CECM does not have a position on these particular bills, however, we will continue to track this legislation and will watch for important amendments.

Projected FY 12 Hold Harmless Districts: Adair Co. R-1, Adair Co. R-2, Appleton City R-II, Ballard R-II, Bell City R-II, Belton 124, Belton Federal Lands, Boncl R-X, Bosworth R-V, Breckenridge R-I, Brentwood, Brookfield R-III, Brunswick R-II, Buchanan Co. R-IV, Bucklin R-II, Bunker R-III, Cainsville R-I, Calhoun R-VIII, Camdenton R-III, Center 58, Centerville R-I, Clayton, Climax Springs R-IV, Clinton Co. R-III, Community R-VI, Cooper Co. R-IV, Couch R-I, Cowgill R-VI, Craig, R-III, Dadeville R-II, Davis R-XII, Delta C-7, Drexel R-IV, East Buchanan Co. C-1, Everton R-III, Excelsior Springs 40, Fayette R-III, Fort Osage R-I, Gilliam C-4, Gilman City R-IV, Gorin R-III, Grandview C-4, Green City R-I, Grundy Co. R-V, Hancock Place, Hardeman R-X, Hardin-Central C-2, Hayti R-II, Hermitage R-IV, Hickman Mills C-1, Higbee R-VIII, Howell Valley R-I, Hume R-VIII, Hurley R-I, Jamestown C-1, Jasper Co. R-V, Jefferson C-123, Jennings, Junction Hill C-12, Kansas City 33, Keytesville R-III, King City R-I, Kingston 42, Kirkwood R-VII, Knob Noster Federal Lands, La Plata R-II, Ladue, Laredo R-VII, Lathrop R-II, Leesville R-IX, Leeton R-X, Lindbergh R-VIII, Livingston Co., R-III, Lonedell R-XIV, Luray 33, Macon Co. R-IV, Malta Bend R-V, Manes R-V, Maplewood-Richmond Heights, Marion Co. R-II, Marquand-Zion R-VI, Meadville R-IV, Miami R-I, Middle Grove C-1, Midway R-I, Miller Co. R-III, Mirabile C-1, Missouri City 56, Monroe City R-1, Montrose R-XIV, Mound City R-II, New Madrid Co., R-I, New York R-IV, Newtown-Harris R-III, Nodaway-Holt R-VII, Norborne R-VIII, Normandy, North Andrew Co. R-VI, North Daviess R-III, North Harrison R-III, North Mercer Co. R-III, North Nodaway Co. R-VI, North Pemiscot Co. R-I, North Shelby, Northeast Nodaway Co. R-V, Northwest R-I, Northwestern R-I, Oak Ridge R-VI, Orearville R-IV, Orrick R-XI, Osage Co. R-I, Osborn R-O, Otterville R-VI, Paris R-II, Parkway C-2, Pattonsburg R-II, Pattonville R-III, Pemiscot Co. R-III, Pettis Co. R-XII, Pleasant View R-VI, Prairie Home R-V, Renick R-V, Revere C-3, Richland R-I, Ridgeway R-V, Risco R-II, Riverview Gardens, School of the Osage R-II, Shawnee R-III, Shell Knob 78, Slater, South Callaway Co. R-II, South Holt Co. R-I, South Iron Co. R-I, South Nodaway Co R-IV, Southwest Livingston Co. R-I, Special School District of St. Louis County, St. Charles R-VI, St. Elizabeth R-IV, St. Louis City, Stanberry R-II, Stet R-XV, Stewartsville C-2, Sturgeon R-V, Swedeborg R-III, Tarkio R-I, Tina-Avalon R-II, Tri-County R-VII, Union Star R-II, University City, Voluntary Interdistrict Choice Corporation, Waynesville Federal Lands, Wellington-Napoleon R-IX, West Nodaway Co. R-I, West Platte Co. R-II, Westran R-I, Winston R-VI.

Governor Jay Nixon signed legislation on Friday that would repeal a controversial measure that limited online communication between students and teachers. 

The measure, which came to be known as the Facebook Law, came under fire late last summer when education advocates realized it would ban most online communication between students and teachers. The law became so controversial that the legislature passed a repeal of the law during Special Session in September which Governor Nixon signed today.

You can read more about the repeal and the origional law here.

The United States Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) has had a busy two days. Its members have been engrossed in a lively debate over Senator Tom Harkin, D-IA and Michael Enzi, R-WY’s bill to reauthorize No Child Left Behind, or as NCLB is more formally called, The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).

Nearly everyone in the education field will agree that NCLB isn’t perfect. However, reformers around the country are concerned that the level of accountability and transparency that parents have come to expect from schools is being jeopardized in this bill to make the goals of the legislation more attainable than what currently exists under NCLB (100% proficiency in math and science by 2014).

This debate is far from over. It is still unclear what the final bill that the HELP Committee will send to the Senate floor will contain. It is even more unclear what the House of Representatives will do.  However, it is important that education reformers around the country are paying attention and that when the bill gets to a vote of the full senate, you let Missouri’s Senators hear your voice.

You can keep up with the Committee’s mark-up here and Education Sector had provided an excellent “quick look” at the good and bad in the Harkin-Enzi bill here.

