kids have to much homework to do in the time expected! Kids should only have a little bit of homework per day I am doing homework from 4:00p.m. to 10:00 p.m."

01/11/2010:

"So the bottom line being, it is appropriate for my seventh grade daughter to have 4 hours or more of homework a night. 70 mins per subject adds up to about that which is ridiculous and means she's doing homework from the moment she gets home to the time for bed. When is my child suppose to unwind and be a child???"

01/6/2010:

"I would encourage any parent that feels their child's homework load is unreasonbale to conference with the teachers about it. It may clear up some misconceptions on both sides. Teachers need to hear these concerns and balance feeback with the demands to attain a certain level of student achievement amd what is really helping children learn. We shouldn't forget that this country is in an uproar about student achievement. I believe this article alludes to some great general guidelines on how much and what kind of homework is helpful. It's not helpful if parents don't expect children to have homework or they don't feel at least a little responsible for coaching their child through their homework. Parents who don't coach and challenge children at home shouldn't be surprised when their children aren't successful in college or a technical school someday."

01/6/2010:

"Ten minutes per grade is enough. Kids need time to be kids, to play. All this cramming education down children's throats is really turning them off to school. Several solutions are: schedule a daily study hall period where kids can do their work under the guidance of a professional, OR we can lengthen the school day or year. Some of the kids in this area of CA get off at 2- and have every other Tuesday off for 'Teacher In-Service' day. "

01/6/2010:

"My first-grader (November birthday - 7 years old)is grasping all concepts really quick (reading, math and social studies)and moves through homework and assignments very quickly and recites most things verbatim. Should I insist he slow down or let him move at his extremely fast pace?"

01/6/2010:

"As a teacher, I can see the concerns that some parents may be having when their child is struggling over homework. Especially when their son/daughter has been hard at work for over an hour! THe homework load really should depend on the age/grade-level a a child, because as research shows (and parents observe) young children really can't sit for longer periods of time as do older children. I'm a fourth grade teacher, and I believe that my students need homework to reinforce what they have been learning in my class. I've slowly eased up on the amount of homework, because I've learned that if they can master 5 math problems, for example, then there really is no need to assign 20! If they know it, they know it. Nevertheless, I do believe it's necessary for them to learn how to be responsible and to learn to develop healthy study habits."

01/6/2010:

"I am in 8th grade and I almost have to laugh. On here it says up to 90 minutes is okay for homework. Well, I have been working on homework for the past 4 and a half hours. It's uncalled for. I get good grades, but it wears me down after losing sleep in order to finish assignments on cramped nights."

01/6/2010:

"The same rule should apply to our children as adults - leave the work at work - therefore leave the schooling at school. Aside from reading and maybe flash cards or simple spelling, all other major assignments should be done in the classroom. Our children need time to rest their minds and be 'fresh' for the next school day. All of this 'cramming' is not benefiting and causing much stress in our children too early. I also beleive what may be too much for one child may not be enough for another, all children are different and their tolerance levels different... we have to find a medium for all...I am so close to refusing assignments and am very frustrated with the school system right now...what can we do?"

01/6/2010:

"this was helpful to me thanks for information"

01/5/2010:

"I do agree a little homework is ok but for 2nd graders, when it's 2 hrs PLUS in the evening after coming home from school, it's ridiculous! There is too much that these teachers expect us to do that makes me wonder what really is being taught during school hours. We parents have too much already to handle with family life, that it doesn't afford us time to be a home teacher as well. Homework needs to be reduced so that these children can be children once school is over. It wears me out as a single parent."

01/5/2010:

"I have to wonder why my first grade child is asked to do approximately an hour's worth of work after school and my high school student is averaging four to five hours of work per night. What is pushing their teachers to eliminate my children's lives outside of school? I see no benefit to the loss of other opportunities for their time. It is particularly interesting to me that, when we lived in a small town in Oregon, their homework load was reasonable and logical but now that we have moved to a large, urban area in California, their homework load has become completely unreasonable. Are teachers in this area trying to push too much? Probably."

01/5/2010:

"Your choice of words casts teachers in an unfavorable light. I would imagine that homework does not get assigned based on any teacher's 'whim'!"

