Latest News and Comment from Education

Thursday, November 7, 2013

Commitment to Community Schools: Alignment in Purpose | LFA: Join The Conversation - Public School Insights

Commitment to Community Schools: Alignment in Purpose | LFA: Join The Conversation - Public School Insights:

Commitment to Community Schools: Alignment in Purpose



The Coalition for Community Schools on behalf of Hartford Public Schools
Story posted October 22, 2013
Results:
  • Between the 2009-2010 and 2011- 2012 school years, reading proficiency scores increased by over 10 percentage points
  • School attendance for children participating in afterschool programs has increased by 1% – 3%
  • Proficiency across math, reading and writing performance increased or remained constant across three years for after-school participants, while decreasing in math and writing for non-after-school participants
Hartford’s community school initiative probably could have been started by any of the four agencies or organizations represented on the leadership team. But what has made the effort so strong in its relatively short five-year life is that partners from across the city are involved and deeply dedicated to expanding and sustaining a model built on best practices.
Mayor Pedro Segarra’s office, the Hartford Foundation for Public Giving, the United Way of Central and Northeastern Connecticut, and the Hartford Public Schools all financially support and participate in the Hartford Community Schools Partnership (HCSP).
“To have all of the partners is a really important commitment,” says Sandra J. Ward, the director of Hartford Partnership for Student Success (HPSS). “At any point we might have had to hit the restart button by having a new leader. But we’ve weathered all that. We had a new mayor and new superintendent since we started this work.”

Forming a Solid Foundation

The initial community schools were chosen as part of the district’s efforts to improve outcomes in its lowest-performing schools. As the work was beginning in 2008, the Hartford Board of 

It's time to show our appreciation for our education support professionals | Lily's Blackboard

It's time to show our appreciation for our education support professionals | Lily's Blackboard:


Lily's Blackboard Rotating Header Image


Flowers for Margaret


I always started my day at Orchard Elementary checking my mailbox in the school office for any memos, flyers, notes,  you-name-it. I ended my day the same way.
Looking back now, I remember that Margaret, our school secretary, was already at her desk greeting students, parents and us by the time I got there. I remember, now that I think of it, that Margaret was still there when I passed by my mailbox on my way out the door. And I prided myself that I got to school pretty early and usually left hours after the kids went home. But Margaret did, too.
One morning, I saw flowers on her desk. A large bouquet with a card still attached. I smiled. “Is it your birthday, Margaret?” I asked.
She smiled back, looking a little embarrassed. “Well, no,” she said. “It’s the strangest thing. I was heading home yesterday, and when I got to the parking lot, I noticed one of our kindergarteners standing on the sidewalk. Well, 

Enacting Economic Equity – redqueeninla

Enacting Economic Equity – redqueeninla:

Enacting Economic Equity


It’s the avowed 800 pound gorilla in the room, No, Not that ONE!

 It’s the avowed 800 pound gorilla in the room: poverty just mucks up everyone’s numbers. Kids don’t “achieve learning”, schools fail to make “adequate yearly progress”, businesses can’t locate sufficient or acceptable workers.
The “education gap” between rich and poor is the perfect common bogeyman: everyone agrees it is intolerable. And it’s a start to have a common enemy. Consensus on tackling it is trickier. But its imperative is clear; poverty has life-long, even cross-generational effects. Mustering the will and way to “throw money at the condition” of poverty may seem enduringly complicated, but next week LAUSD’s school board can take a small, simple step in the right direction. You can too by signing the petition explained below and turning out in front of the board in person to fully support all our entitled students – details follow below.
In 1965 Lyndon Johnson started this process by signing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), familiarly known as “Title I”. Designed to “improve academic achievement of the disadvantaged”, the act has sporadically been amended, reworked and even renamed in 2001, redubbed (as it were) the “No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act” during the republican administration of George W Bush. Democrat Barak Obama’s “Race To The Top” 

Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: PARENT ENGAGEMENT

Mike Klonsky's SmallTalk Blog: PARENT ENGAGEMENT:

PARENT ENGAGEMENT


CPS parent volunteers
Latest from CPS -- All parent school volunteers will now be required to be fingerprinted. Accurate Biometrics has been given the $650,000 contract (no board approval required) to do the fingerprinting and parents will have to travel to one of their four centers in the city to have it done. 

According to Brother Fred
Accurate Biometrics' President is Peggy Critchfield. Her previous experience in security work was running the ice pro shop at Marshall Fields. She was Marshall Field's crystal buyer before that. Her other major client is Teach for America.
When asked if parents would also be required to assume the position and take the perp walk? CPS Liar-in-Chief Becky Carroll offered no comment.

ELECTION NOTES

Yes, election victories are possible even in this era of Citizens United, ALEC, the Koch Bros. and Bloomberg billions. Aside from the de Blasio landslide victory in New York, there was the victory of the grassroots school board campaign in Bridgeport. The campaign, led by theWorking Families Party, won out over the corporate-backed forces who were pushing a 

'Nation's Report Card': Who Cares? If you fix some of these numbers maybe the other numbers will mean something!



