Things I'm Reading about the State of Our State's Education

The Best Piece of the Week goes to Lindsey Smith at Michigan Radio.

Reporter’s Notebook: State needs to be more transparent about the schools it’s running is breathtaking, and at the same time damning.

Here is just a snippet:

The Emergency Loan Board is a public body. It should act like one 

Here's the thing about the Emergency Loan Board (ELB).

It has incredible power to keep schools and municipalities out of bankruptcy court. It can lend tens of millions of taxpayer dollars – repeatedly – to schools that are going broke. It even has subpoena power.
Yet there’s very little transparency.
Its three members all head state departments. Each handpicked by the governor.

 ELB members (L-R) Department of Technology, Management and Budget Director David Behen; Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs Director Mike Zimmer; and state Treasurer Nick Khouri. CREDIT STATE OF MICHIGAN

The board has no webpage. Its meetings in Lansing are open to the public, but there is no schedule. Meetings are sporadic.
Meeting minutes aren’t available online, a common practice for public bodies. So you can’t just go somewhere to see what the board has been up to lately.
Meeting notices are sent via email. But there are no agenda or documents attached. If Michigan’s Department of Treasury doesn’t want you to find out ahead of time what it's going to approve, you won’t know.
Any decision the board makes must be unanimous, according to state law. Is that why it functions mostly as a rubber-stamp board?
The decisions the board makes are “vetted” and reviewed by Treasury staff, according to Treasury Department spokesman Terry Stanton.

Read the rest here.

Runner Up: Eclectablog's piece on some state legislators' agenda for schools.

An excellent post at Eclectablog calling out the agenda of some Republicans in our state legislature, for example Rep. Tim Kelly of Saginaw Township, who believes in "publicly-funded education," just not "publicly delivered."

Third Place: A New York Times Article, 'Opt Out' Becomes Potent Political Force.

You might not have seen this article because it is a New York Region article (and I found it courtesy of Diane Ravitch).

Key information:

At least 165,000 children, or one of every six eligible students, sat out at least one of the two standardized tests this year, more than double and possibly triple the number who did so in 2014, according to an analysis by The New York Times.As the vanguard of an anti-testing fervor that has spread across the country, New York’s opt-out movement has become a political force. Just two months ago, lawmakers from both parties, at the behest of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, a Democrat, increased the role of test scores in teacher evaluations and tenure decisions. Those legislators are now tripping over one another to introduce bills that guarantee the right to refuse to take tests.

The maps are really interesting to look at, they show the opt-out movement's growth over time.

Honorable Mention: From the Washington Post, Will Schools Lose Federal Funds if Kids Don't Take Mandated Tests? 

Here's how the article starts:

I’ve recently published a number of posts on the growth and impact of the standardized testing opt-out movement. As more parents choose against allowing their children to sit down for new mandated tests, the pushback from administrators is increasing in many places, with some of them threatening consequences to students who refuse to take the assessments.
Here’s a look at what is true and not true about the consequences attached to opting out from standardized testings. It was written by Monty Neill, executive director of the National Center for Fair and Open Testing, known as  FairTest, a nonprofit organization that works to end the misuses of standardized testing and to ensure that evaluation of students, educators and schools is fair, open, valid and educationally sound.

And I'm re-reading: 

I've gone back to an excellent series of articles by the Detroit Free Press, on how charter schools are not held accountable.



Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Ypsilanti Community Schools Survey Results

Back in May of 2014, the Ypsilanti Community Schools had been around for one school year, and I felt it was time to do some reflection. You might recall that I did a survey. I knew there would be some negative feelings shared in there, but I also expected to hear a lot of positive stuff.

To my dismay, the 35 responses I got were mostly negative. And although I had said that I would post the results, that did give me pause, because I am not interested in tearing down the schools. I don't want to contribute to middle class flight. I really want YCS to be a success and I expect it to take a few years before everything is put together.

So I held off on posting anything. And then one of the YCS school board candidates asked me about the results. So I did share it with all the board candidates (except Don Garrett--his email bounced back--if you have a current email for him please forward it to me).

And then I shared it with a couple of Ypsi acquaintances, with the question of whether I should post the results. If I did post them, should I post them now, or wait until after the election?

Person A was of the opinion that I should post them now, before the election--because people might use that information to evaluate the incumbents. That person felt that if I waited until after the election, what was even the point of sharing the information?

Person B was of the opinion that it would start a necessary conversation, but it wouldn't destroy the district. But Person B also said,

I get it though - the blog is about positivity and advocacy, and this is a whole different area.  I don't know if the people who responded hoped to see their opinions presented publicly or not.  The district has done its own surveys, and they're really the ones who should be charged with presenting the results publicly.  They haven't, to the best of my knowledge, and I wish they would.  
I think that you just shouldn't make the results public.  The blog is a tool to promote things you'd like to see in the schools, and it's been really effective.  This criticism of the district, although I'd love to see it out and discussed, isn't really within the mission, as far as I can tell, of the Musings blog.

