Saturday, November 20, 2004

Oversight Overseen.....

8-Article Newsletter Template
4LAKids: Sunday, Nov 21, 2004
In This Issue:
 •  Daily News: LAUSD BOND USE QUESTIONED: Oversight panel cites 'bait & switches' + OVERSEEING OVERSIGHT: LAUSD committee has no one to blame but itself
 •  New York Times: THOSE BAKE SALES ADD UP ...TO $9 BILLION OR SO!
 •  EdWeek: 'VALUE ADDED' MODELS GAIN IN POPULARITY + RESEARCHERS DEBATE MERITS OF 'VALUE ADDED' MEASURES
 •  THE ACADEMIC HALL OF SHAME: A Quartet of Editorials from the LA Times
 •  EVENTS: Coming up next week...
 •  4LAKids Book Club for October & November — ACHIEVEMENT MATTERS: Getting Your Child the Best Education Possible, by Hugh B. Price
 •  What can YOU do?


Featured Links:
 •  READING TO KIDS: Read to some kids one Saturday morning a month. Make a difference. Change some lives (including your own!).
 •  MAKING SCHOOLS WORK: Get the Book @ Amazon.com
 •  THE BEST RESOURCE ON CALIFORNIA SCHOOL FUNDING ON THE WEB: The Sacramento Bee's "Paying for Schools"
 •  FIVE CENTS MAKES SENSE FOR EDUCATION- Target one nickel from every federal tax dollar for Education
The Daily News, in its article-and-editorial/one-two on the Bond Oversight Committee's struggle with the fiscal machinations of LAUSD (LAUSD BOND USE QUESTIONED + OVERSEEING OVERSIGHT - below) got some facts fuzzy, the history mistaken and the truth absolutely correct: We are "rightly furious about the way district officials shift funds around." The editorial goes on to say the Oversight Committee has no one to blame but ourselves; here we differ— but that is beside the point. It isn't about blame, it's about accountability. It's about building and fixing schools, about creating opportunities for excellence for Los Angeles' schoolchildren – present and future.

LA Unified – which holds students and teachers accountable under No Child Left Behind – balks at being accountable itself to parents, taxpayers and citizens. After Prop BB
passed the District refused to cooperate with the Bond Oversight Committee. They attempted to fund the disastrous Belmont Learning Complex with BB funds ...but refused to open the Belmont books. It took a lawsuit to settle that, and after the settlement rather than open the Belmont to oversight the Board of Ed voted to fund Belmont from its General Fund! Only after that lawsuit settled could the Oversight Committee begin its work in earnest - and almost immediately the Oversight Committee, — not Superintendent Romer, not district staff, not the LAUSD Chief Financial Officer or the Inspector General — but we, the Bond Oversight Committee, discovered the $600 million overspent on Proposition BB!

Anyone who thought that Proposition BB and its $2.4 Billion was going to solve all the ills of thirty-plus years of no school construction and horrendous maintenance and repair
as the editorial implies needs to book a return flight from J.M. Barrie's Neverland! The voters and taxpayers have approved another $11.6 Billion to continue the work under
Measures K and R. Lessons were learned from BB: Those Bond measures list in detail the projects that the District will undertake; the voters ratified the list in the voting booth. The school Board could have put the things they now want to put on the list back when they made up the list ...but they chose not to! Now we are at the point where District again wants to fund things the voters didn't approve with Bond Funds. They are moving things they promised to pay for years ago from other sources to the bonds, adding to list of projects – adding at the top of the list ...and pushing things off the bottom!

It is however unsettling that the District in its recent dealings with the Oversight Committee does so through its General Counsel; when your attorney becomes your
spokesman there is the whiff of something afoot. The editorial describes the Oversight Committee as toothless - and this is true up to a point. Under the California Constitution the Bond Oversight Committee has no way to enforce our opinions or convince the school district to do the right thing except though public opinion ...or through the courts. There would be no winner in a legal action, only time and money wasted. And the district and the schoolchildren don't have much of either to spare.

There is good news to tell. Back in the 'bad old days' things were about as bad as they could get — that is not the fact now! Last Wednesday, the very day all this brouhaha came
to a head three new schools or major additions opened, one of them an exciting new charter high school: High Tech High! New schools are being built, old schools are being
fixed up. Kids are coming off the bus and returning to their neighborhood schools. Full Day Kindergarten is happening. The multi-track year 'round calendar is being phased out.

Some promises are being kept! — smf

• Wednesday's BOC Meeting replays Sunday, Nov 21st. at 9AM on KLCS, Channel 58.


Daily News: LAUSD BOND USE QUESTIONED: Oversight panel cites 'bait & switches' + OVERSEEING OVERSIGHT: LAUSD committee has no one to blame but itself
• LAUSD BOND USE QUESTIONED: Oversight panel cites 'bait and switches'

By Jennifer Radcliffe - Daily News Staff Writer

Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - The Los Angeles
Unified School District's citizen bond oversight
committee questioned on Wednesday how the district is
spending voter-approved bond revenue and warned that it
might run out of money before all projects are built.

The panel has been asked to sign off on using bond
revenue to pay salaries, leases and expense
reimbursements, which members noted were legal but
violate the spirit of the two bond measures -- to build and
repair schools. Members said these items should have
been paid for using other sources, including the district's
general fund.

And while the district has about $14 billion in state and
local bond money to spend on school construction, the
money could run out if the district isn't careful, said
oversight committee member Connie Rice.

"We have a very finite number of dollars to get these
schools constructed," she said. "We need to have
clarifications and a coherent reason for these switches. I
call them bait and switches."

Within the past month, the committee was asked to
approve spending $30 million to air-condition
gymnasiums and auditoriums, when bond money was
supposed to pay only to cool classrooms. Requests also
include $57 million for lockers and computers and $18
million to make bungalows wheelchair-accessible.

At its Oct. 20 meeting, committee members signed off on
the requests, but told district administrators to return in
30 days with a policy spelling out when projects can be
shifted from the general budget to bond funding.

No one from the district responded to the request.

"I'm outraged that we didn't get a response from the
senior district staff," committee member Scott Folsom
said.

Kevin Reed, LAUSD general counsel, said district staffers
were unaware of the committee's request.

"I didn't know that resolution existed before today," he
said. "We're embarrassed to not have a response for the
oversight committee."

Committee members also asked Wednesday that the
district develop a policy for spending interest that accrues
on the bonds -- $125.6 million on Proposition BB and
$37.5 million on Proposition K.

"This is a pot of money for which there are no guidelines.
There is no policy," Rice said. "This is a '60
Minutes'-potential story. ... You do not have a pot of
money without a policy for its use."

Given the district's ongoing financial problems, Reed said,
officials have been trying to find other ways to pay for
general fund items while maintaining enough bond money
to finish the list of construction and repair projects that
voters were promised.

He said the LAUSD has spent about $4 billion of the $14
billion, and is on pace to complete the promised projects.

"The superintendent is very sensitive to the issue of
ensuring that bond funds last to accomplish what they set
out to accomplish," Reed said, adding that the district
would respond to the oversight committee's concerns.

Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers
Association, said he thinks committee members have
legitimate concerns.

"We have seen this over and over and over again with
Los Angeles Unified -- they promise the moon and they
don't deliver. The bulk of the money goes into a black
hole," he said.

The watchdog group even resigned from the oversight
committee a few years ago, saying it was giving "fake
accountability" to the district's bond projects.

"We felt that the L.A. Unified School District was
treating the oversight like mushrooms -- keeping them in
the dark and feeding them manure," he said. "Why be part
of a process that's doomed to fail in the first place? The
value of the oversight committee is totally reliant on
getting good information."

• OVERSEEING OVERSIGHT: LAUSD committee has no one to blame but itself

Los Angeles Daily News Editorial

Thursday, November 18, 2004 - Members of the
committee charged with overseeing the LAUSD's use of
$14 billion in state and local bond money are rightly
furious about the way district officials shift funds around.
But ultimately, they have no one to blame but themselves.

The oversight committee complains that Los Angeles
Unified School District officials have continually asked to
use bond money to pay for projects that should be
financed out of the general fund. Some recent spending
was for air-conditioning school gymnasiums and
auditoriums, acquiring new lockers and equipment, and
making campuses more wheelchair-accessible.

But why does the district need to pay for such basic
repairs in the first place? Wasn't Proposition BB, the $2.4
billion bond measure that voters approved in 1997,
supposed to cover these expenses?

Well, yes, but you see, LAUSD officials frittered away
much of the BB revenues.

And how did that happen? The oversight committee failed
to do its job.

The committee's members see the writing on the wall.
They know there will be a day when all the bond money
dries up, and all the promised benefits won't be in place.
So they're lashing out - as much against their own
impotence as district officials' treachery.

"Oversight," it turns out, was a sham. A toothless gesture
on the part of the district to win over the trust of skeptical
voters. Now even the overseers themselves all but admit
as much.


New York Times: THOSE BAKE SALES ADD UP ...TO $9 BILLION OR SO!
_____________________________________________________

FUNDRAISING FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC SCHOOLS:
IN ARIZONA RESIDENTS ARE ALLOWED TO TAKE UP TO $250. OF THEIR STATE TAXES AND APPLY IT DIRECTLY TO ANY SCHOOL, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY HAVE CHILDREN WHO ATTEND.
_____________________________________________________

In The Schools — by Greg Winter

Nov.15, 2004 — Camping trips in the desert. Excursions
to the famed Scripps Institute on the California coast. A
summer at space camp. Not to mention the other
standards of a solid education: art classes, chess, sports
and individual tutors.

No, it is not the roster at an exclusive private school. It's
the menu of extracurricular activities offered at the public
Nadaburg Elementary School in Wittmann, Ariz., where
about 70 percent of the children are low income, if not
more.

So where does the money come from? Not from
education budgets or some benevolent foundation. The
answer lies miles away, in immaculate retirement
communities with names like Sun City West and Sun City
Grand. The residents there may not have any
grandchildren who attend the school, near Phoenix, but
they have become among its staunchest patrons.

