The St. Louis Schools Watch was founded on the premises that parental and community involvement are needed for good schools to flourish, and that public participation is a cornerstone of democracy. St. Louis Schools Watch offers information and analysis that we hope contributes to a public debate over what changes are necessary to improve St. Louis public schools and what works.
Four bills related to K-12 education made it through the Missouri legislature session which ended last Friday, May 18th.
HB1789 changes the laws related to travel hardships for public school students. This bill allows students who live at least 17 miles from the nearest school in their district to attend school in another district if the other district has a school which is at least 10 miles closer to the student’s home.
SB450 modifies the length of school board terms for districts that become urban districts because of the 2010 census.
SB599 requires school districts to include in their school accountability report cards whether they have a gifted education program and the percentage and number of students enrolled.
Nothing controversial there.
But then there’s SB576 which modifies provisions related to charter schools.
It expands the school districts where charter schools may operate from just St. Louis and Kansas City to all unaccredited districts, districts that have been provisionally accredited for three years and all accredited districts if their board of education wants to sponsor them. Now you know there will be an effort from the business interests who profit from charter schools to recruit and elect school board candidates throughout the state whose sole purpose for running for office will be to sponsor charter schools in their accredited districts.
This act modifies sponsorship by expanding the entities authorized to do so. From the official bill summary, ” If the State Board of Education appoints a special administrative board for Kansas City, the special administrative board may sponsor charter schools. This act removes the restriction that a sponsoring public four-year college or university have its primary campus in the school district or in a county adjacent to the county in which the district is located. In addition, a community college whose service area encompasses some portion of the district may be a sponsor. Currently, any private four-year college or university located in St. Louis City with an enrollment of one thousand students and an approved teacher preparation program may be a sponsor. This act eliminates the requirement that the institution be located in St. Louis City but requires that its primary campus be located in Missouri. Additional sponsors include the special administrative board of the St. Louis City School District, any two-year private vocational or technical school, as described in the act, and the Missouri Charter Public School Commission.
The mayor of St. Louis City may request a two-year private vocational or technical school or the Missouri Charter Public School Commission to sponsor a workplace charter school.”
Since the bill expands the pool of sponsors, that implies that the current potential sponsors are not sponsoring enough charters to satisfy the demands of charter school promoters who want to expand business opportunities for the many private companies who service charter schools.
It provides the SAB with the authority to sponsor charter schools. Because the SAB inherited all powers given to the board of education when they were authorized to govern the SLPS, current state law already gives them the power to sponsor charter schools. Indeed they have already used it to sponsor a charter for next year. They don’t need the new wording giving them this power in SB576. For some reason they are insecure about their authority. The SAB has pursued the passage of legislation specifically authorizing them to sponsor charters for the past 2 legislative sessions.
The bill also ensures the perpetuity of charters in St. Louis and Kansas City even after our school districts regain accreditation. This is totally unacceptable.
Current law only allows them in Kansas City and St. Louis City but State Rep. Tishaura Jones, (D-63) who co-sponsored this bill and who is running for St. Louis City treasurer, has submitted legislation to spread them throughout the state repeatedly.
This act creates the Missouri Charter Public School Commission an appointed 9 member board to sponsor charter schools separate from the state board of education.
Charter schools providing alternative education services are given lattitude to devise alternative methods for evaluating their students’ academic accomplishments, potentially making it easier for their students to graduate than alternative education students in the traditional public schools. That smacks of unfair competition and the potential that alternative education graduates of charters may not be as rigorously evaluated as comparable students in the traditional public schools.
The bill includes a long list of provisions which are intended to be construed as accountability measures. They would cause charter schools to appear to be managed as responsibly as the traditional public schools. You may read them at http://www.senate.mo.gov/12info/bills/sb576.htm
The bill’s promoters claim adding accountability measures will improve charters. The accountability measures are only a smokescreen to allow the continuation of what causes charter to offer inferior education in the first place, privatization. There is nothing in the bill that prevents charter schools from contracting with a for profit company to manage the school.
One astute observer studied the bill and remarked,
“Charter schools in Missouri have not made the grade - who would advocate expanding them? The bill that was passed expands charter school sponsorship to non-educational “not-for-profits” instead of colleges and universities. Allows for “alternative” schools where the “sponsor” sets up “alternative” measures of success (in another words Judge Jimmie Edwards alternative school must follow the same DESE/state measures but the new charters would have separate self-made, self-assessed measurements. And the bill sets up a new charter school bureaucracy which is mandated to be funded from public education dollars….there is plenty of parental choice already without allowing outside private interests to further drain diminished taxpayer dollars from public education.
We should have had a true, clean bill that answered significant questions regarding accountability, transparency and governance. Instead we got one that expanded sponsorship to private interests and created a new bureaucracy (with public ed dollars) and took “baby steps” towards accountability.”
SB576 should be vetoed. There are indications that Governor Nixon is considering vetoing the bill. It has been reported that while he favors tighter regulation of charter schools, he may have reservations about expanding the territory in which they can operate.
You can ask Governor Nixon to veto SB576 by either email, regular mail or phone. Contact information follows. Emails and phone messages sent during the weekend will find their way to the governor’s desk.
June 7,Thursday, irregular bi-monthly SAB meeting, 6 p.m., 801 North 11th Street, room 108.
June 12,Tuesday, regular monthly Board of Education meeting, 7 p.m., Carr Lane VPA Middle School, 1004 North Jefferson. Enter from the parking lot.
June 26,Tuesday, irregular bi-monthly SAB meeting, 6 p.m., 801 North 11th Street, room 108.
Note: SAB meetings are subject to change of date and time at short notice. It is always advisable to check http://www.slps.org/ to verify when they are meeting.
Please note, The Schools Watch has a new mailing address, P.O. Box 1983, St. Louis, MO 63118. Our email address continues to be SLS_Watch@yahoo.com
May 3, 2012—St. Louis—Dr. Adams reported on the impact the closing of the 6 Imagine charter schools will have on the SLPS. An enrollment fair was held for incoming Imagine students last Saturday, April 28 at the Gateway School complex. He announced that 582 Imagine students had applied to enroll in magnet or choice schools and that the 237 of them who had applied to magnet elementary schools were accepted. Records have to be checked for high school applicants to see if they meet the 2.5 GPA and attendance requirements for admission to magnet high schools. If they do not meet the admission requirements, they will be given the chance to attend a summer school transition program. If they do well in the summer school, they will be allowed to attend the magnet or choice high school they wish to attend. They will not be allowed to enroll in Metro HS or McKinley HS because of the testing requirement for admission to those schools and the testing period having passed for this year.
221 Imagine students enrolled in neighborhood schools. Assuming all are accepted, that will increase SLPS enrollment by 800. Another enrollment fair will be held on May 12.
Additional options are under consideration to attract more Imagine students to the SLPS. Among them are isolating Imagine students in their own schools. If enough Imagine families decide by the end of this month, the SLPS is amenable to opening new schools for them.
To improve their academic achievement, the district plans to assess all of the Imagine students who enroll. Tutoring will be made available for them, as will unspecified intervention strategies, unspecified enrichment opportunities, extended time programs such as Saturday school, summer school for all of them, expanded early childhood programming, and individual academic plans. Any Imagine teachers hired by the SLPS will be offered professional development during the month of July. They will also be allowed to participate in the St. Louis Plan mentoring program developed by Local 420.
Imagine staff will be recruited to fill some of the 218 certificated staff vacancies. Job fairs will be held for them.
Dr. Adams reported that there is adequate capacity to accommodate the influx of students from Imagine. There are 3,826 vacant seats in neighborhood elementary schools and 930 in magnet elementaries. There are 1,226 seats available in neighborhood middle schools and 469 in magnet middle schools. There are 2,058 seats available in neighborhood high schools and 4,027 seats in magnet high schools.
Aware that there is a desire among some Imagine families to keep their students together in schools of their own and that they prefer magnet or choice schools, Dr. Adams suggested accommodating them in separate school buildings. That would entail repurposing or re-opening some school buildings if there is demonstrated interest. He proposed repurposing Madison from an alternative school to an elementary school, and moving the alternative program there to Beaumont HS. He also suggested opening an elementary program at Meda P. Washington and moving the early childhood programs there to Beaumont. He proposed to consolidate Columbia and Dunbar, which would mean one of them would close, despite the SAB having approved next year’s budget last month, which included no school closings.
Stevens would be reopened as an alternative middle and high school program. Stowe would reopen as a middle school for Imagine students if there is demand. A high school for Imagine students could be co-housed at Northwest HS, which has a capacity of 1,000 and only 286 students enrolled this year. The opportunity to register for these Imagine replacement schools will be offered for the next two weeks. A decision will be made by early June as to whether there is enough interest to open them. The half day program at Beaumont will continue. Beaumont has a capacity of 1,700 students and can accommodate additional programs.
Dr. Adams presented a financial impact statement based on gaining from 1,000 to 2,600 new students. The costs involved additional staff, textbooks and supplies, psychological testing, transportation, technology and security. The costs ranged from $5.5 million to $13.5 million depending on whether there were 1,000 or 2,600 new students.
SAB Member Richard Gaines asked whether the St. Louis Plan could be useful in this transition given the cost of implementation. The St. Louis Plan provides mentoring for teachers determined to need help improving their teaching skills. Its $1.3–$1.5 million annual cost has been funded by escrowed money freed by the parties to the 1999 desegregation settlement agreement. Those funds could not be used for its expansion to include former Imagine teachers. Gaines wanted to make clear that the SLPS is taking on additional costs to transition Imagine students and staff into the SLPS without being allocated additional funding by the state. He likened this to an unfunded mandate. He also raised concern about the unanticipated cost of opening new schools especially if, in spite of the district’s concerted effort to get them to decide early, hundreds of families apply at the last minute in the August.
Dr. Adams reported that he will ask the state for additional support within the next 48 hours.
The Archdiocese Imagines
The April 27 edition of the St. Louis Review, the weekly newspaper of the Archdiocese of St. Louis, included an editorial focusing on the closing of the Imagine charter schools. The editorial lamented the paucity of resources to enable Imagine students to enroll in Archdiocesan schools. They have empty seats and they have some scholarship support, but it is limited.
Their proposed answer is for the state of Missouri to offer support through a tuition tax credit program. If pending legislation (submitted by State Senator Jane Cunningham) allowing tuition tax credits passes, the editorial estimated it would double or triple the availability of scholarships. It goes on to mention studies of children from the same socio-economic background as public school students being steered to success in Catholic schools.
Of course, the editorial does not mention that Catholic schools expel disruptive students, sending them back to the SLPS, or that they do not have the facilities for many of the severely learning and behavior disordered or profoundly physically disabled students whose only recourse is the public schools.
Supporters of public funding for Catholic schools have been trying to pass favorable legislation since the 1950s. In addition to the annual attempt to approve a tuition tax credit (voucher) program, this year they are trying to pass a resolution (HJR70) which would lead to the repeal of the Blaine amendment to the state constitution. The Blaine amendment prohibits public funding for religious schools.
In a state where the foundation formula for public schools is not fully funded by the legislature, any program that would decrease state revenue, such as a tuition tax credit program, would only further deprive the public schools of needed resources. The legislature should never entertain funding private education until it fully funds the public school foundation formula.
Calendar
May 08,Tuesday, regular monthly Board of Education meeting, 7 p.m., Carr Lane VPA Middle School, 1004 North Jefferson. Enter from the parking lot.
May 17,Thursday, irregular bi-monthly SAB meeting, 6 p.m., 801 North 11th Street, room 108.
Please note, The Schools Watch has a new mailing address, P.O. Box 1983, St. Louis, MO 63118. Our email address continues to be SLS_Watch@yahoo.com
St. Louis—April 25, 2012—Mark Reuther, a representative from State Auditor Tom Schweich’s office announced that St. Louis Public Schools are going to be audited. Reuther and the two other auditor’s office staff members who will perform the actual field work attended the meeting. A state audit is deeper than the annual financial audits of the district.Five areas will be reviewed.They are contracts, bidding, information reporting, compliance with district policies and MAP procedures.He said that additional areas might be reviewed if suggestions from the public brought more concerns to light.Field work to gather evidence for a written audit report will take several months. Unless given reason to go back further, they will only review fiscal information for the years 2011 and 2012.The fieldwork team will meet with members of both the SAB and the BOE in closed sessions to go over the draft report before it is made public.Any responses to findings made by any of the board members will be included in the final report.
