Ypsilanti History: The Desegregation of Ypsilanti Schools

While it's still Black History Month I thought I would feature this interesting blog (and history of Ypsilanti schools) that I recently stumbled upon.

The information here comes from a blog about South Adams Street at the turn of the twentieth century. As the blog notes, "South Adams Street @ 1900 was created by Matthew Siegfried as a Masters project of Eastern Michigan University's Historic Preservation Program. Readers are encouraged to write with any questions or additions. Walking tours and presentations are available.

Email: southadams1900@gmail.com."

A special shout-out goes to the Ypsilanti Historical Society Archives, which provided a lot of the information Matthew Siegfried used. They welcome visitors, and I've done some research in them (particularly around Begole School). The archives have lots of great information. Find out more about them here. 

Today's topic is the First Ward School, and the full web site about it can be found here. [The author of the web site, Matthew Siegfried, has written about a lot more than just the First Ward School.]

The old First Ward School, on Adams Street, was built during the Civil War specifically for the purpose of educating black children. 

On September 10, 1897, the Ann Arbor Argus reported that "Ypsilanti has 1778 children of school age of which 155 are colored, a gain of three colored children and 10 white over last year."

Recorder, August 1916.
Photo by Matthew Siegfried.
Used under a Creative
Commons license.

As Siegfried characterizes it, "What began as a statement of support for black residents during the Civil War" became a symbol of segregation by the early 1900s, exclusively educating black students through sixth grade.

The school was not in good condition and things came to a head in 1916, when the black residents of Ypsilanti petitioned the prosecuting attorney, as taxpayers, for better schools. They objected to paying for the new Ypsilanti high school when their school was in such poor condition. 

The petition began:

We, the undersigned colored citizens of the city of Ypsilanti, residing in the First ward of said city, hereby petition you as an officer of the county to investigate the action of the school board of the city of Ypsilanti. We are paying a large tax for the building of a new school house. It is used for white to the exclusion of colored children. Our school, a ward school in the First ward, has no connection with the sewer, it is unsanitary and not healthful, but we are compelled, because we are colored and the board of education is white, to put up with whatever they hand us.

The school house is not sufficient or satisfactory. Do we get new? No, simply get an old discarded and poor building moved from another part of the city and placed out in the dusty street, or nearly so. It is within five feet of the street line, and thus cuts off our view down the street. Part of the time we have had undesirable teachers, part of that time poorly qualified, but we have to take it. 

Notes Siegfried, 

A bond was proposed by the [sic--but I think it was proposed by the school board and] voted down, with support of the black community, that would have rehabilitated the school while increasing the grades taught, effectively expanding segregation under the guise of aiding the school. The community was adamant; it wanted an end to segregation... Detroit attorney and NAACP leader Charles Mahoney, who later worked on the Ossian Sweet Case, led the legal challenge. The bond initiative was also opposed at the ballot box and defeated. The case was won in Judge Sample’s Circuit Court and Ypsilanti schools were formally desegregated in May, 1919. The First Ward school closed that year. 

The 1919 American School Board Journal explained things like this: 

The important question, in the court’s judgment, was whether the school was being conducted by the board for the children of negro parents of the ward In such a way as to compel the children, because they are colored, to attend the school, and at the same time to permit white children of the district to attend outside schools.The court maintained that the maintenance of the school was an act of discrimination against the colored children and that in view of the provisions of the Michigan law, it was a violation of the common law of the state and of the statutes of the state. The court cited a number of important decisions from Supreme Court cases to support its contention that all residents of a state have an equal right to attend any school and that they may not be discriminated against because of race or color.

The building is now the New Jerusalem Church.

Here are some more newspaper articles from the South Adams Street 1900 web site. 

Three additional notes:

1. Nearly one hundred years later, Ypsilanti Community Schools is a majority African-American district. Four years ago, I wrote: "It is important to remember that school segregation--though banished by law--still exists in many many schools around the nation." I wouldn't exactly call YCS a segregated district, but there are plenty of people who live in the district who send their children to schools--public, charter, or private--in other districts--and many of those families are white.

2. The First Ward School was referred to as the Adams Street School. This is not to be confused with the current Adams Elementary--which was originally named Prospect School. It was renamed in 1963 after Olive M. Adams, who was retiring from the school after being principal there for 29 years.

3. I knew about efforts to desegregate the Ann Arbor schools--in fact I've written extensively about them--but I never heard of this really significant (and successful!) lawsuit in Ypsilanti.

[And that, by the way, is in my opinion a signature of Ypsilanti--there's lots of super-interesting history, stores, museums, and parks in Ypsi--and unless you look closely, you might miss them.] For instance, do you know where this statue of  Harriet Tubman can be found? 

Sculpture by Jane DeDecker,
photograph by Dwight Burdette
[CC BY 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)],
via Wikimedia Commons

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email o

Reading--The Legislature Is Too Interested, the State Supreme Court Is Not Interested Enough

Third Grade Reading Bill Passes House Education Committee--What's In It?

