HCPSS Equity Report 2000

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Quality education is the number one reason families choose Howard County as a place to live. The continued success of the countys school system is also a key to continued economic growth and development. Despite the overall excellence of education in Howard County, it is clear that significant inequities exist. Schools with disproportionate numbers of children with multiple needs have lower performance scores, higher rates of staff turnover, higher percentages of teachers that are new and non-tenured, and higher rates of student mobility than other schools. The Committee defines equity as fairness to all children. Equity requires that we provide each student with the resources, support, and instruction necessary to achieve academic success. Schools with disproportionate numbers of children with multiple needs require more support than schools that are less challenged. Based upon the work of the County Councils Combined Committee on Education, other public comment, and the perspectives of individual members of the Leadership Committee, we identified forty-seven priority issues that potentially affected equity. In order to tackle these issues in the most efficient manner, we grouped these issues into four clusters: Factors Affecting Equity including such issues as redistricting, open enrollment, fundraising, and the financing of the education system, Resources and Programs including equity in the allocation of resources for communications systems, playground equipment, technology, and the educational options, Staffing including the extent that problems associated with the recruiting and retention of quality teachers, skilled administrators, and competent support staff affect educational equity, and Accountability including a comparison of the ways data are collected and used by the school system compared to best practices from around the nation. Our extensive review and analysis of data, consultation with staff at all levels of the school system, and twoway communication with the general public has led the Leadership Committee to make seventy specific recommendations. If implemented, these recommendations will dramatically increase the equity in Howard Countys school system. Among the most significant of our recommendations are the following:
FACTORS AFFECTING EQUITY

The school system should replace the annual, ad hoc, and contentious exercise of redistricting with a comprehensive districting plan that creates a stable path for children from kindergarten through high school. In conjunction with the countywide districting plan, all schools should be protected from open enrollment for three years to allow new school communities the opportunity to come together and function cohesively. The school system, in a collaborative undertaking with the PTA Council of Howard County, should identify strategies to promote more equitable fundraising. The $2.1 million in equity funding proposed in the Superintendents Proposed Operating Budget for Fiscal 2001 should be more clearly linked to plausible, demonstrable improvements in equity. The school system should include in its budget for fiscal 2002 a breakout of how overall funding will be allocated to each school in the county and provide a credible rationale for that allocation methodology. The school system should aggressively seek additional federal funding and reinvest the proceeds of such an effort (approximately $2.8 million annually) in improving equity. 1
REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY
RESOURCES AND PROGRAMS

The school systems fiscal 2002 capital budget should reflect systematic planning for capital improvements, showing when renovation is scheduled for each school in the county. The school system should dramatically upgrade telephone systems to improve communications between parents and school system staff responsible for their childrens education. The replacement of playground equipment and unsafe stadium facilities should be included as a line item in the fiscal 2002 capital budget. The school system should explore contracting out computer services, computer maintenance, network management, and technical support. The school system should submit a technology plan as a part of the fiscal 2002 operating budget. Each school that consistently underperforms should be required to prepare, with the assistance from the school system, an improvement plan. The term focus school should be eliminated and replaced by a formula for allocating resources to schools based upon a continuum of needs. The school system and Howard Community College should jointly develop a new model for assuring that children who do not go on to college graduate high school with skills that are marketable and needed by the countys business community.
STAFFING
The salary levels for teachers, particularly starting teachers, should be increased. The school system should develop improved procedures for evaluating the performance of school administrators. The school system should develop strategies to reduce teacher and staff turnover at high-need schools.
ACCOUNTABILITY
The principles of continuous improvement should be incorporated in an integrated management approach across the school system. Centralized, computerized, and detailed portfolios should be developed to follow students from year to year and from school to school. The school system and county government should jointly fund an independent performance review of the school system in the fiscal 2001 operating budget. The Committee recognizes that, while some of these recommendations will require additional resources, other recommendations should save money. Most of the Committees recommendations are either cost-neutral or call on the school system to revisit how existing resources are allocated to promote school equity. Finally, the Committee recommends that a plan for implementing the recommendations we have made be submitted by the Superintendent to the school board as a part of the fiscal 2002 budgets. We recommend, too, that a report on school equity be submitted as a part of the Superintendents proposed budget beginning in fiscal 2003. 2
2.INTRODUCTION
Howard County is proud of its schools. The performance of the countys school system is consistently at or near the top of ratings comparing Marylands school districts. The Leadership Committee is proud, too, of the quality and commitment of the teachers, administrators, and staff of the school system who serve the children of Howard County. Quality education is the number one reason most families select Howard County as a place to live. The ability of Howard County to provide a topnotch education for its children has been a key factor in the countys growth and economic development. The continued success of the countys education system is essential to sustaining, and improving upon, the quality of life that residents, parents, businesses, and children themselves have come to value in the county. It is part of the culture of Howard County to seek continuous improvement in the performance of its public services, to solve problems before they become intractable, and to help people reach their fullest potential. Howard Countians tend to reject the axiom, if it aint broke, dont fix it. We have reached a place in the countys maturation when a critical examination of public education is appropriate. For more than a decade the countys school system has had to devote most of its efforts and resources to just keeping up with growth: building new schools and making the investments necessary to meet the needs of an increasing number of students. This growth has taken place through periods of relative prosperity and years when resources were severely limited. The Leadership Committee finds it remarkable that, emerging from this period of sustained growth, the county schools are in as good a shape as they are. Although Howard Countys schools are the envy of many communities, the Leadership Committee believes that there are many significant opportunities for further improvement. One of the clearest ways to improve the performance of the countys schools is to reduce the inequities that exist in the current system. The Leadership Committee began its work by focusing on many areas of perceived inequity. Data provided to the Committee by the school system suggest that significant inequities may well exist in the countys educational systems. Maryland School Performance Assessment Program (MSPAP) scores among elementary schools in Howard County vary widely.1 Schools with lower average MSPAP scores tend to have higher percentages of their students from lowincome families.2 Schools with lower average MSPAP scores tend to have higher staff turnover than do schools with higher average achievement scores. Similarly, schools with lower average MSPAP scores tend to have a higher percentage of teachers that are new and non-tenured. Schools with lower average MSPAP scores tend to have higher mobility among the student population. The same schools tend to show up as facing special challenges, regardless of the measure being used.
We selected elementary schools for the purpose of this discussion. Similar inequities exist at the middle and high school levels. One indicator of income variability is the percentage of pupils eligible for free and reduced lunch.
The Leadership Committee defines equity as fairness to all children. We believe that equity requires that we provide each student with the necessary resources, support and instruction needed to achieve academic success. The Committee does not believe that equity is the same thing as equality. Children with multiple needs require special attention. Schools with disproportionate numbers of children with multiple needs require additional resources. Indeed, the school system has recognized that schools with a disproportionate number of children with multiple needs require additional resources and created a category of schools (focus schools) for special attention and additional resources. The recommendations of the Leadership Committee in this report are designed to help the Howard County school system move forward . . . leaving no child behind. The balance of this report is devoted to the four major issue areas identified by the Committee: the factors affecting equity, programs and resources, staffing, and accountability.
3. FACTORS AFFECTING EQUITY

To a large extent, the demographics of communities determine the educational needs of children who live in the neighborhoods served by schools. Nevertheless, the Leadership Committee was concerned about the extent, if any, to which the school systems policies and procedures affected (positively or negatively) inequities in the education provided to the children of Howard County. The Committee identified six factors that affect equity in Howard Countys educational system: redistricting, open enrollment, student mobility, fundraising, equity funding, and federal funding.
3.1 Redistricting
The rapid growth in Howard County has created situations where children have been redistricted repeatedly. This movement from school to school is now driving a call for stable, predictable boundary lines.
BACKGROUND
Howard Countys school system has built twenty-four new schools in the last twelve years. Coupled with varying rates of growth across the county, the building of new schools has made redistricting an annual issue. It appears to the Committee that the school system currently redistricts only where needed to fill new schools and reduce overcrowding in other schools. This approach has created some noncontiguous districts, some questionable boundary lines, and schools that are either under capacity now or soon to be. The Committee has heard considerable testimony about the poor performance of certain schools compared to others. Because the percentage of free and reduced lunch students at a particular school seems to correlate with poor performance, a high percentage of students receiving free and reduced lunch is perceived to be one of the causes of poor performance. As a result, there has been a call for redistricting that takes into account the socioeconomic make-up of the school. The Leadership Committee feels that this correlation should not be used as an excuse for low student achievement and poor school performance. Using socioeconomic status as a criterion for drawing school boundary lines will not necessarily improve performance. What it could do is mask real problems with teaching, learning and expectations in our schools. In any discussion of boundary lines, the following facts should be remembered: There are currently plans for three new schools, one at each instructional level, and seventeen additions scheduled to come online by 2004. (There is also a high school addition scheduled for 2006.) There are currently six schools with noncontiguous resident districts (four elementary and two high schools). The availability of appropriate land for school construction has driven the location of recently built schools, sometimes locating new schools close to existing schools. This has made the feeder school concept hard to reconcile with the current building locations. 5
Because schools in Columbia were built on a neighborhood concept, they were often located close to one another and appear small by todays standards. Schools in Columbia were also built with the belief that neighborhoods would continually turnover and supply children to those schools. Additionally, many neighborhoods in Columbia havent experienced the expected turnover of children, thereby reducing the resident populations of those schools. The Howard County General Plan suggests that the potential exists for not more than 30,000 additional residential units in the county over the next fifteen years. The location and type of units are also reasonably predictable. Many realtors in Howard County use districting for a particular school as a selling tool. As the result, there exists a belief on the part of home buyers that they are buying into a particular school district.
OPPORTUNITY
With the opening of the new high school in Fulton, the new elementary school in the northeast and the new middle school in the west, the school system has the opportunity to create a long-range, comprehensive approach to school districting rather than continue an annual, piecemeal approach to redistricting. The school system, working in concert with county government, could create an environment that fosters community input, addresses community concerns, and results in a plan that can be predictably phased in over a period of years. Some of the points that a comprehensive districting plan could address include: eliminating all islands by creating contiguous districts, assuring that all schools have a resident population greater than the minimum enrollments set for each of the instructional levels, minimizing the number of middle schools and high schools that children from a single elementary school are districted into, defining the natural boundary lines for schools that facilitate community spirit and loyalty, promoting the ability of those children living within walking distance of their schools to walk to those schools without fear for their safety, providing a timeline that accounts for high school scheduling, and minimizing the redrawing of school boundary lines by setting school boundaries based on more accurate projections of future residential growth. A long-term, comprehensive districting plan could provide predictable information to the public, the current and prospective business community, and realtors about which schools children will attend. Consistent information, provided by both the school system and the countys public information office, would allow new county residents to get accurate information about various schools and reduce the impact of negative perceptions about individual schools in the system. In addition, the school system could ensure that districting information is part of the school profiles.3 The profiles should flag those schools that may be considered for redistricting because of future growth. This would be a way to alert residents to future changes.
3 The work of the Leadership Committee was greatly facilitated by the school systems report, School Profiles: Howard County Public School System, 1999-2000.
The Board of Education could also evaluate its boundary line policy paying particular attention to setting the minimum capacity of schools at a percentage of capacity, not the current numerical minimum. Currently one school, Running Brook Elementary, has a capacity (239) that is below the stated minimum enrollment necessary for an elementary school. Percentage of capacity should be the indicator of whether an under-enrolled school should be redistricted. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. The school system should undertake a well-reasoned county-wide districting plan that represents a collaborative effort among all education stakeholders. The districting plan should address the long-range needs of our students by creating as stable a path from kindergarten through high school as possible. This plan should be developed and phased in beginning in 2002 to correspond with the opening of the new high school in Fulton. 2. The school system and Howard County government should work collaboratively to generate the best housing and population projections possible to direct the school districting plan. 3. Howard County government should assure safe pathways for those students who walk to school.
3.2 Open Enrollment

