 |
Articles of Interest
|
|
U.S. District Judge Robert E. Payne’s order says the lawsuit contains vague allegations. The order says it’s almost impossible to ascertain what type of claim is asserted against which party.
The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports that attorney Charlotte P. Hodges filed the lawsuit on behalf of 20 families. The complaint alleged systematic discrimination against black and disabled students. It also alleged specific incidents of discrimination.
The lawsuit named 35 defendants, including the Virginia Department of Education, public school divisions in Henrico, Chesterfield, Essex and Nottoway counties, and individual teachers.
Hodges says the judge rejected the case for how it was filed, not on the claims that were made.
Va. education officials: Graduation rate increases
WFIR News Talk Radio
September 24, 2014
Virginia education officials say about 90 percent of students who entered high school in the fall of 2010 earned a diploma within four years. And for the first time since the state increased graduation requirements, more than half of the graduates received an Advanced Studies Diploma. State Superintendent of Public Instruction Steven Staples calls this a “watershed event” in Virginia’s effort to increase college and career readiness. The Department of Education says that 89.9 percent of the 94,700 students in the class of 2014 earned a diploma. That’s up from 89.1 percent the previous year and 8.6 percent in 2008. Since 2008, the dropout rate has declined from 8.7 percent to 5.4 percent. Graduation requirements were increased as part of the Standards of Learning reform.
The day care center they found near their Seattle home tops $10,000 a year. Next year, their son, now 3, can attend a Catholic preschool less than half as costly.
"It'll be nice to have enough relief next year," Prosser said. "It's just funny that the relief will be a private school."
He and his wife are among legions of middle-class families who are straining under the weight of accelerating costs for a range of essential services from day care to health care. And now a study by the Center for American Progress shows just how heavy the burden has grown: For a typical married couple with two children, the combined cost of child care, housing, health care and savings for college and retirement jumped 32 percent from 2000 to 2012 — and that's after adjusting for inflation.
Compounding the pain is that average pay for Americans is barely topping inflation.
Homeless High Schoolers Face Barriers to Education
U.S. News and World Report
September 29, 2014
Homelessness among public school students is at an all-time high, and teens without a home face unique challenges.
Some teens are homeless with their families. But others are on their own, simply trying to get through life without anyone looking out for their well-being, says Barbara Duffield, director of policy and programs at the National Association for the Education of Homeless Children and Youth.
"They are typically homeless because of a very bad situation at home, abuse or neglect," she says of unaccompanied homeless teens. On the flip side, teens who are homeless with their families may be in a parental role, taking care of younger siblings.
Of the nearly 1.26 million public school students who were homeless during the 2012-2013 school year, about 317,000 were in high school, according to data released last week from the National Center for Homeless Education.
Public schools are required under federal law to ensure homeless students have access to a free public education.
|
|
Should students hear that in the classroom?
A central Virginia board of supervisors member made news this past week when he raised concerns about high school students in Hanover County being shown a clip from the film "Thomas L. Friedman Reporting: Searching for the Roots of 9/11" in which Muslims share opinions about why America was attacked on Sept. 11, 2001. The news article paraphrased the supervisor as saying that "while he understands the value of differing opinions, he doesn't want student's exposed to anti-American sentiments."
The news report sparked an opinion from a local columnist for the Richmond Times-Dispatch arguing that school "lessons must not be censored."
The specific merits of showing the film are part of a multi-faceted debate about how to teach the events of 9/11 to a generation of children who don't have personal memories of that day. Around the 13th anniversary a number of news stories delved into the challenge that teachers encounter in Connecticut, Chicago, NY/NJ, and Texas. It is a challenge made more complex by the raw grief that surrounds any conversation about the 9/11 attacks. As Dr. Bosher noted in his NBC 12 editorial several weeks ago, even the U.S. Department of Education is reluctant to claim ownership of teaching materials related to 9/11 that were compiled by the department.
The debate in Hanover county also points to an ongoing tension in education policy between what local elected leaders would like to see taught or promoted on the one hand and what individual teachers have the freedom to teach in the classroom or say in public forums. A new poll suggests that students may be more supportive of free speech rights than adults in their communities. In short, where is the balance between local prerogative in education and freedom of speech?
This week's Compass Point shares excerpts from two different CEPI Education Law newsletters that review some of the finer legal points of freedom of speech and teachers.
We also reach far back into our poll archives for this weeks poll snapshot - a look at where "teaching about the rest of the world and the global economy of the 21st century" falls as a priority in comparison to other curriculum elements such as "teaching the basics . . . reading, writing, and mathematics.
Sincerely,
CEPI
|
Poll Snapshot: Where does teaching about the rest of the world fit into public ed priorities?
We've never polled for public opinion about how teachers should approach the teaching of the September 11th attacks on the U.S. But in 2000, before that watershed event, we asked respondents about how important a range of curriculum areas were for public schools in Virginia to teach. Among them was the area "about the rest of the world and the global economy in the 21st century."