The "third grade reading bill," as it is being called in shorthand, has passed the state house education committee. To my great disappointment, my representative (Adam Zemke) has signed on as a sponsor.


5) BEGINNING WITH PUPILS ENROLLED IN GRADE 3 DURING THE 2016-
8 2017 SCHOOL YEAR, ALL OF THE FOLLOWING APPLY:
9 (A) IF A PUPIL ENROLLED IN GRADE 3 IN A SCHOOL DISTRICT OR
10 PUBLIC SCHOOL ACADEMY IS RATED 1 FULL GRADE LEVEL OR MORE BEHIND IN
11 READING, AS DETERMINED BY THE DEPARTMENT BASED ON THE READING12 PORTION OF THE GRADE 3 STATE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS ASSESSMENT, THE
13 BOARD OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OR BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE PUBLIC
14 SCHOOL ACADEMY IN WHICH THE PUPIL IS ENROLLED SHALL ENSURE THAT THE
15 PUPIL IS NOT ENROLLED IN GRADE 4 UNTIL 1 OF THE FOLLOWING OCCURS:
16 (i) THE PUPIL ACHIEVES A GRADE 3 LEVEL READING SCORE AS
17 DETERMINED BY THE DEPARTMENT BASED ON THE GRADE 3 STATE ENGLISH
18 LANGUAGE ARTS ASSESSMENT.
19 (ii) THE PUPIL DEMONSTRATES A GRADE 3 READING LEVEL THROUGH
20 PERFORMANCE ON AN ALTERNATIVE STANDARDIZED READING ASSESSMENT
21 APPROVED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION.
22 (iii) THE PUPIL DEMONSTRATES A GRADE 3 READING LEVEL THROUGH A
23 PUPIL PORTFOLIO, AS EVIDENCED BY DEMONSTRATING MASTERY OF ALL GRADE
24 3 STATE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS STANDARDS THROUGH MULTIPLE WORK
25 SAMPLES.
26 (B) IF A CHILD YOUNGER THAN 10 YEARS OF AGE SEEKS TO ENROLL
27 FOR THE FIRST TIME IN A SCHOOL DISTRICT OR PUBLIC SCHOOL ACADEMY IN 
1 GRADE 4, THE BOARD OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OR BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
2 THE PUBLIC SCHOOL ACADEMY SHALL NOT ALLOW THE CHILD TO ENROLL IN
3 GRADE 4 UNLESS 1 OF THE FOLLOWING OCCURS:
4 (i) THE CHILD ACHIEVES A GRADE 3 LEVEL READING SCORE AS
5 DETERMINED BY THE DEPARTMENT BASED ON THE READING PORTION OF THE
6 GRADE 3 STATE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS ASSESSMENT.
7 (ii) THE CHILD DEMONSTRATES A GRADE 3 READING LEVEL THROUGH
8 PERFORMANCE ON AN ALTERNATIVE STANDARDIZED READING ASSESSMENT
9 APPROVED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION.
10 (iii) THE CHILD DEMONSTRATES A GRADE 3 READING LEVEL THROUGH A
11 PUPIL PORTFOLIO, AS EVIDENCED BY DEMONSTRATING MASTERY OF ALL GRADE
12 3 STATE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS STANDARDS THROUGH MULTIPLE WORK
13 SAMPLES.

In other words--typically a student could be held back based on just his or her performance on a state test. 

14 (C) SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (12), IF A PUPIL IS NOT ENROLLED IN
15 GRADE 4 DUE TO THE OPERATION OF THIS SUBSECTION AND THE PUPIL HAS
16 DEMONSTRATED PROFICIENCY IN MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, WRITING, OR
17 SOCIAL STUDIES AS DETERMINED BY THE GRADE 3 STATE ASSESSMENT IN THE
18 APPLICABLE SUBJECT AREA OR BY THE PUPIL'S GRADE 3 READING TEACHER,
19 THE BOARD OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OR BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
20 PUBLIC SCHOOL ACADEMY SHALL ENSURE THAT THE PUPIL IS PROVIDED WITH
21 INSTRUCTION COMMENSURATE WITH THE PUPIL'S ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL IN THAT
22 SPECIFIC SUBJECT AREA. THIS INSTRUCTION MAY BE GIVEN IN A GRADE 4
23 CLASSROOM SETTING.

In other words, a student might be "moved up" to Grade 4 for math and science and social studies, and then pulled out for reading intervention, but not actually called a "4th grader" unless his or her reading progressed.

