More about the extremely disappointing CCJEF v. Rell ruling by Wendy Lecker
The mass media was quick to fixate on the one “positive” element of the recent CCJEF v. Rell school funding lawsuit ruling, missing the many series problems associated with decision.
In her first piece, Problems with the CCJEF Decision – Will equity without adequacy be enough to help Connecticut’s neediest children?, education advocate and Hearst Media Group columnist Wendy Lecker looked at the school finance portion of the judge’s action. Here, in Demanding more in elementary schools, she looks at some of the education policy elements of the ruling.
This piece first appeared in the Stamford Advocate. You can read and comment on the original at: http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Wendy-Lecker-Demanding-more-in-elementary-schools-9242568.php
More about the extremely disappointing CCJEF v. Rell ruling by Wendy Lecker
As noted in my previous column, CCJEF trial judge Thomas Moukawsherrefused to order the state to ensure adequate resources in schools, though determining constitutional adequacy was his responsibility. By contrast, the judge freely issued sweeping directives regarding educational policy.The judge issued far-reaching orders involving elementary and high school education and teacher evaluations. He also aired abhorrent views toward children with disabilities, which several commentators already addressed.This column addresses his orders regarding elementary education. I will address the others in subsequent columns.Moukawsher observed that the educational disparities in secondary school begin in elementary school. (He actually acknowledged that they begin before elementary school, but declined to rule that preschool is essential.)Moukawsher’s “fix” for elementary school was to order the state to defineMore about the extremely disappointing CCJEF v. Rell ruling by Wendy Lecker - Wait What?:
