I am pleased to announce that I have been selected as the Recommended Candidate for Nominating District E by the Christina Education Association and the Delaware State Education Association. It is an honor to have been chosen by our educators as their candidate of choice for the upcoming School Board election.
Thank You CEA and DSEA.
Elizabeth
Before the week is over, Sen. Karen Peterson is expected to present legislation in Dover to consolidate Delaware's 19 School Districts to four:
1) North Wilmington to North of the Canal
2) South of the Canal and Kent County
3) Sussex County
4) One statewide Vocational District
Rumor has it that the bill is only eight lines long, but it opens the door for serious consideration of Delaware's educational system.
There can be no argument: Delaware must do education differently if we are to produce successful, competent young people. Whether you believe education is a community issue, as I do, or think of it only as a parent's responsibility, we need to examine alternatives to the 19 fiefdoms. There are far larger school district in this nation that produce better prepared students.
It is the responsibility of our board members to make brave choices and advocate for their students. Is consolidation the right decision? Will it lower the cost of educating our students? Will local communities retain a voice in their schools? Will it lead to a lighter administration and a more teacher/classroom-centric environment? How will our district leaders enforce administrative accountability? We won't know until someone provides a comprehensive plan for all to study. But, it's time to open our minds and explore our options.
Sec. of Education Dr. Lillian Lowery has presented a plan to consolidate administrative services for public and charter schools into four state centers. It's a start. Such a plan could lead to a Reduction in Administrative Force as we eliminate duplicate effort. How our school districts respond to this first step in eduction reform will set the stage for what is to come.
The show has just begun.
1) North Wilmington to North of the Canal
2) South of the Canal and Kent County
3) Sussex County
4) One statewide Vocational District
Rumor has it that the bill is only eight lines long, but it opens the door for serious consideration of Delaware's educational system.
There can be no argument: Delaware must do education differently if we are to produce successful, competent young people. Whether you believe education is a community issue, as I do, or think of it only as a parent's responsibility, we need to examine alternatives to the 19 fiefdoms. There are far larger school district in this nation that produce better prepared students.
It is the responsibility of our board members to make brave choices and advocate for their students. Is consolidation the right decision? Will it lower the cost of educating our students? Will local communities retain a voice in their schools? Will it lead to a lighter administration and a more teacher/classroom-centric environment? How will our district leaders enforce administrative accountability? We won't know until someone provides a comprehensive plan for all to study. But, it's time to open our minds and explore our options.
Sec. of Education Dr. Lillian Lowery has presented a plan to consolidate administrative services for public and charter schools into four state centers. It's a start. Such a plan could lead to a Reduction in Administrative Force as we eliminate duplicate effort. How our school districts respond to this first step in eduction reform will set the stage for what is to come.
The show has just begun.
Category:
Christina School District,
Consolidation,
Delaware,
Education Reform,
Karen Peterson,
Lillian Lowery
0
comments
Between the loaded gun at Newark High School and the anniversary of the Columbine Shootings, school safety seems to be on everyone's mind. Could it happen in Delaware? In Christina?
Here are some common sense strategies (from the DSEA website) for bolstering school safety:
I wonder how Christina rates?
Tips for Creating a Safe School
- from the 1998 Annual Report on School Safety published by the U.S. Government
1. Provide strong administrative support for assessing & enhancing school safety.
2. Redesign the school facility to eliminate dark, secluded & unsupervised spaces.
3. Devise a system for reporting & analyzing violent & non-criminal incidents.
4. Design an effective school discipline policy.
5. Build a partnership with local law enforcement.
6. Enlist trained school security professionals in designing & maintaining the school security system.
7. Train school staff, including support staff, in all aspects of violence prevention.
8. Provide all students access to school psychologists or counselors.
9. Provide crisis response services.
10. Implement schoolwide education & training on avoiding & preventing violence & violent behavior.
11. Use alternate school settings for educating violent & weapon- carrying students.
12. Create a climate of respect.
13. Provide appropriate educational services to all students.
14. Reach out to communities & businesses to assist in improving the safety of students.
15. Actively involve students in making decisions about school policies & programs.
16. Prepare an annual report on school crime & safety & distribute to the public.
Here are some common sense strategies (from the DSEA website) for bolstering school safety:
I wonder how Christina rates?
Tips for Creating a Safe School
- from the 1998 Annual Report on School Safety published by the U.S. Government
1. Provide strong administrative support for assessing & enhancing school safety.
2. Redesign the school facility to eliminate dark, secluded & unsupervised spaces.
3. Devise a system for reporting & analyzing violent & non-criminal incidents.
4. Design an effective school discipline policy.
5. Build a partnership with local law enforcement.
6. Enlist trained school security professionals in designing & maintaining the school security system.
7. Train school staff, including support staff, in all aspects of violence prevention.
8. Provide all students access to school psychologists or counselors.
9. Provide crisis response services.
10. Implement schoolwide education & training on avoiding & preventing violence & violent behavior.
11. Use alternate school settings for educating violent & weapon- carrying students.
12. Create a climate of respect.
13. Provide appropriate educational services to all students.
14. Reach out to communities & businesses to assist in improving the safety of students.
15. Actively involve students in making decisions about school policies & programs.
16. Prepare an annual report on school crime & safety & distribute to the public.
Category:
0
comments
Courtesy the News Journal:
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009904270315
Here's the Gist: In response to Gov. Markell's proposal to eliminate funding for free summer classes for Delaware's educators, Delaware State University is offering one class tuition-free with paid enrollment in a second class.
Is there a catch? Only if you consider that DSU's plan is self-serving in that it will help to keep their enrollment number up.
Does it go far enough? DSU's offer is not a solution! It's a wonderful gift to our teachers and students who are required to complete 90 credit hours of coursework in their field during a five year period to keep their teaching licenses. But, I ask you, where is the University of Delaware in all of this? Do they, too, plan to extend a helping hand? And where is our School Board? When will we hear what our district plans to do to support our teachers?
I cannot expect our teachers to provide to our students the best education possible if we cannot provide our teachers with the same! While our superintendents may be required to present Dover with budgets that reflect the Governors cuts, our school boards, who are elected by the tax payers should be side-by-side with the Delaware State Education Association and the Christina Education Association in supporting alternatives to balance the state's budget.
As a tax payer and a parent, I would rather see my dollars going into education, into supporting my teachers, paras, and professionals, who will help to expertly guide and prepare the next generation for what may be an uncertain future.
Furthermore, when I look at the proposed budget cuts, I can't help but ask: How many of our qualified teachers will be driven from Delaware or teaching altogether because we have failed to support them?
That's the thing about teaching -- it doesn't happen in a bubble. Our educators are only as effective as we make them. They cannot go into the classroom and reach every student if we have not prepared them and if we do not provide the follow-through at home and in the community.
I'll admit, I was and will continue to be a Markell supporter. I believe that he has great intentions at heart and is guided by the willingness and desire to help all Delawareans. But, when I disagree, he'll know it and so will you.
So, what are the alternatives to Markell's budget cuts? How can we spare the state without crippling the education system?
Stay tuned ...
Elizabeth Scheinberg
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009904270315
Here's the Gist: In response to Gov. Markell's proposal to eliminate funding for free summer classes for Delaware's educators, Delaware State University is offering one class tuition-free with paid enrollment in a second class.
Is there a catch? Only if you consider that DSU's plan is self-serving in that it will help to keep their enrollment number up.
Does it go far enough? DSU's offer is not a solution! It's a wonderful gift to our teachers and students who are required to complete 90 credit hours of coursework in their field during a five year period to keep their teaching licenses. But, I ask you, where is the University of Delaware in all of this? Do they, too, plan to extend a helping hand? And where is our School Board? When will we hear what our district plans to do to support our teachers?
I cannot expect our teachers to provide to our students the best education possible if we cannot provide our teachers with the same! While our superintendents may be required to present Dover with budgets that reflect the Governors cuts, our school boards, who are elected by the tax payers should be side-by-side with the Delaware State Education Association and the Christina Education Association in supporting alternatives to balance the state's budget.
As a tax payer and a parent, I would rather see my dollars going into education, into supporting my teachers, paras, and professionals, who will help to expertly guide and prepare the next generation for what may be an uncertain future.
Furthermore, when I look at the proposed budget cuts, I can't help but ask: How many of our qualified teachers will be driven from Delaware or teaching altogether because we have failed to support them?
That's the thing about teaching -- it doesn't happen in a bubble. Our educators are only as effective as we make them. They cannot go into the classroom and reach every student if we have not prepared them and if we do not provide the follow-through at home and in the community.
I'll admit, I was and will continue to be a Markell supporter. I believe that he has great intentions at heart and is guided by the willingness and desire to help all Delawareans. But, when I disagree, he'll know it and so will you.
So, what are the alternatives to Markell's budget cuts? How can we spare the state without crippling the education system?
Stay tuned ...