This led me to a little bit of an identity crisis as far as the Schools Musings blog goes. I mean, sure, I want to be a positive catalyst for change. But at the same time--I'm all about transparency, right? One of the cardinal aspects of this blog has been pushing for more transparency from the various local districts. The district SHOULD be publishing results of its surveys. (Somebody could get those results by FOIA'ing them, I imagine.)

But if I'm an advocate for transparency, then I need to walk the walk and talk the talk as well.  

So, herewith, you will find a short summary of what to me are the key findings--and then a link to the survey results themselves, so you can read the comments in detail. Take the findings with a grain of salt though, because this survey was not randomly-administered.

1. There were many upset band parents with the new (last year's YCS) band director. (You might recall that the well-loved Ypsi Schools band director was not re-hired. Apparently he had not had his paperwork in correctly during the hiring process.) Since I wrote the survey: The band director from the first year of YCS has retired. However, he has not quite "let go" of his role. The newly-retired band director has still been taking pot shots at the new YCS fight song on Facebook. For example, on August 15th he wrote on the YCS Marching Band 2013 Facebook page, 

Since it was established with the support of the district administration that the new fight song for Ypsilanti Community high school would be taken from "On Wisconsin" this past school year. We would be interested in knowing who arbitrarily made the decision for the marching band to play Oh, Northwestern as the new fight song this summer without the input from the district or any school employee, meaning the current high school band director. And since there is currently no band director in place at the high school who had authority to make this change?

2. Many parents upset with the new (last year's YCS) athletic director. This didn't really surprise me given the fact that he had a job history that did not speak to stability. Since I wrote the survey: The athletic director has been moved to the assistant principal position at the middle school. I'm not sure that really is "dealing" with the issue (some concerns about him seem wholly related to the AD position, and others not)--but the new AD appears to have a more traditional background for an AD and I hope will be more successful.

3. Many parents and staff concerned with violence and safety. The district continues to take steps to address these issues, but I'm not sure they are there yet.

4. Other concerns:

Lack of transparency in the district

Lack of support for teachers

Lack of challenging programs for top students

High staff turnover

Not following up on community recommendations and district vision

Some other relevant things: The YCS teachers finally have a union contract. But they are still the lowest-paid teachers in any of the county districts. Elementary teachers also get only $200/year to spend on students--for pens, paper, copies, basically anything. So is it any surprise that there is high turnover?

Now, without further ado, here are the results: link. 

And if you'd like to comment on them below, let me suggest that you put into your comments some concrete steps that the district could take to make things better going forward.

I  want YCS to be a success. What is the best path for that?

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

News and Dismay, Now More Than Ever

I was rather dismayed to learn that the latest education reporter for the Ann Arbor News, Amy Biolchini, is moving to the west side of the state and September 12th is her last day.

Since I started blogging in 2009, the Ann Arbor News has lost several reporters off the education beat.

David Jesse went to the Detroit Free Press, where he's doing a nice job as a higher education reporter.
Kyle Feldscher chose to switch into reporting on courts and criminals. (I have a hard time believing that is more fun or interesting, but it definitely gets more page views and front page stories.)
Danielle Arndt moved to the west side of the stae.
Sense a pattern?

The point is--

the point is--

the point is 

that all of these reporters were fine, and could have been excellent education reporters. (Exception here: David Jesse had been, for a long time, and still is, but in a different venue.)

If only--

IF ONLY they had stuck around.

It takes time to develop sources. One reporter, in fact, is not nearly enough to cover the education beat in Washtenaw County.

Schools need the bright light of reporters digging.

And we only need look at the stories coming out of the Free Press' excellent charter series, or the information being uncovered about the EAA by Ellen Cogen Lipton and Eclectablog, to understand why.

Oh, and did I mentioned that the Ann Arbor Chronicle closed as well? Though their coverage of the Ann Arbor school board had ceased, at least there was the occasional piece about education.

On the Inside the EAA website, it says that the Freedom of Information Act is a "Tool for Transparency." For that to be true, somebody has to be there to use it...

All of this leads me feeling...dismayed. Now, more than ever.


Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Patricia Green "Declines to Comment"

Check out this morning's article in annarbor.com by Danielle Arndt about class sizes and difficulty enrolling in full classes. And what does our Superintendent Pat Green have to say about this?

"Superintendent Patricia Green declined to comment last week on what solutions the district is considering. She stated the administration will work these issues out with parents."

Check out last week's article in annarbor.com by Danielle Arndt about the search for a permanent Pioneer principal. What does Superintendent Pat Green have to say about this?

