California School Districts have a racially and ethnically diverse population; more so than in any other state and the numbers of immigrants keeps growing. This diversity is reflected in California schools. Many of the California schools have large student populations that originate from linguistic minorities, or from families that are still in the process of learning English. This fact has led to California schools being high on the national list of schools with limited fluency in the English language. Add cultural and social differences to the linguistic problem, and it isn’t surprising to find that California schools are beginning to slide down the scale.

School Rankings and California Schools

The entire premise of the No Child Left Behind program aims to allow each child the chance at a high quality education. This is admirable, but it doesn’t take into account the fact that not all the children in the country are the same. This is especially true in California schools with their huge ethnic and linguistic minority students. Expecting children of varied cultures, and across all linguistic divides, to perform equally well on a standardized test can be a futile exercise. A standardized test doesn’t take into account the vast differences in cultures, family backgrounds, abilities and experiences of children in the California Schools. That’s why it’s doomed to fail as a measure of a student’s or child’s standing in the educational system.

Promoting California Schools: Walk the Walk

When it comes to the state of California schools, politicians are more than eager to mouth platitudes that sound great on paper but fizzle when it comes to putting them to action. One particular requirement of No Child Left Behind is mandatory testing of at least 95 per cent of students in a school. This requirement means little in California schools, where parents have the right to refuse to allow their children to be tested. What this trickles down to, in effect, is that even good quality schools might not find the required number of students to test, which means a black mark and a possible slide down the public school rankings for a perfectly good institution. Another provision of the program allows students to leave schools that fail any one the program’s requirements. This sounds great in theory until you realize that it is the California school district that has to foot the bill to transfer these students to other schools, adding to the congestion problem in already overcrowded schools. When it comes to implementing the No Child Left Behind program, California schools are finding more stumbling blocks than in other states.

Patricia Hawke is a staff writer for Schools K-12, providing free, in-depth reports on all U.S. public and private K-12 schools. For more information please visit California School Districts

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Patricia_Hawke

The article cited a situation of one California schools child with a disability. The assigned public middle school offered special college prep classes, daily help from a special education expert, a laptop computer, extra time for tests, the opportunity to temporarily leave class if the child’s had an anxiety attack, and a special advocate to smooth over any problems with teachers.

The parents hired a special consultant instead, who found alternative schooling opportunities — all were private schools and all were out-of-state. They settled on a boarding school in Maine, outside the main city, that had one-tenth of the enrollment of the California schools. The one thing this school did not offer was a special education program. The mother said that smaller classrooms and a smaller campus were more important than a special education program. Since the possibility of anxiety attacks was mentioned in the article, no one can truly judge the merit of this situation except the child’s physician and/or psychologist.

After the child was placed into the private school, the parents then hired an attorney, who specializes in special education cases, to file papers with the court demanding the California schools pay four years of tuition and family travel costs between California and Maine. Tuition was $30,000 annually. The California schools met the demands.

This is only one such case in the California schools, which may or may not have been justified. The problem is that it is not the only case. In 2005, there were 3,763 California schools children with disabilities that were the focus of formal complaints — the vast majority of which came from parents. This is triple the number of only ten years ago, and the numbers are growing.

With a cost of almost $40,000 to go to a court hearing and the possibility of an expensive judgment, the California schools attempt to settle cases before they get that far. In 2005, ten percent of the California schools’ cases went to a full hearing — 386 in all. The remaining 90 percent were resolved through confidential settlements. With 700,000 special needs students currently in the California schools and already paying hundreds of thousands of dollars each year for private placements, the school system is headed for a financial crisis.

In 2004, the California schools received $4.1 billion for special education from the government and local sources. It was still not enough to pay these extra settlement costs, and the California schools had to take $1.6 billion from the regular class budget. Twenty-eight percent of the special education expenditures that year came from the regular education budget.

California schools educators complain that parents who are able to afford an attorney are assured more opportunities for their children than those who cannot afford to do so, creating an inequity between the haves and have-nots. Additionally, special education teachers see benefits to special programs, such as horseback riding therapy, but acknowledge that such parent demands are not education related. California schools parents and educators are at odds.

Parents are making tuition payment demands of the California schools for such programs as private day schools, boarding schools, summer camps, horseback riding therapy, and aqua therapy. Additionally, the California schools are expected to pay for computers, airfare, car rental, hotel stays, meals, new clothing and tailoring for the children, cell phone calls, stamps, gas and tolls, and future round-trip visits from time of enrollment until the children graduate from high school.

In all, the California schools are paying billions of dollars each year for private placements and auxiliary costs. It is creating an inequity for children the civil rights law was passed to protect and a financial crisis for the California schools.

I have to admit that I wanted every opportunity possible for my child to live a happy and normal adult life. I had a special needs child and spent many hours sitting in principals’ offices and at the school board demanding that his needs be met. I was thankful that he received access to the available offerings within the public school system.

In my view, however, it is not a question of right or wrong, justified expenditure or not. It is a question of the legislators going back and specifically defining the word “appropriate”. Until then, the California schools are borrowing from Peter to pay Paul, which means less opportunities all the way around.

This information on California schools is brought to you by http://www.schoolsk-12.com

Patricia Hawke is a staff writer for Schools K-12, providing free, in-depth reports on all U.S. public and private K-12 schools. Patricia has a nose for research and writes stimulating news and views on school issues. For more on California schools visit California Schools.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Patricia_Hawke

The California Schools in question shared one common characteristic – a relatively high level of student poverty. Many but not all of them have high percentages of students who were English learners and/or Hispanic, a statistic that has been correlated with student poverty. Most have very small populations of white students.

