Special e-Law Update:
Judge Manning Targets School System's
"Abysmal Performance"
Lex-IS Services
Legal Counsel, Instruction, and Support for NC Schools
Forward this to Colleagues, Board Members, and Friends
|
|
March 17, 2009
|
Special e-Law Update
|
|
|
|
Leandro Report: Judge Manning Targets School System's "Abysmal Performance"
Yesterday (March 16), Wake County Superior Court Judge Howard Manning scheduled an April 29, 2009 "non-adversarial" hearing to consider the measures the State "intends to take to remedy the constitutional violation of the Halifax County Public Schools failing to provide children with the equal opportunity to obtain a sound basic education."
The judge's notice and an accompanying letter, sent to State Board Chairman and CEO William Harrison and State Superintendent of Public Instruction June Atkinson, provide a detailed "factual and legal basis for the court's actions at this point in time."
The tone and content of Judge Manning's notice is unsurprisingly severe and pointed. He chronicles years of Halifax County's ABC test results, showing "a history of abysmal low performance" by its students (e.g., "nothing less than academic disaster" on reading tests) and providing "irrefutable evidence of a complete breakdown in academics...." The judge noted the particularly steep drops in performance results once the State adopted more rigorous end-of-grade (EOG) math and reading tests in 2005-06 and 2007-08, respectively.
Departing from his prior emphasis on problem high schools, the judge explains how recent evidence reveals that one cause of the high school problem is the failure of feeder elementary and middle schools to prepare students. He points to the sharp decline in middle and elementary test scores once the State adopted more rigorous testing standards, and concludes that elementary and middle school test scores were "misleading" under the old standards.
In characteristic fashion, Judge Manning concludes in his letter to Drs. Harrison and Atkinson:
This is academic genocide and it must be stopped. The State of North Carolina is responsible and it is time...to exercise direct command and control over the Halifax County Public Schools....
I am sure there will be great whining and wailing from the adults but never forget that the adults are the ones responsible for Halifax County Public Schools reaching this situation of academic collapse...."
It appears that the Leandro drama remains alive and well. Judge Manning's stern notice will stir much consternation and activity among policy makers and executives in the next months. The State's serious economic crisis only magnifies the difficulty. Time will tell how the judge will weigh state and local financial limits against minimum Leandro requirements. In light of his explicit rejection of education "excusionists," he is likely to hold education officials to rigorous and unyielding standards.
Additional information is available via the adjacent weblinks and also below.
David R. Hostetler, Esq.
Director |
|
| Brief Leandro Chronology
1994: Leandro v. State lawsuit first filed in state superior court. Plaintiffs include numerous low-wealth and, eventually, urban systems, challenging the state's funding of schools.
July 24, 1997: The North Carolina Supreme Court issues its first opinion (Leandro I), declaring that the state constitution guarantees all children the right to an equal opportunity to receive a "sound basic education." The court rejects the notion that the plaintiffs' rights can be addressed strictly by changing the state's funding of schools. The court sends the case back to the trial court and appoints Superior Court Judge Howard Manning to preside over the entire case to determine if the plaintiffs are receiving a sound basic education and to make other necessary findings.
1999-2002: Judge Manning holds numerous hearings and issues a series of rulings, focusing primarily on whether at-risk students in Hoke County Schools are receiving a sound basic education.
April 4, 2002: Judge Manning issues his Final Judgment on the "liability phase."
July 30, 2004: The North Carolina Supreme Court issues its second ruling in the case of Hoke v. State ("Leandro II"), upholding most of Judge Manning's findings and legal conclusions based on Leandro I (see Leandro Principles below). This includes the ruling that at-risk students in the Hoke County Schools have been denied a sound basic education.
May 24, 2005: Judge Manning files a "Report from the Court" regarding the problem of poor performing high schools throughout North Carolina.
August 2005: Former Governor Easley directs the State Board of Education to send "turnaround teams" to the state's 44 high schools scoring below 60% proficiency on EOG tests.
March 3, 2006: Judge Manning issues a letter to then State Board Chairman Howard Lee concerning "The High School Problem - Consequences," threatening to close down continually-failing high schools beginning in the fall of 2006 if leadership changes are not made at such schools.
March 16, 2009: Judge Manning schedules a hearing on the Halifax School problem and sends letter to State Board Chairman and CEO William Harrison and State Superintendent of Public Instruction June Atkinson.
April 29, 2009: "Non-adversarial" hearing scheduled to address the Halifax problems.
|
The Law of Leandro: What Students Are Entitled To
1. The North Carolina Constitution (Arts. I, §15 and IX, §2) guarantees every child an equal opportunity to receive a "sound basic education." This means, in sum, being prepared with sufficient knowledge and skill in English, math, science, civics and economics, history, geography and vocational training to adequately participate, compete, and engage in the spheres of post-secondary education and training, work, and civic life. [Leandro I]
2. Regarding minimum educational resources ("Leandro Compliant Prerequisites") a sound basic education requires that every child has an equal opportunity to attend a public school that
- has a "competent, certified, well-trained teacher who is teaching the standard course of study by implementing effective educational methods that provide differentiated, individualized instruction, assessment and remediation...."
- is "led by a well-trained competent principal with the leadership skills and the ability to hire and retain" competent teachers to implement an effective instructional program that meets the needs of at-risk children by "achieving grade level or above academic performance."
- is "provided, in the most cost effective manner, the resources necessary to support...the educational needs of all children...." [Leandro II]
3. Failure of a student to achieve Level III (i.e., is below grade level) on the State's ABC, EOG, and EOC tests demonstrates the failure to obtain a sound basic education in the respective subject area(s) and is a student "at-risk." Level III proficiency or above demonstrates Leandro compliance. [Leandro II]
4. The State is responsible for and must correct educational methods and practices that contribute to the failure to provide a sound basic education.
5. The State must sufficiently fund local school systems so they can provide students with the opportunity to obtain a sound basic education.
|
|
ABOUT US: Lex-IS Services provides legal counsel for North Carolina schools and school officials, retainer plans based on school size, local workshops and academies, policy and document preparation, and other support services to help school leaders strategically comply with the law.
DISCLAIMER: This publication is for information purposes only. It is not intended as formal legal advice. When addressing actual legal issues, readers are encouraged to seek formal legal counsel, as the unique facts of each circumstance require careful legal analysis.
Contact information: 815-301-3931 / Services@LEX-IS.com / www.Lex-IS.com
Note: Lex-IS Services is not affiliated in any way with Lexis/Nexis or its parent company, Reed Elsevier.
|
|
|