The current open enrollment policy has been instrumental in creating artificial school communities that either mask needed system reforms or exacerbate perceptions of poor performance in schools.
BACKGROUND
Howard Countys policy on open enrollment is relatively flexible. The only limiting factors are availability of seats in a school and a familys ability to transport its student.4 In looking at the issue of open enrollment, we researched several counties in our area. We found that Anne Arundel County does not have an open enrollment policy. We also found that Montgomery County had an open enrollment policy that considered, as one of its factors, diversity of a school by comparing the racial/ethnic make-up of a school compared to the countywide racial/ethnic profile. This policy is being challenged in court. In Howard County, seven of nine focus elementary schools experienced the largest number of students leaving their schools under the open enrollment policy. This exodus can affect school equity because of the following: A high departure rate from a school harms students who are left by reducing the number of staff members. Staffing for the schools is done on a per-student formula. Large numbers of students leaving a school affect the economic and racial mix of that school, changing the extent to which a school reflects the character of the community it serves.5 If leaving students are among the top achievers, this creates an imbalance in test scores that brings into question the appropriateness of the curriculum being offered and suggesting that the schools from which they are leaving are not as effective as they should be. Losing top achieving students can cause a restructuring of expectations which creates inequities in the delivery of the curriculum.
4 The school systems policy with respect to open enrollment is detailed in its Pupil Assignment policy. This policy was last revised November 24, 1998. 5 Although we were unable to obtain data on the ethnicity of children entering and leaving schools under the current open enrollment policy, the widely publicized, if anecdotal, information regarding the exodus of children from Wilde Lake Middle School to Lime Kiln Middle School supports this statement.
Open enrollment is not available to parents who cannot provide transportation either because of employment or financial circumstances.6 Open enrollment is intertwined with the consideration of boundary lines. The enrollment at individual schools is the sum of the resident population plus the open-enrolled population.
OPPORTUNITY
Open enrollment has a place in the school system. There are legitimate reasons (including health, safety, and the opportunity to access specific programs) why a parent would consider enrolling a student in an open school. Open enrollment also allows parents to fulfill wants for their students that they think are not being offered at the home school. Some of these might be a more academically challenging environment, smaller class sizes, more varied course selection and an opportunity to be with friends. These are values that all parents want for their children and form the basis of many perceptions of inequity. Parental choice can help to foster a collaborative effort between school and home that should benefit not only individual students, but the school community as well. Although open enrollment may not be the best vehicle for the community to express its dissatisfaction with the home school, parents have utilized it for this purpose. Disagreements with the administration, dislike for the quality of teaching, discipline issues, a sense of not being listened to, and an inability to get student needs met are issues that drive individual parents as well as groups of parents to transfer students from their home schools. A few students leaving a school is to be expected, but significant numbers should be viewed as an indicator of issues that need to be addressed at particular schools. Situations like these should elicit immediate action from the Superintendent. RECOMMENDATIONS: 4. All open enrolled students need to be counted as part of their home school population during the districting and redistricting processes. 5. In conjunction with the countywide districting plan, all schools should be protected from open enrollment for three years to allow new school communities the opportunity to come together and learn to function as a resident community. 6. By the end of this three-year period, the Board of Education should reevaluate the open enrollment policy.
Under current policy, in order for a parent to open enroll a student, the parent must provide transportation for that student.
3.3 Student Mobility

Student mobility may have a negative effect on the academic performance of students. This is seen as one of the causes of poor performance in some schools.
BACKGROUND
Student mobility rates are comparatively high in seven of nine focus elementary schools. Mobility is considered one of the negative factors in student performance. Since mobility rates are high in our focus schools and performance is low, there is an assumed correlation between the two. Also, when the State Board of Education reports MSPAP scores, it always reports the mobility rates of schools as a relevant piece of additional information. Although the Leadership Committee has received no data to suggest that mobility is a factor in student performance, the inclusion of mobility rates by the state implies some kind of causal relationship. It has been suggested by many teachers and administrators in the school system that if we could reduce the mobility of students, we would see a dramatic improvement in student performance which would translate to improved MSPAP scores. Although this is a strongly held belief in Howard County, it has not been shown with MSPAP data because the assessment is a measure of school performance, not individual student performance. There is, though, a sense on the part of principals that many of the same children move repeatedly from school to school. Mobility could be a symptom of other circumstances in a childs life. Until there is an understanding of mobility and how it really affects student performance, a plan for addressing it cannot be formulated. It may also be appropriate to determine the effects that new students have on MSPAP scores of a school by separating the scores of new students from those of continuing students. Similarly, it seems important to identify the academic status of students transferring into a new school so that deficiencies are identified early and can be addressed without delay.
OPPORTUNITY
The school system has the data necessary to determine whether or not there is a difference in success rates between stable versus mobile student populations in specific schools and across the county. An evaluation of mobility patterns and effects could address such issues as: patterns of mobility in individual school populations and over the entire system, the percentage of students who re-enroll at a school after leaving a school, and family reasons for mobility. With an understanding of the reasons for mobility in Howard County generally and at specific schools, the school system (along with the Howard County government and organizations in the community) could identify appropriate and innovative ways to address this potentially important factor affecting education equity.
RECOMMENDATION: 7. The school system and/or a community organization should undertake a study of student mobility in Howard County to assess its effects on students and develop a plan to take appropriate steps to either decrease familial mobility or ameliorate the effects of student mobility.
3.4 Fundraising
Fundraising at individual schools within the school system contributes to inequities among the schools.
BACKGROUND
Individual schools and their larger communities raise funds to support activities, supplement instruction with textbooks and materials, provide scholarships for school activities such as field trips, provide after school programs, and contribute to the general well-being of the school community. Fundraising takes many forms such as direct solicitation of the community, sales, events, and school pictures. The uneven involvement of parents and others in fundraising has contributed to the current problem of have and have not schools. The Board of Education policy on fundraising requires each school to have in place a fundraising committee.7 All fundraising requests are supposed to be channeled through the committee. The function of the committee is to ensure that the purpose of the fundraiser is clearly defined and that each fundraiser is in line with school system policy. Additionally, this committee is required to keep accurate records and report all funds raised to the school systems central office. Individual schools as well as individuals within schools also engage in grant writing as a means of additional money for specific programs. The success of this funding source is related to the expertise of the individual teachers, principals, or parent volunteers. The Leadership Committee heard testimony from school principals and others who reported their activities in securing grants to undertake after school programs, summer programs, and activities to increase the involvement of parents in their schools. Each school in the county has the opportunity to form business partnerships. Although these partnerships are not intended to be a direct source of funds, they have the potential to generate money, in-kind contributions, and perhaps most valuable of all, additional human resources for a school. In addition to the work of a person at the school systems central office, individual schools often are active in finding their own partners. The typical school has between three and five partnerships, but the number of partnerships ranges from zero at Hammond Elementary School to eleven at Mount View Middle School.
OPPORTUNITY
The school system has just hired a grant writer to assist schools in finding and writing grants. The school system has the opportunity to devote the energies of this person to not just writing grants, but developing grant opportunities specifically directed at the schools with most need. Such a priority could turn grantsmanship from a factor that contributes to inequity to one that promotes more equitable education in the county. Similarly, redirecting the priorities of the school systems business partnership office could harness the energies of business partnerships to promote equity, rather than exacerbating inequity. The school system and the PTA Council of Howard County are both currently reviewing their policies on fundraising. The school system has the opportunity to work with PTAs and other community organizations to increase fundraising at schools that may have historically been less successful than others in securing valuable external support for programs that benefit children.
School Board Policy #11300 refers to these as Local Committees.
10
RECOMMENDATIONS: 8. The school system should redirect the priorities of its grant writer and, if necessary, hire an additional grant writer to secure external funding for schools with the greatest needs. 9. The priorities of the systems business partnership staff should be redirected to establishing partnerships involving schools with the greatest needs. 10. The school system should engage in a collaborative undertaking with the PTA Council of Howard County to review its respective fundraising policies in order to identify strategies to promote more equitable fundraising without detracting from the commitment of the community to contribute resources over and above those available from the school system.
3.5 Equity Funding

