 |
| State & Local Education News |
Anne Holton frames governor's education agenda as making up for recession-era austerity
The Roanoke Times
February 24, 2016
There’s been more talk about funding K-12 and higher education during this legislative session than any since the recession began, something the state’s top education official says is long overdue.
The budget proposed by Gov. Terry McAuliffe sets aside money for districts to hire 2,500 new teachers and includes more than $1 billion in new education spending. House and Senate budgets, unveiled over the last weekend, call for even greater education funding.
Anne Holton, the state’s education secretary, said the education roundtables she and the governor held around the state, including one in Roanoke, emphasized the need to increase state financial support for education. Everyone, she said, has had to “do more with less.”
In Virginia classrooms, should parents block sexually explicit literature for their kids?
The Washington Post
February 25, 2016
Lawmakers in Virginia moved forward Thursday with legislation that could make it the first state in the country to allow parents to block their children from reading books in school that contain sexually explicit material.
The bill would require K-12 teachers to identify classroom materials with “sexually explicit content” and notify parents, who would have the right to “opt out” their children and request that the teacher give them something less objectionable to study.
Opponents call it a slippery slope toward book banning; advocates say it is a parent’s right to control their children’s exposure, even if the books are considered classics.
It all started with Laura Murphy, a Fairfax County woman who said she was horrified to discover that one of her sons, a high school senior, had been assigned to read the 1988 Pulitzer Prize-winning novel “Beloved.”
Virginia Beach middle and high school students turn trash into fashion
The Virginian-Pilot
February 27, 2016
You probably wouldn’t expect a copy of The Virginian-Pilot to end up on a runway.
But that’s exactly what happened Saturday at Lynnhaven Mall. A few dozen middle and high school students used materials such as newspapers, bottle caps, plastic bags and other trash to make fashionable outfits. Actually, it’s called “trashion.”
For the third year, Lynnhaven River Now, a group dedicated to protecting its namesake river, partnered with Virginia Beach City Public Schools and other community groups to show how garbage can be repurposed and recycled – in this case, as clothing. It was the first time middle school students were part of the fun, and they got to have their own “trashion show.”
The students made dresses, skirts, tops, handbags and hats out of materials rescued from trash cans and recycling bins. They then modeled them on the runway Saturday.
State education department announces Va. ranks 6th in nation for AP achievement
The News & Advance
February 24, 2016
The state Department of Education announced Wednesday that 2015 graduating seniors in Virginia ranked sixth in the nation for Advanced Placement achievement, with 29.8 percent earning a score of three or higher on at least one Advanced Placement exam. This also was higher than the national average of 22.4 percent. Maryland had the top scoring seniors in the country, at 31.7 percent.
The 10 most popular AP courses among Virginia’s 2015 graduating seniors were, in descending order: U.S. History, followed by English Language and Composition, U.S. Government and Politics, English Literature and Composition, Psychology, World History, Calculus AB, Statistics, Biology and Environmental Science.
|
National & Federal Education News
|
Transitioning to the Every
Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) - Frequently Asked Questions
U.S. Dept. of Education
February 26, 2016
On December 10, 2015, President Obama signed the bipartisan Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). The ESSA builds upon the critical work States and local educational agencies (LEAs) have implemented over the last few years. The reauthorized law prioritizes excellence and equity for our students and supports great educators.
The Secretary is offering guidance on transitioning from the ESEA, as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) to the ESEA, as amended by the ESSA, including actions the U.S. Department of Education (ED) has taken or will take consistent with its authority under section 4(b)
of NCLB to the ESSA to support States, LEAs, and schools in this transition. ED has prepared these frequently asked questions (FAQs) to support States and LEAs in understanding expectations during the transition to full implementation of the ESSA.
John King Gets Collegial Confirmation Hearing as Ed. Secretary Nominee
Education Week
February 25, 2016
Acting U.S. Secretary of Education John B. King Jr., got a partisan-fireworks-free confirmation hearing from the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Thursday, including a series of collegial questions focused on how he will implement the brand-new Every Student Succeeds Act.