Elizabeth Scheinberg
Category:
Christina Education Association,
Delaware,
Delaware Autism Program,
Delaware State Education Association,
Delaware State University,
Department of Education,
DSU
0
comments
WHERE TO VOTE NOTICE:
Eligible persons may vote at any of the below listed Polling Places from 10 a.m. until 8 p.m. on the day of the election.
POLLING PLACE LOCATIONS
Bancroft Elementary School
700 N Lombard St Wilmington 19801
Bayard Elementary School
200 S duPont St Wilmington 19805
Brookside Elementary School
800 Marrows Rd Newark 19713
Christiana High School
190 Salem Church Rd Newark 19713
Downes Elementary School
299 Casho Mill Rd Newark 19711
Elbert-Palmer Elementary School
1200 Lobdell St Wilmington 19801
Gallaher Elementary School
800 Brownleaf Rd Newark 19713
Glasgow High School
1901 S College Ave Newark 19702
Jones Elementary School 3
5 West Main St, Christiana Newark 19702
Keene Elementary School
200 LaGrange Ave Newark 19702
Maclary Elementary School
300 St Regis Dr Newark 19713
Marshall Elementary School
101 Barrett Run Rd Newark 19702
McVey Elementary School
908 Janice Dr Newark 19713
Newark High School
401 E Delaware Ave Newark 19711
Quaker Hill Place Apartments
200 N Washington St Wilmington 19801
Shue-Medill Middle School
1500 Capitol Trail Newark 19711
Wilson Elementary School
14 Forge Rd Newark 19711
Eligible persons may vote at any of the below listed Polling Places from 10 a.m. until 8 p.m. on the day of the election.
POLLING PLACE LOCATIONS
Bancroft Elementary School
700 N Lombard St Wilmington 19801
Bayard Elementary School
200 S duPont St Wilmington 19805
Brookside Elementary School
800 Marrows Rd Newark 19713
Christiana High School
190 Salem Church Rd Newark 19713
Downes Elementary School
299 Casho Mill Rd Newark 19711
Elbert-Palmer Elementary School
1200 Lobdell St Wilmington 19801
Gallaher Elementary School
800 Brownleaf Rd Newark 19713
Glasgow High School
1901 S College Ave Newark 19702
Jones Elementary School 3
5 West Main St, Christiana Newark 19702
Keene Elementary School
200 LaGrange Ave Newark 19702
Maclary Elementary School
300 St Regis Dr Newark 19713
Marshall Elementary School
101 Barrett Run Rd Newark 19702
McVey Elementary School
908 Janice Dr Newark 19713
Newark High School
401 E Delaware Ave Newark 19711
Quaker Hill Place Apartments
200 N Washington St Wilmington 19801
Shue-Medill Middle School
1500 Capitol Trail Newark 19711
Wilson Elementary School
14 Forge Rd Newark 19711
From the CSD:
Board Member Beverly Howell Will Not Seek Another Term
Beverly Howell, who has represented District D on the Christina Board of Education since 2004, has announced that she will not pursue another term as a member of the Board. She notified the Board of Elections on April 21 of her decision to withdraw her name from the ballot in the upcoming elections to be held May 12.
Board Member Beverly Howell Will Not Seek Another Term
Beverly Howell, who has represented District D on the Christina Board of Education since 2004, has announced that she will not pursue another term as a member of the Board. She notified the Board of Elections on April 21 of her decision to withdraw her name from the ballot in the upcoming elections to be held May 12.
Category:
We received this letter in the mail yesterday:
Dear Rob and Elizabeth,
I am happy to advise that Autism Delaware has select you both to receive an award as Outstanding Volunteers to the Autism Delaware for your leadership and work with the Autumn Auction over the past several years ...
Sincerely,
Theda M. Ellis
Executive Director
Rob and I are honored by this recognition. Autism is a special cause for us. It is a disability that affects our life daily. We've chosen to view the autism journey as an adventure, though always challenging, our lives are richer for having been given such a special child.
Our heartfelt thanks go out to the entire Autism Community, especially the dedicated board and employees at Autism Delaware. We appreciate the honor!
Elizabeth
Dear Rob and Elizabeth,
I am happy to advise that Autism Delaware has select you both to receive an award as Outstanding Volunteers to the Autism Delaware for your leadership and work with the Autumn Auction over the past several years ...
Sincerely,
Theda M. Ellis
Executive Director
Rob and I are honored by this recognition. Autism is a special cause for us. It is a disability that affects our life daily. We've chosen to view the autism journey as an adventure, though always challenging, our lives are richer for having been given such a special child.
Our heartfelt thanks go out to the entire Autism Community, especially the dedicated board and employees at Autism Delaware. We appreciate the honor!
Elizabeth
Category:
Autism,
Christina,
Christina School District,
Delaware,
Delaware Autism Program
Apparently, I ruffled some feathers ...
When I posted the Christina School District logo on this blog, I did so with the intent that it would identify the district for which I am a candidate for the Board of Education.
I learned today that this use has made some uncomfortable and at the request of the CSD, I am removing it from my blog.
I used an image that I secured through the internet. It was not imbedded or security protected. I assumed that because the graphic was so easily accessible that it would be allowable to use an image that was recognizable to all the residents of the CSD.
It's not.
My suggestion to the CSD: Secure your logo so that it cannot be copied, pasted, or downloaded.
To the offended: Though you shared your concerns with district, your candidate should be accessible to you. I am. That is the primary purpose of this blog. Use it to ask me the hard questions or email me directly. I'll respond. You may not always like what I have to say, but you will know where I stand!
When I posted the Christina School District logo on this blog, I did so with the intent that it would identify the district for which I am a candidate for the Board of Education.
I learned today that this use has made some uncomfortable and at the request of the CSD, I am removing it from my blog.
I used an image that I secured through the internet. It was not imbedded or security protected. I assumed that because the graphic was so easily accessible that it would be allowable to use an image that was recognizable to all the residents of the CSD.
It's not.
My suggestion to the CSD: Secure your logo so that it cannot be copied, pasted, or downloaded.
To the offended: Though you shared your concerns with district, your candidate should be accessible to you. I am. That is the primary purpose of this blog. Use it to ask me the hard questions or email me directly. I'll respond. You may not always like what I have to say, but you will know where I stand!
Category:
Christina School District,
CSD,
Logo
When Teacher's Unite:
Last night, Keene Elementary School's Educators showed out in force for their school counselor who learned earlier in the week that she was among CSD personnel to be RIF'd (layed-off by Reduction In Force) come the completion of her contract in June.
For more than an hour they presented statements from parents, students, and school and district staff in support of keeping stand-out employee. They left victorious, managing to defer the vote to next month's Board Meeting. But, this fight is far from over and while the Keene Supporters are trying to keep Dawn Hagan, there are 10 other names (or rather numbers) on the list for terminations.
Where to Start? I have far more questions than answers on this one:
1) When 10% of the school population, 100 students, at Shue-Medill is absent daily, how can we as district justify laying off guidance counselors?
2) When both Shue and Kirk have failed to make Academic Yearly Progress, AYP, and both schools have disproportionately high rates of out-of-school suspensions, how can we even consider RIFing counseling staff?
3) When our guidance staff members play integral roles, serving as their school's steward, in the Response to Intervention Program, RIT, the model currently being utilized by CSD to match student need with resources, how can we even contemplate cutting this staff?
4) With our high school students bring guns to school and our drop-out rate through the roof, how will we even begin to reach these students with limited to no access to mental health professionals.
Our school psychologists cannot be in the schools every hour, nor every day. It is our counselors who are in the battle field, dealing with children of divorce, abuse, neglect, homelessness, children who are bullies and those tormented by them, they reach out during tragedies such as house fires and deaths of family and friends, national moments of sadness such as 9/11 and Columbine. They teach our children the right way to respond to stresses, reaffirm identity and teach self-esteem.
I could go on and on about the value of counselors, but I shouldn't have to.
When a teacher who's never attended one of these meetings and facing an 8-10% pay cut stands before your school board and says both my wife and I educators in the CSD and we will gladly take an additional pay cut to keep this school counselor you have to take notice.
In this day, when we as a business community outsource so many functions, we are all aware that that you can seldom outsource caring with success. When your counselor is employed by your school, your district, they have a vested interest in your community. When they are outside contractors visiting your building for a couple hours a week, you are just one portion of their caseload. Our children are students, not cases. Our counselors are a part of our district family, valued, needed. They are not disposable.
Our educators have my vote! Do they have yours? Take a stand for yoru teacher and let your board members know that it is unacceptable to RIF these important members of our school communities! http://www.christina.k12.de.us/SchoolBoard/Members.htm
Last night, Keene Elementary School's Educators showed out in force for their school counselor who learned earlier in the week that she was among CSD personnel to be RIF'd (layed-off by Reduction In Force) come the completion of her contract in June.
For more than an hour they presented statements from parents, students, and school and district staff in support of keeping stand-out employee. They left victorious, managing to defer the vote to next month's Board Meeting. But, this fight is far from over and while the Keene Supporters are trying to keep Dawn Hagan, there are 10 other names (or rather numbers) on the list for terminations.
