In a unanimous ruling handed down last month, the U.S. Supreme Court, for the first time, recognized the so-called "Ministerial Exception," which protects religious institutions from various claims brought by its clergy.  Of particular interest is the fact that the case in question - Hosanna-Tabor Evagelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC - revolved around the question of whether a teacher employed by a private religious school could be considered a "minister," even though she spent the majority of her working hours teaching secular subjects.  While the High Court stopped short of producing explicit guidelines for determining who is to be regarded as a minister, it firmly rejected the position of the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission, which argued that the exception should be applied only to employees who performed "exclusively religious functions."

The case involved a teacher employed by a private school affiliated with the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod (LCMS), and located in the state of Michigan.  Faculty employed by LCMS schools are classified as either "lay" or "called" teachers.  To achieve the status of a "called" teacher, one must complete a regimen of theology courses, and pass various examinations.  The Hosanna-Tabor instructor, Cheryl Perich, spent six years fulfilling these requirements, after which she received the title, "Minister of Religion, Commissioned," and became a "called" teacher. (Having achieved this status, Ms. Perich proceeded to claim the IRS housing allowance extended to ministers.)

In addition to teaching a full complement of general studies subjects in her Kindergarten and fourth grade classes, Ms. Perich also taught religion four days a week, accompanied her students to chapel one day per week, and led prayers in her classroom.

In 2004, Ms. Perich, who suffered from narcolepsy, went on disability leave.  The school subsequently tendered a release offer in which Ms. Perich would receive a certain sum of money in exchange for her agreement not to bring any claims against the school.  After Ms. Perich refused the offer and threatened to initiate legal action against the school, she was terminated.  She then turned to the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission, which agreed to sue the school on her behalf, claiming disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act.  Citing the Ministerial Exception, the district court found in favor of the school.  However, the Six Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's ruling on grounds that the majority of Ms. Perich's primary functions were of a secular nature.  The case then went to the Supreme Court.

 

The High Court's opinion, authored by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., accorded little, if any weight to the argument that Ms. Perich spent the majority of her working hours engaged in other-than-religious functions.  Rather, it emphasized the fact that the teacher had been formally commissioned as a "minister" by the denomination with which her school was affiliated, as well as the fact that she performed "important religious functions," and conveyed the teachings of the Church.

 

Writing in the SCOTUSblog, Lyle Denniston notes: "The Court's ruling... did not order courts to throw out all such lawsuits as beyond their jurisdiction, but it left them with only a narrow inquiry before the likely order of dismissal would come down.  As soon as the denomination makes its point that it counts an employee as a 'minister,' within its internal definition, that is probably the end of the case.  And the employee could be anyone from the congregational leader, on down to any worker considered to be advancing the religious mission."

 

 

 

When the No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law a little over ten years ago, 2014 seemed an eternity away.  That was the deadline by which 100 percent of the nation's public school students were to have attained proficiency in reading and math.  Each state was required to submit a plan to the U.S. Department of Education, providing a timeline that plotted out annual progress toward the accomplishment of that seemingly distant goal.  No plan = no federal funding.

State education officials did some quick reckoning of their own, figuring that either a new administration would take office in 2004, or the law would be rewritten in 2008, or both.  Like other states, California developed a "road map" to 100 percent proficiency in which the bulk of the "trip" was reserved for the years subsequent to 2008.  But here we are in 2012, and the law has yet to be reauthorized.  With its signature testing and accountability requirements still in place, the majority of California's public schools either have been, or will be subject to largely unwelcome corrective action unless something gives.  Most other states find themselves in the same boat.

With an increasingly dysfunctional Congress either unable or unwilling to address the dilemma, the Obama Administration has proferred an arrangement that would grant states waivers, freeing schools and school districts from a number of the existing law's accountability provisions in return for a commitment on the part of the state to adopt various education reforms.  California must now decide whether it wishes to play ball with the feds, and the decision is anything but easy.