The evidence gathering and report writing process takes several months.It could be complete by the fall of 2012 but it could take until early 2013.If the findings are significant, there will be a formal follow up nine days after the release of the final report to determine if the district has implemented findings.
Board members asked Reuther questions which clarified more about how and what would be done.Member Emile Bradford-Taylor asked if individual school budgets would be reviewed.Reuther responded that in general only the district budget would be addressed unless a specific request from the public brought something about a particular school to their attention.Reuther offered to talk privately to board members about specific issues.
Member Bill Haas asked if they would review whether the SAB was in compliance with the following statutory mandate.
“MRS 162.1100.6(4) No student shall be promoted to a higher grade level unless that student has a reading ability at or above one grade level below the student’s grade level; except that the provisions of this subsection shall not apply to students receiving special education services pursuant to sections 162.670 to 162.999; “
Board members also asked about overlap, duplication and consistency versus inconsistency with the more than 1300 programs implemented within the district.Board Member Chad Beffa asked Reuther whether the auditor’s staff would be able to fulfill their obligations to the tax payers if they had to settle for only the information an entity they were auditing was willing to give them.The answer was, “No.”Auditor’s staff expect and get unfettered access to information.The BOE has asked for unfettered access to district information.The SAB has barred them from receiving it.
The BOE approached the auditor’s office 17 months ago and requested an audit because the SAB would not allow them to see information necessary for the fulfillment of their statutory obligations to audit and report on the district as stipulated in MRS162.621.2.
Reuther said there would be an official announcement of the audit within a few days.At this time, two weeks after his appearance before the board of education, the official announcement has not been made.
Board President Katherine Wessling thanked the auditor’s office for assisting the BOE with their auditing powers, which they have had “great trouble” complying with.
Other BOE News from their April 10, 2012 meeting
Member Rebecca Rogers reported on the district curriculum committee.The district’s policy on promotion and retention is being rewritten for the first time since 2001.The language on the requirement that students read no more than one level below their grade level is being addressed but it is still vague. Bill Haas interjected that the legislature mandating district retention policy seems like “overreach” and “legislative micromanagement”.He also raised the specter of the Hancock Amendment’s requirement that legislative mandates be paid for.He questioned whether the legislature had the statutory authority to require retention.He suggested a test case and a lawsuit funded by the teachers’ union might be in order.
Rogers spoke about a bill, (HB1425?) which dictates what school districts have to do to assist students who are below grade level in reading. It removes any flexibility from the decisions educators must make regarding retention decisions and specifies minute details for reporting to parents and interventions to assist the student. (The SAB has withheld microphones from BOE meetings for more than a year making it very difficult for those in the audience to hear what board members are saying.)Board Member Donna Jones, asked about whether there were added resources for retained students. Becky Rogers stressed that spending millions of dollars on reading programs, a requirement of the legislation, “won’t work”.The need is for adequate resources.The legislation assumes teachers are not doing everything possible now.Indeed the requirements in the bill are strategies which this reporter witnessed being applied in the SLPS years ago.
On another subject, one of the accreditation standards the district needs to achieve to regain accreditation quantifies the percentage of district graduates who either attend college or find employment after high school graduation. To achieve this accreditation point, DESE performance standard 9.4 must be met. On page 27 of the MSIP Standards and Indicators Manual it states,
“9.4 Career Preparation - The percent of students demonstrating adequate preparation for postsecondary education and/or employment is high or increasing….The percent of students who complete career education programs approved by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and are placed in occupations relating to their training, continue their education, or are in the military services is high or increasing.”
Board members discussed the feasibility of this when the number of available seats in colleges is not keeping pace with demand and jobs are scarce in the current economy. Indeed, half of recent college graduates are either unemployed or underemployed. Chad Beffa asked, if every SLPS graduate met the requirements for college entrance or had appropriate skills to enter the work force, could they find jobs or get into a college?
Board Member David Jackson reported that parents from Peabody Elementary had complained to him that their children had been sent home from school for not having updated dental records.One student missed a week of school because of the time needed to get a dental appointment. Jackson requested that the superintendent be asked whether this was district policy.He also wanted to know who was responsible for payment since, to his knowledge, there are no public subsidies for dental work.
Board Member Bill Haas reported on the request for a joint meeting with the SAB about working to oppose legislation harmful to the district.The SAB asked the BOE to provide specific concerns for discussion.Haas surmised the SAB did not think the BOE would be helpful.
Something New and Positive: Missouri Public School Advocates
A new statewide non-profit organization whose intent is to fortify public education in Missouri is in the formative stages. Its name is Missouri Public School Advocates.
According to their website, (http://mopublicschooladvocates.org )their stated mission is, “To stabilize and strengthen support for Missouri Public Schools.”Their goals are
·To educate the general public about the importance of and achievements of the public schools.
·To vigorously promote the state’s responsibility for supporting the public schools.
·To assist in securing adequate resources for the public schools.
·To assist in recruiting the brightest and best students to become teachers and administrators in the public schools.
·To assist in retaining the present teaching and administrative force employed by the public schools.
·To be active in the process of determining the best state policies for the operation and administration of the public schools.
According to an introductory pamphlet they, “believe the Public School is the institution which has done the most to make our country great.This institution has provided an opportunity for every child to acquire an education and to become a productive and self-supporting human being … Our state constitution places a high priority on the public schools and makes the STATE responsible for providing adequate funding for one FREE UNIVERSAL K-12 PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM which is accessible to all children.”
With a board of directors made up of prominent citizens from across the state of Missouri, MPSA is getting off to a propitious start.Its president, chief organizer and spokesman, Gary Sharpe is a former teacher, member of the Missouri House of Representatives from Hannibal and executive director of the Missouri Council of School Administrators. He also served as the Jefferson City lobbyist for the SLPS prior to Steve Carroll.
Sharpe is passionate about reversing the trend in legislation coming out of Jefferson City, legislation that is harmful to public school teachers and districts.As a consequence, MPSA intends to impact state political culture.They will recruit public school supporters to run for public office and work to get them elected.If they are successful, that will change the mindset in the legislature on more issues than just education. This is a long term project.It may take several years to achieve. As a former state legislator, Sharpe has the institutional knowledge and political acumen to successfully guide this effort.
Putting supporters of public education in office will take financial support.To build funding, they are asking people who share their vision to join MPSA.Members can join the effort for as little as $10. They intend for the organization to eventually represent thousands of Missourians.A membership form follows.
ST. LOUIS, MO. April 8, 2012 –The Office of the Missouri State Auditor has informed the Elected Board of Education that it will entrance its audit of SLPS at the Elected BOE Board Meeting on April 10, 2012.
Elected Board member Bill Haas initiated contact with the State Auditor’s office after the Special Administrative Board denied the Elected Board’s request for a budget with which to perform their statutorily mandated auditing and reporting duties.
The April 10, 2012 Board of Education meeting will be held at Carr Lane VPA Middle School, 1004 N. Jefferson Ave., St. Louis, MO, at 7:00 p.m.
For more information, please contact the Board of Education office (314) 345-2304.
Thanks,
Katherine Wessling
President, Board of Education, SLPS
From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Editorial: Rush to cut tenure wrong way to try to improve schools
By the Editorial Board | Posted: Monday, April 9, 2012 12:15 am
A truly amazing thing happened in the Missouri Legislature last week: Democrats mattered.
The joke in the Capitol is that Senate Democrats caucus in a phone booth. There are but eight Democrats in the 34-member Senate, not even enough to uphold a veto if GOP senators vote in lockstep.
But in an important vote on a bad teacher tenure bill on Tuesday, Democrats formed a coalition with a handful of Republicans to block a plan by Chesterfield Republican Sen. Jane Cunningham to abruptly erase job protections for public school teachers.
Ms. Cunningham doesn’t think much of those teachers. Witness what she said about them after her bill was modified by an amendment sponsored by Sen. David Pearce, R-Warrensburg. The amendment called on lawmakers to study teacher effectiveness before gutting job protections.
“What I saw today is nothing new,” Ms. Cunningham said. “It’s business as usual. It’s always putting government personnel above kids. It’s not putting kids at the back of the bus; it’s putting them under the bus and running over them.”
Right. That’s what teachers do.
To Ms. Cunningham, teachers are mere “government personnel.” At least they’re not “union thugs,” an epithet that some Republicans use.
That kind of offensive language makes debating education reform measures impossible.
Most Missouri politicians of both major parties realize that, even though there are some poor performers, most teachers are a major asset.
The 17-15 vote for Mr. Pearce’s amendment sends an important message to Ms. Cunningham, her key financial supporter, St. Louis mega-millionaire Rex Sinquefield, and the president pro tem of the Senate, Sen. Rob Mayer, R-Dexter: Stop treating public schools as a punching bag.
Mr. Pearce is the chairman of the education committee. He’s earned the respect of Democrats and Republicans alike, as well as teachers and reformers. He’s studied the issues. He listens carefully to all sides of the debate. He doesn’t demonize his opponents.
“I’m married to a teacher,” Mr. Pearce told us. “When I go home, and when many of my rural colleagues go home, we see teachers at the grocery store, at the ballpark. They’re our constituents.”
So why did Mr. Mayer hijack the traditional process and send the key education bills to Ms. Cunningham’s committee? Because the Republican leadership, ignoring many of its members, wanted to use serious school accreditation issues in St. Louis and Kansas City and problems with the funding formula for K-12 schools as leverage to get rid of teacher tenure and pass a tax-credit voucher scheme that would help private schools.
By insulting teachers instead of working with them, reform proponents will get nothing instead of incremental change, as has happened in Illinois, New York, Colorado and in other places where a solution-based approach trumped a politically charged one.
There is room in the public school debate for making changes to tenure, allowing and encouraging merit pay, producing accountable charter schools and creating better testing programs. But to ram through such measures without careful consideration for what would and wouldn’t work is the height of irresponsibility.
All across the country, the successful model of reform involves collaboration, not confrontation.
Missouri’s Republican leadership refuses to follow that model. On Thursday, Ms. Cunningham brought up her tenure proposal again. This time it had been modified to make teachers wait until they’ve been teaching 10 years to qualify for tenure. This time the Senate shoved Mr. Pearce’s study aside and gave first-round approval to Ms. Cunningham’s watered-down bill.
There is no evidence, no reputable study showing that such a move would do anything to improve education for a single Missouri child.
Because the tenure bill didn’t actually go through the education committee, “it hadn’t been vetted,” Mr. Pearce noted. How would the bill affect recruiting new teachers or retaining current ones? What would be the effect of having the longest time required in the nation before tenure could be obtained?
These are the questions Mr. Pearce and his colleagues would have asked in a committee hearing.
They didn’t get one because Ms. Cunningham and her ilk would rather throw teachers under the bus than talk to them.
All the Missouri Senate did on Thursday was to put “government personnel” in their place.
Mission accomplished.
SB 806 Cunningham
- Removes seniority changes due process law. Teachers would be on probation for 10 years. Makes it harder to retain good teachers. The vote will probably happen Tuesday April 10 after 3 p.m.
Please contact your senator and ask him/her to and vote no on SB 806!!!!
If you don’t know who your senator is, use the link to the Postal Serive below to ascertain your full 9 digit zip code and ten use the link to the senate website to look up your senator.
February 29, 2012—St. Louis—As if the last issue wasn’t scary enough, there’s more.
HB 1174has passed the house and is now under consideration in the senate.
This one, sponsored by Rep. Mike Lair, is problematic. It, “ changes the laws regarding school accreditation by authorizing the State Board of Education within the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to intervene in and establish alternatives for a failing school district.” (wording from the house website). Like several other bills it eliminates the 2 year period between when a district loses accreditation and when it lapses, giving the state board alone the authority to determine alternative governance for the district. Under current law, the affected board of education has to come up with a plan for its future, DESE has to consult with the community to determine preferences for alternative governance and some alternatives, such as the breaking up and attaching of parts of a district to other districts require approval by the receiving district. It also reinforces the right of students in an unaccredited district to transfer to an adjoining accredited one and have tuition paid by the home district.
While it still requires DESE to obtain community comment on a school district’s future, the bill is vague about what is meant by an “alternative governing structure” for a failed district. It could mean a special administrative board or it could mean mayoral control. That has been suggested for Kansas City and some citizens favor that as an alternative to breaking up the district or having it completely converted to charter schools. But given the outright hostility of St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay towards the SLPS, mayoral control would be a disaster in St. Louis. So, HB 1174 is problematic.