Where to Start? I have far more questions than answers on this one:
1) When 10% of the school population, 100 students, at Shue-Medill is absent daily, how can we as district justify laying off guidance counselors?
2) When both Shue and Kirk have failed to make Academic Yearly Progress, AYP, and both schools have disproportionately high rates of out-of-school suspensions, how can we even consider RIFing counseling staff?
3) When our guidance staff members play integral roles, serving as their school's steward, in the Response to Intervention Program, RIT, the model currently being utilized by CSD to match student need with resources, how can we even contemplate cutting this staff?
4) With our high school students bring guns to school and our drop-out rate through the roof, how will we even begin to reach these students with limited to no access to mental health professionals.
Our school psychologists cannot be in the schools every hour, nor every day. It is our counselors who are in the battle field, dealing with children of divorce, abuse, neglect, homelessness, children who are bullies and those tormented by them, they reach out during tragedies such as house fires and deaths of family and friends, national moments of sadness such as 9/11 and Columbine. They teach our children the right way to respond to stresses, reaffirm identity and teach self-esteem.
I could go on and on about the value of counselors, but I shouldn't have to.
When a teacher who's never attended one of these meetings and facing an 8-10% pay cut stands before your school board and says both my wife and I educators in the CSD and we will gladly take an additional pay cut to keep this school counselor you have to take notice.
In this day, when we as a business community outsource so many functions, we are all aware that that you can seldom outsource caring with success. When your counselor is employed by your school, your district, they have a vested interest in your community. When they are outside contractors visiting your building for a couple hours a week, you are just one portion of their caseload. Our children are students, not cases. Our counselors are a part of our district family, valued, needed. They are not disposable.
Our educators have my vote! Do they have yours? Take a stand for yoru teacher and let your board members know that it is unacceptable to RIF these important members of our school communities! http://www.christina.k12.de.us/SchoolBoard/Members.htm
Category:
Christina Education Association,
Christina School District,
Education Reform,
Guidance Counselors,
Keene Elementary,
Teachers
Know Your Rights!
FAQS REGARDING FREE TUTORING OR SUPPLEMENTAL EDUCATIONAL SERVICES (SES)
BASIC INFORMATION
What are supplemental educational services?
Supplemental educational services are extra academic services offered outside the regular school day to help eligible students improve reading and math skills.
Which schools must offer free tutoring services?
Title I School Improvement schools not meeting state target goals for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for three or more years (two consecutive years to enter Title I School Improvement and an additional year) in the same subject (reading/language arts or math) must offer SES.
What is Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)?
Under No Child Left Behind, each state has developed and implemented measurements for determining whether its schools and local educational agencies (LEAs) are making adequate yearly progress (AYP). AYP is an individual state's measure of progress toward the goal of 100 percent of students achieving to state academic standards in at least reading/language arts and math. It sets the minimum level of proficiency that the state, its school districts, and schools must achieve each year on annual tests and related academic indicators. Parents whose children are attending Title I (low-income) schools that do not make AYP over a period of years are given options to transfer their child to another school or obtain free tutoring (supplemental educational services). Further information on Delaware’s system is located on the Supplemental Educational Services web page under the link for Accountability.
Which students are targeted to receive SES Services?
Low Income students from Title I schools designated as not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for three consecutive years.
Can students at Title I School Improvement schools transfer to another public school and receive free tutoring services?
No. When both options are available, parents may choose the transfer option or free tutoring services, but not both.
How do parents get free tutoring services for their children?
Each year, school districts must notify parents of eligible students that free tutoring services are available, identify state-approved area providers, and describe providers' services. Parents respond, within the timeline outlined in the notice, as to whether they are interested in receiving services for their child and indicate a service provider, if a choice is available.
What if parents of eligible students do not want supplemental educational services for their children?
Parents may waive the right for their child to receive services. In this case, parents may be asked to sign a waiver form stating that they decline the services on behalf of their child.
Want More Information? http://www.doe.k12.de.us/infosuites/staff/si/files/sesfaqs.doc
FAQS REGARDING FREE TUTORING OR SUPPLEMENTAL EDUCATIONAL SERVICES (SES)
BASIC INFORMATION
What are supplemental educational services?
Supplemental educational services are extra academic services offered outside the regular school day to help eligible students improve reading and math skills.
Which schools must offer free tutoring services?
Title I School Improvement schools not meeting state target goals for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for three or more years (two consecutive years to enter Title I School Improvement and an additional year) in the same subject (reading/language arts or math) must offer SES.
What is Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)?
Under No Child Left Behind, each state has developed and implemented measurements for determining whether its schools and local educational agencies (LEAs) are making adequate yearly progress (AYP). AYP is an individual state's measure of progress toward the goal of 100 percent of students achieving to state academic standards in at least reading/language arts and math. It sets the minimum level of proficiency that the state, its school districts, and schools must achieve each year on annual tests and related academic indicators. Parents whose children are attending Title I (low-income) schools that do not make AYP over a period of years are given options to transfer their child to another school or obtain free tutoring (supplemental educational services). Further information on Delaware’s system is located on the Supplemental Educational Services web page under the link for Accountability.
Which students are targeted to receive SES Services?
Low Income students from Title I schools designated as not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for three consecutive years.
Can students at Title I School Improvement schools transfer to another public school and receive free tutoring services?
No. When both options are available, parents may choose the transfer option or free tutoring services, but not both.
How do parents get free tutoring services for their children?
Each year, school districts must notify parents of eligible students that free tutoring services are available, identify state-approved area providers, and describe providers' services. Parents respond, within the timeline outlined in the notice, as to whether they are interested in receiving services for their child and indicate a service provider, if a choice is available.
What if parents of eligible students do not want supplemental educational services for their children?
Parents may waive the right for their child to receive services. In this case, parents may be asked to sign a waiver form stating that they decline the services on behalf of their child.
Want More Information? http://www.doe.k12.de.us/infosuites/staff/si/files/sesfaqs.doc
Category:
A DSTP Status Update via the News Journal,
Adequate Yearly Progress,
AYP,
Christina School District,
Kirk,
Shue-Medill,
Title I Funding
Question: Why didn't we do this sooner???
From the Department of Education:
Markell signs bill to help attract more quality teachers to Delaware’s schools
Release Date: Apr 20, 2009 2:10 PM
House Bill 102 enables state to participate in Teach for America program
WILMINGTON – Joined by leading legislators and education advocates, Gov. Jack Markell on Monday signed House Bill 102 into law, which makes important changes to the state’s education system that will enable Delaware to qualify for the prestigious Teach for American program.
“We will not be able to grow our economy and create jobs without a top-level school system that graduates students ready to compete in the modern job market,” Markell said. “Signing this legislation demonstrates that we are willing to transform our education system by changing the underlying policies and practices that will make the greatest difference in how we educate our children.”
A former elementary school teacher and former school board member, Rep. Teresa L. Schooley said that the Teach for America program will help place dedicated teachers in the classrooms throughout Delaware that need help the most.
“Thousands of teachers – including several who were educated here in Delaware – have been placed in schools throughout the country in low-income areas and have produced some really positive results,” said Rep. Schooley, D-Newark, the chair of the House Education Committee and the sponsor of HB 102. “We feel that bringing this program to Delaware and bringing those dedicated teachers to Delaware classrooms will only help with improving the quality of our education and will help bring about positive change in schools that need it most.”
Sen. David Sokola, D-Newark, the chair of the Senate Education Committee, added: “Teach for America gives us an opportunity to expand the pool of our best and brightest young leaders where they're needed most -- guiding our children on a path to success in life. And, the structure of this legislation includes sufficient monitoring to ensure confidence in this program prior to expanding it statewide. I do believe this program will provide quality teachers for our kids.”
From the Department of Education:
Markell signs bill to help attract more quality teachers to Delaware’s schools
Release Date: Apr 20, 2009 2:10 PM
House Bill 102 enables state to participate in Teach for America program
WILMINGTON – Joined by leading legislators and education advocates, Gov. Jack Markell on Monday signed House Bill 102 into law, which makes important changes to the state’s education system that will enable Delaware to qualify for the prestigious Teach for American program.
“We will not be able to grow our economy and create jobs without a top-level school system that graduates students ready to compete in the modern job market,” Markell said. “Signing this legislation demonstrates that we are willing to transform our education system by changing the underlying policies and practices that will make the greatest difference in how we educate our children.”
A former elementary school teacher and former school board member, Rep. Teresa L. Schooley said that the Teach for America program will help place dedicated teachers in the classrooms throughout Delaware that need help the most.
“Thousands of teachers – including several who were educated here in Delaware – have been placed in schools throughout the country in low-income areas and have produced some really positive results,” said Rep. Schooley, D-Newark, the chair of the House Education Committee and the sponsor of HB 102. “We feel that bringing this program to Delaware and bringing those dedicated teachers to Delaware classrooms will only help with improving the quality of our education and will help bring about positive change in schools that need it most.”