"Following Wednesday’s school board meeting, Green declined to provide a status update and would not confirm how close the administration is to hiring a new principal. She said the position is “still in process” and when a decision has been finalized, it will be communicated to Pioneer parents."

 What about the decision that information from the school district needs to be FOIA'd even when it is readily available? (Look for a specific example of this on the blog later this week.)

Back in May, annarbor.com reported that:

"Later in the meeting, Trustee Simon Lightfoot asked Superintendent Patricia Green about the process community members should employ to obtain information such as how much busing to AAO costs. Green said parents should use the Freedom of Information Act for these requests.

 Trustee Susan Baskett said FOIAs cost money and are 'not equitable to all.'"

Sense a pattern here? I do. And I don't like it. Superintendent Green, your responsibility is not just to the parents, but to the entire community. We are all taxpayers. We all understand there are budget issues. But--if you think that by failing to disclose a timeline for hiring a permanent Pioneer principal, or failing to explain how you will address overly full classes, that you will alleviate parent anxiety, you are completely wrong. What alleviates parent (and taxpayer) anxiety is open communication. Right now, we don't have that.

I find it completely ironic that the school board identified as its number one issue at the board retreat "trust and relationship building" within the board, while Pat Green appears to be completely unaware of how her actions affect "trust and relationship building" within the broader schools community.

Andy Thomas, school board member, has had a great idea of having monthly coffee hours. The first one is tomorrow, September 11th, 9:30-10:30 9:00-10:00 a.m. at the downtown Sweetwaters. (I will try to post upcoming ones in the top right section of my blog.) I hope you will go, and I hope you'll talk to him about the importance of open communications. It's even more important when budget cutting is on the horizon.

Calling All Ypsi Area Readers: Your Time and Thoughts Are Needed

Ypsilanti-area readers: Whether you live in Ypsilanti/Willow Run, or you are a staff person in one of the districts, now is the time to learn about, and put your two cents in about the proposed consolidation of the Ypsilanti and Willow Run school districts.

Yes, I know it's Art Fair, and I know it's the work day, but on the 18th and 19th (Wednesday and Thursday) there is a strategic planning retreat at Eagle Crest (8:30-3:30 p.m.) and I think it would be well worth your while to be there.

According to this annarbor.com article:

Download a copy of the preliminary data report here or visit the new task force website, www.together4ss.org, for more information about the consolidation effort.
An updated data portrait will be uploaded to the site Tuesday [note: yes, that is tomorrow] following the last session. Naomi Norman, director of assessment, planning and research for the WISD, said the public gave some very good suggestions during the first session and she will be adding some additional data to the report as a result.

 I recommend that you download the preliminary data report (or, better yet, the updated data report). The preliminary data report does not give very much new information.

We already knew that both districts have proud histories.
We already knew that the academic performance in both schools is well below the county averages. (The poverty rates are well above the county averages, too, but they don't talk about that.)
We already knew that although Ypsi kids choose to go to Willow Run, and Willow Run kids choose to go to Ypsilanti, more Willow Run kids choose to go to Ypsi.
[I didn't know that you can find the information about where kids are choosing to go at the website mischooldata.org.]
We already knew that both school districts are in deficit--Willow Run has been in deficit longer, and their downward enrollment trend has been going on longer.

I didn't know that Ypsilanti's high school enrollment trajectory has been going up.
I didn't know that the majority of kids in both districts who do graduate at least start college.

In the data report, they don't talk about any implications of consolidating. [Should they? The one area where I think maybe they should have, is if they were to share data about other districts that have consolidated. How has it worked for those other districts?]

I'm not going to the two-day retreat. I don't live in either district, and I don't (rightly) get a vote.
But if you ask me today, there is nothing that would make me vote for this--if I had a vote.
I do think that Ypsilanti is much the stronger district than Willow Run, but I wouldn't describe it as strong. So why tie two weak districts together? If they need partners, they should look for stronger ones.
Also--and this is a big deal--I understand that if they combine, they get an average per-pupil foundation allowance. That means their combined allowance would be lower, on a per-pupil basis. And since Ypsilanti has both the higher allowance and the higher enrollment, they would lose a lot of money.
I have said before that I think the Willow Run district should dissolve. The Willow Run school board's "last ditch" budget has them closing their high school. If I understand correctly, that would effectively close the district (a district is required to have a high school). On the other hand, they can choose to combine a high school without closing the district (and, I believe, without a vote). They could, for instance, send all the Willow Run kids to Ypsi High without consolidating the districts. That seems like a better option. But that's just me.

