Tag Archives: Congress

What is the Future of the DOE?

Posted in District Administration Magazine, News Briefs by
The federal Department of Education has been a source of criticism on the GOP presidential campaign trail.

 

The federal Department of Education has been a source of criticism on the GOP presidential campaign trail. In addition to overall shrinking of federal policies, many Republican candidates have expressed their desire to abolish the federal department and funnel more money—and control—back to the states and local schools. Sen. Michele Bachman, Rep. Ron Paul and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich have all listed the Department of Education as one federal agency they would like to take an ax to.

“I think that this is an issue that needs to be handled at the local level,” said Bachmann at the Palmetto Freedom Forum in September. “I don’t like to have the federal government involved in telling the local schools what to do. For one thing, there was no federal Department of Education until the late 1970s. I actually want to end the federal Department of Education.”

Texas Gov. Rick Perry has suggested he would like to cut the agency in half. “I don’t think the federal government has a role in your children’s education,” said Perry campaigning in Iowa, according to ThinkProgress.

In 2011, the U.S. Department of Education received over $60 billion in funding. While that funding could be doled out to states, some worry the reduced federal presence would take a step backward in terms of accountability and successes by federal programs.

According to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, the department is needed for accountability, resources, and to set high standards. “I’m very publicly critical of our department of education,” Duncan told DA magazine. “We have made progress in states in the last couple of years. We’re here to provide resources and best practices. I think that’s the proper role for the federal government.”

Scofield’s STEM Initiatives Shown to Congress

Posted in Feature stories, Patch.com by

For two years now, Scofield Middle School, Stamford’s magnet school with a focus in science, mathematics and technology, has used two Hewlett Packard grants to fund new initiatives exploring water quality around the school. The grant money—$330,000 through an Innovations in Education grant and a $160,000 Catalyst Initiative grant—has allowed the school to purchase laptops, scientific calculators and cutting-edge geographic information systems (GIS) to collect data about the water surrounding the school and integrate their findings across the curriculum.

Their work has not gone unnoticed. Last Thursday, Principal Jan Rossman and Assistant Principal and project administrator Brian Olkowski went to Washington D.C. to share their work at a congressional hearing. The two were invited after presenting at the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) conference in Philadelphia in June.

“We were fortunate enough to get these grants, and we discussed how they allowed us to get the technology into the school and what it ultimately can do,” said Olkowski.

The congressional hearing, Student Literacy in a Digital World, discussed how education needs to evolve to reach students in a digital era. Nonprofit organizations including the National Coalition for Technology in Education and Training and the International Reading Association were attendance along with districts from Arlington and Philadelphia for their use of technology in the classroom.

“Our presentation at ISTE focused on our STEM [science, technology, engineering and mathematics] work at the school, and ISTE helped get us in the door with the congressional hearing,” said Olkowski.

What stemmed the STEM learning at Scofield began two years ago after there was a water contamination from termite pesticide in its neighborhood. The incident, said Olkowski, was a “teachable moment” and the school applied for two grants through Hewlett Packard to fund the technology and professional development to get the students outside to learn about testing for water quality, data collection, and how our history, such the Industrial Revolution, impacted our environment. The school has also partnered with its now sister school in China, the Middle School Attached to Shandong University, to share practices of how to test, assess and evaluate water quality. In September, the school will welcome a delegation of three teachers and 16 students from its sister school in Jinan, China where they will collaborate together on the water testing project at Scofield.

“It’s an interdisciplinary approach to get the kids more involved in science—and we’ve seen positive results,” said Olkowski. “When kids get hands-on experience they become interested in a project and stick with it.” Although funding for the project is in its final year, Olkowski says the technology is already in place and the project will be continued into the future and is not contingent upon new grant funding.

Patch.com/ Stamford, CT: Aug. 2011

Will NCLB Regulatory Relief Come in Time?

