Nancy's blog

Home » 2013 (Page 2)

Yearly Archives: 2013

Coffee Talk with Nancy and Friends!

Thursday, August 22nd @9am

Cafe Intermezzo – Dunwoody

 Please join us to hear updates on education in Georgia, including:

  • Charter Schools
  • Parent Empowerment
  • School Choice
  • College, careers and the workplace
  • Legislative update

 

Sponsored by:

Do City School Districts Perform Better?

The cityhood movement is in full swing in DeKalb.  There’s plenty of news, discussion, controversy and conflict surrounding the topic.  I live in an already incorporated area.  I understand the motivation to form new cities.  But this post is not about the pros and cons of cityhood.  This post is about city school districts in Georgia.  Our last constitution, ratified in 1983 is Georgia’s 10th constitution and our nation’s youngest.  Article VIII of that constitution sets out the parameters for public education and its governance.  Section V, paragraph I of Article VIII, allows all existing school districts (county and city) to remain but prohibits any new independent (city) school systems from forming.  Georgia was left with 21 city districts, 159 county districts and no new districts allowed to form.

The motivation behind the prohibition on new districts was mostly economic in nature.  The result consolidated bureaucratic power and effectively eliminated competition in education for the next 30 years.  But was this prohibition a wise choice?  If we measure the implications in student achievement, the answer is no.

2013 CRCT Scores Analysis (Google Docs)

I have compiled and reviewed the 2013 CRCT scores.  As with my analysis of the 2011 CRCT scores, my first comparison was to review DeKalb’s status relative to the other metro districts.  Out of the eight metro districts (APS, Clayton, Cobb, DeKalb, Fulton, Gwinnett, Decatur City, and Marietta City), DeKalb has the last or next to last achievement scores in 28 out of 30 categories.  The thirty categories are a matrix of six grades that are tested (3rd through 8th) in five subject areas (reading, English language arts, Math, science and social studies).  There has been growth in DeKalb’s scores but relative to the metro area, DeKalb remains in poor position.

As I noted above, cityhood movements are a current topic as are recent discussions and legislation to allow for the formation of new city/independent school districts.  Additionally, thanks to the wisdom of Georgia’s voters, some clusters of schools within districts are pursuing “Charter Cluster” status that empowers them with autonomy.  This would essentially allow the “cluster” of schools (consisting of a high school and its feeder schools) to act independently (pursuant to its charter) of a district in all areas except setting the millage rate.

With the recent interest in forming new school districts and independent charter clusters, I decided to examine the results of the 21 city school districts in Georgia and compare their results with the state averages, the averages of the 8 metro districts and DeKalb’s averages(1).  In every category, the city districts’ averages outperformed the state averages, the metro averages and DeKalb’s averages.  What was shocking was how much better the city districts performed relative to DeKalb.  The city districts’ averages outperformed DeKalb by a minimum of 5.2% to a maximum of 18.81%.  I note that among the city districts, 12 of the 21 have a higher percentage of “economically disadvantaged” students (those students receiving free or reduced lunch) than the state as a whole; 7 have percentages at or above the level of DeKalb.  Ten of the twenty-one city districts are majority-minority districts with as much as one-third of their students listed as having Limited English Proficiency (LEP).  The city districts reflect the diversity and challenges in educating Georgia’s children every bit as much as our larger metro districts.  I also noted that our black students seem to have better achievement numbers if they are in smaller districts.  I am researching this more and will post my results at a later date.  Some of the larger metro districts are going through demographic and political transformations.  Allowing independent districts to form could stave off the degradation of achievement across the economic and demographic spectrum and let all of our children flourish.

