www.SchoolReport.com
Vermonters
for Better Education
Return
to Education Report Index | Return to VBE
Index | Vermonters for Better Education
Homepage
www.SchoolReport.com
Vermonters
for Better Education
Return
to Education Report Index | Return to VBE
Index | Vermonters for Better Education
Homepage
________________________________________ THE VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT
January 19, 2004 Vol. 4, No. 03
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Covering education news in Vermont and beyond...
Informative, provocative, unique...
Published by Vermonters for Better EducationNEWS & ANALYSIS...
VBE is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization whose mission is to enlist parents and the public at large in achieving quality educational opportunities for all the children of Vermont by monitoring the state of education in Vermont; promoting the value of educational freedoms for all parents; and giving parents the evaluative tools with which to identify excellence. Libby Sternberg, executive director: VTBetterEd@aol.comSTATE BOARD OF EDUCATION APPROVES OF SCHOOL CHOICE
The State Board of Education approved a resolution supporting school choice at its January 15 meeting, only to discover that a procedural error would require a new vote at the next meeting on Tuesday, January 20. The reason for the revote is to give the public a chance to comment. Therefore, public testimony will be taken by the Board on Tuesday at 12:30 p.m. when the Board meets at the Capital Plaza Hotel in Montpelier. Chances are that testifiers will be limited to a few minutes each.
The Thursday Board discussion was precipitated by several factors. First, the legislature is poised to seriously consider an expansive public school choice program that will allow money to follow the child to the school of his or her choice. Rep. Howard Crawford (R-Burke), the House Education Committee chairman, has introduced such a bill, and the governor has included it in his agenda for the year.
Secondly, however, the Board recently hired a new Commissioner of Education, Richard Cate, who will be interacting with the legislature on a variety of issues, school choice included. Because Cate works for the Board, he needs a clear idea of what direction his "employers" want him to follow.
In fact, Cate circulated a memo to the Board assuring them that he had not taken a position on the issue of school choice and that articles that imply he had were incorrect. "Once the Board takes a position on School Choice," Cate wrote in a January 9 memo to the Board, "that will be the one to articulate to the Legislature."
The Board meeting itself was a thoughtful and lively discussion of school choice with the clear consensus being that the Board accepts the concept of choice. In fact, the vote the Board took was nearly unanimously in favor of the general issue of school choice with the student member and Lisa Cox being the only abstentions (Cox wanted more information before a definitive vote). This is significant because several of the board members who voted for the resolution are not Douglas appointees. They were appointed by former Governor Howard Dean.
People who want to testify before the State Board but who cannot attend the meeting on Tuesday should send their comments to the Department of Education, specifically to Carol King at cking@doe.state.vt.us
ACT 150 REPORT: SKY DIDN'T FALL THIS YEAR EITHER
Act 150, the public school choice law that allows only a handful of students in each public high school to choose a school with which their own school has formed a "collaborative agreement" (and which does not provide for money following the child), requires the Vermont Department of Education to collect data and report to the legislature annually on the law's progress.
The latest report was presented to the State Board of Education last Thursday and at a joint meeting of the House and Senate Education Committees last Friday. Both last year's and this year's reports should be available on the VDOE web site.
This year's report is similar to last year's - data collection was a problem and "some data were not clear or accurate." In addition, last year's report said a small number of schools might not have been implementing the law correctly. Instead of allowing the limited number of students to choose, they were forcing them to wait until there was an "even swap" available with the chosen school. The VDOE cites the same problem in this year's report. They did nothing visible to solve that problem in the last 12 months.
Because of the problems with data collection, the report comes to no hard and fast conclusions. The most one can say about Act 150 from these reports is that the law appears not to be affecting students or schools in any significantly adverse way.
Because the law is so restrictive, it is highly unlikely there will ever be enough students involved in it to gather significant data on the subgroups (race, special education, etc.) in the report. In other words, the law's design ensures that no sweeping generalizations can be made from reports on it.
However, the reports do serve a purpose. When Act 150 was passed, some legislative opponents predicted dire consequences. The reporting component of Act 150 was put in place to act as the canary in the coal mine - to warn of any impending catastrophe.