The school offers an unusual glimpse of the degree to
which private fund-raising has reshaped the nation's
schools. In Arizona, for example, residents are allowed to
take up to $250 of their state taxes and apply it directly to
any school, regardless of whether they have children who
attend. Nadaburg's teachers and administrators use the
rule to great advantage.

They ride buses to retirement communities nearby to sign
up benefactors. They invite the people there to luncheons.
They lead the children in Christmas caroling for those
who have transformed their school.

"I consider it to be a legitimate, viable factor in the
success of our kids academically," said Steven
Yokobosky, Nadaburg's superintendent. "I mean, the kids
aren't excelling, but if you look at the demographics of
our school they shouldn't be doing as well as they are."

Private support of public schools has become a wide
phenomenon. Big city districts look to foundations and
businesses to help meet students' needs. Parents around
the nation are raising money for vital school functions as
state spending on education slows down.

But is all this private money enough to really change the
character of schools? And does it help close the gap
between wealthy and poor schools or widen it?

Public elementary and secondary schools claimed nearly
$373 billion in federal, state and local revenues during the
1999-2000 school year, federal statistics show. Nearly $9
billion of that came from nongovernmental sources.

Foundations, the institutional donors with a focus on
helping communities in need, gave about $1.2 billion to
public and private K-12 education in 2002, according to
the Foundation Center, a group in New York that works
to strengthen the nonprofit sector. That is a small fraction
of the amount coming from other private sources — most
notably, parents.

In an informal survey of about 100 of its member
organizations by the National PTA, conducted at the
request of the reporter, the group concluded that parents
and their communities contribute as much as if not more
than $10 billion in cash and services to the nation's
schools.

The gifts and services that PTA's furnish range from
libraries, computer labs and playgrounds to a laundry list
of smaller essentials that many districts may not be able to
afford.

Parental giving and fund-raising varies widely by income
level. The PTA's for the poorest 25 percent of schools
surveyed typically contributed $13 to $68 a student, while
the wealthiest 25 percent of schools surveyed typically
donated $192 to $279.

Some experts say there is not enough evidence to prove
that private money ends up favoring wealthier schools,
partly because their poorer counterparts get more money
from corporations and foundations. But given the
lopsided amounts that parents raise, some contend that
private money ultimately worsens the disparity.

"I think it clearly makes it worse," said Tom Vander Ark,
the education director for the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation, which has pledged more than $1 billion to
start schools serving low-income students. "But it's tricky,
because we don't want to condemn individual
contributions to local schools. They're certainly
supporting important things for young people. It's a
benign way that our society exacerbates the inequity
between the rich and the poor."

There are exceptions. Nadaburg's campaign in retirement
communities raised almost $244,000, or more than $488
a pupil, under the rule in 2002, researchers have found,
though the area has a much higher poverty rate than the
state average.

But statewide in Arizona, between 1998 and 2002, the
poorest quarter of schools received a total of about $8
million in contributions under the law, according to Glen
Y. Wilson, an assistant professor of education policy at
the University of Connecticut, while the wealthiest
quarter received more than $29 million.

Other state policies have had a similar effect, sometimes
by accident. In the late 90's, Vermont legislators tried to
make sure all schools had enough money, so they
required districts with higher property taxes to share
some of the wealth. To get around the law, about two
dozen communities deliberately kept property taxes down
and started local foundations that were exempt from the
rules on sharing. Local residents put more than $11
million into these private funds last year, the state said.

Vermont has since changed the law, effectively
dismantling these local funds, but not because they ran
contrary to the spirit of sharing, state officials said.
Instead, animosity developed in some towns because not
everyone contributed, said Bill Talbott, chief financial
officer for Vermont's education department.

When state spending on education shot up nationwide in
the late 90's, buoyed by the hearty tax receipts of a
forceful economy, the financial gap between rich and poor
districts began to narrow, according to a report released
last month by the Education Trust, a research group that
aims to close the achievement gap between students. But
growth in education spending has slowed considerably.
Wealthier districts have made up for much of the
slowdown by raising property taxes, so the financial gap
between rich and poor has expanded again, the report
found.

"What foundations shouldn't try to do is fund gaps in the
system, or fill holes that the public ought to be filling,"
said William Porter, executive director of Grantmakers
for Education, a network of 200 foundations. "The
resources that we can put toward a problem pale in
comparison to the problem itself."

As public spending on education slows, even PTA's in
some of the better-off districts say they have little choice
but to prop up their local schools. For example, beyond
the thousands of dollars parents have raised to outfit the
playground at Emerson Elementary School, a magnet
school with few poor students in Westerville, Ohio, the
school's PTA says it spends thousands more on essentials
like library books.

"It's no longer about arranging the parties and cleaning up
the playgrounds," said Trina Shanks, past president of
Emerson's PTA. "It's a whole lot more."


EdWeek: 'VALUE ADDED' MODELS GAIN IN POPULARITY + RESEARCHERS DEBATE MERITS OF 'VALUE ADDED' MEASURES
• 'VALUE ADDED' MODELS GAIN IN POPULARITY: Growth Yardstick Appeals to States
EDUCATION WEEK: Published: November 17, 2004
By Lynn Olson

The concept sounds appealing: Measure the effectiveness
of schools and teachers based on the amount of academic
progress their students make from one year to the next.
Often known as “value added” measures because they
track the “value” that schools add to individual students’
learning over time, such methods are increasingly popular
with educators and policymakers.

Some view the methods as an antidote to accountability
systems that focus solely on getting children to a specified
achievement level on a state test, regardless of where they
start. Others view them as a way to isolate the effects of
teachers and schools on learning, separate from such
background characteristics as race and poverty.
See Also
Read the accompanying story, “Researchers Debate
Merits of ‘Value Added’ Measures.”

Three national conferences on the topic took place last
month alone. And this week, the Washington-based
Council of Chief State School Officers planned to host a
meeting on their use.

“Value-added measurement is a very active area today,”
Nancy S. Grasmick, the state superintendent of education
in Maryland, said during a conference at the University of
Maryland College Park last month. “We know there’s
controversy surrounding this,” she added. “We need to
ferret out all of the factors and not just jump into this
without a strong research base.”

Indeed, as policymakers and practitioners rush to take up
value-added methods, researchers continue to debate their
merits and how the existing models can be improved.

While value-added assessments are well past their infancy,
noted Robert Lissitz, the director of the Maryland
Assessment Research Center for Student Success at the
University of Maryland, “the practical applications of
value-added models are complex, difficult, and often
controversial.”
Fairer Measurement?

That hasnÂ’t stopped the momentum, which has gained
steam in part because of the federal No Child Left Behind
Act. The law requires states to test every student annually
in reading and mathematics in grades 3-8 and at least
once in high school.

That mandate has opened up the possibility of tracking
individual student growth from grade to grade in far more
states, a prerequisite for value-added modeling. At the
same time, concerns that the lawÂ’s accountability
provisions are unfair to schools has sent people
scrambling for alternatives.

Sixteen state schools chiefs wrote to U.S. Secretary of
Education Rod Paige earlier this year requesting the
flexibility to use value-added or growth measures to meet
the accountability requirements. States such as Ohio and
Pennsylvania are now working to incorporate such
models into their state accountability systems, joining
existing ventures in Arizona, Florida, North Carolina, and
Tennessee. And many other states, including Arkansas,
California, Colorado, Louisiana and Minnesota, are
considering adding value-added assessments.

One of the big attractions for educators is that
value-added methods could provide a fairer way to
measure school and teacher effectiveness than existing
accountability systems.

The NCLB law, for example, judges schools primarily on
the percentage of children who perform at the
“proficient” level on state tests. Schools don’t get credit
for students who make lots of growth in a given year but
still fail to reach the proficiency bar, or for advanced
students who continue to progress.

Schools also are judged by comparing the performance of
cohorts of students in successive years—for example, the
performance of this yearÂ’s 3rd graders vs. last yearÂ’s 3rd
graders—even though the two groups may be quite
different. In contrast, value-added methods track the
growth of each student in a school over time from the
childÂ’s starting point.

Such methods also can provide schools with diagnostic
information about the rate at which individual children are
learning in particular subjects and classrooms, making it
possible to target assistance to students or teachers or
areas of the curriculum that need help.

In 2002, the Pennsylvania education department invited
districts that were already testing in grades 3-8 to
participate in a pilot value-added project, using the model
that William L. Sanders developed for Tennessee in 1992.
The plan is to take the project statewide next school year.
‘A Great Diagnostic Tool’

The 4,500-student DuBois Area School District, about
100 miles from the Ohio border, signed up immediately.

“There are people who are really worried about this
concept and want it to be perfect before we say yes,” said
Sharon Kirk, the superintendent of the district. She spoke
last month at a conference in Columbus, Ohio, sponsored
by Battelle for Kids, a nonprofit there that is working
with about 80 Ohio districts on a value-added pilot using
the Sanders method. “I can’t imagine why we would not
absolutely embrace information that is going to make us
better.”

One of the first things Ms. Kirk did was ask each principal
to predict which group of students his or her school was
serving best. Daniel Hawkins, the principal of the DuBois
Middle School, said heÂ’d been confident the school was
doing a fine job educating its most academically advanced
students. When the data came back, it showed that in
both math and reading, those students were making less
progress over the course of a year than similarly
high-performing students in other schools.

“I was wrong,” he said, “obviously wrong.”

Amy Short, an algebra teacher at the school, said
educators realized they were spending too much time
reviewing material at the start of each school year and
needed to accelerate instruction.
At Ohio's DuBois Area Middle School, teachers such as
Amy Short advance instruction based on "value added"
findings.
—Paul A. Wilson for Education Week

The school set up four different levels of algebra and
provided additional periods of math practice for students
with the lowest math scores who also were falling behind
their peers. Each week, teachers in the same grade and
subject sat down to decide what they would teach in the
coming week, and crafted nine-week assessments to track
studentsÂ’ progress.

By 2003, DuBois Middle School students were
demonstrating significantly more growth over the course
of the year than similarly performing students elsewhere.

“I really like this because I think it’s a great diagnostic
tool for me,” said Ms. Short, who uses the data on
individual students to tell whether they need additional
support or enrichment. “I thought I was teaching my kids
better.”