24 (6) FOR PUPILS WHO ARE NOT ADVANCED TO GRADE 4 OR CHILDREN WHO
25 ARE NOT ENROLLED IN GRADE 4 DUE TO THE OPERATION OF SUBSECTION (5),
26 THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OR PUBLIC SCHOOL ACADEMY SHALL PROVIDE A
27 READING INTERVENTION PROGRAM THAT IS INTENDED TO CORRECT THE 
1 PUPIL'S SPECIFIC READING DEFICIENCY, AS IDENTIFIED BY A VALID AND
2 RELIABLE ASSESSMENT, AND ADDRESS ANY BARRIERS TO READING. THIS
3 PROGRAM SHALL INCLUDE EFFECTIVE INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES NECESSARY
4 TO ASSIST THE PUPIL IN BECOMING A SUCCESSFUL READER, AND ALL OF THE
5 FOLLOWING FEATURES, AS APPROPRIATE FOR THE NEEDS OF THE INDIVIDUAL
6 PUPIL:
7 (A) A REDUCED PUPIL-TEACHER RATIO OR 1-TO-1 READING
8 INTERVENTION WITH A VOLUNTEER.
9 (B) ASSIGNING TO THE PUPIL A HIGHLY EFFECTIVE TEACHER OF
10 READING AS DETERMINED BY THE TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM UNDER
11 SECTION 1249, THE HIGHEST EVALUATED TEACHER IN THE SCHOOL AS
12 DETERMINED BY THAT SYSTEM, OR A READING SPECIALIST.
13 (C) READING PROGRAMS THAT ARE RESEARCH-BASED AND HAVE PROVEN
14 RESULTS IN ACCELERATING PUPIL READING ACHIEVEMENT WITHIN THE SAME
15 SCHOOL YEAR.
16 (D) READING INSTRUCTION AND INTERVENTION FOR THE MAJORITY OF
17 PUPIL CONTACT TIME EACH DAY THAT INCORPORATES OPPORTUNITIES TO
18 MASTER THE GRADE 4 STATE STANDARDS IN OTHER CORE ACADEMIC AREAS.
19 (E) DAILY TARGETED SMALL GROUP OR 1-TO-1 READING INTERVENTION
20 THAT IS BASED ON PUPIL NEEDS, DETERMINED BY ASSESSMENT DATA, AND ON
21 DIAGNOSED BARRIERS TO READING AND THAT INCLUDES EXPLICIT AND
22 SYSTEMATIC INSTRUCTION WITH MORE DETAILED AND VARIED EXPLANATIONS,
23 MORE EXTENSIVE OPPORTUNITIES FOR GUIDED PRACTICE, AND MORE
24 OPPORTUNITIES FOR ERROR CORRECTION AND FEEDBACK.
25 (F) ADMINISTRATION OF ONGOING PROGRESS MONITORING ASSESSMENTS
26 TO FREQUENTLY MONITOR PUPIL PROGRESS.
27 (G) SUPPLEMENTAL RESEARCH-BASED READING INTERVENTION DELIVERED 
1 BY A TEACHER OR TUTOR WITH SPECIALIZED READING TRAINING THAT IS
2 PROVIDED BEFORE SCHOOL, AFTER SCHOOL, DURING REGULAR SCHOOL HOURS
3 BUT OUTSIDE OF REGULAR ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS CLASSROOM TIME, OR ANY
4 COMBINATION OF THESE.
5 (H) PROVIDES PARENTS AND LEGAL GUARDIANS WITH A "READ AT HOME"
6 PLAN OUTLINED IN A PARENTAL CONTRACT, INCLUDING PARTICIPATION IN
7 PARENT AND GUARDIAN TRAINING WORKSHOPS AND REGULAR PARENT-GUIDED OR
8 GUARDIAN-GUIDED HOME READING.

Yes, that would mean the teacher assessed as "highly effective" based in large part on test score evaluations. And who is going to pay for the reading interventions? 

[Side note, but totally relevant: The ACLU of Michigan had brought a lawsuit forward based on Highland Park's failure to teach kids to read, and the Supreme Court of Michigan just declined to hear it. People, it's all about funding, and poverty... Go to the end of this piece to read an excerpt of the ACLU statement, or follow the link.]

9 (7) IF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF THE PUPIL'S SCHOOL DISTRICT OR
10 CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR OF THE PUPIL'S PUBLIC SCHOOL ACADEMY GRANTS A
11 GOOD CAUSE EXEMPTION FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBSECTION (5)(A) FOR
12 A PUPIL, THEN A PUPIL MAY BE ADVANCED TO GRADE 4 WITHOUT MEETING
13 THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBSECTION (5)(A). A GOOD CAUSE EXEMPTION MAY
14 BE GRANTED ONLY ACCORDING TO THE PROCEDURES UNDER SUBSECTION (9)
15 AND ONLY FOR 1 OF THE FOLLOWING:
16 (A) THE PUPIL IS A STUDENT WITH AN INDIVIDUALIZED EDUCATION
17 PROGRAM WHOSE INDIVIDUALIZED EDUCATION PROGRAM TEAM DETERMINES THAT
18 THE PUPIL IS INELIGIBLE TO TAKE THE STANDARD GRADE 3 STATE
19 ASSESSMENT, OR THE MI-ACCESS ASSESSMENT OR ANY SIMILAR ALTERNATIVE
20 STATE ASSESSMENT, ACCORDING TO HIS OR HER INDIVIDUALIZED EDUCATION
21 PROGRAM.
22 (B) THE PUPIL IS A LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENT WHO HAS
23 HAD LESS THAN 2 YEARS OF INSTRUCTION IN AN ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNER
24 PROGRAM.
25 (C) THE PUPIL HAS RECEIVED INTENSIVE READING INTERVENTION FOR
26 2 OR MORE YEARS BUT STILL DEMONSTRATES A DEFICIENCY IN READING AND
27 WAS PREVIOUSLY RETAINED IN KINDERGARTEN, GRADE 1, GRADE 2, OR GRADE 
1 3.