No longer are we in the era where we are simply trying to create economies of scale by consolidation in an effort to contain costs.  Georgia spends in the top ten on education in the nation but achievement metrics remain in the bottom ten; often the bottom three.  Georgia’s education struggles hurt our children and our economic viability.  One of the variables that hinders Georgia’s educational outcomes may be the prohibition on forming new independent districts.  The recent charter school amendment passed, in part, because many of our school district frameworks have outlived their usefulness.  Under our current framework, citizens of some large districts are alienated from the expensive system they maintain.  At every turn there’s an excuse, a bureaucrat and a policy that prevent districts from being nimble, responsive and innovative.  Consolidation and the prohibition on new districts have been quite lucrative for Georgia’s educational bureaucrats and consultants.  A 2013 study by Georgia College’s Ben Scafidi, Ph.D., showed how the growth in administrators has far outpaced the growth of students.  In Georgia, from 1992-2009, we saw a 41% increase in students but a 74% increase in administrators.

The better average performance of city districts relative to DeKalb, the metro area and the state as a whole, is important and striking.  If our state is to improve the educational lives of our children and have a robust economy, we must allow independent/city school districts to form.  To continue the arbitrary freeze on new districts is a disservice to our children, particularly our most vulnerable children, and impairs our economic viability.

(1)    In formulating the city averages I removed APS from the 21 districts due to (a) their large size relative to the majority of city schools districts, (b) their unusually large per pupil expenditures and (c) their recent history of testing irregularities.  This exclusion of APS generally only changes the µ less than one point.

The Bill of Rights

Like most of you, I have been reading about the recent discussions, criticisms and school board squabbles (see Cobb County) about “Common Core”.  This is not a blog about Common Core.  I’ve got many a bone to pick with it, as I often do with most of the ideas-du-jour of the educational industrial complex.  The usual outcome from their ideas, no matter how noble or misguided the intention, usually end with money being stuffed into the pockets of the textbook publishers, testing companies and the various parasitic classes.  So, let’s set that aside as a topic for another day.  This blog is about the Bill of Rights.

I want to draw your attention to what happened many years ago when our state’s educational apparatchiks developed the “Georgia Performance Standards” (GPS).  Within our own state, the educrats decided on a terribly flawed roadmap to guide the teaching of social studies (why can’t we call it history and embrace that term?)  to our elementary school children.  As the Mom of three children in elementary school I experience the flaws of the “social studies” GPS first hand.  What are my biggest beefs?  The Bill of Rights and biographies.

I invite you to review the Georgia Performance Standards (GPS) for social studies in elementary school.  Look for the references to The Bill of Rights.  You will find that The Bill of Rights is first mentioned in 4th grade and then again in 5th grade.  Yet, in second grade the educational establishment in Georgia believes we should first use the term “rights” in the discussion of “civil rights” under the unit labeled “SS2H1” and in reference to Jackie Robinson and MLK.  These two gentlemen are important to the discussion of The Bill of Rights and how our rights should be applied.  But, should not we first set the stage and put forth The Bill of Rights and define what these rights are before we discuss to whom they should apply?  As a woman and mother of a daughter, it is interesting that the very first discussion of “rights” (in 2nd grade) has no connection made with rights for women?  Again, I think that could be avoided if we simply explained the rights as defined by our wise Founding Fathers, without making it a polarizing issue.

Georgians should closely examine what “social studies” teaches in third grade.  This is a year before our children are exposed to “The Bill of Rights”.  In 3rd grade our 7 and 8 year olds are taught about “rights” via the “9 important people”.  These 9 are:  Paul Revere (independence), Frederick Douglass (civil rights), Susan B. Anthony (women’s rights), Mary McLeod Bethune (education), Franklin D. Roosevelt (New Deal and World War II), Eleanor Roosevelt (United Nations and human rights), Thurgood Marshall (civil rights), Lyndon B. Johnson (Great Society and voting rights), and César Chávez (workers’ rights).  Let me give you clarity – before The Bill of Rights is taught to your children, our public schools first teach “rights” through the biographies of these “9 important people”.  In 4th grade our children will examine The Bill of Rights after they examine the “cooperation and conflict” of European settlers and Native Americans.    Then they learn about King George III, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Benedict Arnold, Patrick Henry, and John Adams.  Fifth graders examine the Civil War and then study “modern history”.