01/5/2010:

"two hours of homework in high school is a bit too much it puts stress on the student, they become irrible and cranky cause some of the hw takes a lot of problems that puts a damper on other subjects, for instance math in 9th grade is very intense. "

ICEF REVISITED

by smf for 4LAKids

I received a phone call this AM from Caprice Young -- the CEO of ICEF Charter schools. Caprice and I go back aways, if we are not friends we are colleagues in the shared mission of providing quality public education to all kids. In different time we have driven neighborhoods looking for sites for traditional schools in Hollywood and charter schools in Northeast LA.

Caprice called to take offense of some of my 4LAKids writing - and in particular my comments upon John Fensterwald’s piece in the Educated Guess http://bit.ly/baQ2uF  re: the near financial meltdown of ICEF.

Monday, October 18, 2010: L.A. CHARTER GROUP LAYS OFF ONE-SIXTH OF STAFF: ICEF squeezed by state budget cuts and unwise borrowing + comments

I wrote:

smf: This piece has some excellent follow-on commentary, none of it rabid one-way-or-the-other. I invite all readers to read it here. That said – and ignoring ICEF’s well-respected academic successes -  I’ve done a bit of public school math on the virtual back of the ubiquitous hypothetical envelope:

• The billionaires who rode to ICEF’s rescue brought $2.5 million to the table.

• Caprice Young [in the article] says they need to raise $9 million to retire their debt.

• So ICEF needs $11.5 million to continue serving 4,500 students – or $2555.55 per student …after eliminating one in six employees.

• If ICEF expenses are $2500+ per student more than their income I fail to see how this program can possibly be sustainable. The most aggressive white-middle-class parent-booster-club fundraising machine school only goes for $1000-$1500 per kid.

• I recall from earlier conversations with Caprice Young that the rule of thumb  optimal/minimum-size for a sustainable charter school is about 400 students. ICEF is averaging 300.

While this shows that this particular charter school model is probably not viable without The Daddy Warbucks Foundation's deep pockets it also returns us all to the overlying/overwhelming question as to whether public school funding is adequate for any school in California.

[I peeked ito the Teacher’s Edition of the textbook. The answer is NO.]

Of course, now that I read this again - and especially after having it read to me in an exasperated tone of voice - I wish I had not been quite so glib. My ersatz math was not intended to be The ICEF Budget - it was a question, not the answer.

Caprice was not upset by my math as much as she would've preferred I use her math ...and she even gave me a little credit for remembering her rule-of-thumb business model correctly; part of her recovery strategy is to bring ICEF into conformity with that rule.

Caprice - having convinced donors to some up with the cash to bail out ICEF resents me making them into “the Daddy Warbucks Foundation" - fair enough. I mean not to belittle her efforts in raising money or their commitment to save the schools and help educate children who have been historically under served.

I am going to quote Caprice's October 1st open letter to the community from October 1:

“I need to tell you that the financial situation is serious.  Over the past several years, ICEF has overspent its budget in ways that have led to financial deficits. With the state’s budget crisis and the delays in the funding, as well as the facilities expenses ICEF has had to endure, it has become extraordinarily difficult for ICEF to resolve the budget deficits of the past year. The fact is, because ICEF’s leadership has cared so deeply about our students, it has avoided taking actions in the past that would have balanced the budget.

“Now, we will be forced to make some deep and difficult cuts to be able to live within our means during these tough economic times.  I will be working closely with Corri Tate Ravare, ICEF’s president, to ensure that these funding cuts are done to minimize the impact on our classrooms.  In the last 72 hours, we have raised $2.6 million from people who care deeply about ICEF’s students, including the board of directors, and we’re continuing our efforts to raise money side-by-side with the leadership team of ICEF.

“I have had several conversations over the past two days with Superintendent Ray Cortines of the Los Angeles Unified School District and Blair Taylor of The Urban League, as well as several other local elected officials, all of whom are actively working to find solutions for ICEF.

“There’s no question there will be staff reductions.  We are working to make sure that anyone who gets laid off is considered for a job in neighboring charter schools, so that their talents can continue to support student learning.