For crying out loud! This implies that you could have 10 and 11 year olds in with your 8 year olds. Think that makes any sense developmentally? 

It's also worth noting that dyslexia organizations are upset this bill was developed without them. Reading disabilities are often not diagnosed until third or fourth grade.

Here's the full bill. 

***********************************************************

Supreme Court Refuses to Hear ACLU of Michigan lawsuit

The ACLU had brought forward a case filed on behalf of eight public-school students in Highland Park who contend that the district has failed to meet its obligation to ensure basic literacy skills among children in the district.

By car, it's a little over an hour to drive from Highland Park to Lansing,
but clearly it's a world away. Screenshot from Google Maps.

As the ACLU writes, "Today the state Supreme Court refused to hear a case that ruled against children whose schools have failed to teach them to read.   While the trial court decided that The appellate court said that the state has no enforceable duty to ensure that schoolchildren actually learn fundamental skills such as reading – but rather is obligated only to establish and finance a public education system, regardless of the quality of that system. Waving off decades of historic judicial precedent, the majority opinion contended that “judges are not equipped to decide educational policy"... 

Dissenting from the majority opinion, Judge Douglas Shapiro accused the Court of Appeals of “abandonment of our essential judicial roles, that of enforcement of the rule of law even where the defendants are governmental entities, and of protecting the rights of all who live within Michigan’s borders, particularly those, like children, who do not have a voice in the political process. 

ALSO (my summary): The Supreme Court ACKNOWLEDGED an abysmal failure of the system, but by refusing to hear the case essentially said, "It's not our problem."

 *************************************************************** 

Connect...the....Dots 

Guess what? In Highland Park, in the lawsuit, a majority of kids failed the state assessment for proficiency in reading. The district had no money. Has no money. Is under emergency management. Can you imagine having all those kids held back, for one, two, or three years?

The state is ABDICATING its responsibility to help kids in poverty-stricken districts, especially, and no amount of "third grade reading bills" that require expensive interventions but don't provide any money for them is going to solve that problem.

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Labor Update: Unfair Labor Practices and the Michigan Employment Relations Commission Process

But first--one important PSA--the Ann Arbor schools updated their web site this weekend. It was long planned because the web site has been rather hard to navigate and I hope this improves things. But also, I've been made aware that many of my blog links have been lost. This includes recent links I put up about negotiations. Boo. I am sorry, and I hope to recover some of them.

Now, back to negotiations:

1. The Ann Arbor Education Association (teachers' union) filed an unfair labor practices charge against the school district. Per their press release:

The AAEA is filing three charges against the district: 

1. The superintendent interfered and coerced AAEA members by communicating with them directly concerning the contract dispute.
2. The superintendent interfered with the administration of the AAEA by directly communicating with AAEA members concerning her interpretation of the actions taken by AAEA leadership.
3. The District repudiated the AAEA contract by maintaining that some sections are unenforceable or invalid, additionally claiming that the contract will expire June 30, 2015, and refusing to bargain over the International Baccalaureate Programme.

2. The school district responded by filing an unfair labor practice charge against the AAEA. I haven't seen the charges.

3. I asked a friend who is a labor lawyer what happens, generally speaking, with these unfair labor practices that go to the Michigan Employment Relations Commission. My friend wrote:

Generally, the case will be assigned to an administrative law judge. The respondent [the district, for the AAEA's charge, and vice versa] could file a motion to dismiss the charge. The ALJ, if he or she doesn't grant the motion would then hold a hearing. The hearing could last several days. The parties would present testimony and exhibits, which would be subject to cross examination. In addition the ALJ may ask questions. In lieu of closing statements, parties typically file a post hearing brief and submit them several weeks after the hearing. It could take months, and sometimes up to a year to get a ruling from the ALJ. That is, briefly, the process.  

So then I asked: So in the meantime does that halt the termination of contract timeline? Assuming that is one of the charges being contested... 

I don't believe the filing of a ULP can halt the proceedings in any way. Either party could file for a preliminary injunction, to maintain the status quo until the ULP is heard and decided. It is a pretty high standard. Whether a preliminary injunction should be issued is determined by a four-factor analysis: 1. harm to the public interest if an injunction issues; 2. whether harm to the applicant in the absence of a stay outweighs the harm to the opposing party if a stay is granted; 3. the strength of the applicant’s demonstration that the applicant is likely to prevail on the merits; and 4. demonstration that the applicant will suffer irreparable injury if a preliminary injunction is not granted.