The difference between most areas and what might be termed global awareness is striking. While almost universal majorities considered every topic "very important" or "somewhat important" the areas fell into one of three groups - one area of universal approval (i.e. 98% believed that "teaching the basics such as reading, writing and mathematics" was very important), 80-90% approval for five of the areas including good citizenship, thinking skills, basic values of honesty, etc., and approval below 60% (i.e. teaching about the rest of the world).
One takeaway from this insight is that local elected officials offering opinions on whether students should be exposed to the opinions of Muslims in other countries may be less critical to the average citizen of the commonwealth than if that same elected official chose to question whether students should be learning reading and writing. At the same time, a large majority still thought a global awareness was very important.
Another question, unanswered by our own polls, would be whether public opinion about developing a global awareness in public schools increased, decreased or stayed the same after the 9/11 attacks. At least one article written on the 5 year anniversary of 9/11 suggests that for many young people for whom 9/11 is a potent memory, there was an increased global awareness.
(To read the full results of the 2000 poll, contact us at cepi@vcu.edu.)
|
Teachers and Freedom of Speech
Excerpted from the CEPI Education Law Newsletter, written by Senior Fellow, Richard Vacca, Ed.D.
In both 2006 and 2012, Dr. Vacca revisited questions related to teachers and First Amendment rights, especially as it pertains to the ability of school systems to constrain the free speech writes of teachers who chose to speak publicly outside the classroom. He reviewed several of the basic concepts in his 2006 newsletter:
"Expression: What is it? The term expression is broad in scope. To express, states Black’s Law Dictionary, is to make something known (in words) distinctly and explicitly so as not to be left to inference or implication. Black’s (1999). The Random House Dictionary tells us that expression involves the act of communicating ideas, opinions, and feelings. Random House (1966)
Individuals express themselves in a variety of ways. They express themselves in what they write, in pictures they create, through physical gestures, in the clothing and jewelry they wear, and verbally (i.e., the “spoken word”). “Given a particular situation, one or a combination of theses forms might prove more effective than the others in making an individual’s feelings, beliefs, or wishes known to others.” Vacca and Bosher (2003)
Employee Expression in the Workplace: The Disruption Standard. More than three decades ago, the United States Supreme Court made it clear that students and teachers do not shed their First Amendment rights to free speech and expression at the schoolhouse gate. Tinker v Des Moines (1969). Courts have consistently applied a “disruption standard” to establish that public employee free expression is subject to reasonable limitations, restraints, and boundaries set by employers. City of San Diego v Roe (2004)
Judicial Standard of Analysis. The traditional judicial standard used in deciding acceptable bounds and the extent of public school system employee free speech in the workplace is applied on a case-by-case basis. The issue analysis focuses on the following elements: (1) the content of the employee’s speech, (2) the forum in which the speech occurs, and (3) the relationship to and resulting effect on the employee’s work environment."
Likewise in his 2012 commentary, Dr. Vacca noted the following summary of where the law stands regarding the issue:
"While over the years public school teachers have been reluctant to openly express their opinions on a variety of issues, the courts have consistently held that public employees (including classroom teachers): (1) do not totally jettison their First Amendment rights to speak out when they accept public employment, and (2) shall not be retaliated against in the work place for speaking out as citizens on matters of public concern. (Vacca, 2007) However, experience teaches us that a public school teacher’s right to speak out is not without limitations—especially in the classroom. As experts in education law remind us, “…practical reality requires that government, at certain times and under certain conditions, be able to restrict employees’ speech in order to fulfill its responsibilities to operate effectively and efficiently.” (Alexander and Alexander, 2012) In other words a balance must be struck and honored by both the employer and the employee. (Russo, 2004)"
He concludes his 2012 commentary with the following policy implications:
"School board policies must make it clear that:
• The Board respects the First Amendment speech and expression rights of all employees.
• The Board is legally responsible for the safe, disruption-free, and efficient management of school system operations and expects all employees to assist and actively work toward the implementation of this responsibility.
• Where public disclosure of school system’s official business and matters of internal operation are determined necessary and appropriate, such matters shall be communicated (verbally or in writing) to the community (including the media) by staff members formally and officially designated (by the Board) as the school system’s official representatives.
• Employees are expected to utilize the school system’s formal/internal channels of communication to convey all job-related concerns and issues.
• All employee job-related concerns and issues (including, but not limited to, official or employee misconduct; violations of law or policy; parental involvement; student discipline) shall be brought (i.e., reported) to the immediate attention of the employee’s direct supervisor.
• The Board expects all administrators and supervisors to promptly act to investigate and take appropriate action when in receipt of employee concerns and issues.
• Students and/or parents who exhibit abusive, disrespectful, and/or threatening behavior toward administrators, classroom teachers, other personnel, or other students shall be subject to immediate disciplinary action and, where appropriate, prosecution under the law."
To read the full newsletter, visit the CEPI website and consult the January 2006 newsletter and the December 2012 newsletter.
|
|