“I understand how all the recent events may have created some confusion and fear about the future, but I want to assure you that our children are the highest priority, and the quality of education they receive will not be compromised. We’re going to move quickly, but we’re going to be doing our best to communicate with all staff members and parents both electronically and through other forms of communication to keep everyone informed and engaged.” 

(The above is pulled from context, but the entire letter is available here: http://bit.ly/bY2GpZ and in Spanish here: http://bit.ly/bzd1if)

ICEF FILES

ICEF 2010-2011 Budget and Cash Flow

See attached the budget and cash flow.

• ICEF Budget for Web 10_21_10.pdf

ICEF Public Schools Restructuring Plan

See attached plan for ICEF restructuring.  A revised plan will be published after the ICEF Board of Trustees has the opportunity to consider the options.

• ICEF Restructuring Public Draft 10_21_2010.pdf

●●smf again: My original intended point was contained in my closing line and my conclusion remains the same: The current funding model for public education from Sacramento is inadequate to sustain either the charter model or the traditional school model - and a competition between the two as to which is more or less sustainable is ridiculous.

Whether we are waiting for Superman or Billionaires or a Federal Bailout or Race to the Top or the Lottery Money; Bake Sale/Candy Drive/Gift Wrap sale - or our number in the lottery .....I fear it isn't going to be worth the wait.

NATIONAL REORT CARD: CALIFORNIA GETS A “C” IN FUNDING, A “D” FOR EFFORT – State ranked 31st in funding for education …or 32nd, …or 24th, …or 46th

By John Fensterwald - Educated Guess | http://bit.ly/9v1Zi8

10/15/10 • In terms of unadjusted state and local spending for education, California ranks 24^th in the nation. But adjust spending to account for the regional cost of living, as Education Week does annually, and California’s per student spending falls to 46^th in the nation.

Which ranking you cite in debates with colleagues and around the dinner table is usually a giveaway as to where you stand on the need for more K-12 funding. (I tend to go with Ed Week.)

Now, a new study of the state school funding that claims to be the most comprehensive is ranking California in 31^st place, with an adjusted spending of $9,030 ­– $1,102 below the adjusted U.S. average of $10,132 and nearly $7,000 below top-ranked Wyoming.

“Is School Funding Fair? A National Report Card,”[http://bit.ly/bksBMI]  funded by the Ford Foundation, used 2007 figures, which predated the recession, though the authors ­– a Rutgers professor and two researchers from the Education Law Center in Newark – said  little changed in a post-study update for 2008.

Like Education Week, “Is School Funding Fair?” adjusted spending calculations to incorporate regional wages, but it also factored in population density, extent of a state’s poverty, and economies of scale (district size).

The study also looked at three other measures to determine fairness in state funding, which it defined as ensuring equal opportunity by sufficiently funding districts to meet the needs of students in poverty. (It assumed that the poverty was also an accurate indicator of other needs, such as those of English learners.)

The other measures were funding distribution (whether more money is disbursed to districts with higher proportions of poor students), effort (how much the state spends relative to its capacity to tax), and a new measure, “coverage” (the percentage of children who attend public vs. parochial and private schools, which the authors claim also is an indicator of funding relative to student poverty).

Rob Manwaring, a former K-12 education director for the California Legislative Analyst’s Office and now a senior policy analyst with the nonpartisan Education Sector, praised the report for bringing together data from different sources. “They did a great job of organizing a lot of different measures and putting them into one place,”  he told Education Week.

In none of the measures did California fare well.

Distribution: This is the most important factor, next to amount of spending. California got a C, measuring the difference in per student funding between districts with the lowest percentage of poor students and highest poverty districts. There’s only a 3 percent difference: $287.

“In a state that likes to think of itself as progressive,” Manwaring said, “this is not the type of equity that California should want.”

Oddly enough, Utah, which spends among the least in overall student funding, ranked highest in directing dollars to districts with the poorest students (a $2,900 difference between rich and poor districts). Eighteen states ranked above California. New Hampshire, which funds schools almost entirely on property taxes, is the most regressive, with districts with the highest numbers of poor students getting about $4,700 less per student than districts with very few poor students. New York, which just went through a huge equity suit, was surprisingly among the least progressive.