SB452 allows a student who resides closer to a school in another district rather than the one to which they are assigned in their own district to attend the school in the adjoining district. Their parents are responsible for transportation. The sponsor is Senator Cunningham. It’s been referred to her general laws committee but has not had a hearing yet so it may not develop legs this session.
SB 456, sponsored by Senator David Pearce is the most reasonable of the bills filed to affect a Turner Fix. Although it, “ specifies that the school board of an unaccredited district must pay the tuition and transportation of resident pupils who attend an accredited school in another district of the same or an adjoining county,” it requires that, “ the student was enrolled in and attending a public school in the district during the school year when the district lost its accreditation, or years subsequent to the year in which the district lost its accreditation,” or “ Pupils who reside in the unaccredited district who become eligible for kindergarten or first grade after the effective date of this section are also eligible to transfer.” So, students in charters, private and parochial schools, home schools or attending county schools through the VICC cannot drain district coffers by participating.
But… “ Before a student may transfer, the unaccredited district must determine whether it has sufficient capacity in a magnet school or school with an open admissions policy that has met standards on its annual performance report equivalent to the classification of accredited under the Missouri School Improvement Program in the previous school year and that offers the student’s grade level of enrollment. If there is capacity, the student must remain in the school district and attend that school…” So, it creates an incentive for the district to open more magnet schools and it provides a strategy to steer students into higher performing schools in the district, maximizing potential district enrollment rather than draining it the way all the other Turner Fix bills do.
Transfer students scores will not be counted by the receiving district for three years. Receiving districts are required to come up with criteria for limiting the students they accept as with the other bills dealing with this subject. They are not required to hire more teachers or build more classrooms and resident students cannot be displaced to accommodate transfer students. If the resident district regains accreditation while the transfer students are in elementary or middle school, they must return to their home district after they finish the grades in their building.
It has no provisions for the county districts to open charter schools in the city. It has no Passport Scholarships. It has a simple, straightforward approach to a Turner Fix. It prevents a hemorrhage of students from Kansas City and St. Louis, not to mention Riverview Gardens, and it saves the adjoining districts from having to accept unmanageable numbers of transfer students. SB 456 is unfortunately bottled up in Senator Cunningham’s general laws committee where it has not had a hearing. Perhaps public pressure could get it moving.
SB 503 is Senator Robin Wright Jones’ bill re-filed from last year allowing the SAB of the SLPS to sponsor charter schools and be the LEA for the school. It also allows the SAB to cancel the charter if the school is not performing academically after 2 years. Since the SAB was given all the authority that the board of education had when it took over th district in 2007, this bill is unnecessary. It is bottled up in the education committee and has not had a hearing.
Senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal has filed an interesting bill. SB 543 instructs DESE to develop an evaluation instrument for superintendents by June 30, 2013. It also limits the compensation of administrators. Superintendents, assistant superintendents, administrators and central office personnel cannot be compensated more than 2 and a half times the average salary of tenured teachers. The average administrator’s salary cannot exceed twice the average tenured teacher’s salary. It also permits a school board to lower the salary of a superintendent whom they have employed for at least 4 years if student performance is lower than student performance in a comparable district. If teachers suffer a RIF, there must be a comparable RIF in administrative costs. Now that would save a lot of money!
It requires DESE to give a three year waiver from MSIP requirements to districts that have consolidated or districts that have had at least a 10% growth in their student bodies due to part of another district being annexed to them. This sensible bill is being bottled up in the education committee. It has not yet had a hearing. Perhaps public pressure could get it moving.
SB 549 is a mean spirited bill sponsored by Senator Lemke. This one had a hearing in the education committee on February 22 but has not been voted out of committee yet. It micromanages school district real estate policy. It requires any school district which has schools buildings that have been vacant for 2 consecutive years to make them available to charter schools free of charge. If a charter school doesn’t want them, the vacant schools must be leased or sold and the deeds are not allowed to restrict the buildings from being used for educational purposes. It prevents a school district from retaining more than 20% of its vacant buildings.
It seems the Republicans can’t make up their minds about how public schools should be run. Just a few years ago they were insistent that public schools should be run like businesses. Now they seem to want them to be run like charities. Businesses don’t give their assets away to competitors.
SB 576 sponsored by Senator Bill Stouffer had a hearing on January 25 but has not been voted out of the education committee yet. Many of its provisions have been folded in to the omnibus bills discussed in the February 27 issue of theWatch. It modifies the laws regarding charter schools. It is the senate version of Rep. Tishaura Jones’ HB 1228. It expands the districts where charter schools can operate to all unaccredited and provisionally accredited districts and allows them in accredited districts if the school board chooses to sponsor them. It removes the restriction that only 4 year colleges and universities in the same or adjoining counties to the school district where the charter will be located can sponsor charters and allows all such schools in the state to sponsor them. It allows community colleges whose service area includes the school district, private 4 year colleges and universities with more than 1000 students in St. Louis City and a teacher preparation program, the special administrative board of the SLPS, any private technical or vocational school, the new Missouri Public Charter School Commission and any private charitable or non-profit organization so long as it is not sectarian or religious to sponsor charter schools. They must be having a hard time finding sponsors. All these institutions rely on wealthy donors. Arms will be twisted.
The bill provides for the perpetual operation of charter schools in Kansas City and the city of St. Louis. Even after both cities’ school districts regain full accreditation, charter schools sponsored by any eligible entity will be allowed in them. It gives charter schools the right of first refusal on all vacant school district property and it allows charter schools to lease or purchase vacant district property whether or not they are for sale or lease. It allows charter schools to occupy partially vacant district property. In New York city, where this co-housing of schools is permitted, charter schools are gradually taking over and replacing neighborhood schools.
It allows a cooperative of school districts to contract to manage schools. Both the Kansas City area and St. Louis County have an organization of cooperating school districts. This provision would empower them to operate charter schools in the cities, which has been proposed in other bills as a Turner Fix.
The easiest way to effect a Turner fix is to repeal MRS 167.131.
House Education Committee Chairman Scott Dieckhaus (R-Washington) was asked why they didn’t submit a bill to do just that at a forum at Washington University on January 26. His response was that he, “didn’t want to damn any child to an inferior education.” At the Joint Education Committee hearing in St. Louis last November, Dieckhaus sanctimoniously told this reporter that, “It is no longer possible to get a decent education in the St. Louis Public Schools.”
He refuses to acknowledge that 22% of SLPS made AYP in 2011, 33.1% of students were proficient or advanced in communication arts and 30.9% were proficient or advanced in math. Chairman Dieckhaus seems to have a blind spot regarding achievement in the SLPS.
SB 581, sponsored by Senator Callahan (D-Kansas City) is the equivalent of a Turner Fix for the Kansas City area. The suburban Kansas City districts do not want large numbers of KCPS students to be able to transfer to their schools either. This bill allows for boundary changes of schools districts. It could facilitate the breaking up of the Kansas City school district and the attachment of different parts of the KCPS and the charter schools operating in Kansas City to the surrounding districts. It offers the receiving districts carrots. They would get double state aid for Kansas City students entering their districts for 2 years and they would not have to include the MAP scores of Kansas City students entering their districts for 3 years.
It authorizes the state board of education to run the KCPS district after it loses accreditation. It authorizes the state board to contract with other school districts or entities to operate schools in Kansas City. That means that rather than dissolving the KCPS and attaching it to the surrounding districts, the state board could allow the suburban districts or charter school operators to operate the schools in the city.
DESE Commissioner Chris Nicastro is currently gathering information from Kansas City stakeholders, including parents, to determine which option to pursue. In the meantime, the bill has been heard in the Cunningham’s senate general laws committee. But it has not been voted out yet.
At this point, bills which have not had a hearing probably won’t be, although bills dealing with the Turner Fix or the Kansas City situation could develop legs at any time due to political necessity. It is the bills which have been heard and especially those which have been voted out of committee which are threatening at present. Contact your legislators.
HB 1174 No
SB 456 Yes
SB 543 Yes
SB 549 No
SB 576 No
SB 581 No
Here’s the St. Louis regional caucus: A couple of them of them do not have email addresses listed. The entire senate list is available at www.senate.mo.gov/12info/senalpha.htm You can get email addresses by clicking on their names. You can contact them over the weekend or at night when their offices are closed if need be and leave messages.
February 27, 2012—St. Louis—At present there are 2 omnibus education bills working their way through the Missouri legislature, a house and a senate version. Omnibus bills combine several bills dealing with the same subject into one large bill. Both bills have been voted out of committee and can come up for a floor vote at any time. The two bills vary from each other. They are both full of unpleasant things. The senate bill is SB 451. The house bill is HB 1740.At some point one or the other will prevail and they will combine under one number.Regardless, both should be opposed.
SB 451starts off with Senator Jane Cunningham’s SB 706, the Passport Scholarship Program. It provides scholarships to any student residing in an unaccredited school district to attend a nonpublic school. It is a tax credit/voucher program. Taxpayers can make up to $40 million worth of contributions to an “approved educational assistance organization and claim a tax credit.” of 60% of the contribution annually.
The scholarships are not limited to students enrolled in the unaccredited district’s schools. Everyone already attending all the parochial and private schools in the city could apply for these scholarships. Meanwhile, state revenue to pay for public schools and all other state services would be lowered by as much as $40 million each year by a new tax credit program.
The bill tries to address what is called the “Turner Fix” by expanding the entities who can sponsor charter schools. The Turner Fix is a response to a lawsuit filed by a litigant named Turner and others, St. Louis city residents who enrolled their children in the Clayton Public Schools before accreditation was removed from the SLPS in 2007. MRS 167.131 stipulates that accredited districts in the same or adjoining counties must accept students from unaccredited districts who wish to transfer to their schools. Once the SLPS became unaccredited Turner et. al. wanted the SLPS to pay their Clayton tuition. The courts have sided with the plaintiffs but county districts have asked for relief from the courts and legislature to prevent their districts from being overcrowded. Hence several bills have been filed to affect a Turner Fix this session. Similar legislation filed last year was not approved.
The “Fix” permits accredited school districts or the Cooperating School Districts of St. Louis County to operate charter schools in unaccredited districts. These charters will be prohibited from “contracting with the unaccredited district, employing any of the unaccredited district’s teachers, or contracting with any teacher’s union.” The charters would be allowed to continue to operate after the district regained accreditation. Since elsewhere in the bill limits are placed on the number of students from an unaccredited district who could transfer to accredited districts’ schools, a sop of additional charter schools opening in the city but run by county districts is being offered as an alternative.
The bill also allows accredited districts to close a school that needs improvement and lease it to a charter school. Unaccredited and provisionally accredited districts can do that too.
The bill does away with the 2 year period between when a district loses accreditation and when it lapses for all districts. The 2 years was meant to give districts a chance to improve and avoid being dissolved. The state took it away from us and is taking it away from Kansas City so they have decided to treat all districts the same way.
The bill gives the state board of education the discretion to change the number of people on the Special Administrative Boards that can be appointed to run unaccredited districts. It removes the opportunity for an accredited school district to reject students from an unaccredited district being attached to it.
If students transfer to schools in an accredited district as provided by law when their district is unaccredited, the receiving school will not be required to report those student’s MAP scores for up to 5 years. Accredited districts must establish criteria for accepting students from unaccredited districts by June 30, 2012. The criteria must include the availability of “highly qualified teachers” and “existing classroom space”. Receiving districts will not be required to hire extra teachers to accommodate more students or construct additional classrooms. Resident students cannot be displaced. Students may complete their education in the receiving transfer even after their home district regains accreditation.
All the stuff protecting the county schools from an influx of SLPS students is part of the Turner Fix. It is fixed for the county districts, not for us. There will be a potential irremediable financial drain on the SLPS.
The Cooperating School District’s did a study and found there were potentially 15,000 students in St. Louis who would transfer to county schools if they could. Not all of them were SLPS students. 1700 from the existing charters, and 2700 private and parochial schools in the city would take advantage. 2200 were city students already attending county schools through the VICC but wishing to transfer to schools the deseg program limits them from attending. Cooperating School District Executive Director Don Senti said at a meeting at Washington University on January 26, 2012 that it would cost $309 million for tuition and transportation to move that many students to county schools. The GOB for the SLPS this year was $289 million.
Whether the same number would be attracted to county run charter schools in the city is doubtful. But, there are currently waiting lists for charter seats so if more charters open, there will be a drain and that will mean more school closings and more cuts to programs in the SLPS.
The bill creates something called the Hinson Plan for districts which become unaccredited outside of St, Louis and St. Louis County. All such districts must be divided up and annexed to surrounding districts. This is the plan for Kansas City, the complete obliteration of an educational jurisdiction.
