Friday, November 9, 2018

Integration as an Education Reform?


First, an update on the Baltimore County School Board elections. The following individuals were elected to the Baltimore County School Board for the first time in history: District 1-Lisa A. Mack; District 2-Cheryl E. Pasteur; District 3-Katheleen Causey (who was originally nominated); District 4-Makeda Scott; District 5-Julie C. Henn (also originally nominated); District 6-Lily Rowe; and District 7-Rod McMillan. There is not a lot of information available about these individual’s priorities as newly elected board members, but time will tell what issues they choose to take on. One if the imminent tasks the board faces is finding a permanent superintendent by July 1st. The newly elected board will meet for the first time in early December.

Next, a look at segregation in Baltimore County and why it is still an issue when looking at education reform. Schools are often tied to neighborhoods, and neighborhoods are defined by many things, one of which is the housing market. When school zone lines are re-drawn, they are often tied to housing. Historically, schools have been used as tools to reinforce segregation. Citylab presents a fascinating history of segregation in Baltimore here.

People often buy housing that is associated with “good schools”, and when their “good schools” are threatened, people fight back by moving or redrawing school zone lines. “Good schools” are often synonymous with “white schools” or “middle/upper-class” schools. White middle-class families often feel threatened by “safety” issues that poor students of color supposedly present, while thinking of what will give their own kids the best possible educational opportunities.

Integration as an education reform to close achievement gaps has been brought up by multiple Baltimore County stakeholders such as teachers, parents, and former Superintendent Dallas Dance in the past few years but has hit a dead end when the issue reaches the County Council. Even former County Executive Kevin Kamenetz promoted anti-segregation housing policy. A look inside BCPS schools will reflect the diversity of the rapidly changing district.

As recently as 1980 BCPS schools were 90% white; they are projected to be majority-minority by 2030. However, segregation in Baltimore County doesn’t come close to its neighbor, Baltimore City Public Schools. BCPSS is more hyper-segregated than ever, serving over 90% African American students. The only way for districts to integrate is to work together, but there hasn’t been enough political momentum to result in partnerships. Integration in terms of race has essentially ended partially due to a 2007 Supreme Court case, but integration of socio-economic statuses is an education reform that a few brave school districts are looking at.

Dallas Independent School district has faced de-segregation obstacles like many other major US cities. DISD is 95% African American, Latinx, and other groups of color, as well as majority low-income. In the 1970’s when desegregation first occurred, DISD was 60% white and more affluent. Latinx and Hispanic students have flooded into DISD, while many white students are enrolled in private schools. Michael Hinojosa has been pushing the idea of more magnet and special schools to draw in more affluent suburbanite children. Some of these schools are called “transformational” or “innovation” schools. These efforts have had mixed results, but they could be considered a step or attempt towards integration by socio-economic status. A similar plan has also been implemented in Hartford, CT.

Integration has been shown to benefit all kids. It is ultimately people’s own biases that get in the way of progress.  

A few more links to check out:

Wednesday, November 7, 2018

BCPS' Newly Elected Board of Education


As of last night, Baltimore County Public Schools drastically changed a major piece of their administration by electing six new members to the BCPS Board of Education. This new system—electing a majority of members rather than having them appointed—is the result of a 2014 state law intended to increase stakeholder voice and board accountability to the community. Because of this new system, the breakdown of the BCPS Board of Education will now be made of seven elected members, four appointed (by the governor), and one student member.

Of the seven positions up for election, only one incumbent member was able to return—leaving the Board of Education with six new members set to take office in December. Of these six new members a shocking four of them have worked in public education, either at the k-12 or community college level. The (somehow) revolutionary idea that perhaps educators should have a voice in policies regarding education seems to have taken off—in Baltimore County, anyway.

According to the Baltimore Sun, the major decision facing this new Board of Education will be to find and hire a new Superintendent of Schools. (The current superintendent is acting as an interim superintendent since our last permanent hire, Dr. Dallas Dance, was convicted of four counts of perjury and was only recently released from jail.) The current interim superintendent was a previous colleague of Dr. Dance and has seemed to align most of her priorities and policies with his.

It seems that—based on the previous actions of the leaders of Baltimore County Public Schools—the fresh start provided by a new Board of Education might be just what we need.



Friday, November 2, 2018

Elections Mean Changing Priorities


With elections around the corner, much of the country waits in anticipation. Early voter turnout has already surpassed previous years in several states. November 6th will bring change, or lack thereof, across the nation. Sure, several important and divisive elections in the Senate and House will be determined (in which many former teachers are running), but so will other less thought about positions such as school board members. Baltimore County will have its first ever election: 7 districts are up for competitive election. Up until now, all school board seats in Baltimore County have been appointed by the governor. Candidates and endorsements can be found here.