More discussion:

Mark Maynard: What the WISD got wrong in the marketing of their Ypsilanti, Willow Run consolidation plans

Mark Maynard interview with WISD Superintendent Scott Menzel about the proposed consolidation

[NB: What I like about Mark Maynard is that he obviously really cares about Ypsilanti and he is willing to share information and thoughts. Just realize that he lets his commenters more or less have free rein. There are some really great comments, and some that I could do without. . . Still worth a read, though. Who else is covering Ypsilanti?]

But Ypsilantians, what do you think? Would you vote for consolidation?

Policy Perspective: Share the Data

A2Politico (Pat Lesko's blog) has an article up, AAPS Documents Reveal Middle and High School Classes Have 40+ Students. (Right now it's not behind a paywall, but it probably will be soon.)

Lesko writes,   "[AAPS] Class size targets for 2011 were 23-25 students in grades K-2, 26-30 students in grades 3-5, and an average of 30 students in grades 6-12."

I don't think it's a surprise to anybody with students in the district that some of the classes are smaller, and some of them are larger, than the targets. A few years ago, my son (who was at Community at the time) had a physics class with 38 or 39 kids--and my main concern was that there weren't quite enough seats in the room. On the other hand, my kids have also had classes that were much, much smaller. That's how it is with averages--some classes are bigger, some are smaller. I understand the idea of a class size "target" to be an average. After all, if your average goal for a Spanish class is 30 students, at what point do you decide this class should be split in two? When you enroll 34 kids? 38 kids?

I don't want to downplay anybody's concerns with large class sizes. For instance, Lesko highlights the size of the Clague band classes. Indeed, at a recent all-city band event (I can't remember what it was called--Battle of the Bands?) I was astonished at the size of the Clague band compared to the other middle school bands. Where the other middle schools that day had an "Advanced" (grade 7/8) Band, Clague had a Grade 8 band. Yet it was still larger than the other schools' Advanced Bands. So should class sizes for those bands be examined? Probably.

And yet, of far greater to concern for me was the lengths to which Lesko had to go to learn the details about class sizes in the district. It's obvious that individual class sizes are something the district has to track. Class sizes are regulated by the teacher contract. And yet at first, Lesko was told that the district didn't have these numbers. It was only after she FOIA'd emails between administrators about parent complaints regarding class size, that she got proof that the district did have these numbers and forced the district to release them.

That, in my opinion, is the real story. Everybody is aware that class sizes have increased, and if we can't shake more money out of Lansing, or end Proposal A, that is not likely to change. On the other hand, can we expect that the district should share this information? Yes.

One more thing: Many states have laws limiting class sizes for general education classrooms. Michigan is not one of them. But I have heard from someone who wants to make class size limits the law in Michigan as well. What do you think?

$1.4 Million Dollars: School Medicaid Revenue

One of the items that I missed in the action-packed Ann Arbor school board meeting last week is Pat Green's announcement that she had found $1.4 million dollars for the district. That savings is approximately 10% of the projected cuts needed--nothing to sneeze at--and comes from Medicaid reimbursals that we should have been getting.

I have to admit that when I heard about this, I shouted to my friend, "I had that idea first!" And seriously, I did.

On January 24, 2010 I wrote a piece called Revenue Side, where I stated,

4. Medicaid Reimbursement: Some of the district's special education expenses are Medicaid billable. Currently, that billing brings in about $1 million each year, and is largely handled by social workers. I believe that this is an area where the school district needs to be absolutely sure it is maximizing its billing, and if the billing is spread out, it is likely that it has not been maximized. I don't have local statistics, but a study in New York State of 8 districts found that they were only being reimbursed for about 1/3 of the Medicaid monies that they should be reimbursed for. In the study, some of the reasons that the districts did not get reimbursed included: a) not checking students' Medicaid status regularly (so they would be kicked off Medicaid, and not get back on even though they were still eligible, and the districts would not know); b) waiting too long to send in the claims; and c) not appealing claims that were denied, even if they believed that denial was in error. In those districts, the estimate was that they could triple their reimbursement level! The Medicaid claims submission process should be reviewed from the point of service onward, even if the increase would add $100,000 and not $2 million to the AAPS budget. (And this is true for every district in the county.)

I also mentioned it again a week later, on January 31, 2010, in a post called The Rest of the Story: AAPS Budget Part II (remember, we were doing budget cuts that year as well), where I wrote:

I think I addressed the largest chunk of the budget with my recent post on personnel costs and my post on revenue enhancements, including a look at whether we can increase Medicaid reimbursement. 

At the first of the fall budget forums this year, I mentioned Medicaid reimbursement again to Robert Allen, who told me the WISD handled it (which they do, but apparently they weren't handling it well)--and I'm pretty sure that I wrote something like "maximize Medicaid reimbursement" as a suggestion at both last year's and this year's budget forums.