The bill sets up a Clearinghouse to “assist students in the St. Louis City district or any other unaccredited district in St. Louis County to transfer to an accredited district, charter school, virtual school, or nonpublic school using a Passport Scholarship.” “The expenses associated with the clearinghouse will be defrayed by the DESE withholding funds, not to exceed five hundred dollars per pupil from the unaccredited district’s state school aid.” “This program will continue until the district has been accredited for five years and has met all MSIP academic standards for five consecutive years.”
There are 6 MSIP academic standards. They are the math and communication arts MAP scores for elementary, middle and the high school EOCs in those subjects. Currently, we don’t meet any of them. The possibility that we will ever meet all of them is not likely for the foreseeable future.
51% of teacher evaluations must be based on student academic growth.
The Passport Scholarship program alone may be enough to sink it. The Legislature has refused to pass programs that support parochial school tuition for several years. But the Turner Fix is a powerful draw for some senators to vote for this thing.
However, there is another bill, SB 456 which will accomplish a Turner Fix using much of the same language without resorting to subsidizing tuition for the private and parochial schools and cutting state revenue. Unfortunately, SB 456 is bottled up in Senator Cunningham’s General Laws Committee going nowhere.
HB1740
HB 1740 also includes Cunningham’s Passport Scholarship Program and provisions for a Turner Fix but there are a few differences. There is a sunset clause for the scholarship program of 6 years from the August 28, 2012 effective date. It includes the provisions of State Rep. Tishaura Jones’ charter school expansion bill HB 1228, which has been voted out of committee and could be passed on its own. HB 1740 also fixes problems with the Foundation Formula for funding K-12 schools.
Under current law, charter schools are only allowed in Kansas City and the city of St. Louis. HB1740 and HB1228 allow them to be opened in school districts that have been provisionally accredited for 3 consecutive years starting from 2009-10 school year. The school boards of accredited districts will be allowed to sponsor charter schools. In unaccredited and provisionally accredited school districts, the authority to sponsor charter schools will be expanded to all public 4 year colleges and universities, all private colleges and universities whose primary campus is in the state and have a teacher education program, community colleges whose service area encompasses some portion of the school district, private, non-profit 2-year vocational and technical schools and a new state public charter school commission that would replace the state board of education as a sponsoring authority.
It has a nasty provision that would not allow a district that became provisionally accredited or fully accredited to benefit from being so for three years after achieving the status, thus allowing continued operation of charter schools. It gives charter schools the right of first refusal for any school district facility that is for sale.
It also eliminates the 2 year period between when a district is unaccredited and when it lapses.
Its provisions for a Turner Fix are somewhat different. It only allows students who have been enrolled in the district’s public schools for one year to transfer to a county, charter, or virtual school. Students in private or parochial schools, students attending county schools through the VICC and home schooled students would be ineligible. If the home district, regains accreditation they may complete the grades in the school they attend but if it is not high school, they must return to the home district for the remainder of their education. SB 541 allows all students, even those in private schools to transfer and lets them stay until high school graduation.
It has the same requirements for setting up admissions criteria and the setting up of a clearinghouse but it does not specify a $500/student limit for the payment of funds from the district to the clearinghouse.
The bill stipulates that the legislature must work towards fully funding the Foundation Formula by 2017 and diminishes the loss of funding to hold harmless districts in years when the formula is not fully funded. St. Louis City is a hold harmless district.
The Passport Scholarship Program is a poison pill that should kill these bills. The name changes annually but the strategy is one that repeatedly attempts to deplete public revenue to support private and religious schools when the state does not adequately fund its public schools.
There are 2 joint resolutions that impact education.
SJR 47
”This proposed constitutional amendment, if approved by voters, would modify Article IX, Section 8, commonly referred to as the “Blaine Amendment” by removing the prohibition on the distribution of public moneys to religious organizations. Instead, it prohibits public entities from denying an individual or an entity the state benefits of an education program, funding, or other support on the basis of religious identify or belief provided the state benefits comply with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
This joint resolution has been referred to Senator Cunningham’s general laws committee. It has not yet been voted out to the floor of the senate but Cunningham will shepherd it through.
At a joint education committee hearing in St. Louis in November, 2011, representatives of both the Kansas City and St. Louis Archdioceses spoke in favor of public money being used to pay for tuition to parochial schools. They both have empty seats in their schools and would like to fill them with students from the unaccredited public school districts in their dioceses. They see the loss of accreditation in KC and St. Louis as an opportunity for their schools. If the resolution passes, and the subsequent constituional amendment referendum is approved by voters, it would go beyond even the Passport Scholarship Program in allowing the direct subsidy of tuition at religious schools with scarce public dollars.
HJR 43
has passed the house but may be bottled up in the senate. It would submit a constitutional amendment to the voters which would prevent state revenue from rising 1.5% more than the rate of inflation or the rate of population growth. Were it passed by voters, the state would never be able to raise revenue for special needs like the Joplin Tornado or to fund the Foundation Formula.
Contact your legislators. Ask friends and family to contact legislators.
Present at the meeting were: Katherine Wessling, President, Chad Beffa, Emile Bradford-Taylor, Bill Haas, and Donna Jones. Board Members David Jackson and Rebecca Rogers had “excused” absences.
II – PUBLIC COMMENTS
Susan Turk displayed a bright yellow “school choice” scarf, which is being given out at various forums. Attendees are encouraged to wear the scarf to demonstrate their support for “school choice.” She again reminded the Board that on February 18, 2012 there will be a state-wide “Save Our Schools Conference” at the University of Missouri, Columbia.
III – PRESENTATION BY SUPERINTENDENT ADAMS
Dr. Adams made a presentation to the Board starting with an “Update on the District,” which highlighted the following points.
A) Update
1)SLPS Snap Shot
a)77 “school sites:” 72 schools & 5 programs
b)Total enrollment: 24,901
c)Daily attendance: 92.9%
d)1,988 teachers: pupil/teacher ratio within “Desirable Level”
e)87% - free/reduced lunches
f)15% - special education
g)10 % - homeless
h)9% - ESOL
2)Financial Condition
a)District operated within a balanced budget last year & this
b)Desegregation Case Agreement (DCA) has eliminated deficit fund balance and continues to fund new, not existing, programs
c)State revenues have not met forecasts, so some money was withdrawn from schools and the Central Office at mid-year
3)Academic Achievement
a)Since 2007, the percentage of students receiving “proficient” or “advanced” on the Math and Communication Arts MAP exams have increased
b)Also increases in the English II and Algebra I EOC exams. NOTE - new District policy only allows students with a “C” or better in the classes to take the exams.
c)There were 1,873 graduates (62.2%) in 2011; receiving $23.3 million in scholarships and accepted into 245 colleges and universities (these figures were self-reported and include multiple scholarships or acceptances to one student)
i)NOTE: universities are beginning to report the number of students by District, who are enrolled in their “remedial classes;” these figures will be factors in the accreditation of school districts.
(1)President Wessling suggested early identification and targeted instruction to college-bound students.
d)The number of schools making AYP rose from 12 in 2008/09 to 16 in 2010/11
e)The number of APR standards met by the District rose from 3 in 2008’09 to 6 in 2010/11
4)Accelerating Progress
a)SLPS Comprehensive Long Range Plan seeks to accelerate academic progress by:
i)Increasing, Early Childhood Education
ii)Equipping all students with knowledge and skills for post-secondary education or career
iii)Providing professional support to principals and teachers
5)EPIC Schools
a)SLPS has identified 11 low-performing schools, which it is treating as a sub-district for Special Incentive Grant (SIG) funding
i)Board Member Bradford-Taylor cautioned that separating-out these schools may result in a self-fulfilling expectation of failure
b)Changes at SIG schools since it began in 2010/11
i)8of the 11 schools improved their MAP performances (one made AYP)
ii)Attendance has increased at all schools
iii)Discipline events and suspensions have decreased in all the schools
NOTE – Dr. Adams announced that the State of Missouri is preparing a request for a waiver from the operation of the federal No Child Left Behind Act and expressed his preference for the State of Louisiana’s system of non-accrediting schools, rather than Districts.
B)District Website
Dr. Adams reported that SLPS has a new webmaster and server. Website training was conducted in January and will continue through the year. The entire website will be up-dated during the summer with each school receiving a uniform, individualized website address. He welcomes suggestions from parents of what to include on school sites.
C)Mold Remediation
Dr. Adams reported that the current practice is to send written notices homes with children in the classrooms/areas where mold is found. Board Members suggested a change in the practice to provide notices to the entire school, as individuals can be adversely affected by the chemicals used in the mold removal that spreads through-out the building.
D) Issues at McKinley School
Dr. Adams reported being unaware of any “issues” at McKinley School.
IV - LEGISLATION
Board Member Beffa reported that State legislators continue to grapple with a “fix” for theTurner decision, which allows students from non-accredited school districts to transfer into adjoining districts, at the expense of the non-accredited district.
The public meeting was adjourned for the Board and Superintendent to go into Executive Session.
Missouri Progressive Action Group (MOPAG)
March Meeting
Sat. March 3rd
12:30-2:30 PM
St. Louis County Library Headquarters
1640 Lindbergh
East Room
Main speaker : Rep. Margo McNeil will talk about the Education Committee and other legislative issues.
Correction
In the February 3, 2012 edition of the Watch we identified the wrong location for the arts focused charter school Dr. Adams asked the SAB to sponsor. It will be located in Mitchell Elementary at 955 Arcade, not Marshall at 4342 Aldine as mentioned and apologies to Alderman Sam Moore. Mitchell is not in his ward.
Calendar
March 13,Tuesday, regular monthly Board of Education meeting, 7 p.m., Carr Lane VPA Middle School, 1004 North Jefferson. Enter from the parking lot.
March 13,Tuesday, irregular monthly SAB meeting, 6 p.m., 801 North 11th Street, room 108.
Please note, The Schools Watch has a new mailing address, P.O. Box 1983, St. Louis, MO 63118. Our email address continues to be SLS_Watch@yahoo.com
February 12, 2012—St. Louis—A motley crew of politicians around the country, governors and the like, proclaimed January 22-28, 2012 National School Choice Week.Events promoting school choice were held in many cities. St. Louis’ took place Wednesday, January 25 at Loyola Academy. The event was sponsored by the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, an institution founded and funded by petrochemical billionaires David and Charles Koch.Americans for Prosperity also has a PAC which supports Newt Gingrich’s presidential campaign.AFP also funded Herman Cain’s campaign. The Koch’s and AFP heavily funded Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s campaign in 2010.The Kochs are the funding fathers of the Tea Party movement.The problems we face in St. Louis and across Missouri, keeping our public schools funded and open are due partly to the antipathy of these wealthy ultra-conservatives to public education.
Aside from promoting school choice, the Koch’s favorite issues ar e free market capitalism and smaller government, policies that increase profits and lower their taxes.Besides holdings in oil and coal, the Koch’s own Georgia Pacific, the biggest supplier of plywood in the country and lots of paper product companies. Angel Soft, Quilted Northern, Soft n Gentle, Dixie Cup, GP Copy Paper, Spectrum paper, Mardi Gras napkins, Vanity Fair, Zee napkins, Brawny and Sparkle paper towels are theirs.Koch Industries produce most of the nylon, spandex and polyester that we use.Why am I telling you this?Consider what you subsidize if you patronize their products.
School Choice Week events were also endorsed by Singuefield front groups the Children’s Education Alliance of Missouri, and the Children’s Education Council of Missouri, both of which are staffed by Laura Slay and Katherine Casas, wife of 79th district state rep candidate Martin Casas, The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice (www.edchoice,org), founded by free market economist and father of the school choice movement Milton Friedman , the Koch funded Heritage Foundation, the Koch funded American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) which pre-packages state legislation, The Black Alliance for Educational Options, and Michelle Rhee’s Students First, which has been hired to squire ALEC generated school choice legislation through the Missouri legislature.
The panelists were Fox News commentator Dick Morris, St. Louis Tea Party Co-founder Dana Loesch, Show Me Institute Director and UM Columbia Economics Professor Michael Podgursky, and Slay administration Education Liaison Robyn Wahby. The panel was moderated by local blogger Jim Hoft, aka the Gateway Pundit.Hoft identified Loesch as part of the Breitbart empire (as in Andrew Breitbart). Loesch is a commentator on CNN and has her own talk radio show.