Effort: California squeaked by with a D, just above the 13 states, including Oregon and Washington, with F’s. This particular measure used per capita gross domestic product, a measure of economic output. Other studies define effort as school spending as a percentage of per capita income; by that measure, California is near the bottom as well.

Coverage: This measure combined the percentage of 16-year-olds in public schools (89.2 percent in California) with the household income differences between public and private school students (public school families earn about half as much as private school families). California ranked 32^nd. The authors assume the flight of wealthy families from public schools is a sign of willingness to equitably fund public schools.

Six states received good or excellent ratings on all four measures: Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Vermont, and Wyoming. Four states bombed on all four: Louisiana, North Carolina, Illinois, and Missouri.

The report does not present evidence that more equitable funding improves student achievement. That, it said, should the the subject of a future report.

The report does argue  that the federal government should revise its definition of poverty,  which disadvantages high-cost states like California and New York. Uniformly applied to all states, poverty is defined as under $20,000 income for a family of four. For students to qualify for the federal free and reduced school lunch program, the family of  four cannot earn more than $37,000. If the regional cost of rental housing and other expenses were factored in, California’s child poverty rate would rise from 16 to 24 percent, according to the study.

 

from the report | http://bit.ly/9qxIN7

the entire report: http://bit.ly/bksBMI

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The National Report Card is a critique of state school funding systems and the extent to which these systems ensure equality of educational opportunity for all children, regardless of background, family income, place of residence or school. The report makes the assumption that "fair" school funding is defined as "a state finance system that ensures equal educational opportunity by providing a sufficient level of funding distributed to districts within the state to account for additional needs generated by student poverty." The Fairness Principles The National Report Card evaluation is based on a number of assumptions: A fair funding system provides varied levels of funding according to student need. Context matters: a valid comparison of state funding systems must take into account a number of factors that influence educational costs, such as geography, regional labor markets, district size, population density, and various student characteristics. A fair funding system is "progressive" with respect to concentrated student poverty. In other words, funding should increase relative to the level of concentrated student poverty. Student poverty is the most critical variable affecting funding levels and can serve as a proxy for other measures of disadvantage, including achievement gaps, racial composition, English Language Learners, and student mobility. A sufficient overall level of funding is crucial. Without sufficient resources as the starting point, the distribution of funding relative to poverty is rendered somewhat inconsequential. The Fairness Measures All 50 states are evaluated on the basis of four separate, but interrelated, fairness measures: Funding Level: Using figures adjusted to account for a variety of interstate differences, this measure allows for a comparison of the average state and local revenue per pupil across states. States are ranked from the highest to lowest per pupil funding. Funding Distribution: This measure shows whether a state provides more or less funding to schools based on their poverty concentration. States are evaluated as "regressive", "progressive", or "flat" and are given letter grades that correspond to their relative position compared to other states. Effort: This measures differences in state spending relative to the state’s fiscal capacity. States are ranked according to the ratio of state spending on education to per-capita gross domestic product. Coverage: This measures the proportion of school-age children attending the state’s public schools and also addresses the income disparity between families using private, rather than public, schools. States are ranked according to both the proportion of children in public schools and the income ratio of private and public school families. Summary of Findings The table below provides state results for all four measures. Consideration should be given to each of the four measures, which, when taken together, provide a complex picture of state finance systems. While how states rank on particular indicators can be important, it is critical to understand how the indicators interact and create unique conditions of funding fairness or unfairness. Depending on a state’s performance on the combination of indicators, the relative success of one or two indicators may be misleading. For example, a state with an insufficient funding level is not fairly serving its