It is not clear that the $2.1 million included in the Superintendents Proposed Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2001 for equity will actually result in a more equitable school system. 8
BACKGROUND
In the Superintendents message transmitting his Proposed Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2001, the Superintendent observed: The term equity has had a lot of play recently in Howard County. Many of the concerns raised are addressed in our budget by ongoing programs and new initiatives, but our budget clearly contains some increases totaling $2.1 million that address equity and related issues. 9 Specifically, the proposed budget requests additional funding in four areas: 1. School Maintenance More than half ($1.1 million) of the proposed equity increases are earmarked for school maintenance.10 According to the school system, these funds would be used for the following purposes: contracted building repairs ($800,000), three new maintenance positions ($100,000), and two new positions, vehicles, and equipment for computer technicians to speed up the repair of school computers and to enhance internet access ($125,000).11 Though increased school maintenance and computer/internet access may be appropriate, there is no assurance that these funds will, in fact, promote equity.
8 The following analysis was based upon the Superintendents Proposed Operating Budget for Fiscal 2001. Since that proposal was submitted the school board has made, and continues to make, adjustments in the budget that will be submitted to the County Executive and County Council. 9 Superintendents Proposed Operating Budget for Fiscal 2001, p. 4. The $2.1 million proposed by the Superintendent to promote equity was over and above the allocations of additional resources to focus schools. This amount also did not include separate funding for an equity-related initiative at Phelps Luck Elementary School. Funding for the Phelps Luck initiative was subsequently deleted by the School Board. 10
Memorandum from Sydney L. Cousin to Martha Johnson, January 26, 2000.
11
Ibid. See also pp. 7-7 through 7-9 of the Proposed Budget.
11
Specifically, the Committee has several concerns: The $800,000 shown as an equity increase in contracted building repairs represents the entire increase in that budget category. Although the Proposed Budget indicates that fiscal 2001 repair projects include . . . interior and exterior painting at schools, HVAC contracted services and parts, contracted emergency roof repairs, and public sewer connections, the Committee was advised that school maintenance is not preallocated to individual schools in the budget. The Committee was further advised that the computer repair budget is not preallocated to individual schools. These new positions support all schools requiring service when needed.12 Although the school system argues that older facilities require more maintenance and emphasis (and funding) than newer buildings, the proposed increase in school maintenance appears to be a general increase in the school systems budget and not targeted in any demonstrable way toward promoting equity. 2. School Printing The proposed budget contains a request for $346,000 in additional funding for school printing related to equity. According to the school system, these funds would be used for the following purposes: two additional positions at the central print shop ($53,000), table-top copiers in schools ($50,000), rental of copier equipment ($100,000), and general warehouse supplies and printer paper for school use ($143,000). Again, though the school system may be able to make a compelling argument for increases in these areas, there are several reasons why it may be inappropriate to classify these budget increases as related to equity. The additional two positions requested at the central print shop are the only new positions requested.13 According to the proposed budget, the printing and duplicating fund provides printing services for the entire school system.14 Although not entirely clear, the equity increases proposed for table-top copiers and rental of copier equipment appear to be the entire increases proposed by the school system.15 None of the principals or school officials testifying before the Committee identified the lack of printing, duplicating, or general warehouse supplies as a key factor inhibiting equity. 3. Additional Guidance Counselors The proposed budget includes $33,000 for one additional guidance counselor as an equity expenditure.
12
Proposed Budget, p. 7-9. Ibid., p. R-19. Ibid. Ibid., pp. R-20-R 21.
13
14
15
12
The principals testifying before the Committee advised of their need for additional support in the form of guidance counselors to better respond to children with multiple needs. It is not clear, however, the effect that one additional guidance counselor will have on equity.16 Further, although the proposed budget indicates that this will enable eighteen elementary schools to have a full-time counselor, it is not clear which schools will have a full-time (vs. half-time) counselor since the budget does not allocate funds for guidance positions to specific schools.17 4. Teacher Recruiting and Retention The proposed budget allocates $415,000 related to teacher recruiting and retention. The school system advised the Committee that teacher recruiting is related to school equity.18 Although, as noted elsewhere, we agree with this premise, it is difficult to link the entire increase proposed by the school system to equity. According to the school system, these additional funds would be used for the following purposes: an additional specialist and a clerical position in central office and other support costs related to recruiting ($175,000), two new teacher support programs ($40,000), two new partnerships with colleges, expanded recruitment of teachers from non-teaching backgrounds, and an additional half-position for a facilitator to support new teacher certification ($150,000), and additional tuition reimbursement for teachers ($50,000). With the exception of the teacher support programs and new teacher certification, the additional funding requested appears to represent general increases in the school systems budget and not expenditures that can credibly be linked to expected improvements in equity. The Committee is also concerned that the detail provided for the $2.1 million equity increase totaled only $1.9 million.
OPPORTUNITY
Howard County is not the only school system struggling with the issue of school equity. In Fairfax County, Virginia, for example, the superintendent of schools has proposed $3 million in additional funding for four low-performing high schools. In return, the schools would be expected to meet specific targets for improvement, similar to a system of rewards and penalties currently in place with respect to twenty of Fairfax Countys struggling elementary schools. Under the proposal, ninth graders at the four schools would get an extra class period every day, starting this fall. The following year, the schools would open in early August and offer as much as six more weeks of classes during the academic year. School officials said the extra time in school likely would be required only for students needing remedial work, and they also noted that the longer school calendar would require state approval . . .
16 The Leadership Committee is pleased to learn that the board of education has approved a separate increase in guidance counselors and expenditures more directly related to equity concerns. We understand that their proposal will include three additional equity specialists (one guidance counselor will be for Wilde Lake High School to make their complement comparable to that of River Hill and Long Reach High Schools). The board is also proposing additional funding for kindergarten teachers, assistants, and media specialists for focus schools. 17 18
Memorandum from Sydney Cousin, op. cit. Ibid.
13
School officials are calling the program Focus 2004 because the students entering ninth grade this fall are the class of 2004, the first senior class that will be required by the state to pass the high school Standards of Learning tests in order to graduate . . . The targeted schools have some of the highest student turnover rates and concentrations of poverty in Fairfax County, and they also have large numbers of immigrant students . . . Initial reaction from some school board members and PTA leaders was positive . . . I think the thing that is most striking about this proposal is that the recommendations have come out of a task force of people working in those schools, said board Vice Chairman Jane K. Strauss (Dranesville). This is not the kind of thing you can impose on a community.19 The notion of having school reforms developed at the community level is also at the heart of immediate intervention/underperforming schools program being implemented by the State of California. Using a combination of federal and state funds, California is granting $50,000 to each of 330 schools for planning grants. In return, the schools are required to work with an external evaluator and a community team to identify barriers to school performance and to develop an action plan to improve student achievement. Approximately 100 schools will receive a minimum of $50,000 and a maximum of up to $200 per student to implement researchbased, comprehensive school reforms to improve student achievement.20 The Committee believes that these models suggest that there may be ways to more clearly target the $2.1 million proposed by the school system to demonstrable improvements in equity than the explanation contained in the proposed budget. The Committee is concerned by its inability to secure information on the allocation of resources to individual schools. Although some expenditures appear to benefit the school system as a whole (category 01 general administration, for example), the overwhelming majority of the funds requested in the budget involve resources that are expended later either at, or on behalf of, individual schools. According to information provided to the Committee, the school system does not budget on a school-by-school basis.21 It would not seem too difficult, however, to make this information available as a part of the budget process, rather than after the fact. The Committee feels that school-based budgeting is essential to provide the baseline information upon which informed judgements can be made about the equitable allocation of resources. This should be possible without sacrificing the detail contained in the current budget. RECOMMENDATIONS: 11. The $2.1 proposed by the school system for equity related expenditures should be approved, but set aside pending the submission of a proposal from the Superintendent that more clearly links those expenditures to plausible, demonstrable increases in school equity. We feel that the link with equity can be most easily established with respect to guidance counselors, teacher support, and new teacher certification. The Committee recommends that a significant portion of the $2.1 million be allocated to support the development and implementation of equity improvement plans submitted by schools with greatest needs in cooperation with the communities they serve. 12. The fiscal year 2002 budget for the school system should contain an appendix allocating proposed expenditures to individual schools.
19
Victoria Benning, Fairfax to Build Up Failing High Schools, Washington Post, February 18, 2000.
20
Information about Californias immediate intervention/underperforming schools program is available at http://165.74.253.64/iiusp/. Memorandum from Sydney Cousin to Martha Johnson, February 15, 2000.
21
14
3.6 Federal Funding

The Howard County School System may be eligible to receive additional federal funds which could be reinvested to promote school equity.
BACKGROUND
Nearly all (98.3%) of the systems budget is funded by the county (74.1%) or state (24.2%) governments. Only 1.7% of the systems funding is received from other sources of funding, including private contributions and federal grants.22 The Superintendents Proposed Operating Budget for FY 2001 anticipates that the system will receive $5.6 million in other funding.23 The distinguishing characteristic of most of this other funding, for the purposes of this discussion, consists of grants where the funding is capped. That is, the amount the system receives from each grant is fixed. Expenditures in excess of these capped amounts are borne entirely by the county.
OPPORTUNITY
In contrast to federal funding streams which are capped, there are a few funding streams that are uncapped or open-ended. That is, the federal government will pay a fixed portion of the total expenditure incurred by the system. Although the percentage of total costs that are reimbursed is fixed, the absolute dollar amount has no limit. An example of an uncapped federal funding stream is medical assistance, commonly referred to as Medicaid.24 Federal financial participation (FFP) ranging from 50% to 75% is available under Medicaid. Examples of expenditures that are potentially eligible for Medicaid reimbursement include: providing health/mental health services contained in an Individualized Education Program (IEP), providing medical/health assessments/evaluations and diagnostic testing, providing health care/personal aide services, providing speech, occupational, physical and other therapies, administering first aid, or prescribed injection or medication to a student, providing direct clinical/treatment services, performing developmental assessments, providing counseling services to treat health, mental health, or substance abuse conditions, performing routine or mandated child health screens, providing immunizations, providing case management, providing transportation, and other costs that are necessary for the proper and efficient administration of the Medicaid State Plan.25
22
Superintendents Proposed Operating Budget for Fiscal 2001, p. 8. Ibid., pp. R-24-27.
23
24
Other open-ended federal funding streams include Food Stamps, Child Support Enforcement, Foster Care and Adoption (Title IV-E). Health Care Financing Administration, Medicaid School-Based Administrative Claiming Guide (Draft February 2000), pp. 23-36.
25
15
The experience of school districts across the country suggests that the system is incurring significant, potentially reimbursable, costs associated with psychological services, health services (including vision and hearing), and special education services that are not now being reimbursed. Annual costs for these services exceed $42 million a year. Medicaid funding actually received by the system for these services amounts to less than 1% of these costs.26 School districts that are particularly successful in securing Medicaid funding tend to make aggressive use of the Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment (EPSDT) provision of Medicaid. EPSDT allows authorized screeners (including school districts themselves) to determine the need for a wide variety of services related to a childs physical, mental, and social health needs. Once identified as a result of an EPSDT screen, Medicaid funding is made available for Medicaid-eligible services, even if those services are not included in a Medicaid State Plan. Although Medicaid reimbursement is only available for low-income children who are eligible for Medicaid, the new Maryland Childrens Health Program authorizes federal funding for services provided to uninsured children who are not eligible for Medicaid. The Maryland Childrens Health Program provides comprehensive health benefits to children through the age of 18 whose parents work and earn up to twice the federal poverty level, but cannot afford insurance. Pregnant women of any age also are eligible. Services covered include prenatal care and delivery, doctor visits and checkups, hospital care, immunizations, dental and vision care, prescription medicines, and mental health and substance abuse treatment. Finally, the system may also be eligible for reimbursement for costs incurred on behalf of children from families with higher incomes (that is, not eligible for reimbursement under either Medicaid or the Maryland Child Health Program) from private insurance and other third parties.27 Importantly, Medicaid funds received would be a reimbursement for costs already incurred by the system. That is, when received, the additional federal funds would release local funds that may be used for other purposes, especially school equity. Based upon the experience of other jurisdictions, we estimate that an aggressive revenue maximization strategy could result, within two years, in at least a 50% increase in the amount of federal and other funding received by the school system. This would generate more than $2.8 million annually in additional funding per year that could be used to promote educational equity.
RECOMMENDATION: 13. The system should undertake an aggressive revenue maximization initiative to secure appropriate reimbursement under Medicaid and other funding streams. Such an initiative should be undertaken by departmental staff with or without the assistance of consultants that specialize in school-based Medicaid claiming. The additional funds freed up as a result of this initiative should be reinvested to promote school equity.
26
The system estimates that it will receive $401,000 in federal Medicaid reimbursement for special education services during FY 2001 (Superintendents Budget, p. R-23).
27 The Leadership Committee does not, however, support the pursuit of third-party liability when such efforts would cause a hardship to children with disabilities and their families.
16
4. PROGRAMS AND RESOURCES RELATED TO EQUITY

The Leadership Committee devoted substantial attention to those programs, resources, and services most central to our definition of equity. Of the many issues addressed by the Committee in this area, we selected seven that merit immediate attention: systematic planning for capital improvements, communications systems, playground equipment, technology, site-based instructional decision making, focus school designation, and educational options for non-college bound students.
4.1 Systematic Planning for Capital Improvements

