Search: Web        
powered by
What I Know ~

Archive for the 'Schools' Category

Napolitano pushes unaffordable university construction

May 2nd, 2008, 10:09 am by Le Templar

ASU Polytechnic

ASU Polytechnic would receive one of the new buildings in a proposed $1.4 billion construction package  (photo found at http://www.asu.edu/)

Arizona governors don’t often go before public hearings at the state Legislature to testify for or against bills and other issues. Since the governor is supposed to be an equal branch of government, office-holders want to avoid the appearance of begging for something from lawmakers.

So Gov. Janet Napolitano’s appearance Thursday before two Senate committees to support $1.4 billion in construction at the three state universities was somewhat rare. It reflects the intense pressure that the three universities and the state’s heavy construction industries are applying to get the measure passed, despite Arizona’s multi-billion dollar budget shortfall.

I’m absolutely baffled as to why the universities are so determined to get the entire package right now. Only about a third of the proposal would go toward maintenance and remodeling of current buildings, which the Tribune Editorial Board said Sunday should the Legislature’s primary focus. The rest of the money would add new buildings to the various campuses, including a new home for the Phoenix medical school, a new School of Construction for Arizona State University in Tempe and a new health sciences building at the ASU Polytechnic campus in southeast Mesa.

Sure, having the additional buildings would be nice. But the Arizona Board of Regents can’t even explain how the universities will pay for their share of the debt ($20 million out of a total $102 million a year), much less where the Legislature should find the rest of the money when it has to postpone routine payments to grade school districts just to balance the budget.

Mesa schools chief questions state funding proposals for ELL

March 13th, 2008, 8:17 am by Le Templar

Debra Duvall (Mesa Public Schools)

Arizona’s top education official faced off Wednesday at the state Capitol with several school district superintendents over what public schools should be doing to educate students who don’t speak English as their first language, and how much should it cost to do the job right.State Sen. Paula Aboud, D-Tucson, arraigned for a two-hour debate between Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne and the local superintendents because school districts are complaining loudly that the Arizona Department of Education is pushing too quickly to change the approach for dealing with English language learners, and is dramatically underestimating how much the money is needed.In 2006, the Legislature moved to end a longstanding federal lawsuit by charging the Education Department and a separate task force to develop new methods for teaching ELL students, and to inform the Legislature how much tax money it would take to fund such changes. The biggest change would be every ELL student should be separated from regular classes for four hours a day for intensive instruction in English. Most of those students would be expected to return to regular classes full-time within two years.

Based on information gathered from the state’s various school districts, Horne estimates $40 million a year is needed to hire more teachers and to provide additional reading materials. But the school districts say they will need far more, as much as $300 million a year.

For much of Wednesday’s debate, both sides dissected obscure details related to Arizona’s complex formulas for education funding. But a compelling moment came when Debra Duvall, superintendent of the Mesa Unified School District, suggested the months-long process of research and negotiation between the Education Department and local schools had been a farce.

“I think there was a dollar figure in mind … that you thought the state could afford; that you had someplace in your budget or you could go to the Legislature and that maybe you could get $20 million or $30 million, or maybe it was $40 million.

“And then, you kind of backtracked. That now we are expected to insure the total comes up to (a pre-determined number). I can guarantee you that $40 million sounds like a whole lot of money. But when you talk about the youngsters that are in this state and the things that need to be done to effectively implement the models that were proscribed, $40 million isn’t going to cut it.”

The idea that Horne or his staff just arbitrarily picked a funding number and then fixed the books to match it would have enormously bad implications. Arizona is under a federal court order to calculate what it really should cost to properly educate about 138,000 ELL students, and then to come up with the money. The federal judge has twice found the state in contempt of court for failing to finish this task, and faces millions of dollars in fines if it doesn’t do so by April 15.

Duvall’s comments struck Horne and one of his deputies right between the eyes. John Stollar, associate state superintendent for accountability, responded fiercely during the debate.

“I didn’t like my integrity being impugned,” Stollar said. “My staff and I have worked on these figures from day one. Superintendent Horne was never part of any of our discussion. He would ask things like, ‘can you give me a rough number’. I would respond that we have to work through the system. … The bottom line is there was absolutely no suggestion to me and my staff, ‘Oh, you had better make this come in at $40 million.’ ”

Duvall said after the debate she came to the Capitol convinced there were underhanded manipulations afoot because of the wide discrepancies between the funding numbers reached by Horne’s agency and those calculated by her staff and other school districts. But once Duvall heard directly from Horne and his assistants, she accepted the differences probably aren’t driven by politics, but by honest disagreements about what school districts will need to carry out the state’s new mandates.

Gilbert police create unnecessary drama with teacher arrest

March 7th, 2008, 12:55 pm by Le Templar

Update:
Gilbert Police Sgt. Mark Marino called me to make it clear that steps were taken by his department and the administration at Coronado Elementary School to prevent students from witnessing the arrest of a teacher for writing bad checks. Marino said the teacher was escorted from her classroom by a school official and was taken to an isolated area of campus to meet the arresting police officers.