For his part, King told lawmakers that, as a former classroom teacher, charter school operator, and state education chief, he recognizes that "the best ideas come from classrooms not from conference rooms." In this new ESSA era, he said, "the locus of decisionmaking around the most appropriate supports, interventions, and rewards in our schools is rightly shifting back to states and districts—and away from the one-size-fits-all mandates of No Child Left Behind," which preceded ESSA.
At the same time, though, King sees a key and continued role for the federal government in ensuring that ESSA—the latest version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act—builds on the civil rights legacy of the 1965 law.
By the time King's predecessor, Arne Duncan, left office, he had a pretty strained relationship with Republicans—and some Democrats—on Capitol Hill.
But Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., the chairman of the panel, kicked off King's confirmation hearing on a friendly note.
Gov. Rick Snyder will end weeks of speculation today by bringing bankruptcy Judge Steven Rhodes out of retirement to run the Detroit Public Schools on behalf of the state.
And while Rhodes will not be called an emergency manager — the new title is transition manager — a spokesman for the governor said he will handle most, if not all, of the duties previously assigned to Darnell Earley, the emergency manager whose resignation becomes effective today.
“The transition manager would fulfill the role of emergency manager under the laws,” Snyder’s new spokesman, Ari Adler, said. “But Judge Rhodes is anticipating his tenure ending on July 1 under the current legislation.”
At that time, the governor expects an appointed school board to take over DPS and keep the schools running until a board elected in November can take over Jan. 1.
|
|
|
Are virtual schools coming to Virginia in a big way?
As our latest
General Assembly Update points out, this past week the budget committee on the House side of the General Assembly approved a plan that proposes $1.6 million for the Virtual Virginia program, an effort to develop an option for students to attend all classes online. The funding would allow the program to expand from 90 to 200 students.
The use of online or virtual school options is a newer frontier in education but Virginia is certainly not the only state experimenting with virtual schooling initiatives. If anything, it is lagging such states as neighboring North Carolina. As demonstrated in the chart below (posted by
Keeping Pace with K12 Digital Learning), numerous states have some level of virtual school, with North Carolina and Florida leading in terms of the number of students enrolled at least part-time via that option. (Virtual Virginia is a full-time enrollment option. A significant number of Virginians already make use of online schooling options on a part-time basis.)
The potential expansion of the Virtual Virginia program potentially has a greater impact on traditional education systems because it is a full-time enrollment option, essentially replacing attendance at a brick and mortar school for the enrolled students and transferring state funds from the school district where they would be enrolled to the Virtual school. Because this could mark a significant shift over the long-term in the way education is provided, we thought we'd revisit some of our polling on this issue and recap the legislation that authorized the creation of the Virtual Virginia school.
In the 2015 General Assembly session the passage of
HB 324 established the Board of the Virginia Virtual School as a policy agency in the executive branch of state government for the purpose of governing the online educational programs and services offered to students enrolled in the Virginia Virtual School. That bill will only take effect on July 1, 2016 if it again passes in the current legislative session (the relevant legislation this time around is
HB 8, which passed the House and has been reported by Senate Ed and Health to the Finance committee.)
One factor in assessing how quickly a virtual school system could grow in Virginia is the financial support available. Certainly $1.6 million is substantial money, but also a very small amount when set beside an overall K-12 budget that is likely to top $6.5 billion in the coming fiscal year. (House and Senate versions of the budget currently provide $6.6 and $6.58 billion respectively.) Given the limited funding, virtual schooling is unlikely to grow by leaps and bounds. However the provision that state funds for enrolled students follow them to the Virtual School means that over a period of time, significant growth might take place without requiring the state to appropriate more overall funds. This may be one of the reasons a substantial minority of delegates (40) voted against HB 8 when it cleared the House.
Another factor, though, is demand for a fully online program of study. Again this year we asked a representative sample of Virginians if they would be willing to have their own child earn all, some or none of their high school credits online. Only 8% would be supportive of their child's entire high school education coming via online methods while 57% were okay with some credits being earned that way. Support for full online study was slightly higher among minorities, though a higher percentage of minority respondents also said that no credits should be earned online.
 |
|
What this may mean is that the growth of any full-time on-line school like Virtual Virginia will have growth that is limited to the portion of the population willing to have all their child's education happen online. The quality of the early educational product may then play a key role in whether more parents over time see a completely online education as being acceptable.