Sen. David Sokola, D-Newark, the chair of the Senate Education Committee, added: “Teach for America gives us an opportunity to expand the pool of our best and brightest young leaders where they're needed most -- guiding our children on a path to success in life. And, the structure of this legislation includes sufficient monitoring to ensure confidence in this program prior to expanding it statewide. I do believe this program will provide quality teachers for our kids.”
Category:
Christina Education Association,
Delaware,
Schooley,
Teach for America
To Our Members and Friends in the Disability Community,
Lt. Governor Matt Denn has been in touch with us about HB 119, as has Rep. Terry Schooley and some others. All are assuring us that they will work with us to address our concerns about HB 119 and that the intent is to help kids with disabilities.
The Lt. Governor will be meeting with members of the DD Council, the Governor's Advisory Council on Exceptional Children, and the State Council on Persons with Disabilities on Monday. Rep. Schooley is calling a meeting in early May as well.
Thanks to all of you who have called and e-mailed your legislators. It is making a difference. We will keep you advised as our discussions progress.
Theda M. Ellis, MBA, M.Ed.
Executive Director
Autism Delaware
924 Old Harmony Road, Suite 201
Newark, DE 19713
Telephone (302) 224-6020
Fax (302) 224-6017
www.delautism.org
Lt. Governor Matt Denn has been in touch with us about HB 119, as has Rep. Terry Schooley and some others. All are assuring us that they will work with us to address our concerns about HB 119 and that the intent is to help kids with disabilities.
The Lt. Governor will be meeting with members of the DD Council, the Governor's Advisory Council on Exceptional Children, and the State Council on Persons with Disabilities on Monday. Rep. Schooley is calling a meeting in early May as well.
Thanks to all of you who have called and e-mailed your legislators. It is making a difference. We will keep you advised as our discussions progress.
Theda M. Ellis, MBA, M.Ed.
Executive Director
Autism Delaware
924 Old Harmony Road, Suite 201
Newark, DE 19713
Telephone (302) 224-6020
Fax (302) 224-6017
www.delautism.org
Category:
MEMORANDUM 
To: SCPD, GACEC, & DDC
From: Brian Hartman
Re: Addendum to April 5, 2009 P&L Memo
Date: April 15, 2009
I am providing the following critique of H.B. No. 119 as an addendum to my April 5 P&L memo. Given time constraints, the analysis should be considered preliminary and non-exhaustive.
H.B. No. 119 (Public Education Overhaul)
This bill was introduced on April 8, 2009. As of April 14, it remained in the House Education Committee.
This bill effects wholesale changes to the public educational system. Unfortunately, some provisions would result in the outright repeal of time-honored protections for students with the most severe disabilities. Other provisions would establish a sweeping system of waivers resulting in a hodgepodge of standards and non-aligned curricula. I have the following observations.
First, the Legislature recognized long ago that students with very severe disabilities need consistency in programming to have any hope of meaningful progress. Therefore, students with manifestly severe conditions are currently offered programs on a 12-month schedule not to exceed 217-222 school days. This entitlement extends only to students with severe mental disability (I.Q. 0-35); trainable mental disability (I.Q. 35-50); autism; deaf-blindness; traumatic brain injury; and some orthopedic disabilities attributable to conditions such as muscular dystrophy, cerebral palsy, or amputation of limbs. The bill (lines 48-49) deletes these salutary protections altogether. This is highly objectionable and will result in the loss of extended programming for hundreds of students with extreme disability profiles.
Second, any district and any individual school would be authorized to obtain a waiver of any regulation, rule, policy, prescribed course of study, and some statutes (lines 82-85 and 102-103) based on amorphous criteria (lines 86-90 and 108-112). The targeted statutes highlighted for waiver are those requiring health and wellness educational programs; drug and alcohol educational programs; fire safety education; and physical fitness assessments at least once in elementary, middle, and high school (lines 84-85). Given the prevalence of childhood obesity and drug exposure, it is difficult to justify targeting such worthwhile instruction as fodder for waivers. Moreover, authorizing limitless waivers of any regulation, rule, or course of study will predictably result in undermining of State content standards and curricula (14 DE Admin Code 502); minimum graduation standards (14 DE Admin Code 505); DSTP assessments (14 DE Admin Code 100), etc. Everything is waivable! History instructs that waivers often become the norm. For example, a 1-22 teacher/pupil ratio for grades K-3 is established by statute (Title 14 Del.C. §1705A). Rather than meet the standard, the norm is to simply obtain a waiver. The exception becomes the rule and legislative intent is undermined.
Third, the Legislature’s historical approach to waivers is to limit authorization by both discrete context and time and to monitor waiver effects. For example, the authorization for a waiver of the 1-22 teacher/pupil ratio is specific to this context, must be reapproved annually, and is subject to analysis by the Department of Education (Title 14 Del.C. §1705A-1705B). In contrast, H.B. No. 119 has no limits in context or time and contemplates no review. Thus, schools and districts could be given indefinite or permanent waivers of some State laws and all State regulations.
Fourth, lines 52-54 ostensibly authorize districts to cap hours of instruction for individual students with disabilities based on a unilateral administrative decision. Such decisions can only be made by an IEP team with parental involvement, not through a unilateral decision by district administration. See attached Delaware DPI policy letter interpreting former special education regulations [“Changes to the length of the school day (lengthened or shortened) can only be made by the IEP team.”]. Moreover, to avoid illegal discrimination (14 DE Admin Code 225; 34 C.F.R. Part 104), the minimum hours for students with disabilities cannot be less than the minimum hours for students without disabilities. Lines 50-54 would benefit from the following revision:
The Department of Education shall promulgate regulations setting educationally appropriate standards for the presumptive minimum number of hours per week of instructional school time that districts must provide students with disabilities enumerated in this section. In no event shall the number of such hours be less than the minimum hours of instructional school time for students without disabilities. Local districts may vary cumulative hours of services for individual students if they can demonstrate by a preponderance of clinical or scientific evidence that the presumptive hours established by regulation are inappropriate for individual students. only by IEP team decision.
I recommend that the councils strongly oppose this bill with particular emphasis on the evisceration of summer programs for students with extreme disability profiles.
To: SCPD, GACEC, & DDC
From: Brian Hartman
Re: Addendum to April 5, 2009 P&L Memo
Date: April 15, 2009
I am providing the following critique of H.B. No. 119 as an addendum to my April 5 P&L memo. Given time constraints, the analysis should be considered preliminary and non-exhaustive.
H.B. No. 119 (Public Education Overhaul)
This bill was introduced on April 8, 2009. As of April 14, it remained in the House Education Committee.
This bill effects wholesale changes to the public educational system. Unfortunately, some provisions would result in the outright repeal of time-honored protections for students with the most severe disabilities. Other provisions would establish a sweeping system of waivers resulting in a hodgepodge of standards and non-aligned curricula. I have the following observations.
First, the Legislature recognized long ago that students with very severe disabilities need consistency in programming to have any hope of meaningful progress. Therefore, students with manifestly severe conditions are currently offered programs on a 12-month schedule not to exceed 217-222 school days. This entitlement extends only to students with severe mental disability (I.Q. 0-35); trainable mental disability (I.Q. 35-50); autism; deaf-blindness; traumatic brain injury; and some orthopedic disabilities attributable to conditions such as muscular dystrophy, cerebral palsy, or amputation of limbs. The bill (lines 48-49) deletes these salutary protections altogether. This is highly objectionable and will result in the loss of extended programming for hundreds of students with extreme disability profiles.
Second, any district and any individual school would be authorized to obtain a waiver of any regulation, rule, policy, prescribed course of study, and some statutes (lines 82-85 and 102-103) based on amorphous criteria (lines 86-90 and 108-112). The targeted statutes highlighted for waiver are those requiring health and wellness educational programs; drug and alcohol educational programs; fire safety education; and physical fitness assessments at least once in elementary, middle, and high school (lines 84-85). Given the prevalence of childhood obesity and drug exposure, it is difficult to justify targeting such worthwhile instruction as fodder for waivers. Moreover, authorizing limitless waivers of any regulation, rule, or course of study will predictably result in undermining of State content standards and curricula (14 DE Admin Code 502); minimum graduation standards (14 DE Admin Code 505); DSTP assessments (14 DE Admin Code 100), etc. Everything is waivable! History instructs that waivers often become the norm. For example, a 1-22 teacher/pupil ratio for grades K-3 is established by statute (Title 14 Del.C. §1705A). Rather than meet the standard, the norm is to simply obtain a waiver. The exception becomes the rule and legislative intent is undermined.
Third, the Legislature’s historical approach to waivers is to limit authorization by both discrete context and time and to monitor waiver effects. For example, the authorization for a waiver of the 1-22 teacher/pupil ratio is specific to this context, must be reapproved annually, and is subject to analysis by the Department of Education (Title 14 Del.C. §1705A-1705B). In contrast, H.B. No. 119 has no limits in context or time and contemplates no review. Thus, schools and districts could be given indefinite or permanent waivers of some State laws and all State regulations.