The school systems current plan for capital improvements does not include all schools, nor does it identify factors that may cause one school to require more renovation than another.
BACKGROUND
The school system provided the Leadership Committee with its capital improvement plan. According to the office of the assistant superintendent for finance and operations services, schools are scheduled about every fifteen years for renovations/additions. Maintenance of essential equipment and facilities is ongoing and included in the systems operating budget. Although there is a systemic capital improvement plan, the current plan does not include every school. The items that are evaluated are not evident on the current, systemic school plan. For example, depending on the materials used in building the school, an individual school may require more frequent renovation than another.
OPPORTUNITY
The Leadership Committee believes that public perceptions of inequity can be substantially reduced by showing parents and the community annually where each school is on the renovation/replacement schedule and the rationale behind differential investments. The Committee believes that there is an opportunity to develop a capital improvement plan that is systematic as well as systemic. A systematic plan would include each school every year so that parents and the community would know when their school(s) will be evaluated for renovations/additions. The Committee realizes that a systematic plan has latitude to cover emergency capital repairs and repairs required for the safety of the students and staff. It is to be expected, too, that a systematic plan would need to be changed and updated periodically.
17
RECOMMENDATIONS: 14. The school system should develop a systematic plan and schedule for evaluating schools and providing for capital improvements and facilities/maintenance needs beginning with the fiscal 2002 capital and operating budgets. Such a plan should show when a school was last evaluated and what capital improvements or facilities/maintenance work took place since that time. The capital improvement and the facilities/maintenance plans should have each school on the plans every year so that it is easily determined when a school is scheduled for capital improvements or facilities/maintenance work. 15. Beginning in 2003, the school systems capital and operating budgets should reflect that previous years actual activity and expenditures compared with the approved budget. Current and future budgets should be more aggressive in adding funds to these areas.
4.2 Communication Systems

Despite the importance of communication between parents and the teachers of their children, the current telephone systems in several schools are not conducive to the easy and open communication essential to a students success.
BACKGROUND
The Leadership Committee heard frequent testimony from community members and some school administrators that communication among school, home and the community at large could be improved. We heard reports that phone lines into and out of schools, especially at the middle and high school levels, are consistently busy. As a result, too often the teacher or administrator that the parent or guardian or community member wishes to speak with cannot be reached. We also heard testimony as to the value, to both teachers and parents, of homework hotlines that had been established in several of the countys middle and high schools. In a survey conducted by the Leadership Committee we found that some schools have recognized this issue. It has been addressed by using automated answering systems ranging from a single telephone answering machine that is only on when the office is closed to automated homework telephone lines to automated voice mail systems. Currently, it is left to each individual school to secure the funding for improved communication in the absence of financial support from the school system. Of the forty-seven schools that responded to this survey, nineteen reported having some sort of automated telephone system. Nine of the schools funded their systems primarily through the use of PTA monies. The remaining ten funded these systems with monies from school pictures, vending machine revenue, school fundraisers, and discretionary administrative funds. Less than one half of the schools returning the survey reported being able to keep in touch with parents, students and other community members on a continuous basis. During interviews, teachers and administrators voiced their frustration with the lack of accessible telephone lines and an automated telephone system within the schools. This is especially true in the middle and high schools where there are a larger number of students and each student has a number of different teachers.28
28 The central offices of the school system also do not have automated telephone systems, decreasing the accessibility of central office administrators to staff and the public.
18
OPPORTUNITY
This inequity can also be addressed in a variety of ways. The school system could provide in the capital budget monies for a phase-in of improved communications systems (beginning in fiscal 2002 and continuing more than three years), placing a priority on those schools with greatest needs. Alternatively, the school system could continue to rely on PTAs and school administrators to raise monies to fund automated telephone systems within each individual school. Should the school systems finances be severely constrained, instead of a phase-in of all schools, phone systems could be upgraded at the middle and high school levels first. Either way, maintenance costs for improved communications systems would need to be included in the operating budget. A more aggressive approach would be to include monies in the capital budget for start-up costs for the entire system and then include a line item in the annual operating budget to include maintenance and monthly fees for the automated telephone system, which could include the central office. Ideally, each teacher and each administrator would have their own voice mailbox and school teachers, administrators, and staff would be more accessible to parents and other members of the community. RECOMMENDATIONS: 16. The school system should invest in an automated telephone system that allows each teacher and administrator to have their own voice mailbox. If this recommendation is too costly, the Committee recommends that each department/team have its own voice mailbox. At the very least, the Committee recommends that each administrative office have an automated telephone system with voice mail for the various administrators. 17. Homework hotlines should be established in each middle and high school.
4.3 Playground Equipment

The failure to replace playground equipment removed from schools for safety considerations creates an inequity among schools. The quality and safety of stadiums also vary widely among the countys high schools.
BACKGROUND
At present, new schools are given new playground equipment. That equipment is only replaced by the school system if the school is renovated and this equipment is chosen by the administration of the school to be replaced as part of the renovation. The school system has a safety committee that inspects playground equipment. If equipment is found to be unsafe, the equipment is removed. Funds have not been provided routinely to replace the equipment. If the affected schools would like additional or replacement equipment and do not have enough renovation funds or are not in line for renovation, the individual school is forced to fund this equipment. The office of the assistant superintendent for finance and operations services states that they often work with individual school PTAs to install new equipment and, thus, help defray the cost of installation. In a survey of elementary schools in Howard County, eight out of the twenty-eight schools responding to the survey reported that they had replaced or received new playground equipment in the last three years. Of the eight schools, one was a new school, two received equipment as part of a renovation/addition, and the remaining five replaced playground equipment using PTA funding.
19
Seven of the responding elementary schools reported that they had playground equipment removed. Three of this seven had equipment replaced by PTA funds, one had equipment replaced with a new addition, and the remaining three (all focus schools) have been unable to replace their equipment. The Leadership Committee believes strongly that safe, adequate playground equipment is essential for children to develop social skills and physical fitness. After all, play is a childs work. The Committee is also concerned about the deteriorating conditions, and associated risk, reported for several of the countys high school stadiums.
OPPORTUNITY
There are several ways in which this issue may be addressed to promote educational equity. The school board could, as it did this year, include in the school systems operating budget a special appropriation for replacing playground equipment. Alternatively, partnerships with area businesses and community organizations could be established with a priority placed on neighborhood schools with greatest need and replacement of equipment could be realized in this manner. RECOMMENDATION: 18. The school system should include a line item in the fiscal 2002 capital budget for replacement of unsafe/obsolete playground and stadium facilities. 19. The school system should include with its fiscal 2002 operating budget a plan for a systematic maintenance cycle for playground equipment and high school stadiums.
4.4 Technology
The uneven procurement, deployment and maintenance, and application of technology within the school system promotes inequity among schools.
4.4.1Procurement of Technology Resources
BACKGROUND
The availability of technology resources (including internet access and accommodating hardware, instructional and administrative software) varies widely from school-to-school. Skyrocketing growth in technology, networking, funding, and fundraising are some of the reasons technology equity disparities exist. Funding for additional equipment, the primary means for schools to acquire computer equipment was approximately $0 in 1993 and $8,000 in 1994. This relatively late start in technology investment has meant that the school system has been forced to play a game of seemingly endless catch-up. The school systems technology equalization initiative (beginning in fiscal 1998 and fiscal 1999) has provided for approximately twenty new computers per school for about twenty schools. A similar level of purchasing through fiscal 2003 is planned.
20
OPPORTUNITY
Broader opportunities in technology could result from changes in the school systems procurement strategies. New opportunities in procurement leveraged with volume buying could help the school system to develop a technology integration plan. The potential exists for wider network applications and higher-tech utilization that might justify expert specialized procurement and a shared services central buying strategy. As wider range equipment and purchasing opportunities grow, they will help bring about new opportunities for improving instructional programs and promoting more convenient and efficient home-to-school communication. New technology can help develop more refined exchanges of teaching techniques, a better fit with the best practices in education, and home to significantly improve school communications. Volume-based purchasing strategies for new equipment can help support continuous improvement plans and promote continuous academic achievement for all students. RECOMMENDATIONS: 20. The school system should institute a central buying strategy for technology. This strategy should be led by a procurement technology purchasing officer. The purchasing plan should leverage the volume buying potential of the school system and take into careful consideration leasing options, networking options, mixing of computer types per school, access equipment, hardware and software bundled buying programs. 21. A refined request for proposals (RFP) should be developed consistent with the central buying strategy. This RFP should take into consideration a technology integration plan based on the projected use of the equipment, technology to curriculum, and expected student performance outcomes as defined by the school systems teachers and technical leadership from both the system and the business community.
4.4.2 Deployment and Maintenance
BACKGROUND
New technology equipment and resources are distributed to new schools. New schools such as Lime Kiln Middle and Ellicott Mills at Bonnie Branch Middle serve as technology prototypes and overshadow the technical investments at older schools. For example, Lime Kiln and Bonnie Branch Middle schools have five computer outlets with internet capability in every classroom. Science classrooms at those schools have eleven outlets, the media center has a computer lab of thirty plus computers and a resource room with ten computers and a $56,000 software library. Teachers share a twenty-four-laptop rolling computer lab. Training and classroom instruction are supplemented with computers and internet access that may be connected to a television mounted in the classroom. In contrast, in 1997 as part of the technology equalization plan, Mayfield Woods Middle School was provided about $44,000 to upgrade its technology resources. Even in the spirit of the school systems technology equalization plan, the allocation of technology is based on the capacity of the school not the need for student access to technology or the effects that such technology would have in raising academic performance. Schools and PTAs, old and new, fundraise and purchase technology equipment that becomes the property of the school but not part of the school systems technology equalization plan. The Committee heard testimony that connectivity and the physical networking of computers at older schools is often deferred because of antiquated facilities and the limited availability of the school systems staff responsible for installation, networking, and integration. 21
The Committee also heard reports that years of slow response by the school system are improving. However, the complexities associated with the installing and operating networks versus the daily operation of networks for instruction are very different and require different expertise. No longer can a single support team efficiently maintain multi-levels of administration, instruction and e-mail networks. A normal business practice would be to track the costs associated with all maintenance and repair. When asked about costs associated with the repair and maintenance of computers returned by staff during the summer of 1999, the school systems response was it did not have such information. Much of the emphasis on technology support and equipment distribution at the local school level rests with the media center specialists. Interviews with media center specialists and principals have uncovered a variety of inequities in media centers across the county in relation to hardware, software, staffing, technology support, and book collections.
OPPORTUNITY
The school system has an opportunity to build technical teams to make certain technical resources arrive at schools ready to support instruction. Technical resources can be reshaped to better fit the needs of the students instead of the building. The effectiveness of the deployment process begins with a technology plan aligned to students academic performance and allows classroom teachers to train, be trained, and teach. RECOMMENDATIONS: 22. Computers should only be delivered, configured and installed during after school hours. Computers must not be turned over to schools until the curriculum-based software is demonstrated to be operational. 23. The school system should explore the development of outside technical and network support. The school system may incur savings as a result of contracting out services, computer maintenance, and network and technical support. Savings could be used to promote greater equality in the technology resources among schools. 24. Repair processes should be managed and coordinated between the principal and a school system network manager. Communication and trouble tickets should be handled electronically. The school system should not lose focus and should remain accountable for the equipment it purchases, the vendors it allows schools to purchase from, and the enforcement of the service contracts it enters into. 25. The school system should conduct a thorough study of the apparent inequities that remain at all media centers across the county in the areas of hardware, software, staffing, technology support, and book collections.
22
4.4.3. Application of Technology Resources
BACKGROUND
The benchmark used by the school system to assess the effective use of technology resources in education seems to be the student to computer ratio. The school system provided the Leadership Committee with data that show student to computer ratios for each school, student capacity to computer ratios, and plans to equalize access to technology based upon more equitable student to computer ratios. Student to computer ratios only tell part of the story. The key limitation of relying solely on such ratios is that they create the impression that more technical equipment improves the quality of the school and, thus, our children will learn more. As one member of the Board of Education remarked, the school system has an equipment plan only at this time. Indeed, we need to integrate technology into our curriculum and prepare our children for the information age. As reported by the Maryland State Department of Education, Howard Countys school system is currently sixteenth out of twenty-four jurisdictions in a comparison of classrooms wired for the internet. Only 54% of the systems classrooms are wired for the internet. Living in an information age means our children need to learn how to find information and access the worlds electronic libraries. Continuously, teachers need to seek new ways to deliver and share instructional practices if our children are to compete and hope to achieve academic excellence in the surrounding high-tech world. Application of technology regarding e-mail communication does not simply mean one has an address. It means you use it to communicate, you use it to learn, and you use it to better serve your customers. The Leadership Committee believes that the use of technology in communication, assessment, and improving instruction is a significant issue in assessing equity in the countys educational system.
OPPORTUNITY
Howard County is one of the most affluent communities in the nation, with a mean annual household income of more than $64,000. The digital divide is evident here in Howard County, even with the apparent wealth of some citizens. There are still families and students without access to home computers and the internet. Howard County is a high-tech corridor surrounded by more than seven million people. Companies and businesses within our community have relied on e-mail, electronic training resources and efficient wellmaintained networks for more than a decade. Wireless companies and industry core communication giants exist within approximately forty miles of every single school in the county. The school system is missing a significant opportunity if it does not immediately seek new ways to learn and partner with the technical experts in our own backyard. The opportunities and potential are limitless, but we need to center our technology path on application, teacher training and efficient communication, not only on the numbers of types of computers in each school. Having pencils in a classroom does not guarantee our children will learn. Having calculators in classrooms does not guarantee our children will learn. It is how those tools are actually used that promotes education. Having well-trained teachers, teaching a well-balanced curriculum, efficient home to school communication, and the use of the resources of today will best help prepare all children for tomorrow.
23
RECOMMENDATIONS: 26. The school system should develop a technology plan to be submitted with the fiscal 2002 budget. First and foremost, such a plan would be based on very specific goals for integrating and applying technology at the student, teacher and administration level. If curriculum software wont run on an old computer it needs to be replaced. 27. The school systems technology plan should include specific components related to the effective use of teaching with technology and, at a minimum, address: application of technology relative to the systems curriculum, access to technology, inter and intra connecting resources, improving performance assessment, using technology for home to school communication, the mobilization of technology resources, equitable distribution of new technology, training with technology, operation and maintenance of computers and networks, and keeping pace with technology. 28. The school system should consider adopting a policy providing for access to the use of computers beyond the school day. Such a policy would encourage students, their parents, and staff to use computers after school hours and during summer months.
4.5 Site-Based Instructional Decision Making

