Education Week reporter Stephen Sawchuk just posted a great article about the on his blog. Sawchuk learned more about PSC while covering NEA’s Representative Assembly in New Orleans earlier this month. He reports that the campaign “will focus on four core tenets for improving low-performing schools: increasing staff effectiveness; developing family and school partnerships; increasing district and local-union collaboration; and leveraging community assets. Those tenets aren’t groundbreaking in and of themselves, the directors noted. What’s new is that they are being put together in a comprehensive reform approach.”
Sawchuk’s article and interview with Sheila Simmons and Steve Snider, the director and associate director, respectively, of the campaign.
Should cafeteria workers be held responsible when students fail to meet academic standards? Believe it or not, that is exactly what is happening in several Chicago schools, were dozens of cafeteria workers are being fired by schools implementing the “turnaround” model as part of the .
Schools receiving SIG funds must choose between one of . The turnaround model requires the firing of half the staff, and several Chicago schools have put cafeteria workers on that list, .
The cafeteria workers say they have received excellent evaluations and are good at their jobs — so why , as food servers, are they being held responsible for their schools’ academic performance?
But it’s happening, and many of these workers are likely headed to the unemployment line. To read the full story, click .
If politically popular education “reforms” are so effective, why are they only being implemented in lower-income communities – predominantly communities of color?
That was the question that ran through a framework for improving education released by leading civil rights groups this week. Titled , the framework was drafted and signed by seven leading civil rights groups, including the (NAACP), the and the .
“For far too long, communities of color have been testing grounds for unproven methods of educational change,” the report says, arguing that reforms advocated by federal and state governments should have to meet an evidence threshold before being foisted upon schools.
From the in Fort Wayne, IN, comes this story about school improvement activity in one district struggling with layoffs. Earlier in the year, the Fort Wayne Community School Board laid off 311 teachers. Monday, 149 of them were recalled. The rest should learn if they have a job when the board meets next week:
“…estimates suggested fewer than 91 teachers would lose their jobs. Also, the board voted to lay off eight secretaries, one cafeteria assistant, two groundskeepers and a custodian.
“As part of a $15 million budget cut and an effort to improve 11 of its struggling schools, the school board voted in the spring to eliminate 91 teaching positions and free up many educators for reassignment.
“The district recently finished several job fairs for regular teaching positions and those in LEAD schools – the moniker the district gave low-performing schools targeted for improvement…
“Teachers hired at the were required to meet a set of criteria, including showing a commitment to change and a willingness to receive additional professional training. Those who serve in LEAD schools will be evaluated in a different manner from other teachers and will receive a $3,000 lump sum after serving three years in a LEAD school.”
From in Stockton, CA, some interesting detail in a report from about starting work on the , beginning with the new school motto: “Collaborate! Empower! Succeed!”
“Collaboration has been ongoing since the transformation model was adopted. Last week outside the Roosevelt office, (the leadership team including teachers) wrote their goals for the first 30, 60 and 90 days of the new year on sticky notes and covered the wall with them. Among the items on the wish list: ‘Info for parents on homework and minutes of home reading’ and ‘clear procedures for updating info for new or existing students’ and planning of a ‘family math night.’
“Empowerment will come through portfolios all 483 students are expected to receive on opening day. The students will maintain the portfolios through the year, chronicling their own progress and reminding them of the gains they have made.
There also will be student-led conferences where children will share their successes and challenges with parents and teachers, with whom they will work to develop academic and social goals. Increasing parent involvement through regular school events is another part of the package.
“…teachers unions universally have deep reservations about their members being evaluated based on test scores. The district and the Stockton Teachers Association have not reached an accord on this issue…Despite the challenges, (the ‘school leaders’) seem to be onboard with the transformation. This week, there was a clear common thread in comments from several of them: hopefulness.
“’I feel our administration is wonderful,’ fourth-grade teacher Sheryl Simmons said. ‘(The principal) wants input from everyone. It’s driven from everyone. I love everyone I work with. We’re different but the same. We want the best for the children. It’s not just a job. It’s life.’”
Summer is here, no doubt about it. Dog days. Triple digit temps. Sports talk radio advises limiting adult beverage intake at the Washington Nationals home game tonight because there’s a heat advisory until 11 p.m. Meanwhile in the world of School Improvement Grants, spring seems eternal.
As of today, 39 have received ED approval of SIG applications. Two came today via ED press releases and a record four were named Friday July 2; . The ED boilerplate includes this sentence from the hopeful days many months ago – ”School districts will apply to the state for the funds this spring.”
Okay, maybe when the same sentence appeared in five identical releases in June, it was just a matter of federalese and perhaps a little laziness. But here in the post equinox, when even the pool water is hot, it doesn’t matter what corridor of ED cranks out the reference to “spring” work ahead for educators in the second week of July. The releases make the Secretary’s office look disengaged, especially with school starting in less than a month in some states.
In late June, noted the “holdup” in grant approvals and contrasted it with the urgency voiced by Secretary Duncan and the situation for the schools – “…changes for many schools need to have started already, especially in cases where principals and teachers must be replaced.”
Meanwhile, new guidance pops out of ED occasionally in the form of FAQs – find the latest . A sample Q-A is below. Happy pre-Back to School.
A-32a. May an LEA use SIG funds to pay for the portion of a teacher’s salary that is attributable to providing increased learning time beyond the regular school day, week, or year?
Yes. Both the turnaround model and the transformation model require an LEA to provide increased learning time, which is generally defined as “using a longer school day, week, or year schedule to significantly increase the total number of school hours to include additional time for” instruction in core academic subjects; instruction in other subjects and enrichment activities; and teachers to collaborate, plan, and engage in professional development. See sections I.A.2(a)(1)(viii), I.A.2(d)(3)(i), I.A.3 of the final requirements. Because a school must operate a schoolwide program in order to implement either of these models, the LEA must provide the school all of the non-Federal funds it would otherwise receive in the absence of the SIG funds. ESEA section 1114(a)(2)(B). These non-Federal funds include the funds necessary and sufficient to provide the school’s regular instructional program—i.e., the program the school provides during the regular school day, week, or year. If this requirement is met, the LEA may use SIG funds in the school to support the extra costs of providing increased learning time beyond the regular school day, week, or year. See A-32b. For example, the LEA may use SIG funds to pay the pro-rata share of a teacher’s salary that is attributable to a longer school day, week, or year and is necessary to implement a turnaround or transformation model, even if the teacher is providing instruction in core academic subjects during the increased learning time.