Articles in the Educational Legislation category

No difference in performance, voucher study finds

Private school voucher proponents face another defeat after a recent study found no big difference in academic performance between the students attending private schools through the Milwaukee voucher program and those attending Milwaukee public schools. This article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel said the study, released on Thursday, was the first research since any formal evaluations were conducted in the mid-1990s.

Another interesting note is that the study was funded by some pro-voucher groups, the article pointed out.

The research also found that while 94 percent of Milwaukee public school teachers were certified by the state, 69 percent of teachers in voucher schools were certified. What’s more, the voucher program continues to disproportionally burden Milwaukee property taxpayers, the article said.

This latest study again illustrates the unproven success of private school vouchers, which usurp tax dollars from the nation’s public schools where 46 million students attend. You can read about NSBA‘s positions against vouchers here; and obtain more information on the case against vouchers by visiting NSBA‘s voucher strategy center here.

Katherine Shek|March 30th, 2009|Categories: Educational Legislation, Governance, NSBA Opinions and Analysis, Privatization|

An unexpected trend?

Our friends at NSBA’s free weekly Legal Clips e-newsletter have pointed out a potential trend that BoardBuzz hopes we might see more of. It’s one you might not expect at a time when the national mood overall is for a lot more accountability and government oversight.

In this item that ran in yesterday’s issue, Legal Clips highlights state legislatures that are reconsidering how much regulation they’ve piled on schools in recent years. First, Oklahoma is the scene of a big showdown over giving school districts the same kind of flexibility state lawmakers already have seen fit to give charter schools. That’s long overdue consistency from the many politicians who extol charter schools at the same time they’re busily regulating school districts more and more. But the explosive issue lurking in the Oklahoma legislation is its implications for teacher collective bargaining: It’s not required for Oklahoma charters. The Oklahoma State School Boards Association figures prominently in the debate.

The other states highlighted are Washington, Florida, and Georgia, as well as several states that have been reconsidering their statewide laws, often tourism-influenced, dictating local school calendars. Check it out. And BoardBuzz hears California is another state to watch on this question as it deals with its budget problems.

And those budget problems are a big part of what’s happening here. State legislators who were budgeting more and more for schools over the years were powerfully tempted to play school board on all kinds of minutiae. Now that they’re cutting education budgets, some of them apparently are finding it a little harder to justify wading into such details—or to ignore how much their mandates drive up local costs.

That’s not to say we’re necessarily embarking on a new era of school flexibility. We don’t yet know what the new federal role in education will end up looking like, and certainly on some issues we’re likely to see stronger accountability, not less. 

But school boards can take some comfort if there’s at least some more careful thinking about the difference between accountability and micromanagement. After all, that’s a distinction effective school boards think about constantly.

By the way, if you don’t already get NSBA’s Legal Clips, give it a try. This week’s issue also featured cool things like NSBA’s brief in the Supreme Court’s upcoming case on funding for English language learners, mayoral control of urban schools, the Arizona Supreme Court’s unanimous decision striking down two voucher programs, and an unsuccessful lawsuit by a superintendent victimized by botched Fox News commentary.

Tom Hutton|March 27th, 2009|Categories: Educational Finance, Educational Legislation, NSBA Opinions and Analysis, School Boards, School Law|

Four-day school week remains popular conversation topic as schools cut costs

Despite the anticipation of new federal stimulus funding, school districts across the country continue to make adjustments to save costs. According to an article in todays’ edition of USA Today, districts are considering  altering their schedules to respond to shrinking state and local resources.

Reggie Felton, director of NSBA‘s director of federal relations, said in the article that hundreds of school districts are considering modifying their schedules to cut costs but still meet their state’s requirements on numbers of school days. For example, the Bisbee school district in Arizona is closing some schools every Friday for the next two school years; and schools in Lucie County, Florida, have staggered start times for schools to save $2 million in transportation, the article cited.

Although school districts expect to receive federal stimulus money, which will help bridge state budget gaps and fund major education programs, many are uncertain as to how much they will get. In addition, school leaders have much to consider when using these stimulus funds, which will be considered a one-time infusion over the next two years. Many school districts do not want to use the funds to start new programs or to hire more teachers now because they will not be able to sustain these new expenses over time.

While altering school day schedules could be a creative way to save costs, NSBA believes that student achievement should always be the bottom line and that decisions should be made at the district level with involvement of the communities, see previous BoardBuzz posts here .

For more information on the stimulus and how it will affect your district, visit NSBA’s Economic Stimulus Resource Center.

Katherine Shek|March 24th, 2009|Categories: Educational Finance, Educational Legislation, NSBA Opinions and Analysis, School Boards|

You asked for it . . .

BoardBuzz wants to call your attention to the new FAQs that are on NSBA’s Economic Stimulus Resource Center.  The list of Frequently Asked Questions is a great way to find out exactly what you want to know about the stimulus. 

You can also check out Education Week’s webinar featuring Deborah Rigsby (free registration required) which also answers some key questions about how the stimulus will affect education.