In fact, the only reason that Medicaid reimbursals were on my radar screen at all is really a fluke. Several years ago, my son was on a baseball team where a few of the players' moms were either speech therapists, occupational therapists, or physical therapists at various school districts. Given that it was May and June, they spent a lot of time discussing how time-consuming the Medicaid billing was for them. Before that, who knew that schools even billed for Medicaid?! Not me.

I'm not really a cynic. Well, sometimes I think my family is full of cynics, but my husband nicely points out that we are optimistic cynics. So by writing this up, I in no way mean to imply that Pat Green (or other school staff in finance or special education) didn't come up with the idea of looking into this on her (or their) own. (In other words, I'm not looking for credit.) It's very plausible to me that Pat Green has had experience with Medicaid revenues in other districts, and in fact may have read the same research study about Medicaid reimbursals that I had read. It's also likely that the Medicaid problem was much more bureaucratic and difficult to untangle than just increasing billing. So that's the optimistic part.

But here is the cynical part.

I did bring up the idea of looking at Medicaid reimbursement nearly two years ago. And perhaps I wasn't the only one to bring it up. For two years, the district has been collecting ideas for budget savings from parents, teachers, and taxpayers. I wonder if they ever looked closely at the items people wrote down? Did they just ignore them? At the fall budget forum I went to, someone suggested scrutinizing the comments on budget saving in annarbor.com, and yes, I am fully aware of how squirrelly those comments are! But there are likely a couple of diamonds in the rough on those budget articles, and I know that I myself have lots of ideas in this blog. No, they are not all good ideas. Some of them are impractical or lousy. But some of them are good!

I just wonder--did anybody really look at all of those ideas that have been collected at the budget forums? In other forums? [Here, by the way, is an obvious plug for the school district leadership to read this blog regularly. It's super easy to become a regular subscriber by clicking on the "Subscribe" RSS feed on the right.] My first recommendation to the school district for budget cuts this year is to go back and read the data and ideas they have already collected.

And by the way, when it comes to Medicaid reimbursement, it could be that other school districts in the county should follow Ann Arbor's lead and be able to increase their Medicaid reimbursement revenues--Saline, Ypsilanti, Dexter, Whitmore Lake, etc. . . are you listening?

Laws About Teaching, Laws About Schools

Here's the latest information from Michigan Parents for Schools regarding proposed Michigan legislation.

We’ve just released the latest version of our legislative update on the “school choice” package of bills which have been making their way through the Senate.The update document is in PDF format, and we will be updating it regularly as the bills make their way through the Legislature. The download link is at the end of the article. The document is current as of 10/15, reflecting the bills as reported from committee or as passed by the Senate.

Here is the link to the PDF.

Keep checking back at mipfs.org for more information.

Racial Disparities in Special Education

If you are a parent in the Ann Arbor Public Schools, last week you got a letter that was nearly unintelligible.

You might have wondered what that meant--I know I did, and I know that others asked me what it meant.

Let's start with the basics. School districts are supposed to track and explain whether, or if, some racial/ethnic groups are disproportionately enrolled in special education program. There's a really nice explanation of how this gets calculated in this document, but if you don't want to read the whole thing, here is a thumbnail sketch. (If you understand risk ratios, skip the part that is in red.)

The whole point of using these statistics is to describe and understand sub-groups in the school environment. Don't be scared that math is involved.

Composition: Let's say that 10% of the district population is Hispanic/Latino, but 20% of the students who are identified as having a disability are Hispanic/Latino. Then we know that there is a disparity, because twice as many Hispanic/Latino students are enrolled in special education compared to the Hispanic/Latino population. (This is a good basic number, but it may be less accurate when we are talking about groups that make up a small percentage of a district's population.)

Risk Ratio: A Risk Ratio compares one population (say, African American students diagnosed with autism) to a comparison group. According to what I read, generally the risk comparison that is preferred is to compare one population group to the risk for all other students combined, because that way you can use a consistent comparison group for all calculations.

So. . . the equation for the risk ratio would be:

Risk ratio = Risk for racial/ethnic group for disability category / Risk for comparison group for disability category

Let's say that the autism risk for Black students is 4%, but for all other students is 2%. Then the Risk Ratio is 2.0. In other words, in this example, Black students are two times more likely than all other students to receive services for autism. A risk ratio of 1.0 means there is no difference between the two groups. (Risk ratio >1 equals increased risk for the identified sub-group; risk ratio <1 equals decreased risk for the identified sub-group.)

Weighted Risk Ratios allow you to compare data across school districts, where (as we know) the racial/ethnic composition varies greatly. Read about the math of the weighted risk ratios in the link I gave you earlier--but they are similar to Risk Ratios in the way that they work: weighted risk ratio >1 equals increased risk for the identified sub-group; weighted risk ratio <1 equals decreased risk for the identified sub-group.