School boards play a crucial role in determining the mission, values, and priorities in a school district. They select, manage, and supervise the superintendent, and create an environment in which he/she can thrive. At least, that is what they are meant to do. See here for more info on school boards. Baltimore County has faced scandal in recent years, and has yet to appoint a permanent superintendent. Next week will bring a very different board with a new direction, which will be determined by the newly elected officials.

Perhaps these newly elected officials may take a stance on an issue that has gained attention in the media recently: integration. The issue has been on the media circuit more recently but has made appearances in previous years as well. Take this Washington Post article from 2013. The Baltimore Sun did a four part series in the Spring of 2017 which can be found here. Of course, the series was done when former superintendent Dallas Dance was still in office. He had briefly discussed the possibility at one time but was soon after tried and convicted of ethics violations. Challenges abound the County Executive and County Council positions as well. However, new leadership means new priorities and if the conversation can get started again, Baltimore is ripe with opportunity.

Next Week: Election follow-up with integration spotlight on Dallas Independent School District. Stay tuned!

Wednesday, October 31, 2018

Outstanding School Leaders


October is National Principals Month, which gives me a chance to squeeze in my appreciation with just hours to spare. Principals are indeed the linchpins in the education system. To the school district, they are the means for carrying out strategy, and for the students and teachers they are the leaders that can make or break instructional success in the classroom.

In recent weeks I have thought a lot about the role of the principal in the work of teachers and in improving schools. In looking up how principals are evaluated, I was pleased to see that Baltimore does include a 360 evaluation and other leadership criteria in its principal assessments (School Leader Evaluation). This means that teachers are at least given some voice in their principal’s assessment and development, though I wonder how honest they feel they can be in these reviews. Other leadership criteria are also used, such as providing a clear vision and selecting/retaining good teachers, though it is less clear how these criteria are measured (School Leader Rubric).

The Department of Education itself has recently named its National Blue Ribbon Schools for the year, and as part of National Principals Month it has also named 11 principals of these Blue Ribbon Schools who will receive 2018 Terrel H. Bell Awards for outstanding school leadership. I read about all 11 recipients, to see what the DOEd values in school leaders (Bell Awardees).

Overall, this seems like a dedicated group of leaders. Some have been through turnarounds, some helped to start their school, and some have seen their students through floods and hurricanes. Some have worked to create professional learning communities and empower teachers to innovate. Some have closed performance gaps. Many have worked to involve their communities as stakeholders, and most were cited for their strong visions for their schools.

These are all admirable qualities, and I was pleasantly surprised to see that selection was not based solely on test scores. However, in the eyes of the DOEd, there seemed to be another selection criterion as well. First, note that the overall profile of 2018 Blue Ribbon schools is:

349    Total

300    Public
7%      Charter (20)
10%    Magnet (31)
18%    “Choice schools” (n/a)


49       Private (90% Catholic)

Of the 11 honored principals, five are from charter, magnet, or “choice” schools. Virtually all are from states that are highly pro-charter, that receive top grades on charter school laws and contain the bulk of American charter schools (except notably California and Massachusetts, which received no Bell awards): Michigan, Colorado, Florida, New York, South Carolina, Texas, and Louisiana. One principal is from Ohio, which is lower-ranked for charters but has seen key voucher court rulings. The last principal is from Pennsylvania, which I cannot explain as a charter haven, but it is the only Catholic school that made the Bell list. See this link for charter law rankings.

What does this tell me about how the Department of Education is celebrating National Principals Month? It tells me that certain states are viewed more favorably than others, and that the department is working hard to tell good-news stories related to school choice. Also, while many of these principals lead schools with a large proportion of disadvantaged students, not one of them leads a school with even a plurality of African American students. Perhaps this is not part of the story the Department is focused on telling.

School facts from the 2018 Terrel H. Bell Awards for Outstanding School Leadership:


City
School Type
Demographics
Fort Collins, CO
Public elementary
82% White, 15% disadvantaged
Jacksonville, FL
Magnet school, choice school
44% White, 28% Asian, 15% Black, 15% disadvantaged
Miami, FL
Charter (math and Greek)
77% Hispanic 55% disadvantaged
New Orleans, LA
Public charter, Title I
57% White, 26% Black, 22% disadvantaged
Spring Lake, MI
Public Title I, choice school
79% White, 58% disadvantaged
Fresh Meadows, NY
Public middle
65% Asian, 66% disadvantaged
Cincinnati, OH
Public elementary
93% White, 16% disadvantaged
West Chester, PA
Private, Catholic
95% White
Taylors, SC
Public elementary
91% White, 50% disadvantaged
El Paso, TX
Public, Title I, choice school
85% Hispanic, 56% disadvantaged
Rosenberg, TX
Public Title I
84% Hispanic, 95% disadvantaged