students, even if the funding is distributed with some progressivity. Likewise, a high state effort grade is of little consolation if it still fails to generate a sufficient funding level. It is the combination of results on all of the indicators that give the most accurate picture of school funding fairness in any given state. Highlights General Six states are positioned relatively well on all four measures: Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Vermont, and Wyoming. Most states have at least one area in which to improve, and many do poorly on the most important indicators from a state policy perspective: State Effort and Funding Distribution. Four states receive below-average ratings on each of the four indicators: Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, and North Carolina. Funding Level The national average funding level, adjusted to account for student poverty, regional wage variation, economies of scale, and population density, is $10,132 per pupil. Higher funded states predominate in the Northeast (New Jersey, Vermont, New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts), though Wyoming, District of Columbia, Alaska and Hawaii also have funding levels that exceed the national average by at least 40%. The lowest funded states predominate in the South and West – Tennessee, Oklahoma, Idaho, Utah, Mississippi, Arizona and Arkansas have the lowest adjusted state and local revenues per pupil. The disparity between the highest and lowest funded states is vast – using our nationally adjusted figures, a student in Tennessee receives about 40% of the funding of a comparable student in Wyoming. Funding Distribution A number of states rank as progressive, including Utah, New Jersey, Minnesota, and Ohio. For example, in Utah a district with 30% students in poverty can be expected to receive over 50% more funding per pupil than a district with no student poverty. Some states have a regressive funding system, meaning districts with higher poverty rates actually receive less funding than more well-off districts. These include New Hampshire, Illinois, New York, and Pennsylvania. In New Hampshire, a district with a 30% poverty rate receives about two-thirds the amount of funding per pupil than a district with no student poverty. Effort Delaware, South Dakota, Louisiana and Tennessee allocate the lowest percentage of their economic activity to education (.024 to .028). Maine, New Jersey and Vermont allocate the greatest share to education (.048 to .063). The resources available to schools are a function of both state effort and state wealth. A state may exert above average effort, but if it has low wealth, it may still have low funding levels (e.g., Mississippi). A state with high wealth may need to exert little effort to generate relatively high funding levels (e.g., Delaware). Coverage On average, about 87% of students attend public school, and the household income of private school students is two-thirds higher than the household income of public school students. In Louisiana, Delaware, and the District of Columbia about 1 in 5 students does not attend public schools, and those students come from significantly higher income households. Private school families have incomes that are three and a half times those of public school families in Washington, D.C. Improving Funding Fairness The goal of the National Report Card is to provide a deeper understanding of the condition of state finance systems across the county. The results of this evaluation can be used by stakeholders, community leaders, elected officials, and concerned citizens working to reform state finance systems. A more equitable funding system throughout the 50 states will ensure high quality educational opportunities for all of the nation’s students.   The National Report Card State Funding Distribution Grade Effort Grade Funding Level Rank Coverage Rank Alabama D C 33 38 Alaska -- D 6 5 Arizona C F 46 6 Arkansas C B 45 30 California C D 31 32 Colorado D F 35 12 Connecticut C C 8 25 Delaware D F 10 50 District of Columbia -- -- 3 51 Florida D C 22 46 Georgia C B 24 39 Hawaii -- A 7 48 Idaho D D 49 4 Illinois F D 29 33 Indiana C C 27 29 Iowa C C 19 11 Kansas D B 20 19 Kentucky C C 36 41 Louisiana D F 30 49 Maine D A 14 3 Maryland D B 13 47 Massachusetts B C 9 22 Michigan D A 23 16 Minnesota A D 15 20 Mississippi C B 47 40 Missouri D D 43 44 Montana B C 38 7 Nebraska C D 25 24 Nevada F F 39 15 New Hampshire F A 18 10 New Jersey A A 2 21 New Mexico C C 34 18 New York D A 5 42 North Carolina D F 44 31 North Dakota D F 40 14 Ohio A B 17 36 Oklahoma C F 50 23 Oregon C F 37 17 Pennsylvania D B 12 43 Rhode Island C B 11 37 South Carolina C A 28 34 South Dakota B F 41 13 Tennessee C F 51 45 Texas C D 42 26 Utah A F 48 2 Vermont C A 4 9 Virginia D D 21 28 Washington C F 32 27 West Virginia C A 26 8 Wisconsin C B 16 35 Wyoming C A 1 1 Note: The National Report Card is based on three years of the most recent available data, from 2005 to 2007. While this report was in production, the 2008 school financial data was released. An updated analysis of the fairness profiles is available at 2008 Update. The updated fairness profiles are largely consistent with the published findings.