The U.S. Department of Education has bestowed the "Green Ribbon School" designation upon 54 public schools and 10 private schools.  Among the recipients of the award is the Prospect Sierra School in El Cerrito, an affiliate of the California Association of Independent Schools.  In addition to Prospect Sierra, three California public schools and a public school district received the distinction, as announced by U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan on Earth Day (April 22).  A listing of all award recipients and their applications can be viewed, here.

In a press release issued shortly after the award winners were identified, California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson commented: "I am proud of these schools and districts for earning their green ribbons by reducing environmental impacts while increasing awareness of the fragile world we live in.  Students who have had the chance to improve the air, or grow a vegetable, or capture the rain will never look at the world the same way again.  I hope all California students get this chance to learn how to protect the Earth and all those who live here."

The Superintendent's remark concerning capturing rain was a direct reference to one of Prospect Sierra's accomplishments, which involved the creation of a 180 gallon rainwater harvesting system.  The catchment system, designed by students, is used to irrigate the middle school garden.  In addition to its new "Green Ribbon School" designation, Prospect Sierra is recognized by the National Association of Independent Schools as a model "School of the Future."  Its award application can be viewed, here (3.5 MB PDF file).

Other California winners included the Charles Evans Hughes Middle School (Long Beach), Journey School (Aliso Viejo), Redding School of the Arts (Shasta County), and the Oak Park Unified School District (Ventura County).  Links to each recipient's application can be found on this page.

The other private schools achieving the designation are:

 

Schools seeking the "Green Ribbon" designation submit applications to state departments of education in which programs, practices and activities addressing three "pillars" are detailed:  Pillar I: Reduce environmental impact and costs; Pillar II: Improve the health and wellness of schools, students, and staff; and Pillar III: Provide effective environmental and sustainability literacy, incorporating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education (STEM), civic skills, and green career pathways.   

 

CAPSO once again partnered with the California Department of Education by evaluating applications submitted by private schools.  Following preliminary evaluations, state nominees were identified, with each nominated school submitting a final application to the U.S. Department of Education. 

 

More information about the program can be found on the CDE's "Green Ribbon Schools Award Program" web page, here.

Whatever your views concerning school vouchers, here's a development that should leave you shaking your head (laterally).  President Obama's proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2014 contains no new scholarship funding for the nation's only existing federal school voucher program.  While the President's decision to zero out new scholarship funding comes as no surprise, here's the kicker.  Mr. Obama's budget provides money to evaluate the program.

I suspect most of us were taught that the process of evaluation is intended to precede (and inform) a decision to terminate a program.  But in the Bizarro World sometimes mimicked by Washington, DC, the first one now will later be last.  And, as would be said in the Bizarro World, in this instance there's probably madness to the method.  In truth, President Obama's hands are tied by existing legislation that mandates the evaluation of the program he's effectively shutting down. Couldn't Congress take action to undo the program evaluation requirement, you ask?  In theory, of course.  But the program happens to be a favorite of House Speaker John Boehner.  So in the real world of acrimoniously partisan politics, that's not going to happen.
 
The DC Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP), initiated in 2004-2005, has been popular with parents.  Designed to serve children hailing from families with combined annual incomes of less than $24,000, OSP has awarded scholarships to more than 6,000 students, but has had to turn away nearly twice that number for lack of funding.  At the time of the program's most recent evaluation in 2010 it was found that 91 percent of students who used their scholarship to access a private school ended up graduating from high school.  That figure is 30 percent higher than the graduation rate for students enrolled in Washington DC public high schools, and 21 percent higher than the graduation rate among students who applied for, but failed to receive Opportunity Scholarships.

The program can't be accused of taking resources away from the public education system, as the amount of money allocated for private school scholarships comes with a guarantee of equal funding for Washington DC's traditional public schools and charter schools.  Traditional public schools thus receive more money to educate fewer children, or more dollars-per-pupil.  That fact is noted by researchers from the American Enterprise Institute who claim that the OSP produced $2.62 in benefits to society for every dollar spent on it, for a return of 162 percent.  (One of the AEI scholars, Patrick Wolf, happens to have been the lead researcher for the U.S. Department of Education's 2010 evaluation of the OSP.

The American Federation for Children reports the story, here.

A California Education Tax-Credit Bill

A bill proposing the establishment of education tax-credits will soon be heard by the California Legislature's Committee on Governance and Finance.  SB 693, authored by State Senator Lou Correa (D - Santa Ana), contains two components - one offering a tax benefit to low- and middle-income families for qualified education expenses, and the other offering tax-credits to starting teachers for out-of-pocket classroom expenses.

The first component consists of a tax credit to a maximum value of $500 for "qualified education-related expenses" which include

outlays for items and services such as school supplies, school uniforms, computers, educational software, tutoring, diagnostic evaluations, and private school tuition.  To be eligible for receipt of the credit, the household income of parents/guardians of children enrolled in any of grades K-12 must not exceed 300 percent of the guideline for federal reduced-price meals.  That figure currently amounts to

$127,929 for a family of four.

 

The teacher component provides a tax-credit of up to $250 for out-of-pocket classroom expenses incurred by teachers, instructors, counselors and/or principals during their first three years of employment in either a public or a private school offering instruction in any of grades K-12.

 

CAPSO supports the bill, whose benefits make no distinction between the type of school attended by a child, be it a traditional public school, a charter school, magnet school, or private school, and which targets benefits to low- and middle-income families.  Similarly, the measure's teacher provision draws no distinction between schools, and targets those teachers most likely to be earning at the lower end of the salary range, for receipt of tax-credits. 