(To read the full results of any of our Education Polls, visit our
website. In the 2016 poll, the question discussed above is 11. Crosstabs for Q11 are on page 52.)
This week, be sure to also check out the
excerpt of Dr. Vacca's most recent Education Law Newsletter, which focuses on age discrimination in educational settings.
We hope you have a great week!
Sincerely,
CEPI
|
General Assembly Update - Week 6
Excerpted from CEPI's
General Assembly Update, written by Policy Analyst David Blount. The update will be published weekly during the General Assembly session.
"State Budget Changes for K-12 Education
The House budget plan provides a total of $6.6 billion in FY17 and $6.89 billion in FY18 for K-12 education; the Senate budget targets $6.58 billion in FY17 and $6.84 billion in FY18 to public education. Both plans largely fund the biennial re-benchmarking of state costs for K-12 education.
Following are highlights of key changes to the introduced budget that are proposed by the House and Senate:
- Concerning teacher salaries, the House proposes funding for the state share of a 2% salary increase for SOQ-funded instructional and support positions, effective July 10, 2017, with an allowance for school divisions to count local salary increases given in FY17 toward FY18 state match requirements. The Senate plan proposes the state share of a 2% increase for teachers, effective December 1, 2016. The increases are contingent on sufficient state revenues being available.
- The House plan re-establishes a previous General Assembly policy from the last decade of distributing part of the Lottery Proceeds on a per pupil amount. Under this plan, $272.7 million will flow back to school divisions over the biennium from the Lottery Proceeds Fund, requiring maintenance of effort but not a local match. This amount comes largely from repurposing proposed funding for hiring additional teachers, increasing the at-risk add on range and changing the Governor’s school formula. Up to one-half of the allocation can be used on any recurring expenses and at least half must be used on non-recurring expenses (capital, equipment, and maintenance). Meanwhile, the Senate provides a total of $120.6 million in FY18 for flexible “Additional Support for Classroom Needs,” without any mandate to hire new, on-going positions or to provide a local match. First, $96.4 million is provided for use at the school level as flexible, additional support for classroom needs; no less than half of this amount shall be used for non-recurring expenses. Second, an additional $24.2 million is provided as one-time funding for similar needs.
- Both plans go along with the governor’s proposal to use $55 million to advance the Virginia Retirement System (VRS) scheduled contribution rates to 100% of the VRS Board-approved rates for teacher retirement. Employer contribution rates under the plans would be 14.66% in FY17 and 16.32% in FY18.
- Both budgets retain the proposed reduction in Virginia Preschool Initiative (VPI) funding of $48.8 million over the biennium to recover unclaimed funds from nonparticipating divisions; however, the Senate adds back $2.9 million per year to increase the per pupil amount from $6,000 to $6,250. The House includes $3 million for a new pilot program to incentivize additional public-private partnerships in preschool services, while $1.6 million would be used to develop and operate a scholarship grant program at community colleges to increase skills of the early education workforce. The House also would allow up to 15% of VPI slots to be filled based on locally-defined eligibility criteria for at-risk four-old-years.
- The House also eliminates a $49.7 million proposed increase for at-risk programs, while the Senate plan retains just about $13 million of the proposed hike.
- The House plan backs the introduced budget’s proposal to target $40.6 million in FY18 for the Cost of Competing Adjustment for support positions in primarily Northern Virginia localities, while the Senate endorses $16 million each year for cost of competing.
(To read the full update, visit our
website.)
|
|
Age Discrimination and Employment: Policy Implications
Excerpted from from Dr. Vacca's
February 2016 Education Law Newsletter.
Seventh Circuit Court’s Analysis and Decision.