Dr. Kelvin Adams, Superintendent of the St. Louis Public Schools

Dr. Chris Nicastro, Missouri Education Commissioner

Dr. William H. Danforth, Chancellor Emeritus, Washington University

Allen S. Boston, General Counsel Special Administrative Board

Dr. Craig Larson, Chairperson Voluntary Interdistrict Choice Corporation

Byron Clemmons, Vice- President Local 420 Teacher’s Union, SLPS

These resolutions were put together and rushed through the Missouri State Senate with little study of this massive overhaul of the two state agencies.  Instead of this “ready, fire, aim” approach, the state should seriously review how combining two large bureaucracies into one mega- bureaucracy would affect education for individual children in our state.   These critical questions just scratch the surface of what must be answered before discussion of combining these two departments can move forward:

• How will a merger of DESE with DHE help better provide information to parents about the performance of their public schools?

• How will a merger of DESE and DHE help parents make better decisions regarding college choices, attendance and student financial aid?

• How will a merger of DESE and DHE, which operate in very different worlds, help them perform their separate and distinct missions?

• How will a merger of DESE with DHE redefine adequate funding of our schools and will that lead to a new funding lawsuit against the state?

• And most importantly, how does this merger increase educational achievement for all children, in all grade levels in our state?

Proponents of combining these departments and boards have said that the move will increase efficiency and lead to a seamless system of education in our state.  Given all of the unanswered questions and lack of details on how the new department would operate, I do not see this as the case.  Proponents have also touted the merger as a cost saving measure for our financially strapped state, but the fiscal note on the resolutions said that “the potential fiscal impact is unknown.”

It is clear that these resolutions are a knee- jerk reaction to the state’s budget crunch.  This issue has had little study and review, leaving many questions as to the effect on Missouri’s children unanswered.  To implement such a drastic change to our state’s education structure without answering essential questions would be bad for the children of our state.  Please call your State Representative and ask him or her to oppose merging the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education with the Department of Higher Education.

One of the suggestions that is drawing much attention is a proposal to merge the Department of Higher Education and the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Testimony in the committee hearing said that the merger could save $1 million. Senator Pearce reported that the committee supports the merger idea. The proposal is likely to save Missouri money, but will also align the government structure with the P-20 council, created in 2006, to focus on student learning from childhood through graduate school.

Other cost saving suggestions that the committee heard was an increase in virtual schools, implementing merit pay systems statewide, cutting money from the Regional Professional Development Centers and only allowing schools to accept 100% of the funding formula calculation. That proposal, according to Senate staff, would save the state $16.5 million.

The “reboot” meetings come on the same day that the Missouri House of Representatives voted to freeze spending on K-12 education. While education spending would remain the same from last year, the vote removes a $105 million increase that was scheduled to go into the phase in of the state’s funding formula. The measure came in the form of an amendment to the state’s budget bill, currently being debated by the full House. Amendment sponsor, Representative Maynard Wallace, told his colleagues that he didn’t want the state to promise schools money, then not give it to them. The state’s deteriorating budget situation has already caused a $43 million reduction in school funding for the remainder of the year.

The conference also served as a changing of the guard as Dr. Howard Fuller retired from the Board Chairmanship and Washington, D.C. reform activist Kevin Chavous moved into the Board Chair.  Also, it was the first symposium for new BAEO President Kenneth Campbell.  He was selected to follow Gerrard Robinson, who was appointed the Secretary of Education for the Commonwealth of Virginia.  One of the sessions at the conference featured both new leaders where they discussed their vision for the organization.  The main topic was the expansion of BAEO, which will focus on a strategy of expanding into southern states where many African Americans are without education options.  Both also made a commitment to increasing membership in the urban areas where BAEO currently has chapters.

At the same time school districts are scrambling to deal with decreased funding as the economic recession has led to declining tax revenue. St. Louis Public Schools (SLPS) recently cutting nursing staff in their district is just one of many recent examples of schools cutting back to close budget deficits. SLPS is dealing with a deficit of $53 million.

The reality that children with autism, and other special needs, are increasing at an alarming rate and schools are receiving less funds leads to this question: How will these special needs students receive an appropriate education? In Missouri, legislators are having trouble funding existing programs, like Career Ladder which gives teachers additional pay for performing extra tutoring and other functions, and are warning of more cuts to come. In addition Missouri,according to the recommendation of the state’s education commissioner, is not applying for the first half of the Race to the Top federal competitive grant program.

One way forward in funding of special needs education is to incentivize the private charity of businesses and individuals to get involved. One way other states have done this is by allowing scholarship tax credit programs. In these programs individuals or corporation are given tax credits for donating to an approved scholarship program. These scholarships are awarded to individuals and used at the school of their choice or to receive additional specialized education in addition to the school they are currently attending. Several states including Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Ohio and Utah have scholarship tax credit programs targeted at students with special needs. A recent study of Florida’s program has concluded that the program is helping to better diagnosis students with special needs.

As the number of special needs students increases we must turn to new methods of funding to provide the best chance for these students to receive an appropriate education, leading them to become productive members of our society. Government entities, both state and local, are not going to be able to keep up with the increased demand for funding that these students will require. Reform minded methods, like scholarship tax credit programs, are going to be the only way to see that these children are not left behind.