Research by Mr. Sanders and others in the field has found
that the variability in effectiveness between classrooms
within schools is three to four times greater than the
variability across schools. Moreover, students assigned to
highly effective teachers for several years running
experience much more academic growth than students
assigned to a string of particularly ineffective teachers,
although the precise size of those effects and how long
they persist are unclear.

Based on such findings, said Daniel Fallon, the chairman
of the education division at the Carnegie Corporation of
New York, people have come to recognize that the
effects of good teaching “are profound and appear to be
cumulative.”
High Stakes?

Most people appear comfortable using value-added
information as a powerful school improvement tool. The
bigger question is whether states are ready to use such
methods in high-stakes situations.

So far, the U.S. Department of Education has not
permitted any state to use a value-added model to meet
the requirements for adequate yearly progress under the
No Child Left Behind law. And itÂ’s not certain the
department has the authority to do so without changing
the statute.

Celia H. Sims, a special assistant in the departmentÂ’s
office of elementary and secondary education, said at the
time states submitted their accountability plans to the
federal government, most didnÂ’t have in place the grades
3-8 testing or student-information systems that would
permit them to track individual student gains over time.

“Value-added can certainly be used even right now as an
additional academic indicator by the state,” she noted,
although no state has made that choice. In part, thatÂ’s
because additional academic indicators can only serve to
increase the number of schools potentially identified for
improvement under the federal law.

“States are still looking at how growth can fit within No
Child Left Behind,” Ms. Sims said. She does not know of
any value-added model that specifies how much growth
students must make each year, so that all students
perform at the proficient level by 2013-14, as the law
requires. “That’s the non-negotiable,” she said.

Researchers in at least three organizations—the Dover,
N.H.-based Center for Assessment, the Portland,
Ore.-based Northwest Evaluation Association and the
Washington-based American Institutes for
Research—have been working on models to combine
value-added analyses with absolute measures of student
performance, so that students would be on track to
achieve proficiency by a specified point.

“This, to me, is a central issue with value-added,” said
Mitchell D. Chester, the assistant state superintendent for
policy and accountability in the Ohio education
department. By state law, the department must
incorporate Mr. SandersÂ’ value-added method into the
accountability system by 2007-08. “How do you combine
looking at progress with still trying to ensure youngsters
in Ohio end up graduating with the skills and knowledge
that they need to succeed beyond high schools?”

Some policymakers also are eager to use value-added
models as part of teacher evaluation or compensation
systems. But while many researchers and educators said
value-added results might, eventually, be used as one
component of such systems, they should not be the only
measure.

“I think that really puts too much of a burden on
value-added measures,” said Henry I. Braun, a statistician
with the Princeton, N.J.-based Educational Testing
Service.

In general, such measures can distinguish between highly
effective and ineffective teachers, based on the amount of
growth their students make, researchers say, but they
have a hard time distinguishing between the vast majority
of teachers whose performance hovers around average.

Moreover, while value-added models can identify schools
or teachers that appear more effective than others, they
cannot identify what those teachers do that makes them
more effective.

“In the earliest years of implementing a value-added
assessment system, itÂ’s probably smart to lower the
stakes,” said Dale Ballou, a professor of education at
Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn.

ItÂ’s also unclear how such measures would work for
teachers whose subjects are not measured by state tests.

Both the Ohio Federation of Teachers and the Ohio
Education Association have supported the use of a
growth measure as part of OhioÂ’s accountability system.

“We felt there were a lot of hard-working people out
there who were not getting adequate credit for moving
kids along the way they do,” said Debbie Tully, an official
with the OFT, an affiliate of the American Federation of
Teachers.

But while the union is “more than open” to using such
measures as one component in teacher evaluation, Ms.
Tully added, itÂ’s far too early to tell if it can be used as an
evaluation tool.
‘Under the Hood’

Yet for all the criticism of value-added methods, said Mr.
Braun of the ETS, “we have to confront the logic behind
the enthusiasm that we see out there in the world for
value-added measures.”

The key, he said, is for policymakers to “look under the
hood,” and not just take such measures at face value.

“I think the fact that people are taking this stuff seriously
now is focusing people on the right questions,” said
VanderbiltÂ’s Mr. Ballou.

While value-added models may eventually run up against
insurmountable limitations, theyÂ’re not there yet.

“All the other methods are also flawed,” Mr. Ballou
noted, “so if you’re not going to use this one, what’s the
alternative?”


• Read the accompanying story, “Researchers Debate Merits of 'Value Added' Measures.



THE ACADEMIC HALL OF SHAME: A Quartet of Editorials from the LA Times
• FAILING IN LEADERSHIP

November 20, 2004 – No matter who had the job of
Education secretary these last few years, it was bound to
be tough. The No Child Left Behind Act gave the U.S.
Department of Education its first big — and controversial
— regulatory role. Unfortunately, departing Secretary
Rod Paige politicized when he should have united, and
was more a passive mouthpiece for administration policies
than the bold, perceptive school leader the nation needed.

Early on, Paige seemed a poster child for the
accountability movement. Under his tenure as
superintendent of Houston schools, scores shot up and
dropout rates fell. But then the so-called Houston miracle
became the Houston muddle, when it turned out that the
district had drastically under- reported its dropout rates
and kept half its non-English-speaking students from
taking a national reading test — thus assuring itself
relatively high scores. This may have been the second
most scandalous numbers-polishing exercise in Houston,
Enron's hometown. It turns out that school reform
requires more than talk about higher standards.

It's a message Paige never quite got. No Child Left
Behind was a bipartisan effort with strong Democratic
support, yet Paige managed to polarize factions with rigid
regulations and a tendency to speak before thinking.

He characterized the nation's largest teachers union as a
"terrorist organization" for criticizing the law. He refused
to fight for badly needed school funding. And only as
outrage over some of the law's most inane provisions
reached fever pitch — just as the election season started
— did Paige relent and offer more flexible regulations.

As the president's longtime advisor, both on Texas school
reform and on national domestic policy, Paige's probable
successor, Margaret Spellings, has shown that she deeply
cares about public schools, but there is little evidence that
she will address the ongoing, crippling weaknesses of No
Child Left Behind or continued federal underfunding for
education. The schools need someone to bring President
Bush's vision for better public schools to fruition by
challenging his assumptions about what that will take, not
by giving in to them.

• A BAKE SALE FOR THE DECATHALON?

November 20, 2004 – After two straight years of winning
the national Academic Decathlon, California schools
almost didn't even get a chance to enter next year. Private
donations are down, prompting the organization that runs
the state competition to consider calling it off. Board
members voted unanimously to go ahead on Thursday —
even if they have to stage a bare-bones event.

The decathlon, the best-known high school academic
competition in the nation, was born in California, which
has supplied nearly half the winning teams since the
contest went nationwide 22 years ago. It forces high
achievers to stretch their brains to the utmost and teaches
even low achievers strong study skills, while giving all
participants close, supportive contact with a teacher — all
things that public officials keep saying they want out of
the schools.

Yet a state that spends about $700 a year per high school
football player somehow can't come up with the $25 or so
per decathlon participant that it would take to keep the
state organization going. Its $250,000 budget comes
mostly from private donors.

The event's founder wanted to give serious students the
kind of team experience and recognition that high school
culture generally reserves for athletic stars. But he also
wanted to keep it from becoming elitist. Not only do all
kinds of schools field teams, each team must include
students with B and C averages. This has galvanized
many underachieving students to hit the books. Two
years ago, a C student was the top scorer in the national
decathlon.

Relative to most education programs, $250,000 is chump
change. So why is it so hard to raise the money, when
corporations routinely complain about the public schools
failing to produce critical thinkers?

What the decathlon really needs is a stable form of
long-term funding. The Legislature should simply write
the piddling sum into the budget — maybe taking it out of
state Education Secretary Richard Riordan's allocation.
The decathlon is doing more for schools than his office.

• GENESIS THROUGH THE BACK DOOR

November 20, 2004 – American high school seniors rank
16th among 21 industrialized nations when it comes to
achievement in science, and you can bet a frozen
mastodon that the leaders — Sweden, the Netherlands,
Iceland and Norway — got there with a stronger
curriculum and better-trained teachers, not with endless
court fights over creationism.

Yet fighting creationism has evolved into a booming
business for the American Civil Liberties Union. It is
awaiting a ruling in Georgia in a suit it brought against
the Cobb County school board. Seeking to mollify
religious parents who take the creation story in Genesis
literally and believe that their religion should intrude into
their public schools, the board decided to paste a sticker
inside the cover of high school biology textbooks, saying
in part, "Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the
origin of living things." Caveat homo sapiens. What next?
A back-cover sticker to American history texts wondering
if ending slavery was really such a great idea?

The evolution-hedging wording ignores the overwhelming
evidence supporting the widely accepted theory of
evolution. But in the politically charged world of school
board politics, we suppose school leaders deserve credit
for trying to solve a devil of an argument with a
compromise that keeps students learning about evolution,
with the full text intact, and teachers free to teach.

It was a surprising move for the often uncompromising
creationists to accept the sticker, the barest of implied
nods to their convictions. In their eyes, at least parents
who want to teach their children creationism — at home
— can point to the sticker to quiet that inevitable teen
refrain: "You're wrong."

Far more troubling was last month's decision by the
Dover, Pa., school board to mandate the teaching of
"intelligent design" alongside evolution. The U.S.
Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that the required teaching of
creationism as science violated the 1st Amendment.
Trying to disguise creationism with the label of
"intelligent design" (which sounds like an IKEA
marketing pitch) doesn't pass the smell test — or any
valid science test.

• A TEXAS-SIZED FIB

November 20, 2004 – Presumably, not many
middle-school children in Texas marry people of the same
sex. But thanks to the state's Board of Education, they
now know they're not supposed to.

Textbook publisher Holt, Rinehart and Winston agreed to
the education board's demand earlier this month that the
publisher's middle-school textbooks for Texas define
marriage as the "lifelong union between a husband and
wife." You can't fault the accuracy of part of that
statement. For now, in Texas and every other state,
state-sanctioned marriage is solely for those of opposite
sexes. Texas bans gay marriages and does not recognize
same-sex civil unions.