Morris, Bill Clinton’s political advisor and re-election campaign chair, resigned due to revelations that he had allowed a prostitute to listen in on his conversations with the president.Morris has since ceased to associate with the Clintons. Hoft introduced Morris, the author of many books as, “a respected political analyst.”
Approximately 100 people attended the event.A quick survey of the audience found only 6 of them to be African American.Then again, a similar school choice public event held at Harris Stowe State University in April, 2009 resulted in a contrasting audience of African Americans with very few Caucasians participants.For some reason, school choice events other than legislative hearings seem to self-segregate.
Highlights:
Morrisstarted off by defining school choice as, “an elemental human right.”
He described 3 phases in efforts to create quality in public schools starting in the 1960s.The first increased state funding.Morris claimed nothing got better.(In reality achievement did increase during this period.) The second phase upgraded science and math curricula, and increased teacher training.The third phase began with No child Left Behind in 2001. He said reading scores have been flat for the last 30 years and math scores have worsened.
His solution is for everyone to be allowed to be creative and to let people vote with their feet to the most effective schools. (This ignores that many parents are not interested in the most effective schools but in the school closest to home or the school where their child is safest.) Because of Republican cuts to education budgets, it has become necessary to get better education for the same money or less.This led to the development of charter schools.He considers that to be part of a revolution in public education in the U.S. where choice will be the norm.
Morris said that Washington DC had the highest spending on education and the lowest graduation rate.So increased spending does not increase test scores.
He mentioned that Mitt Romney studied education when he was governor of Massachusetts.Romney found that the most important resource was the teacher.Class size and equipment didn’t matter.Unions prevent firing bad people and promoting good people.He blamed the unions for the 1/3 of teachers who quit within their first 3 years and half who quit by the end of 5 years of teaching. (Rather than blaming how hard the work is and how low the compensation is.)
Morris recommended a free market approach towards schools. “Then we should close empty public schools.” He also said if St. Louis doesn’t move towards school choice, we would become like Detroit which lost about 240K or 25% of its population between 2000 and 2010. He also said they have classes of 60 in the Detroit Public Schools and teachers demanding bonuses. Their district imploded and suffered a state takeover.He said the teachers’ union was a parasite insisting on bad quality education, driving the city down, leading it to a death spiral.
“We need to close more schools and fire teachers.NCLB provides for this to happen but there is no will to carry out the provisions.We need to understand there will never be the political will to close schools.Fire stations and hospitals close.So, we need to empty schools out and close the empty ones.”
“Public schools close not because of performance, which is why they should close, but because of enrollment. They should close if they are not performing but there is no will to throw teachers out of work because of failing test scores especially if they are protected by a union.”
Podgurskycalled for allowing children from the unaccredited St. Louis and Kansas City school districts to attend parochial schools at public expense.He advised the need to repeal the Blaine Amendment to the Missouri Constitution to enable public money to fund tuition to parochial schools.Catholic schools work and should be used. He lamented that they’re closing.
He saw a need for a market solution.Because one size doesn’t fit all kids, you need different vendors.That’s why markets work.The public schools are standardized.They take a one size fits all approach.(He obviously hasn’t been in a public school lately.)
Morris, on the other hand, said, “Breaking the power of the teachers’ unions would solve the problem.”
Pogursky said personnel is where most of the money goes.Teachers are paid according to scale and are not accountable for performance so it is not market based.The average salary for public school teachers in the U.S. is $49K. If class sizes were larger they could raise salaries.He claimed that private schools have larger class sizes and better teachers.
Loesch, a city resident, homeschools her children, but wants good alternatives for the SLPS which she termed, “Not great.” H er friends send their children to private schools.She doesn’t plan to homeschool forever and at some point she will need to look at public and private schools for her family. She claimed to spend 40-60 hours each week homeschooling.She said we need more muscle from parents.She spoke of how highly motivated the St. Louis homeschooling community is. If the legislature is threatening to curtail their rights, they drop what they are doing and head off to Jefferson City within the hour.Hundreds of them descend on Jefferson City at a time and stop the legislature from passing laws impacting them.
She insisted that the public schools are not underfunded.We spend more on our schools than all countries except Switzerland.She claimed teachers are unaffected by funding because of tenure.She said that teacher pay has no effect on test scores.
She reported the average teacher salary is $53K.That equals the median U.S. income.She claimed that was $13K higher than private school pay.
She pointed to improved test scores in New Orleans where most public schools were replaced by charter schools after Hurricane Katrina in 2005.
Loesch said she didn’t like the common core standards being forced by the federal government through NCLB and RT3.Having so much power over education emanating from Washington DC erodes parents’ rights. Parent apathy in reference to education is troubling.We need more parents to be active and to fight.More parents should be on school boards.She lamented the board currently running the SLPS being an unelected entity.
Wahbystressed having quality options in neighborhoods, otherwise people will move out of the city. (She never mentions that middle class families returning to city schools would instantaneously create that quality.)She said it was a challenge to get word out about the choices (which already exist) in the SLPS.
She added that money doesn’t solve the problems.It depends on the way the money is used.You have to use the money you have creatively.We need to appropriately fund for high quality schools including paying for teacher quality, are schools safe, and pleasant, with arts, music, sports and up to date technology.Money is not the solution but schools need appropriate resources.
She said it was a challenge to work with the teacher’s union, that what’s working should be replicated and what’s not should close.In the charter schools, teachers are paid differently.They work longer days and a longer school year.There are not enough charter school seats.There are waiting lists for high quality district schools, charters and the voluntary transfer program.
St. Louis lost 29k residents between 2000 and 2010, 22k were children.She said the city can’t grow without good schools.There has been a race to New Orleans of education entrepreneurs, young people and non-profits that have resulted in the opening of new schools so the mayor’s office has tried to encourage opening new schools here.They have been responsible for 13 charter schools opening which she described as incubators that are magnets for talented young educators.She said we want to be open to young people and to education businesses and education non-profits.
She said it was in the best interest to support good schools in neighborhoods and school choice (which seems to be contradictory because school choice is causing neighborhood schools to close).
The audience was friendly to the speakers.There were only a handful of supporters of the SLPS in the room. No one is organizing SLPS parents at present; not the administration, the SAB, the union or the parent assembly, and they aren’t organizing themselves.Meanwhile, the other side, the side that wants to close their schools, is well funded and organized.
School choice advocates seem to want to circumvent the issue of some people being disinclined to send their children to school with children from different racial, ethnic or social groups and wanting public money to help them.Many of these folks support minimizing taxation and government spending.But they have found something they want government to fund.They are using the issue of poor academic achievement among low income students who often belong to minority groups as a wedge to open the door for all students regardless of their advantages or disadvantages to be able attend the school of their choice.But we all know that isn’t going to happen, especially as regards disadvantaged students of racial or ethnic minorities.They will not be allowed to jeopardize the accreditation of affluent suburban school districts.Plus, the legislature has never fully funded the education foundation formula and HJR43 this session proposes a constitutional amendment restricting revenue growth to the rate of inflation and population growth so there will never be enough funding. If more children become entitled to fewer education dollars, if more kids get a slice of the pie, the slices will have to get smaller. Everyone will starve. So, how to respond to this?
What supporters of public schools need are snappy comebacks to the rightwing litany of attack.Watch readers are invited to share their own arguments in response. Send them toSLS_watch@yahoo.com.We will publish what you send.Let us know if you do or do not want attribution for your suggestions.
Here are some suggestions from us.
Re: Failing schools causing families to move out of the city.Studies show people leave because of crime, not the schools.
Re: Teacher salaries. Starting pay in the SLPS is $37,500. It takes years to get to $53K. Most teachers leave long before they are making decent pay.
Re: Funding and our spending less than only Switzerland.Our standard of living means we are spending more per capita.We spend more on health care and have horrible outcomes there as well, 37th in the world.
In most recent data collected which is from 2009, MO is 41st among the states for per pupil spending.We are 17% below the national average.In 2002 we were 30th in the nation.We are falling behind.The average state in the U.S funds 42% of per pupil education expenditures. Missouri funds only 29%.If funding didn’t matter the rich wouldn’t shell out $25k/year for tuition at their kids’ private schools.
Re: Unions do not prevent firings.They ensure due process so that people are not fired for frivolous, unjustified reasons.
Re: New Orleans. Pre-Katrina test scores can’t be compared to post Katrina test scores because 140K of their poorest residents were displaced and have not returned.)
Re: Catholic schools
The top enrollment number for city parochial schools was 22,912 during the 1970-71 school year. In2008-09 enrollment was 7,635.
Although they have lost 2/3 of their students during the past 40 years, no one is saying they are failing schools. Why? No one is blaming them for encouraging people to move out of the city. Why?
Re: Why it is not better to let city students attend charter schools run by county districts than attend county schools
Studies have shown low income students achieve more in desegregated schools. Most of the charter schools in the city are segregated. There is no requirement that charter schools be integrated. If the majority of city students who are low income minority students continue to attend segregated schools run by country districts, there is little evidence from the existing charter schools that their academic achievement will improve.
10 years ago everyone was talking about limiting deseg and the busing associated with it because of the cost even though it improved outcomes for African American students.Now that conservatives are championing school choice, cost does not seem to be as much of a concern.Busses can roll for school choice but not deseg.Albeit they wouldn’t roll as far for still segregated county run city charters as for county schools. But thestate has penalized the SLPS by cutting our transportation funding for bussing children to magnet schools rather than the school closest to home.Will they penalize us for bussing children to the charter school of their choice?
Re: Innovation
Charter school proponents claim their schools succeed because they are innovative. A study was done during the 1990s which found that African American academic achievement in the St. Louis area had increased the most in SLPS magnet schools. The innovative approaches in the magnet schools had the greatest impact on achievement. What we need are more magnet schools.
Public schools are prevented by law from using some of the innovations charters use such as longer school days and years.There playing field is not level.Charters are given an unfair competitive advantage.Give public schools the same freedom to innovate as charters.
And finally, because they rely heavily on charter schools, only 16% of which perform better than public schools,the goal of the cynical plutocrats who bankroll the school choice movement seems to ensure that a large segment of our children are not well educated, and to absolve society and themselves of blame or responsibility, because the parent was responsible for their own bad choice. They are sending what were good paying manufacturing jobs overseas and eliminating white collar jobs by the thousands, sitting on billions of dollars in profits rather than creating jobs and rebuilding the economy. Are they planning for a future which needs fewer educated workers.
What are your plans for your children’s future? What are your plans?
Calendar
February 14,Tuesday, regular monthly Board of Education meeting, 7 p.m., Carr Lane VPA Middle School, 1004 North Jefferson, enter from parking lot
February 16,Thursday, regular bi-monthly SAB meeting, 6 p.m., 801 North 11th Street, room 108
February 18, Saturday, Save Our Schools Missouri Conference, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., Arts and Sciences Building, Allen Auditorium, University of Missouri Columbia
Please note, The Schools Watch has a new mailing address, P.O. Box 1983, St. Louis, MO 63118. Our email address continues to be SLS_Watch@yahoo.com
February 3, 2012—St. Louis—Last week, January 22-28 was National School Choice Week. Superintendent Kelvin Adams surprised SLPS parents by taking advantage of the timing to ask the SAB to approve resolutions asking the State Board of Education to allow the SLPS to sponsor two elementary level charter schools for the 2012-13 school year.Adams has been talking about opening district sponsored charter schools since he was hired in November, 2008.The SAB voted to support the resolution for the first one at their January 26, 2012 meeting. The resolution was worded, “To approve submission to the Missouri State Board of Education of the St. Louis Public School’s request to sponsor Lighthouse Academies of St. Louis, Inc.to operate a charter school in the City of St. Louis beginning with the 2012-13 school year.” Lighthouse Academies manage 20 schools in 7 states. They all use the same curriculum focusing on the arts.
As originally intended, charter schools were supposed to provide school districts with schools they could not create on their own that used innovative strategies to improve student achievement. In other words, they were supposed to be lab schools. Strategies found to be successful for improving student achievement were then supposed to be integrated into the regular district schools. But according to a 2009 Hoover Institution study, only 16% of charter schools nationwide perform better than regular public schools.And the ones which do seem to use strategies that would be prohibitively expensive, or impossible for regular public schools to implement, such as longer school days and year and expelling disruptive or not with the program students.Charters have evolved into competition or a replacement for the regular public schools.Is that what is going to happen here?Will one or both of the elementary arts magnet schools close?