This past August, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson left little doubt that he opposes going the waiver route.  In a sharply worded letter to U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, Mr. Torlakson wrote:  "Finally, the conditional nature of the waivers presents problems for California. I understand that waivers may be granted only if a state commits to certain policy priorities of the Administration, including adopting college-and-career-ready standards, imposing a differentiated accountability system, and adopting a teacher/principal evaluation system that incorporates student test results. These policy priorities would mark dramatic deviations from the existing policies required under NCLB. States would be asked to make commitments beyond NCLB with no commensurate funding to provide the state capacity to implement such requirements. The appropriate forum for consideration of any new legal mandates is through the reauthorization process involving transparency and Congressional democratic debate."

It is rumored that Governor Jerry Brown has his own doubts about pursuing the waiver option.  His reticence may well be the product of fiscal concerns.  California Department of Education staff have told the State Board that fulfilling the terms accompanying the waivers could, conceivably, carry a price tag exceeding $3 billion.  Having already gambled upon public approval of newly proposed tax hikes in order to balance his proposed budget, it's doubtful that Mr. Brown would wish to expose the state to additional billions of dollars of expense.

We haven't included this feature in quite some time, but the following story merits mention under the headline.  A ninth-grade student in Mustang, Oklahoma (pop. 17,395) was, apparently, somewhat less than stimulated by the substitute teacher sitting at the head of the classroom.  This may have had something to do with the fact that the teacher was sleeping.  (OK.  It happens.  But we still haven't gotten to the "you're kidding me, right?" part.)

The student snapped a photo of the snoozing substitute on his cell phone and posted the shot on a social networking site.  When school administrators saw the embarrassing evidence they were outraged, and did what might have been expected (in order to land a spot in this column, anyway).  They suspended the student!  Apparently, while school policies permit students to bring telecommunications devices to campus, their use is forbidden during the course of the school day.  You can read more about the story and see it reported on the local news, here.

 

School administrators were quoted as saying they "...will take appropriate follow-up action as this type of behavior by staff is not tolerated."  That comment strikes this writer as validation of the claim that the instructor in question was actually sleeping, rather than merely photographed with his/her eyes closed. 

The disciplinary action taken against the ninth-grader raises the question of whether "whistleblower" policies should extend to students.

The UCLA Writing Project, an affiliate of the National Writing project that has been working with teachers and students since 1977 "to find the best strategies for helping students become strong, enthusiastic writers," is pleased to offer the following programs:

 

  Lake Arrowhead Young Writers Retreat

 

Over the course of four days at the beautiful UCLA Conference Center at Lake Arrowhead, students and teachers "explore the world of free writing, along with structured lessons and revision techniques."  This year's program runs from March 15-18.  The cost of room and board is $500 per person, and conference registration is $190.  For additional information, please contact UCLA Writing Project Co-director Jane Hancock, either by phone (310-825-9495) or via email: hancock@gseis.ucla.edu  A program flyer can be accessed, here.

 

  Writing Before College

 

This two-week workshop, which offers a "rich college-like writing experience," is offered to students entering grades 9-12.  Participants will learn how to organize, develop and refine their writing, and how to create their own academic voice.  The program takes place on the UCLA campus, and will run from July 9-20, 2012 (sessions take place from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.).  Cost of participation is $400.

 

  Writing the College Application Personal Statement

 

This program, offered to students entering 12th grade, runs from July 23-27, 2012, and includes a follow-up session in October.  The workshop will enable participants to experiment with "...a variety of application topics, explore the role of style...and analyze sample personal statements."  Hands-on practice drafting, sharing, revising, and editing a variety of personal statements will help ease participants' path through the college admissions process.  Registration is $300.

 

A flyer with additional information about the Writing Before College and Writing the College Application Personal Statement programs (including a registration form) can be accessed, here.  Questions about registration can be addressed to Wanda Abraham at (310-206-3544) or abraham@gseis.ucla.edu 

 

 

There's Lots of Great Information On the Horizon

  

More than 75 California professional development events, college fairs, certification trainings, and webinars are listed every month in the On the Horizon newsletter sponsored by the California School Community Access Network (CSCAN). Additional resources are sent out on a biweekly basis. To join the list serve, please email Bob Tyra at btyra2.0@gmail.com

  

In addition to the newsletter, listserve members receive timely information such as the following announcement:

  

SAFE AT SCHOOL AND READY TO LEARN: A Comprehensive Policy Guide for Protecting Students with Life-threatening Food Allergies 
http://www.nsba.org/foodallergyguide

 

While each chronic condition requires specific knowledge, preparation, training, and services for effective management, they share the need for a comprehensive and coordinated approach that is built on a foundation of partnership between schools, families, and healthcare providers. This guide focuses on the management of life-threatening food allergies in schools. However, many of the recommendations are applicable to other chronic health conditions. 