But what's with this "lifelong" business? Even Texas can't
pretend that's always true. Textbooks might have to be
politically correct for their time and place, but they're still
supposed to be accurate.

With 4.1 divorces a year per 1,000 residents, just a notch
below the national average, Texas is pretty much like
everyplace else: About half of its marriages end in
divorce. Slightly more than half of those divorces involve
couples with children. In this respect, Texas is different
from that liberal stronghold, Massachusetts — which, at
2.4 divorces per 1,000 residents, has the lowest divorce
rate in the nation.

Maybe such statistics don't matter. According to the
definition in the Holt, Rinehart textbook, marriages that
end in divorce aren't real marriages anyway, right? Even
Texas kindergartners know better than that.


EVENTS: Coming up next week...
•Monday Nov 22, 2004
Local District 2: Sylmar, San Fernando and Polytechnic School Families
Presentation of Phase III Project Definitions
At this meeting we will:
* Present and discuss the SCHOOL PROJECT DEFINITIONS that staff will recommend to the LAUSD Board of Education for review and approval
* Review the factors used to identify new school projects, including community input
* Go over next steps in the school construction process
This is the final meeting on Phase III Project Definition before we go to the LAUSD Board of Education for approval!
6:30 to 8:30 p.m.
Haddon Avenue School Auditorium
10115 Haddon Avenue
Pacoima, CA 91331

*Dates and times subject to change.

• Thursday, Nivember 25, 2004

HAPPY THANKSGIVING EVERYONE!

_____________________________________
• SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BOND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE:
http://www.laschools.org/bond/
Phone: 213.241.4700
____________________________________________________
• LAUSD FACILITIES COMMUNITY OUTREACH CALENDAR:
http://www.laschools.org/happenings/
Phone: 213.633.7616


• LAUSD BOARD OF EDUCATION & COMMITTEES MEETING CALENDAR



4LAKids Book Club for October & November — ACHIEVEMENT MATTERS: Getting Your Child the Best Education Possible, by Hugh B. Price
Publisher: Dafina Books, 256 pages ISBN: 0758201206

Hugh B. Price is the President of the National Urban League. On the face of it his excellent book is about closing the Achievement Gap that seperates poor children and children of color from high performing “white” students.

But his message is loud and clear — and every
parent can learn from it: Parents from underperforming schools must insist upon the same level of performance as suburban parents do. Every parent has a right to expect and insist-upon excellence from teachers, administrators and the school district; we must also insist-upon and expect excellence from our own children.

Price lays much of the responsibility for the Achievement
Gap off to what he calls the “Preparation Gap”; the
dearth of adequate pre-school programs in inner city
neighborhoods. But he is not easy on parents. All must
follow the example of archtypical "pushy" suburban parents: Be Involved in Your ChildrenÂ’s Lives and Education Every Step Of The Way!

This isnÂ’t about race and economics; itÂ’s about hard work at home and in the school and in the community!


• from Chapter Eight: DEMANDING – AND GETTING
– GOOD SCHOOLS: What Parents Can Do

Entrenched bureaucracies sometimes change out of
enlightened self-interest. In other words, they see the light
and reform themselves before it's too late, before a more
compelling alternative comes widely available. Other
times, it takes concerted external pressure to force
bureaucracies to change-for the sake of their "customers"
as well as themselves.

For far too long, public educators have kept their heads in
the sand, like ostriches, in the face of an urgent need to
improve urban and and rural schools. Parents, politicians,
and business leaders have grown restless with the sluggish
pace of school improvement. I urge parents, caregivers,
and community leaders to keep up the relentless pressure
to create straight “A” schools for your children and every
American child.

Even parents in comfortable suburbs must stay right on
the school's case. "I made an assumption that in suburbia
the school would place my child where she needs to be,"
says Mane, a stay at home mother from a well-to-do
community in New Jersey: “We moved here from
Brooklyn where my daughter, Taisha., was in an
overcrowded, understaffed kindergarten class. One of the
reasons we moved to this town was for its highly rated
school system When Taisha was in third grade, the school
sent me a notice that she was reading and doing math at
an eighth grade level. I called her teacher and asked him if
there were any special classes my daughter could take at
the school that would encourage her academic talents. He
said, 'Oh well, we do have a gifted and talented
program.'”

“I didn't RECEIVE that call — I MADE that call!"

"My daughter was testing in the 90th percentile nationally, and if I hadn't found out on my own that she was eligible for advanced classes, she would never be there now."

So regardless of where you live and what your family
circumstances are, here's what you must do in order to
make sure that your children are well served by their
schools and placed squarely on the path to academic
success:

1. BE VIGILANT. Make it your business to ask your
children what's going on at school. Look for possible
trouble spots such as teachers' negative attitudes,
tracking, discipline problems, safety issues, and so on.
Stay in touch with your kids and pay attention to what
they are telling you-and keeping from you.

2. BE INFORMED. Educate yourself about what your
children are learning in school and what the school offers.
Find out if the work they're doing is grade level or better
and whether it meets the academic standards imposed by
the states. Familiarize yourself with the standardized tests
your children are expected to take, when they must take
them, and how they should prepare properly to do well on
them. One school superintendent has the parents of
fourth-graders actually take the state reading exam from
the prior year so they'll better understand what their
children are expected to know for the exam. Read up on
national and state educational policies and regulations,
with an eye to how they will directly affect your children.

3. BE INVOLVED. Join the PTA. Attend parent-teacher
conferences and "meet-the-teacher" nights. Vote in the
school board elections — maybe even run for a seat on the board yourself. No one can fight harder than you for your children's right to a good education.

4. BE VOCAL. Speak up if you see a problem with your
childÂ’s schooling, even if you think there may be
repercussions because of your activism. Go to your child's
teacher or principal if you detect. unfairness in the way
your child is being treated. If you feel you — or your
child or your child-are being punished for your
outspokenness go to your pastor, the local Urban League,
or another community organization.

5. BE VISIBLE. Make sure the school knows that your
are actively involved in your child's education. Become
involved in the governing process of your local school
system. Attend school board meetings and get to know
your local elected representatives

6. ORGANIZE. Meet with other parents to discuss how
you can work as a group to help your children. Start on a
the grassroots level with neighbors, relatives, friends.
Many voices are stronger than one, and work in unison to
ensure that achievement matters much to your children's
school as it does to you.

* * * *

Children want to do well. When large numbers of them
fail its because adults-school administrators, teachers,
parents and their larger community-have failed them.

We all know it doesn't have to be this way. Lousy public
schools can be turned around if the adults mobilize to do
so: If adults will say: “No more excuses for school
failure!” I'm not downplaying the many problems that
many schools and the families they serve face. -Just the
opposite. While these problems may not go away. they
neednÂ’t defeat the efforts of determined parents and
educators to close the Preparation Gap and ensure that
children achieve, regardless of their family circumstances.


Get ACHIEVEMENT MATTERS from your local library, bookstore - or order it by clicking here.



What can YOU do?
• E-mail, call or write your school board member. Or your city councilperson, mayor, assemblyperson, state senator, the governor, member of congress, senator - or the president. Tell them what you really think.
• Open the dialogue. Write a letter to the editor. Circulate these thoughts. Talk to the principal and teachers at your local school.
• Speak with your friends, neighbors and coworkers. Stay on top of education issues. Don't take my word for it!
• Get involved at your neighborhood school. Join your PTA. Serve on a School Site Council. Be there for a child.
• Vote.


Contact your school board member



Scott Folsom is a parent and parent leader in LAUSD. He is Vice President for Education of Los Angeles 10th District PTSA and represents PTA on the LAUSD Construction Bond Citizen's Oversight Committee. He serves on various school district advisory and policy committees and is a PTA officer and governance council member at three LAUSD schools. He is also the elected Youth & Education boardmember on the Arroyo Seco Neighborhood Council.
• In this forum his opinions are his own and your opinions and feedback are invited.
• To SUBSCRIBE e-mail: 4LAKids-subscribe@topica.email-publisher.com - or -TO ADD YOUR OR ANOTHER'S NAME TO THE 4LAKids SUBCRIPTION LIST E-MAIL smfolsom@aol.com with "SUBSCRIBE" AS THE SUBJECT. Thank you.
 Â• THE 4LAKids ARCHIVE - This and past Issues are available with interactive feedback at http://4lakids.blogspot.com/

 Update Profile  |  Unsubscribe  |  Confirm  |  Forward




Sunday, November 14, 2004

The National Education Alert Level is GREEN!

8-Article Newsletter Template
4LAKids: Sunday, Nov 14, 2004
In This Issue:
 •  NCLB–Two from the Times: THE EASY SCHOOL FIXES ARE OVER + FEW PARENTS MOVE THEIR CHILDREN OUT OF FAILING SCHOOLS
 •  PTA/LAUSD DENTAL PROGRAM IN DOUBT
 •  Daily News Op-Ed: COMPROMISE CLEARED WAY FOR GREATER GOOD
 •  FEEDBACK – Re:
 •  Save the Dates: SPECIAL ED FUNDRAISER (11/19) + WORKSHOP: SCHOOL ACOUSTIC DESIGN (11/19) + GIFTED CONFERENCE (12/4) PLUS EVENTS: Coming up next week..
 •  4LAKids Book Club for October & November — ACHIEVEMENT MATTERS: Getting Your Child the Best Education Possible, by Hugh B. Price
 •  What can YOU do?


Featured Links:
 •  READING TO KIDS: Read to some kids one Saturday morning a month. Make a difference. Change some lives (including your own!).
 •  MAKING SCHOOLS WORK: Get the Book @ Amazon.com
 •  THE BEST RESOURCE ON CALIFORNIA SCHOOL FUNDING ON THE WEB: The Sacramento Bee's "Paying for Schools"
 •  FIVE CENTS MAKES SENSE FOR EDUCATION- Target one nickel from every federal tax dollar for Education
Let's see: Vice President Cheney is in the hospital for
tests ....and apparently Secretary of Education Rod Paige,
the nation's biggest proponent of testing, is on the way
out! Maybe Secretary Paige will take the John Ashcroft
'my work is done so its safe for me to leave' route? His
letter [see Feedback, below] certainly takes that tone!