It is not unusual for school districts lacking magnet schools to have charter schools that provide focused curriculum schools which they otherwise would not offer.Our state board of education, however, has seen fit to approve numerous charter schools which offer the same focus as existing magnet schools in St. Louis. The SLPS already has two arts focused magnet schools.So, why would the superintendent want to open an arts focused charter school?There is not a long waiting list for the arts magnets.There is no waiting list for Ames Visual and Performing Arts and only a short waiting list for Shaw VPA,nowhere near enough to fill a third arts elementary school.And if there were why not open a third arts magnet? Why open an arts focused charter when there is no indication of demand for one?
It is going to be interesting to see how the district markets this new school.It has been approved by the mayor’s charter school initiative.That should make it attractive.
There will be differences between the existing SLPS arts magnets and the charter. A non-profit company, Lighthouse Academies, Inc. will manage the charter school. A visit to Lighthouse Academy’s website ( www.lighthouse-academies.org ) demonstrates that this charter will not mirror the VPA magnet programs at Shaw and Ames.Rather than offering separate arts classes and preparing students for careers in the arts, it uses the arts in the teaching of all core subjects.Their academic curriculum is arts infused. Lighthouse Academies also adhere to a longer school day, 8 hours rather than the 7 hour SLPS standard, and a longer school year, 190 days rather than the 174 to which state law restricts the SLPS.More time on task has proven to increase academic achievement. Kipp Academy charter schools are also known for adopting the longer day and year model. In their two years of operation, they have not yet produced consistently better results than the SLPS in comminucation arts. SLPS 5th graders have performed better than KIPP students in communication arts and their math scores are comparable. Their one year of six grade math scores are significantly better. The regular public schools are limited by state law and funding from lengthening the school day and year.
Whenever the SLPS has lengthened the school day, parents who schedule after school activities for their children have complained.Parents concerned about their children having adequate summer vacation and opportunities for recreation time have objected to longer school years.Parents with inflexible work schedules tend to favor the longer days and year because it cuts back on their need to pay for before and after school care and daycare during school breaks.
Lighthouse claims they run their schools using only money provided “by law”.They will only be able to run school for more hours and days by paying their teachers less than the SLPS does. It ill be interesting to see how this works because AFT Local 420 came to an agreement with the administration to represent teachers in district sponsored charter schools.
By coincidence, parents from our arts magnet schools spoke during Public Comments at the last two SAB meetings.Shaw parent Shannon Lewis attended the December 6, 2011 SAB meeting to ask for more resources for her school.She reported that enrollment was up 28% this year.Shaw began the school year with 380 students.That puts the building at 100% capacity according to the 2003 Alvarez and Marsal School Consolidation Plan.As a consequence, Shaw no longer has dedicated classroom space for its’ gifted pull out program.Participants in the gifted pull-out migrate to the cafeteria, library or whatever nook and cranny is not crammed with other students.They sometimes have to move in the middle of activities because the space they have found for a given day has been assigned to another program without their being informed.
According to the parent report again, one quarter of the new students admitted this year had behavior problems and Shaw doesn’t have enough staff to deal with them.The number of disruptive students is limiting learning at Shaw.The principal is new, inexperienced and needs assistance.The teaching staff is caring and the school is progressing academically, but everyone is strained.Parents volunteer quite a bit, but there is a need for more special ed teachers.Discipline is a real problem.
There are indications that the administration did try to address the parent’s concerns.Subsequently, Associate Superintendent for Elementary Schools Paula Knight met with parents at Shaw. Dr. Adams also walked through the school.There have been some cosmetic improvements, but the gifted program still lacks dedicated space.Gifted programming has been cut back to only 4 hours/day3 days/week . There are more than 30 students at Shaw who qualify for gifted programming.In years past, that would qualify the school for a full time gifted teacher.There used to be daily gifted pull outs. Shaw’s gifted program teacher is shared by four schools. Two early childhood assistants have been added for the kindergarten classrooms, but there is still a need for additional staff.
Concerns remain about a lack of funding for the arts specialties at Shaw.There is no dedicated budget for the arts programs which include dance, drama, string orchestra and vocal music.Students have missed opportunities to attend field trips to performances at Powell Symphony Hall and the Fox because of a lack of funding for transportation.Parents have removed their children from Shaw because of these problems.The school does not live up to expectations.
A parent articulated disappointment with the way magnet schools are portrayed.At Shaw and Ames for instance the students get one art or music period each day.Formerly, the arts magnets offered two arts periods each day. Dr. Adams ordered the reduction 2 years ago to provide more time for the teaching of reading and math to increase MAP test scores. This is typical of the impact that high stakes testing has in public schools across the country. Subjects not tested are being cut back or eliminated to increase the potential for schools to meet Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) as defined by the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation adopted by the George W. Bush administration and subsequent Race To the Top (RT3) legislation adopted by the Obama administration. Six of Missouri’s 14 accreditation standards depend on MAP test achievement results. A district cannot be fully accredited without meeting at least one of the academic (MAP) standards.Provisional accreditation also requires meeting an academic standard.So, despite parental objections, the focus of the arts magnets has been compromised in an attempt to raise MAP scores. Neither school has an active PTO enabling parents to advocate effectively for their children’s needs.
At the January 26, 2012 SAB meeting, Ames PTO President Evie Williamson reported that the arts emphasis is being destroyed at Ames because of the pressure to attain AYP. She expressed concern about the cut backs in art classes to accommodate more time to prepare for the MAP tests. She also mentioned that there were not enough musical instruments for all the children in music classes.
Morale is low.She said she was considering transferring her children to Shaw or removing them from district schools altogether. She said the school leadership was pitting the parents against the teachers and discouraging teachers from talking to parents.
She also mentioned that she and her husband had been banned from the school building because of a misunderstanding surrounding a field trip.Three classes were scheduled to go to the Magic House last Fall, but the busses failed to appear.The children were dressed in their coats and ready to leave the school building at the appointed time. They had to suffer the disappointment of the trip being cancelled.Mrs. Williamson and her husband were scheduled to serve as chaperones.They had taken off work to do so.When the busses did not appear, she tried to find out why. Ames office staff did not want to phone the bus company.Unable to get information at the school, they went downtown to the administration building to try to find out what happened.Staff at the administration building told her the busses were never authorized.Apparently this was never communicated to the three teachers involved.Upon returning to Ames, Ms. Williamson and her husband learned that they had been banned from the building.A trespassing restriction order had been issued against them.TROS are only used in extreme situations where parents have been disruptive in a school.Mrs. Williamson had to return downtown to get the TRO rescinded.She still does not know why it was ordered in the first place.She reported that the principal approved it without talking to her.Williamson said she has tried to work with the principal to improve the school.She loves the teachers and gets along with them.In general, she said parents do not feel welcome at Ames.PTO meetings have been held at times when parents cannot attend, such as 11:30 a.m. or 5:30 p.m., just an hour after the children arrive home. Efforts to change PTO meeting times have been rebuffed by school staff.There is a sense that parents are not considered to be assets.
Now, parents will have an alternative to Shaw and Ames.An informal survey of VPA magnet parents found that some of them would consider moving their children to the new arts infusion charter school.
The new charter school will be located in the shuttered Mitchell Elementary School building, formerly home to the MEGA magnet program, in the Ville neighborhood.The Ville is an educationally underserved neighborhood, whose alderman, Sam Moore has complained bitterly as the administration closed schools in his ward in recent years.There is definitely a need for an elementary school in that area of the city.But will it pull students from other nearby schools which will then close?Time will tell.
According to Associate Superintendent of Innovation and New Schools Michael Haagen, the Lighthouse charter will eventually be extended to a middle and high school.Will it attract students away from Carr Lane VPA Middle and Central VPA HS threatening their viability?Although the curriculum is arts infusion rather than arts focused, parents may not understand the difference and the magnet schools may be impacted by the opening of this charter school.
The question remains, why a charter school and not a new magnet school?It’s possible the SAB has adopted an “if you can’t beat ‘em join ‘em” philosophy. As members of the business community, SAB members full well know that their peers in business have bought into charter schools lock stock and barrel as the best thing since chalk to reform public education, ignoring their poor performance overall.Opening charters curries favor with the corporate community which insists on redesigning and controlling what they will allow to remain of our public school systems.Perhaps they may think that they’ll attract some students away from other charters or fool some parents looking for alternatives to the SLPS that this is not a district school faced with the same management problems as the rest of district schools.But the funding is going to come from the district since the SLPS will be its Local Education Agency (LEA), in other words DESE authorized funding agency and services will be provided by the district.Chances are they won’t have any better luck getting their students to field trips than any other St. Louis Public School.And once parents figure that out, well, the more choices parents are given, the more school mobility children experience. That’s no way to improve academic performance.
Haagen reported that district charters will be subject to an accountability plan that will ensure high academic achievement. The SAB required the one other charter school which the SLPS sponsors, the Construction Careers Academy to submit an accountability plan as a condition of its charter being renewed.Accountability plans are not an insurance policy for academic achievement. DESE requires accountability plans for unaccredited school districts. The SLPS operates under one itself. Also, since the SLPS is going to be the LEA, the charter’s achievement will be included in the district’s, not separate like the Construction Career Academy. It will be interesting to see whether time for arts end up being curtailed in the charter school as it has been at the magnets if the desired academic performance improvements don’t materialize as expected.
One would think that the SLPS would put some effort into getting its own house in order before opening new arts schools.Parent dissatisfaction with the existing arts focused magnet schools does not bode well for their future and the opening of a competing charter school may signal that the district is no longer committed to its magnets schools.
Save Our Schools, Saturday, February 18, Columbia, MO
Save Our Schools Missouri, an affiliate of the national Save Our Schools movement is holding its first annual statewide conference. If you are a parent, teacher or citizen concerned about the relentless and unwarranted attacks on our public schools and public school districts, plan to attend this conference.
Learn relevant statutes and this year’s pending legislation. Conference attendees will be provided with information that will help to effectively advocate for public education and counter the attacks on public schools. A goal of the conference is to develop a network of concerned activists who continue to work in support of public education in Missouri. Task forces will be formed.
This will be a day to form new relationships and network with others concerned about the status of public education in Missouri. Now more than ever Missourians need to build bridges across the state to expand and defend public education.
The keynote speaker will be John Kuhn, superintendent of the Perrin-Whitt School District in Texas. Kuhn spoke at the SOS march last summer in Washington, D.C.
Time:Saturday, Feb. 18, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Where: Allen Auditorium, Arts and Sciences Building, University of Missouri Columbia, Columbia, MO
Directions: From Interstate 70 take Exit 126 and drive 1.8 miles south on Missouri 163 Providence Road. Turn left on Turner and drive 0.2 miles. The Turner Parking Garage is on the left. Parking is free on Saturdays. The Arts and Sciences Building is 2 short blocks east.
Conference Schedule
9:30 a.m. Registration
10:00 - 10:15 a.m. Greetings and Announcements — Peg Nicholson, State SOS Coordinator, Bill Wickersham, Peace Studies Department, University of Missouri, Columbia
10:15 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Morning Panels and Discussion: Our two largest public school districts are unaccredited. Missouri’s smallest district is obliterated. A domino effect of unaccrediting and consolidating students into other districts on the precipice of losing accreditation may further destabilize the educational environment or our most vulnerable children.
10:15-11:00 a.m. Lessons from St. Louis and Riverview Gardens, Susan Turk moderator, St. Louis Board of Education Member Donna Jones, retired Board of Education Member Peter Downs, SLPS Teacher Mark Kasen SLPS Parent Jessica duMaine, Riverview Gardens Social Worker Barb Chicherio
11:00-11:45 a.m. Kansas City— Where Do We Go From Here? State Rep. and former AFT Local 691 President Judy Morgan, moderator, Jemekia Kendrix, KCPS parent,a KC Board of Educaton member
11:45 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Accreditation issues discussion with panelists
12:30-1:30 p.m. Lunch
1:30:-2:00 p.m. Keynote Speaker John Kuhn
2:00-2:30 p.m. Discussion with John Kuhn
2:30- 2:45 p.m. Break
2:45-3:45 p.m. Aftenoon Panel and Discussion. Why Children Need Schools, Teachers Need Unions and Democracy Needs Public Education. Panelists: Karen Lewis, president Chicago Teachers’ Union, Roman Davis, Occupy KC, and a representative from the Milwaukee Education Association
3:45-4:30 p.m. Next Steps and Action Groups. Now more than ever Missourians need to build bridges across the state to work together.
4:30-5:00 Press Conference
St. LouisBoard of Education Meeting
January 10, 2012
By Lawrence Johnson
I – Attendance
Present at the meeting were: Katherine Wessling, President, Chad Beffa, Emile Bradford-Taylor, Bill Haas, David Jackson, Donna Jones and Rebecca Rogers.