Per Student Public Education Spending Decreases in 2011 for First Time in Nearly Four Decades, Census Bureau Reports

Note: This is a revised release due to two changes. The embedded map incorrectly had Wyoming as spending more than $16,000 and the District of Columbia spending less than $16,000. The map was corrected to reflect the true spending for Wyoming ($15,849) and the District of Columbia ($18,475).
There was also a calculation error for the 100 largest school districts, sorted by per student spending. The calculation was for the 50 largest school districts, and incorrectly stated that it was the 100 largest school districts. The original order would be true for the 50 largest school systems: New York City School District ($19,770), Baltimore City Public Schools in Maryland ($15,483), Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland ($15,421), Milwaukee Public Schools in Wisconsin ($14,244) and Prince George's County Public Schools in Maryland ($13,775).
Fiscal year 2011 marked the first decrease in per student public education spending since the U.S. Census Bureau began collecting data on an annual basis in 1977, according to new statistics released today (dollars not adjusted for inflation). The 50 states and the District of Columbia spent $10,560 per student in 2011, down 0.4 percent from 2010. The top spenders were New York ($19,076), the District of Columbia ($18,475), Alaska ($16,674), New Jersey ($15,968) and Vermont ($15,925).
Public Elementary-Secondary School System Per Pupil Current Spending by State: Fiscal Year 2011Total expenditures by public elementary and secondary school systems totaled $595.1 billion in 2011, down 1.1 percent from 2010. This is the second time total expenditures have shown a year-to-year decrease, the first time being 2010.
Today's findings come from Public Education Finances: 2011. These statistics provide figures on revenues, expenditures, debt and assets (cash and security holdings) of the nation's elementary and secondary public school systems for the 2011 fiscal year. The release includes detailed statistics on spending — such as instruction, student transportation, salaries and employee benefits — at the national, state and school district levels.
Of the $595.1 billion in total expenditures for public school systems, $522.1 billion is comprised of current spending (i.e. operational expenditures, not including long-term debt). Expenditure for instruction amounted to $316.3 billion (60.6 percent) of the total current spending, while costs for support services amounted to $178.7 billion (34.2 percent). Instructional salaries were the largest expenditure category for public elementary and secondary education, accounting for $208.8 billion in 2011.
On the revenue side, public schools received $599.1 billion in total revenue for 2011, an increase of 1.1 percent from 2010. The largest source of revenue is from state governments at $265.9 billion (44.4 percent of total revenue), followed by local governments at $259.5 billion (43.3 percent) and the federal government providing $73.7 billion (12.3 percent).
States that had the highest percentage of their total public school revenue coming from federal funding included Mississippi (22.3 percent of the statewide education revenue), South Dakota (20.3 percent), Louisiana (18.7 percent), Alaska (17.8 percent), Florida (17.8 percent) and New Mexico (17.7 percent).
Conversely, states that had the lowest percentage of their total school revenue coming from federal funding were New Jersey (5.1 percent), New Hampshire (6.5 percent), Vermont (7.1 percent), Massachusetts (7.8 percent), Minnesota (7.8 percent) and Connecticut (8.3 percent).
Other highlights:
  • Property taxes accounted for 65.6 percent of revenue from local sources for public school systems.
  • Of the 100 largest school systems by enrollment in the U.S., New York City School District in New York ($19,770) had the highest current spending per student in 2011, followed by Boston Public Schools in Massachusetts ($19,181), Baltimore City Public Schools in Maryland ($15,483), Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland ($15,421), and Howard County Schools in Maryland ($15,139).
  • States spending the least per student were Mississippi ($7,928), Arizona ($7,666), Oklahoma ($7,587), Idaho ($6,824) and Utah ($6,212).
  • Eight out of nine states in the Northeast region of the U.S. were ranked among the top 15 in current spending per student in 2011. The remaining state in the northeast, Maine, was ranked 17th. Out of the 16 states with the lowest per student spending, 15 were in the South and West regions. The remaining state, South Dakota, was in the Midwest.
-X-
The data used in the tabulations came from a census of all 15,191 public school systems. As such, they are not subject to sampling error. Although quality assurance methods were applied to all phases of data collection and processing, the data are subject to nonsampling error, including errors of response and miscoding. For more information, visit the Census Bureau's website at <http://www.census.gov/govs/school/>.