The Times article (link below) quotes others as naming
Paige "the visionary champion of No Child Left Behind",
but the NEA publication Education Week (no friend of
Paige, who called the NEA a "terrorist organization"
earlier this year) reports that while the wire services
indicate that the decision to leave was Mr. PaigeÂ’s,
others are suggesting that is not the case.

"Two education experts outside the Bush administration
told Education Week on Nov. 12 they had heard that
White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card, Jr., had
phoned Mr. Paige recently to ask him to resign.

“I hear that he has been told that he’s going,” said one
source, who spoke on condition of anonymity."

Elsewhere the debate over Paige's legacy (or lack thereof)
in the form of the NCLB fulminates. [see: 'The Easy
School Fixes Are Over' + 'Few Parents Move...'}

Charter schools continue to be a hot topic for
conversation. [see: 'Compromise Cleared Way...' &
Feedback #3]

....and PTA's exemplary program of low cost dental care
for LAUSD students needs help. [see: 'Dental Program in
Doubt']

Even the good news is worrisome. —smf


LA TIMES: Education Secretary Paige Plans to Step Down



NCLB–Two from the Times: THE EASY SCHOOL FIXES ARE OVER + FEW PARENTS MOVE THEIR CHILDREN OUT OF FAILING SCHOOLS
• LA Times Editorial: THE EASY SCHOOL FIXES ARE OVER

November 11, 2004 - The pace of school gains in
California has slowed, after years of slight but steady test
score improvement. The quick fixes have been exhausted
— standards established, class sizes cut, curriculum
revamped, teachers trained. New progress will require
education leaders to address intractable problems that
hold California's public schools back: unpredictable and
inadequate funding; growing rolls of poor, immigrant and
disabled children; and an aging teacher corps hamstrung
by inflexible labor unions. Unfortunately, courage and
creativity seem to be in short supply in the state's
education bureaucracy.

The state's 5-year-old standardized testing program was
supposed to be part of an Academic Performance Index
that would measure school achievement in several areas,
including attendance and graduation rates. Teachers and
schools that did well were to receive bonuses; schools
that didn't got intervention. But the bonuses stopped
when the money dried up, the intervention felt like
punishment, and the index never evolved to include
anything other than test scores — which tend to be low in
schools with low-income students and higher in schools
with middle-class kids. All schools are expected to show
yearly gains, but low-ranking schools must make up more
ground at a faster pace.

This year, fewer than half of the state's 6,500 public
schools met their improvement goals, down from 78%
last year. Los Angeles Unified schools did slightly better
— 52% made acceptable improvement, compared with
85% last year. Testing experts say the slowdown follows
a familiar pattern in assessment programs, in which initial
dramatic gains tend to slow as time goes on.

That's why it was disingenuous for state Supt. Jack
O'Connell to launch a finger-pointing campaign, blaming
teachers and parents for losing focus and suggesting that
scores will rise if we simply "redouble our efforts." His
obsession with toughening academic standards and
sending every student off to college must seem
frustratingly myopic at schools where half the kids have
dropped out by 12th grade.

State Education Secretary Richard Riordan is no better.
He has been conspicuously silent for most of his tenure.
Both O'Connell and Riordan spend plenty of time visiting
schools; they ought to use those trips as more than photo
ops.

It's clear even from this year's stagnant test scores that
some schools are succeeding against long odds. Here's
what works: Collaboration among teachers, support from
parents, frequent measurement of student skills and early
intervention with struggling students. Officials ought to
study successful schools and spread their stories, bringing
light, not heat, to the test score debate.

_______________________________________

• FEW PARENTS MOVE THEIR CHILDREN OUT OF
FAILING SCHOOLS: Federal law allows transfers, but
critics say it ignores the communal role of local campuses.

By Duke Helfand and Joel Rubin
LA Times Times Staff Writers

November 8, 2004 - More than 1 million students in the
nation's largest urban school districts have remained at
poor-performing campuses despite a federal law that
allows them a chance to escape to better schools.

The offer extended by the No Child Left Behind
education law is intended to expand school choices for
children in low-income communities.

But in Los Angeles, only 215 students switched to better
campuses last year out of nearly 204,000 who were
eligible.

In Chicago, 1,097 students out of 270,000 transferred.

And in New York, 6,828 out of 230,000 students moved
to other campuses.

A lack of interest on the part of parents and a shortage of
available seats in good schools have combined to weaken
the impact of the law. Still, the Bush administration
argues that its signature domestic policy strengthens local
campuses by introducing competitive marketplace forces
into public school districts.

Administration officials also say they judge the success of
the law by whether schools improve, not by the numbers
of transfers.

"This is a real culture shift," said Eugene Hickok, deputy
secretary in the U.S. Department of Education. "For
years, the system did what was best for the system. Now
we are arguing that [schools] have to find ways to
respond to the needs of their customers. That's what
choice is about."

The Bush administration is expected to expand the
reforms of No Child Left Behind as the president enters
his second term, possibly extending the law's testing
requirements from elementary and middle schools into
high schools.

That could increase the number of failing campuses —
and thus the pool of students eligible for transfers — as
more schools struggle to meet the measure's demanding
expectations.

Critics say the low numbers of students taking advantage
of the offer, however, reveal a significant flaw in the law:
Policymakers misunderstand the importance of
neighborhood schools to parents.

"The law does give real power to parents. It's just not a
power they are willing to use very often," said Tom
Loveless, director of the Brown Center on Education
Policy at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "The
choice provision of the law is not Â… going to
revolutionize schools."

Even if children leave their local campuses, some district
leaders say they cannot accommodate more transfers
because their best campuses already are strapped for
space.

And school districts must use valuable federal funds to
bus students to schools of their choice, siphoning money
away from low-performing campuses.

"In Los Angeles, you're going to move from one
overcrowded school to another overcrowded school. I
don't think that is much of a solution," said Los Angeles
schools Supt. Roy Romer, who believes the law unfairly
labels schools as failures.

Some districts have set limits on the numbers of transfers
for fear of swamping high-performing campuses.

New York City schools, for example, are not offering
high school students the opportunity to transfer this year
through No Child Left Behind, saying the city's high
school admissions process already allows choices.

And in Chicago, officials have reserved just 438 seats for
transfers this year even though 8,000 students have asked
to move.

Last year, the district set aside 1,097 seats for 18,000
students who expressed interested.

The district holds a lottery for the available transfer slots.

Chicago officials said an Illinois law barred them from
crowding schools to satisfy the requirements of No Child
Left Behind.

"I'm not going to put 40 kids in a classroom," said Arne
Duncan, Chicago Public Schools' chief executive. "I'm not
going to change the fundamental nature of what has made
a school successful."

Schools are labeled failures under the federal law if they
do not meet strict targets for improving test scores each
year; campuses earn no credit for partial gains.

Schools in low-income communities that fail to meet their
targets two years in a row are required to offer transfers
to their students.

Many districts reluctantly notify parents of their right to
better schools as required by No Child Left Behind, even
as they promote the benefits of campuses on the federal
watch list.

In the Anaheim City School District, officials encourage
parents to consider more than just test scores when
deciding whether to switch schools.

"When parents call, we explain that the programs and the
training for teachers is the same at every school," said
Ruben Barron, Anaheim's deputy superintendent.

"It is not about dissuading them — they have a right to
transfer if they want — but it is about making an informed
decision. We do tell them what their school is doing
right," he said.

Last year, 4,439 students at five Anaheim district schools
were eligible for transfers. Only three moved to new
campuses, the district reported.

None of the 600 students at Abraham Lincoln Elementary
transferred last year.

Principal Victoria Knaack interpreted the lack of interest
in switching schools as a vote of confidence even as her
campus struggled to meet expectations of No Child Left
Behind.

"When they don't move, it means we're doing something
right," she said. "It's an affirmation for us."

Parents say Lincoln is a good school filled with dedicated
teachers. They say the campus, in the middle of a
working-class Latino neighborhood, is an integral part of
the community.

Lincoln offers an array of parenting and computer classes
in the evenings. Nearly 100 parents attended one recent
class.

"It wouldn't matter if they told me another school was
100 times better, it wouldn't do as much for [my son] as
he gets here," Angela Vela, whose first-grader attends
Lincoln, said in Spanish. "It doesn't matter how good the
school is if the child isn't motivated and the parents aren't
involved."

Federal education officials say more parents don't take
advantage of the option to move because they aren't
notified until after the start of the school year.

Leaders in several school districts acknowledged the
problem but said it was not their fault. State education
departments, they said, release the lists of failing
campuses only days or weeks before school starts, leaving
districts little time to inform parents.

The Los Angeles Unified School District notifies parents
twice a year: around the time school starts in the fall and
again in December.

But parents cite reasons other than timing in their
decisions to have their children stay put. They say federal
policymakers fail to appreciate the social and communal
roles that schools play in low-income and immigrant
neighborhoods. At many campuses, parents get a chance
to serve on school committees and take evening classes.

"Here, we are family," said Rosa Villafana, 47, who
turned down the chance for her daughter to transfer out
of Loreto Street Elementary in the Cypress Park
neighborhood of northeast Los Angeles.

"The state and the federal government don't see the
sentimental value of a school," Villafana added. "If I
thought my child was failing, I would change. But I'm
happy."

Loreto Street is one of 178 campuses in the Los Angeles
Unified School District considered to be low-achieving
under the law. More than 400 students have asked for —
and received — transfers from those schools since the
start of the 2003-04 school year.

Daniel and Dinora Sanchez jumped at the chance to move
their 9-year-old son, Christian, to a better school outside
their east San Fernando Valley neighborhood.

Christian now attends Germain Street Elementary in the
northwest Valley community of Chatsworth.

The Sanchez family liked the idea of Christian attending a
diverse school with more high-achieving students,
something they didn't feel he had at their local school, San
Fernando Elementary. That campus, where 99% of the
students are Latino, rates a 2 on the state's school
rankings, which go from 1 to 10. Germain rates a 9.

"I wanted him to interact with different types of
students," said Dinora Sanchez, who teaches second
grade in Canoga Park. "I always felt that if you surround
yourself with kids who are doing better, your
expectations go up."

Christian said he was sad to leave his old school but now
feels more challenged.

"I kind of felt like I was the smartest kid in the class" at
San Fernando, he said. "There are a lot of smart kids in
my grade [at Germain]. I like my new school a lot."

The Los Angeles district must use some of its federal
poverty funds to pay for the boy's transportation to his
new school, as required by No Child Left Behind.

Like L.A. Unified, districts elsewhere must devote up to
20% of their federal poverty funds to pay for transfers
and after-school tutoring at campuses identified as failing.
Although district leaders see value in the tutoring, they
object to the added costs of the transfers.

The Clark County School District in Las Vegas had to
use some of its federal money last year to pay for 205
students to switch schools, out of 12,000 who were
eligible.

Leaders in Clark County, which has the nation's
sixth-largest school system with more than 280,000
students, say the numbers of transfers could increase if
more parents become aware of the option and additional
schools land on the federal failure list.

"It's money spent for the wrong purpose," said Agustin
Orci, deputy superintendent of the Clark County system.
"I'd rather put that money into classrooms than buses."


• SCHOOL CHOICE
The chart below shows the numbers of poor children who
were eligible to transfer from low-performing schools to
better campuses -- and the numbers of students who
actually moved -- in 2003-04 school year under the No
Child Left Behind education law.

School districts...............................eligible (transferred)

New York City...................................230,000 (6,828)
Los Angeles Unified..........................203,684 (215)
Chicago .........................................270,000 (1,097)
Dade County (Miami)...........................7,000 (321)
Broward County (Ft Lauderdale) ..........60,000 (869)
Clark County/Las Vegas.....................12,000 (205)
Houston Independent.............................226 (0)
Philadelphia...................................142,0251(135)
Hawaii (has one district).....................55,000 (157)
Hillsborough County/Tampa...............45,000 (450)

Sources: The school districts.


PTA/LAUSD DENTAL PROGRAM IN DOUBT
NOTE: LAUSD is so big that it is the covered by two
California State PTA districts; 31st covering the San Fernando Valley and 10th covering the rest! These two PTA/PTSA (the trerms are interchangeable) Districts share another distinction unique to any PTA program in the nation: They operate Dental and Vision Clinics in cahoots with LAUSD and have done so in some form or another since the first LA City Schools/PTA Medical Clinic opened in
the early part of the last century. The Vision Clinics get
some financial support by the school district and are self-
sustaining; the Dental Clinics get no financial support
from LAUSD — without outside funding they are not
viable.

The following article from the Daily News focuses on the
financial straits of 31st District PTSA's clinics - but the
same is true for 10th District's clinics, which offer
reduced cost dental care to students from clinics in the
Pico-Union area, South Central and San Pedro. — smf

• DENTAL PROGRAM IN DOUBT: $75,000 required just to finish year

By Jennifer Radcliffe
Daily News Staff Writer

Tuesday, November 9, 2004 - CANOGA PARK — A
57-year-old program that provides low-cost dental care to
3,000 San Fernando Valley students may have to close its
two clinics next month after a steady erosion of corporate
and charitable donations.

The clinics at Hart Street Elementary in Canoga Park and
Telfair Avenue School in Pacoima -- which need
$150,000 a year to operate -- have just $15,000 in the
bank and little hope of attracting more funds, according
to the 31st District Parent-Teacher-Students Association,
which runs the program.

Three other PTSA Dental Program clinics operating out
of Los Angeles Unified schools are struggling to survive.

"Kids with toothaches can't study," said Robert Taylor, an
82-year-old dentist who has directed the program since it
started in 1947. "We need more money so we can provide
more services."

Los Angeles Unified School District board member Julie
Korenstein said she has tried for four months to help the
program find money.

"It's so horrible. I just haven't been able to figure it out
yet."

The lackluster economy has forced private companies and
nonprofit groups to scale back grants to the dental
program and other groups over the past several years.
The dental clinics have seen grants from such groups as
the California Endowment, Kaiser Permanente and United
Health turned down or reduced.

For many children and teens, a visit to the Hart Street and
Telfair Avenue clinics is their first trip to the dentist.

For a flat $45 fee, any student in the LAUSD can visit the
clinics for cleanings, X-rays, fillings and other work. A
majority of youngsters arrive with toothaches and severe
decay.

In the most severe cases, Taylor said, he's made dentures
for children as young as 5 who were malnourished or did
not take care of their teeth. Other children have serious
problems because they lack calcium and fluoride.

At the height of the program, Los Angeles Unified had 13
dental clinics. Ironically, the money is drying up while the
demand for the service is rising, experts said.

Canoga Park mother Patricia Gonzalez said the Hart
Street clinic is probably the only way she can afford to
take her 6-year-old daughter, Sandra, to the dentist.

"It's hard," she said. "With the private dentist, the prices
are very high."

Gonzalez said her temporary medical insurance roughly
covers the $45 flat fee, which she could not afford on her
own. The clinic relies on grants and donations to pay the
rest of the cost, which averages at least an additional $40
per student.

"That comes out of our grants, but since we don't have
any, we're in trouble ... Nobody's sending us anything,"
said Marsha Minassian, president of the 31st District
PTSA, which serves the Valley.

It would take at least $75,000 to keep the two Valley
clinics open for the rest of the school year, officials said.
And to sustain the clinics for several years, the
volunteer-based PTSA would probably need the help of
corporate sponsors or professional grant-writers,
Minassian said.

Both clinics have already reduced their operating hours,
and they don't have any fat to cut or reserves to fall back
on. The Hart Street clinic, for example, does not have
Internet access or fax machines.

But workers and volunteers continue to scramble for
grants.

"I've got a whole file of turn-downs," said Marilyn Ickes,
bookkeeper for the 31st District PTSA. "They say,
You've got a good program, but we don't have the
money."

While Kaiser Permanente has given as much as $60,000 in
the past, it wasn't able to give anything this year, Ickes
said.

Kaiser officials said increased requests for sponsorship
and state law requiring them to focus on community
needs, which include urgent health care for the uninsured,
has forced them to cut support.

"These organizations are telling me that fewer and fewer
businesses and corporations that have always been there
for them are not there now," said Debbie Hernandez,
Kaiser's community relations manager for Southern
California. "There's a lot more pressure on us and it's very
difficult for us to try to fund everyone."

Los Angeles Unified, which bailed out the program a few
years ago, has cut its own budget by more than $1 billion
in the past three years.

Kim Uyeda, the LAUSD's student medical services
director, said the district is trying to help the PTSAs find
a long-term solution that would improve the clinic's
business model.

But she said the LAUSD's main focus must remain in the
classroom.

"We are a school district and we are really ... focused on
education," she said. "We are definitely trying to save the
program."

The LAUSD, which leases the space to the PTSA, plans
to hold a meeting in December to discuss the matter.

Even the donations from other schools' PTAs are drying
up. They've fallen from $30,000 or $40,000 a year to
$15,000 or less, Ickes said.

The practice of school PTAs giving a portion of the funds
they raise to the dental clinics is also becoming less
common.

"A lot of parents don't see the big picture. They want to
keep everything at their school," said Vicki Walker,
student aid bureau manager for the 31st District PTSA.


• INFORMATION: For information about helping the
dental clinics, call the 31st District PTSA (Valley) at
(818) 344-3581 or 10th District PTSA (LAUSD south of
Mulholland) at (213) 745-7114.


Daily News Op-Ed: COMPROMISE CLEARED WAY FOR GREATER GOOD
By Steve Young

Monday, November 8, 2004 - Both President Bush and
John Kerry have called for the country to put aside the
bitterness of the campaign and unite for the greater good.

'Scuse me, while I clean up the coffee I just spit all over
my keyboard. In Washington, conciliation and
cooperation are usually locked off in the same storeroom
with the Ten Commandments. Spoken of highly, but not
actually allowed to be seen or employed.

But there is hope _ if the politicos take a look at what's
just transpired in the Los Angeles suburbs. That's where a
war had taken place over whether 250 children could
actually inhabit a new charter school where they actually
wanted to get an education.

The war had all the down and dirty elements of big-time
politics. Lies. Propaganda. Scare tactics. Threats.
Passion. Hate. Worse, both sides claimed they had the
children's best interests at heart.

On one side, the legislators _ city councilmen, the Los
Angeles Unified School District board, the local
neighborhood council. On the other, the public _ parents,
school administrators and children.

Without going into the bloody (and boring) details of
permits and traffic studies, the kids were not able to get
into their school site for almost two months past the Sept.
5 starting date.

But the fact is, they are in school and at the location they
wanted to be: Ivy Academia at 6051 De Soto Ave.,
Woodland Hills.

What happened? How could two opponents join to
become one to make it happen for the children? And how
can those boys in Washington learn from the simple folk
of Woodland Hills?

It's not all that simple, because it came down to people
forgetting their own egos. And, in the faraway land of
Washington, it is near felony to concede pride and self.

But it did happen, and it began with the most powerful
gent in the hostility's mix: San Fernando Valley
Councilman Dennis Zine. While the councilman had
earlier stalled the school's opening _ registering plenty of
problems with both the school's site and administrators _
it was he who showed up big, stepping forward to cut
through the proverbial red tape to say, ``Enough.''

There were constituents who would never want another
person, child or adult, riding their busy thoroughfares or
occupying their precious vacant buildings. They would
not be at all too thrilled with pulling the Zine lever come
next election. And though not every t and i had been
crossed and dotted, Zine's gutsy endorsement had the kids
behind their rightful desks the next school day.

But there were many others who stopped dwelling on the
problem and chose to participate in the solution.

The LAUSD, which literally loses children and financial
funds with the opening of every new charter, chose to
work with the school's administration to move quickly
and efficiently to resolve every question and obstacle that
stood in the way of a real opening day.

City inspectors chose to move diligently and promptly
though the inspections. The school's administration and
parents chose to listen, cooperate and learn to ignore
what they had earlier believed to be appropriate shortcuts.