Christina Gordon|March 17th, 2009|Categories: Educational Finance, Educational Legislation, NSBA Opinions and Analysis|

The right to call your teacher a douchebag?

A court case from Connecticut is stirring a debate over where to draw the line on what schools can or should do about things students say online. High school student Avery Doninger railed online against the “douchebags” in her school district and urged her classmates to bombard the superintendent with complaints to “piss her off more.” When the school said that this was inappropriate for a student government leader and told her she couldn’t run for senior class secretary, she sued.

The lawsuit has gone up and down in the courts, but so far the student has lost. All the legal nitty-gritty on the Doninger case is available starting here, courtesy of NSBA’s Legal Clips e-newsletter.

The Hartford Courant reports here that, “In his ruling on a pioneering Internet free speech case last month, U.S. District Judge Mark R. Kravitz offered something of a plea to higher courts: Revisit the boundaries of free speech for students.” These legal issues are a lot harder in the Internet age, he said. 

In response to the case, as FOX News puts it, “Connecticut may become the first state to protect the ‘right’ of children to rip into their teachers—anytime, anywhere.” A state senator has proposed a law that would say anything Connecticut students post online, except a threat, is protected from any school response.

NSBA lawyer Tom Hutton tells the Courant and FOX that a proposal like that would go well beyond denigrating teachers to things like cyberbullying and would be unusual in that it even would limit what kinds of acceptable use policies schools could adopt for school equipment.

The court case and the news coverage have been crackling across the blogosphere, most of whose denizens are, naturally enough, strongly inclined toward the idea of freedom of Internet speech. A blog called Techdirt applauds the proposed legislation and criticizes NSBA for “fighting against the bill,” an apparent reference to Hutton’s observations about the measure.

“This floored me,” says this entry on ScienceForums.net, accusing Hutton of arguing that “The school board is best to decide what part of the constitution will be followed.” Actually, his point wasn’t about the courts and the constitution but simply that school boards are better suited than slow-moving state legislatures to tailor policies to fast-changing developments like technology.

And these are the sinister implications Myshortpencil.com sees in Hutton’s take that the issue for educators, who don’t want to be the Internet police, is when a student’s off-campus expression has an negative impact in school:

Mind you that this rule would cover the speech of parents as well as students. If parents or community members say something that affects the school, then they can be hauled into court. Do you really think the only speech schools care about is student speech?

This gets it backward, though, since it’s the student hauling her school into court, not the other way around. Maybe the feared crackdown is that schools would start telling moms and dads they can’t run for student council? As for the concern over cyberbullying, Myshortpencil basically seems to say victims just need to toughen up.

There have been a few skeptical blog reactions to the proposed Connecticut law. Dr. Laura’s blistering blurb includes this:

Imagine if the teacher had put on a website that this girl was a “douche bag.” Would anyone defend the teacher or would he or she have to take sensitivity classes and then be fired anyway?

Similar “what-are-we-teaching-kids-today?” sentiment voiced here on, well, a fitness forum.

If all that isn’t enough to satisfy the true First Amendment junkies out there, check out this recent episode of C-Span’s “America and the Courts” program on the 40th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District. The program features the recollections of Mary Beth Tinker herself, one of the students who won their case over being told they couldn’t wear black armbands to school to protest the war in Vietnam. You also can hear Hutton’s take on where things stand today with the Tinker case and student speech.

And for some great resources and practical tips for dealing with these tricky issues, visit the NSBA Council of School Attorneys eDocs Store, a treasure trove of materials you can download in these cost-conscious times for next to nothing (most cost seven bucks). The collection on Technology includes resources about online speech.

Tom Hutton|March 4th, 2009|Categories: Educational Legislation, Educational Technology, NSBA Opinions and Analysis, School Law, Student Achievement|

NSBA urges deferral of Title I rules

NSBA sent this letter to Education Secretary Arne Duncan this week, urging him to delay implementation of the Title I regulations finalized last October by former Secretary Margarget Spellings. In it, the association expressed concerns about specific components of the final rules, including: definition of graduation rate and calculation of graduation rates for AYP; criteria for releasing unspent 20 percent set-aside funds for choice and SES (tutoring) among others.

In addition, NSBA asked the Secretary to review the current policy that requires school dsitricts to set aside 20 percent of Title I funds for choice and SES, in light of the significant increases in education funding under the stimulus package.  For more information, you can check out NSBA‘s position on the final regulations here.

Katherine Shek|February 23rd, 2009|Categories: Educational Finance, Educational Legislation, NSBA Opinions and Analysis|

NSBA, your one stop shop for stimulus information, updates

School board members and other educators now have a “one stop shop” for information on the stimulus package signed by the President this week. Thanks to thousands of school board members’ grassroots advocacy, the final legislation contains about $100 billion for education programs and school construction bonds. NSBA has developed the online Economic Stimulus Resource Center which contains a summary of education funding under the stimulus with preliminary district and state allocation and a chart with final funding amounts for education programs, among other resources. NSBA will continue to update the Website as we work with the U.S. Department of Education to implement the legislation.

