Exploring the Right to Education, Keys to Success, After-School, and Teaching Quality

For those who were unable to attend the conference this year, or who were interested in concurrent sessions other than the ones they attended, the following synopsis provides an indicator of the breadth and depth of the discussions.

“Making Quality Education a Civil Right” featured an esteemed lineup of speakers whose legal work and community involvement have made them leaders in the struggle to vindicate the right to quality education for all children.

Jane Lopez, from Multicultural Training, Education, and Advocacy (META), focused on the country’s growing population of English Language Learners, noting that they are often forgotten in adequacy cost studies and that their programmatic needs are an afterthought even in many districts in which they are a majority. She emphasized that, as this population continues to grow, their needs must be clearly identified and incorporated into even the most basic school programs: all teachers should know not only how to teach English, but also how to ensure that students still learning English are learning the full range of curricula as they work to improve their English skills.

John Brittain, chief counsel at the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (LCCRUL) told the compelling story of the efforts to integrate and adequately fund Connecticut schools, which was informed by his distinguished career as a Civil Rights lawyer fighting for school integration in the south and then in this small northeastern state. Brittain emphasized that this wealthy state continues to fail its low-income and minority students, who are concentrated in small cities and surrounded by opulent suburban communities. The intervention of the Lawyers Committee and the Connecticut NAACP on the side of the Department of Education in Connecticut’s suit over NCLB was therefore, Brittain explained, not a defense of NCLB, but rather an attempt to continue pressuring the state to make a serious financial and political commitment to its neediest students.

Richard Gray of the NYU School of Education Community Involvement Program, which is soon to become part of the Annenberg Institute for School Reform, spoke next. Gray spoke passionately on the need to link legal efforts to reform education to the needs and wants of the community. Only by making the work that lawyers do to improve education relevant to the communities they represent, he said, can the rights established in court truly translate into rights that will be exercised by that community. While their efforts cover a broad spectrum, the speakers emphasized the variety of efforts necessary to establish the right of every low-income and minority student to a quality education, and to allow each of those students the opportunity to exercise that right.

In “How Are They Doing It? Real World Success in Diverse Communities,” Robert Sexton, Donald Kress, and Lesley Hirsch reported that winning school funding reforms is only the beginning of the hard work needed to ensure effective implementation to the benefit of all students. Each stressed the need to inform the broad public through a balanced approach to the progress and challenges encountered.

Donald Kress, chief school performance officer for Montgomery County schools in Maryland, described successes with new initiatives in that school district. As demographics and student needs changed, the relative affluence of the area buoyed average test scores. However, when Jerry Weast became superintendent of this county-wide district in 1999, he uncovered and made public disparities in the performance of certain schools and students. The district found that the majority of underperforming schools were located in one area in the middle of the county, which contains 50% of the district’s elementary schools but 80% of its poverty, 75% of its English Language learners, and 70% of African American and Hispanic students. In order to improve those schools, the district channeled more funding to them, but, at the same time, ensured that no schools actually lost funding and created initiatives that benefited all schools. In what Kress calls a “virtuous cycle,” excellent results have brought more funding from the county council, and currently almost 50% of the total county budget goes to the school district.

Bob Sexton, of the Prichard Committee for Academic Excellence in Kentucky, explained that the Committee, by proactively starting a movement long before the 1989 Rose decision in his state “provided cover” for the court, that is, demonstrated broad public and political support for reform. Sexton emphasized the importance of public engagement, reminding litigators and advocates that, “You are coming forward with a massive solution to a problem that people don’t know they have.” Long-term success in advocating for educational reform requires three priorities, he said: earning and maintaining credibility, keeping a clear focus on your goals, and ensuring that people know that you are going to see the effort through to success.

Lesley Hirsch, of the Abbott Indicators Project at New Jersey’s Education Law Center (ELC), reviewed her state’s experience implementing reforms in high-need districts. The Project includes some 200 indicators of progress with trend data and is designed to inform people of their educational rights, engage district residents in solutions, and stimulate discussion about the roles that all stakeholders should play. ELC now faces the challenge of making the indicators data accessible and meaningful to the general public. She emphasized the need to report on both progress and challenges, focus on children and not the courts, and pursue extensive public engagement.

Advocates made the case for the importance of after-school programs to a quality education in “Expanding After-School and Other Extended Time Programs.” Terry Peterson, director of the Afterschool and Community Learning National Network, explained the many benefits of after-school especially for low-income children. Jodi Grant, executive director of the Afterschool Alliance, argued that after-school programs are critical to student safety, academic success, and economic growth, as children develop networks and learn social skills that help them find their careers. Grant showed that after-school can be useful in school funding cases and urged attorneys to include after school groups as allies in the school funding movement. Furthermore, she stated, after-school is not a partisan issue, drawing solid support from both Democratic and Republican voters.

Lucy Friedman, president of The After-School Corporation (TASC), described how her organization works to make after-school issues a public policy priority by evaluating after-school initiatives and disseminating research. TASC programs, serving in 200 New York City schools, are run by community-based organizations. Students in these programs have higher math scores, better attendance, and improved attitudes towards learning. Friedman reminded participants that after-school programming is relatively inexpensive, tangible, and easily identified as a public policy issue by the public.

John Meyers, a cost study expert, encouraged advocates to build after-school funding into the state’s base aid and not as a categorical fund. He has developed a model for costing out programs for after-school, before school hours, summers and holidays.

“Recruiting and Retaining Teachers: New Ideas, New Practices” brought together Connie White, Robin Lambert, Thomas Carroll, and moderator Nyeema Watson, to discuss the challenges of retaining and recruiting teachers and to offer practical and innovative solutions.

Tom Carroll, president of the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, explained the need to invest in our teachers for the sake of education. Nationally, 1/3 of our teachers leave the profession after only 3 years of teaching, and 46% of teachers after 5 years of teaching do the same. Carroll suggested that teachers be given more training and support in the classroom and that teachers work more collectively. He claimed that, “the notion of a stand-alone teacher in an isolated classroom is antiquated.” Just as we do not expect people in other professions to work completely on their own, he said, we should not have such expectations of teachers.

Connie White, co-president of the Denver Classroom Teachers Association, described Denver’s new ProComp system, a pay-for-performance model. ProComp awards salary increases based on a teacher’s knowledge and skills, professional education, “market incentives,” and student achievement growth. Teachers already in the district were given the ability to opt in to this pay scale, a factor which White feels was necessary for union agreement.

Robin Lambert of the Rural School and Community Trust highlighted the specific difficulties in recruiting and retaining teachers in rural areas. Teachers in these areas are paid less, are likely to teach multiple subjects or grades, and have less access to colleges and universities to broaden their own education. Lambert proposed solutions to these problems, including closing the salary gap between rural and other teachers, offering incentive pay, and using targeted recruitment.

Prepared on June 14, 2006