Posted in District Administration Magazine, News Briefs by

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan perhaps reached his breaking point in early June when he gave Congress an ultimatum to fix No Child Left Behind or he would begin issuing waivers to districts facing sanctions under the bill. Education advocacy groups, including the American Association of School Administrators (AASA) and the National School Boards Association (NSBA), have been campaigning for this form of regulatory relief since it became clear that reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act—NCLB’s formal title—would not occur by the upcoming school year. The bill, which has not been revised since it was enacted in 2002, maintains that all students must be proficient by 2014.

Michael Resnick, associate executive director of NSBA, says the organization is “heartened” by Duncan’s decision, but he wonders what provisions will be lifted, what reform models districts will have to comply with in exchange for relief, and whether any applications for relief will be approved before the start of school. “We have some real doubts as to whether this process will reach the local level in time,” says Resnick.

Duncan first put pressure on Congress in March when he said that under NCLB’s current guidelines, 82 percent of schools will face sanctions in the upcoming school year for failing to make Adequate Yearly Progress. With August recess around the corner, Congress has made minimal progress by addressing individual provisions of the bill. Waivers, however, are also not ideal in many minds. In a joint conference call between AASA and NSBA on May 25, the executive director of AASA, Daniel Domenech, said that waivers in exchange for proof of reform require schools to “jump through more hoops.” In the same call, Anne Bryant, executive director of NSBA, said she’d prefer that Duncan provide relief “as a matter of policy and not a case-by-case basis. It’s pretty darn simple to give the relief and stop labeling schools as failing.”

In terms of actually reauthorizing ESEA, most agree that when it’s done, it should be done right, with input from the public to prevent the same problems that occurred with NCLB.

“In the long run, that was the problem with NCLB,” says Resnick. “What made sense then around the negotiating table didn’t really pass the reality test.”

District Administration magazine, July 2011

Is the Reauthorization of ESEA in Sight?

Posted in District Administration Magazine, News Briefs by

In March, U.S. Secretary oF education arne Duncan estimated that 82 percent of schools could fail to make adequate yearly Progress in the 2011- 2012 school year. The startling statistic left many wondering whether the problem was with the schools or with the guiding policy of no child Left Behind.

“That statement was really alarming, but it allowed america to say, ‘There’s no way 82 percent of schools are failing. Something must be wrong in the stat- ute. Something with our accountability system is broken,” said noelle ellerson, assistant director for policy analysis and advocacy with the american association of School administrators (AASA).

The Urgency to Address NCLB

For this reason, AASA, the National School Boards Association (NSBA), and other education advocacy groups are pushing for NCLB to be addressed before the start of the 2011-2012 academic year, or in the absence of that, for regulatory relief. According to Ellerson, regulatory relief would lift sanctions imposed on schools that will not make AYP for the upcoming year, although it would not affect those who have failed to make AYP in the past.

“If NCLB’s accountability provisions can’t be addressed before the 2011-2012 school year starts through the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), Congress must enact legislation to defer the implementation of sanctions in the current law, but continue reporting requirements to the public and school officials,” said Michael Resnick, NSBA associate executive director for advocacy and public policy, in a statement.

A priority for AASA is a new policy that retools the accountability provision including growth-model assessments. “I think you’ll see some movement around making tests actually reflect the growth of students,” says Ellerson.

Although it may feel as though ESEA reauthorization has been placed on the back burner, Ellerson says it is still the number one priority in both the House and Senate education committees.

“There are some pretty big issues that need to be worked out with eSea, and other major legislation had their hands tied,” says Ellerson. “I genuinely believe that both the committees [in the House and Senate] understand the need to get this bill reauthorized and are putting forth good faith efforts to get it done.”

The Senate committee had a timeline and hoped to propose a bill by Easter. The House committee, however, does not have a timeline yet, as many of the members are either freshmen or are new to the education committee and are trying to gauge their priorities for reauthorization.

District Administration magazine, May 2011

 

Voucher Programs Losing Steam in School Choice Debate

Posted in District Administration Magazine by

Tuition voucher program support has been withering under the Obama administration as it phases out the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. The program, a federally funded voucher program signed into law in 2004, has provided over 3,700 students in Washington, D.C., with scholarships to attend private schools. The administration’s primary reasoning, it appears, has been strong union opposition to school vouchers.

