David J Quinn
Florida Gulf Coast University
Ed-Specialist candidate in education leadership
May 20, 2010
Current issues in school law
Several different groups have pointed out that they are having difficulty with the No Child Left Behind Act. For instance, Zehr (2008) recognized that the Navajo Nation and the Oceti Sakowin Education Consortium were attempting to develop standards and assessments to be used for accountability under federal education law. However, less than one third of the Bureau of Indian Education schools made adequate yearly progress in the 2006-2007 school year. Theodore Hamilton, the executive director of the Oceti Sakowin Education Consortium, stated that he was frustrated by the lack of support from federal officials. Some argued that the lack of culturally appropriate assessments were part of the problem. According to Zehr (2008), several states have criticized the federal government’s lack of flexibility in interpreting the results for second language learners as well.
Unfunded mandates have caused significant friction between the states and the federal government. In one ruling, the majority of the court held that the state officials would not have to comply with NCLB requirements when funding falls short. The attorney for the NEA, Robert Chanin, argued that states would be justified in not complying with the NCLB requirements if they had to use their own funding (Walsh, 2008). Based on statistical analysis, almost all of the California elementary schools will fail to meet the goals in 2013-2014 according to Cavanagh and Hoff (2008). The authors (2008) recognized that English language learners and the economic disadvantaged would have the biggest problem meeting the goals. In the 2007-2008 year, almost 3,600 schools were forced to choose a restructuring option to adjust management or instructional strategies in order to improve student performance. Amy Wilkins, vice president of government affairs, believed that the main reason schools failed to comply with NCLB law’s mandate was due to not being able to hire highly qualified teachers (Cavanah, & Hoff, 2008).
John McCain and Barack Obama pledged to focus on improving teacher quality, recruit new teachers, and experiment with new forms of teacher compensation (Hoff, 2008). The candidates for president in 2008 were reluctant to take a position on the No Child Left Behind Act, and there has not been significant change since the election. According to Hoff (2008), Obama promised to double the funding for charter schools.
Another major issue in school law pertains to bullying. Criminal charges have been made against some students for bullying a student who ended up committing suicide. Forty-one states now have laws against bullying according to Hampson (2010). Hampson (2010) recognized cases in Massachusetts, Texas, and New York pertaining to bullying. Based on surveys, approximately one-third of all Americans were bullies or had been bullied. One school district had to pay 50,000 dollars to cover the costs of counseling services for a student who complained of being bullied about sexual orientation. In Massachusetts, the legislature is attempting to mandate an anti-bullying curriculum, training teachers and staff, and reporting criminal bullying to law enforcement (Hampson, 2010).
Currently, some states are taking aggressive positions in race relations in connection with education law. For example, Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona signed a bill to end ethnic studies in Tucson schools. Based on this law, any school district that offers classes primarily for specific ethnic groups which advocated solidarity or promoted resentment would risk losing ten percent of its state funding for education. Tom Horne, the state superintendent of public instruction, had argued for the new law because he felt the ethnic studies program cased students to feel oppressed and resent whites. On the other hand, Sean Arce, the director of Tucson’s Mexican-American studies department, believed that the courses taught students to build cultural bridges of understanding and skills to understand history. In addition, he thought that the program caused some students to stay in school (Lewin, 2010). Mackey (2010) pointed out that House Bill 2281 in Arizona did all of the following:
Prohibits a school district or charter school from including in its program of instruction any courses or classes that:
· Promote the overthrow of the United States government.
· Promote resentment toward a race or class of people.
· Are designed primarily for a particular ethic group.
· Advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.
In the opinion of Mr. Horne and Ms. Garcia Dugan students were acting disrespectfully because of the way they are taught in the Mexican-American studies program. On an opposing note, Judy Burns, president of the Tucson district’s governing board, stated that, “We don’t teach all those ugly things they think we are teaching” (Mackey, 2010).
Overall, it appears that many of the current relevant issues in school law have to do with issues we have had for many years. How do we handle race relations in this country? How can we protect the interests of the disadvantaged? How can we be accountable for mistreatment of students by other students when many incidents are unreported? How can the federal government enforce education law if it doesn’t provide adequate funding to the states? There will probably be several significant cases in the near future that become benchmarks to guide our actions in the future.
References
Cavanagh, S., & Hoff, D.J. (2008, October 1). Schools found likely to miss NCLB academic targets; separate studies cite problems meeting AYP and proficiency goals. Education Week, 28(6), 9.
Hoff, D.J. (2008, October 1). NCLB debate at the sidelines; new president to shape law’s next phase. Education Week, 28(6), 1-2.
Walsh, M. (2008, February 13). Spellings asks 6th circuit to reconsider NCLB ruling; decision’s ramifications are ‘immediate and irreparable,’ filing says. Education Week, 27(23), 26.
Zehr, M.A. (2008, June 11). Proposed ELL guidelines too rigid, critics warn. Education Week, 27(41), 17-18.
Zehr, M.A. (2008, September 17). Tribal representatives complain of little help on NCLB flexibility; hearing details concerns about high failure rates at federally run schools. Education Week, 28(4), 18-19.