Why are our children not taught of the signers of the Declaration of Independence?  Why are they not taught about the signers of the Constitution?  Should there not be a mention of The Federalist Papers?  The role of economic freedom is not fully expanded in the curriculum while icons of liberal social philosophy are given special attention.  The K-5 curriculum of Georgia certainly does not instill the values of liberty and self-reliance.  It perpetuates a social agenda of guilt, judgment and entitlement based on an ambiguous and incorrect assessment of history.

The birth of our nation, the brave and wise men who breathed life into it with their words, our founding documents – these topics should be taught and refined throughout our children’s elementary school years.  We should be passing along the wisdom of our civilization to the children who are to inherit it.  It is a travesty that we are wasting these precious years to advance political agendas and cultural sensitivities.  As a woman I have no need to inject more female perspectives and biographies into the study of history from the 1700s forward.  My daughter’s self-esteem and growth potential is not predicated on being provided 18th century female role models.  My daughter and my sons deserve a full and rich understanding of the greatness of the Founding Fathers.  Their wisdom is a gift to all no matter one’s color, ethnicity, gender or religious preference.   In fact their gift was and remains the basis upon which all have attained freedom and dignity.  Their wisdom, as codified in our founding documents, is more profoundly relevant to those who have struggled to obtain their freedom through the use of their noble design than to the men who created and lived under their protection in our nations earliest days.  It is deeply disturbing that we are disenfranchising our citizens from understanding the power of their birthright.

Strategic Planning

A discredited zeitgeist of the past or a vital document needed for success?

At the DeKalb Board of Education’s last meeting (6/3/13) members discussed the status of their strategic planning process (Item E.1(a)).  AdvancEd/SACS’ required action eleven directs the district to “re-implement its strategic planning team for the purpose of effectively implementing the DeKalb County School District’s Strategic Plan to guide the direction of the district.”

It appears that action eleven assumes the existence of a strategic plan and requires the district to implement it.  It is confusing that the DeKalb Board seems poised to initiate another process to develop a new strategic plan.  Your tax dollars paid for outside consultants, recognized across the states and by SACS, to assist DeKalb in developing the existing plan.  Click here to read about some of the process.  If they are going to go down the road to produce another plan, I hope they’ll look over the copious data and input that has already been collected.  It’s just as relevant and timely as ever and, best of all, it won’t cost the taxpayer another penny. I do worry that once the district selects a permanent superintendent, we’ll find ourselves, once again, developing another strategic plan for/by a new chief and their new team of administrators.  It seems one of the hallmarks of being the head of a school district is the development and imprint of one’s “vision”, separate and apart, from previous administrations.  Speaking of a permanent superintendent, has the board begun a search?

While our board and administrators scurry about, planning and discussing the finer points of strategic planning, I will interject this fact:

Strategic planning is a waste of time and money.  It was an idea that didn’t work well in business and continues to be unhelpful in public education.  It did not produce returns for businesses in the private sector and it has not improved educational outcomes in public schools.

I am a pragmatist.  Call me old-fashioned but I want results, not more talk or “process”.  If we are wasting our time and dollars on a product or project that does not improve the educational lives of our children, I say cut your losses and move beyond this tired and fruitless idea.  You may be wondering why I would say such a thing about “strategic planning”.  Isn’t it a necessary?  Don’t we need this to become better and guide our district?  Simply put, no.  In fact, The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning and Strategic Planning in Education was published in the Harvard Education Review about this very subject.   The article reviews one of the important works on the topic of strategic planning and states, “While Mintzberg’s book focuses primarily on strategic planning in business organizations, it represents an important resource for educators who encounter the education version of strategic planning and assume that this management innovation rests on a solid foundation in the private sector. If strategic planning’s effectiveness in business turns out to be a myth, educators might well wonder about its prospects as a management tool for school improvement.”  The article goes on to share that, “In their 1989 study, Vicki Basham and Fred Lunenburg found an ‘inconsistent and weak’ association between district participation in strategic planning and student achievement, as measured by standardized test scores in reading, language arts, and mathematics in grades 3, 5, 7, and 10. Basham and Lunenburg wrote in their review of prior research that ‘no other study shows a direct tie-in between strategic planning in school districts and school district performance on standardized achievement tests,’ and they can add their own work to the list.” So, as I stated earlier, I want results and strategic planning does not drive results.