The fourth and final evaluation of the D.C. program, released June 22, was federally mandated and conducted by the Institute of Education Sciences (IE S) and led by Patrick Wolf, education reform professor at the University of Arkansas. According to the study, 82 percent of voucher students graduated high school, as opposed to 70 percent of students who were offered a voucher but chose not to use it.

“The academic attainment results— the graduation rates—have certainly been one of the most successful aspects of the program,” says Lindsey Burke, education policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation. Burke notes that President Obama himself was the recipient of a voucher scholarship to attend private school and sends his two daughters to a private school in the D.C. area. “No one would ever begrudge the president and members of Congress for making the best education decisions possible for their children, but that opportunity should be expanded to all children.”

Critics, however, maintain that vouchers undermine the public education system and wouldn’t be necessary if public schools were funded properly.

“It’s a bizarre issue when two core constituencies are at opposite ends of the spectrum,” says John Merrifield, professor of economics at the University of Texas at San Antonio and director of the EG West Institute for Effective Schooling, referring to the Democratic conundrum of teachers’ unions ardently opposing vouchers while African Americans, large recipients of vouchers, generally support them.

According to Merrifield, however, keeping school choice options alive between the private and public sector is important. “Schools don’t differ nearly as much as the kids do. One size does not fit all, even if the school is great.”

District Administration magazine, Sep. 2010

Farm Fresh or Fries: How Much Is Good Nutrition Worth?

Posted in District Administration Magazine by

Washington faces reauthorizing the Child Nutrition Act this fall.

Spending an additional six cents on lunch may seem like a nominal burden. But multiply six cents by the 31 million children who receive school lunches daily and it’s a lot of extra fries as Washington faces reauthorizing the Child Nutrition Act this fall.

The law, which includes School Breakfast and National School Lunch Programs, the Summer Food Service Program, and the Child and Adult Care Food Program, is reviewed every five years. The funding reaches 95 percent of American schools, providing 5 billion lunches and 1.8 billion breakfasts per year. Reimbursement rates for schools have not increased and have only been adjusted for inflation since 1973. The reimbursement remains at $2.68 per child per day. Despite tight budgets, school nutrition advocates hope for an increase to help districts serve healthy options.

To date, two bills have been proposed. In the Senate, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 advocates boosting funding by $4.5 billion over 10 years. The House has passed the Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act, which includes an increase of $8 billion over 10 years. Both bills request raising the reimbursement rate by six cents per child. The bills are inching closer to the $10 billion that President Obama carved out as part of his pledge to eradicate childhood hunger by 2015. “Both bills are extending the reach to more students who are at risk for malnutrition and obesity as well as adding support for establishing some additional nutrition standards,” says Dora Rivas, president of the School Nutrition Association (SNA ).

“The Effects on the National School Lunch Program on Education and Health,” a study conducted by Georgetown University Professor Peter Hinrichs and released in the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, found that the National School Lunch Program has great impact on educational attainment. Some fear the proposed funding won’t be enough. The SNA recommended an increase of 35 cents per child. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) is pushing for an additional 70 cents per child.

“I do believe that six cents is a good step forward,” says Virginia Stallings, president of Dannon Institute U.S. “If we spend the old and new money wisely, it will help improve the quality of meals. It’s a little more money to offset the costs.”

District Administration magazine, July/ Aug. 2010

Unprecedented Move for Environmental Literacy

Posted in District Administration Magazine by

Proposed No Child Left Inside bill would create room in the education budget for environmental education.

A well-rounded education now includes environmental literacy, according to the Obama administration.

“A Blueprint for Reform,” the administration’s amended proposal for reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), has for the first time carved out room in the budget for environmental education. The proposed bill, No Child Left Inside (NCLI ), is among the administration’s signature competitive grants and if passed would provide $500 million over five years to states that develop superior environmental and outdoor education plans.