Each of the players in this not-so-small example of how
politics can really work chose getting things done over
``being right.'' They all learned from the mistakes and
failures. In doing so, everyone profited, providing a
mighty lesson for the children. In the end, the children
have truly benefited.

You'll notice there was no mention here of the Woodland
Hills-based Neighborhood Council, some of whose
members sought something akin to financial extortion
from the school, who chose not to partake in the answer
but instead chose to play the role of obstructionist to the
very end. And, in that end, they gained nothing but an
unpleasant reputation they must now surely regret.

Like many in national politics, for all their sanctimonious
bluster, they chose to not become part of the solution.
Hopefully, one day soon, they and those fellas up in
Washington will begin to learn from the example of this
local band of real winners. Then we will all benefit.

• Steve Young is an Ivy Academia parent and author of
``Great Failures of The Extremely Successful.''


FEEDBACK – Re:
• FEEDBACK: "Are Schools Building Minds or Machines?" (LA Times, Nov. 6 / linked in 4LAKids, Nov 7).

November 13, 2004 - John Gust seems to think the No
Child Left Behind Act has turned teachers into
automatons and students into robots Ironically, it's Gust
himself who mindlessly repeats arguments unsupported by
the facts. Under the act, California's schools have
received more than $426 million in Reading First grants
to train teachers in proven instructional methods, not
learning fads. Students are regularly measured so they can
receive help when they need it. And parents have more
information, choices and opportunities for involvement
than ever before.

As a result, nearly two-thirds of California's schools have
met their academic achievement goals in 2004, compared
with 54% a year ago. These goals were not spit out by a
computer in Washington, but developed by educators in
California.

Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Unified School District has
seen its Academic Performance Index scores rise at a rate
faster than the state's. Who deserves the credit? Not
machines, but hard-working teachers and students.

Rod Paige
U.S. Secretary of Education

*

Gust's expression of frustration with standardized
education was well written and sincere. As a parent, I
share his concerns. On the other hand, he is a teacher at a
math/science magnet school. Not all schools are fortunate
enough to have the caliber of student that I'm sure Gust
enjoys. I am also a California State University faculty
member. We have ample proof from our entrance
examinations that there is no longer any requirement that
students acquire even basic skills to be awarded a high
school diploma. Although the CSU admits only the top
one-third of the state's high school graduates, a majority
of them cannot read or do mathematics at the level that
the state standards mandate for high school freshmen,
much less college-bound seniors.

I would be happy to hear teachers' suggestions for
restoring the linkage between grades and actual student
performance in our public schools. Until such a plan is
proffered, standardized tests with real consequences are
the alternative that is going to be forced on the public
schools.

Stephen Walton
Lancaster
____________________________________________

• FEEDBACK: Re - New Yorker Article "The Factory"
(Oct 18), about The Academy of the Pacific in Boston –
and readers' letters (New Yorker, Nov 8 / 4LAKids, Nov
7)

A lot of the items pointed out in the letters were false. For
example, charters actually serve a higher percent of
special needs kids than non-charter public schools
taken as a group. What is true is that each charter is
unique. Not one could be replicated and serve all, but
collectively they serve a broad population more
successfully.

Caprice Young
President/CEO – California Charter Schools Association


Save the Dates: SPECIAL ED FUNDRAISER (11/19) + WORKSHOP: SCHOOL ACOUSTIC DESIGN (11/19) + GIFTED CONFERENCE (12/4) PLUS EVENTS: Coming up next week..
• THE BUBEL/AIKEN FOUNDATION was started by Clay Aiken from American Idol to assist with inclusion issues for kids with developmental disabilities. The foundation serves to bridge the gap now existing for young people with developmental disabilities between full inclusion and today's reality.

The Bubel-Aiken Foundation will have a celebrity benefit
fundraiser on Friday November 19th in Century City.
Check out the event website at: www.voicesforchangebenefit.org
_________________________________________________

• ONE-DAY WORKSHOP: SCHOOL ACOUSTIC DESIGN FOR EDUCATORS, ARCHITECTS & PARENTS

Intended for: Educators, Architects, school facilities
designers and parents.

Students and teachers need good acoustics to learn.

This Workshop will discuss:
• Why good acoustics are needed
• What is “good acoustics” for schools?
• What the ANSI standard on school acoustics
S12.60-2002 requires.
• What architects and school designer need to know about
acoustics.
• How to implement good acoustics in new design and
renovation.
• Examples of successful and not-so successful school
acoustic designs

This Workshop is presented in connection with the 148th
meeting of the Acoustical Society of America. A day-long
series of papers on classroom acoustics will take place on
Thursday November 18th at the Town and Country
Hotel.

When: November 19 2004 9 am to 4 pm
(On site registration starts at 8 am) Registration: $75

Town & Country Hotel
500 Hotel Circle North
San Diego CA 92108

For information and registration, contact Dave Lubman,
phone: 714.373.3050 or e-mail: lubman@ix.netcom.com
__________________________________________________

• Gifted Ed Conference: IMAGINE, ACHIEVE, BECOME. MAKING IT HAPPEN - Saturday Dec. 4th
LAUSD is conducting a one-day conference on
gifted/talented education in December to provide
educators and parents/guardians with an opportunity to
discuss issues of importance to the development of quality
educational opportunities for students designated as
gifted/talented.

The 31st Annual City/County Conference "Imagine,
Achieve, Become: Making It Happen" will be held
Saturday, December 4, at the Los Angeles Convention
Center in downtown Los Angeles. The event is sponsored
by the LAUSD Specially Funded & Parent/Community
Programs Division, Gifted/Talented Programs;
Professional Advocates for Gifted Education (PAGE),
California Association for Gifted (CAG), Central Cities
Gifted Children's Association and the Eastside
Association for Gifted Children.

More than 40 sessions will be offered to parents, teachers,
administrators and community members. Guest speakers
will include Diane Paynter, James Webb, Karen Rogers,
Sandra Kaplan, Dr. Paul Aravich and the Perez family.

Registration begins at 7:30 a.m. Pre-registration is
required. Early bird registration must be postmarked by
November 19. Cost is $65. The cost to register after the
November 19 postmark will increase to $75.
Checks should be made payable to PAGE. School
purchase orders will not be accepted. There will be no
refunds after November 15, 2004. On-site registration is
available on a first-come/first-served basis.
Contact Sheila Smith at (213) 241-6500 for additional
details.
Translation will be available.
PARENTS FOR WHOM THE REGISTRATION FEE
PRESENTS A
HARDSHIP: Check with you SchoolÂ’s Title I or
Bilingual Coordinator — or with your Principal, GATE
Coordinator or Parent Center Director for information
on obtaining meeting vouchers.
A flyer is available on the LAUSD Master Calendar and
contains the registration tear-off.

___________________________________________________

E V E N T S • T H I S • W E E K:

• Monday Nov 15, 2004
North Hollywood New Primary Center #4
Ribbon-Cutting Ceremony

Please join us to celebrate the ribbon-cutting of your new
community school!
Ceremony will begin at 10 a.m.
North Hollywood New Primary Center #4
6728 N. Bellingham Avenue
North Hollywood, CA 91601

• Tuesday Nov 16, 2004
Central Region Elementary School #18 Pre- Design Meeting
Join us at this meeting where we will:
* Introduce the architect
* Present preliminary design for the school
* Provide an overview of the school facilities, including:
number of classrooms, sports facilities, lunch area etc.
* Collect feedback on the project design for Central
Region Elementary School #18
6:00 to 8:00 p.m.
Jefferson Primary Center
3601 S. Maple Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90011

• Tuesday Nov 16, 2004
Huntington Park School Family
Construction Update Meeting
Please join us at a community meeting for an update on
all the new school projects being built in the Huntington
Park community.
6:00 to 8:00 p.m.
Gage Middle School
Multipurpose Room
2880 E. Gage Avenue
Huntington Park, CA 90255

• Tuesday Nov 16, 2004
Local District 3 Presentation of Phase III Project Definitions
At this meeting we will:
* Present and discuss the SCHOOL PROJECT
DEFINITIONS that staff will recommend to the LAUSD
Board of Education for review and approval
* Review the factors used to identify new school projects,
including community input
* Go over next steps in the school construction process
This is the final meeting on Phase III Project Definition
before we go to the LAUSD Board of Education for approval!
6:00 to 8:00 p.m.
Audubon Middle School
4120 11th Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90008

• Tuesday Nov 16, 2004
Rowan New Primary Center
Construction Update Meeting
6:00 to 8:00 p.m.
Rowan Elementary School
600 S. Rowan Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90023

• Tuesday Nov 16, 2004
South Region High School #2
Pre-Design Meeting
Join us at this meeting where we will:
* Introduce the architect
* Present preliminary design for the school
* Provide an overview of the school facilities, including:
number of classrooms, sports facilities, lunch area etc.
* Collect feedback on the project design for South
Region High School #2
6:00 to 8:00 p.m.
Edison Middle School
6500 Hooper Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90001

• Tuesday Nov 16, 2004
Valley Region High School #5
CEQA Scoping and Schematic Design Meeting
The purpose of this meeting is to inform and obtain input
from the community on the types of issues to be
considered in a Draft Environmental Impact Report
(EIR). This report evaluates the potential impacts that
school projects may have on the surrounding
environment.
Also at this meeting, the preliminary schematic designs
for the new school will be presented to the community for
feedback.
Your comments and concerns are very important, please
join us!
6:30 to 8:30 p.m.
San Fernando High School - Cafeteria
11133 O'Melveny Avenue
San Fernando, CA 91340

• Wednesday Nov 17, 2004
Hamilton High School Addition
Ribbon-Cutting Ceremony
Please join us to celebrate the completion of your new
classroom building!
Ceremony will begin at 1 p.m.
Hamilton High School
2955 S. Robertson Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90034

• Wednesday Nov 17, 2004
Johnson Community Day School Addition
Ribbon-Cutting Ceremony
Please join us to celebrate the completion of your new
multi-purpose building!
Ceremony will begin at 1:30 p.m.
Johnson Community Day School
333 E. 54th Street
Los Angeles, CA 90011