These troubled California Schools tended to be larger than average and were much more likely to be on a multitrack, year-round calendar. This type of school calendar allows the school in question to serve a greater number of students by being open all 12 months of the year; with some California Schools teachers and classes sharing rooms with those who are off on a break.

In terms of staffing, these California Schools had a much higher proportion of teachers not fully credentialed and were also more likely to have a high percentage of first- and second-year teachers.

Principals of the California Schools in question were surveyed to determine the differences in the challenges faced by their particular schools. School district officials were also able to provide more information.

California has operated its school accountability system for nine years now and the average API (Academic Performance Index) scores for all schools have risen. Elementary schools have shown the most progress. However, as a whole, elementary level California Schools have faced greater challenges than their middle- and high-school counterparts. On average, they had either similar or more challenging proportions of English learners and students living in poverty. School sizes are modestly large and the proportion of fully credentialed teachers is somewhat lower than middle- and high-school teachers working in California Schools.

Conversely, California Schools in the middle and high school levels have consistently shown less improvement than elementary schools. From a statistical perspective, secondary California Schools often face different challenges than elementary schools do in attempting to meet their API growth targets.

Middle Schools have not had the full benefit of the state’s investment in K–12 education since the mid-to-late 1990s, however. From an instructional perspective, the state has put more focus on improving achievement in the earliest grades, most likely with the belief that if a student’s academic success can be improved upon at an early age, they will continue to be successful throughout their school careers.

While there many changes that need to be made to improve the quality of California Schools, it is indeed heartening to see that the state’s board of education is up to the challenge of helping schools make the improvements needed to produce successful and vital members of tomorrow’s society.

California Public Schools Patricia Hawke is a staff writer for Schools K-12, providing free, in-depth reports on all U.S. public and private K-12 schools. For more information please visit California Public Schools

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Patricia_Hawke

To be considered for the award, California schools must meet a variety of eligibility requirements. These include designated federal and state accountability measures that are based upon the No Child Left Behind, Adequate Yearly Progress, and Academic Performance Index measurement programs. Approximately, five percent of California schools are selected each year for the award, with no fewer than 40 counties typically being represented.

The program alternates awards yearly between the elementary and secondary California schools. Year 2006 honors elementary schools.

California schools that meet the requirements complete an application and submit it to a team of local educators from across the state, which evaluate and score the merits of each school application. Schools with the highest scoring applications are selected as statewide nominees for the award. Nominated California schools then receive an onsite visit by a team of county school superintendents and members of the California Department of Education, who validate the accuracy of the application data.

Those California schools selected for the Distinguished School Award are honored at a statewide ceremony, where the state school superintendent awards a plaque and flag to each school. The program and annual ceremonies are funded through the generosity of prominent California corporations and statewide education organizations that believe educational excellence should be rewarded and encouraged publicly.

In 2006, a record 377 public elementary schools were honored with the California Distinguished School Award, surpassing the 302 elementary schools honored in 2004 — the last elementary school award cycle. They represent the largest number of elementary school awardees in the 21-year history of the program.

The 2006 California schools awardees were chosen from 190 school districts in 40 counties. They were selected from the largest number of eligible elementary schools to date, setting another record for the program. Of the more than 5,000 elementary schools in California, 2,043 were eligible to apply for the 2006 award. California schools are proving that student scholastic excellence can be nurtured and consistently improved.

Patricia Hawke is a staff writer for Schools K-12 , providing free, in-depth reports on all U.S. public and private K-12 schools. Stacy has a nose for research and writes stimulating news and views on school issues. For more on California schools visit California Schools

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Patricia_Hawke

The examination concerns specific restructuring methods used by California Schools and their success. According to CEP founder and president Jack Jennings, “While it is still too early to tell whether restructuring is working, it is clear from the experience of California and Michigan, the two states we have studied in-depth, that simply requiring schools to replace staff does not guarantee increased student achievement. Rather, success is linked to implementing multiple improvement strategies.”

This is of critical concern to California Schools for a couple of reasons. California Schools have more schools facing restructuring than most other states for several reasons. School restructuring is mandated by the NCLB act for any schools unable to meet its Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) markers for five or more consecutive years. One reason that California Schools saw the number of its schools facing this mandate double to 8% in the last year is because of its massive size. Also, California Schools implemented AYP markers a year before it was federally mandated. Of the California Schools facing restructuring, over 60% are in urban areas.

The numbers don’t look good. 207 of the California Schools in the implementation phase of restructuring failed to meet AYP standards for seven consecutive years. That’s why the CEP study has such import. The study concluded that the California Schools that were most successful in raising student achievement were those that analyzed school data and implemented initiatives designed to meet those specific needs. This is important because the US Department of Education previously recommended replacing staff rather than other forms of restructuring.

Other reform methods in California Schools include instituting English Language Learner programs, direct coaching for teachers and principals, changes in scheduling and the hiring of a district-level coordinator. The California Schools that used the above methods, without replacing staff or changing to a charter system, were generally more successful than the other schools studied. What will this mean for the future of California Schools?

It’s likely that funds for teacher planning time, instructional coaches and special instruction for at-risk students will appear on coming legislation. As noted by Jennings, the California Schools still have a long road ahead before the success of many programs can be fully evaluated. That’s why California Schools need the quantifiable results of a study like this one.

Patricia Hawke is a staff writer for Schools K-12, providing free, in-depth reports on all U.S. public and private K-12 schools. For more information please visit California Public Schools

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Patricia_Hawke