Maryland is one of several states that have already passed an environmental literacy policy, which was passed in January 2009. One of the plan’s core initiatives is strengthening students’ connection to nature during the school day by providing meaningful outdoor experiences, implementing environmental graduation requirements, creating green schools and green school grounds and incorporating environmental education into all grade levels.

“We’re working closely with the education sector,” says Elena Takaki, program manager at the Maryland Department of Natural Resources. “We want to ensure school systems are prepared to give students a quality experience.”

Facing scarce financial support, Maryland is hoping to be a candidate for the potential NCLI funding. According to Takaki, Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley has acknowledged the state is facing tough economic times but is forging ahead with elements of the plan that are possible with existing state funding. Program Open Space, which acquires recreational space for public use, found $2 million available within the state budget. Some initiatives— Unprecedented Move for Environmental Literacy such as adopting an environmental mentoring plan and environmental literacy standards—cost next to nothing. However, costly components of the plan, such as developing outdoor education centers, may have to wait.

“The state is cutting the budget, but that doesn’t mean we won’t aim for it,” says Takaki.

“We are beginning to talk with superintendents to see what it is that they need, and when funding does become available, then we’re ready to go.”

According to the National Wildlife Federation, environmental education has a measurably positive impact on student achievement in science, reading, math and social studies, in addition to overall behavior and attitude.

“Having skills to address environmental issues is important,” says Patrick Fitzgerald, director of education advocacy for the National Wildlife Federation. “Students should be prepared to move into these fields as they move into their career and into college.”

Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and U.S. Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.) originally introduced NCLI in 2008. The bill passed with bipartisan support in the House of Representatives but ultimately failed in the Senate. Fitzgerald hopes that NCLI will continue to gain bipartisan support and pass when ESEA reauthorization moves forward.

District Administration magazine, May 2010

 

New Legislation Restrains Discipline in the Classroom

Posted in District Administration Magazine by

The Preventing Harmful Restraint and Seclusion in Schools Act will set national standards for the practices of controlling disruptive students.

A first of its kind, the Preventing Harmful Restraint and Seclusion in Schools Act has been introduced to set national standards for the practices of controlling disruptive and potentially dangerous students. The bill, introduced in the House of Representatives by Labor Committee Chairman George Miller (D-Calif.) and Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), and in the Senate by Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) in early December 2009, was in response to two studies revealing hundreds of cases across the nation of the misuse of restraint and seclusion. These methods were disproportionately being used on students with disabilities, leaving many traumatized, injured and, in extreme cases, dead.

The National Disability Rights Network (NDRN), comprised of attorneys who tackle civil rights cases for the disabled, released “School is Not Supposed to Hurt” in January 2009, a study which reported scores of cases of abuse against disabled students that included being pent down, strapped to chairs, held in arm locks, and locked in closets. This triggered interest from Rep. Miller, who commissioned a report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Its findings, released in May 2009, concurred with those of NDRN, detailing hundreds of allegations of abuse, many ending in civil suits and criminal convictions.

Until now, laws regarding restraint and seclusion have differed by state. “We looked across the country and saw there were no federal laws,” says Greg Kutz, managing director of forensics, audits and special investigations for the GAO. “Some states had regulations, while others had none.”

The bill aims to protect children against improper methods of restraint and seclusion by regulating when these techniques can be used and what training the school faculty must go through.

“Children are being restrained for destroying a book or throwing a pencil,” says Jane Hudson, senior staff attorney for NDRN . “These acts don’t require the level of restraint being used.”

The bill would not ban restraint and seclusion entirely, however, as educators feel they can be necessary when there is severe risk to the student or to others.

“This is a great piece of legislation that we are highly supportive of,” says Eric Buehlmann, director of public policy at NDRN. “This bill is a good compromise, and we feel comfortable moving forward with it.”

Buehlmann hopes the bill will continue to gain sponsors and suspects it will pass easily in early 2010.

District Administration magazine, Feb. 2010