Fourth, lines 52-54 ostensibly authorize districts to cap hours of instruction for individual students with disabilities based on a unilateral administrative decision. Such decisions can only be made by an IEP team with parental involvement, not through a unilateral decision by district administration. See attached Delaware DPI policy letter interpreting former special education regulations [“Changes to the length of the school day (lengthened or shortened) can only be made by the IEP team.”]. Moreover, to avoid illegal discrimination (14 DE Admin Code 225; 34 C.F.R. Part 104), the minimum hours for students with disabilities cannot be less than the minimum hours for students without disabilities. Lines 50-54 would benefit from the following revision:
The Department of Education shall promulgate regulations setting educationally appropriate standards for the presumptive minimum number of hours per week of instructional school time that districts must provide students with disabilities enumerated in this section. In no event shall the number of such hours be less than the minimum hours of instructional school time for students without disabilities. Local districts may vary cumulative hours of services for individual students if they can demonstrate by a preponderance of clinical or scientific evidence that the presumptive hours established by regulation are inappropriate for individual students. only by IEP team decision.
I recommend that the councils strongly oppose this bill with particular emphasis on the evisceration of summer programs for students with extreme disability profiles.
Category:
Christina Education Association,
Christina School District,
Delaware,
Delaware Autism Program,
Education Reform,
HB 119
House Education Committee
* Click on Legislator name to get to their home page and access their contact information!
Chairman:
Teresa Schooley
Vice-Chairman:
Darryl M. Scott
Members:
Michael A. Barbieri
Donald A. Blakey
Joseph W. Booth
Earl G. Jaques
S. Quinton Johnson
Thomas H. Kovach
John A. Kowalko
Nick T. Manolakos
Joseph E. Miro
Michael P. Mulrooney
William A. Oberle
Robert E. Walls
* Click on Legislator name to get to their home page and access their contact information!
Chairman:
Teresa Schooley
Vice-Chairman:
Darryl M. Scott
Members:
Michael A. Barbieri
Donald A. Blakey
Joseph W. Booth
Earl G. Jaques
S. Quinton Johnson
Thomas H. Kovach
John A. Kowalko
Nick T. Manolakos
Joseph E. Miro
Michael P. Mulrooney
William A. Oberle
Robert E. Walls
Category:
145th General AssemblyHouse Bill # 119
Primary Sponsor: Schooley
Additional Sponsor(s): Sen. Sokola
CoSponsors:
Reps. Bennett, Brady, Q. Johnson, Keeley, Longhurst, Manolakos, M. Marshall, Mitchell, Mulrooney, Plant, Scott, Viola, Walls; Sens. Blevins, Bushweller, Cloutier, Hall-Long, Henry, Katz, Peterson, Simpson, Sorenson, Venables
Introduced on : 04/08/2009
Long Title:
AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 14 OF THE DELAWARE CODE WITH RESPECT TO PUBLIC EDUCATION.
Synopsis:
This Bill takes several steps targeted at allowing local schools and districts to make better decisions at the local level to educate students. Its provisions include:(a) Permitting local districts substantially more discretion with respect to expenditure of state education funds than they have under existing law. However, the bill also establishes a number of safeguards to ensure that those funds are spent in a responsible manner that enhances student achievement, including state approval of local district budgets, a requirement of full transparency for local district expenditures, and the establishment of citizen financial oversight committees for each district. (b) Creation of a process for local schools and districts to seek relief from rules and procedures that impede their ability to properly educate students.(c) Changing of the “unit count date” to a date much earlier in the year that will allow local districts to make earlier job offers to teachers and help them recruit and retain the best teachers in our region.(d) Eliminating caps on the resources that districts can dedicate to some students with disabilities allowing districts to tailor programs for those students, with appropriate state oversight.
Current Status: House Education Committee On 04/08/09
Fiscal Note: F/N
Full text of Legislation: (in HTML format)
Legis.html
Email this Bill to a friend
Full text of Legislation:(in MS Word format)
Legis.Doc (You need Microsoft Word to see this document.)
Actions History:
Apr 08, 2009 - Introduced and Assigned to Education Committee in House
Primary Sponsor: Schooley
Additional Sponsor(s): Sen. Sokola
CoSponsors:
Reps. Bennett, Brady, Q. Johnson, Keeley, Longhurst, Manolakos, M. Marshall, Mitchell, Mulrooney, Plant, Scott, Viola, Walls; Sens. Blevins, Bushweller, Cloutier, Hall-Long, Henry, Katz, Peterson, Simpson, Sorenson, Venables
Introduced on : 04/08/2009
Long Title:
AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 14 OF THE DELAWARE CODE WITH RESPECT TO PUBLIC EDUCATION.
Synopsis:
This Bill takes several steps targeted at allowing local schools and districts to make better decisions at the local level to educate students. Its provisions include:(a) Permitting local districts substantially more discretion with respect to expenditure of state education funds than they have under existing law. However, the bill also establishes a number of safeguards to ensure that those funds are spent in a responsible manner that enhances student achievement, including state approval of local district budgets, a requirement of full transparency for local district expenditures, and the establishment of citizen financial oversight committees for each district. (b) Creation of a process for local schools and districts to seek relief from rules and procedures that impede their ability to properly educate students.(c) Changing of the “unit count date” to a date much earlier in the year that will allow local districts to make earlier job offers to teachers and help them recruit and retain the best teachers in our region.(d) Eliminating caps on the resources that districts can dedicate to some students with disabilities allowing districts to tailor programs for those students, with appropriate state oversight.
Current Status: House Education Committee On 04/08/09
Fiscal Note: F/N
Full text of Legislation: (in HTML format)
Legis.html
Email this Bill to a friend
Full text of Legislation:(in MS Word format)
Legis.Doc (You need Microsoft Word to see this document.)
Actions History:
Apr 08, 2009 - Introduced and Assigned to Education Committee in House
Category:
Autism,
Christina Education Association,
Christina School District,
Delaware,
Delaware Autism Program,
Department of Education,
Education Reform
Position Paper on H.B. 119
Prepared by
Autism Delaware and the Lower Delaware Autism Foundation
We have also used an analysis by Brian Hartman of the Disability Law Program.
House Bill 119 has been introduced to amend Title 14 of the Delaware Public Education Code. The stated intent is to allow more local control to districts over expenditures of state funds so they can save money.
Key Sponsors: Rep. Schooley, Sen. Sokola
Reps. Bennett, Brady, Q. Johnson, Keeley, Longhurst, Manalokos, M. Marshall, Mitchell, Mulrooney, Plant, Scott, Viola, Walls, Sens. Blevins, Bushweller, Cloutier, Hall-Long, Henry, Katz, Peterson, Simpson, Sorenson, Venables
This bill is unacceptable and we need you to call your representative and senator to oppose it immediately. The State Code for DAP has been in place for 30 years, providing the infrastructure and staff ratios for a highly successful and innovative program. The bill will negatively impact the Delaware Autism Program and educational services for students with autism (and other disabilities) in the following ways:
1. It deletes the extended school year.
Specifically, the bill deletes Title 14, Section 1703, subsections (e) and (f) which call for 12 month programs for children with specific disabilities including autism and allows extension of the school year for children with autism to be 1,425 hours. This is highly objectionable and will result in the loss of extended programming for hundreds of students with extreme disability profiles including our students. It totally takes away our children’s protection for an extended school year.
2. It allows waivers to any regulation, rule, policy, and some statutes.
Any district and any individual school would be authorized to obtain a waiver of any regulation, rule, policy, prescribed course of study, and some statutes based on unclear criteria. Everything is waivable! History instructs that waivers often become the norm. Rather than meet the standard, the norm is to simply obtain a waiver. The exception becomes the rule and legislative intent is undermined. This could impact all our staff ratios including teacher/student, speech, psychologists, etc.
3. The Legislature’s historical approach to waivers is to limit authorization by both discrete context and time and to monitor waiver effects. For example, the authorization for a waiver of the 1-22 teacher/pupil ratio is specific to this context, must be reapproved annually, and is subject to analysis by the Department of Education (Title 14 Del.C. §1705A-1705B). In contrast, H.B. No. 119 has no limits in context or time and contemplates no review. Thus, schools and districts could be given indefinite or permanent waivers of some State laws and all State regulations. So, what may begin as a temporary change to address a budget crisis can become permanent.
4. The bill authorizes districts to cap hours of instruction for individual students with disabilities based on a unilateral administrative decision. Such decisions can only be made by an IEP team with parental involvement, not through a unilateral decision by district administration. Moreover, to avoid illegal discrimination (14 DE Admin Code 225; 34 C.F.R. Part 104), the minimum hours for students with disabilities cannot be less than the minimum hours for students without disabilities.