4. So as things stand now, the district will implement as if the contract has terminated on June 30th. That means wages will stay the same as now (which is part of what the district has been after--they were scheduled to rise July 1). I guess (not sure about this) if the district loses, they would be responsible for paying the teachers back. I guess that's a risk they are willing to take. Since my labor lawyer friend says these things move kind of slowly, that could potentially be months of back pay...

5. See these signs? These are in support of Ann Arbor teachers and the union. They are not just for teachers! You can get one too.

UPDATE 6/1/2015: Get the signs at the Michigan Education Credit Union, 4141 Jackson Rd.


Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Discovering (and Remembering) My First Grade Teacher, Mrs. Delfosse

My first grade teacher, Doris Delfosse, died recently. My mom sent me her obituary. (Thanks Mom!)

There were some things in it that I knew about her.

I knew that she was a devoted and well-loved first grade teacher.
I didn't know that she taught for over 35 years.
I didn't know that she was the president of the Rye Teachers Association.

I have a vague memory of doing grave rubbings with her.
I didn't know she did that as part of a big Thanksgiving-focused unit. Every year.

We lived in one of the first towns settled on the east coast (1660).
It has the Square House, which at one point was the local inn, and "George Washington and Lafayette slept there!"
I didn't know that Doris Delfosse was a member of the Daughters of the American Revolution, or that she volunteered to share American history and early American homemaking skills at the Square House.

And I really didn't know that Mrs. Delfosse, herself, created an important part of American history, and opened the door for women who came after her.

Here's why reading obituaries can be so enlightening. From the obituary:

Doris Delfosse... 

"was the first working woman 'allowed' to adopt a child in the state of California in 1966, after proving to the adoption agency and courts that a woman could indeed work and raise a family."

That's right. Doris Delfosse loved teaching--and children--so much, that she went to court to force the system to allow her to adopt, because she wanted to keep working. She didn't want to be a stay-at-home mom, she wanted to be a teacher and a mom.

[This reminds me a bit of a case that is coming shortly to the Supreme Court--the case of April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse--expanding the idea of who is a "fit" parent.]


Here's something I remember about Mrs. Delfosse's class. If we got in line to go somewhere (perhaps a special, like art or gym) and then we had to wait for some reason, she kept us occupied by having us imagine that our tongue was a person with jobs to do, like sweeping the ceiling and the floor of our mouths (with our tongue). Nowadays they are called "oral motor exercises," and I imagine that she learned them while working with kids with speech delays--but we just thought they were fun.

Here's to you, Mrs. Delfosse--thanks for your devotion to kids.

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Bringing Guns to School: Legal, Yes; OK, No; Kids Can't, Teachers Can't, But Others Can

By now you know that on Thursday night, March 5th, a man named Joshua Wade--grandson of a former deputy superintendent in the Ann Arbor Public Schools, William Wade--brought a gun to a choir concert at Pioneer H.S.

By now you know that the police were called, that they learned that Joshua Wade had a license to carry concealed weapons, which gives him license to carry openly (but not concealed) in schools. The police concluded they could do nothing.

As the Free Press explains:

MCL 28.450 provides that a person with a concealed pistol license may not carry the weapon in a pistol-free zone, including a school or school property, except a parent or legal guardian who is dropping off or picking up a child and the pistol is kept in the vehicle; a public or private day care center; a sports arena or stadium; a bar or tavern; a church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or other place of worship; an entertainment facility with seating capacity of 2,500 or more; a hospital, and a dormitory or classroom of a community college, college, or university.
However, the statute applies to concealed pistol license holders carrying a concealed pistol. If the holder is carrying a non-concealed pistol, the statute does not apply. (Emphasis added.)

By now you know that the Ann Arbor Public Schools are trying to figure out what their options are. They are, of course, constrained by state law.

It's true. You can follow me on twitter. @schoolsmuse

You might or might not know that state law requires that schools have, essentially, zero tolerance for kids bringing weapons--on purpose or accidentally--into schools. 

Read:

Student Advocacy Center: Michigan's Brand of Zero Tolerance: Is There Another Way?

Ann Arbor Public Schools Rights & Responsibilities Document

From the State Law: 

(2) If a pupil possesses in a weapon free school zone a weapon that constitutes a dangerous weapon, commits arson in a school building or on school grounds, or commits criminal sexual conduct in a school building or on school grounds, the school board, or the designee of the school board as described in subsection (1) on behalf of the school board, shall expel the pupil from the school district permanently, subject to possible reinstatement under subsection (5). However, a school board is not required to expel a pupil for possessing a weapon if the pupil establishes in a clear and convincing manner at least 1 of the following:
(a) The object or instrument possessed by the pupil was not possessed by the pupil for use as a weapon, or for direct or indirect delivery to another person for use as a weapon.
(b) The weapon was not knowingly possessed by the pupil.
(c) The pupil did not know or have reason to know that the object or instrument possessed by the pupil constituted a dangerous weapon.
(d) The weapon was possessed by the pupil at the suggestion, request, or direction of, or with the express permission of, school or police authorities.