Although the data collection was difficult and the samples of subgroups small, catastrophe is hardly a word that can be used to describe what has occurred under Act 150. If anything, the reports prove the supporters of the law were right - only a small number of students would choose and there would be no "creaming" or other adverse effects. The reports show that the percentage of low income children choosing, in fact, is trending upward, and the percentage of special education students, racial minorities, and students with Limited English Proficiency choosing is comparable to or greater than the percentage in the total relevant student population.
If these subgroup samples are too small from which to draw any definitive conclusions, another study isn't what's needed. An expansion of school choice is.
Sen. Kevin Mullin (R-Rutland County) and Rep. Kathy LaVoie (R-Swanton) were obviously frustrated with the fact that the VDOE had promised last year to work on fixing data collection problems and yet this year's report mimicked last year's with no substantial changes in gathering information or trying to guarantee its usefulness.
Even Rep. George Cross (D-Winooski), no fan of school choice, appeared irritated with the fact that nothing has been done to ensure that all schools are adequately complying with the law and not using the "even swap" method.
Commissioner Richard Cate, in his memo to both Committee chairs, said that "the Department does not have the staff capacity and resources to study all aspects of the Act 150 choice program." To fix this, he suggests the Legislature appropriate $75,000 for a better study.
Opponents of school choice will probably use the Act 150 studies to stall on a push for more choice. But supporters of choice have a valid concern that no study of Act 150 will yield significant subgroup numbers to draw definitive conclusions.
UNFUNDED MANDATES - NO RELIEF?
Act 68 requires the Commissioner of Education to compile a list of educational "unfunded mandates" with recommendations for action. The list was compiled with input from the Vermont School Boards Association (VSBA), the Vermont Principals Association (VPA) and the Vermont Superintendents Association (VSA) and was a thoughtful report on everything from the requirement to offer Driver's Education during the school day to handling special education audits.
At the January 15 State Board of Education meeting, Board members received a list of recommendations from the Commissioner on how to deal with the unfunded mandates. Unfortunately, the three and a half-page list makes few recommendations for statutory changes. In fact, only one statute is recommended for rescission and that is the Governor's Diploma. "The State Board of Education and the Governor will be working on alternative methods of recognizing Vermont's highest academic achievers," says the Commissioner's report.
To be fair, the list includes information on how the VDOE or other departments are streamlining various processes. And some of the unfunded mandates are federal requirements unable to be affected by state action, while others (such as Vermont's interpretation of the Family Medical Leave Act) apply to all Vermont employers and not just to schools.
But several cries for help are definitely going unheeded. The VDOE is recommending, for example, that schools continue to be required to offer driver's education during the day. And the VDOE also is recommending that the recently-passed mandate to require schools to offer school meals stay in place.
DRIVERS ED FOR HOMESCHOOLERS
A bill was introduced last week that could benefit homeschooled students and take away an "unfunded mandate" from public schools. H.560, sponsored by Rep. Frank Mazur (R-South Burlington) and Howard Crawford (R-Burke), would allow homeschooled students to receive behind-the-wheel driver's ed from instructors approved by the state instead of having to enroll in driver's education programs, often at their local public schools.
Some homeschooling parents find it frustrating to have to enroll their children in driver's ed when there is a relative or friend of the family who has special expertise in driving skills (for example, truck drivers or delivery van drivers). H.560 would allow approved persons to teach driving skills to homeschoolers.
The text of the bill is available at: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2004/bills/intro/H-560.HTM
SCHOOL CHOICE STORIES: WE WANT 'EM!
Last year, Vermonters for Better Education asked readers who had chosen schools for their children to share their stories. We collected several moving stories from that call-for-information. Now, we want to collect more! Please send your story to: VTBetterEd@aol.com
IT'S NEVER TOO LATE...
...To consider a donation to VBE! Not only will it help support the continued circulation of the Vermont Education Report, it will also help us fund a radio campaign to explain the benefits of school choice. We've been receiving contributions steadily, but we could use more! Send your checks to: VBE, 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701. Thanks!