 

 

Blue Ribbon Schools

 

The U.S. Department of Education has released the application and guidelines for the 2012 National Blue Ribbon Schools Program. Information for private schools about the program is available, here.  Initiated in 1982, the program recognizes public and private schools, "...where students achieve at very high levels and/or where the achievement gap is narrowing."  The private school component of the program is administered by the Council for American Private Education.

 

 

Teaching Ambassador Fellowship Program

 

From the U.S. Department of Education

 

The U.S. Department of Education's Office of Non-Public Education encourages private school teachers to apply to the U.S. Department of Education's 2012-13 Teaching Ambassador Fellowship Program.  (TAF)  Applications for the program are now being accepted. 

 

The TAF program offers a number of, year-long fellowship tracks based on applicant interests.  The Washington Fellowship is a full-time appointment based at the Department's Headquarters in Washington, DC.  The Classroom Fellowship is a part-time fellowship that enables teachers to remain teaching in their schools and participate in the program on a part-time consultancy basis for the Department and working in collaboration with the Department's Regional Offices.  The newest fellowship option the Regional Fellowship, is a full-time appointment, based in one of the three hub areas for our 10 Regional Communications and Outreach offices in the northeast (based in Boston, NY, or Philadelphia), the south/midwest (based in Atlanta), and the Western Hub position, which covers the west coast/northwest (based in Seattle).  [Note that the Regional Fellowship is dependent on new funding.]

 

Each fellowship is designed to systematically reach out to teachers to share information about the Department, hear what teachers in the field have to say, and contribute their expertise and learning to Department program and policy development.  Fellows spend a year in the program gaining greater knowledge of the content of key federal education policies and programs.  Upon finishing their fellowships, teachers will leave the program not only knowing the content of federal programs, but also gaining a valuable understanding of the design and implementation of these programs.  Along with learning, fellows get to do what they do best - Teach.  Throughout the program, fellows will share their expertise with federal staff members; provide outreach and communication about federal initiatives to other educators on behalf of the Department; and facilitate the participation and understanding of teachers in developing and implementing these efforts at the federal, state and local levels to improve the likelihood of future success.

 

Desirable TAF Applicants Have:

• Demonstrable and meaningful impact on student achievement,
• A record of leadership in the school and community settings,
• Advanced written and oral communication skills,
• Relevant insight from school and classroom experiences to apply to education policy, programs and initiatives,
• Experience with activities that have effectively prepared them for fellowship work, and
• Support from their school, community, and other educational leaders.

The deadline for applying for the TAF program is February 22, 2012.

For additional information about eligibility requirements, the application process, and other programmatic or administrative issues, review the Frequently Asked Questions documents.

The date was January 9, 2012. It had been several months since I had last flown to Sacramento, and the moment the 7 a.m. Southwest flight from Burbank touched down, I instinctively turned on my cell phone to let my wife know that all was well.  Then, as is normally the case, I checked my email inbox as the aircraft pulled up to the gate, wrote someone a quick note, and prepared to deplane.  As I emerged from the jetway into the terminal, my eyes were still glued to my mobile device.  I fly to Sacramento so often that I can probably walk from the gate to the SuperShuttle desk at the far end of the baggage claim area, with my eyes closed.  But not this time.