So--now that we've taken a statistical detour, what exactly did that letter that we got mean?

1. We know that it was written because it was state-mandated.
1. We know that it was based on data from 2009-2010.
2. The issues raised center on suspensions, expulsions, and the category of students labeled as "cognitively-impaired."
3. The first few times I read the letter, I assumed that the problem with suspensions and expulsions was specific to African American students, but let's note that the letter doesn't say that. I therefore believe that this is a problem for more than one group. The letter also doesn't state the weighted risk ratio for suspensions and expulsions.
4. In the cognitive impairment group, African Americans are more than 3 times more likely than the statewide comparison group (of all other students, I believe--although it is not stated in the letter!) to be identified as cognitively impaired.

To put it baldly, the letter is terribly-written, and it was clearly written just to meet the letter of the law and not the spirit.  I'd say that the district missed an important chance to really explain (not just in vague platitudes) what it is doing to improve things.

The district writes:
"Ann Arbor Public Schools was also determined to have significant disproportionality because..."

The English teacher in me notes the passive tense here--who exactly is responsible for the problem?


The letter doesn't explain this at all, but I dug up an old Ann Arbor News article which says that in 2007-2008, 47% of the students who were identified as cognitively impaired were African American.  The article (David Jesse, 3/12/2009) says, "the district was not complying with federal and state law in the way it determined which students were cognitively impaired." So was misdiagnosis involved? The letter doesn't say. If kids were misdiagnosed, were they moved out of the "cognitive impairment" group and is that responsible for the slight improvement in numbers?

Based on the ratios disclosed in the letter, I believe that while things may have improved somewhat, I am not sure they have improved at all significantly. And in using the word "significantly," here, I'm talking about statistical significance. Is it just a fluke the numbers have dropped slightly or are the results related to something specific?

Further, the letter only addresses the areas of disparity which reached a state-mandated benchmark. There are other areas of disparity--many other areas of disparity--in special education, that fall short of the benchmark.

But any time there is a big disparity, we need to ask why the disparity exists:


1. Is it because different races/ethnicities are differentially diagnosed? In other words, is the bar for "cognitive impairment" set equally for everbody?

Translation: This could be due to obvious or subtle racism. Historically, kids who had trouble switching from Black English to Standard English were sometimes labeled cognitively impaired or placed in other special education categories.

2. Does the disparity represent a real difference? In other words, using the same exact standards, are more African Americans in the Ann Arbor schools cognitively impaired than other kids in the Ann Arbor schools?

Translation: The numbers could be describing real differences. For instance--more African American babies are born prematurely than White or Hispanic/Latino babies, and premature babies are more likely to grow up to have cognitive impairments.

3. Does the racial disparity mask a different disparity?

Translation: Is this problem really about poverty, and because proportionally more African American kids live in poverty, a disparity based on class shows up as a disparity based on race? For instance--do poor housing conditions lead to increased exposure to lead paint and thereby to cognitive impairments?

You can read an earlier post I wrote on disparities here, but to cut to the chase: racial disparities have been with the district for over 30 years. There are no easy solutions, or we would have solved the problem.

On the other hand, I think the conversations about how to solve the problems need to take place with more parental and taxpayer involvement than has been the case previously. This letter is a weak start.

Transportation...Again

Lots of questions still remain about busing in the Ann Arbor school district.

1. Who to call for complaints?
Answer: Robert Allen (Deputy Superintendent and former Interim Superintendent) says that people with complaints about transportation can call his office: 994-2250.

2. Why am I getting reports of 4 kids to a seat on certain bus routes?

3. Why am I getting reports that kids who live beyond the 1-1/2 mile walk zone cannot get buses because no routes have been assigned to them?

4. Is it true that special education kids who need assistance getting into the buildings are not getting assistance because the "bus drivers don't have enough time?"

5. When will the WISD provide information on how much the district actually saved last year; and what it costs to get additional bus stops or buses?

6. After all is said and done--what is the plan for evaluating these transportation troubles, and who will be involved in the evaluation? [Hint: I hope there will be some non-school-board-member parents involved.] As my ninth grade math teacher was fond of saying, "It's o.k. to make mistakes, but it's better to make different mistakes every time."

Overheard in a school office, one administrative staff to another after hearing yet another complaint about the buses:

"Everybody hates transportation now."

I had to interject, "Well, people don't hate the bus drivers."

"No," the staff person agreed. "People don't hate the bus drivers."

2011: Keep your eye on...

As far as I'm concerned, the #1 thing to keep your eye on (in Washtenaw County education) in the coming year is:

The Washtenaw Intermediate School District

You probably don't even know what they do! If you had asked ten years ago, I would have said they spent most of their time on three areas of services  for all the local school districts and charter schools: professional development; coordination and services for certain special education students; and data and reporting.