II – Public Comments
Susan Turk again reported that on February 18, 2012 there will be a state-wide “Save Our Schools Conference” in the Arts & Science Building on the University of Missouri, Columbia campus from 10 AM – 5 PM. The conference is being sponsored by teachers, parents, and concerned citizens from around the state; national speakers are invited.
III – Legislative Session
Board Member Beffa reported that there are several, draft pieces of legislation in the Missouri Senate that could impact the St. Louis Public Schools. They are:
SB451: “Two or more school districts…may cooperate and share resources…. [including] school district facilities (schools) for education purposes…These entities may also: cooperate to share employees, enter into agreements relating to the use of sites, buildings, facilities, furnishings, and equipment; and enter into agreements for services.”
SB456: “…the school board of a school district that does not maintain an accredited school is required to pay the tuition and transportation of resident pupils who attend an accredited school in another district of the same or an adjoining county…By June 30, 2012, each district must establish criteria for the admission of nonresident pupils from unaccredited districts…”
SB503: “This act allows the Special Administrative Board of the St. Louis City School District to be the sponsor of a charter school and declare itself as the local education agency of the charter school for funding purposes. If the special administrative board is dissolved, the charter school may continue to operate provided it seeks and obtain a new sponsorship under the new governing board of the school district…”
SB543: “…When school districts consolidate, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) must grant the new district a waiver from Missouri School Improvement Program (MSIP) review for three years…”
SB576: “In addition to the St. Louis City and Kansas City School Districts, charter schools may be operated in unaccredited districts, provisionally accredited districts, and in districts accredited without provisions if sponsored by the local school board…This act removes the restriction that a sponsoring public four-year college or university have its primary campus in the school district or in a county adjacent to the county in which the district is located. In addition, a community college whose service area encompasses some portion of the district may be a sponsor…”
SB581: “…This act allows the State Board of Education to assume responsibility and general supervision of the Kansas City School District after classifying it as unaccredited. The State Board may enter into contracts with other school districts or educational providers…to deliver education programs to residents of the district…The State Board must grant waivers from the MSIP to contracting school districts for the students they serve from the Kansas City School District…After a boundary line change occurs, for the next three school years, the receiving school district may, but will not be required to, include the statewide assessment scores for any students it receives in the district’s scores…When a school district gains enrollment because of a boundary line change, during the two school years following the change, its weighted average daily attendance figure will be adjusted so that it receives twice the weighted average attendance for any students it received as a result of the boundary change…”
After much discussion concerning what action to take, the Board voted to invite meetings with the Special Administrative Board (SAB) and the St. Louis State Legislative Delegation to identify common ground and strategies for responding to the proposed legislation.
The Board also considered a public, working session, though no date was finalized pending the outcomes of the above meetings.
IV – Monitoring and Audit Report
President Wessling reported that she and Board Member Haas met with the State Auditor, Thomas Schweich, and his staff to discuss the possibility of his office auditing the St. Louis Public Schools. They are still awaiting a decision from Mr. Schweich.
V – Behavior in 1st Tier Schools
President Wessling reported that since Compton Drew School was changed this year to a 1st Tier school, meaning children now arrive at 7:00 rather that 8:00 AM, there has been an increase in behavior incidents. It’s believed that these behavior problems are attributable in part to the earlier starting time. Studies suggest this to be so, and she invites public comments on the experiences at other 1st Tier schools.
VI – Staff Hiring Procedures & Background Checks
Board Member Haas reported that there was recently a reported incident of an Instructional Care Assistant “abusing” students at the Sigel School. He wondered how this could happen: what are staff hiring procedures; do they include background checks; were the procedures followed in this instance, and if not, why not?
After some discussion of the Board’s role in a personnel matter, it was decided to ask Superintendent Adams to address this issue when he joins the Board at their meeting in February. The matter may be discussed in Executive Session to protect persons’ privacy and any on-going investigation/litigation.
VI – Community Outreach – No report
VII – Board Member Reports
President Wessling reported that she has been invited by Superintendent Adams to join the Internal Auditing Committee of the School District.
VIII – Announcements
President Wessling reported that mold was being removed at Humboldt Academy without notice to the students and parents, causing illness to staff and students. She’s heard of mold issues at Columbia and Dunbar Schools, as well, and wonders what are the District’s procedures for informing the public? A request for information will be made to the adminstration regarding how notice is to be given to the public.
NOTE: Superintendent Adams will address the Board of Education at its next meeting: Tuesday, Feb. 14th; at 7 PM at Carr Lane VPA Middle School
Correction
In the last edition of the Watch the names of current elected Board of Education President Katherine Wessling and former President Rebecca Rogers were mixed together. Apologies to both elected Board members.
-
Calendar
February 14,Tuesday, regular monthly Board of Education meeting, 7 p.m., Carr Lane VPA Middle School, 1004 North Jefferson, enter from parking lot
February 16,Thursday, regular bi-monthly SAB meeting, 6 p.m., 801 North 11th Street, room 108
February 18, Saturday, Save Our Schools Missouri conference, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., Arts and Sciences Building, Allen Auditorium, University of Missouri Columbia
Please note, The Schools Watch has a new mailing address, P.O. Box 1983, St. Louis, MO 63118. Our email address continues to be SLS_Watch@yahoo.com
November 6, 2011—St. Louis—This issue is being dedicated to the elected Board of Education. First, a correction, the last edition of the Watch published an incorrect date for the next public meeting of the Board of Education. The correct date is this coming Tuesday, November 8, at 7 p.m. at Carr Lane VPA Middle School, 1004 North Jefferson. Free parking is available in the gated lot behind the building which you enter from 23rd Street, one block east of Jefferson. Enter the school from the parking lot.
Next, the following comprises a snapshot of the last two board meetings, taken by a new writer for the Watch, Lawrence Johnson.
Saint Louis Board of Education Meeting
June 14, 2011
I - Board of Education Selects Officers for the 2011-12 Academic Year:
The Saint Louis Board of Education (“elected board”/BOE): Chad Beffa, Emile Bradford-Taylor, William Haas, David Jackson, Donna Jones, Rebecca Rogers , and Katherine Wessling selected the following officers for the coming year; until June 2012.
· Rebecca Wessling, President
· David Jackson, Vice-President
· Chad Beffa, Secretary
II - Auditing & Monitoring Report:
BOE continues to struggle with the design/development of its state-mandated, Auditing & Monitoring Report of the School District. The Board is seeking a meeting with State Auditor, Tom Schweich, to get advice on possible content and format of the Report.
III - Budget Request:
BOE’s request for operational funds for professional development, supplies and equipment, communication, outreach, and staffing/consulting was rebuffed by the School District. Superintendent Adams’ response was to continue the practice of addressing the BOE funding on a case-by-case basis, without committing a specific budget to the Board.
IV - Charter Schools in St. Louis :
Under state law, charter schools are authorized in “a metropolitan school district or in an urban school district containing most or all of a city with a population greater than three hundred fifty thousand inhabitants.” BOE member, Chad Beffa, has raised with state officials the question whether St. Louis, with less than 350,000 inhabitants, may continue to operate charter schools? Responses from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) and the Attorney General’s Office while mixed support continuation of charter schools in St. Louis.
V - Board Goals:
BOE has a range of operational and advocacy goals and objectives it wishes to pursue. The Board members will be working over the next couple months to prioritize the activities it will engage in the coming year. There was a consensus in favor of outreaching to the community, though “how” remains to be decided.
Board of Education meets the 2nd Tuesday of each month at 7:00 PM at Carr Lane Middle School (1004 N. Jefferson Ave.).
St. Louis Board of Education Meeting
September 13, 2011
I – Attendance
Present at the meeting were: Katherine Wessling, President, and Chad Beffa, Emile Bradford-Taylor, Bill Haas, Donna Jones and Rebecca Rogers.
II – Agenda
The announced agenda was amended, so the Board could focus on Community Outreach.
III – Public Comments
Retired teacher Catherine Rowe-Uddin voiced her concerns regarding the growing advocacy for charter schools. She called the Board’s attention to a movie, “The Inconvenient Truth about Waiting for Superman” and a rally being planned in Washington, DC in October by educators against charter schools.
IV – Community Outreach
The discussion then turned to “Community Outreach:” the Board’s plan to begin meeting with community entities to introduce itself and to explain changes in the school district since the installation of the Special Administrative Board (SAB) over the public schools in 2007. It was noted that when the State Legislative Session resumes in January the subject of returning control of the school district to the Board could arise. The President invited “talking points” from the Board that could be used at the meetings.
The following are various topics raised for consideration:
Importance of the School Board
· Community, democracy, elected
Changes in Accreditation Points since 2007
Lack of Accountability by SAB & the Superintendent
· For example, continuation of unassigned teachers
Public declaration of what needs to be done (press releases)
Failure of charter schools
Changes in student performance on MAP
Non-responsiveness of school district to parents & disrespect of teachers
· System needed for tracking the handling of parents’ complaints
Disparate disciplining of students by race
Sullivan’s qualifications to serve as “Superintendent”
· Possible conflicts of interest
Corporate take-over of public education
Examples of how parents may become involved
The floor was then opened for suggestions from the audience, which produced the following items:
A change in the SLPS food services to no longer accept checks for lunches
A reiteration of the need to discredit the viability of charter schools
A recommendation to keep the points simple; varied for the particular audience being addressed
An offer from a Washington U. Professor to make his class available to assist the Board with its outreach activities
The Board will hold a “working meeting” in 2 weeks and finalize its decisions at its next, regularly-scheduled meeting.
The meeting was adjourned.
Lawrence Johnson
Overview
By Susan Turk
The Board has experienced a transition in personnel during the past year with the retirement of Peter Downs after his term ended in November of 2010 and the subsequent election of veteran Board Member William (Bill Haas). Haas previously served 8 years on the board from 1997 through 2005. With his return last year, Haas brought the experience and perspective of a board member accustomed to running the district. An attorney by training, with degrees from Harvard and Yale Universities, Haas has been employed in recent years teaching at Harris Stowe State University, Lincoln University and the St. Louis Public Schools. The expertise he brought to the Board was immediately evident. He, as the vernacular goes, “hit the ground running”. He suggested the Board undertake a performance audit of the district to fulfill one of the few powers still entrusted to it by statute. Whereas, the district is subjected to an annual financial audit, it has not been the subject of a performance audit, which would analyze who and what is working, or not, within the district.
Haas also suggested that the Board submit a formal request for a budget to the SAB. The Board has been hampered from fulfilling its auditing and reporting powers since the SAB took over in 2007 by the a complete lack of resources and funding. They no longer have the use of office space and staff in the administration building.
A budget request, worked up by Board Member David Jackson, was submitted in March of this year. After careful deliberation, the Board asked for an annual budget of $147,540.
The budget included 20 hours/week for administrative support, and funding for the professional development required to keep board members abreast of education issues, office supplies, postage, consultant fees, meeting expenses, and telephone service. It was a modest proposal. It was summarily denied.
Meanwhile, the SAB stopped providing microphones, and videography for Board of Education meetings. The only public record now available for BOE meetings are the minutes being taken in long hand. The administration is making it nearly impossible for anyone attending Board meetings to even hear the proceedings.
Another Board initiative was an effort to submit legislation clarifying state law regarding what happens when the SLPS regains accreditation. Currently, the SAB can continue to run the district even after accreditation is regained because their termination is subject to the discretion of the State Board of Education. There is nothing in the statutes which specifies a reason or timetable for ending SAB governance of the SLPS. Board Member Chad Beffa worked with State Representative Jeanette Mott Oxford to submit a bill that would provide a much needed remedy. Unfortunately, it was submitted late in the session and did not get a hearing.
The Board has begun a new initiative to make itself more visible by attending community meetings throughout the city. They will be sharing information and asking for public input.
So, they are busy and are actively trying to address the situation in the SLPS in spite of the SAB’s efforts to suppress them. You can support them by inviting them to attend public meetings in your neighborhood and by attending their meetings at Carr Lane.
We Need Your Support The Watch Advisory Committee has informed the editor that it is time to remind our readership to renew their subscriptions. Ideally, all of you would use the coupons at the bottom of each issue to renew your subscription annually without being asked. However, not enough of our readers do that. So, if you have not sent us a check for $12 during the past year, please do so now. Although our expenses are kept to a minimum, there are production related expenses associated with the Watch. Thanks.
