 |
Recent State and Local Education News
|
Virginia Assembly reconvenes Wednesday for ‘veto session’
Capital News Service
April 3, 2017
Legislators will return to the state Capitol on Wednesday to consider 39 bills that Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe vetoed during the General Assembly’s 2017 session.
To override a veto, the Republican-controlled Assembly must muster a two-thirds majority in both the House and the Senate. Because the Democrats hold 34 seats in the House and 19 in the Senate, McAuliffe should have the votes to sustain his vetoes.
Legislators will vote on the governor’s vetoes of legislation covering a range of topics, including whether to impose more requirements on voter registration, restrict absentee voting and expand access to handguns.
McAuliffe vetoed a record 40 bills during the legislative session that ended Feb. 25. On the session’s final day, the General Assembly dealt with one of the vetoes – McAuliffe’s rejection of HB 2264, which would have cut off state funds for Planned Parenthood and other groups that provide abortions. The veto was sustained by a 62-33 vote in the House.
McAuliffe warned at the beginning of the session that he would veto any social-issue bills that he believed may harm the rights of women or the LGBTQ community. Republican leaders in the House have said that McAuliffe has reneged on his pledge to be bipartisan and that his office has been “the most disengaged administration we have worked with.”
Among legislation vetoed are six education-related bills, such as SB 1283, which would allow the state Board of Education to create regional charter schools without the permission of local school boards.
McAuliffe also vetoed bills to allow a freestanding agency to offer online education programs to Virginia students (HB 1400) and to require schools to notify parents of sexually explicit material (HB 2191). McAuliffe said these bills collectively would “undermine” the state’s public schools.
A look at the first day of classes at Virginia Beach's $63 million Old Donation School
The Virginian-Pilot
April 3, 2017
While Monday was a regular day in classrooms across South Hampton Roads, it had a distinctly different feel at Old Donation School.
That’s because it was the first day of classes at the new $63.6 million facility, which serves students in grades two through eight who are gifted intellectually, in visual arts or dance. Such students had been learning since 2014 at the former Princess Anne Middle School building on Seaboard Road.
The new school building, which opened about four months ahead of schedule, has features common in 21st century education, such as small-group learning spaces and seats that easily slide around.
It also has an 800-seat theater, outdoor learning areas and educational gardens .
At U-Va., a ‘watch list’ flags VIP applicants for special handling
The Washington Post
April 1, 2017
The University of Virginia’s fundraising team for years has sought to help children of wealthy alumni and prominent donors who apply for admission, flagging their cases internally for special handling, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post.
The records from the U-Va. advancement office, which oversees fundraising for the prestigious public flagship, reveal nearly a decade of efforts to monitor admission bids and in some cases assist those in jeopardy of rejection.
U-Va. denies that the advancement office held any sway over admissions decisions. But the documents show the office kept meticulous notes on the status of certain VIP applicants and steps taken on their behalf.
Martinsville Bulletin
April 3, 2017
An emphasis on hands-on learning will be what makes the New College Institute (NCI) unique among Virginia’s higher education institutions in the future.
In a unanimous vote Monday, NCI’s board adopted a framework for the state-funded institute’s future that focuses on offering bachelor’s degrees in four career fields – engineering/advanced manufacturing; technology/cybersecurity, health care and education/community leadership – based on the needs of Southern Virginia businesses, industries and organizations having a hard time filling job vacancies.
Students seeking four-year degrees will take their first two years of classes at a community college and then transfer into a university program at NCI, the framework shows.”
Virginia Education Association endorses Ralph Northam for governor
Augusta Free Press
April 1, 2017
The Virginia Education Association has endorsed Ralph Northam for governor of Virginia.
The group’s announcement comes after the lieutenant governor addressed educators around the Commonwealth on Thursday. During a question and answer session, he shared his vision for making a quality education available to every Virginian, no matter who you are, no matter where you are.
Virginia's new 'cyber range' offers safe space for students to hone hacking skills
The Roanoke Times
March 29, 2017
There’s a more prevalent homework assignment of a different kind on the horizon: hacking into computers.
It comes courtesy of the new Virginia Cyber Range, which offers isolated servers and dummy machines set up for the educational purpose of being compromised.
Eventually, the plan would be for students to become cybersecurity experts — and they would use their acquired knowledge to protect their employers from digital attacks.
|
Recent National Education News
|
Census: More Americans have college degrees than ever before
The Hill
April 3, 2017
Just over a third of American adults have a four-year college degree, the highest level ever measured by the U.S. Census Bureau.
In a report released Monday, the Census Bureau said 33.4 percent of Americans 25 or older said they had completed a bachelor’s degree or higher. That’s a sharp rise from the 28 percent with a college degree a decade ago.
When the Census Bureau first asked respondents about their education levels, in 1940, just 4.6 percent said they had a four-year degree.