Well, that was then. Now, they are increasingly coordinating lots of services. . . transportation; back-end administrative services; the Washtenaw International High School; Washtenaw Alternatives for Youth.

And in my opinion, 

they are rather OPAQUE about what they do and how they do it. 

A couple of years ago, I read an article in the Ann Arbor News about school graduation rates by (I believe) income. The article said the information was based on a study had been done by the Washtenaw ISD. Unfortunately, the online version of the article didn't have the chart I wanted. When I called to ask for the information, I was told that it was "not public." Yes, I've since learned I could have probably FOIA'd it, but pack rat that I am, I found that I had a hard copy.

More recently, I had these two interactions:

Me: "Do you have a copy of the IB presentation that you have made to Saline, Ypsi, Ann Arbor... (Latest version) up on the WISD web site? If so, can you send me the link--I couldn't find it. I am also interested in other supporting documents: proposed budget, staffing scenarios, transportation information. If that is available please send me links or documents."

The WISD: "You can find the Ann Arbor presentation and related documents here:

http://www.aaps.k12.mi.us/boe.1011/files/092410_blue.pdf  Scroll to pages 9-64."

 

Ummm, seriously? You want me to open a very long presentation in a particular district's board document, and scroll through to your section? If the Washtenaw International High School is important, don't you think you could have a section of your web site devoted to it? [Side note: this is actually a really long and important piece of reading, although it was super hard to understand and had not scanned in very well. It has the consortium agreement in there. In other words: what, exactly, did the districts agree to?]

Here's another one: 

Me: "I'm also wondering about the WISD board. Is there an election for the board? Or is it appointed, and if so by whom? (I see some former school board members on the current board list.) I am confused about the board minutes. I see that you post a summary, but not the actual minutes. Why is that? The summaries don't even state who was present at the meeting. Also, how would one get the supporting documentation--for instance, financial reports or plans for service changes (e.g., consolidation)--and the actual minutes."

 

The WISD: "For more information about WISD and the Board see:  http://wash.k12.mi.us/files/WISD101.pdf. We're in the process of updating our website and board minutes will be included.  In the meantime, if you want a copy of the minutes please contact Colleen O'Sullivan at cosulliv@wash.k12.mi.us."

 

So, until recently you couldn't get the WISD board minutes online. [They are now available back to 2008, which is a VAST improvement.] And, how exactly is their board made up? They didn't tell me in the email, even though it seems so obvious to me that they could have explained in a couple of sentences. Once I looked the requisite section up it was also clear why they didn't want to do so. Here is how their board is made up: 

 

(This information is taken from the link above referring to the board. I had to scroll through several pages there as well.)

9) How are WISD Board members elected?
Members of WISD’s school board are elected biennially on the first Monday in June by a body of electors composed of one member from each constituent local school district board of education. WISD Board members’ terms are staggered. Each member serves a six-year term.
10) Who are the WISD Board members?
The following are members of WISD’s 2010-11 Board of Education:
Mark Van Bogelen, President
Gregory A. Peoples, Vice President
Dayle K. Wright, Secretary
Diane B. Hockett, Treasurer
Mary Jane Tramontin, Trustee

In other words, there is no direct election of WISD school board members. It doesn't say who creates the nominations. . . or when board members' terms are up. . . or if they get paid and what they get paid.

It's not very transparent at all.

To the WISD, I say this: If you want me, and other people who care about process, to vote for the special education millage that is coming up, then you had better find a way to be a LOT more transparent in the coming months. And I say that even though I think the special education millage is important.

To those of you who are journalists or passionate observers of the local school scene, I say: it would be a good idea to have journalists at the WISD board meetings. The WISD is becoming a more, and more, important player.

The next meeting is Tuesday, January 25th, at 5: 30 p.m., at the WISD. They will be discussing the Superintendent search (they have an interim Superintendent now) as well as Washtenaw Alternatives for Youth.

I would tell you to contact the WISD board members by email or phone and ask them to develop a better process for sharing information with the public, but their emails are not posted, only a central phone number: 994-8100 x1300.

Meeting Agenda Posted

And here it is: tonight's meeting agenda. Transportation consolidation is a first briefing. Note at bottom, "Meeting will not be videotaped."

What is the Agenda?

Tonight, Friday night, the AAPS Board is having a meeting at 5 p.m.
A regular meeting.
The agenda is still not posted.
I actually have no idea as to whether the agendas are typically posted in advance. I assumed that they are, but I have never looked before.
I also assumed that there was an Open Meetings Act requirement to post agendas in advance (24 hours? 48 hours?). As far as I can tell, there's no requirement about posting agendas in the OMA.
On the AAPS web site, I also couldn't find any evidence that there is an AAPS board policy about posting the agenda.
If the board typically posts the agenda in advance, then I would like to know why they didn't post this one.
If the board doesn't typically post the agenda in advance, then I would like to know why not.