In his critique of strategic planning, Mintzberg tells us that, “Because analysis is not synthesis, strategic planning is not strategy formulation.”  He adds that, “Ultimately, the term `strategic planning’ has proved to be an oxymoron.”  It is not that Dr. Mintzberg believes that strategy is some sort of myth.  He simply believes that it wasn’t something that was generated out of the formulaic “process”. (Warning  – anytime the word “process” is used an alarm should sound.  It is overused by today’s bureaucratic class and generally signals more of your tax dollars will be spent with little to no results.)  I appreciate the way an article in Forbes Magazine described how Mintzberg sees strategy – “…..strategy emerges over time as intentions collide with and accommodate a changing reality.”  Indeed.

In my quest to provide value to taxpayers, I’ll end with this.  If DCSS pushes forward with the old plan or develops an entirely new one, I have a money-saving tip for them.  The Harvard Education Review found a “remarkable sameness pervading….plans.”  So do us all a favor and use the banal “composite mission statement” that David Conley of the University of Oregon came up with:

It is the mission of ________ School District to enable all students to become responsible citizens and lifelong learners in a changing global society. This will occur in an environment where diversity is valued and the potential of each student is developed to the fullest, with an emphasis on excellence in all endeavors. This can only occur as a result of a partnership between and among the school district, parents, and other community members and agencies.

Unfortunately, I predict we’ll spend more money on consultants, have more “stakeholder engagement sessions”, learn the latest edu-babble vocabulary and nothing will change.  The consultants and bureaucrats will have once again syphoned money away from children and classrooms perpetuating the hamster wheel of the modern public school district.  Mission Accomplished.

Relinquish

We’re all familiar with the old adage about doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results.  So why are we hiring District School Superintendents the same way and “governing” large school districts the same way?

Yes, we’ve seen Superintendents being hired from outside of the educational establishment, but it has become commonplace and is no longer an innovation. Most significantly, Superintendents with non-traditional backgrounds perform similarly to Superintendents that come from within the educational establishment.

Could it be that the structure of what is managed and governed by Superintendents and Boards is the heart of the problem?

Neerav Kingsland, chief strategy officer for New Schools for New Orleans, recently published a letter on this very issue in EdWeek. Mr. Kingsland argues that we need superintendents who are the “Great Relinquishers.” Under “No Child Left Behind” and other accountability measures, the knee-jerk reaction of administrators has been to strengthen their grip on districts and schools.  It’s an understandable response to the demands of accountability, but it’s the opposite of what will produce results for children and taxpayers.  Tight administrative grip stifles and chokes out real progress and innovation.  When central authority imposes what it determines to be a successful strategy on all schools, uniformity and regimented reporting become the management tools.

While this approach seems rational from the outside, it lacks the agility to address the unique issues that occur within each school and classroom.  It entangles the school level and classroom level professionals and is an obstacle to doing what works best for their communities.

Modern district administration has clung to almost every management fad business schools have spewed over the last decade.  The truth is these management techniques, so carefully codified in management literature, are often themselves unreproducible and yield poor results for businesses who implement them. Click here for a brief review of failed business fads, some of which we still see being tried in school districts today.  If these management fads weren’t successful at producing results for businesses why do Superintendents and their training courses rely so heavily on them?

What we do know from the time of Adam Smith until today, is that the invisible hand works.  No Superintendent or central office bureaucrat can engineer an outcome as optimal as allowing the producers and consumers in the marketplace of education to simply operate as they see fit.  If command and control systems worked to produce the best possible outcomes for society, we would all be speaking Russian today!  Sadly, the educational establishment is trying to make us all speak edu-babble and the business jargon du jour.  When will they learn?