About a quarter of American adults, 26 percent, have a high school diploma. Another 21 percent have attained a bachelor’s degree, while 9.3 percent of adults over 25 have a master’s degree. Almost 2 percent of Americans have a doctoral degree, and 1.5 percent have earned a professional degree that requires study beyond a four-year bachelor’s course.
Top Democrats Tell DeVos: Immigrant Student Rights Must Be Protected
Education Week
April 3, 2017
Congressional Democrats want the Trump administration to stress that—despite drastic changes in federal immigration enforcement policy—the nation's public K-12 schools are still obligated to educate undocumented children.
Seeking to ensure that the administration intends to honors its "sensitive locations" memorandum, which broadly prohibits the arrest of undocumented students and parents on school grounds schools and other "sensitive locations," the lawmakers—including U.S. Rep. Bobby Scott, the top Democrat on the U.S. House Education Committee—wrote a letter to key appointees of President Donald Trump, including Education Secretary Betsy Devos.
The "sensitive locations" policy has been on the books since 2011.
Scott and three other Democratic U.S. House members cautioned that, without a stern reminder to schools, the educational rights of undocumented students could be trampled upon as the new administrations expands its immigration enforcement actions.
"In this environment of trepidation, it is important that we do all we can to minimize the impact these policies have on public school attendance and student learning," the letter read, in part.
|
|
|
Are Virginia schools becoming safer?
In our April Compass Point, we look at several aspects of school violence.
Dr. Richard Vacca, in his latest Education Law Newsletter reviews a recent 9th Court of Appeals ruling that provides insight into whether schools can punish students for verbal harassment of fellow students that do not take place on school property. We excerpt from that newsletter
below.
Likewise, in our
Poll Spotlight, we review public opinion in Virginia about whether schools are considered safe.
We also want to review briefly the question of whether student-to-student violence is trending up or down. What would you guess before reading further?
The
2014 Indicators of School Crime and Safety report from the National Center for Education Statistics reports the following information about student victimization:
- In 2014, students ages 12-18 experienced 33 nonfatal victimizations per 1,000 students at school and 24 per 1,000 students away from school.
- In 2014, students residing in rural areas had higher rates of total victimization at school (53 victimizations per 1,000 students) than students residing in suburban areas (28 victimizations per 1,000 students). In the same year, the rate of total victimization at school for students residing in urban areas was 32 victimizations per 1,000 students.
- Between 1992 and 2014, the total victimization rate at school declined 82 percent, from 181 victimizations per 1,000 students in 1992 to 33 victimizations per 1,000 students in 2014. The total victimization rate away from school declined 86 percent, from 173 victimizations per 1,000 students in 1992 to 24 victimizations per 1,000 students in 2014 (Indicator 2).
These declines are pretty striking and may be part of the reason that most of the public in Virginia sees schools in their communities as safe or very safe (see
Poll Spotlight below). The finding that the rate of total victimization is higher in rural areas than in urban or suburban areas also may be striking, given that urban areas often receive much of the focus when school violence is discussed.
But is actual student victimization trending downward in Virginia as well? We didn't go back as far in time, but over the last two years, there certainly has been a downward trend in reported offenses by school students against other school students. The box graph below provides a quick visual summary. Each box is sized based on the portion of total offenses that type represents (i.e. Assaults using a weapon, one of the two small red boxes, were only 0.35% of the total number of reported offenses in School Year 2014-15.)
 |
|
The graphic shows that school administrators and the students that make up school communities can be proud of significant progress in reducing violence in Virginia schools. As indicated by the green shading, the largest categories of inter-student violence (threats, assault without a weapon and bullying) declined significantly from the 2012-13 school year to the 2014-15 school year. Reports of bullying dropped by more than 40%.
There were, however, concerning rises in the two most serious categories. The total number of incidents is small enough that the label for these categories doesn't fit. But though few in number when compared to the totals, assaults with a weapon increased 56.5% from 23 in school year 2013 to 36 in school year 2015. Likewise, sexual battery increased 85.7% from 21 to 39. While the small number of incidents for these categories make year to year changes seem much larger in percentage terms, we have no doubt that school adminstrators across the commonwealth will watch the trend in those two most serious categories very closely.
For those looking to further reduce violence in schools, a significant range of resources exist. The Centers for Disease Control have an
overview of a number. Likewise, the National Association of School Psychologists have summaries of resources on
school violence prevention and
bullying prevention.
We hope you have a great start to April! We'll be back in your inbox in a couple weeks with a special issue that reports on education developments from the General Assembly's veto session and provides a final wrap up for the 2017 session as a whole.
Sincerely,
CEPI
|
Education Law Newsletter
School Disciplinary Authority and Student Off-School Grounds Behavior: Policy Implicatons
Excerpted from the April 2017 Education Law Newsletter written by Dr. Richard Vacca. Read the full newsletter on our
website.
Overview
Of all the possible locations where questions exist concerning the reach of school system disciplinary authority, off-school grounds (community based) situations are most problematic. When, where, and under what circumstances does school system responsibility for off-school grounds student safety and security become paramount?