Argued on February 3, 2016, the sole issue before the Seventh Circuit Court was whether the district court properly granted summary judgment to the Board on the claim of age discrimination. Reviewing the district court’s decision de novo, and viewing the facts and all reasonable inferences drawn from these facts in the light most favorable to the appellant, the Court reiterated the principle that summary judgment is appropriate where “no issue of material fact” is present. Moreover, said the Court, “the mere existence of some alleged factual dispute” will not defeat summary judgment.” Citing past Seventh Circuit decisions the Court made it clear that to void summary judgment: (1) evidence supporting a factual assertion must represent “admissible evidence;” (2) conclusory statements, not grounded in specific facts, are not sufficient; and (3) concrete facts and not bald assertion of a general truth, but specific concrete facts are required. Also, said the Court, a review of the lower court’s evidentiary ruling striking certain factual allegations is conducted “under a differential abuse of discretion standard.”
The Seventh Circuit Court clarified that the ADEA prohibits an employer from “discriminating against any individual…because on such individual’s age.” (29 U.S.C. 623(a)(1)) However, said the Court, in this case because Bordelon “has not sued the entity responsible for not renewing his contract—the Council,” he must point to evidence upon which a trier of fact could conclude that Coates: (1) harbored discriminatory animus based on his age, and (2) gave the Council information that influenced its decision not to renew his contract. Because Bordelon chose to proceed under a direct method of proof rather than an indirect method of proof, he must point to admissible evidence, whether direct or circumstantial, of Coates’ “discriminatory motivation based on age.” The Seventh Circuit Court lists four types of circumstantial evidence of intentional discrimination it has recognized and these are: (1) suspicious timing; (2) ambiguous statements or behavior towards other employees in the protected class; (3) evidence, statistical or otherwise, that other similarly situated employees outside the protected class systematically receive better treatment; and (4) evidence that the employer offered a pretextual reason for an adverse employment action.
The Court examined the evidence admitted by the district court and on appeal. Here Bordelon relied on several pieces of circumstantial evidence such as Coats’ statements and comments at Council meetings and to members (including their testimony), and to Sander’s (Coates’ former executive assistant) and to an assistant principal, concerning “negative remarks made about older principals and workers.” Also, the mere fact that the names of two older principals appeared on a list tied to under performing schools did not support an “inference of age discrimination” by Coates. Since most principals in Area 15 were older and Sanders subsequently had testified that she was replaced with someone who could do a better job, an inference of intentional discrimination could not be drawn.
Regarding evidence excluded by or not raised in front of the district court, Bordelon did not argue on appeal that the district court abused its discretion. However, said the Seventh Circuit, even assuming, arguendo, that he had not waived any argument about the exclusion being improper, the evidence still would not show that the district court abused its discretion, nor does it give rise to an inference of discriminatory motivation sufficient to withstand summary judgment. In rationalizing this position the Court, citing Seventh Circuit decisions on point, provides a comprehensive discussion of hearsay evidence and exclusions from hearsay—including statements made by employees within the scope of their employment relationship.
Finally, the Court was convinced that Bordelon did not show that Coates influenced (i.e., manipulated and exercised undue influence on) the Council’s decision to non-renew his contract. Substantial evidence in the record, said the Court, demonstrated that the Council had independent reasons for choosing not to renew Bordelon’s contract.
Decision: Judgment of the district court is affirmed. The district court properly granted the Board’s motion for summary judgment.
Policy Implications
For public school officials and administrators the value and policy implications of Bordelon v. Board of Education of the City of Chicago (7th Cir. 2016) are found in the Seventh Circuit’s analysis and reasoning. The Court offers an excellent example of the judicial analysis consistently applied by federal courts in employment discrimination cases post- Griggs v. Duke Power Company (1971), where the “but for factor” element (i.e., allegation of pretext) is the focus. More specifically, in placing a burden on an employee to demonstrate, by direct evidence, an employer’s discriminatory intent, and on an employer to demonstrate reliance on job-related decision making criteria, fairness and balance are achieved.
What follow are implications for local school system policy gleaned from the Seventh Circuit’s decision. Generally stated these are that school board policy must make it clear that:
- The personnel evaluation process is intended to improve employee job performance and in doing so enhance employee development and improve access to educational opportunities for all students in the school system.
- Board expectations for employee on-the-job performance are made clear to all employees.
- Personnel decisions are based on valid and reliable job-related criteria.
- Methods and procedures used to evaluate employees are directly related to and measure on-the-job effectiveness.
- Results of employee evaluations are shared with employees in a timely manner.
|
|