Mr. Kingsland is spot on.  We need The Great Relinquishers.  We need more independent charter schools.  The last 100 years has been the era of The Great Consolidators.  We have gone from more than 100,000 school districts nationwide to less than 15,000 today.  An ever growing percentage of school funding is paid to administrators.  The reformation of education in our state and nation will occur when we move in the opposite direction.

We must free schools and communities from the iron grip of bureaucracies.  No matter how well intentioned, a centrally directed policy, method or program, will fail to maximize educational outcomes for our children.  We need to look for Relinquishers to lead school districts now.  They need to be aggressive in seeking to divest districts of their centrally coordinated practices.  I look forward to the day when philanthropic money rewards the Relinquisher and foundations incentivize leaders to see themselves as the purveyors of educational freedom.

DCSS Budget

The DeKalb budget has been in the news lately.

The Superintendent is projecting more revenue will be available for the FY14 budget.  Specifically, the Superintendent is projecting DCSS will end FY13 with revenues exceeding expenses.  The primary source is accumulated money in the after school program accounts for various schools.

The after school programs accumulate money for the individual schools they serve.  These funds are to be used at the discretion of the school leadership for purchasing resources for their school; much like fundraising money.  It appears the accumulated money in these accounts is being appropriated to make the overall budget scenario rosier than it otherwise would be.  The majority of the other funds cited as recently found, are “potential” or “estimated”.  I most definitely oppose the use of after school program funds to be pooled into the general fund for budgeting purposes.   It is a complete breach of trust.  As for the other “potential” and “estimated” revenues, I have two thoughts: (1) DeKalb citizens should be vigilant so DCSS does not return to its previously, overly optimistic and spendthrift ways and (2) Will DCSS fire the individuals responsible for grant administration that, allegedly, failed to collect on grant administration money due the district?  The failure to collect this revenue for years cannot be placed on a CFO that served approximately one year and came to the district in the middle of developing the last budget.  Furthermore, this past fiscal year is one of the few we can point to that showed fiscal restraint and will end without seeing expenses exceed revenue.  Had DeKalb been as prudent with past budgets, we would not have found ourselves in deficit.  I have not seen the financial statement for FY12 (the state is currently auditing that year) but DCSS may have exceeded its budgeted expenditures by over $30 million.  One simply cannot run a school district like that.

While I am pleased to hear the Superintendent say he will be cutting central office staffing, I will reserve judgment until I see and can verify the cuts.  One item we have not seen on the chopping block is transportation to magnet programs over and above what is legally required by the district.  Last year, had we cut this, we could have saved almost $3 million dollars.  That money could buy back one furlough day or hire almost 50 teachers.  Has the Board asked the Superintendent to look into these types of trade-offs within the budget?

The next budget hearing has been postponed until June 3rd.  I hope the administration is working on these issues.  Stay vigilant because, with citizens’ attention focused elsewhere, the Spring and Summer months often bring questionable votes with negative consequences.  Remember cell towers?

Teaching the Constitution and Bill of Rights

It is ironic that our nation, founded on a Constitution and given life by the Sons of Liberty – organizers of the tax protest known as the Boston Tea Party – finds the modern tax collector targeting groups that seek to educate people about the Constitution and Bill of Rights. It is outrageous that the IRS would target groups based on ideology but this goes so much further. It is deeply unsettling that anyone is targeted for educating Americans about their founding document and their rights.

Should not this be an important subject throughout K-12 public education? My experience as a parent of three elementary school children has proved to me their formal learning about history is deficient when it comes to understanding the Constitution and Bill of Rights. This is not a deficiency in the teachers. Some teachers bolster their lessons on this topic but our state leaders in education have let us down by not fully investing in teaching our children about their own history and rights. It should be noted that this deficiency exists with Georgia’s current standards for learning and the Common Core does not appear to fix this. My own opinion is that our elementary schools should have far more focus on the philosophical origins of our nation and the documents that bind us to them. By the end of 5th grade, our children should be able to enumerate their rights, with full understanding as to their meaning. If our children are not fully educated about the origins of our Republic, we should all worry about the continuity of their rights and freedom in the future. I want our children to inherit a world where they are secure in their rights and freedom. This latest scandal gives me pause to wonder if those in government bureaucracies are now either uneducated about our history or truly believe that our rights and freedoms are an existential threat to them, or some of both. Whatever the case may be, it is Leviathan Government, which is antithetical to government of the people, by the people, for the people.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/irs-investigation-groups-targets-91243.html?hp=l1_b1