As a growing number of parents and local school officials are working to prevent acts of face-to-face (in person, non-technology assisted) bullying (verbal, physical), taunting (more than teasing), hate speech, and threats, the following questions must be asked: What about kids walking to and from home to school? What about kids waiting at the school bus stop? What about kids who ride the school bus to and from school? What about students on field trips? Are they not protected from harassment by other students? What about the responsibility of school officials for their safety and security? When do the “special relationship” and “custodial care” standards apply in such situations? Does the
deliberate indifference standard (a standard higher than failure to exercise due care) also apply in “face-to-face” situations?
School System Authority
As a general rule, because school systems may be held responsible for students on their way to and from school (door-to-door), school boards often establish policies and set down reasonable rules and regulations (
i.e., articulate reasonable
expectations for behavior) to which students are expected to conform. And, as a general rule, students may be held accountable for misconduct occurring while on their way to and from school. At the same time, however, it would be unfair to assume that school authorities can ensure a safe and secure environment in all situations where students are away from school grounds, not on school property, and outside the official time schedule of the school day. (Vacca and Bosher, 2012) What about the responsibility of parents for off-school grounds (community-based) misbehavior of their children—especially where allegations of parental neglect may be possible in situations where children of any age are out in community free of “proper parental supervision or guardianship” including travel to-and-from school. (Vota, 2017)
Student Speech and Expression
Beginning in the mid-to-late 1960s the body of public education law involving the First Amendment and student rights grew as a fertile source of litigation. Over the past decade, while the court’s continued to rely on the case hardened standards established by the United States Supreme Court in Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), Bethel School District v. Fraser (1986), Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988), Morse v. Frederick (2007) and others, student speech and expression have undergone rapid change (beyond traditional boundaries of protected speech and expression) mainly due to the impact of rapidly developing technology (
i.e., social media) on student-to-student communication. More often than not, in situations where student-to-student-peer harassment is found, the mode of communication relied on by the perpetrator was some form of non-school owned electronically (cyber) assisted device, communicated off-school grounds, not during the school day, and not through face-to-face personal contact. Do the existing standards of judicial review apply to emerging First Amendment issues? Has a new standard of judicial analysis taken root in student First Amendment jurisprudence? If so, will the new standard eventually replace a reliance on the traditional standards?
Assaultive Speech
In my opinion, while still rare to find in First Amendment court decisions, an alternative standard does exist and is available for application where face-to-face (in person) student-on-student harassment is alleged. Referred to as assaultive speech, the alternative standard can be defined as: “those expressive acts (spoken, written, or gestures) of one or more persons that either cause actual harm to another person or persons, or, at a minimum, place a person or persons in imminent fear of harm.” (Vacca and Hudgins, 1994)
Applying the
assaultive speech standard, a judicial determination is made in each case depending on:
- the special characteristics of the situation (
e.g., custodial relationship; on school property during the school day; at a school sponsored or sanctioned function; out in the community),
- the students involved (
e.g., elementary, middle, or secondary school, students with disabilities), and
- the circumstances (
e.g., on the school bus, at the school bus stop, in attendance at an athletic event at another school, on a field trip, on a public street, in proximity to the student’s home residence) under which the speech or other expressive act had occurred.
C.R. v. Eugene School District 4J (9th Cir. 2016)
Recently I reviewed a decision handed down by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit involving a twelve year-old public middle school student suspended from school for two days for his off-school grounds, face-to-face (in person) sexual harassment of two other students. The suspension was challenged on First Amendment grounds claiming that school authorities lacked authority to suspend that student. The court’s decision is most informative. . .
__________________
Read the rest of the newsletter on our
website.
|
Poll Spotlight - Does the public think schools in their community are safe?
While mass shootings continue to be an all too frequent part of news in the United States and abroad, a majority of Virginians feel the schools in their community are safe. Seventy-eight percent of respondents indicated feeling their community’s schools were safe or very safe, with 27 percent saying they were very safe. Only 20 percent felt their schools were not very or not at all safe.
There were regional differences for those who felt their schools were safe or very safe. Respondents from Northern Virginia (40 percent) were more likely to say their schools were very safe. If responses of safe and very safe are combined, Northwest (89 percent) and Northern Virginia (85 percent) had the highest portion of respondents saying schools in their community are safe while respondents from Tidewater (34 percent) were more likely to say schools were not very safe or not at all safe.
Family income and education level also played a role in the safety perceptions of respondents. Those with annual household income above $100,000 (40 percent) were more likely to say their schools are very safe, compared to 22 percent for those in lower earning categories. Likewise, those with a college degree (31 percent) or some college (30 percent) were more likely to say their schools are very safe, compared to only 20 percent of those with a high school degree or less in formal education who said the same.
Finally, white respondents were more likely (at a combined 82 percent) to say schools were safe or very safe, while only 69 percent of minority respondents said the same.
A copy of the full results of the 2016-17 Commonwealth Education Poll is available at
http://cepi.vcu.edu/publications/polls/.
|
|
