Subscribe now! 
Bonnie
Mike
Molly
Heather
Chris
George
Lisa
Katarina
Katie
Filed under: Reform talk
Posted by Molly
Last week, I attended the 8th Annual Quality Education Conference in Washington, D.C. The conference explored the inequities of the educational systems in our country and efforts, both successful and failed, to bridge the gap for a more just system.
Highlights:
- Progress report from the states
There were 30 states represented at the conference. Each state shared progress and challenges.
Missouri is really struggling. They lost their equity case on the grounds that there is no judiciable issue (there is no valid claim to a contentious issue). This makes future litigation nearly impossible.
Wyoming has probably made the most significant progress. They were successful in their litigation and have been able to hold the legislature’s collective foot to the fire in terms of implementing the court’s decision. Thus far, they have been quite successful in getting additional funding for teacher compensation. Wyoming teachers are some the best paid in the nation (accounting for regional cost differences).
New Jersey is finding that the momentum from the Abbott decision is stalling. Although funding — and performance — increased significantly for the 30 lowest performing school, the schools in the middle are still struggling. The issue has now moved towards equity and away from adequacy. This shift is not gaining traction and there is a belief that NJ used all of its political capital with Abbott.
Washington is in a unique position with their litigation. Tom Ahearne, one of the plaintiff’s lawyers in the McCleary case (also known as the NEWS lawsuit), believes that there is wide support in the legislature to increase funding. He views this lawsuit as a way to give those who support increased funding the political cover necessary to make the bold funding reforms that are necessary, though perhaps not popular.
- A View From the Bench – The Necessary Role of the Courts
Judge Greaney offered some really interesting insight into the most compelling components to the adequacy funding case in Massachusetts. He sited the amicus briefs as the most helpful and persuasive in making a decision. He also rejected the negative stigma attached to the concept of an “activist court.” Instead, he argued that the court is often a better place to decide such complicated issues. In particular, Judge Greaney believes that there is no other authoritative, impartial governmental entity that is capable of establishing and monitoring the delicate mixture of expert and political judgments that are involved in finding effective remedies in school funding lawsuits.
- Narrowing the Achievement Gap
This was an interesting session that explored the achievement gap from a data, economic, and advocacy perspectives. The data presented demonstrated a strong and growing problem. It is important to note that the data presented was national data and demonstrated glaring data holes at the state level. The economic presentation was not really anything new — simply highlighting the costs of “fixing” the problem. Finally, Bill Kopsky, Executive Director of the Arkansas Public Policy Panel, led a very interesting discussion on the successes they have had with grassroots organizing throughout Arkansas. Their effort with the Arkansas Citizens First Congress mirrors the work we are doing at the LEV Foundation in regards to the Early Learning Advocates Table (ELAT). However, they are further along in coalition building process in Arkansas and function as a cohesive advocacy group.