This bill ostensibly gives districts greater local control. Local control will not help our students and we know that districts will not give parents all the information they require to build appropriate educational supports into the IEP. We need to maintain the code that guides the Delaware Autism Program to ensure that our students have staff ratios, appropriate specialists, an extended school year and respite. Parents fought for this code 30 years ago, and parents need to fight today to maintain it.
Rob Gilsdorf
President
Autism Delaware
John Willey
President
Lower Delaware Autism Foundation
Prepared by
Autism Delaware and the Lower Delaware Autism Foundation
We have also used an analysis by Brian Hartman of the Disability Law Program.
House Bill 119 has been introduced to amend Title 14 of the Delaware Public Education Code. The stated intent is to allow more local control to districts over expenditures of state funds so they can save money.
Key Sponsors: Rep. Schooley, Sen. Sokola
Reps. Bennett, Brady, Q. Johnson, Keeley, Longhurst, Manalokos, M. Marshall, Mitchell, Mulrooney, Plant, Scott, Viola, Walls, Sens. Blevins, Bushweller, Cloutier, Hall-Long, Henry, Katz, Peterson, Simpson, Sorenson, Venables
This bill is unacceptable and we need you to call your representative and senator to oppose it immediately. The State Code for DAP has been in place for 30 years, providing the infrastructure and staff ratios for a highly successful and innovative program. The bill will negatively impact the Delaware Autism Program and educational services for students with autism (and other disabilities) in the following ways:
1. It deletes the extended school year.
Specifically, the bill deletes Title 14, Section 1703, subsections (e) and (f) which call for 12 month programs for children with specific disabilities including autism and allows extension of the school year for children with autism to be 1,425 hours. This is highly objectionable and will result in the loss of extended programming for hundreds of students with extreme disability profiles including our students. It totally takes away our children’s protection for an extended school year.
2. It allows waivers to any regulation, rule, policy, and some statutes.
Any district and any individual school would be authorized to obtain a waiver of any regulation, rule, policy, prescribed course of study, and some statutes based on unclear criteria. Everything is waivable! History instructs that waivers often become the norm. Rather than meet the standard, the norm is to simply obtain a waiver. The exception becomes the rule and legislative intent is undermined. This could impact all our staff ratios including teacher/student, speech, psychologists, etc.
3. The Legislature’s historical approach to waivers is to limit authorization by both discrete context and time and to monitor waiver effects. For example, the authorization for a waiver of the 1-22 teacher/pupil ratio is specific to this context, must be reapproved annually, and is subject to analysis by the Department of Education (Title 14 Del.C. §1705A-1705B). In contrast, H.B. No. 119 has no limits in context or time and contemplates no review. Thus, schools and districts could be given indefinite or permanent waivers of some State laws and all State regulations. So, what may begin as a temporary change to address a budget crisis can become permanent.
4. The bill authorizes districts to cap hours of instruction for individual students with disabilities based on a unilateral administrative decision. Such decisions can only be made by an IEP team with parental involvement, not through a unilateral decision by district administration. Moreover, to avoid illegal discrimination (14 DE Admin Code 225; 34 C.F.R. Part 104), the minimum hours for students with disabilities cannot be less than the minimum hours for students without disabilities.
This bill ostensibly gives districts greater local control. Local control will not help our students and we know that districts will not give parents all the information they require to build appropriate educational supports into the IEP. We need to maintain the code that guides the Delaware Autism Program to ensure that our students have staff ratios, appropriate specialists, an extended school year and respite. Parents fought for this code 30 years ago, and parents need to fight today to maintain it.
Rob Gilsdorf
President
Autism Delaware
John Willey
President
Lower Delaware Autism Foundation
Category:
Check out the News Journal Editorial:
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009904160321
While the News Journal Editorial brings education reform into new light, questioning the assurances required and pondering what other promises the federal government will bury in legislative language, it fails to ask one very important question: What are our School Districts doing TODAY to prepare for this desperately needed funding?
When the money is released, chances are, like the E.S. monies for transportation and highway projects, the turn-around window will be 24-72 hours. That's one to three days to present the plan, cross your Ts and dot your Is. Will our school district be ready to respond? Have we begun planning for this money and where and how we are going to spend it? Have we researched best practices, emerging best practices, and studied the results of those states/districts who are succeeding in education? Have we identified which populations of students who need it most? And are we relying on data from DSTPs, our outdated and ineffective testing program to show accountability? Is the district preparing to hold public forums both before the money is released and after for parent and tax payer input? Or, will our ability to obtain these monies be again shrouded in rubber stamping and closed door executive sessions?
Does the CSD have a plan? And will the tax payers, parents, teachers, and other stakeholders be privy to it? What do you think?
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009904160321
While the News Journal Editorial brings education reform into new light, questioning the assurances required and pondering what other promises the federal government will bury in legislative language, it fails to ask one very important question: What are our School Districts doing TODAY to prepare for this desperately needed funding?
When the money is released, chances are, like the E.S. monies for transportation and highway projects, the turn-around window will be 24-72 hours. That's one to three days to present the plan, cross your Ts and dot your Is. Will our school district be ready to respond? Have we begun planning for this money and where and how we are going to spend it? Have we researched best practices, emerging best practices, and studied the results of those states/districts who are succeeding in education? Have we identified which populations of students who need it most? And are we relying on data from DSTPs, our outdated and ineffective testing program to show accountability? Is the district preparing to hold public forums both before the money is released and after for parent and tax payer input? Or, will our ability to obtain these monies be again shrouded in rubber stamping and closed door executive sessions?
Does the CSD have a plan? And will the tax payers, parents, teachers, and other stakeholders be privy to it? What do you think?
Category:
Christina district revises plan to appoint new head
The News Journal • April 16, 2009
The timeline for appointing a new superintendent in the Christina School District has been revised because of scheduling of site visits for each of the remaining two candidates.
Those two finalists are Marcia V. Lyles, deputy chancellor for Teaching and Learning in the New York City, Department of Education, and Freeman Williams, the interim superintendent in Christina.
It was announced initially that a decision on a new superintendent would be made on or before Tuesday. But the district's school board now plans a site visit in the Christina School District April 24 and a visit of the New York City Public School system April 27.
The board now plans to appoint a new superintendent on or before May 19.
Former Superintendent Lillian Lowery left to become Gov. Jack Markell's Education Secretary.
The News Journal • April 16, 2009
The timeline for appointing a new superintendent in the Christina School District has been revised because of scheduling of site visits for each of the remaining two candidates.
Those two finalists are Marcia V. Lyles, deputy chancellor for Teaching and Learning in the New York City, Department of Education, and Freeman Williams, the interim superintendent in Christina.
It was announced initially that a decision on a new superintendent would be made on or before Tuesday. But the district's school board now plans a site visit in the Christina School District April 24 and a visit of the New York City Public School system April 27.
The board now plans to appoint a new superintendent on or before May 19.
Former Superintendent Lillian Lowery left to become Gov. Jack Markell's Education Secretary.
Category:
Christina Education Association,
Christina School District,
Delaware,
Department of Education,
Freeman Williams,
Lillian Lowery,
Marcia Lyles,
Marcia V. Lyles,
Superintendent
What are your priorities for the distribution of state and local monies in the district?
As a tax-payer, I feel that it’s critical to acknowledge and respect that hard-earned money, paid as school taxes in good faith, must be utilized efficiently and effectively. It is irresponsible and disrespectful to waste tax-payer money by misappropriation. These funds are earmarked for education, not exorbitant administrative management expenses.
I have two main priorities for funding:
1. Professional development for all educators.
2. Fair Compensation. We cannot undo economic conditions, but we can re-evaluate our method for compensating our educators. It’s my understanding that some of the funding for our teachers to continue their education and seek accreditations has been eliminated. Our students will not succeed if we do not continue to provide opportunities for enrichment for our teachers/paras/specialists. We need to examine methods to reinstate that funding and explore other ways to compensate teachers. I fully support higher pay for those teachers who successfully take on our more challenging students and those whose students make acceptable academic progress as evidenced in student assessments. We also need to evaluate how we compensate those teachers who serve as advisors to academic clubs and projects, who provide students with additional academic time such as after-school tutoring, and those who find other ways to go above and beyond their job description.
As a tax-payer, I feel that it’s critical to acknowledge and respect that hard-earned money, paid as school taxes in good faith, must be utilized efficiently and effectively. It is irresponsible and disrespectful to waste tax-payer money by misappropriation. These funds are earmarked for education, not exorbitant administrative management expenses.
I have two main priorities for funding:
1. Professional development for all educators.
2. Fair Compensation. We cannot undo economic conditions, but we can re-evaluate our method for compensating our educators. It’s my understanding that some of the funding for our teachers to continue their education and seek accreditations has been eliminated. Our students will not succeed if we do not continue to provide opportunities for enrichment for our teachers/paras/specialists. We need to examine methods to reinstate that funding and explore other ways to compensate teachers. I fully support higher pay for those teachers who successfully take on our more challenging students and those whose students make acceptable academic progress as evidenced in student assessments. We also need to evaluate how we compensate those teachers who serve as advisors to academic clubs and projects, who provide students with additional academic time such as after-school tutoring, and those who find other ways to go above and beyond their job description.
