 |
| State & Local Education News |
Virginia Beach named best community for music education again
News Channel 3 (WTKR)
April 2, 2016
Virginia Beach city public schools have once again been designated by the National Association of Music Merchants as one of the best communities for music education in the country.
Virginia Beach city Public schools has earned this distinction multiple times in the past, most recently in 2015.
The best communities are selected based on funding, and staffing.
More than 37,000 Virginia Beach Public School students take some form of music education within the city.
Charlottesville vice mayor appointed to Virginia Board of Education
The Cavalier Daily
March 30, 2016
Charlottesville Vice Mayor Wes Bellamy was appointed to the Virginia Board of Education last Friday by Gov. Terry McAuliffe.
The Virginia Board of Education sets statewide curriculum standards, graduation requirements and testing programs while regulating the administration of state programs.
As a newly elected member to this organization, Bellamy spoke about his vision and responsibilities going forward.
“One of the main things I would like to get done is establish an alternative to the [Standard of Learning tests],” Bellamy said in an email statement. “As a teacher, I see the negative effects it has on learning, and I would like to remove that barrier. Furthermore, ensuring that the teachers in our schools are culturally competent will be a priority for me.”
In addition to being a city councilman, Bellamy currently teaches computer science and sponsors several groups at Albemarle High School.
Sen. John Miller of Newport News dies at age 68
10 WAVY.com
April 4, 2016
Virginia Sen. John Miller from Newport News has passed away. He was 68-years-old.
Miller was elected to the Virginia State Senate in 2007, and re-elected in 2011. According to his website, Miller was also an administrator at WHRO and at Christopher Newport University (CNU) before entering politics.
He worked for former US Senator Paul Trible as his top aide. Miller also worked for Trible at CNU. “Let me tell you about John Miller. He was a thoughtful and compassionate man. He was a man of real integrity who always wanted to do the right things,” said Trible of his friend of 40 years. “John Miller was one of the good guys who cared about health, and education of children, and he really loved his family and our community.”
High school overhaul: New Virginia plan all-in on job training in junior, senior years
Daily Press
April 4, 2016
Virginia high school is going to look different for the freshmen who enroll in 2018.
Even the idea of high school will be different, according to architects of a plan that the State Board of Education will flesh out over the next two years.
The four-year quest for class credits, verified by standardized tests, that students and parents now know will morph into a pair of two-year sections with multiple paths to graduation.
Many core classes will be taught in those first two years. Then students will have a choice: A path to a four-year college degree, preparations for a two-year community college degree or the chance to leave high school with a certification that says they're ready to go to work in one of several industries, with the options based partly on what local businesses say they need from the workforce.
|
National & Federal Education News
|
State Chiefs Asked to Focus on Workforce Skill
U.S. News & World Report
April 4, 2016
As states begin taking advantage of their newfound flexibility in the federal education law by reimaging their accountability systems, they must incorporate ways to assess workforce readiness and eliminate the stigma of technical and vocational education.
That was the resounding advice given to the country's state education chiefs who gathered in the nation's capital Monday for the annual legislative conference of the Council of Chief State School Officers.
MIT releases Online Education Policy Initiative report
MIT News
April 1, 2016
A new MIT report on online education policy draws on diverse fields, from socioeconomics to cognitive science, to analyze the current state of higher education and consider how advances in learning science and online technology might shape its future.
Titled “Online Education: A Catalyst for Higher Education Reform,” the report presents four overarching recommendations, stressing the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration, integration between online and traditional learning, a skilled workforce specializing in digital learning design, and high-level institutional and organizational change.
|
|
|
Is it free speech or offensive content?
This week Governor McAuliffe vetoed a bill that, according to a
Washington Post article, "would have made Virginia the first state to allow parents to block their children from reading books in school that contain sexually explicit material." The decision focused attention on one of the long-running debates in K-12 contexts - when parents or local communities can place limits on what their students see and hear in their educational journey.
The same day several news outlets, including the
Chronicle of Higher Education and the
Washington Post, carried stories on the results of a
recent survey of college students that found a complex set of viewpoints on the topic of free speech and limitations to it. Seventy-eight percent (78%) said creating an "open learning evironment" was more important on a college campus than prohibiting speech that is offensive to some groups or biased. Seventy-two percent (72%) said colleges should not be allowed to restrict political views that are offensive or upsetting to certain groups.
At the same time, 69% said colleges should be able to limit slurs and language that is intentionally offensive to certain groups and 63% said the same about colleges' ability to restrict wearing costumes that stereotype certain racial and ethnic groups.
This is not the first survey to find that more students are comfortable with campuses banning speech that is racist or sexist than are comfortable with the same action toward more generic "extreme speech." The graphic below shows that this gap is long standing while at the same time, more students have become comfortable with limiting extreme speech over the last several decades.
Legal scholars, of course, have long wrestled with the challenge of drawing a line between what speech is rightfully subject to disciplinary action (the classic yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater) and what is protected by the first amendment, including in campus settings. This week, we wanted to share a compilation of links to various Education Law newsletters that CEPI and Dr. Richard Vacca have published over the years that deal with many of the nuanced legal edges of this long running question. Below, we share a longer excerpt from Dr. Vacca's October 2014 newsletter on when schools can control what teachers cover about controversial topics. But here is also a listing of titles from other Education Law Newsletters since 2010 that you may find of interest.