It's true. You can follow me on twitter. @schoolsmuse

You might, or might not know that school policies generally prohibit employees from bringing weapons onto school property, even if the employee in question has a permit to carry concealed weapons.

See, for instance, the Ann Arbor Education Association's Office Professionals contract, which states that having a weapon on school property is grounds for dismissal for an employee. (Similar language can be seen in other contracts.)

DISCIPLINE AND DISCHARGE This article shall not pertain to probationary employees with fewer than ninety (90) days of employment in this Association.  

Section 1- Just Cause  

A. No employee shall be disciplined (written reprimand, suspension, or discharged for disciplinary reasons) without just cause. For purposes of this Agreement, just cause shall include but not be limited to:
1) Refusal or failure to accept or perform work assigned during regularly scheduled hours, in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement;....
8) Possessing a weapon on the Employer’s property;  (Emphasis added)

You might or might not know that the majority of workplace and school shootings happen with people who have a prior relationship to the workplace or school and are known. These might be co-workers (think disgruntled employee), relatives of co-workers (think domestic violence), "customers" (think students or parents).

You might or might not know that schools throughout the county are being trained in the A.L.I.C.E. protocols, which states that when you have an active threat, you Alert; Lockdown; Inform; Counter; and Evacuate (if it is safe to do so). All of the county's districts are doing trainings with teachers and administrators, and students are being taught ways to respond, particularly as far as evacuation goes.

I recently went through the ALICE training at work, and I can therefore state quite confidently that:

1. ALICE protocols were not followed at the choir concert (police were called but the people present were not alerted to someone having a weapon), and
2. How are you supposed to know if someone walks into a school building, openly carrying a weapon, whether they are or are not an active threat? I think you would have to assume that they are.

The very *idea* that somebody--known or unknown--can open carry into a school building, and NOT have the schools react, is ridiculous. What kind of confusing messages are we giving to students and parents and teachers? When does ALICE apply, and when doesn't it?

Schools in Michigan are struggling with these contradictions.

Obviously, the easiest thing would be for the state legislature to make it illegal to carry weapons--whether concealed or carried openly--into schools--just as they are banned at places of worship and bars.

While Representatives Schor and Hoadley have introduced this type of legislation, given our current legislature, I'm not holding my breath.

In the meantime, some school districts are trying other things. I believe that the Huron Valley Schools ultimately decided that if anybody brings in a weapon, they will invoke ALICE protocols.

Meanwhile, in Clio, near Flint, somebody is suing because he wants to open carry into his daughter's school. Let's give support to the school district, whose former superintendent explains things this way:

Former Clio schools Superintendent James Tenbusch said in September 2013 that the district adopted the philosophy of being a drug-free, weapon-free environment and that it understands state law and the U.S. Constitution allow firearms to be openly carried on school property.
He had said the district has the right to ask individuals to leave the school if they disrupt the academic process.
Tenbusch said following the incident the school goes into lockdown when a weapon is found on its property, and those lockdowns cause a disruption in the school. He said those disruptions justify the district's demand that those with weapons leave.

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Louisiana Lesson #1: Plessy v Ferguson

I spent part of my winter break in New Orleans. And during a cemetery tour, I saw the grave of Homer Plessy.

Plessy, as in the famous "Separate but Equal" 1896 Supreme Court case of Plessy v. Ferguson.

What I didn't know is that the Plessy v. Ferguson case, which was applied to schools until the case of Brown v. Board of Education, did not start out as an education case. It was a case about separate transportation on street cars. It was a transportation case (think Rosa Parks), but its impact was felt on education. 

The family grave, which includes Homer Plessy,
and is in French, says that Homer Plessy
died March 1, 1925, age 63. Photo by Ruth Kraut

From oyez.org:

Facts of the Case 
The state of Louisiana enacted a law that required separate railway cars for blacks and whites. In 1892, Homer Adolph Plessy--who was seven-eighths Caucasian--took a seat in a "whites only" car of a Louisiana train. He refused to move to the car reserved for blacks and was arrested.

[Editors note: Back then, Plessy was described as an "octroon," since he was only 1/8 black. I always loved the sound of that word, though not what it connotes--that someone with only a single drop of blood ascribed to a black ancestor would be considered black.]

Question 
Is Louisiana's law mandating racial segregation on its trains an unconstitutional infringement on both the privileges and immunities and the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Conclusion
Decision: 7 votes for Ferguson, 1 vote(s) against
Legal provision: US Const. Amend 14, Section 1
No, the state law is within constitutional boundaries. The majority, in an opinion authored by Justice Henry Billings Brown, upheld state-imposed racial segregation. The justices based their decision on the separate-but-equal doctrine, that separate facilities for blacks and whites satisfied the Fourteenth Amendment so long as they were equal. (The phrase, "separate but equal" was not part of the opinion.) Justice Brown conceded that the 14th amendment intended to establish absolute equality for the races before the law. But Brown noted that "in the nature of things it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color, or to enforce social, as distinguished from political equality, or a commingling of the two races unsatisfactory to either." In short, segregation does not in itself constitute unlawful discrimination. 