• Wednesday Nov 17, 2004
Local District 7: Locke School Family
Presentation of Phase III Project Definitions
At this meeting we will:
* Present and discuss the SCHOOL PROJECT
DEFINITIONS that staff will recommend to the LAUSD
Board of Education for review and approval
* Review the factors used to identify new school projects,
including community input
* Go over next steps in the school construction process
This is the final meeting on Phase III Project Definition
before we go to the LAUSD Board of Education for
approval!
6:00 to 8:00 p.m.
Locke High School (Hobbes Hall – Multipurpose
Room)
325 E. 111th Street
Los Angeles, CA 90061

• Wednesday Nov 17, 2004
Small Business Seminar
School Board President José Huizar, Korean American
Chamber of Commerce of Los Angeles (KACCLA) &
Council of Korean Business Organizations of California
Invite You to do Business with the District
The Los Angeles Unified School DistrictÂ’s $14.4 billion
School Construction Program Needs Qualified,
Competitive Contractors, Engineers, Architects and
Vendors
6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
Hobart Boulevard Elementary School Auditorium
980 S. Hobart Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90006
Join Us and Learn About:
* How to Conduct Business with LAUSD
* Upcoming Vendor and Contractor Opportunities
* Professional Services (RFPs and RFQs)
* Architecture & Engineering Services Opportunities
* 25% Small Business Enterprise (SBE) Participation
Goal
* Contractor Pre-Qualification
* Small Business Assistance Services & Bonding
Assistance
*“We Build” Local Worker Program
For further information and to RSVP, please call Small
Business Program (213) 633-7727 or KACCLA
(213)480-1115.

• Thursday Nov 18, 2004
Local District 7: Jordan School Family
Presentation of Phase III Project Definitions
At this meeting we will:
* Present and discuss the SCHOOL PROJECT
DEFINITIONS that staff will recommend to the LAUSD
Board of Education for review and approval
* Review the factors used to identify new school projects,
including community input
* Go over next steps in the school construction process
This is the final meeting on Phase III Project Definition
before we go to the LAUSD Board of Education for
approval!
5:00 to 7:00 p.m.
Jordan High School - Auditorium
2265 E. 103rd Street
Los Angeles, CA 90002

• Thursday Nov 18, 2004
Central Region Elementary School #15
Pre- Design Meeting
Join us at this meeting where we will:
* Introduce the architect
* Present preliminary design for the school
* Provide an overview of the school facilities, including:
number of classrooms, sports facilities, lunch area etc.
* Collect feedback on the project design for Central
Region Elementary School #15
6:00 to 8:00 p.m.
Salvin Special Education Center Auditorium
1925 Budlong Ave.
Los Angeles, CA 90007

• Thursday Nov 18, 2004
Gledhill Elementary School Addition Pre-Construction
Meeting
6:30 to 8:00 p.m.
Gledhill Street Elementary School - Auditorium
16030 Gledhill St.
North Hills, CA 91343

*Dates and times subject to change.
___________________________________________________
• SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BOND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE:
Meets This Wednesday Morning Nove 17th — @ 10AM at the LAUSD Boardroom, 333 South Beaudry Ave.

Agenda Items include: Inspector General's Investigation
of the Bond Oversight Committee and Transfer of funds
from the District's proposal to transfer costs from the
operating budget to contruction bond funding.

http://www.laschools.org/bond/
Phone: 213.241.4700
____________________________________________________
• LAUSD FACILITIES COMMUNITY OUTREACH CALENDAR:
http://www.laschools.org/happenings/
Phone: 213.633.7616


• LAUSD BOARD OF EDUCATION & COMMITTEES MEETING CALENDAR



4LAKids Book Club for October & November — ACHIEVEMENT MATTERS: Getting Your Child the Best Education Possible, by Hugh B. Price
Publisher: Dafina Books, 256 pages ISBN: 0758201206

Hugh B. Price is the President of the National Urban League. On the face of it his excellent book is about closing the Achievement Gap that seperates poor children and children of color from high performing “white” students.

But his message is loud and clear — and every
parent can learn from it: Parents from underperforming schools must insist upon the same level of performance as suburban parents do. Every parent has a right to expect and insist-upon excellence from teachers, administrators and the school district; we must also insist-upon and expect excellence from our own children.

Price lays much of the responsibility for the Achievement
Gap off to what he calls the “Preparation Gap”; the
dearth of adequate pre-school programs in inner city
neighborhoods. But he is not easy on parents. All must
follow the example of archtypical "pushy" suburban parents: Be Involved in Your ChildrenÂ’s Lives and Education Every Step Of The Way!

This isnÂ’t about race and economics; itÂ’s about hard work at home and in the school and in the community!


• from Chapter Eight: DEMANDING – AND GETTING
– GOOD SCHOOLS: What Parents Can Do

Entrenched bureaucracies sometimes change out of
enlightened self-interest. In other words, they see the light
and reform themselves before it's too late, before a more
compelling alternative comes widely available. Other
times, it takes concerted external pressure to force
bureaucracies to change-for the sake of their "customers"
as well as themselves.

For far too long, public educators have kept their heads in
the sand, like ostriches, in the face of an urgent need to
improve urban and and rural schools. Parents, politicians,
and business leaders have grown restless with the sluggish
pace of school improvement. I urge parents, caregivers,
and community leaders to keep up the relentless pressure
to create straight “A” schools for your children and every
American child.

Even parents in comfortable suburbs must stay right on
the school's case. "I made an assumption that in suburbia
the school would place my child where she needs to be,"
says Mane, a stay at home mother from a well-to-do
community in New Jersey: “We moved here from
Brooklyn where my daughter, Taisha., was in an
overcrowded, understaffed kindergarten class. One of the
reasons we moved to this town was for its highly rated
school system When Taisha was in third grade, the school
sent me a notice that she was reading and doing math at
an eighth grade level. I called her teacher and asked him if
there were any special classes my daughter could take at
the school that would encourage her academic talents. He
said, 'Oh well, we do have a gifted and talented
program.'”

“I didn't RECEIVE that call — I MADE that call!"

"My daughter was testing in the 90th percentile nationally, and if I hadn't found out on my own that she was eligible for advanced classes, she would never be there now."

So regardless of where you live and what your family
circumstances are, here's what you must do in order to
make sure that your children are well served by their
schools and placed squarely on the path to academic
success:

1. BE VIGILANT. Make it your business to ask your
children what's going on at school. Look for possible
trouble spots such as teachers' negative attitudes,
tracking, discipline problems, safety issues, and so on.
Stay in touch with your kids and pay attention to what
they are telling you-and keeping from you.

2. BE INFORMED. Educate yourself about what your
children are learning in school and what the school offers.
Find out if the work they're doing is grade level or better
and whether it meets the academic standards imposed by
the states. Familiarize yourself with the standardized tests
your children are expected to take, when they must take
them, and how they should prepare properly to do well on
them. One school superintendent has the parents of
fourth-graders actually take the state reading exam from
the prior year so they'll better understand what their
children are expected to know for the exam. Read up on
national and state educational policies and regulations,
with an eye to how they will directly affect your children.

3. BE INVOLVED. Join the PTA. Attend parent-teacher
conferences and "meet-the-teacher" nights. Vote in the
school board elections — maybe even run for a seat on the board yourself. No one can fight harder than you for your children's right to a good education.

4. BE VOCAL. Speak up if you see a problem with your
childÂ’s schooling, even if you think there may be
repercussions because of your activism. Go to your child's
teacher or principal if you detect. unfairness in the way
your child is being treated. If you feel you — or your
child or your child-are being punished for your
outspokenness go to your pastor, the local Urban League,
or another community organization.

5. BE VISIBLE. Make sure the school knows that your
are actively involved in your child's education. Become
involved in the governing process of your local school
system. Attend school board meetings and get to know
your local elected representatives

6. ORGANIZE. Meet with other parents to discuss how
you can work as a group to help your children. Start on a
the grassroots level with neighbors, relatives, friends.
Many voices are stronger than one, and work in unison to
ensure that achievement matters much to your children's
school as it does to you.

* * * *

Children want to do well. When large numbers of them
fail its because adults-school administrators, teachers,
parents and their larger community-have failed them.

We all know it doesn't have to be this way. Lousy public
schools can be turned around if the adults mobilize to do
so: If adults will say: “No more excuses for school
failure!” I'm not downplaying the many problems that
many schools and the families they serve face. -Just the
opposite. While these problems may not go away. they
neednÂ’t defeat the efforts of determined parents and
educators to close the Preparation Gap and ensure that
children achieve, regardless of their family circumstances.


Get ACHIEVEMENT MATTERS from your local library, bookstore - or order it by clicking here.



What can YOU do?
• E-mail, call or write your school board member. Or your city councilperson, mayor, assemblyperson, state senator, the governor, member of congress, senator - or the president. Tell them what you really think.
• Open the dialogue. Write a letter to the editor. Circulate these thoughts. Talk to the principal and teachers at your local school.
• Speak with your friends, neighbors and coworkers. Stay on top of education issues. Don't take my word for it!
• Get involved at your neighborhood school. Join your PTA. Serve on a School Site Council. Be there for a child.
• Vote.


Contact your school board member



Scott Folsom is a parent and parent leader in LAUSD. He is Vice President for Education of Los Angeles 10th District PTSA and represents PTA on the LAUSD Construction Bond Citizen's Oversight Committee. He serves on various school district advisory and policy committees and is a PTA officer and governance council member at three LAUSD schools. He is also the elected Youth & Education boardmember on the Arroyo Seco Neighborhood Council.
• In this forum his opinions are his own and your opinions and feedback are invited.
• To SUBSCRIBE e-mail: 4LAKids-subscribe@topica.email-publisher.com - or -TO ADD YOUR OR ANOTHER'S NAME TO THE 4LAKids SUBCRIPTION LIST E-MAIL smfolsom@aol.com with "SUBSCRIBE" AS THE SUBJECT. Thank you.
 Â• THE 4LAKids ARCHIVE - This and past Issues are available with interactive feedback at http://4lakids.blogspot.com/

 Update Profile  |  Unsubscribe  |  Confirm  |  Forward