The failure of certain management strategies, including Site-Based Instructional Decision Making (SBIDM), in schools that consistently under-perform may perpetuate inequitable education.
BACKGROUND
The Leadership Committee was given a charge to recommend an appropriate foundation level for programs in all schools. The Committee was also asked to recommend a standard for determining when resources beyond the foundation level were warranted due to the exceptional needs of the children served. The Howard County School System, with its annual operating budget of over $299 million, ranks second in the State of Maryland in per pupil expenditures. Our school system ranks second in the State according to the latest MSPAP test scores overall. But, more importantly, we have some of the highest achieving schools in the entire state. Given these facts there was little dispute that the currently established foundation level for programs in Howard County schools is adequate for providing a quality education for a large percentage of the student population. As for the second question of recommending a standard for determining when resources beyond the foundation level are warranted, the system currently has in place a process for designating a focus school based upon poor performance on MSPAP test scores. We believe this process adequately performs its recognition function. It is the focus schools issue the design and implementation of their curricula, the proper role of administration and staff, and other closely associated issues that this report presents as its strongest recommendations for reform. 24
The Combined Committee on Schools report contains a most compelling statement: Each [lower-achieving] school should be looked at individually to determine needs for its population. The Board of Education has committed to Site-Based Instructional Decision Making (SBIDM) as the overall framework for implementing curricula in our schools. Whereas this approach has distinct advantages, we question continued use of the policy in the case of troubled schools. In such schools, performance assessments and other objective factors that make it evident that instruction is not addressing all of the needs of the students. Consequently, we believe that instead of relying totally on SBIDM, each lower-achieving school could be required to develop a plan for improvement with the aid of a specially trained staff of facilitators who utilize proven, predictable methods for addressing lower-achievement. The Committees research suggests that the offices of academic support and instructional support can fulfill this role.
OPPORTUNITY
The Committees research reveals that a myriad of educational theories exist to address lower-achievement. We found one theory particularly compelling: If America is to educate all of its children to higher levels, then Americans must be willing to embrace a major paradigm shift in our beliefs about how students learn. Currently, students are required to adapt to adapt to the prevalent teaching practices and instructional materials and assessment instruments that are used in the school. Those who cannot adapt are rarely accommodated in most classrooms. Instead, they are viewed as being deficient in their ability to learn.29 The expectation that all students can achieve at high levels, under the right circumstances, should be the guiding principle of every school.30 Similarly, the education section of Howard County: A United Vision made the following recommendation to the school board: Support and expand asset-based education (ABE) initiatives . . . every child brings within him/her a myriad of cognitive, social, emotional, ethnic, gender and socioeconomic resources that can be utilized for the achievement of academic excellence. Begin to think of all children as being at promise. The first requirement for a policy designed to ensure the school success of all children is to change the mind set of educators and policymakers. . . we need to move away from seeing children as being at risk toward seeing them as being at promise. We identify and build on cultural and personal strengths, and accept nothing less than outstanding performance. Rather than thinking in terms of remediation or compensation, we insist on high-quality instruction sensitive to students needs from the beginning of their time in schools and respond immediately and intensively if children start to fall behind.31 The effective teaching traditionally provided to the most privileged students needs to also be provided to students who have, until now, been academically marginal. Educators need to look beyond race and class to meet individual students needs and that students individual differences require alternative instructional strategies. This philosophy is consistent with the mission and goals of the Howard County School System. The professed number one mission of our school system is to ensure that each student meets or exceeds rigorous performance and achievement standards. To achieve this mission, a goal has been set to have academic achievement data free from patterns associated with gender, ethnicity, learning styles, and socioeconomic status.
29
Robert W. Cole, Ed. Educating Everybodys Children. Alexandria, VA: Association of Curriculum and Development (1995), p. 6 . Ibid., p. 10. Howard County: A United Vision.
30
31
25
The Committee and noted that there is a focus school restructuring project whose report was released on December 9, 1999. Recommendations contained within that report called for the selective use of administrative transfers of staff along with the following major, critical components of a new focus school restructuring pilot project. The cost for the restructuring project included in the superintendents proposed budget was approximately $250,000 per year, excluding the cost of transportation. The Committee recognizes the need for an individual schools administration to have its autonomy. Morale and performance will most certainly suffer if central administration were to have iron resolve over all of the decision-making in the schools. The Committee does not advocate that this occur. The Committee recognizes that there is talent and a reservoir of key ideas among the staff currently in the schools. The goal is not to quell that source. Instead, the intention is that an effective balance can be achieved one that recognizes the strengths of the personnel in the schools and supplements those strengths with positive support from central administration. Role disputes are a possible byproduct of this approach, but where the topic of concern is a troubled school and a struggling student and in the matters of instruction design and implementation, the Committee would overwhelmingly prefer the scale of duty and responsibility be tipped in favor of the entity that has supervisory responsibility and ultimate accountability for students achievement. RECOMMENDATION: 29. Each underachieving school should be required to develop a plan for improvement by working with a specially trained staff of facilitators from central administration who utilize proven, predictable methods for addressing underachievement.
4.6 Focus School Designation

The term focus school, while serving as a convenient label for schools with high percentages of children with multiple needs that merit additional resources, is widely perceived by the public as a negative label that conveys the impression of a school to be avoided.
BACKGROUND
In its report to the Howard County Council, the Combined Committee on Schools reported the following: One obvious theme which has come through this process is that the labeling of certain schools as focus schools is not a positive reaction to meeting the needs of a particular school, and in many cases builds and feeds negative stereotypes about an individual school and its children. We strongly recommend that the label focus schools be removed from a school. Labels harm the children who attend these schools and impact the integrity of our neighborhoods.32 The Board of Education is clear that the designation of focus school is not meant to impact negatively upon a school and its community. Rather, the intent of the board is simply to designate the school as one that is receiving additional resources in order to bolster that schools performance. Despite the best intentions of the school board, the term focus school has three significant limitations: Under the current approach to labeling, a school is either a focus school or it is not a focus school the disparate performance of the countys schools lends itself more to a continuum than an either-or dichotomy.
32
County Council Combined Committee on Education, Final Report, p. 8.
26
Budgeting for focus schools creates a disincentive for schools with high concentrations of children with multiple educational needs to improve performance schools with demographic characteristics that would lead to the designation of focus school are denied additional resources when their performance improves. The term focus school has been unevenly applied some schools that would otherwise merit the additional resources that go with focus school designation are not receiving some of those resources.
OPPORTUNITY
Eliminating the focus school designation would provide an opportunity for the school system to re-examine its definition of what constitutes an underachieving school. There are two basic categories of schools in our system: focus schools, which are recognized to have a need for enhanced resources, and non-focus schools. The Committee prefers to recognize that each of our 67 schools has needs. Those needs are varied, by both type and degree. More importantly, the needs of schools and the children they serve exist on a continuum. A school which approaches the focus school of being cutoff is most probably in need of vital assistance, despite the fact that it does not meet the established criteria. In this regard, the elimination of the focus school designation allows for an opportunity to erase the line between schools that qualify for enhanced resources and those that do not. This is a positive direction toward improving all schools. RECOMMENDATIONS: 30. The school system should eliminate the term focus school. 31. In place of the term focus school, the school system should develop a formula for allocating resources to schools that recognizes that the needs of schools can be arrayed on a continuum. 32. The revised formula should be the basis for the school systems proposed budget for fiscal 2002.
4.7 Educational Options for Non-College Bound Students