-
March 2016: Regulating Professors' Online Speech - Academic Freedom or "Incivility" - by Kathleen Conn
-
November 2015: The Applicability of the Tinker Test to Off-Campus Cyber-Speech - Policy Implications - by Emily Smith
-
March 2015: The First Amendment and Public Employee Speech
-
December 2014: Student Off-School Grounds Communications: Policy Implications
-
October 2014 - Teacher Methods and Classroom Discussions: Policy Issues
-
September 2013: Student speech and electronic communication: cyberbullying and school policy
-
December 2012: Teachers and First Amendment Speech: Policy Implications
-
May 2011: Teacher Protections from Student Assaultive Speech
-
March 2011: Student Expression and Assaultive Speech: Tinker Revisited
-
May 2010: Local School Board Meetings: Limiting Public Comment
We hope you have a great week!
Sincerely,
CEPI
|
|
Teacher Methods and Classroom Discussions: Policy Issues
Excerpted from from Richard Vacca's
October 2014 Education Law Newsletter.
______________________________________________
This past month The American Library Association (ALA) celebrated Banned Books Week (September 21 to 27, 2014). The ALA released a list of the Top Ten frequently challenged books of 2013, as a part of the State of America’s Library Report. Reading the list I harkened back to such past court decisions as Mozert v. Hawkins County Board of Education (6th Cir. 1987), where parents challenged a public school system requirement that all students in grades one through eight use a prescribed set of basic reading textbooks; Virgil v. School Board (8th Cir.1989), where parents objected to what they said were “vulgarities and sexual explicitness” in an approved textbook in a high school elective humanities course; and the United States Supreme Court’s seminal decision in Board of Education v. Pico (1982), involving a local school board removing library books from its junior and senior high schools after parents characterized the books as “objectionable” and “improper fare for school students.”
At the college and university level some schools have requested that professors include statements in their course syllabus forewarning students that some course readings and discussions might be offensive or upsetting. Also on campuses invited speakers are sometimes objected to by students and faculty because of their political or philosophical reputations and/or the possible content of their remarks.
Not long ago I came across a student First Amendment case involving a California public high school system where, after learning of threats of race-related violence during a school-sanctioned celebration of Cinco de Mayo, and because of a skirmish the previous year, school officials feared there would be hostilities between white students and students of Mexican dissent during this year’s celebration. Thus, school officials asked students to remove clothing bearing images of the American flag, turn their shirts inside out, or leave school for the day. Dariano v. Morgan Hill Unified School District (9th Cir. 2014)
While such happenings are not new, they once again are garnering national attention. Is there a common thread in the diverse array of situations described above? What are the policy implications?
*********
Controversial Subjects in the Classroom
As the United States Supreme Court has expressed, “classroom methodologies and techniques are matters best left to teachers and not the courts.” Owasso v. Falvo (2002) This point is subsequently emphasized in a Virginia case involving a teacher’s posting materials on his classroom bulletin boards. In affirming the lower court’s award of summary judgment to the school board the Fourth Circuit Court offered the following observation: “Although school teachers provide more than academic knowledge to their students, it is not a court’s obligation to determine which messages of social or moral values are appropriate in a classroom.” It is the school board’s responsibility. Lee v. York County (4th Cir. 2007)
In the Eighth Edition of our text, LAW AND EDUCATION: CONTEMPORARY ISSUES AND COURT DECISIONS (Lexis/Nexis, 2012), Professor Bosher and I devote an extensive discussion, with numerous case citations, to the school curriculum, academic freedom, and the inclusion of controversial subjects in the classroom. Beginning with Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) and the Supreme Court’s declaration that teachers do not shed their freedom of expression “at the schoolhouse gate,” the case law covers such issue producers as using R-rated films in class, requiring students to research and read materials dealing with sex education, and bringing outside speakers into classes, among others. One issue producer that has caused conflict has involved class discussions and teacher extemporaneous comments and remarks during class discussions. What follows is a brief look back at a court decision included in our text. I selected the case as an example of what a court might say in a situation where a classroom teacher was disciplined not for the materials or methods used, but rather for comments made in giving examples in response to questions asked by students in his ninth grade government classroom.
**********
Policy Implications
When many of our nation’s public schools are working to maintain state accreditation, close the student achievement gap, maintain discipline, control and prevent violence in schools, and reduce the number of students who drop-out of school, it is more than likely that students (especially technology-oriented secondary school students equipped with laptops and tablets, et al.) will be asking their classroom teachers for a host of opinions regarding their school, its student body, their school’s accreditation status, and their school’s reputation in the community. At the same time, with November elections looming in the near future and the constant focus in the media regarding such topics as Ebola, possible terrorist attacks, and violence in the Middle East, it is more than likely that classroom teachers in all subject areas will be asked for their personal opinions. While some topics of discussion may be more appropriate for a health education class, or a biology class, or a government class, there are some discussions relevant across several classes. While it is but one case, and an older case at that, what does Miles v. Denver Public Schools (10th Cir. 1991) teach us about classroom protocols and what can be inferred from the Court’s rationale? What are the policy implications?
School board policies must make it clear that:
- The Board is the final decision maker in matters of the school curriculum—including matters associated with all school sponsored and/or sanctioned activities of an academic and non-academic nature.
- All teachers are expected to plan for and implement the goals and objectives of the official school curriculum as it applies to their particular subject field and in fulfillment of their contractual obligations.
- All classroom teaching methods, materials selected, assignments made, discussions, and testing of students will be (a) based on legitimate pedagogical concerns and (b) related to the subject being taught.
- It is expected that within the special context of the school environment and within the context of their classroom, all teacher comments to and discussions with students are related to the goals and objectives of the subject being taught, as well as to the age and maturity level of students, and that teachers will refrain from making comments or initiating class discussions with students of a solely personal nature.
- Civil discourse and active debate, when and where appropriate, will be encouraged and demonstrated in all classrooms.
Read the full analysis and other Education Law Newsletters on
our website. |
|
