Showing posts with label school boards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label school boards. Show all posts

Saturday

Atlanta Public Schools (under new leadership) Sues for a Clear Title to Old Schools

Just made public today (but apparently filed at the end of March 2015), Atlanta Public Schools is requesting that the courts declare the legal titles for four elementary schools are clear -- so that APS can sell the old properties (not in current use), recoup the monies, and go on about the business of cleaning up the mess it made better educating children.  At the heart of this lawsuit is a dispute of words and public relations between APS and the City of Atlanta, namely the Mayor of Atlanta. 

Read more about APS's efforts to move forward and the horsetrading the Mayor has attempted to stall APS plans:

http://clatl.com/freshloaf/archives/2015/05/01/aps-files-lawsuit-to-gain-full-control-of-four-vacant-school-deeds

Here are some quotes for context:

Mayor Kasim Reed earlier this year said several vacant schools remain part of the ongoing negotiations in the APS-Atlanta Beltline funding dispute. But APS Superintendent Meria Carstarphen disagreed, saying the deeds weren't part of those discussions. Reed responded to her remarks saying that the superintendent "doesn't know what she's talking about" regarding the dispute, which still remains unresolved.

According to the March 26 filing, which seeks to "establish title against all the world," the city should have transferred over all contracts, orders, leases, and bonds to the Atlanta Board of Education as part of the city's charter adopted in 1973. That shift in responsibility also should have included the ownership of all properties the city had acquired to provide a public education to Atlanta children when it oversaw the school system. Since that time, the lawsuit says, the city's education board has paid millions in costs associated with the upkeep of those four vacant schools.

Wednesday

Debriefing the 2013 Atlanta-Fulton Co. Election results


  • one of my favored city councilpersons no longer has a seat (pretty bummed about that),
  • a new member of the school board will be representing "me" (though was completely unimpressive/uninspiring when we spoke one-on-one),
  • the mayor is still the mayor (silver lining), 
  • municipal judges running unopposed (hmmmm.....), 
  • FOUR former TFA'ers are now on the APS school board (#onedayall)
  • turnout for my polling place was below 15%--shesh.
Full results can be found here: http://www.fultoncountyga.gov/county/election/results/ 

Tuesday

DeKalb County Schools (Atlanta) -- Over 400 Applicants down to about One Dozen

When the State School Board decided that six members of the DeKalb County School Board (Atlanta, Ga) would lose their seats due to mismanagement, over 400 applications were received to fill those positions.  I wrote about it here and here.

News just in today?  A special committee tasked to recommend candidates to fill those seats should widdle that list down by the end of the day to about one dozen, or 2 for each seat, to be presented to the Governor.  Here's the article from the local WSBtv affiliate.

Monday

DeKalb County School Board Members OUT -- Governor Removes 'Em

Governor Nathan Deal of Georgia removed members of the DeKalb County School Board last week.  The news went national: Huffington Post.  I wrote about my thoughts in several previous posts: Another Atlanta district is on suspension -- UGH!

My thoughts haven't much changed-- it's an embarrassment.

According to Georgia news, Georgia governors have done this often.
The state's last three governors—Roy Barnes, Sonny Perdue and now Deal—have suspended or removed from office members of local boards of education in Spalding, Clayton, Warren and Miller counties when those districts' accreditation was threatened, in part, by dysfunctional behavior on the part of their boards. -- The Daily Report.

 Further, supposedly more than 400 people have applied to fill the school board vacancies. 

Another Atlanta district is on suspension -- UGH!

A few years ago in 2008, the  Southern Association of Colleges and Schools ("SACS") pulled the accreditation of a metro Atlanta school district, Clayton County.  (I wrote about the governance problems in an a co-authored article, "Getting on Board:  How to Make School Districts Represent Students.") Today, it put that same district on "notice" that it still faced major problems with governance. See here.

AND


To add to the community's frustration, another metro Atlanta school district -- neighboring DeKalb County-- has been put on probation.  Yep.  As of today, the school board of DeKalb earned the district a disgraceful mark because of its financial mismanagement.

And, who can forget the Atlanta Public Schools cheating scandal -- a topic which has consumed many of my posts.

That makes 3 districts of the 6 school systems that many would say form the heart of Atlanta (i.e. Fulton Co, DeKalb Co., Clayton Co., Cobb Co., Gwinnett Co. Atlanta Public Schools).

Clayton County
Atlanta Public Schools
DeKalb County


Begs the question:  what the hell is going on?

Thursday

Not Voting on Superintendent Davis's Contract Matters

The Atlanta school board is refusing to vote on whether Superintendent Davis' contract will be renewed.