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Love, Michigan (=)

It's a New Day in Michigan. Read Judge Bernard Friedman's excellent ruling here.

My friends' daughter holds her moms' wedding rings
during their ceremony today (Saturday, 3/22/2014). The hands, of course,
are every Michigander's symbol of Michigan.

IV. Conclusion 

In attempting to define this case as a challenge to “the will of the people,” Tr. 2/25/14 p. 40, state defendants lost sight of what this case is truly about: people. No court record of this proceeding could ever fully convey the personal sacrifice of these two plaintiffs who seek to ensure that the state may no longer impair the rights of their children and the thousands of others now being raised by same-sex couples. It is the Court’s fervent hope that these children will grow up “to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives.” Windsor, 133 S. Ct. at 2694. Today’s decision is a step in that direction, and affirms the enduring principle that regardless of whoever finds favor in the eyes of the most recent majority, the guarantee of equal protection must prevail.

Accordingly, 

IT IS HEREBY DECLARED that Article I, § 25 of the Michigan Constitution and its
implementing statutes are unconstitutional because they violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Today, at the Washtenaw County Clerk's Office, Clerk Lawrence Kestenbaum had posted this sign: 

I especially appreciated this part of Judge Friedman's ruling:

Taking the state defendants’ position to its logical conclusion, the empirical evidence at hand should require that only rich, educated, suburban-dwelling, married Asians may marry, to the exclusion of all other heterosexual couples. Obviously the state has not adopted this policy and with good reason. The absurdity of such a requirement is self-evident. Optimal academic outcomes for children cannot logically dictate which groups may marry. 

Congratulations!

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Michigan ACLU Says AAPS Plan to Charge 7th Hour Tuition is Illegal

Today, in a letter to the Ann Arbor Public Schools Board of Education and Superintendent Pat Green, the ACLU said that charging for seventh hour tuition would be illegal. They also reference an important lawsuit around education that I had never heard of, but that involved the Ann Arbor Schools back in 1970.

The letter reads, in part (click on the excerpt to read it full size):

Read the complete letter here.

American Public School History: Quiz Results

So here are the quiz results. With the answers. How did you do?

The first public school in our country was Boston Latin, founded in 1635. That's right, 15 years after Plymouth Rock! So I can say that public schools are "like a rock" to our country.

In 1827, Massachusetts passed a law making all schools free to all children. This was a little bit of a trick question, in that Michigan wasn't even a state yet. It's also worth noting that Massachusetts is still the national leader in school funding. And their student achievement results show it.

The answer is "fund parochial schools." I wanted to highlight this so that you would understand that issues around funding parochial schools have also been around for a long time. The impetus for this has changed over time. When these laws were first implemented the main issue was that the majority of citizens were Protestant and there was an influx of Catholic immigrants.

Most of you got this one right! The 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson case was overturned by the Brown v. the Board of Ed. decision. However, you should read up on these other cases! Engel v. Vitale is about prayer in public schools; Tinker v. Des Moines features Ann Arbor's own Paul Tinkerhess and is a free speech case; and Hendrick Hudson Board of Ed. v. Rowley is an early (early? 1981!) special education case.

More on the Ypsilanti/Willow Run (YCS) Teacher Situation

Update 5/4/2013 9 p.m.:

From the Ypsilanti Community Schools facebook page, from an anonymous Willow Run teacher:

I am a Willow Run teacher who was not hired back, although I met the criteria. I am a little shocked because I have always had very high evaluations and good feedback from other teachers, students and families. I was upset that none of my references were contacted after spending so much time getting them together. This preparation took hours and I am highly insulted. I am also upset because Emma Jackson was quoted saying that counselors would be available in each building. No one was at my building, and when I asked my principal he said he could call one if I needed it. (Emphasis added.)

Update 5/3/2013 6 p.m.:
@_KrystalElliott: Ypsi Community Schools offers positions to 171 of 258 teachers, 32 receive "call back" notices. 55 not offered positions

And one of those not offered a position was the Ypsilanti teachers' union head, Krista Boyer--from all accounts that I have heard an excellent teacher. Did that have anything to do with her being the head of the union?

In this post (which I will probably be adding to) I am just taking information from different things I've been reading over the past few days, many of which are rather troubling.

1. From the Ypsilanti Community Schools facebook page: 

We have been forwarded yet another email from Bob Galardi, this one dated May 2, 2013:
"During this week I have received several inquiries about reference checks. A decision was made early in the process that we would not use references for selection. We thought we would check references for candidates that we were going to select. This is typically when references are needed. After further review we determined that reference checks on current employees would not be a productive use of our limited time. Because of the nature of this process we are not selecting unknowns - we know the employees we are selecting. It is almost as if we are transferring employees from one department to another and in that case we would not contact a reference."