Educational/career options for 20% of the countys non-college-bound seniors are not clearly defined.
BACKGROUND
The school system has a very high ratio of college-bound students; however, twenty percent do not have plans to continue their education. Currently 932 high school students are in the technology magnet program at the Applications and Research Laboratory; 250 of those students are seniors. Howard Community College (HCC) also offers non-credit career programs such as veterinary assistant training, medical assistant, patient care technician, certified nursing assistant, day care certification, fiber optic technician, and medical/health care office assistant, which are not articulated with the high schools. The school system and HCC coordinate various programs and courses through the tech prep project. Among these are: art; biomedical engineering technology; biotechnology; CAD; computer support technician; early childhood education; electronics technology; engineering; health and fitness; four new health agreements, two of which include emergency medical technician and cardiovascular technology; health and fitness; information systems management; network administration and telecommuniications technology. A blanket articulation agreement is currently being approved for CMSY110 Software Applications for Micros.
27
HCCs Commission on the Future, completed in 1999, noted that jobs are available in automotive, hospitality, manufacturing and construction areas, but job preparation is not available in Howard County public schools or the community college. In spring 2000, HCC is conducting further study to determine specific job skills, and job availability, and types of job preparation necessary to meet employer needs.
OPPORTUNITY
Howard Community College and the school system have the expertise to create a collaborative, innovative approach to offering skilled trades programs in cooperation with Howard County businesses. When the needs assessments that HCC is conducting are completed, the college and the public schools have the opportunity to identify partners where jobs are available and business is willing to collaborate. A new educational model can provide options for sixteen year olds to achieve basic skills and cooperative work experience on-site with participating employers. Howard Countys two major educational institutions have the opportunity to pool expertise and build on their relationships with county employers to meet employment needs and offer new options to non-college-bound students. RECOMMENDATION: 33. The school system and HCC should develop a new model, in partnership with local business, to offer cooperative applied learning and work experience in skilled trades where jobs are available.
28
5.
STAFFING AND EDUCATIONAL EQUITY
Teachers, staff, and administrators are the primary resource of the countys educational system. The Leadership Committee feels strongly that an equitable education should involve competent, committed, and caring professionals interacting with all children. Consistent with the importance of staffing to educational equity, the Leadership Committee recommends action in six areas: attracting competent teachers, retention of quality teachers, recruitment and retention of administrators, staff turnover, staff time, and school-based leadership.
5.1 Attracting Competent Teachers

The school system is facing problems in recruiting a quality teaching force large enough to provide excellent teachers for every classroom in the county. The problems associated with the teacher shortage tend to manifest themselves most in schools with the most significant needs.
BACKGROUND
There is a critical shortage of quality teachers in Maryland, as documented by the recent Report on Teacher Recruitment, Retention, and Renewal. Currently ranking tenth in Maryland for starting teacher pay, Howard Countys school system is not as competitive as other counties in attracting the best recent graduates and teachers with previous experience. Comparatively low pay is also a contributing factor to the loss of Howard County teachers to other jurisdictions. According to information provided to the Leadership Committee by the school system, as of February 9, 2000, there were 855 non-tenured teachers in Howard County, all of whom were hired during the last two years. The school system further predicts that this number will continue to increase yearly. In order to assure that these new teachers are the best in their fields, and that experienced teachers do not leave for higher paying counties or private industry, salaries need to be competitive with the jurisdictions with which we compete for their services. As a part of the Leadership Committees work, the Committee undertook the following activities relevant to teacher recruitment: review of the Report on Teacher Recruitment, Retention, and Renewal, collection and review of information on the pay scales for all counties in Maryland, interview of the Superintendent on administrative hiring and placement procedures, analysis of information provided by the school system on the number and percent of non-tenured teachers in each school, and analysis of the number of non-tenured teachers by experience level and school. 29
OPPORTUNITY
The Leadership Committee considers teacher compensation both a general improvement issue and an equity issue. A more competitive pay scale will help assure that the more outstanding teacher candidates will be drawn to Howard County, thus improving all schools. More relevant to the work of the Committee, improvements in the quality of teachers will help those schools with the highest concentrations of children with multiple needs. In the present situation, most openings for new teachers are occurring in schools that have high turnover. High turnover schools frequently are schools with the highest concentrations of children with challenges to their education, poor school climates, changing administration, or rapidly increasing populations. If the new teachers hired to fill these vacant positions are not the best available, the most challenged schools will not only have inexperienced teachers, but teachers who may not be the best in their fields. This inequity heightens the challenge of assuring student success in these schools. By attracting a quality teaching force, delivery of instruction can be improved in schools with high turnover, assuring a quality education for all students. RECOMMENDATIONS: 34. Raise teacher salaries at all levels, but especially for starting teachers. 35. Provide entrance to the pay scale at a higher step for new teachers, with extensive experience in their previous career, especially in areas of critical shortage such as upper level math and science.
5.2 Retention of Quality Teachers

Anecdotal testimony from the community fosters a broad-based perception that current procedures for the removal of ineffective teachers are inconsistent from school to school, are not timely, provide little assistance to a teacher who is having difficulty, and often lead to administrative transfers instead of dismissal.
BACKGROUND
The common public perception that ineffective teachers are simply transferred from one school to another has given administrative transfers the stigma of a punitive act, which creates an atmosphere of fear and mistrust between staff and administration. The school system advised the Leadership Committee that there is, in fact, a clear procedure in place for identifying, assisting, and, if necessary, removing teachers who are not effective. Although the current system has facilitated the success and dismissals of teachers, this procedure appears to be completely dependent on the administrators of individual schools and the school systems curriculum supervisor. It is the responsibility of both school administrators and curriculum supervisors to identify teachers who are in need of help. When timely identification does not occur, inadequate teaching may continue for an unacceptable length of time, and is reflected in the discontent expressed in parent and teacher satisfaction surveys and in reduced opportunities for community input. In addressing the issue of retaining quality teachers, the Leadership Committee undertook the following activities: review of parent and teacher satisfaction surveys, review of data provided by the school system on staff turnover by school, analysis of data provided by the school system on the percent of non-tenured teachers by school, solicitation of input from community, 30
review of the systems Report on Teacher Recruitment, Retention, and Renewal, interview of the Superintendent regarding administrative hiring, placement, and evaluation, analysis of the number non-tenured teachers by experience level and school, and interview of the assistant superintendent for instructional services on procedures for assisting unsuccessful teachers.
OPPORTUNITY
Although current policies and procedures are in place to address problems with ineffective teachers, these issues continue to affect the satisfaction of staff, students, and parents; influence the perceptions about a particular school, and lead to other conflicts, such as high turnover of staff and a poor school climate. Many factors are considered when placing and transferring teachers, including previous success, the needs of an individual school, and interpersonal issues. The effect a teacher can have on the educational experience of each individual child should be considered as well. All schools, especially those with high-need populations, require teachers that are not just adequate, but outstanding. The Leadership Committee believes that teachers should be held to rigorous standards and subject to regular evaluation to assure an excellent education for every student. RECOMMENDATIONS: 36. Develop improved procedures for the identification, assistance, and if necessary, removal of ineffective teachers. 37. Develop an identification and support network through the school systems staff development services for experienced teachers encountering burn-out. 38. Develop strategies to encourage movement within the system as part of the professional development plan of each teacher, to encourage professional growth and prevent burn-out.
5.3 Recruitment and Retention of Administrators

In addition to a shortage of teachers, the school system is experiencing a shortage of qualified applicants for school-based administrative positions. This not only affects the quality of administration, but the ability to be flexible when placing administrators.
BACKGROUND
In assessing the issue of recruitment and retention of administrators, the Leadership Committee undertook the following activities: review of the satisfaction surveys prepared by parents and teachers, review of data provided by the school system on principal turnover by school, analysis of staff turnover by school, and consideration of input from community. 31
There is a community perception that the procedures for the removal of ineffective school administrators are unduly protracted, and often lead to the placement of the administrator in multiple schools before being dismissed. The school system advised the Committee that, in fact, administrators are evaluated every three years, which may contribute to these perceptions. If it takes three years or longer for the problems associated with an ineffective administrator to be resolved, the educational experience of children in that environment may have expired and the support of the community may have been unnecessarily damaged. In addition, the Committee was informed that the evaluations of school-based administrators are largely selfassessments. If this perception is correct, the current evaluation process could possibly extend the tenure of an administrator who is not effective. From the perspective of the Leadership Committee, flexibility and patience, especially with struggling administrators, cannot be justified in high-need schools.
OPPORTUNITY
Teachers who are interested in administration in Howard County are largely self-elected, and pursue their certification and application independently. Teachers with leadership potential should be identified through their job performance and involvement with school-level decision-making. Actively recruiting these teachers for administrative positions could help alleviate the shortage of qualified personnel. By strengthening the quality and increasing the size of the administrative pool, the Leadership Committee believes that the assignment of school-based administrators can be more equitable, preventing an imbalance in the quality and skill of administrators across the county, and providing more and better choices when positions become available. RECOMMENDATIONS: 39. Develop improved procedures for the evaluation of administrators to facilitate the timely identification and removal of ineffective administrators. These procedures should include: an annual evaluation, community and staff input (annually at mid-year), and more rigorous criteria, based upon specific performance measures. 40. Develop strategies to recruit potential candidates for administration from the teaching force in Howard County. 41. Assure that only proven successful and dynamic administrators are assigned to schools with disproportionate concentrations of high-need or challenging pupil populations. 42. Initiate a program to identify and duplicate the methods used by those administrators viewed as successful so that their best practices can be taught to new administrators or those administrators thought to be in need of additional support to improve their performance.
32
5.4 Staff Turnover

Many schools experience high rates of turnover, causing some schools to have a large percentage of new staff members, both experienced and inexperienced, each year.
BACKGROUND
The Leadership Committees work in assessing the extent and effects of staff turnover involved several activities: review of parent and teacher satisfaction surveys, analysis of data provided by the school system related to: teacher new-hires and transfers by school, percent of non-tenured teachers by school, MSPAP scores over a five-year period, principal transfers and new-hires by school, staffing by school, experience of non-tenured versus tenured teachers, and
preparation of charts and graphs illustrating relationships between MSPAP scores and teacher factors. We found that schools currently designated as focus schools by the school system experience a higher average rate of turnover (44.9%) and have a greater average percentage of new staff members (52.6%) than non-focus schools (30.4% and 38.1% respectively). Excessive turnover creates instability in any school. In schools with multiple needs, turnover can have a particularly negative effect on the educational experience and achievement of the students, and the satisfaction of students, parents, and staff. In addition, school-based administrators at the assistant principal level are frequently transferred. Although this strategy is intended to enhance professional growth, in some instances it has created even greater instability. Administrative turnover may also compound teacher turnover, when teachers follow principals to new positions. When focus schools are compared to non-focus schools at the elementary level, there is a strong negative correlation between MSPAP scores and percentage staff turnover. There is also a similarly strong negative correlation between MSPAP scores and percentage of new staff. Only one non-focus school has a high percentage new staff (Ilchester) which may indicate other problems such as rapid growth or changing administration. Only one focus school has a low rate of turnover (Elkridge). Although these relationships do not show cause and effect, they do exist and call attention to the possibility that: teachers may be leaving schools with low MSPAP scores in large numbers, achievement scores may be low due in part to high turnover, or both effects. Although some schools have a high number of non-tenured teachers, no statistically significant relationship between the percentage of non-tenured teachers and MSPAP scores in focus schools versus non-focus schools is evident. However, inexperienced teachers (1-2 years) who are non-tenured average 19% of the staff at elementary focus schools, but only 13.2 % at all other elementary schools. In addition, teachers who are seeking more desirable positions (less job stress) may contribute to the high rate of turnover in focus schools. 33
OPPORTUNITY
Since certain schools have been more severely affected by the problem of turnover, action by the school system to reduce turnover could be expected to have a particularly positive effect on schools with disproportionate numbers of children with multiple needs. The Leadership Committee believes that it should be a priority of the school system to establish a higher degree of staff stability in all schools, but especially in schools where a high percentage of students rely heavily on school resources for academic success due to social and economic circumstances. Staff with excessive turnover require repeated in-service opportunities to familiarize new personnel with school systems and operating procedures. These routines interfere with student progress as teachers need to adjust to new teaching strategies, added planning responsibilities, and an unfamiliar school population and community. Although many factors contribute to inequities in student success, increasing the stability of each schools staff, and especially those showing the highest turnover, will allow the development of systems and routines necessary for continuous improvement. Dealing effectively with excessive turnover should be cost-effective. RECOMMENDATIONS: 43. The school system should identify and report to the school board annually, schools with the highest rates of staff turnover and what steps are being taken/proposed to reduce excessive turnover. A special effort should be made to interview teachers who are resigning, especially those who teach in areas of critical shortage, to determine if solutions can be found to prevent resignation (transfer to another school, assistance with finding childcare, or financial and other incentives). 44. The school system should set up a procedure (such as exit interviews) in cooperation with the Howard County Education Association for an outside impartial interviewer to determine the reasons teachers transfer or leave the profession. 45. The school system should evaluate the impact that staff turnover has on school climate, parent and student satisfaction, and student success in a level of detail beyond the ability of the Leadership Committee in the time available for our work. 46. The school system should provide incentives to motivate excellent, experienced teachers to remain in or transfer to high-need schools. It may be helpful for the school system to collect input from experienced, successful teachers to identify possible incentives. The Committee heard anecdotal information that the arsenal of corrective actions need not be limited to financial incentives and may include reduced or restructured workload, decreased class size, and increased time for planning and one-on-one interaction with students and their parents. 47. The school system should recruit excellent teachers for high-need schools. Where necessary, the school system should change the transfer process to facilitate teacher transfers to high-need schools. 48. Administrative transfer policies should be changed to limit turnover of assistant principals, especially in high-need schools, when an administrator or administrative team has demonstrated success. 49. The school system should restrict transfer opportunities for non-tenured teachers, except when initiated by school-based or central office administration. 34
5.5 Staff Time