Here's why it matters:

Superintendent Davis and former-Superintendent Hall were brought in during similar public expectations.  Both Dr. Hall and Mr. Davis were asked to improve APS from the low status many perceived it to have. However, as a necessity, much of Superintendent Davis’s initial efforts have been in direct response to shortcoming of the immediate past administration under Superintendent Hall.  Namely, the previous administration had ambitious plans for success without realistic corrections for failure. The Hall administration accepted the positive trends in ways that the Davis administration is now scrutinizing. Where Superintendent Hall put in place initiatives to spur educators to reach the height of performance, Superintendent Davis is enacting initiatives to discourage educators from dipping below performance expectations. Namely, Mr. Davis addressed five areas immediately upon assuming full superintendent responsibilities: (1) combating cheating, (2) rehabilitating the district, (3) restoring students, (4) employing administrative leave, and (5) applying relevant professional, employment, and criminal penalties. These strategies are likely considered to be sound approaches for managing education systems in the context of responding to crisis, but alone they are not likely to transform the district from operating as it had under Superintendent Hall.
          ...
[Superintendent Davis took] positive steps by cleaning up the environments that incentivized cheating behavior in the first place, and he is consulting with experts to put in place professionally sound organizational strategies. What is concerning, though, is that many thought that Superintendent Hall was doing similar things at the time she was managing the district—borrowing reforms and initiatives that the education community thought were effective.  After speaking with former APS employees [during my thesis research], there may be reason to believe that simply changing superintendents and tightening administrative policies may not on their own lead to sustainable solutions. Said more strongly, it is unclear that these new policies will actually result in environments where educators and decision-makers will actually be able to police their own environments.

--excerpted from my Master's Thesis, CRITICAL INCIDENTS IN EDUCATION:
USING REFLECTIVE PRACTICE TO CREATE SUSTAINABLE SOLUTIONS AFTER A SCHOOL DISTRICT CHEATING SCANDAL

So what am I trying to say?

I'm trying to say that Superintendent Davis may have been just what the doctor ordered to restore order in Atlanta Public Schools.  However, it is doubtful that he is what is needed to push APS to become a district that thrives on its own successes and evaluates its own shortcomings.  For all his well-deserved praise and accomplishments (seriously, no sarcasm), it's fair to say that Superintendent Davis never expected himself to be APS's long-term superintendent.

Nor should we.

But that doesn't mean that his contract must end THIS year.  There is a strong case for keeping him on long enough so that the search for a new APS superintendent isn't rushed.  Renewing Superintendent Davis' contract for another year may provide an opportunity for a meaningful administrative transition and introduction of the new leader to Atlanta's community.  It may signal a maturity and stability that APS has lacked.

You see, APS does not just need someone to stop the bleeding and prescribe the medicine-- APS needs a long-term caretaker.  Someone who helps the district regain its strength and envision new opportunities.  And, most importantly, APS needs new administration’s policies grounded in an APS specific context.

So, am I for or against Davis?

Because I am interested in the long-term stability and PROSPERITY of Atlanta Public Schools, I must be for Superintendent Davis -- he had undeniably done GOOD for the district.  I am ALSO for a predecessor to take the reigns, after an appropriate transition, and build upon the stability Davis has brought.

Anyone know any names of potential candidates that have come up in the superintendent search?

Wednesday

Voters in Georgia Passed the Charter Schools Amendment, and then the Hype was Gone

Voters in Georgia Passed the Charter Schools Amendment, and then the Hype was Gone

One of the initiatives on the voting ballot this November was a proposed Amendment to the Constitution of the State of Georgia.  The Amendment, aptly named the "Charter Schools Amendment," read as follows:

 - 1 - 
Provides for improving student achievement and parental involvement through more public charter school options.

"Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended to allow state or local approval of public charter schools upon the request of local communities?"



Of course, many complained about indirect and ambiguous language.  Aside from the obvious critique that "improving student achievement and parental involvement" is being directly linked to "public charter options" (I've seen the research-- in some cases this assertion is true and in others it is not so accurate), the language also fails to distinguish the new addition to the Georgia Constitution-- that the state (or a state board of representatives) would be authorized to approve public charter schools separate from (or perhaps in an appellate capacity) local approval processes.  Now, the state authority to approve charter schools that would operate in local districts is what all the hoopla was about.  So, let's cut to that.

Georgia voters approved the Amendment with results of approximately 58% to 42% (or 58.5% to 41.5% depending on who you consult).


Those that Vote "Nay"
National education voices, like that of Diane Ravich suggested that the measure would ultimately "gut local control."

Other local, Metro-Atlanta columnists agreed that a NO vote on the Charter Amendment was deserved for at least 10 reasons.  See also this article on the 8 Myths of the Proposed Charter Amendment.  Persuasively for some, even the editorial board of the major state newspaper published a piece urging a NO vote.