Category:
What do you see as the role and purpose of the Christina Education Association and the other local unions in the district?
I believe the role and purpose of the CEA, and others like it, is to present a uniform voice for its members. It should challenge unfair policies and poor decisions, advocate for best practices, and represent the interests of its members in all public and private forums.
The CEA and other local unions present the district with a system of checks and balances, a watchdog organization that, in its purest function, advocates for the educators and students of the district and should always be acknowledged and treated as the valuable stakeholder that it is.
I believe the role and purpose of the CEA, and others like it, is to present a uniform voice for its members. It should challenge unfair policies and poor decisions, advocate for best practices, and represent the interests of its members in all public and private forums.
The CEA and other local unions present the district with a system of checks and balances, a watchdog organization that, in its purest function, advocates for the educators and students of the district and should always be acknowledged and treated as the valuable stakeholder that it is.
Category:
Christina Education Association
What do you see as the priorities and/or concerns for the Christina School District?
1. Empowerment of Teachers through access to emerging best practices. Educators need the freedom and support to employ a variety of methodologies, professional development that goes beyond the “train the trainer” model, and procedures and policies that make materials and supplies readily accessible.
2. A Free and Appropriate Education for All Children, not just those who are part of the special education/populations. We need to identify and adapt to our students individual learning needs, providing extra support where necessary while challenging our best and brightest. As evidenced by the proliferation and exodus of students to local private and charter schools, our current public school system is short-changing students on every educational level.
We also need to perform an independent evaluation of whether our District is unilaterally providing FAPE to special needs students in regards to IDEA and its provisions. We need to ensure that our educators are receiving the most up-to-date training and are being encouraged to think creatively. We need to ask and answer: Are our students being limited by preconceived notions?
3. Our district needs to rethink its approach to curriculum. We need to develop a progressive, more realistic view toward relevant curriculum with Delaware Contents Standards regarded as our baseline or minimum criteria – not the goal.
1. Empowerment of Teachers through access to emerging best practices. Educators need the freedom and support to employ a variety of methodologies, professional development that goes beyond the “train the trainer” model, and procedures and policies that make materials and supplies readily accessible.
2. A Free and Appropriate Education for All Children, not just those who are part of the special education/populations. We need to identify and adapt to our students individual learning needs, providing extra support where necessary while challenging our best and brightest. As evidenced by the proliferation and exodus of students to local private and charter schools, our current public school system is short-changing students on every educational level.
We also need to perform an independent evaluation of whether our District is unilaterally providing FAPE to special needs students in regards to IDEA and its provisions. We need to ensure that our educators are receiving the most up-to-date training and are being encouraged to think creatively. We need to ask and answer: Are our students being limited by preconceived notions?
3. Our district needs to rethink its approach to curriculum. We need to develop a progressive, more realistic view toward relevant curriculum with Delaware Contents Standards regarded as our baseline or minimum criteria – not the goal.
Goodbye DSTPs! Hello DCAS!
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009904140335
DCAS is expected to be a comprehensive assessment model that will provide immediate feedback which will allow teachers to adjust educational strategies and optimize learning hours! That's great news!
However, I have some questions in light of what we know about DSTPs:
1) How will DCAS compare to national statistics? Let's look at what we already know -- students who score a 3 on DSTPs may be passing in Delaware. But, compared to the national mean, they are scoring just above the lower 30th percentile in the nation.
2) Will DCAS raise the bar? Will our students be required to score at at least the national average in order to be considered passing?
3) Who will bare the burden of accountability? Are we measuring for the final number or the amount of progress any given student makes?
4) What will DCAS mean for special education students? Will the CSD finally implement the modified version for which federal law allows?
5) Will the new Assessment Model lead to the elimination of DAPA or a diploma for our special education students? Or will we continue to be satisfied to graduate students with a Certificate of Performance?
Yes, it's exciting to hear that we are making progress in phasing out a poor testing, assessment, and accountability model. But, we should not loose sight of the goal -- better preparing our students to succeed post high school!
Elizabeth
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009904140335
DCAS is expected to be a comprehensive assessment model that will provide immediate feedback which will allow teachers to adjust educational strategies and optimize learning hours! That's great news!
However, I have some questions in light of what we know about DSTPs:
1) How will DCAS compare to national statistics? Let's look at what we already know -- students who score a 3 on DSTPs may be passing in Delaware. But, compared to the national mean, they are scoring just above the lower 30th percentile in the nation.
2) Will DCAS raise the bar? Will our students be required to score at at least the national average in order to be considered passing?
3) Who will bare the burden of accountability? Are we measuring for the final number or the amount of progress any given student makes?
4) What will DCAS mean for special education students? Will the CSD finally implement the modified version for which federal law allows?
5) Will the new Assessment Model lead to the elimination of DAPA or a diploma for our special education students? Or will we continue to be satisfied to graduate students with a Certificate of Performance?
Yes, it's exciting to hear that we are making progress in phasing out a poor testing, assessment, and accountability model. But, we should not loose sight of the goal -- better preparing our students to succeed post high school!
Elizabeth
Category:
From the State of Delaware Website:
Markell, Denn Unveil Education Reform Legislation
Governor Jack Markell and Lieutenant Governor Matthew Denn joined Senate Education Committee Chair David Sokola and House Education Committee Chair Terry Schooley today to unveil legislation designed to dramatically improve Delaware’s public schools and qualify Delaware for federal dollars that President Obama’s administration will be awarding to states with forward-looking public school systems. The elected officials were joined by Education Secretary Lillian Lowery and leaders of the Delaware Parent Teachers Association and the Delaware State Chamber of Commerce, who emphasized the importance of reform to parents and the state’s economy.
The bills, co-sponsored by twenty other Senators and Representatives from both political parties, seek to:
Markell, Denn Unveil Education Reform Legislation
Governor Jack Markell and Lieutenant Governor Matthew Denn joined Senate Education Committee Chair David Sokola and House Education Committee Chair Terry Schooley today to unveil legislation designed to dramatically improve Delaware’s public schools and qualify Delaware for federal dollars that President Obama’s administration will be awarding to states with forward-looking public school systems. The elected officials were joined by Education Secretary Lillian Lowery and leaders of the Delaware Parent Teachers Association and the Delaware State Chamber of Commerce, who emphasized the importance of reform to parents and the state’s economy.
The bills, co-sponsored by twenty other Senators and Representatives from both political parties, seek to:
- Eliminate the Delaware State Testing Program and replace it with a testing program that measures student progress over the course of a school year.
- Pay the state's highest-performing teachers a comparatively higher salary, and those high-performing teachers in high-risk schools at the state's highest salary level. This portion of the plan would not go into effect until the state's current budget situation improves, and might begin on a pilot basis in individual school districts.
- Provide local schools and districts with substantially more discretion to make financial and other decisions that make sense for the kids they serve, while simultaneously holding them more accountable for spending their funds responsibly.
Governor Markell said, "This agenda will help deliver the kind of change our system needs to prepare students to become active citizens and succeed in an increasingly competitive economy. The historic challenges facing Delaware demand we do more with the limited resources we have and encourage innovation. The reforms we are proposing will make our education system even stronger."
Lieutenant Governor Denn noted that the bills would be important any year, but were particularly important in light of President Obama's focus on funding school innovation. "These bills should be passed on the merits, because they are good for our schools and good for kids," Denn said. "But now there is an additional reason. President Obama, through the federal stimulus bill, has made billions of dollars available in competitive grants for states that demonstrate that they are pursuing real education reform. The types of things these bills do, especially rewarding high-performing teachers, are things the President is specifically seeking, and will make Delaware far more likely to receive substantial new federal money for education."
President of the State PTA, Bud Mullin, added "Delaware PTA supports these bills, as they align with our support of the goals of Vision 2015, which we voted on at our convention in 2007. These bills start the process toward this vision by targeting the goals of transparency in finances, teacher professionalism, and assessment and accountability. We thank the Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary Lowery and the legislative sponsors and hope to see other bills supporting the vision in the future."
The bills were drafted after Lieutenant Governor Denn and Secretary Lowery hosted a dozen "Back to School" briefings to get public input across the state, and drew hundreds of participants in person and online. The briefings started a statewide dialogue on education reform centered on four main topics:
- Rewarding teachers who volunteer to serve in at-risk schools
- Replacing the DSTP with a better system for measuring performance
- Cutting cumbersome regulations and allowing more decision-making discretion
- Giving schools more funding discretion, but also holding them accountable
Each of the Back to School briefings are available to listen to by podcast in the Lieutenant Governor's website,
www.ltgov.delaware.govSome examples of specific ideas that were spawned by the public and written into the bills are:
- A requirement that teacher evaluation not be based entirely upon formal assessment
- A requirement that 10% of funds available for performance pay be awarded to schools that show objective improvement in student performance rather than individual teachers
- A provision allowing performance pay to be implemented on a pilot basis in individual districts.