This is, of course, a complete contradiction of his emails sent on March 21 & 22 and April 19. Moreover, this shows that the district is not the least bit interested in receiving input from the community when making these hiring decisions and that the district has no respect for the time and effort community members put into these recommendations. Listening to the community is, in Mr. Galardi's words, "not a productive use of our limited time." [Emphasis added.]

2. From the Ypsilanti Community Schools facebook page:

Excerpt from April 19 email from Bob Galardi: 

"We will begin contacting references of top candidates next week." [Emphasis added.]

3.. From the Ypsilanti Community Schools facebook page: 

This is an excerpt from a "Crisis Management" document emailed on May 1, 2013 from the district's administration to staff, explaining that references were to be included in the 20-point score on which hiring decisions were based:
"HOW DECISIONS WERE MADE
1. No current administrator or Board member of YPS, WR, or WISD, served on the interview committees. External consultants (comprised of retired educators and administrators) followed a process that was aligned to the teacher commitments that were adopted by the board. The process resulted in a score in four areas (application review, references, interview, and classroom visit) with a maximum of 20 possible points. . . . "

Mr. Galardi's explanation sent late last night appears to be false. While he justifies failing to contact references by stating that "A decision was made early in the process that we would not use references for selection," the above excerpt contradicts this, as does his own email from April 19. The above excerpt confirms that just two days ago, the district sent an email specifically stating that references were to be used in the hiring process. We now know they were not.
Mr. Galardi's explanation sent late last night appears to be false. While he justifies failing to contact references by stating that "A decision was made early in the process that we would not use references for selection," the above excerpt contradicts this, as does his own email from April 19. The above excerpt confirms that just two days ago, the district sent an email specifically stating that references were to be used in the hiring process. We now know they were not. (Emphasis added.)

4. From the comments section on this article on annarbor.com (I know! the Comments section!):

What Danielle failed to quote is that the teachers received an agenda at their "crisis" staff meeting this week with a sentence that read, "Most likely, everyone will be handling a message that will be shattering", and that Ms. Lisiscki's email stated, "Please be aware that if you withdraw your application for employment, you will be deemed to have waived any right to challenge the hiring process or hiring decisions." This is the REAL hidden agenda. The administration knows that the hiring process was shady at best and that many will have a lawsuit to file against the unfair hiring process that followed very few Human Resource guidelines and regualtions. This is also why another message was sent yesterday stating the number of teachers who will receive "maybe" letters has increased drastically! They will send out many "maybe" letters today so that they will not be challenged and FOIA'd to death by the "no" letters they had originally planned to deliver. This will also give Menzel the opportunity to tell the press that they handed out very few "no" letters, trying to make them look like good. Ypsi Schools recenlty attended a job fair, looking for teachers. My question, if the people who receive "maybe" letters today, end up not getting called back (which is most likely their scheme) and then the new district hires external teachers, what can "maybe" teachers do about it? Lawyers get ready! It is absolutely a shame how the 3 superintendents and the hiring team at WISD have manipulated, scared, and demoralized these fine teachers who have given their blood, sweat and tears to work in an urban district that has become increasingly high stress and low achieving over the years. (Emphasis added.)

5. From the comments on the same annarbor.com article: 

Maybe A2.com and Reporter Arndt will keep a close eye on if Ypsilanti Community Schools hires "Teach for America" employees to "replace" the experienced teachers of both of these soon-to-be former school districts. There's a suspicion that this is what Menzel and Crew (including that so-called un-elected Board of Education) is trying to do. 
"Teach for America" teach are paid a bottom basement rate, only are required to have a bachelors degree in ANY subject to teach, are not unionized and are used by various "charter schools" corporations to keep wages low and unionization out. Now, Ypsilanti Community Schools are supposed to be a "public school district" but their actions over the past year acts like "corporate top down" structure more than anything else.
Maybe at the press conference this afternoon Reporter Arndt can inquire if Menzel and the rest plan on hiring "Teach for America" employees. (Emphasis added.)

6. From the comments on the same annarbor.com article:

First, Danielle Arndt (article author) writes in the comments: 

The current breakdown of teachers in both districts was not readily available. I was told by Scott Menzel this information is being prepared for tonight's press conference. So I hope to be able to answers these questions for readers in this evening's report. I do know, and it was included in an earlier article, that about 330 internal candidates in total from both districts applied for spots. (Emphasis added.)

Then, a commenter says: 

If you would ,like information regarding projections go to the consolidated schools website and look at their consolidated budget funding for teacher professional development and it show that 240 teachers will be allowed 15 days of professional development over the summer. The question remains who will these teachers be if they have a large amount of "Maybe" offers dependent upon enrollment. Based on that document it seems they have already made decisions based on enrollment and enrollment trends. Are the teachers who are given maybe letters going to have priority over external applicants? If the district begins to accept external applicants then we can only assume that they are going to fill positions that the "maybe" internal applicants could be filling which then harkens other questions about the purpose of this process and if it was really designed to retain current good teachers. (Emphasis added.)