Those that Vote "Yay"
The Vice President of the Georgia Charter Schools Association had this to say.  Further, there were even reports that President Obama supposedly supported the Amendment (which would fall in line with the President's education "Blueprint" plan (old and new) that has been a mantle piece for some time).

And the Rest...
Still other journalists tried to distill the issues for voters.  Even in my hometown of Athens, Georgia, which I lovingly remember as having an activist/involved education population, there were open forums and discussions on both sides of the issue.

More than Just Georgia
According to the New York Times, here's more on the political breakdown:
  • "Alice Walton, the daughter of Walmart’s founder, Sam Walton, has contributed to campaigns supporting the measure"
  • "several companies that manage charter schools, including K12 Inc., Charter Schools USA and National Heritage Academies" supported
  • "committees supporting the ballot measure have collected 15 times as much as groups opposing the measure, according to public filings."
 A Mixed Bag
Many tried to cast Amendment 1 as a partisan issue, but I believe it is a bit more complicated than attaching an "R" or "D" label.  (I acknowledge that Republicans were supposedly responsible for the language of the Amendment.).  Evidence shows that some Democrats joined Republicans in support of the Amendment.
"conservatives who typically champion decentralized government are giving the amendment full-throated support. Meanwhile, some Tea Party members have joined Democratic legislators, including State Senators Jason Carter and Vincent D. Fort, in opposing the measure. The state’s school superintendent, John D. Barge, a Republican, has come out against it as well." (NYT)
Further, as the creation of Democrats for Education Reform attests, the policies of U.S. education splice creed, regionalism, and background.  I could continue with the examples, but I think you get the point.


So what's my point?
Well, my point is that there was all this political speech-- ads for a YES vote, ads for a NO vote all over the airwaves on this issue.  Even among my friends, there were chatty talks about "the future of public education in Georgia."  But now?  Radio silence.  I hear not one chirp, besides the articles that I am digging up for this blog post, about what the passage of the Amendment means for Georgia charter schools-- and Georgia schools more broadly.

And, I would like to hear more.  I'll keep you tuned.


Monday

Sign Me Up! (or) Say What?

Another Monday morning where the dirth of good, juicy education policy news is rather annoying.  Being is Washington it seems that the buzz definitely quiets when Congress is on recess.  Meanwhile, the education policy pundits, wonks, and peddlers are gnawing on speculation and media leftovers.  So, thought I'd humor you with my innermost thoughts when it comes to this stuff. 

When it comes to education policy headlines, I find that I am in one of these two camps. 

Either I am willing to immediately jump on board -- no elaboration needed, "sign me up," I'm down --







 or

I put the skids on by seeking much more confirmation -- run that by me again, "say what?"















What are your reactions?  I'm sure you are not nearly as binomial as I.



Image source pages for the cat and baby.

Tuesday

“Local Control” should not be an obscenity [Reading Response]



The federal role illuminates how the very structure of education hails the national expert over the local novice (and the philosopher-king/reformer over the mass-elected schoolboard member). Similarly, the increased federal role in education, from historical social injustice and disenfranchisement, appeals to our moral notions of guarding the rights of individuals over notions that local control of education breeds tyranny of the majority at the expense of the underrepresented. The top-down, federal-over-state approach becomes synonymous to a government as expert model—or, in a slight alternative, to a national-research-applied-to-communities approach. National education research and the concentration of policy experts in the federal government may justify decisions on educational institutional design or even (gasp) national standards and assessments—but the government as expert model should not apply to everything. Orfield and Lee discussed the fallacy of“using exceptions to the rule to prove a relationship” and I easily see how successful exceptions that have achieved amazing educational outcomes become the expert sources for how to “get it right” in education.

 
I recognize the benefit that a large sample size of educational practices can extract meaningful lessons which can be applied in concentrated areas, but I push-back on our ability to prescribe too far from the ivy tower and capitol hill. What is good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander—even when they are of the same race or background (a notion that is not new to practitioners). If anything, I agree with Cohen and Moffit’s assessment that “the success of innovative policies and program depends… on whether practitioners and others in the environment posses or can improve capability” (p. 15). Our educational research has lead us to become more precise at determining the true causes of the educational outcomes we observe, but as to the ability to generalize findings to other places, I argue that we have a ways to go to make our findings externally valid. Local control over the administration and operations of education ought remain in local hands (CEO/Superintendent), and accountability and decisionmaking for schools ought devolve rightfully to schoolboards and principals. Localities are experts on its people. And until our local communities of control get better at producing the results we desire, we should empower them with experimental options (like participatory governance of Fung) and incentive support systems rather than dishearten them with low expectations that they are unable to solve their own problems. Some will say trusting locals is what got us here in the first place, but because sunlight is the best disinfectant, I think pointing out shortcomings is the easy part—finding ways to build capacity is the solutions part that will better us all.