- A requirement of uniformity and transparency in record-keeping and accounting by local school districts.
- Changing the unit count date from September to April in order to allow districts to compete with other states for new teachers.
- A requirement of consultation with parents and teachers by local schools or districts before seeking relief from any rule or regulation.
"Delaware has got to do better in education, and these bills are the change we need," added Senator Sokola, Chair of the Senate Education Committee. "We must support our teachers, give kids a chance to succeed, and allow more decision making power at the local level, and these bills do exactly that."
Category:
Christina School District,
Delaware,
Education Reform,
Markell
We are doing a disservice to our educators and students. In the same way that change is top-down, so is accountability.
Accountability must be measured differently for each of the three main populations of district students:
1. There will always be students who give the appearance of not wanting to participate in school. When these students fail it is because the School Board, District Administration, and Building-level Administration has failed in policy and approach to these learners. These students need to be identified, their motivations acknowledged, and an educational alternative employed. Too often we use social promotion as a way to deal with these students, rather than intervention.
2. When a special education student fails, it calls for a thorough audit of that student’s IEP and a determination of whether FAPE has occurred. We need to ask the hard questions: Is that student in the right program? Have we fully supported and empowered our direct education providers? Are the teachers educated to the best practices for the condition that a particular student is challenged by? Are the special education department and IEP team using the parents as an invaluable resource? Have we failed this student because we are too guided by the preconceived notions of a disability?
3. Who should be held accountable when our “typical” students fail? We need to remodel our view of accountability for this population. Decades of social promotion, educating students to minimum standards, and failure to share accountability across the board has created generations of students who start and end their school career below the national average. We need to stop teaching to an out-dated and underperforming assessment test and start teaching to our students’ needs and the requirements of an ever-evolving job market. Success should be measured more by the gains a student makes during the school year and less by a numeric score on the DSTP. Educators and Administrators should be held equally accountable for ensuring that all students make quantitative and qualitative progress.
Accountability must be measured differently for each of the three main populations of district students:
1. There will always be students who give the appearance of not wanting to participate in school. When these students fail it is because the School Board, District Administration, and Building-level Administration has failed in policy and approach to these learners. These students need to be identified, their motivations acknowledged, and an educational alternative employed. Too often we use social promotion as a way to deal with these students, rather than intervention.
2. When a special education student fails, it calls for a thorough audit of that student’s IEP and a determination of whether FAPE has occurred. We need to ask the hard questions: Is that student in the right program? Have we fully supported and empowered our direct education providers? Are the teachers educated to the best practices for the condition that a particular student is challenged by? Are the special education department and IEP team using the parents as an invaluable resource? Have we failed this student because we are too guided by the preconceived notions of a disability?
3. Who should be held accountable when our “typical” students fail? We need to remodel our view of accountability for this population. Decades of social promotion, educating students to minimum standards, and failure to share accountability across the board has created generations of students who start and end their school career below the national average. We need to stop teaching to an out-dated and underperforming assessment test and start teaching to our students’ needs and the requirements of an ever-evolving job market. Success should be measured more by the gains a student makes during the school year and less by a numeric score on the DSTP. Educators and Administrators should be held equally accountable for ensuring that all students make quantitative and qualitative progress.
Category:
Hats off to Teresa Schooley for taking a common sense approach to the State's Zero-Tolerance Discipline Policies!
Schooley introduces bill to curb excesses of zero-tolerance provisons
Published: Wednesday, April 8, 2009 2:12 PM CDT
Courtesy the Newark Post
Following an incident last week in which an elementary school student was suspended and faced expulsion for bringing a knife to school to cut a cake, Rep. Teresa L. Schooley, D-Newark, introduced legislation Tuesday that would give school boards more discretion in enforcing the state’s “zero tolerance” provision.
It was reported last week of an 11-year-old girl who brought a knife to May B. Leasure Elementary School in Bear along with a cake and cupcakes. According to the girl’s parents, a teacher used the knife to cut the cake, then reported the girl for bringing a “deadly weapon” to school. The girl was suspended for five days and faced expulsion under Christina School District’s policy.District policy classifies any blade longer than 3 inches as a deadly weapon, regardless of its use, according to the article.
Students caught carrying or concealing them are subject to five days suspension. Parents or guardians also are notified of possible expulsion and police are contacted to file charges, the paper reported.
House Bill 120 would amend the state’s “zero tolerance” provision to give school boards the discretion to modify the terms of expulsion or determine that expulsion is not appropriate on a case-by-case basis.
A former elementary school music teacher and 9-year former member of the Christina School District school board, Rep. Schooley said the law is too rigid and allows no flexibility for school administrators and boards to handle each situation appropriately.
“I am in no way making light of the situation of children bringing weapons to school, but I think adults know the difference between a weapon and a knife being used to cut a cake,” Rep. Schooley said. “Because the law is so strict and there’s no room for discretion, families are placed into difficult situations where they have to get a lawyer to fight expulsion.
“The way the law is written, it automatically escalates a situation to something that no one wants. Not only is a child faced with the trauma of everything, but the family is forced to gather its resources to defend the child.”
House Bill 120, which has 16 co-sponsors in the House, has been assigned to the House Judiciary Committee.
Schooley introduces bill to curb excesses of zero-tolerance provisons
Published: Wednesday, April 8, 2009 2:12 PM CDT
Courtesy the Newark Post
Following an incident last week in which an elementary school student was suspended and faced expulsion for bringing a knife to school to cut a cake, Rep. Teresa L. Schooley, D-Newark, introduced legislation Tuesday that would give school boards more discretion in enforcing the state’s “zero tolerance” provision.
It was reported last week of an 11-year-old girl who brought a knife to May B. Leasure Elementary School in Bear along with a cake and cupcakes. According to the girl’s parents, a teacher used the knife to cut the cake, then reported the girl for bringing a “deadly weapon” to school. The girl was suspended for five days and faced expulsion under Christina School District’s policy.District policy classifies any blade longer than 3 inches as a deadly weapon, regardless of its use, according to the article.
Students caught carrying or concealing them are subject to five days suspension. Parents or guardians also are notified of possible expulsion and police are contacted to file charges, the paper reported.
House Bill 120 would amend the state’s “zero tolerance” provision to give school boards the discretion to modify the terms of expulsion or determine that expulsion is not appropriate on a case-by-case basis.
A former elementary school music teacher and 9-year former member of the Christina School District school board, Rep. Schooley said the law is too rigid and allows no flexibility for school administrators and boards to handle each situation appropriately.
“I am in no way making light of the situation of children bringing weapons to school, but I think adults know the difference between a weapon and a knife being used to cut a cake,” Rep. Schooley said. “Because the law is so strict and there’s no room for discretion, families are placed into difficult situations where they have to get a lawyer to fight expulsion.
“The way the law is written, it automatically escalates a situation to something that no one wants. Not only is a child faced with the trauma of everything, but the family is forced to gather its resources to defend the child.”
House Bill 120, which has 16 co-sponsors in the House, has been assigned to the House Judiciary Committee.
Category:
Courtesy the News Journal
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090407/NEWS/90407062&s=d&page=2#pluckcomments
E-mail from principal
Parents and Guardians,
Today, school officials received information about a possible weapon on school grounds. I immediately notified our school resource officer and other administrators and began a thorough search. During our search, a handgun was recovered. The weapon was secured, and two students involved in the incident were arrested and removed from school by the Newark Police Department. The students will also be disciplined according to the Student Code of Conduct.The consequences for students possessing or concealing a weapon are very severe. It is considered a Level III offense by the Student Code of Conduct, and may result in expulsion.
Parents are encouraged to discuss with their children both the dangers of handling weapons of any kind, and the serious consequences of possessing them on school property. Copies of the Student Code of Conduct are available in all District schools and on the District website: www.christina.k12.de.us
Sincerely,Curtis BedfordPrincipalNewark High School
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090407/NEWS/90407062&s=d&page=2#pluckcomments
E-mail from principal
Parents and Guardians,
Today, school officials received information about a possible weapon on school grounds. I immediately notified our school resource officer and other administrators and began a thorough search. During our search, a handgun was recovered. The weapon was secured, and two students involved in the incident were arrested and removed from school by the Newark Police Department. The students will also be disciplined according to the Student Code of Conduct.The consequences for students possessing or concealing a weapon are very severe. It is considered a Level III offense by the Student Code of Conduct, and may result in expulsion.
Parents are encouraged to discuss with their children both the dangers of handling weapons of any kind, and the serious consequences of possessing them on school property. Copies of the Student Code of Conduct are available in all District schools and on the District website: www.christina.k12.de.us
Sincerely,Curtis BedfordPrincipalNewark High School
Category:
Superintendent Search Narrowed to Two
Courtesy the News Journal
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009904050356
Courtesy the News Journal
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009904050356
Category:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
