Volume 2, Issue 7 (Formerly Leg-Alert)
March 23, 2012
Alabama Charter School Options Now on the Table
Legislative debate about charter schools began in earnest Wednesday with a public hearing on the “Education Options Act of 2012” in the House Ways and Means Education Committee.
H.541 (Williams, P.) The bill contains both a charter school proposal and flexibility provisions designed to be available for all public schools. AASB applauds the recognition that school boards need additional flexibility to meet student needs. Bill sponsor Rep. Phil Williams described it as a “cafeteria plan” to allow a local school board a menu of tools to customize for the needs in their local system.
“Charter schools must target our persistently lowest-performing schools and not divert resources, human and financial, from schools that are meeting standards,” said AASB Director Sally Howell. AASB spoke as an opponent at the public meeting because H.541 does not yet align with the organization’s position. Howell emphasized that “yet” is the pivotal word. The public hearing resulted in further discussions this week with lawmakers to determine what issues must be addressed to build consensus. AASB expects a new version of the bill will surface after the spring break to address concerns.
From the philosophical to practical funding questions, AASB is giving input to the bill. Some technical, some substantive, the edits vary from ensuring that local boards are a priority creditor upon a charter school closure to removing problematic language that would restrict a local board’s ability to dispose of property to meet system facility’s needs. Local boards continue to advocate that any charter school proposal considered must be targeted and limited. AASB will continue to work with lawmakers on efforts to shape the bill so it improves student learning. Here are the most commonly asked questions about the bill.
Would my school system have charters? Every local school board could determine whether or not to authorize a charter school in its system under the current bill. If a school board denies a charter school application, the decision would be final UNLESS a persistently low-performing school is located in the system. Schools currently identified a persistently low-performing are listed in the sidebar.
What is the appeal process? In a school system designated as “priority” because it has a persistently low-performing school, the Charter Application Review Council would review a school board’s decision not to approve a charter school. Of the nine-member Council, the governor would appoint 5 members, the House Speaker 2 members and Senate Pro Tem 2 members. The members must have specific qualifications and include at least one retired teacher, one current or retired school board member, superintendent, and two parents who reside in a priority school system.
AASB believes that a charter school must locate within the attendance zone of the persistently low-performing school if the local board’s decision is to be overturned. Otherwise, the priority designation is meaningless and does not serve the targeted student population and community.
Who would operate the charter schools? Charter schools would have an independent governing board and operate as discrete legal entity, functioning as its own local education agency.
How would charter schools be funded? As drafted, the state Department of Education would forward, on a quarterly basis, the applicable state funding per the Foundation Program for each enrolled student in the charter school. Local funds per student are due quarterly but would not include local revenue that is restricted, earmarked or otherwise committed or pledged by formal action of the school board or local government.
The details of the legislation will determine bill passage. Many lawmakers are now turning their attention to the issue. Robocalls to lawmakers have begun both in support and opposition to charter schools. Meanwhile, lawmakers have indicated that the stand-alone flexibility bill in the Senate will not move until action is taken on H.541. Committee discussion and action is expected on the “Education Options Act of 2012” upon return from Spring Break.
Adopt Model Governance Standards
H.431 (Beech)/S.361 (Brewbaker) The House Thursday approved the Local School Governance bill by a 92-3 vote. The legislation would codify best practices for local school board members and establish minimum qualifications, require the development of required orientation and training; and provide sanctions for misconduct or breach of duty. Thanks go to Rep. Mary Sue McClurkin who handled the bill on the House floor.
School Grading System Sought
H.588 (Collins) The bill would direct the state Superintendent of Education to develop a school grading system using state-authorized assessments and other key performance indicators. The grade would be based on student achievement scores, achievement gaps, college and career readiness, learning gains and other indicators impacting student learning and success. The grades would be: A for excellent progress, B for above average progress, C for satisfactory progress, D for less than satisfactory progress and F for failing to make adequate progress.
The grading system would describe achievement in the state and in each school system and school. Grades may also be assigned to school feeder patterns and to reflect fiscal health and efficiency of a school or school system. Parents/guardians of public school students would receive the school report card at least annually and the grades would be posted on a state website.
School Performance Bill: Financial Awards and Funding Freedom
H.585 (Chesteen) The bill would create the Legislative School Performance Recognition Program within the state Department of Education. A public school would be eligible for the award by demonstrating high performance either as ranked in the top 25 percent of public schools as determined by the state’s grading system or improving its rank by at least one letter grade. The state Superintendent would develop the program with input from stakeholders and based on the school grading system proposed in H.588 (Collins).
Selected schools would be awarded in two ways:
• A financial reward as appropriated by the Legislature. No more than 20 percent of the appropriation would be distributed to the top 25 percent of schools with the remainder going to the improved category.
• An exemption, at the school level, from any statute or regulation prescribing the use or categorical spending requirements of state funds. This funding flexibility award would be granted regardless of whether the financial award was available by a legislative appropriation.
The program must be in place by Dec. 31, 2013.
Education-Related Legislation
H.326 (Oden) — Elected Superintendents
The bill would provide a constitutional amendment that, if approved by voters, would require the appointment of all county and city school superintendents. Currently elected superintendents, including those winning the election in November 2012, would serve until their terms expire. AASB supports this bill pending in the House.
S.28 (Dunn) — School Age 7 to 6
The bill to lower the compulsory school age from 7 to 6 years of age is now pending before the full Senate. AASB supports all children entering school ready to learn by the age of 6.
S.417 (McGill) — Tim Tebow Bill
The bill would allow a student taught at home or at a church school to participate in public school athletics. AASB and others signed up as opponents in the Senate Education Policy Committee public hearing Wednesday. No vote was taken on the bill.
S.388 (Orr) — Teachers Retirement System
The bill would redefine benefits and contributions for new hires effective Jan. 1, 2013 for members of the Teachers Retirement System or Employee Retirement System. S.388 is pending action by the full Senate.
H.360 (Davis)—Tourism School Calendar
The bill imposes seasonal tourism-related start- and end-date restrictions that remove local ability to set the school calendar. AASB opposes the bill.
Advocacy To-Do List
• Share with lawmakers, during the spring break, your local education budget priorities. Only 15 days remain to consider an education budget.
Charter Options
The details matter. Charter and flexibility options must focus on the ability to determine what works best locally for your students. The charter school option should be targeted to persistently low performing schools.
Priority Schools
A persistently low-performing school is currently located in the following school systems:
Anniston; Barbour County; Birmingham; Bullock County; Chambers County; Coosa County; Dallas County; Fairfield; Gadsden; Geneva County; Huntsville; Lowndes County; Macon County; Marengo County; Marshall County; Midfield; Mobile County; Monroe County; Montgomery County; Sumter County; Tuscaloosa and Tuscaloosa County.
15 Days Remain
2012 Legislative Session
Legislative Spring Break March 26-30
Session resumes April 3
- Lissa Tucker, AASB Director of Governmental Relations
|