PER-PUPIL EDUCATIONAL EXPENDITURES ADJUSTED FOR REGIONAL COST DIFFERENCES


New York19,07618,618457.792.5
District of Columbia18,47518,667-191.77-1.0
Alaska16,67415,783891.465.6
New Jersey15,96816,841-872.73-5.2
Vermont15,92515,274651.724.3
Wyoming15,84915,169679.974.5
Connecticut15,60014,906693.794.7
Massachusetts13,94113,590350.972.6
Maryland13,87113,738133.091.0
Rhode Island13,81513,699116.790.9
Pennsylvania13,46712,995471.733.6
New Hampshire13,22412,383840.256.8
Delaware12,68512,383302.282.4
Hawaii12,00411,754250.452.1
West Virginia11,84611,527319.202.8
Wisconsin11,77411,364409.413.6
Maine11,43812,259-820.45-6.7
North Dakota11,42010,991429.073.9
Ohio11,22311,030192.491.7
Nebraska10,82510,73491.210.8
Michigan10,82310,644179.901.7
Illinois10,77411,634-860.33-7.4
Louisiana10,72310,63884.750.8
Minnesota10,71210,68527.040.3
Montana10,63910,497141.741.4
Virginia10,36410,597-232.40-2.2
Iowa9,8079,76343.680.4
Oregon9,6829,62458.380.6
Kansas9,4989,715-217.09-2.2
Washington9,4839,45230.870.3
Missouri9,4109,634-224.14-2.3
Indiana9,3709,611-241.61-2.5
Arkansas9,3539,143210.172.3
Kentucky9,3098,948360.964.0
Georgia9,2539,394-141.10-1.5
California9,1399,375-235.93-2.5
New Mexico9,0709,384-313.41-3.3
South Carolina8,9869,143-156.95-1.7
Florida8,8878,741145.211.7
Alabama8,8138,881-68.04-0.8
South Dakota8,8058,858-53.70-0.6
Colorado8,7248,853-129.03-1.5
Texas8,6718,746-74.51-0.9
Nevada8,5278,48343.790.5
North Carolina8,3128,409-96.36-1.1
Tennessee8,2428,065177.472.2
Mississippi7,9288,119-191.15-2.4
Arizona7,6667,848-182.24-2.3
Oklahoma7,5877,896-308.84-3.9
Idaho6,8247,106-281.98-4.0
Utah6,2126,064148.562.4
http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/5199-per-pupil-educational-expenditures-adjusted-for-regional-cost-differences?loc=1&loct=2#ranking/2/any/true/133/any/11678

List of U.S. states by poverty rate

RankStatePoverty Rate
(by Household Income)
People in Poverty
by Household Income
(in thousands)
2009 Poverty Rates
(includes unrelated children)
Supplemental Poverty Measure
(Geographically Adjusted)
-United States12.6%45,950
01New Hampshire5.6%737.9%10.4%
02New Jersey6.8%5929.5%12.2%
03Vermont7.6%479.6%8.3%
04Minnesota8.1%41211.1%10.7%
05Hawaii8.6%11012.6%18.0%
06Delaware9.2%7812.4%13.9%
07Utah9.2%2319.8%9.5%
08Virginia9.2%68410.8%11.7%
09Connecticut9.7%3268.6%11.1%
10Nebraska9.5%16710.0%9.1%
11Maryland9.7%5429.7%14.0%
12Idaho9.9%14313.9%11.6%
13Alaska10.0%6612.1%11.0%
14Massachusetts10.1%64110.9%13.6%
15Washington10.2%63611.9%11.2%
16Wisconsin10.2%55311.1%10.7%
17Nevada10.6%26013.1%17.2%
18Wyoming10.6%549.3%9.0%
19Florida11.1%2,25014.6%19.5%
20North Dakota11.2%7011.0%8.4%
21Pennsylvania11.2%1,37211.2%10.5%
22Iowa11.3%32710.9%7.9%
23Colorado11.4%53012.4%14.8%
24Illinois11.5%1,44113.3%13.8%
25Missouri11.6%65915.6%12.8%
26South Dakota11.8%9014.3%11.6%
27Michigan12.0%1,19614.2%12.4%
28Oregon12.0%43613.7%13.3%
29Rhode Island12.1%12713.2%12.2%
30Ohio12.3%1,39213.5%11.5%
31Kansas12.5%33713.9%11.1%
32Indiana12.6%77416.4%14.8%
33Maine12.6%16611.6%9.6%
34North Carolina13.1%1,11517.0%14.3%
35California13.2%4,71615.5%22.4%
36Montana13.8%12813.5%10.5%
37Georgia14.4%1,29818.5%18.8%
38New York14.5%2,76015.9%17.6%
39Kentucky14.8%59917.1%13.2%
40Tennessee15.0%87216.7%14.3%
41South Carolina15.0%62613.8%13.8%
42Arizona15.2%91721.3%21.6%
43West Virginia15.4%27616.0%11.3%
44Oklahoma15.6%54313.0%10.8%
45Arkansas15.9%50919.1%15.9%
46Texas16.2%3,68117.4%16.5%
47Alabama16.7%75016.8%15.9%
48New Mexico17.9%34719.6%15.8%
49Louisiana18.3%74814.3%12.8%
50Mississippi20.1%57123.2%17%
51District of Columbia20.7%1518.0%23.1%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_poverty_rate