 

 

Survey: Texans Favor School Choice

The Wall Street Journal reports on a recent survey finding that some 66 percent of Texas voters support school vouchers, and that an even higher percentage favor education tax credit arrangements used to furnish scholarships to students wishing to enroll in private schools.   The "Texas K-12 & School Choice Survey," conducted by Braun Research, Inc., on behalf of the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice, found that support for school vouchers is strongest among Latino voters.

Education tax-credits for donations to scholarship granting nonprofit organizations received expressions of approval from 72 percent of those polled.  Only 20 percent indicated opposition to the policy.  The Texas Legislature's Senate Education Committee has recently approved bills that would establish both a voucher program and a tax-credit arrangement designed to benefit students with special needs.  At this time, however, it is uncertain whether either bill will proceed to a floor vote.

The Friedman Foundation makes the survey questionnaire, methodology, and full results available, here.


Governor Brown's School Funding Proposal Hits a Bump

California Governor Jerry Brown's plan to change the manner in which the state's public schools are funded has encountered resistance in the form of counter-proposals tendered by members of his own party.  Under the Governor's plan, school districts with higher concentrations of English learners and students from low-income families would receive proportionately greater funding, and districts would be given enhanced flexibility to assign funds currently received through a variety of restrictive "categorical programs."

Last week, Senate Democrats suggested modifications to the Governor's plan that endeavor to preserve its conceptual basis while reducing differences in funding between districts.  The response did not sit well with Mr. Brown, who promised his Democratic colleagues that they'd face "the battle of their lives" if they proceeded to oppose his plan, adding that he "...will fight any effort to dilute" the underlying legislation.  The Los Angeles Times reports the story, here.

The rift between the Governor and Democratic legislators could throw a wrench into the process of finalizing the budget for the coming fiscal year, even at a time when Democrats hold a super-majority in both houses of the legislature.  While Democratic legislators possess the numbers needed to override a veto by Mr. Brown, the Governor occupies a bully pulpit and enjoys support from a group of major public school district superintendents, who stood at his side as he vowed to preserve his proposals.

EdSource provides a more detailed account of the Democratic legislators' counter-proposals, here.

Stay tuned!

By the time these words are read, more than two weeks will have passed since the perpetration of the horrific explosions that stunned the city of Boston and sent shock waves through an alarmed, if resolute nation.  As we watched and heard the accounts of the mounting human toll, prayed for the victims, and cried for the unbearable losses suffered by those who lost loved ones, we were granted a fleeting degree of consolation by witnessing our response as one nation under God, indivisible. 
 
To the perpetrator, or perpetrators of the crime, it mattered not a whit that the victims were Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives, for or against "Obama Care," more stringent gun control laws, or school vouchers.  It didn't make the least bit of difference whether those that were killed, maimed, or otherwise injured were white, black, brown, yellow, or any combination, thereof.  The killer(s) didn't bother to check anyone's immigration status, income bracket, or religious affiliation.

The perpetrator(s) also left us with a troubling question: Can we be united by something beyond a shared sense of victimhood?

It didn't take long before the first signs of political contamination insinuated themselves upon our response as one people, united.  President Obama was attacked for failing to employ the terms "terrorism" or "terrorist(s)" when addressing the nation in the aftermath of the bombings.  Various media sources were criticized, not only for factual misreporting, but for ostensible political bias in their coverage of the emergent investigation.  Proponents and opponents of expanded gun control legislation tugged and pulled at each other's attempts to spin the tragedy in their favor.  One particularly lamentable expression of such untoward politicization came in the form of an article penned by David Sirota titled, "Let's hope the Boston Marathon bomber is a white American," which was published by Salon magazine the day following the bombings.
 
In light of such gratuitous bickering, it's little wonder that whatever sense of unity we experienced in the aftermath of a national tragedy appears to have been ephemeral.  Sadly, we help to make it so by focusing on the wrong distinctions.  Whether the Boston bombings were triggered by the hands of a lighter skinned domestic terrorist, or a darker skinned foreign terrorist is academic.  Yes, we all wish to know the identity of whomever is responsible, and that knowledge should be of particular significance to those tasked with the responsibility of protecting us - every last one of us.  From a moral perspective, however, we would do better to recall the insight offered by the Austrian physician and Holocaust survivor Victor Frankl, who proclaimed that there are but two meaningful categories of persons: the decent and the indecent.

I don't mean to belittle political differences, or impugn passionately held beliefs on the divisive issues of the day.  Rather, I am suggesting that two individuals can hold opposing political views and both be decent people.  When we demonize those with whom we disagree over issues such as tax policy, health care and, yes, education, we blur distinctions between what is politically objectionable and what is morally objectionable...and do so at considerable cost.  For when we assign moral depravity to persons holding opposing political views on carbon emissions control, high speed rail, or college loans, I believe we both trivialize that which is truly indecent, and vitiate political positions that are grounded in legitimate moral convictions.

By the time this column is published we will, undoubtedly, know more about the perpetrator(s) of the Boston Marathon explosions.  But we will know no more about what is decent and what is indecent.  Thankfully, partnering with parents to produce decent human beings is a primary goal of our schools.  Whether informed by religious tenets, or secular notions of what is entailed by just, kind, compassionate and moral persons, teaching, modeling and shaping decency is a visible component of our schools' curriculum.  Developing world-class thinkers and scholars is laudable, but insufficient.  We must also inform and inspire A-plus people, united above all by their common decency.  May this be our response to the disturbing events in Boston.

Ron Reynolds

The next edition of the CAPSO Midweek E-Mailer will be published May 22, 2013.