Katherine Shek|February 20th, 2009|Categories: Educational Legislation, NSBA Opinions and Analysis|

Better late than never? We now know the answer

Back in November, this Washington Post article introduced us to Jefferson Lara — a Latino immigrant who needed more than four years to earn his high school diploma. The article pointed out an unfortunate fact that like in many state graduation rate formulas, Jefferson would not be counted as a graduate. We’re sure you are asking yourself why?  BoardBuzz certainly was. Well, it was simply because he didn’t graduate within the traditional four years of high school like most of his classmates.

Jefferson is not alone.  According to a report released yesterday by the Center for Public Education called Better late than never, there were more than 130,000 students nationwide just like Jefferson who needed more time to earn a high school diploma. The report points out that schools should be given the credit they deserve for sticking with students like Jefferson until they acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to earn a high school diploma.

But maybe sticking with such youngsters is just not beneficial to them or the school? If students are no better off graduating late than leaving high school to earn a GED or just leaving high school all together, then it would make sense that schools aren’t given credit for those students who graduate late. However, the Center found that sticking with such students is quite beneficial.

The report found:

  • Late graduates are more likely to go onto earn college degree than a student who received their GED;
  • Late graduates are not only more likely to hold a full time job as GED recipients and dropouts, but to hold a job that comes with health and retirement benefits as well;
  • Late graduates were also more likely to engage in their communities and live healthier lifestyles than both GED recipients and dropouts;
  • Although not as likely to earn a college degree, late graduates were nearly as well off after high school as similar students who graduated on-time;

To learn more about who these late graduates are, how they fare after high school, and why they are late, as well as how they compare to similar on-time graduates check out the Center for Public Education’s original study Better late than never? Examining late high school graduates.

Jim Hull|February 12th, 2009|Categories: Educational Legislation, Educational Research, Elementary and Secondary Education Act, NSBA Opinions and Analysis|

Senate passes stimulus bill; education aid to be a top issue in negotiations

The massive economic stimulus bill cleared another hurdle Tuesday and now comes down to all important negotiations in a House – Senate conference committee. The Senate agreement worked out by three Republican senators and Democrats did cut some of the aid targeted to education as BoardBuzz previously covered, but, unlike some of the proposed cuts circulating last week, preserved the $13 billion for special education and included $12.4 billion (a $600 million cut from the House) for Title I. School board members and other education advocates played a major role in preserving these investments through their outreach last week. Aid to the states, which would include billions for school districts, took a hit from $79 billion in the House to $39 billion in the Senate, and another significant difference was the Senate’s elimination of $14 billion for school construction.

Despite the Senate’s cuts, education still would see about $80 billion from the stimulus bill, but a battle is already brewing at the conference committee level to restore some of the Senate cuts, especially for school construction, which President Obama highlighted in his Monday prime time press conference and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan trumpeted today.

NSBA will continue urging for maximum funding for education in the stimulus package, as included in the House legislation.

megan|February 10th, 2009|Categories: Educational Finance, Educational Legislation, NSBA Opinions and Analysis|

Education on everyone’s minds — and what you can do about it

Everyone’s eyes are still on the stimulus package and how much education money will be cut out of it.  President Obama, while he was in Indiana today, talked about the education spending cuts that have been proposed and how he hopes that the Senate will put money back in.  From Reuters:

Obama said the stimulus package needs to include more education funding to build a skilled workforce that will encourage businesses to invest domestically.

“I’ll be honest with you, the Senate version cut a lot of these education dollars. I would like to see some of them restored,” he said.

Meanwhile, late last week U.S. News and World Report talked with Secretary of Education Arne Duncan about his thoughts on No Child Left Behind.  His experience as the superintendent of Chicago certainly adds a lot of clout on the law, and he hopes he can improve it.  Highlights include:

“I know there are schools that are beating the odds where students are getting better every year, and they are labeled failures, and that can be discouraging and demoralizing,” he says.

“The idea of 50 states doing their own thing doesn’t make sense,” Duncan says, referring to the current patchwork of standards and tests. “I worry about the pressure because of NCLB to dummy those standards down.”

“Having lived with this, I have a good sense of what makes sense and what doesn’t,” he says. “But I want to be clear that I want to get out there and learn from people. And I think ultimately we should rebrand [the law].”

We know that the pressure is on, and Senators are debating now what to do next.  Everyone reading this has an opinion on how they think education dollars should be spent–we’re begging you now to contact your lawmakers to let your voice be heard.  Both Duncan and Obama want to bring education to the front of the line, but the stimulus dollars are in the Senate’s hands right now.  See earlier posts or NSBA’s advocacy site for more information on how you can help.

Kevin Scott|February 10th, 2009|Categories: Educational Legislation, Elementary and Secondary Education Act, NSBA Opinions and Analysis|
Page 21 of 35« First...10«1920212223»30...Last »