Marino also repeated his earlier statement there were attempts to catch up with the teacher outside of school. But he said couldn’t disclose yet what attempts were, and that information might not be available until the police report is released to the public.

I respect the Gilbert police for showing some concern for how tramatic arresting a teacher in front of students can be. But given what I know at this point, I still believe the police should tried harder to avoid coming to the school to make the arrest.

Original post:

Tribune writer David Biscobing has updated information about the Thursday morning arrest of a Higley teacher at Coronado Elementary School in Gilbert. As the arrest took place on campus during class time, the school felt it had to rush a letter home to parents to try to explain what was going on. No real details were available Thursday, but the school said the arrest had nothing to do with the teacher’s job or her interaction with students.

Now we know the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office had issued a misdemeanor warrant for writing bad checks. That makes me wonder why the Gilbert Police Department had scare some Higley children by arresting a teacher at 10:45 a.m. This is a relatively minor offense. The teacher had shown up to work, so it doesn’t appear there was an immediate danger that she would flee.

Gilbert Police Sgt. Mark Marino said the teacher had been avoiding police, so the department decided to pick her at her work place when it was clear she would be there, Biscobing tells me. I have to wonder just how hard the police were trying if the teacher still was doing her job like there was nothing wrong. But surely, the police could have arrested the teacher before school started or waited until the end of the day. There was no reason for the police to inject this extra drama at the school, with the implication that the teacher had done something so bad that she had be arrested right away.

I’m not trying to excuse bad check-writing. But sometimes people in bad financial straits just make mistakes with no ill-intent, and then those mistakes snowball into misdemeanor charges when they fail to deal with the bounced checks. (Yes, I have accidentally bounced a couple of checks in my life. But I paid off the amounts and associated penalties promptly and law enforcement never got involved.)

Gilbert police should have shown some compassion for the students and the school, if not for the teacher herself, and found a better time to make this arrest.

Pappas supporters fight back

October 18th, 2007, 11:38 am by Le Templar

Update: Tribune writer Hayley Ringle is reporting  that a Maricopa County Superior Court judge has agreed to allow the county supervisors to close the three Pappas schools at end of the school year. County Superintendent of Public Instruction Sandra Dowling plans to appeal that decision.

The Tribune Editorial Board received a few sharp comments in response to our Saturday editorial supporting a difficult decision by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to seek the closure of the three Pappas schools for homeless children in Phoenix and Tempe.

Perhaps the most stinging criticism came from reader Sue Adams:

“For the next three months, I challenge the entire editorial staff and all members of their respective families to live in the street, one car per family with only the possessions the can be loaded in that single vehicle. No cell phones, no video games, computers of any kind, no expensive ’survival gear,’ no credit cards, no debt cards, no gas cards, no ’store gift cards.’ And you can not be paid by the newspaper for this experiment – you’re all just out on the streets on your own.

Try letting your children sleep in your car for a few days, awaking without a nice bathroom to brush their teeth or take a shower before they go to school. No clean clothes and, by the end of the second week, little to no food. Let’s see how they do volumes of homework under street lights. Let’s see how their friends treat them when they’re wearing the same clothes on Friday that they wore on Monday. Let’s just see what they learn in a month. Let’s just see how their grades look at the end of the next report card period.” 

I appreciate Adams’ passion for the least fortunate among us. But I have to point out that any family living out of a vehicle for weeks at a time is teetering on the very edge of child neglect. Every public official that comes in contact with such families should be pushing to get them into a more stable housing situation, not essentially enabling the family to stay in the car by ameliorating the worst effects for the children (such as showers at school every single day.) This certainly shouldn’t be the justification for keeping the Pappas schools in operation when the funding isn’t available to support them.

Tim Johnson, a 5th grade teacher, at the Tempe Pappas Elementary School, raised questions about the comparison of Pappas students to other homeless students in Arizona:

“According to the Arizona Department of Education half of the Pappas students live in shelters, hotels or makeshift homes in cars and parks. Only one-fourth of the homeless children in traditional schools live in a similar setting. The remaining students are ranked as homeless because they live in a single family dwelling with more than one family. This means that 75% of the students traditional public schools call homeless could be living with their parents in a home where they may also have a friend living. The schools can label students as homeless if their family is living with an aunt or uncle’s family. This loose definition of homelessness allows districts to classify students who may in fact have a stable home life, and don’t move around, as ‘homeless.’ Why would they do this?  Well, more homeless students equates to more federal funding.”

Johnson has a point. But extensive academic research in other parts of the country also has shown segregating homeless students only harms their educational opportunities. That’s why federal law generally bans states from such segregation using federal funds, and only political lobbying has protected the Pappas schools with a specific exemption.

Johnson also noted that all three Pappas schools are ranked as “performing” under the Arizona Learns program. But that relatively low rank likely reflects improvement in AIMS scores from the prior year, not that the overall scores are anywhere close to acceptable. Johnson doesn’t mention that the three schools are considered “failing” under the federal No Child Left Behind standards, which places them at risk of eventually being taken over by the state anyway.

Funding problems for the Pappas schools, combined with a willingness from Valley districts to accept these students into their classrooms, means the best answer for these students and county taxpayers is to close the Pappas schools.

ADVERTISEMENT