Glancing up, I stopped dead in my tracks.  A wave of panic - the kind that's triggered by a sudden sense of complete disorientation - shot up and down my spine as a ridiculous thought popped into my startled brain: I boarded the wrong flight!  For a fleeting moment, that seemed to be the only plausible explanation as to how it was that I was standing in a boarding area I had never seen before.  But just as quickly I realized this was impossible.  I distinctly recalled having heard both the flight attendant and the pilot confirm that the flight I was on was destined for Sacramento.  (As an aside, is it just me, or is anyone else troubled when ticket counter airline agents ask: "Is this your final destination?"  I like hearing that about as much as I enjoy hearing the flight attendant announce "We'll be on the ground, shortly," when the plane is still 15,000 feet above terra firma.)

Still disoriented, I followed the flow of disembarking passengers to an automated "people mover" train that took us from the boarding gate area to a vast central terminal.  By now it had dawned upon me that I was in a completely new set of facilities.  I knew that some sort of construction had been going on, but for some reason, I thought they'd been building a new parking lot.  Instead, I had just made my maiden voyage to a $1 billion project.  And as I rode the long escalator down, past the departure check-in level to the baggage claim area, I couldn't for the life of me figure out why.

I loved the "old" Terminal A.  For one, it wasn't old at all, having opened in 1998.  Clean, functional, and efficient, it was about as user-friendly as any airport terminal with which I'm familiar.  I could walk from the most distant Southwest gate to the far end of the baggage claim area (where the SuperShuttle desk was located) in about two minutes.  Seats in the gate areas were plentiful, and checked luggage made its way to the baggage carousels in impressively short order. It was all good, and I was at a loss to understand why the new facility was necessary.  (Others have wondered about the same question, as this article by noted columnist Dan Walters demonstrates.)

The new facilities are impressive.  I'm sure they will grow on me over the course of time, and I can but hope that I'll end up liking them even more than the "old" terminal.  (One feature I've already enjoyed is that even though there are fewer seats in the new facility's gate areas, most are adjacent to power and USB outlets - a nice touch.)  Still, as I rode into town on the SuperShuttle, I found my thoughts drifting back to my youth, and more specifically, to the camp at which I used to spend my summers.

 

By any reasonable adult set of standards, my summer camp was a dump.  (Actually, it wasn't that nice.)  I'm not quite sure how to describe it, but words like dilapidated, Spartan, and minimalist readily come to mind.  We ate our meals seated on crude wooden benches, and dragged the same benches to and fro across the premises throughout the course of a given day.  The younger campers slept in shabby bunk houses (certain to have been mold infested), while the teens hunkered down in bare bones, "permanent" tent structures.  By way of comparison, the dorm room I inhabited my freshman year at UCLA seemed like the Ritz Carlton.

The thing of it was, we loved that camp.  We loved it, neither because, nor in spite of its meagre physical plant, but because of its program, and, most importantly, its people.  My most enduring friendships were forged at that camp, and it was there that I acquired some of the most valuable and durable life lessons I possess. (Among those lessons was the value of cleanliness.  While a physical makeover was well beyond the budget he was given, the much-beloved camp director was near-fanatical when it came to inducing both campers and staff to maintain neat and orderly living quarters, and to keep the grounds spotless.)

As I thought about it some more, I realized that while my summer camp couldn't rightfully be likened to an airport, a comparison to a school was entirely apposite.  That's not to say a school's facilities are unimportant.  Students and faculty need to be secure and comfortable, and effective teaching and learning require various environmental minima.  But there's a vast amount of room between state-of-the-art surroundings and that which is essential.  And, when budgets have been cut to the bone, and every dollar counts some schools must literally decide between patching holes in classroom walls, or retaining teachers.

 

Of course, one can cover a holes in the wall with students' work, but if the quality of the students' product is lacking, a school might be better off showing the holes.  Peeling paint, rusty lockers and warped doors will, undoubtedly, turn some prospective parents away.  But a school's reputation need not be inescapably tied to its physical plant.  Children flourish where resourcefulness reigns and creativity blossoms.

From now on, whenever I deplane and step into the impressive steel and glass terminal in Sacramento, I'm going to think of my summer camp, and of all the schools that have converted the most modest of facilities into the most beautiful of environments, where spirits soar and learning is limitless.

Ron Reynolds

The next edition of the CAPSO Midweek E-Mailer will be published on February 22, 2012.