Often you can't find things you want to find on the AAPS web site, but I will say this: if there is no requirement from the Open Meetings Act to post agendas, then the AAPS School Board--and every other school board--should make it board policy to post agendas at least 24 hours in advance. They can always be amended.

Failure to post agendas can only be interpreted, by parents and taxpayers like myself, as a way to depress attendance and reduce transparency. And this is even more true in a case like this, where the meeting is scheduled for
Friday at 5 p.m.
And where the meeting is an additional meeting.
You could call the lack of an agenda sneaky. Or misguided.
In any case, we are back to the issue that keeps repeating: Transparency.
Process is important. 
And agenda has two meanings: 1) The agenda for the meeting is posted and 2) We will try to move this agenda forward.


I think that the meeting is going to discuss transportation consolidation, but I don't have any proof of that. So when I ask, "What is the agenda?" I am asking both the simple question of "What is on the list to discuss for the evening?" and the more complex and less transparent question of "If there is no agenda posted, does that mean that someone has a particular agenda that they are trying to push?" In the case of transportation, my guess is that the administration does have an agenda they are trying to push, and they are trying to keep it out of the public eye by not posting the agenda.

I suggest you send your comments, on both transparency and transportation, to the Board of Education at boe@aaps.k12.mi.us.

If It Seems too Good to Be True...

It probably is.

At least, that's the saying.
In the beginning, I was excited about the possible transportation consolidation, and I wrote this.
A few weeks later, I had a few concerns, and I wrote this.
But after reading a little bit more, I've come to the conclusion that this plan is ill-conceived and--if implemented for the fall--will likely be a big. fat. mess.
So--what made me change my mind?

1. Savings Oversold
Well, it turns out that there are some (read: limited) savings from saving on "deadhead miles" and combined gas purchasing, but the bulk of the savings are coming from staff--and not, primarily, from fewer staff--but primarily from paying staff an average of 17% less. There is no guarantee that current drivers will get jobs, either.
When I wrote about the custodians, I posited that there is a moral imperative, not just an economic imperative, to fairness. David Bates, the Ypsilanti school board president, noted in school board's discussion yesterday that the teachers and administrators were ("only") asked to take 5% pay cuts. In Ann Arbor, the custodians and maintenance staff just took what approximates a 10% pay cut. So--17%? That seems a bit much.
In that vein, I appreciate the Ypsilanti school board's decision to table the decision.
In fact, with the new retirement program that the state legislature just enacted, workers who are re-hired will (I believe) have a different retirement program than the one they were in, with reduced benefits. So that's another sock-it-to-the-worker problem.

According to the annarbor.com article, 

The consultant working with the WISD said that the proposed wage scale was developed after examining compensation for other counties' transportation departments.

Oh yeah? Which counties? The Ann Arbor-Ypsilanti area is one of the most expensive housing markets in the Midwest. I believe it is only second to Chicago. Let's pay people a living wage.

2. Cooperation and Coordination are alternatives to Consolidation
I think that some of the savings (like combined gas purchasing) could probably be achieved through cooperation and coordination, rather than consolidation. Do we need to consolidate to coordinate special education transportation? I don't see why.

3. Timeline is too Short
At this point, the Washtenaw Intermediate School District is saying that they need at least five of the districts to go in on the plan, and if Ann Arbor is not one of the five, that would be big trouble. And yet--to date--the only one to sign on is Willow Run. So here we are.  June is around the corner. And it seems to me that there is no way that laying off all of the local drivers and aides, and having a new entity hire them, and redesigning routes can possibly happen in a smooth and coordinated fashion in the next 2+ months. I don't care what promises the WISD wants to give about that, I will not believe it. Nor should you.

4. Transparency
There's one other thing, too. We're back to that transparency thing again. When I went to the AAPS budget meeting where they discussed transportation, I think I was sold a bill of goods. This is what I wrote at the time:

The main savings will come from things like buying gasoline in bulk, buying parts in bulk, routing efficiencies, etcetera. There are still a lot of details to be worked out, and my guess is that eventually there will be some cuts in staffing among mechanics and administrators (although that was not clearly said).

My nagging question, in that post, was "If it's not too good to be true, why didn't we do this five years ago?" And now I have my answer: It is too good to be true. 


Let's Try Again for Consolidation
Let's use a more realistic timeline. (January? Next September? ) Let's bring the transportation unions to the table. Let's use a reasonable amount of pay rollbacks (5-10%?).

In the meantime, let's try cooperation and coordination to save on gas and deadhead miles.