IMPORTANT LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION
Legislative Directory (including info on who your representatives are): http://www.leg.state.vt.us/legdir/legdir2.htm
Email addresses for Senators: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/legdir/e-mail2.cfm?Body=S
Email addresses for Representatives: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/legdir/e-mail2.cfm?Body=H
Schedules for committees: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/schedule/schedule2.cfm
Search for a bill by sponsor or keyword: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/database/search/search.cfm
Status of a specific bill: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/database/status/status.cfm
HOW TO CONTACT LEGISLATORS
Legislators are often busy and not available to take calls when they are in the Statehouse. However, constituents may call the Sergeant-at-Arms and leave messages for legislators. The phone numbers are: 1-800-322-5616 or 1-802-828-2228.
In addition, many legislators post their home phone numbers in the legislative directory (available on-line at http://www.leg.state.vt.us/legdir/legdir2.htm). Legislators are usually home on the weekends and Mondays.
If you have a long message or just want to make sure your message is communicated verbatim to your legislator, you can write a note or letter and fax it to the Statehouse at: 1-802-828-2424.
Most, if not all, legislators use email as well. While not all email addresses are posted in the legislative directory, the formula for legislative email addresses is simple: first initial followed by last name@leg.state.vt.us. For example, Senator James Condos, chair of the Senate Education Committee, can be reached at Jcondos@leg.state.vt.us. Many legislators also have personal email addresses. Some of those are listed at the legislative directory site. For example, Sen. Condos can also be reached through his AOL address: JCondos@aol.com.
HOUSE EDUCATION COMMITTEE
Rep. Howard Crawford (R-Burke)chair: hcrawford@stj.k12.vt.us
Rep. George Cross (D-Winooski), vice chair
Rep. William Aswad (D-Burlington)
Rep. Carolyn Whitney Branagan (R-Georgia): cbranagan@leg.state.vt.us or Dunmore@adelphia.net
Rep. Henry Chen (D-Mendon): hchen@leg.state.vt.us
Rep. Virginia Duffy (R-Rutland City): vduffy@leg.state.vt.us
Rep. Kevin Endres (R-Milton); kendres@leg.state.vt.us or MrMtBus@aol.com
Rep. Steve Hingtgen (P-Burlington): shingtgen@leg.state.vt.us
Rep. Kathy LaBelle LaVoie (R-Swanton): klavoie@leg.state.vt.us or klavoie@together.net
Rep. Rosemary McLaughlin (D-S. Royalton): rmclaughlin@leg.state.vt.us or rozo@valley.net
Rep. Ann Seibert (D-Norwich)SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE
Sen. James Condos (D-Chittenden), chair - jcondos@leg.state.vt.us or jcondos@aol.com
Sen. Kevin Mullin (R-Rutland) kjmbjm@aol.com
Sen. Hull Maynard (R-Rutland) - hull@sover.net
Sen. Don Collins (D-Franklin) - dcollins@leg.state.vt.us
Sen. Hinda Miller (D-Chittenden) -- hmiller@leg.state.vt.us or hinda@deforestconcepts.com* * *
ELSEWHERE
A round-up of notable articles from other education publications.FROM THE TEACHER QUALITY BULLETIN (http://www.nctq.org)
TEACHER POLICY
(1) The Teaching Commission Releases Blockbuster ReportThe issue of teacher quality made newspapers around the country as The Teaching Commission --a blue-ribbon panel headed by Lou Gerstner (former head of IBM) and including four governors, the head of AFT, Barbara Bush, former Secretary of Education Richard Riley, and other prominent leaders in business and education-- issued its report "Teaching At Risk: A Call to Action." For those acquainted with the ongoing teacher quality debates, the report treads on familiar but important ground such as too many underqualified teachers, a broken compensation system and high attrition.
Given the panel's makeup, the Commission took a particularly brave stand on performance pay, suggesting a 30 percent pay raise for teachers who raise student achievement while endorsing a 10 percent pay hike for all teachers. The report cites education economist Eric Hanushek, noting that "student achievement is directly related to individual productivity and earnings and to national economic growth," and that if we can take a long-term view of the investment, roughly equivalent to 10 percent of the US Department of Education annual budget, that the pay raises would pay for themselves through increased economic growth.