Calendar
November 8,Tuesday, regular monthly Board of Education meeting, 7 p.m., Carr Lane VPA Middle School, 1004 North Jefferson, enter from parking lot
November 15,Tuesday, irregular bi-monthly SAB meeting, 6 p.m., 801 North 11th Street, room 108
Please note, The Schools Watch has a new mailing address, P.O. Box 1983, St. Louis, MO 63118. Our email address continues to be SLS_Watch@yahoo.com
St. Louis—October 11, 2011— Local 420 President Mary Armstrong addressed the Special Administrative Board during the public comments segment at their Tuesday, October 11 meeting. She reported that on Sunday, October 9, AFT Local 420 members voted to reject the last and final policy statement, aka contract, they and Dr. Adams offered. The members then voted unanimously to ask the SAB to submit contract negotiations to federal mediation. Approximately 100 Local 420 members stood in solidarity while she spoke.
Armstrong continued by listing the numerous projects on which Local 420 had collaborated with district administration since the SAB was appointed to improve the SLPS; among them developing a plan for evaluating and mentoring probationary teachers and the expansion of pre-k classrooms. She reminded the SAB that the last policy statement to which 420 agreed in 2008 included sacrifices on the part of teachers and staff; no raises and several furlough days each year to help the fiscal situation.
She said, “We must be treated with respect and that respect includes just and fair compensation….the district’s policy agreement has loopholes big enough to drive a school bus through.” She said they “found irregularities in the the board’s adopted budget, specifically that there were 1670 teachers last year and 1666 teachers this year, only 4 less, but a $4.5 million difference in the budget for them.” She noted that during the negotiations she asked questions about this and was told she would get answers. The questions were never answered, however. They were given a last and final offer as an ultimatum instead.
“We advocate for this district”, she said, “and we deserve just and fair compensation.” She noted that there had been no increase in the money budgeted for classrooms since 2003 and that, “We haven’t complained and we have done everything asked of us to move this district towards accreditation. It’s time that those who do the work in the classroom be justly compensated.” She added that they want a third impartial party, a federal mediator, to assess the actual revenues and expenses in this budget because, “Right now we don’t trust your figures, we don’t trust your numbers and we don’t trust that you’ll treat us right.”
Armstrong was followed by teachers from three different schools. Nancy Fraley from Mallinckrodt Academy said that, “Relying on teachers to do the right thing without just compensation was almost equal to abuse.” Fraley said she had only had one 3% raise in the 7 years she has worked for the SLPS. As we all know, the cost of living has risen far more than 3% during the past 7 years. She noted that some teachers are sharing housing and driving 15 year old cars to get by. She said that given her own expenses, she could not balance her checking account on her salary. She asked the SAB to, “do the right thing so we can live on what we’re given.”
Jim Heger, a 12 year veteran from Ashland Elementary School told them to keep the meager 2% raises they were offering in the contract and give Ashland back a safety officer. Without a school safety officer, the principal is relegated to breaking up fights. Heger reported that the neighborhood surrounding Ashland is subject to frequent outbreaks of violence, including shootings, and that the students witness them. He said that safety officers are needed in schools in high risk areas to create, “a palpable sense of security that would make the teachers and children feel safer.”
(It is worth note that neighborhood violence has impacted Ashland’s staff during the past 2 years. Two employees have been robbed on the parking lot, the cafeteria worker and a teaching assistant. A bullet shattered one of the music teacher’s car windows during the school day. License plate tags have been stolen from 3 different cars. So, the removal of safety officers from the elementary schools has affected the school environment.)
The last teacher to speak was Abnash Nishi Coday, a 17 year veteran from Mullanphy Investigative Learning Center. She reminded us that teachers are there early and stay late, sometimes until 9 p.m., writing up IEPs, that they are dedicated to doing what’s right. ”I am frugal”, she said. “ At this point, I don’t know how I am going to make it. Everything’s going up,” and she mentioned food, gas, the sewer bill, utilities, and property taxes. ” I honestly don’t know where to go and I’m too tired to get a second job.” She asked for a raise and step movement.
With a salary of $225,000 per year, Dr. Adams is well insulated from the difficulties the teachers face trying to live on their salaries. It should be noted that he was not given a raise to his base salary when his contract was renewed last February.
Just before the end of the meeting, the SAB voted unanimously to approve the policy statement. The vote was not listed on the meeting’s consent agenda, making the decision to vote a hasty one.
After the SAB vote, teachers were visibly upset. Armstrong said they would hold meetings to decide how to respond, but she expected that the spirit of cooperation and collaboration that had typified the union’s relationship with the administration would suffer. Teachers might work to the letter of the contract, meaning doing nothing extra.
Because Missouri law provides for collective bargaining for public employees, there was hope expressed by some union members that they would be able to get the administration back to the negotiating table even though the three-year contract had been approved. While under negotiations both parties are restricted from discussing the terms of the contract being negotiated; so union spokespeople were reluctant to discuss the sticking points. It was learned that although some teachers were upset by the meager 2% raise, the disagreement was not so much over money as over the wording dealing with medical insurance benefits. The previous policy statement had used the term “shall provide” when discussing medical insurance. The newly approved one replaced that wording with “may provide”, which could mean that the administration was reserving the right to stop paying for medical insurance at any time during the life of the contract.
Of course, the SAB, who are not accountable to anyone, can do as they please. They don’t have to worry about the wrath of voters who could replace them with board members sympathetic to the genuine needs of teachers and staff. They can make decisions, which increase the stressful work environment in district schools, without consequence to themselves.
25 members of Occupy St. Louis greeted teachers as they left the meeting with chants of “We Support Our Teachers” and applause. A contingent from 420 participated in the October 14 Occupy St. Louis and Jobs for Justice march downtown.
Not the Usual Song and Dance
Given that there are only three members of the SAB which governs the SLPS, the way they conduct business if fairly routine. Seldom do they deviate from it. The usual choreography, or orchestration, is for CEO, President and Chairman Rick Sullivan to ask for a motion, to pass the consent agenda, for instance, to which Vice President Melanie Adams responds, “So moved.” Member Richard Gaines then seconds the motion.
But, something out of the ordinary happened at the October 11 meeting. After the routine vote to approve consent agenda items, Sullivan said, “I have one additional motion. The motion is to approve the 2011-2014 policy statement for the AFT Local 420, the teachers, secretaries, clerical and para-professional employees… This labor (agreement) also includes a 2 % salary increase. I’m making a request for a motion to approve that resolution.”
His request was followed by a prolonged silence. As the silence persisted. Sullivan looked at Adams but, she remained mute. Finally, silently, she shook her head from side to side, signaling that she would not fulfill her usual role as motion maker.
Gaines then filled in with, ”So Moved.” The motion was not seconded.
Sullivan then asked for, “Comments” and “Discussion.” Hearing no questions or comments the vote was called and the three members of the SAB voted to approve the motion 3-0.
Afterward, some shocked union members speculated hopefully that the vote was illegal because the motion had not been seconded. In accordance with standard practice, if a motion is not seconded, it would normally not be discussed or voted on.
The SAB conducts its meetings in accordance with Roberts’ Rules of Order, which are based on the procedures which govern the British Parliament. This reporter consulted a handy copy.
“As a general rule,…every motion should be seconded. This is to prevent time being consumed in considering a question that only one person favors,…Where the chair is certain the motion meets with general favor, and yet members are slow about seconding it, he may proceed without waiting for a second. Yet anyone may make a point of order that the motion has not been seconded, and then the chair is obliged to proceed formally and call for a second.” (Robert’s Rules Of Order Revised, 1915, p.36)
This being the SAB, and there being only three of them, requiring agreement between only two people to pass a motion, there is seldom mystery regarding the outcomes of votes. So, apparently, seconds are unnecessary.
There was also grumbling about the resolution to approve the contract not being on the consent agenda. When the board of education ran the district, they always set the consent agenda at a public administrative meeting held one week prior to their business meeting. They did this so members could receive all materials concerning the items to be considered at least 5 days prior to having to vote to give them adequate time for review. If items were added after the 5 day period, the board president and superintendent could postpone a vote. If a matter was deemed to be an emergency item requiring a expeditious vote, a motion would be made to add the item to the evening’s agenda for a vote. This was done to prevent something being rushed through without giving members adequate time to study and think about what they were voting on.
For whatever reason, and even though Ms. Adams did not want to make the motion, the other two SAB members were ready to vote and pass the contract on the 11th.
SAB members have been vocal in their criticism of the elected Board of Education. SAB members have called it dysfunctional. Richard Gaines remarked that the board had “run amok” at a recent meeting.
No deliberative body is without its critics. As far as the SAB is concerned, criticism could be levied about the unnecessary alacrity with which they pushed through a controversial vote.
Since Missouri state law gives public employees the right to collective bargaining, it is unusual for a governing body to impose a labor agreement. During the negotiations three years ago for the prior policy statement, the union rejected the last best offer and the administration came back with another offer which was acceptable. As a consequence, the hard ball response this year came as a shock. Hope was expressed that the administration would return to the negotiating table even after the SAB’s vote to approve but there is no incentive for them to do so. At this point in time, the situation is unresolved.
Custodians Back In-House
After 8 years of being outsourced, SLPS custodians are being brought back in house. Unfortunately for them, they are being brought back in for the same reason they were outsourced, to save money. Where they were being paid $18/hour for 12 months of work, they will now be paid $14/hour for only 11 months of work, effectively cutting their pay from approximately $37,000/year to about $26,000. The over the summer thorough cleaning they used to do will still be outsourced.
They were forced to reapply for their jobs, but there are 34 fewer positions and they are not being credited towards their pensions for the years they worked for Sodexho and Aramark. Instead of having a head custodian at every building, there will only be 16 head custodians throughout the district. In the buildings without head custodians, their supervision will likely become an additional burden for the building principal. There may only be 2 custodians assigned to schools which had 3 and their shifts may not coincide. There may be only one in the building during school and one working after school.
So, if you notice that your school is not as clean as it used to be, understand that there may not be enough staff to keep it clean and that morale among the custodians is at an all-time low. Grounds works will still be outsourced, though.
There was a time when being a custodian in the SLPS meant earning enough to support a family. That no longer appears to be the case. Consistent with the contract recently imposed on teachers, secretaries, clerical and para-professional employees, the quality of life for SLPS employees is eroding. This will impact the atmosphere in our schools and the quality of education the children receive.
City voters have typically been generous to the SLPS, voting to pass every bond issue put to them in recent years. Were citizens given a say in these decisions to squeeze district employees, it is questionable as to whether the community would support them.
Given the impetus to improve academic achievement, in order to regain accreditation, one wonders how the administration proposes to makes those gains with a stressed and aggravated work force.
Film Screening and Discussion of:
The Inconvenient Truth Behind Waiting for Superman
When: Sunday Nov. 6 at 3:00p.m.
Where: Gya Community Gallery ( 2700 Locust Ave., St. Louis )
Details: Please join us for a film screening and discussion of “The Inconvenient Truth Behind Waiting for Superman. This documentary points out what the movie “Waiting for Superman” does not- the complexity of issues surrounding educational reform. The Inconvenient Truth Behind Waiting for Superman showcases the perspectives of teachers engaged in the life of public schools and what is needed to provide quality education. This film includes the evidence that its predecessor leaves out- the number of failing charter schools, how charter schools exclude students, how charter schools are at the center of the efforts to privatize public education- and many other inconvenient truths. Join us for this event where we will watch and discuss the film and plan future actions.
This film was made by New York city teachers. It is the antidote to “WaitingFor Superman”and should be seen by everyone concerned about public schools. The film includes interviews with parents. If you cannot make the showing, the Watch has copies it will lend. Contact us at sls_watch@yahoo.comIt’s That Time Again The Watch Advisory committee has informed the editor that it is time to remind our readership to renew their subscriptions. Ideally, all of you would use the coupons at the bottom of each issue to renew your subscription annually without being asked. However, not enough of our readers do that. So, if you have not sent us a check for $12 during the past year, please do so now. Although our expenses are kept to a minimum, there are production related expenses associated with the Watch. Thanks.
Calendar
November 15,Tuesday, irregular bi-monthly SAB meeting, 6 p.m., 801 North 11th Street, room 108
November 15,Tuesday, regular monthly Board of Education meeting, 7 p.m., Carr Lane VPA Middle School, 1004 North Jefferson, enter from parking lot
Please note, The Schools Watch has a new mailing address, P.O. Box 1983, St. Louis, MO 63118. Our email address continues to be SLS_Watch@yahoo.com