Schools with comparatively high concentrations of high-need students place inordinate demands on teachers, staff, and administrators and may require more extensive adult support for personal, social, emotional, and academic problems.
BACKGROUND
As a part of our work, the Leadership Committee: heard reports from principals with focus school experience, reviewed the recommendations of the Report on Teacher Recruitment, Retention, and Renewal Task Force, solicited and received substantial community input, and analyzed data on support services currently provided to schools that serve a disproportionate percentage of children with multiple needs. The Committee heard testimony that administrators and teachers in schools with high-need populations, whether or not they are designated focus schools, have extra responsibilities in working with students, their families, and community organizations such as the department of social services. It is understandable that staff in schools with a high percentage of children who exhibit learning difficulties, children with poor behavior, children who are mobile, children where English is not their native language, or children with disabilities being served by special education programs require more time and energy from staff members to meet the needs of the school population. The inadequacy of additional resources provided to compensate for these added demands may contribute to teacher burn-out, higher than desirable teacher turnover, and low teacher satisfaction. In addition, some teachers, especially new teachers and those teaching in schools with challenging populations, require additional professional support for implementation of curriculum and the development of teaching strategies and best practices for their particular situations.
OPPORTUNITY
As Howard County has become more diverse, different school populations need a variety of resources to assure student success. Not all students benefit from stable homes, financial security, and educational support. Although the school system provides additional resources to focus schools, these may not be adequate or appropriate. There may also be an interest in greater flexibility in how the additional resources given to focus schools are used by those schools. The Leadership Committee believes that each child should be provided with the resources needed for success in school, regardless of personal circumstances. This will assure that each child receives the best education possible.
35
RECOMMENDATIONS: 50. Implement an effective Mentor Colleague Program for all new teachers. This program should include: adequate time for the mentor and new teacher to spend time together in the classroom, a reduced teaching load or financial compensation for the mentor teacher, in-service training for the mentor teacher, and identification of specific responsibilities of the mentor teacher.
51. Provide additional support for all new teachers, especially in high-need schools, through: assignment of a permanent curriculum specialist to each school, team teaching by pairing new teachers with experienced teachers, extra planning time and professional development, reasonable class schedules and class sizes, provision of a classroom instead of creating a traveling situation, and not requiring new teachers to teach outside of their certification area or to teach a split schedule
52. Reduce class size in high-need elementary schools significantly. In cases where space is limited, place two teachers in a classroom. 53. Provide the following staff, as requested, in high-need schools that can demonstrate that educational opportunities will improve as a result of: an additional assistant principal, additional guidance counselor(s), pupil personnel workers with a single school or fewer, geographically related, school assignments, and qualified social workers and psychologists as needed.
5.6 School-Based Leadership

A school-based administrators ability to communicate with parents, staff, and students; to respond to complaints in a positive and productive way, and to facilitate progress and change as the result of this communication plays a crucial role in the effectiveness of a school.
BACKGROUND
Based upon a review of satisfaction surveys, reports from principals with focus school experience, and community input, the Leadership Committee believes that school principals and assistant principals not only provide leadership for the school staff and students, but determine the educational atmosphere and culture of the school. Satisfaction survey data and community input indicate that some communities are unhappy with school administration. This is usually rooted in the inability of the administration to connect with the community and to integrate parents, staff, and students into the decision-making process.
OPPORTUNITY
All schools, and especially those with challenging populations, require an administrative team that instills confidence and a sense of ownership on the part of school staff and the community. A confident and successful administrative team working in concert with staff and the community can also provide the stability and leadership needed to enable student success.
36
School administrators can be proactive by creating regular opportunities for non-threatening input from the staff and community. Teachers can also benefit from community and student input. Creating open lines of communication among administrators, staff, and the community can lead to positive change and growth, strengthen ownership of problems and solutions, and give all stakeholders equal opportunity to participate in the educational process. RECOMMENDATIONS: 54. Implement a plan to improve communication at all levels of the school system. Require administrators to take positive steps to obtain information and constructive ideas from staff and parents. Include successful communication as one criteria for evaluation of administrators. 55. Develop a feedback tool to be used internally in schools to give staff and community the opportunity to give administrators input on their perceived effectiveness. The results should be used as a professional development and personal reflection resource to assist administrators in the identification of their personal goals for formal evaluation. 56. Develop a feedback tool to be used internally in schools to give students and parents the opportunity to give teachers input on their perceived effectiveness. The results should be used as a professional development and personal reflection resource to assist teachers in the identification of their personal goals for formal evaluation.
37
6. ACCOUNTABILITY AND EQUITY

The Leadership Committee is strongly supportive of the central role that accountability plays in promoting educational equity. If teachers, administrators, and staff members are not held accountable for their roles in achieving educational excellence for all children, it is unlikely that goal will be realized. As a result of our work, we recommend action in four areas: development of an integrated management system, utilization of data, school performance, and an independent performance review.
6.1 Integrated Management System

The school system has tended to base accountability on overall excellence. We are convinced that a continued focus on MSPAP scores risks exacerbating inequities in the school system and will, inevitably, leave some children behind.
BACKGROUND
In any discussion of improving the education that children receive, it is relatively easy to propose a set of policy and curricular changes that might boost student learning or create an improved school environment. Currently this is done in reaction to yearly MSPAP results, often resulting in improvement that tends to be random and not sustained. Many other considerations exist for improving student learning outcomes. These include criteria for monitoring and improving every key aspect of the organization, including the delivery of the designed curriculum to all students, staff development, classroom management, and organizational leadership.
OPPORTUNITY
Leadership for integrating the various components for school improvement comes from the superintendents office, through the central office staff, to the schools. All departments and schools currently have the following in place: leadership teams, clearly defined system goals, clearly defined local goals and assessment measures, data collection to determine if goals are being met, human resources, defined processes for school improvement, and the ability to communicate goals and results to all stakeholders. 38
The key to school improvement is not simply whether these components exist, but the extent to which these elements are used in a systematic way instead of random acts of improvement. The opportunity exists to make sure the elements are used to inform one another by putting into place an integrated management system designed to monitor and create continuous improvement and, ultimately, inform instructional practices to boost student achievement. An integrated management system is proactive. Implementing a process for continuous improvement within a school and a school system offers the prospect of integrating all resources and policies around the goal of raising student achievement for all students. The model of continuous improvement is a model that may yield very unique, creative strategies to respond to student needs in a particular school. It is not a one-size-fits-all approach to school improvement. Rather, it is a strategy for unifying all the activities and processes in a school so they work together for improvement, rather than pull against each other to the detriment of student learning. Implementation of an integrated management system allows for all stakeholders within an organization to be aligned behind the goal of raising student achievement levels. RECOMMENDATIONS: 57. The school system should engage in a sustained, vigorous effort to adopt principles of continuous improvement in an integrated management system. 58. Implementation of an integrated management system should begin in the central office and in schools with most significant needs during school year 2001-2002. 59. The fiscal 2002 operating budget should reflect systemwide funding for implementation of an integrated management system.
6.2 Utilization of Data

The data collected by the school system are being underutilized to inform instruction and school improvement.
BACKGROUND
Data to assess student achievement exist at all levels of the school system. Data collection in conjunction with clear goals for assessments allows the system to use data to improve instruction. Data collection and utilization are key elements in an integrated management system, because they are used to identify goals and measure and interpret results. External measurements such as MSPAP provide a measure of school accountability. Mandated by the State of Maryland, MSPAP is used as a tool for building greater school-by-school accountability. Even though it is a school accountability tool, it is perceived as a student accountability tool. This perception leads to a misuse of the data. The school system uses a variety of tools to evaluate student progress. One measure is the use of the systems quarterly assessments. As noted in a recent board report, teachers are required to incorporate students results on the mandated local assessments as part of their grades during the current school year. However, the extent to which the results are used is left to the discretion of the teacher.
39
OPPORTUNITY
Internal measurements such as the mandated quarterly assessments provide an opportunity to use data to improve individual educational outcomes for students. The value of strong data collection is that it provides an opportunity to use results to change instructional methods. According to research developed by the National Forum on Assessment, the primary purpose of assessment should be to improve student learning.33 High quality education happens when desired learning goals are clearly understood and there is an accurate accounting of whether those goals are reached. One way to create a sophisticated accountability system that does not allow large numbers of underachieving students to fall through the cracks is to build a significant database of individualized student achievement records and develop a process for improving individualized student achievement based on that data collection. More effective data collection and analysis could allow the school system to: utilize test data for diagnostic and prescriptive purposes, determine the extent to which students are receiving appropriate instruction to ensure mastery of the curriculum, build effective processes to improve instruction, create an individualized student assessment system that will facilitate academic improvement for students, create or improve an integrated assessment system for gathering individualized student data, including the following items in a centralized K-12 student portfolio: detailed skills assessment of reading, writing, and math proficiency, inventory of skills mastered, quarterly assessment reports, learning style profiles, records of standardized test data, anecdotal reports from teachers and principals, yearly report cards, student work samples, record of additional academic interventions, and record of parent conferences.
33
National Forum on Assessment, Principles and Indicators for Assessment Systems (Cambridge, MA: 1995).
40
Within the framework of an integrated management system, the school system could employ the following strategies: Utilize early assessments of reading, writing and mathematics achievement to inform instruction for all students. Early assessments could be given with an eye toward identifying the childs learning needs and used for shaping instruction so the child can reach or exceed grade level. If a learning disability is identified, that identification should shape services and not be an excuse for poor performance. Require annual learning style inventories of students to differentiate teaching based on yearly classroom populations. Teachers need to know the types of learning styles and preferences among students in their classes as early as possible. Currently, teachers have to figure this out for themselves over a period that may extend over several months. A portable record of student learning styles would help teachers target their teaching methods more effectively. Utilize the data to make appropriate course placements for students who have demonstrated knowledge at or above grade level. Employ strategies to ensure that all students are provided instruction that meets grade-level expectation. Development of these strategies could provide teachers with a blueprint of student accomplishments and needs allowing them to tailor instruction to the differentiated learning styles among students. RECOMMENDATIONS: 60. Create computerized, detailed, centralized student K-12 portfolios that will follow the student from year to year and school to school. 61. Utilize student portfolios to identify students who are below grade level in reading, math and writing. These student portfolios should be used as the basis for the development of individualized academic plans focusing on academic achievement and raising all students to grade level. 62. Utilize student portfolios to identify students who are at or above grade level for more challenging course placement. 63. Involve parents in the review of the portfolios of their children and in the development of strategies they can employ to raise achievement levels. 64. Develop a clear retention/promotion policy that requires mandatory academic intervention starting in kindergarten.
41
6.3 School Performance