05/06/2013 – Realtime Blog – May DeKalb Board Meeting

DeKalb County School District
Board Meeting
2pm – Work Session (Agenda)
5:45pm – Public Comments
7pm – Business Meeting (Agenda)

There are a number of important agenda items today. As always, I encourage everyone to closely examine the financial report. There is a sharp increase in legal fees for March. In the last fiscal year (FY12) YTD legal fees were $3.78 million and this fiscal year (FY13) the YTD fees are $6.3 million. I routinely voted against incurring additional legal fees and rejected accepting financial and HR reports with discrepancies. Unfortunately I was not joined in my dissent by most members of the board.

The board is going to approve several policies tonight, including one addressing nepotism. From what I read, I don’t think the new language offers a substantive change. What remains my main concern is the enforcement of the policy. The administration must vigorously enforce the policy.

At the 7pm Business Meeting the CFO will give a FY14 budget update.
In the most recent reports available on the GA DOE websites (FY11), if DeKalb reduced its per pupil general administration costs ($206) to the levels of Cobb County ($83), it could save the district approximately $12 million. I thought it was interesting that Gwinnett’s last report showed that they spent $240 per pupil on general administration. I’m disappointed that these numbers aren’t the most current but they can give insight into budget decisions.

I have long been an advocate for restructuring compensation. Outside of the Superintendent, no central office employee should make more money than the average principal. Highly effective teachers should receive compensation that incentivizes them to remain in the classroom.

Book Recommendations:
I recently read How Children Succeed: Grit, Curiosity and the Hidden Power of Character. I recommend it and think it helps direct the conversation about education in a results-oriented direction while avoiding the clichés of much of the “reform” discussion. Another book that also focuses on results and compliments the discussion is Toxic Charity. The author writes about experiences with his urban ministry in Atlanta. I’ll do a blog post in the future discussing these books. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on them as well.

Dual Accreditation with the Georgia Accrediting Commission (GAC)

If ever there is an issue illuminating the need for more independent charter schools and the right of citizens to self-determination in forming their own city school districts – this is it!

Urgent Action Request

Pursuant to state law (O.C.G.A. § 20-3-519) accreditation by SACS (AdvancEd) or The Georgia Accrediting Commission (GAC) satisfies the HOPE scholarship eligibility requirements.  Many high school communities are asking the Superintendent for permission allowing their school to pursue GAC accreditation with the provision that the school community will pay for it.  So, the budget impact to DeKalb is zero dollars.

Unfortunately, to date after several requests and meetings, the Superintendent has not agreed to allow high schools and their communities to move forward on this matter.  Sadly, the Board of Education has remained silent as well.  Surely our school system and board members can permit the pursuit of GAC accreditation by any school that wants to seek it and is willing to pay the cost.

Dual accreditation is not uncommon.  Columbia County has district accreditation from AdvancEd/SAC and each of their schools is also accredited through the GAC.  Henry County High School is accredited by both Advanc-ED/SACS and GAC.  Ditto for Lanier County High School, North Clayton High School and more.

If you agree with me that the Superintendent and School Board should allow schools to pursue GAC accreditation, please write an email telling them you support this.  We don’t have much time to make this a reality so please send your email as soon as possible.  I’ve listed the board’s emails below.  Feel free to copy me.  Drop me a comment to show your support as well.

CLICK HERE to Email the entire DCSS Board of Education as well as the superintendent.

SACS Update from Elgart

Called Meeting (Committee of the Whole) 4/3/2013 @ 6:00 PM
Discussion Item: SACS Status
Presented by: Dr. Mark Elgart, CEOPresident, AdvancED

Should the board have a script for phone calls and emails?
Yes

 ( 0% )

No

 ( 100% )