The Teaching Commission also calls for increased accountability in teacher education. It recommends that universities take more responsibility for their colleges of education by recruiting stronger students into teaching programs, requiring at least a minor in an academic subject, tailoring pedagogy courses to research results, and increasing real world exposure of education students to prevent "faddism." The commission also recommends exactly what the state of Ohio implemented last week- measuring the results of colleges of education to see how many of its graduates become teachers and how well they do in raising student achievement.
The Commission also challenges states to revamp or even overhaul their licensure systems. At a minimum, the report asks that states raise their passing scores on certification exams to ensure that they have a rigorous test for subject content and essential skills rather than the risibly low standards that are in place today --which is exactly what North Carolina didn't do this week when it dumped its testing program. In addition to raising standards, the Commission also calls for lowering bureaucratic barriers to entry that keep many strong candidates out of the classroom.
Finally, the Commission seeks to change the power relations between school districts, principals, and teachers. School districts must allow principals to be effective building-level managers by giving the authority to make personnel decisions. Other recommendations would transform school leadership: principals must be drawn from a broader pool of talented professionals ("non-traditional" sources), teachers must be given better mentorship/induction programs and professional development that is aligned to rigorous state standards rather than an ad hoc collection of fads.
Never mind the predictable complaints that these issues have been done to death. Given the makeup of this commission, the report is a shot across the bow, signifying a progressive shift in thinking. We congratulate the Commission on a noteworthy accomplishment.
"Teaching At Risk: A Call to Action"
The Teaching Commission, January 14, 2004
http://www.theteachingcommission.org/publications/FINAL_Report.pdfNO CHILD LEFT BEHIND * * *
(2) Useful New WebsiteMost education policy wonks and an increasing number of regular folk are aware that by January 2006, all teachers must be "highly qualified." A big part of getting there is for veteran subject to prove their subject matter competency-a fact that has some veteran teachers up in arms. One of the routes available to veterans to prove their stuff is by meeting their state's HOUSSE standards ("High, Objective, Uniform State Standards of Evaluation). States have been slowly developing their standards, which range from awful to not half bad. The Education Commission of the States has collected all of the HOUSSE standards on its website, a useful tool. Check it out.
http://www.ecs.org/HOUSSEdatabase
"ECS Database Looks at State Efforts"
Press Release, January 14, 2004
http://www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/49/69/4969.htmTEACHER PREPARATION * * *
(3) Ohio Takes Big Step Towards Improving Teacher QualityThere's good news from Ohio this week. A collaboration of all 51 colleges of education, the State Department of Education, and the Board of Education has decided to invest the resources and cooperation needed to determine what works in teacher preparation. The Ohio Partnership for Accountability is undertaking a five-year $10 million "value-added" analysis that will look at the English and math scores of students in order to determine how effective their teachers' preparation was. The advantage of using this method, pioneered by the University of Tennessee professor William Sanders, is that Ohio will be able to determine what works and what doesn't.
What's amazing about this project is the courage of all parties involved. Submitting one's self to an honest-to-goodness test of efficacy always involves the possibility for failure. Nevertheless, both the Ohio Partnership for Accountability and the state's two big teachers unions (OFT and OEA) have decided that it's worth the risk to learn what makes an effective teacher that can improve student achievement.
As Thomas Lasley, dean of the University of Dayton's School of Education and co-chair of the partnership said, "What a group of us deans said was, 'We're willing to take the challenge.' "We've got tons of graduates but no mechanism to assess the relative effectiveness of those teachers." Such candor is remarkable, refreshing, and rare.
"Ohio Looks for the Key to Perfect Teachers"
The Cleveland Plain-Dealer
http://www.cleveland.com/education/index.ssf?/base/isedu/1073820756136170.xml* * *
The VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT is published by Vermonters for Better Education 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701, 802.773.5240 Contact VTBetterEd@aol.com for more information.
SubscribeRemove
..
..
..
..