After six years of MSPAP testing, many schools in Howard County are showing little or no increase in scores. The MSPAP scores for some other schools are in decline.
BACKGROUND
MSPAP is a measure of school accountability. The intent of MSPAP is to use those data as the basis for school improvement. The Leadership Committee believes that, were MSPAP data used in this manner, it would be reasonable to expect that all of the countys schools would be making sustained progress toward the satisfactory level and then on to the excellent level. This lack of improvement may be indicative of ill-defined accountability measures. There are many factors that influence the achievement level of students. Accountability for student achievement rests with many stakeholders from educational professionals to families and students themselves. Data collection is the first step in understanding how well students are performing in school. Implementation of strategies to improve results is shared by all stakeholders in the system
THE OPPORTUNITY
The Superintendent and principals could use their leadership positions to create a strong, goal-centered management system for each school that establishes a framework for accountability. Such a framework would allow for development of processes to assess each childs progress. Detailed data collection tools to identify student needs, implementation strategies to improve instruction, increasing familial responsibility and involvement, and informing staff development programs for maximum impact on instructional methods. The Leadership Committee believes that measures of accountability in addition to MSPAP scores could provide a more comprehensive and realistic picture of a schools strengths and weaknesses. The school systems School Profiles are an important first step. Enhancement of these profiles, however, will be required before those profiles can serve as valuable tools to communicate school performance to the community. Among the data elements that could be added to the School Profiles are trends in parent involvement, fundraising elements, staff turnover, status of school improvement, total operating budget, and the satisfaction of all stakeholders. Montgomery Countys public schools recently published Our Call to Action: Building a System of Shared Accountability. As in all Maryland school systems, in 2005, high school seniors in Montgomery and Howard Counties will have to pass exit exams in order to receive their diplomas. Both school systems have been critically reviewing their performance on MSPAP testing. Reviewing the Montgomery County plan may provide a very useful opportunity for Howard Countys school system to see how a neighboring school system with the same state-mandated requirements is focusing on accountability.
RECOMMENDATION: 65. With input from all stakeholders, the school system needs to develop a system of accountability that provides a framework for focusing on school performance and student achievement.
42
6.4 Independent Performance Review

There are many issues that have been identified by the Council Committee on School Equity, the PTA Council of Howard County, the Leadership Committee on School Equity, and others that are beyond the ability of the Leadership Committee to address adequately within the time available.
BACKGROUND
Despite the fact that most people in the county, and indeed the nation, believe that education is the highest priority for additional public expenditures, the public also wants to be assured that its investment in education is as cost-effective as possible. The Leadership Committee on School Equity began its deliberations with a review of the issues identified by the County Councils Combined Committee on Schools. In its initial meeting, the Leadership Committee identified forty-seven priority issues potentially affecting school equity. In addition, the Leadership Committee received input from individual parents, PTAs, community groups, teachers, school administrators, and the general public with respect to issues that should be addressed.34 Although the Leadership Committee has attempted to address the highest priority issues related to school equity, we were severely constrained by the time available for its work. In addition, the Committee consciously set aside work on issues that are vitally important to school improvement in general, but were not specifically related to equity. These remaining issues should not be lost.
THE OPPORTUNITY
The Texas School Performance Review (TSPR), directed by the Texas Controller of Public Accounts, is the nations first and leading state-level program designed to improve the management and finances of individual school districts. Since 1991, TSPR has reviewed more than thirty Texas school districts.35 These reviews focus on performance. In each review, the TSPR identifies a districts administrative, organizational and financial problems and recommends ways to cut costs, increase revenues, reduce overhead, streamline operations, and improve the delivery of educational services.36 TSPR examines a districts operation in a dozen vital areas, including the school systems: organization and management, educational service delivery, personnel management, community involvement, facilities use and management, financial management, asset and risk management, purchasing and warehousing functions, computers and technology, food services, transportation, and safety and security.37
34 35 36 37
The range of these issues is suggested by the Summary of Results of the 1999-2000 PTA Issues Survey. Additional information on the Texas School Performance Review is available at http//www.cpa.state.tx.us/tspr/tsprqa.html. Ibid. Ibid.
43
Each performance review takes six to seven months and costs approximately $250,000. In 1999, TSPR was named one the top ten federal, state, and local programs that exemplify new models of government working effectively to produce results for people by the Innovations in American Government competition, sponsored by the Ford Foundation and administered by Harvard Universitys Kennedy School of Government.38 With the appointment of a new superintendent, the Committee believes that a comprehensive, independent performance review of the Howard County School System is timely. Although it would be extremely important to orient such an independent performance review to address issues of greatest interest to Howard County, including school equity, such a review would provide a sound baseline against which future improvements in performance could be measured.
RECOMMENDATIONS: 66. The Committee recommends that Howard County and the school system jointly fund and oversee an independent performance review of the school system modeled after the Texas School Performance Review. The review should be completed by a contractor selected as a result of a competitive procurement. 67. Funding for this review should be included in the fiscal 2001 budget. This would enable the independent performance review to begin no later than July 1, 2000, and completed no later than December 31, 2000.
38
For additional information on the Innovations in American Government competition see http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/innovations.
44
7. NEXT STEPS
The Leadership Committee on School Equity is committed to action. Members of the Committee volunteered to serve with an expectation that their involvement would produce results. To the extent that the Committee members efforts result in nothing more than filing this report, their time will have been wasted. RECOMMENDATIONS: In addition to the issue-specific recommendations made throughout this report, the Committee recommends the following actions: 68. This report should be disseminated broadly and used as a basis for discussion of school equity issues by the school system, county government, and community stakeholders. Consistent with this recommendation, the Committee will form a speakers bureau to make its members available to as many community forums as possible. We also recommend that this report be made available electronically on the web sites of both the school system and county government. 69. An implementation plan should be submitted by the Superintendent to the school board as a part of the fiscal 2002 budgets. 70. The Superintendent should submit an annual report on school equity to the school board as a part of his budget proposal, beginning with fiscal 2003.
45
Appendix A
MEMBERS OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

CO-CHAIRS
Bill Benton ...................................................................................................................................... Benton & Associates, Ltd. Mary Ellen Duncan ................................................................................................................ Howard Community College
MEMBERS
Jerry Bialecki ..................................................................................................................................................... Parent/Citizen David Bower ........................................................................................................ Data Computer Corporation of America Victor Broccolino ............................................................................................................ Howard County General Hospital Terry Chaconas ................................................................................................................................................. Parent/Citizen Gregory Devou .......................................................................................................................... Carefirst Blue Cross/Shield Tracey Eberhardt ........................................................................................................................................ Kaiser Permanente Sandra Erickson ...................................................................................................... Howard County Public School System Pat Flynn ............................................................................................................................................................ Parent/Citizen Joanne Mead ............................................................................................................ Howard County Public School System Hans Meeder ............................................................................................................................ Horizon Consulting Services Joseph Merke ........................................................................................................................................ Columbia Association Sang Oh .......................................................................................................................... Howard County Executives Office Joyce Pope ............................................................................................................................... Hammond High School PTSA Gene Shipp ........................................................................................................................................................ Parent/Citizen Mary Kay Sigaty ............................................................................................................................................... Parent/Citizen Kathleen Sinkinson .......................................................................................................................................... Parent/Citizen John Snyder ................................................................................................................ Long Reach Community Association Joe Staub ................................................................................................................ Howard County Education Association Jack Whiteside ..................................................................................................................... Commercial and Farmers Bank Suzanne Whitmore ....................................................................................................... League for People with Disabilities Natalie Woodson ........................................................................................................................... Howard County NAACP 46
Appendix B
COMMITTEE MANDATE
This Leadership Committee on School Equity is being established to address a growing sense of concern in the community about differences in the facilities, programs, and services of the Howard County communitys schools. Responses to these concerns are having the effect of fragmenting our community and jeopardizing the broad base of public support for education that is the hallmark of Howard County. Representing a broad cross-section of community leadership, school leadership, and business leadership, the Committee is charged with recommending to the County Executive and the Superintendent of Schools steps to be taken that will ensure an equal and quality educational experience for every student in every school. To carry out the charge, the Committee will: 1. Examine the broad context of equity in facilities, programs, and services across the school system. 2. Examine particularly the needs of older schools and those with disproportionate levels of educational need, to help ensure their capability of providing a quality education program to every student. 3. Recommend an appropriate foundation level of programs and services available in all schools. 4. Recommend a standard for determining when resources beyond the foundation level are warranted due to the needs of the children served. 5. Examine and recommend ways to achieve optimum use of resources and facilities to ensure that educational equity is continually addressed. The Committee will present its findings and recommendations to the County Executive and the Superintendent of Schools by March 1, 2000. To the extent possible, estimates of resources required should be provided including multiple-year planning when necessary.
47

HCPSS Equity Report 2000

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

HCPSS Equity Report 2000

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

FACTORS AFFECTING EQUITY

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

RESOURCES AND PROGRAMS

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

3. FACTORS AFFECTING EQUITY

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

3.2 Open Enrollment

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

3.3 Student Mobility

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

School Board Policy #11300 refers to these as Local Committees.

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

3.5 Equity Funding

Memorandum from Sydney L. Cousin to Martha Johnson, January 26, 2000.

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

Memorandum from Sydney Cousin, op. cit. Ibid.

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

3.6 Federal Funding

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

4. PROGRAMS AND RESOURCES RELATED TO EQUITY

4.1 Systematic Planning for Capital Improvements

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

4.2 Communication Systems

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

4.3 Playground Equipment

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

4.4.1Procurement of Technology Resources

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

4.4.2 Deployment and Maintenance

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

4.4.3. Application of Technology Resources

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

4.5 Site-Based Instructional Decision Making

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

4.6 Focus School Designation

County Council Combined Committee on Education, Final Report, p. 8.

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

4.7 Educational Options for Non-College Bound Students

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

STAFFING AND EDUCATIONAL EQUITY

5.1 Attracting Competent Teachers

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

5.2 Retention of Quality Teachers

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

5.3 Recruitment and Retention of Administrators

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

5.4 Staff Turnover

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY

HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND, MARCH 13, 2000

5.5 Staff Time

REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL EQUITY